Discussion:
Channel 4 News Brexit Debate: Largest poll ever found an 8% lead for Remain
Add Reply
MM
2018-11-06 09:21:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.

Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.

Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html



MM
Ian Jackson
2018-11-06 09:36:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-ref
erendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Nigel Farage was rather subdued - and really only came to life to
condemn Theresa May for not really trying to get a proper Brexit.

Those two MPs were a disgrace. The Conservative chap's main point was
that we should plough on, and respect the result of the now out-of-date
referendum, regardless of how misinformed the electorate were. The
Labour guy was little better, and it was rather difficult to understand
what his real opinions were.

But it will be an hour well-spent to watch it again.
--
Ian
Yellow
2018-11-06 12:47:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-ref
erendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Nigel Farage was rather subdued - and really only came to life to
condemn Theresa May for not really trying to get a proper Brexit.
Those two MPs were a disgrace. The Conservative chap's main point was
that we should plough on, and respect the result of the now out-of-date
referendum, regardless of how misinformed the electorate were. The
Labour guy was little better, and it was rather difficult to understand
what his real opinions were.
But it will be an hour well-spent to watch it again.
I thought the show was well worth a watch, not just because of the poll
but because as Farage said at the end, he was the only non-audience
member who was there to fight on the side of Brexit while all the others
were *all* remain voters.

Yet the C4 presenter was quite taken aback when this was drawn to his
attention

And that is how it has been for the last 18 months. Drip.... drip....
drip....

So an interesting programme just from that point of view.

But as for the presentation of the voting data - how interesting was
that too and thank god for the commentary from the polling guy who put a
different spin on almost every chart the show presented, including
noting that some of the questions were loaded.

But what was the most interesting was that the presentation of the data
that remain would win another vote.

First, they did not present the number of don't knows, and only told us
the split between those who had an opinion on the day of the survey. And
second, as the poll guy said, they did not weight the information for
the likelihood of people actually turning out to vote and simply assumed
that everyone would.

To be clear - if the poll result had been as presented then fair enough,
but it wasn't and this took the show from an useful look at people's
opinions to a piece of propaganda on behalf of remain as it seemed
someone had made the deliberate decision to mislead.

I thought the EU women was good, and I would liked to have had a whole
show listening to her.
abelard
2018-11-06 13:26:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Yellow
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-ref
erendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Nigel Farage was rather subdued - and really only came to life to
condemn Theresa May for not really trying to get a proper Brexit.
Those two MPs were a disgrace. The Conservative chap's main point was
that we should plough on, and respect the result of the now out-of-date
referendum, regardless of how misinformed the electorate were. The
Labour guy was little better, and it was rather difficult to understand
what his real opinions were.
But it will be an hour well-spent to watch it again.
I thought the show was well worth a watch, not just because of the poll
but because as Farage said at the end, he was the only non-audience
member who was there to fight on the side of Brexit while all the others
were *all* remain voters.
Yet the C4 presenter was quite taken aback when this was drawn to his
attention
And that is how it has been for the last 18 months. Drip.... drip....
drip....
So an interesting programme just from that point of view.
But as for the presentation of the voting data - how interesting was
that too and thank god for the commentary from the polling guy who put a
different spin on almost every chart the show presented, including
noting that some of the questions were loaded.
But what was the most interesting was that the presentation of the data
that remain would win another vote.
First, they did not present the number of don't knows, and only told us
the split between those who had an opinion on the day of the survey. And
second, as the poll guy said, they did not weight the information for
the likelihood of people actually turning out to vote and simply assumed
that everyone would.
To be clear - if the poll result had been as presented then fair enough,
but it wasn't and this took the show from an useful look at people's
opinions to a piece of propaganda on behalf of remain as it seemed
someone had made the deliberate decision to mislead.
I thought the EU women was good, and I would liked to have had a whole
show listening to her.
the prime central objective of fossil media is to stir up emotion
and 'controversy'
--
www.abelard.org
MM
2018-11-07 10:12:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Yellow
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-ref
erendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Nigel Farage was rather subdued - and really only came to life to
condemn Theresa May for not really trying to get a proper Brexit.
Those two MPs were a disgrace. The Conservative chap's main point was
that we should plough on, and respect the result of the now out-of-date
referendum, regardless of how misinformed the electorate were. The
Labour guy was little better, and it was rather difficult to understand
what his real opinions were.
But it will be an hour well-spent to watch it again.
I thought the show was well worth a watch, not just because of the poll
but because as Farage said at the end, he was the only non-audience
member who was there to fight on the side of Brexit while all the others
were *all* remain voters.
Gauke was wholeheartedly for honouring the Brexit result, even though
he voted Remain. With Barry Gardiner, it was difficult to work out
what Labour's stance is currently. Farage got ratty, because he felt
it was a stitch-up. But it wasn't. The mood in the audience reflected
the mood in the country when that poll of 20,000 was conducted to
establish the turnaround in Remain's favour. You just don't want to
believe that a swing from Brexit towards Remain is fact now.
Post by Yellow
Yet the C4 presenter was quite taken aback when this was drawn to his
attention
Yes, because what Farage claimed was absolutely not true. A number of
'Leave' audience members stated quite clearly that they hadn't changed
their mind. Farage's problem is that many leavers *have* changed their
mind. Look at the Sunderland finding, for example.
Post by Yellow
And that is how it has been for the last 18 months. Drip.... drip....
drip....
Yes, and it is having an effect. More people across the nation are now
moving towards Remain, as this trend has been accelerating over the
past few months. There is nothing to stop that trend now. There just
isn't enough time left before March. So while technically we'll have
to leave on March 29 as that is what Article 50 and the Act in
Parliament require, there will be so many caveats, backstops and
'arrangements' that we will not to all intents and purposes have
actually left.

And then there's the transition period...!
Post by Yellow
So an interesting programme just from that point of view.
But as for the presentation of the voting data - how interesting was
that too and thank god for the commentary from the polling guy who put a
different spin on almost every chart the show presented, including
noting that some of the questions were loaded.
You're so desperate to play down that turnaround, aren't you? Even now
you still don't believe the facts, preferring the spin instead. Oh,
and note how the Brexiters sole line of defensive argument is to warn
of civil unrest. So will that insurgence happen if the terms of our
departure still keep us in a customs union? Still need us to listen to
the ECJ? Still don't impart that magical 'sovereignty' you've been
blabbing on about?
Post by Yellow
But what was the most interesting was that the presentation of the data
that remain would win another vote.
First, they did not present the number of don't knows, and only told us
the split between those who had an opinion on the day of the survey. And
second, as the poll guy said, they did not weight the information for
the likelihood of people actually turning out to vote and simply assumed
that everyone would.
You know the Brexit movement is sinking fast, don't you! Hence your
clutching at straws.
Post by Yellow
To be clear - if the poll result had been as presented then fair enough,
but it wasn't and this took the show from an useful look at people's
opinions to a piece of propaganda on behalf of remain as it seemed
someone had made the deliberate decision to mislead.
The poll result was 54% Remain v. 45% Leave, and thusly was It
presented. At what point did you fail to grasp these figures? Was it
at the point when your inner voice said "Oh, dear. Those figures don't
look good, so I'd better believe the spin instead!"
Post by Yellow
I thought the EU women was good, and I would liked to have had a whole
show listening to her.
These types of political shows on British TV are so micromanaged,
there is little point to them apart from providing entertainment. Only
one hour to debate such an important issue? In Germany, debates like
this tend to be open-ended so that speakers aren't constrained by the
clock.

MM
Tim Woodall
2018-11-07 10:34:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Yes, and it is having an effect. More people across the nation are now
moving towards Remain, as this trend has been accelerating over the
past few months. There is nothing to stop that trend now. There just
isn't enough time left before March. So while technically we'll have
to leave on March 29 as that is what Article 50 and the Act in
Parliament require, there will be so many caveats, backstops and
'arrangements' that we will not to all intents and purposes have
actually left.
And then there's the transition period...!
However, if we actually make it to end Mar without an A50 extension then
we will have left with whatever deal is agreed.

From that point onwards we lose out 'strong' bargaining position as many
issues then come under individual member's veto (including rejoining)
Shitsack Moishe Goldberg
2018-11-06 13:59:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 09:36:55 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-ref
erendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Nigel Farage was rather subdued - and really only came to life to
condemn Theresa May for not really trying to get a proper Brexit.
Those two MPs were a disgrace. The Conservative chap's main point was
that we should plough on, and respect the result of the now out-of-date
referendum, regardless of how misinformed the electorate were.
A misinformed electorate is the KEYSTONE of any democracy.
The Peeler
2018-11-06 15:15:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 06 Nov 2018 05:59:00 -0800, serbian bitch Razovic, the resident
psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous sexual cripple, making an ass
Post by Shitsack Moishe Goldberg
Post by Ian Jackson
Nigel Farage was rather subdued - and really only came to life to
condemn Theresa May for not really trying to get a proper Brexit.
Those two MPs were a disgrace. The Conservative chap's main point was
that we should plough on, and respect the result of the now out-of-date
referendum, regardless of how misinformed the electorate were.
A misinformed electorate is the KEYSTONE of any democracy.
BRILLIANT! Psychopathically "brilliant"! Eh, psychopath? <VBG>
--
shadow to housebound cripple Razovic:
"Temper, temper little serbian muzzie or your colostomy bag will start
leaking again."
MID: <570d39cb$0$61723$b1db1813$***@news.astraweb.com>

SPOT ON!
MM
2018-11-07 09:49:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 09:36:55 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-ref
erendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Nigel Farage was rather subdued - and really only came to life to
condemn Theresa May for not really trying to get a proper Brexit.
Those two MPs were a disgrace. The Conservative chap's main point was
that we should plough on, and respect the result of the now out-of-date
referendum, regardless of how misinformed the electorate were. The
Labour guy was little better, and it was rather difficult to understand
what his real opinions were.
That was Barry Gardiner for Labour. He was, and is, pretty useless in
my opinion. Gorky looked decidedly uncomfortable when that 54%/46%
turnaround was announced.

MM
Dean Jackson
2018-11-09 00:30:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-ref
erendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Nigel Farage was rather subdued - and really only came to life to
condemn Theresa May for not really trying to get a proper Brexit.
Those two MPs were a disgrace. The Conservative chap's main point was
that we should plough on, and respect the result of the now out-of-date
referendum, regardless of how misinformed the electorate were. The
Labour guy was little better, and it was rather difficult to understand
what his real opinions were.
But it will be an hour well-spent to watch it again.
The Derby result,the Cup Final result and the Boat Race result are out
of date and will be replayed next year but that is not how elections or
referendums are played.

D.J.
Dean Jackson
2018-11-09 00:31:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-ref
erendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Nigel Farage was rather subdued - and really only came to life to
condemn Theresa May for not really trying to get a proper Brexit.
Those two MPs were a disgrace. The Conservative chap's main point was
that we should plough on, and respect the result of the now out-of-date
referendum, regardless of how misinformed the electorate were. The
Labour guy was little better, and it was rather difficult to understand
what his real opinions were.
But it will be an hour well-spent to watch it again.
Why it won't change anything.
D.J.
Omega
2018-11-06 09:37:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
MM
Copied from Mark Devons' Thread.

"Some 54 per cent of people said they would stay in the EU if the 2016
referendum were held tomorrow – when those who refused to vote or
answered “don’t know” were removed".

Quote: Channel 4 Survation.

I read that as, all the people who told the pollsters to "fuck off" and
those, "I haven't got a fucking clue" were removed from the final poll.
results.

If some dumb arsed snowy pushed a mike or a clipboard in my face asking
how I would vote in this daydream second Referendum, as an ardent
Brexiteer, I too would tell them to fuck off so asking me and people
like me would very quickly void your nonsense poll, wouldn't it?

My vote was in 2016 and that was the one that counted despite the
slanted polls of the day. You do remember that, don't you?

Virtually every poll around the time of the Referendum, if not *all* if
someone can correctly inform me, indicated we would stay. These polls
were ALL WRONG!

I realise you are merely trolling with your idiot addresses to the
group, have fun however you feel but as long as you realise, you will
always be challenged.

If it needs be said again, we won in a democratic vote two years ago, we
will be leaving the EU next March. I won't bother to give you solace,
just keep crying.

omega
abelard
2018-11-06 09:52:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Omega
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
MM
Copied from Mark Devons' Thread.
"Some 54 per cent of people said they would stay in the EU if the 2016
referendum were held tomorrow – when those who refused to vote or
answered “don’t know” were removed".
Quote: Channel 4 Survation.
I read that as, all the people who told the pollsters to "fuck off" and
those, "I haven't got a fucking clue" were removed from the final poll.
results.
If some dumb arsed snowy pushed a mike or a clipboard in my face asking
how I would vote in this daydream second Referendum, as an ardent
Brexiteer, I too would tell them to fuck off so asking me and people
like me would very quickly void your nonsense poll, wouldn't it?
My vote was in 2016 and that was the one that counted despite the
slanted polls of the day. You do remember that, don't you?
Virtually every poll around the time of the Referendum, if not *all* if
someone can correctly inform me, indicated we would stay. These polls
were ALL WRONG!
I realise you are merely trolling with your idiot addresses to the
group, have fun however you feel but as long as you realise, you will
always be challenged.
If it needs be said again, we won in a democratic vote two years ago, we
will be leaving the EU next March. I won't bother to give you solace,
just keep crying.
i don't believe he's trolling...i believe he actually is daft enough
to believe fake polls
or whatever else he wishes were true
--
www.abelard.org
Omega
2018-11-06 10:52:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by abelard
Post by Omega
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
MM
Copied from Mark Devons' Thread.
"Some 54 per cent of people said they would stay in the EU if the 2016
referendum were held tomorrow – when those who refused to vote or
answered “don’t know” were removed".
Quote: Channel 4 Survation.
I read that as, all the people who told the pollsters to "fuck off" and
those, "I haven't got a fucking clue" were removed from the final poll.
results.
If some dumb arsed snowy pushed a mike or a clipboard in my face asking
how I would vote in this daydream second Referendum, as an ardent
Brexiteer, I too would tell them to fuck off so asking me and people
like me would very quickly void your nonsense poll, wouldn't it?
My vote was in 2016 and that was the one that counted despite the
slanted polls of the day. You do remember that, don't you?
Virtually every poll around the time of the Referendum, if not *all* if
someone can correctly inform me, indicated we would stay. These polls
were ALL WRONG!
I realise you are merely trolling with your idiot addresses to the
group, have fun however you feel but as long as you realise, you will
always be challenged.
If it needs be said again, we won in a democratic vote two years ago, we
will be leaving the EU next March. I won't bother to give you solace,
just keep crying.
i don't believe he's trolling...i believe he actually is daft enough
to believe fake polls
or whatever else he wishes were true
I had to smile yesterday at Pamelas' post lampooning Brexiteers gone
quiet recently, accusing them, they had stopped their nasty leering
until "Joe" addressed him/her, many times Brexiteers usually only
challenge these fools when sparked up by some daft remark or when
misinformation has been deliberately presented by a Remainer.

Omega
abelard
2018-11-06 11:03:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Omega
Post by abelard
Post by Omega
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Copied from Mark Devons' Thread.
"Some 54 per cent of people said they would stay in the EU if the 2016
referendum were held tomorrow – when those who refused to vote or
answered “don’t know” were removed".
Quote: Channel 4 Survation.
I read that as, all the people who told the pollsters to "fuck off" and
those, "I haven't got a fucking clue" were removed from the final poll.
results.
If some dumb arsed snowy pushed a mike or a clipboard in my face asking
how I would vote in this daydream second Referendum, as an ardent
Brexiteer, I too would tell them to fuck off so asking me and people
like me would very quickly void your nonsense poll, wouldn't it?
My vote was in 2016 and that was the one that counted despite the
slanted polls of the day. You do remember that, don't you?
Virtually every poll around the time of the Referendum, if not *all* if
someone can correctly inform me, indicated we would stay. These polls
were ALL WRONG!
I realise you are merely trolling with your idiot addresses to the
group, have fun however you feel but as long as you realise, you will
always be challenged.
If it needs be said again, we won in a democratic vote two years ago, we
will be leaving the EU next March. I won't bother to give you solace,
just keep crying.
i don't believe he's trolling...i believe he actually is daft enough
to believe fake polls
or whatever else he wishes were true
I had to smile yesterday at Pamelas' post lampooning Brexiteers gone
quiet recently, accusing them, they had stopped their nasty leering
until "Joe" addressed him/her, many times Brexiteers usually only
challenge these fools when sparked up by some daft remark or when
misinformation has been deliberately presented by a Remainer.
i rather like her/his naive and optimistic innocence
--
www.abelard.org
Yellow
2018-11-06 12:58:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Omega
Post by abelard
Post by Omega
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
MM
Copied from Mark Devons' Thread.
"Some 54 per cent of people said they would stay in the EU if the 2016
referendum were held tomorrow ? when those who refused to vote or
answered ?don?t know? were removed".
Quote: Channel 4 Survation.
I read that as, all the people who told the pollsters to "fuck off" and
those, "I haven't got a fucking clue" were removed from the final poll.
results.
If some dumb arsed snowy pushed a mike or a clipboard in my face asking
how I would vote in this daydream second Referendum, as an ardent
Brexiteer, I too would tell them to fuck off so asking me and people
like me would very quickly void your nonsense poll, wouldn't it?
My vote was in 2016 and that was the one that counted despite the
slanted polls of the day. You do remember that, don't you?
Virtually every poll around the time of the Referendum, if not *all* if
someone can correctly inform me, indicated we would stay. These polls
were ALL WRONG!
I realise you are merely trolling with your idiot addresses to the
group, have fun however you feel but as long as you realise, you will
always be challenged.
If it needs be said again, we won in a democratic vote two years ago, we
will be leaving the EU next March. I won't bother to give you solace,
just keep crying.
i don't believe he's trolling...i believe he actually is daft enough
to believe fake polls
or whatever else he wishes were true
I had to smile yesterday at Pamelas' post lampooning Brexiteers gone
quiet recently, accusing them, they had stopped their nasty leering
until "Joe" addressed him/her, many times Brexiteers usually only
challenge these fools when sparked up by some daft remark or when
misinformation has been deliberately presented by a Remainer.
Omega
Personally, I have just got better ways of spending my time than keep
having the same old arguments with people who who often become personal
instead of sticking to what we are talking about, and I was finding
myself getting dragged in to the same behaviour.

This post on the other hand is about something new, so worth a few
minutes writing a contribution.
Pamela
2018-11-06 13:56:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Omega
Post by abelard
Post by Omega
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit.
Towards the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest
poll ever carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing
towards Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-
win-new-brexit
-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
MM
Copied from Mark Devons' Thread.
"Some 54 per cent of people said they would stay in the EU if the
2016 referendum were held tomorrow – when those who refused to
vote or answered “don’t know” were removed".
Quote: Channel 4 Survation.
I read that as, all the people who told the pollsters to "fuck off"
and those, "I haven't got a fucking clue" were removed from the
final poll. results.
If some dumb arsed snowy pushed a mike or a clipboard in my face
asking how I would vote in this daydream second Referendum, as an
ardent Brexiteer, I too would tell them to fuck off so asking me and
people like me would very quickly void your nonsense poll, wouldn't
it?
My vote was in 2016 and that was the one that counted despite the
slanted polls of the day. You do remember that, don't you?
Virtually every poll around the time of the Referendum, if not *all*
if someone can correctly inform me, indicated we would stay. These
polls were ALL WRONG!
I realise you are merely trolling with your idiot addresses to the
group, have fun however you feel but as long as you realise, you
will always be challenged.
If it needs be said again, we won in a democratic vote two years
ago, we will be leaving the EU next March. I won't bother to give
you solace, just keep crying.
i don't believe he's trolling...i believe he actually is daft enough
to believe fake polls or whatever else he wishes were true
I had to smile yesterday at Pamelas' post lampooning Brexiteers gone
quiet recently, accusing them, they had stopped their nasty leering
until "Joe" addressed him/her, many times Brexiteers usually only
challenge these fools when sparked up by some daft remark or when
misinformation has been deliberately presented by a Remainer.
Omega
I clearly recall there was posts of wild jubilation from Brexiteers who
would become rather agressive when the impracticality of implementing their
ideas was pointed out.

There would be arguments about this but as time has gone the "facts" used
to support Brexit were disproven. Brexiteers expect hardly any tangible
benefit from Brexit and have to rely on vague notions like sovereignty.

Brexiteers seem somewhat subdued now that reality has taken hold. You
don't hear these cries very often now:

"We won, you lost",
"WTO trade deals are dead easy",
"We will be richer and goods be cheaper",
"The Germans will be begging us to take their cars".
abelard
2018-11-06 14:00:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by Omega
Post by abelard
Post by Omega
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit.
Towards the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest
poll ever carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing
towards Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-
win-new-brexit
-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
MM
Copied from Mark Devons' Thread.
"Some 54 per cent of people said they would stay in the EU if the
2016 referendum were held tomorrow – when those who refused to
vote or answered “don’t knowâ€? were removed".
Quote: Channel 4 Survation.
I read that as, all the people who told the pollsters to "fuck off"
and those, "I haven't got a fucking clue" were removed from the
final poll. results.
If some dumb arsed snowy pushed a mike or a clipboard in my face
asking how I would vote in this daydream second Referendum, as an
ardent Brexiteer, I too would tell them to fuck off so asking me and
people like me would very quickly void your nonsense poll, wouldn't
it?
My vote was in 2016 and that was the one that counted despite the
slanted polls of the day. You do remember that, don't you?
Virtually every poll around the time of the Referendum, if not *all*
if someone can correctly inform me, indicated we would stay. These
polls were ALL WRONG!
I realise you are merely trolling with your idiot addresses to the
group, have fun however you feel but as long as you realise, you
will always be challenged.
If it needs be said again, we won in a democratic vote two years
ago, we will be leaving the EU next March. I won't bother to give
you solace, just keep crying.
i don't believe he's trolling...i believe he actually is daft enough
to believe fake polls or whatever else he wishes were true
I had to smile yesterday at Pamelas' post lampooning Brexiteers gone
quiet recently, accusing them, they had stopped their nasty leering
until "Joe" addressed him/her, many times Brexiteers usually only
challenge these fools when sparked up by some daft remark or when
misinformation has been deliberately presented by a Remainer.
Omega
I clearly recall there was posts of wild jubilation from Brexiteers who
would become rather agressive when the impracticality of implementing their
ideas was pointed out.
There would be arguments about this but as time has gone the "facts" used
to support Brexit were disproven. Brexiteers expect hardly any tangible
benefit from Brexit and have to rely on vague notions like sovereignty.
Brexiteers seem somewhat subdued now that reality has taken hold. You
"We won, you lost",
"WTO trade deals are dead easy",
"We will be richer and goods be cheaper",
"The Germans will be begging us to take their cars".
i see no problem with any of those claims/hopes...

but then you're a marxist materialist, so naturally you
have no context for freedom or independence
--
www.abelard.org
R. Mark Clayton
2018-11-06 10:56:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Omega
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Any stitch up was on the Leave side - they lied and cheated, although we do not yet know how much they cheated.
Post by Omega
Post by MM
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
MM
Copied from Mark Devons' Thread.
"Some 54 per cent of people said they would stay in the EU if the 2016
referendum were held tomorrow – when those who refused to vote or
answered “don’t know” were removed".
Quote: Channel 4 Survation.
I read that as, all the people who told the pollsters to "fuck off" and
those, "I haven't got a fucking clue" were removed from the final poll.
results.
If some dumb arsed snowy pushed a mike or a clipboard in my face asking
how I would vote in this daydream second Referendum, as an ardent
Brexiteer, I too would tell them to fuck off so asking me and people
like me would very quickly void your nonsense poll, wouldn't it?
My vote was in 2016 and that was the one that counted despite the
slanted polls of the day. You do remember that, don't you?
Yes. And I remember the vote in 1975 too.
Post by Omega
Virtually every poll around the time of the Referendum, if not *all* if
someone can correctly inform me, indicated we would stay. These polls
were ALL WRONG!
I realise you are merely trolling with your idiot addresses to the
group, have fun however you feel but as long as you realise, you will
always be challenged.
If it needs be said again, we won in a democratic vote
under false pretences
Post by Omega
two years ago, we
will be leaving the EU next March. I won't bother to give you solace,
just keep crying.
omega
and it was close - just two reasons why the final deal should be put the people.
Yellow
2018-11-06 12:54:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Omega
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
MM
Copied from Mark Devons' Thread.
"Some 54 per cent of people said they would stay in the EU if the 2016
referendum were held tomorrow ? when those who refused to vote or
answered ?don?t know? were removed".
Quote: Channel 4 Survation.
I read that as, all the people who told the pollsters to "fuck off" and
those, "I haven't got a fucking clue" were removed from the final poll.
results.
If some dumb arsed snowy pushed a mike or a clipboard in my face asking
how I would vote in this daydream second Referendum, as an ardent
Brexiteer, I too would tell them to fuck off so asking me and people
like me would very quickly void your nonsense poll, wouldn't it?
My vote was in 2016 and that was the one that counted despite the
slanted polls of the day. You do remember that, don't you?
Virtually every poll around the time of the Referendum, if not *all* if
someone can correctly inform me, indicated we would stay. These polls
were ALL WRONG!
I realise you are merely trolling with your idiot addresses to the
group, have fun however you feel but as long as you realise, you will
always be challenged.
If it needs be said again, we won in a democratic vote two years ago, we
will be leaving the EU next March. I won't bother to give you solace,
just keep crying.
omega
As the polling guy pointed out, there were a few other times (notably
the immigration one, but also the better/worse off results) where the
don't knows/don't cares was just as important ask the yes/no answers yet
the show brushed over them.

Was this deliberate, to make it look as if the result meant one thing
when in fact it might have meant something else, or was it because
understanding polling takes a bit to get to grips with and the people
who put the show together simply did not appreciate what the information
meant?
Basil Jet
2018-11-06 14:10:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
MM
Thank God for that! The countless hours I spent in 2016 wearing a "Vote
Leave" sandwich board would have been wasted if we could win a poll
without me doing it. But MM... if another referendum is called, I'll put
my sandwich board back on and I'll win Britain around again.
--
Basil Jet - listening... Soft Cell. Soft Machine. Solomon Grey. Sonic
Youth. Sonique. Sonny Rollins. Sophie Ellis Bextor. Soul-Junk. Space.
Space (French). Spacehog. Spacemen 3. Spear Of Destiny. Spectres (UK).
Spiller feat Sophie Ellis Bextor. Spiritual Vibes. Spiritualized.
Splat!. Split Enz. Spoon. Spring King. Squeeze. Sroeng Santi.
Ian Jackson
2018-11-06 14:15:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-re
ferendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
MM
Thank God for that! The countless hours I spent in 2016 wearing a "Vote
Leave" sandwich board would have been wasted if we could win a poll
without me doing it. But MM... if another referendum is called, I'll
put my sandwich board back on and I'll win Britain around again.
It's your democratic right to do that. You can start today, if you want
- or do you want to have to wait 'a generation' before you do it again?
--
Ian
Basil Jet
2018-11-06 14:40:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Basil Jet
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
 Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
 Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-re
ferendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
 MM
Thank God for that! The countless hours I spent in 2016 wearing a
"Vote Leave" sandwich board would have been wasted if we could win a
poll without me doing it. But MM... if another referendum is called,
I'll put my sandwich board back on and I'll win Britain around again.
It's your democratic right to do that. You can start today, if you want
- or do you want to have to wait 'a generation' before you do it again?
My "Vote Leave" sandwich board would hide my "Free Nelson Mandela" T-shirt.
--
Basil Jet - listening... Soft Cell. Soft Machine. Solomon Grey. Sonic
Youth. Sonique. Sonny Rollins. Sophie Ellis Bextor. Soul-Junk. Space.
Space (French). Spacehog. Spacemen 3. Spear Of Destiny. Spectres (UK).
Spiller feat Sophie Ellis Bextor. Spiritual Vibes. Spiritualized.
Splat!. Split Enz. Spoon. Spring King. Squeeze. Sroeng Santi.
Ian Jackson
2018-11-06 14:42:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Basil Jet
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
 Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
 Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-re
ferendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
 MM
Thank God for that! The countless hours I spent in 2016 wearing a
"Vote Leave" sandwich board would have been wasted if we could win a
poll without me doing it. But MM... if another referendum is called,
I'll put my sandwich board back on and I'll win Britain around again.
It's your democratic right to do that. You can start today, if you
want - or do you want to have to wait 'a generation' before you do it
again?
My "Vote Leave" sandwich board would hide my "Free Nelson Mandela" T-shirt.
Good man!
--
Ian
Vidcapper
2018-11-06 15:17:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Pardon me, but the largest poll ever on Brexit was on 23/6/16...
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
Ian Jackson
2018-11-06 19:09:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vidcapper
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-re
ferendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Pardon me, but the largest poll ever on Brexit was on 23/6/16...
This is 'the other Brexit issue' - the one about whether the two year
old result of the 2016 referendum is still valid - if, indeed, it ever
really was.
--
Ian
smolley
2018-11-06 19:41:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vidcapper
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-
shows-a3981436.html
Post by Vidcapper
Post by MM
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Pardon me, but the largest poll ever on Brexit was on 23/6/16...
Don't forget the public were conned into joining the EU by saying it was just a common market.
MM
2018-11-07 10:22:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by smolley
Don't forget the public were conned into joining the EU by saying it was just a common market.
You're having a fair go at conning the public if you think we joined
the EU in 1973. The EU didn't exist back then. It didn't come into
being until 20 years later.

MM
Fredxx
2018-11-07 22:58:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by smolley
Don't forget the public were conned into joining the EU by saying it was just a common market.
You're having a fair go at conning the public if you think we joined
the EU in 1973. The EU didn't exist back then. It didn't come into
being until 20 years later.
We should have had a referendum then too.
MM
2018-11-07 10:20:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vidcapper
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Pardon me, but the largest poll ever on Brexit was on 23/6/16...
That's redundant now, especially since so many young voters have
become old enough to vote and many OAPs have died.

As it is now increasingly clear, we will leave officially, while
remaining unofficially. There will be so many clauses, caveats,
special arrangement's and backstops that we won't actually have left,
except on paper. This whole issue is going to rumble on throughout the
transition period and beyond. There has to be an election in 2022 and
you can be sure that Brexit will feature heavily in that election. In
2022 are you still going to claim that a referendum held in 2016 must
be valid for a generation? How come elections are held every five
years, but referendums are not allowed to be? Who makes the rules?
You?

MM
JNugent
2018-11-06 17:51:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Yet more of MM's garbage.

The largest poll ever found 52% in favour of Leave and 48% in favour of
Remain.

For every hundred votes the reactionary Remain campaign got, the
revolutionary Leave cause got one hundred and eight - 8% more.
MM
2018-11-07 10:24:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Yet more of MM's garbage.
This comment must mean I've hit a nerve -- again!
Post by JNugent
The largest poll ever found 52% in favour of Leave and 48% in favour of
Remain.
That wasn't a poll. Or to put it another way, if it was, when do we
ever consider the results of polls to be mandatory?

MM
JNugent
2018-11-07 12:49:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Yet more of MM's garbage.
This comment must mean I've hit a nerve -- again!
Post by JNugent
The largest poll ever found 52% in favour of Leave and 48% in favour of
Remain.
That wasn't a poll.
Was it not?

When I voted on 23rd June 2016, I did so at a local council-owned
builkding with a large temporary sign outside reading "Polling Station".

But it *wasn't* a poll, you say?
Post by MM
Or to put it another way, if it was, when do we
ever consider the results of polls to be mandatory?
When they are held under the terms of the Representation Of The People
Act (in other words, when they are officialy-arranged and facilitated
votes for the purposes of election.

[Yes, I know you don't fully understand the meaning(s) of the word
"election".]
MM
2018-11-08 09:56:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Yet more of MM's garbage.
This comment must mean I've hit a nerve -- again!
Post by JNugent
The largest poll ever found 52% in favour of Leave and 48% in favour of
Remain.
That wasn't a poll.
Was it not?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union Referendum
Act 2015. This page tells you all you obviously didn't know:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted

By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that page,
nota bene.
Post by JNugent
When I voted on 23rd June 2016, I did so at a local council-owned
builkding with a large temporary sign outside reading "Polling Station".
But it *wasn't* a poll, you say?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union Referendum
Act 2015. This page tells you all you obviously didn't know:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted

By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that page,
nota bene.
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Or to put it another way, if it was, when do we
ever consider the results of polls to be mandatory?
When they are held under the terms of the Representation Of The People
Act (in other words, when they are officialy-arranged and facilitated
votes for the purposes of election.
So why doesn't this apply in the case of the European Referendum,
which was, and is, NOT mandatory?
Post by JNugent
[Yes, I know you don't fully understand the meaning(s) of the word
"election".]
Personalised jibes fall from me like water off a duck's back, so
you're just wasting your time, while drawing attention to your
immediate idiocy.

MM
JNugent
2018-11-08 14:06:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Yet more of MM's garbage.
This comment must mean I've hit a nerve -- again!
Post by JNugent
The largest poll ever found 52% in favour of Leave and 48% in favour of
Remain.
That wasn't a poll.
Was it not?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union Referendum
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted
By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that page,
nota bene.
Post by JNugent
When I voted on 23rd June 2016, I did so at a local council-owned
builkding with a large temporary sign outside reading "Polling Station".
But it *wasn't* a poll, you say?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union Referendum
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted
By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that page,
nota bene.
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Or to put it another way, if it was, when do we
ever consider the results of polls to be mandatory?
When they are held under the terms of the Representation Of The People
Act (in other words, when they are officialy-arranged and facilitated
votes for the purposes of election.
So why doesn't this apply in the case of the European Referendum,
which was, and is, NOT mandatory?
Promises, promises.

The best of us do our best to keep them.

The worst of us just laugh and pretend the promise wasn't made.
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
[Yes, I know you don't fully understand the meaning(s) of the word
"election".]
Personalised jibes fall from me like water off a duck's back, so
you're just wasting your time, while drawing attention to your
immediate idiocy.
Ah... there are quite a few words whose meanings you don't understand.
MM
2018-11-09 10:52:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Yet more of MM's garbage.
This comment must mean I've hit a nerve -- again!
Post by JNugent
The largest poll ever found 52% in favour of Leave and 48% in favour of
Remain.
That wasn't a poll.
Was it not?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union Referendum
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted
By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that page,
nota bene.
Post by JNugent
When I voted on 23rd June 2016, I did so at a local council-owned
builkding with a large temporary sign outside reading "Polling Station".
But it *wasn't* a poll, you say?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union Referendum
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted
By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that page,
nota bene.
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Or to put it another way, if it was, when do we
ever consider the results of polls to be mandatory?
When they are held under the terms of the Representation Of The People
Act (in other words, when they are officialy-arranged and facilitated
votes for the purposes of election.
So why doesn't this apply in the case of the European Referendum,
which was, and is, NOT mandatory?
Promises, promises.
The best of us do our best to keep them.
The Act didn't promise anything EXCEPT a referendum. Whatever Cameron
& Co may or may not have commented verbally or in leaflets had no
legal impact on what would follow.
Post by JNugent
The worst of us just laugh and pretend the promise wasn't made.
See above.

MM
JNugent
2018-11-09 13:49:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Yet more of MM's garbage.
This comment must mean I've hit a nerve -- again!
Post by JNugent
The largest poll ever found 52% in favour of Leave and 48% in favour of
Remain.
That wasn't a poll.
Was it not?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union Referendum
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted
By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that page,
nota bene.
Post by JNugent
When I voted on 23rd June 2016, I did so at a local council-owned
builkding with a large temporary sign outside reading "Polling Station".
But it *wasn't* a poll, you say?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union Referendum
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted
By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that page,
nota bene.
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Or to put it another way, if it was, when do we
ever consider the results of polls to be mandatory?
When they are held under the terms of the Representation Of The People
Act (in other words, when they are officialy-arranged and facilitated
votes for the purposes of election.
So why doesn't this apply in the case of the European Referendum,
which was, and is, NOT mandatory?
Promises, promises.
The best of us do our best to keep them.
The Act didn't promise anything EXCEPT a referendum. Whatever Cameron
& Co may or may not have commented verbally or in leaflets had no
legal impact on what would follow.
Post by JNugent
The worst of us just laugh and pretend the promise wasn't made.
As you have just tried - unsuccessfully - to do.

I believe you when you say that you would not have kept a promise.

That's obviously the sort of person you are. Thanks for confirming it.
MM
2018-11-10 09:10:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Yet more of MM's garbage.
This comment must mean I've hit a nerve -- again!
Post by JNugent
The largest poll ever found 52% in favour of Leave and 48% in favour of
Remain.
That wasn't a poll.
Was it not?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union Referendum
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted
By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that page,
nota bene.
Post by JNugent
When I voted on 23rd June 2016, I did so at a local council-owned
builkding with a large temporary sign outside reading "Polling Station".
But it *wasn't* a poll, you say?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union Referendum
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted
By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that page,
nota bene.
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Or to put it another way, if it was, when do we
ever consider the results of polls to be mandatory?
When they are held under the terms of the Representation Of The People
Act (in other words, when they are officialy-arranged and facilitated
votes for the purposes of election.
So why doesn't this apply in the case of the European Referendum,
which was, and is, NOT mandatory?
Promises, promises.
The best of us do our best to keep them.
The Act didn't promise anything EXCEPT a referendum. Whatever Cameron
& Co may or may not have commented verbally or in leaflets had no
legal impact on what would follow.
Post by JNugent
The worst of us just laugh and pretend the promise wasn't made.
As you have just tried - unsuccessfully - to do.
I believe you when you say that you would not have kept a promise.
That's obviously the sort of person you are. Thanks for confirming it.
It's not about me. It's about the referendum result, which was, and is
(still), advisory.

MM
Norman Wells
2018-11-10 09:23:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
It's not about me. It's about the referendum result, which was, and is
(still), advisory.
It was a Conservative manifesto pledge in 2015 on which a majority
Conservative government was elected:

"We will legislate in the first session of the next Parliament
for an in-out referendum to be held on Britain’s
membership of the EU before the end of 2017. We will
negotiate a new settlement for Britain in the EU. And then
we will ask the British people whether they want to stay
in on this basis, or leave."

It concluded with the commitment:

"We will honour the result of the referendum, whatever the outcome."

No sign there of it being merely advisory.
JNugent
2018-11-10 12:10:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Yet more of MM's garbage.
This comment must mean I've hit a nerve -- again!
Post by JNugent
The largest poll ever found 52% in favour of Leave and 48% in favour of
Remain.
That wasn't a poll.
Was it not?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union Referendum
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted
By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that page,
nota bene.
Post by JNugent
When I voted on 23rd June 2016, I did so at a local council-owned
builkding with a large temporary sign outside reading "Polling Station".
But it *wasn't* a poll, you say?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union Referendum
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted
By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that page,
nota bene.
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Or to put it another way, if it was, when do we
ever consider the results of polls to be mandatory?
When they are held under the terms of the Representation Of The People
Act (in other words, when they are officialy-arranged and facilitated
votes for the purposes of election.
So why doesn't this apply in the case of the European Referendum,
which was, and is, NOT mandatory?
Promises, promises.
The best of us do our best to keep them.
The Act didn't promise anything EXCEPT a referendum. Whatever Cameron
& Co may or may not have commented verbally or in leaflets had no
legal impact on what would follow.
Post by JNugent
The worst of us just laugh and pretend the promise wasn't made.
As you have just tried - unsuccessfully - to do.
I believe you when you say that you would not have kept a promise.
That's obviously the sort of person you are. Thanks for confirming it.
It's not about me. It's about the referendum result, which was, and is
(still), advisory.
The worst of humans, as you have demonstrated, care so little for other
people, and for morality and roper behavious, that they not only break
promises, but do their damnedest to pretend that they were never made.
Pamela
2018-11-10 13:38:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit.
Towards the end of the programme it was revealed that the
largest poll ever carried out on the Brexit issue found a
significant swing towards Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was
far greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-
new-
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-
a398143
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
6.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Yet more of MM's garbage.
This comment must mean I've hit a nerve -- again!
Post by JNugent
The largest poll ever found 52% in favour of Leave and 48% in
favour of Remain.
That wasn't a poll.
Was it not?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union
Referendum Act 2015. This page tells you all you obviously didn't
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted
By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that
page, nota bene.
Post by JNugent
When I voted on 23rd June 2016, I did so at a local
council-owned builkding with a large temporary sign outside
reading "Polling Station".
But it *wasn't* a poll, you say?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union
Referendum Act 2015. This page tells you all you obviously didn't
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted
By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that
page, nota bene.
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Or to put it another way, if it was, when do we
ever consider the results of polls to be mandatory?
When they are held under the terms of the Representation Of The
People Act (in other words, when they are officialy-arranged and
facilitated votes for the purposes of election.
So why doesn't this apply in the case of the European Referendum,
which was, and is, NOT mandatory?
Promises, promises.
The best of us do our best to keep them.
The Act didn't promise anything EXCEPT a referendum. Whatever
Cameron & Co may or may not have commented verbally or in leaflets
had no legal impact on what would follow.
Post by JNugent
The worst of us just laugh and pretend the promise wasn't made.
As you have just tried - unsuccessfully - to do.
I believe you when you say that you would not have kept a promise.
That's obviously the sort of person you are. Thanks for confirming it.
It's not about me. It's about the referendum result, which was, and
is (still), advisory.
The worst of humans, as you have demonstrated, care so little for
other people, and for morality and roper behavious, that they not only
break promises, but do their damnedest to pretend that they were never
made.
Realpolitik was ever thus. Welcome to reality.
JNugent
2018-11-10 16:01:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit.
Towards the end of the programme it was revealed that the
largest poll ever carried out on the Brexit issue found a
significant swing towards Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was
far greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-
new-
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-
a398143
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
6.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Yet more of MM's garbage.
This comment must mean I've hit a nerve -- again!
Post by JNugent
The largest poll ever found 52% in favour of Leave and 48% in
favour of Remain.
That wasn't a poll.
Was it not?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union
Referendum Act 2015. This page tells you all you obviously didn't
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted
By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that
page, nota bene.
Post by JNugent
When I voted on 23rd June 2016, I did so at a local
council-owned builkding with a large temporary sign outside
reading "Polling Station".
But it *wasn't* a poll, you say?
No. It was a referendum as laid out in the European Union
Referendum Act 2015. This page tells you all you obviously didn't
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted
By the way, not a single mention of a "poll" anywhere on that
page, nota bene.
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Or to put it another way, if it was, when do we
ever consider the results of polls to be mandatory?
When they are held under the terms of the Representation Of The
People Act (in other words, when they are officialy-arranged and
facilitated votes for the purposes of election.
So why doesn't this apply in the case of the European Referendum,
which was, and is, NOT mandatory?
Promises, promises.
The best of us do our best to keep them.
The Act didn't promise anything EXCEPT a referendum. Whatever
Cameron & Co may or may not have commented verbally or in leaflets
had no legal impact on what would follow.
Post by JNugent
The worst of us just laugh and pretend the promise wasn't made.
As you have just tried - unsuccessfully - to do.
I believe you when you say that you would not have kept a promise.
That's obviously the sort of person you are. Thanks for confirming it.
It's not about me. It's about the referendum result, which was, and
is (still), advisory.
The worst of humans, as you have demonstrated, care so little for
other people, and for morality and roper behavious, that they not only
break promises, but do their damnedest to pretend that they were never
made.
Realpolitik was ever thus. Welcome to reality.
Indeed - that *is* the reality of MM's duplicitous position.
MM
2018-11-11 10:22:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Indeed - that *is* the reality of MM's duplicitous position.
What is "duplicitous" in respecting the wording of trhe Act?

In fact, YOU are the duplicitous one by denying the Act and
substituting non-legally binding statements by Cameron and others.

MM
JNugent
2018-11-11 14:09:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Indeed - that *is* the reality of MM's duplicitous position.
What is "duplicitous" in respecting the wording of trhe Act?
There you go again, pretending that there was no promise (by misdirection).
Post by MM
In fact, YOU are the duplicitous one by denying the Act and
substituting non-legally binding statements by Cameron and others.
There you go yet again, pretending that there was no promise (by
misdirection).
Pamela
2018-11-11 14:33:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Indeed - that *is* the reality of MM's duplicitous position.
What is "duplicitous" in respecting the wording of trhe Act?
There you go again, pretending that there was no promise (by
misdirection).
Post by MM
In fact, YOU are the duplicitous one by denying the Act and
substituting non-legally binding statements by Cameron and others.
There you go yet again, pretending that there was no promise (by
misdirection).
Which "promises" are you referring to? Are you still expecting them to be
kept or have they lapsed?
JNugent
2018-11-11 16:27:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Indeed - that *is* the reality of MM's duplicitous position.
What is "duplicitous" in respecting the wording of trhe Act?
There you go again, pretending that there was no promise (by
misdirection).
Post by MM
In fact, YOU are the duplicitous one by denying the Act and
substituting non-legally binding statements by Cameron and others.
There you go yet again, pretending that there was no promise (by
misdirection).
Which "promises" are you referring to? Are you still expecting them to be
kept or have they lapsed?
They have been pointed out several times, and even, IIRC, in this thread.
Pamela
2018-11-11 19:22:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by Pamela
Post by JNugent
Post by JNugent
Indeed - that *is* the reality of MM's duplicitous position.
What is "duplicitous" in respecting the wording of the Act?
There you go again, pretending that there was no promise (by
misdirection).
In fact, YOU are the duplicitous one by denying the Act and
substituting non-legally binding statements by Cameron and others.
There you go yet again, pretending that there was no promise (by
misdirection).
Which "promises" are you referring to? Are you still expecting them
to be kept or have they lapsed?
They have been pointed out several times, and even, IIRC, in this thread.
Any early promises have lapsed or are of no consequence.
JNugent
2018-11-11 22:45:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by JNugent
Post by Pamela
Post by JNugent
Post by JNugent
Indeed - that *is* the reality of MM's duplicitous position.
What is "duplicitous" in respecting the wording of the Act?
There you go again, pretending that there was no promise (by misdirection).
In fact, YOU are the duplicitous one by denying the Act and
substituting non-legally binding statements by Cameron and others.
There you go yet again, pretending that there was no promise (by
misdirection).
Which "promises" are you referring to? Are you still expecting them
to be kept or have they lapsed?
They have been pointed out several times, and even, IIRC, in this thread.
Any early promises have lapsed or are of no consequence.
The relevant promises have been kept and the process is almost at an end.
MM
2018-11-11 10:20:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
The worst of humans, as you have demonstrated, care so little for other
people, and for morality and roper behavious, that they not only break
promises, but do their damnedest to pretend that they were never made.
No such promise was made in the actual document that matters, namely
the European Union Referendum Act 2015.

MM
Norman Wells
2018-11-11 10:29:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
The worst of humans, as you have demonstrated, care so little for other
people, and for morality and roper behavious, that they not only break
promises, but do their damnedest to pretend that they were never made.
No such promise was made in the actual document that matters, namely
the European Union Referendum Act 2015.
Statutes are not the place for promises, but for the law.

It's pretty fundamental.
JNugent
2018-11-11 14:09:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
The worst of humans, as you have demonstrated, care so little for other
people, and for morality and roper behavious, that they not only break
promises, but do their damnedest to pretend that they were never made.
No such promise was made in the actual document that matters, namely
the European Union Referendum Act 2015.
Thank you for the live demonstration (again).
Fredxx
2018-11-07 22:55:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Yet more of MM's garbage.
This comment must mean I've hit a nerve -- again!
Post by JNugent
The largest poll ever found 52% in favour of Leave and 48% in favour of
Remain.
That wasn't a poll. Or to put it another way, if it was, when do we
ever consider the results of polls to be mandatory?
That's right, it was a once in a generation referendum.

Many polls before the referendum showed a Remain lead but that didn't
count then and doesn't now.
MM
2018-11-08 09:58:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Fredxx
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Yet more of MM's garbage.
This comment must mean I've hit a nerve -- again!
Post by JNugent
The largest poll ever found 52% in favour of Leave and 48% in favour of
Remain.
That wasn't a poll. Or to put it another way, if it was, when do we
ever consider the results of polls to be mandatory?
That's right, it was a once in a generation referendum.
Which was, and is, not mandatory.
Post by Fredxx
Many polls before the referendum showed a Remain lead but that didn't
count then and doesn't now.
Neither does any legal mandate for carrying out the referendum result,
as it was purely an *advisory* referendum.

MM
Omega
2018-11-08 11:40:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by Fredxx
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
Yet more of MM's garbage.
This comment must mean I've hit a nerve -- again!
Post by JNugent
The largest poll ever found 52% in favour of Leave and 48% in favour of
Remain.
That wasn't a poll. Or to put it another way, if it was, when do we
ever consider the results of polls to be mandatory?
That's right, it was a once in a generation referendum.
Which was, and is, not mandatory.
Post by Fredxx
Many polls before the referendum showed a Remain lead but that didn't
count then and doesn't now.
Neither does any legal mandate for carrying out the referendum result,
as it was purely an *advisory* referendum.
MM
Re-writing history once again MM?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282

You really are outrageous even for a duck!

omega
Ian Jackson
2018-11-08 14:47:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
You really are outrageous even for a duck!
omega
Regardless of what was promised (and what you choose to think), in UK
law the result of the referendum is not binding.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yaafskua

But that is not to say that it should not be honoured - unless, of
course, there is good evidence that the result no longer represents The
Will Of The People - and that this will continue to be the case. If this
IS the case, then the result should not be arbitrarily dismissed, but
instead should only be changed by The People again expressing Their
Will.
--
Ian
Omega
2018-11-08 17:24:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
You really are outrageous even for a duck!
omega
Regardless of what was promised (and what you choose to think), in UK
law the result of the referendum is not binding.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yaafskua
But that is not to say that it should not be honoured - unless, of
course, there is good evidence that the result no longer represents The
Will Of The People - and that this will continue to be the case. If this
IS the case, then the result should not be arbitrarily dismissed, but
instead should only be changed by The People again expressing Their Will.
You don't understand do you?

Whether the Referendum is binding or not legally the British Government
pledged beforehand, they would honour the majority vote.

The Brexiteers were the winners with a substantial vote and the
Government kept their word, now intending to take us from the EU.

A perfectly legal move!

You insist the decision was NOT legally binding but the Government chose
to make it legally binding BEFORE the Referendum. That makes it legal.

Had the Remainers won the vote, The Government was happy to honour that
vote, something you would have relished. The Government acted
completely legally and equally so had it been a Remain vote supporting
that!.

It really is YOUR problem, you lost!

Keep crying, were leaving!

Your surmising, the vote would change if we have a new referendum is
irrelevant. The Government set a course of action as promised nearly
two years ago and we leave in less than four months.

Regarding your summation another Referendum would change the overall
vote is a view based on nonsense polls. Do remember your consternation
when you realised the Brexiteers won, your polls looking utterly
ridiculous!

Your 'New Referendum' campaign is being run by traitors.

omega
The Todal
2018-11-08 17:37:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Omega
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
You really are outrageous even for a duck!
omega
Regardless of what was promised (and what you choose to think), in UK
law the result of the referendum is not binding.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yaafskua
But that is not to say that it should not be honoured - unless, of
course, there is good evidence that the result no longer represents
The Will Of The People - and that this will continue to be the case.
If this IS the case, then the result should not be arbitrarily
dismissed, but instead should only be changed by The People again
expressing Their Will.
You don't understand do you?
Whether the Referendum is binding or not legally the British Government
pledged beforehand, they would honour the majority vote.
Which is as valid as any manifesto promise. It can be broken at the next
Budget.
Post by Omega
The Brexiteers were the winners with a substantial vote and the
Government kept their word, now intending to take us from the EU.
A perfectly legal move!
You insist the decision was NOT legally binding but the Government chose
to make it legally binding BEFORE the Referendum.  That makes it legal.
No, it really doesn't. It was an advisory referendum. The enabling Act
said that there shall be a referendum and didn't specify what the
consequences would be.

Even if you assume that it would be political suicide not to honour the
result of the referendum, the only obligation would be to leave the EU.
Signing up afresh to all the obligations and rules of the EU would be
entirely consistent with that, so long as technically we have ceased to
be members of the EU.

I agree that we must not have yet another referendum. There is no
justification for another referendum.
Omega
2018-11-08 18:33:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by The Todal
Post by Omega
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
You really are outrageous even for a duck!
omega
Regardless of what was promised (and what you choose to think), in UK
law the result of the referendum is not binding.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yaafskua
But that is not to say that it should not be honoured - unless, of
course, there is good evidence that the result no longer represents
The Will Of The People - and that this will continue to be the case.
If this IS the case, then the result should not be arbitrarily
dismissed, but instead should only be changed by The People again
expressing Their Will.
You don't understand do you?
Whether the Referendum is binding or not legally the British
Government pledged beforehand, they would honour the majority vote.
Which is as valid as any manifesto promise. It can be broken at the next
Budget.
Post by Omega
The Brexiteers were the winners with a substantial vote and the
Government kept their word, now intending to take us from the EU.
A perfectly legal move!
You insist the decision was NOT legally binding but the Government
chose to make it legally binding BEFORE the Referendum.  That makes it
legal.
No, it really doesn't. It was an advisory referendum. The enabling Act
said that there shall be a referendum and didn't specify what the
consequences would be.
Even if you assume that it would be political suicide not to honour the
result of the referendum, the only obligation would be to leave the EU.
Signing up afresh to all the obligations and rules of the EU would be
entirely consistent with that, so long as technically we have ceased to
be members of the EU.
I agree that we must not have yet another referendum. There is no
justification for another referendum.
Okay, for brevity, I do understand now and did so before my previous
post, 'a referendum is not legally binding'. Let us say then, the
Government gave the majority vote credence by supporting them as soon as
the votes had been counted just as they had promised.

If the referendum was 'advisory' then the 'outcome' as supported by
Government, soon became legal when A50 was invoked.

What the other poster believes, I think, he will let us know no doubt,
because the referendum was advisory only, the Government acted illegally
in reacting to the result. They did not! They were perfectly correct
to support the result or not. Their promise in the manifesto was
succinct. Remain or leave, the Government had pledged to support the
majority vote. They did, just that.

Oh what an irony if there was some mechanism to have REF2 and the
Remainers somehow come away with the majority but the Government having
made no promises this time said, well that was only advisory and as we
are so near to leaving it would be far too messy to turn back now.

omega


omega
The Todal
2018-11-08 19:21:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Omega
Post by The Todal
Post by Omega
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
You really are outrageous even for a duck!
omega
Regardless of what was promised (and what you choose to think), in
UK law the result of the referendum is not binding.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yaafskua
But that is not to say that it should not be honoured - unless, of
course, there is good evidence that the result no longer represents
The Will Of The People - and that this will continue to be the case.
If this IS the case, then the result should not be arbitrarily
dismissed, but instead should only be changed by The People again
expressing Their Will.
You don't understand do you?
Whether the Referendum is binding or not legally the British
Government pledged beforehand, they would honour the majority vote.
Which is as valid as any manifesto promise. It can be broken at the
next Budget.
Post by Omega
The Brexiteers were the winners with a substantial vote and the
Government kept their word, now intending to take us from the EU.
A perfectly legal move!
You insist the decision was NOT legally binding but the Government
chose to make it legally binding BEFORE the Referendum.  That makes
it legal.
No, it really doesn't. It was an advisory referendum. The enabling Act
said that there shall be a referendum and didn't specify what the
consequences would be.
Even if you assume that it would be political suicide not to honour
the result of the referendum, the only obligation would be to leave
the EU. Signing up afresh to all the obligations and rules of the EU
would be entirely consistent with that, so long as technically we have
ceased to be members of the EU.
I agree that we must not have yet another referendum. There is no
justification for another referendum.
Okay, for brevity, I do understand now and did so before my previous
post, 'a referendum is not legally binding'.  Let us say then, the
Government gave the majority vote credence by supporting them as soon as
the votes had been counted just as they had promised.
If the referendum was 'advisory' then the 'outcome' as supported by
Government, soon became legal when A50 was invoked.
What the other poster believes, I think, he will let us know no doubt,
because the referendum was advisory only, the Government acted illegally
in reacting to the result.  They did not!
Agreed.
Post by Omega
  They were perfectly correct
to support the result or not. Their promise in the manifesto was
succinct.  Remain or leave, the Government had pledged to support the
majority vote.  They did, just that.
Oh what an irony if there was some mechanism to have REF2 and the
Remainers somehow come away with the majority but the Government having
made no promises this time said, well that was only advisory and as we
are so near to leaving it would be far too messy to turn back now.
Regardless of whether the referendum result is binding on the
government, it has now clearly embarked on a policy of negotiating our
exit from the EU, with the support of the majority of MPs in Parliament.
Any attempt to reverse this policy will make Parliament look very silly,
and will waste a huge amount of taxpayers' money and civil servants'
time already expended on planning our exit.

Still. Remember the Blue Streak missile? And the Nimrod MRA4?
Ian Jackson
2018-11-08 22:55:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by The Todal
Post by Omega
Post by The Todal
Post by Omega
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
You really are outrageous even for a duck!
omega
Regardless of what was promised (and what you choose to think), in
UK law the result of the referendum is not binding.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yaafskua
But that is not to say that it should not be honoured - unless, of
course, there is good evidence that the result no longer represents
The Will Of The People - and that this will continue to be the
case. If this IS the case, then the result should not be
arbitrarily dismissed, but instead should only be changed by The
People again expressing Their Will.
You don't understand do you?
Whether the Referendum is binding or not legally the British
Government pledged beforehand, they would honour the majority vote.
Which is as valid as any manifesto promise. It can be broken at the
next Budget.
Post by Omega
The Brexiteers were the winners with a substantial vote and the
Government kept their word, now intending to take us from the EU.
A perfectly legal move!
You insist the decision was NOT legally binding but the Government
chose to make it legally binding BEFORE the Referendum.  That makes
it legal.
No, it really doesn't. It was an advisory referendum. The enabling
Act said that there shall be a referendum and didn't specify what
the consequences would be.
Even if you assume that it would be political suicide not to honour
the result of the referendum, the only obligation would be to leave
the EU. Signing up afresh to all the obligations and rules of the EU
would be entirely consistent with that, so long as technically we
have ceased to be members of the EU.
I agree that we must not have yet another referendum. There is no
justification for another referendum.
Okay, for brevity, I do understand now and did so before my
previous post, 'a referendum is not legally binding'.  Let us say
then, the Government gave the majority vote credence by supporting
them as soon as the votes had been counted just as they had promised.
If the referendum was 'advisory' then the 'outcome' as supported by
Government, soon became legal when A50 was invoked.
What the other poster believes, I think, he will let us know no
doubt, because the referendum was advisory only, the Government acted
illegally in reacting to the result.  They did not!
Agreed.
The decision to leave the EU was made not by The People, but instead it
was made by the UK's sovereign Parliament (acting on what the Will Of
The People happened to be on 23 June, 2016).

The only time that the Government tried to act illegally was when
Theresa May tried to bypass the legal process, and wanted to invoke A50
without this being approved by Parliament.
Post by The Todal
Post by Omega
  They were perfectly correct to support the result or not. Their
promise in the manifesto was succinct.  Remain or leave, the
Government had pledged to support the majority vote.  They did, just
Oh what an irony if there was some mechanism to have REF2 and the
Remainers somehow come away with the majority but the Government
having made no promises this time said, well that was only advisory
and as we are so near to leaving it would be far too messy to turn
back now.
Regardless of whether the referendum result is binding on the
government, it has now clearly embarked on a policy of negotiating our
exit from the EU, with the support of the majority of MPs in Parliament.
But against the better judgement of most of them.
Post by The Todal
Any attempt to reverse this policy will make Parliament look very
silly, and will waste a huge amount of taxpayers' money and civil
servants' time already expended on planning our exit.
Better to look silly than doggedly plough on and wreck the UK.
Post by The Todal
Still. Remember the Blue Streak missile? And the Nimrod MRA4?
Only fools knowingly throw good money after bad.
--
Ian
Norman Wells
2018-11-09 08:42:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by The Todal
Regardless of whether the referendum result is binding on the
government, it has now clearly embarked on a policy of negotiating our
exit from the EU, with the support of the majority of MPs in Parliament.
But against the better judgement of most of them.
If you vote on anything, you have to vote for what you want, otherwise
the whole process is a nonsense. Too bad if they voted 'against their
better judgement' (for which there is no evidence actually). They can't
whinge now. They voted the way they did. They decided what was decided.

And they decided it by a massive majority of 384 (498 voted for, 114
against).
Omega
2018-11-09 08:33:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by The Todal
Post by Omega
Post by The Todal
Post by Omega
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
You really are outrageous even for a duck!
omega
Regardless of what was promised (and what you choose to think), in
UK law the result of the referendum is not binding.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yaafskua
But that is not to say that it should not be honoured - unless, of
course, there is good evidence that the result no longer represents
The Will Of The People - and that this will continue to be the
case. If this IS the case, then the result should not be
arbitrarily dismissed, but instead should only be changed by The
People again expressing Their Will.
You don't understand do you?
Whether the Referendum is binding or not legally the British
Government pledged beforehand, they would honour the majority vote.
Which is as valid as any manifesto promise. It can be broken at the
next Budget.
Post by Omega
The Brexiteers were the winners with a substantial vote and the
Government kept their word, now intending to take us from the EU.
A perfectly legal move!
You insist the decision was NOT legally binding but the Government
chose to make it legally binding BEFORE the Referendum.  That makes
it legal.
No, it really doesn't. It was an advisory referendum. The enabling
Act said that there shall be a referendum and didn't specify what the
consequences would be.
Even if you assume that it would be political suicide not to honour
the result of the referendum, the only obligation would be to leave
the EU. Signing up afresh to all the obligations and rules of the EU
would be entirely consistent with that, so long as technically we
have ceased to be members of the EU.
I agree that we must not have yet another referendum. There is no
justification for another referendum.
Okay, for brevity, I do understand now and did so before my previous
post, 'a referendum is not legally binding'.  Let us say then, the
Government gave the majority vote credence by supporting them as soon
as the votes had been counted just as they had promised.
If the referendum was 'advisory' then the 'outcome' as supported by
Government, soon became legal when A50 was invoked.
What the other poster believes, I think, he will let us know no doubt,
because the referendum was advisory only, the Government acted
illegally in reacting to the result.  They did not!
Agreed.
Post by Omega
  They were perfectly correct to support the result or not. Their
promise in the manifesto was succinct.  Remain or leave, the
Government had pledged to support the majority vote.  They did, just
that.
Oh what an irony if there was some mechanism to have REF2 and the
Remainers somehow come away with the majority but the Government
having made no promises this time said, well that was only advisory
and as we are so near to leaving it would be far too messy to turn
back now.
Regardless of whether the referendum result is binding on the
government, it has now clearly embarked on a policy of negotiating our
exit from the EU, with the support of the majority of MPs in Parliament.
Any attempt to reverse this policy will make Parliament look very silly,
and will waste a huge amount of taxpayers' money and civil servants'
time already expended on planning our exit.
Still. Remember the Blue Streak missile? And the Nimrod MRA4?
If you are interested in aviation there is a fabulous Air Museum at RAF
Cosford if ever you are in the area.

If I recall there is an example of Blue Streak and a Comet from which
the Nimrod was derived.

King of the castle in my view is an example of the TSR 2 another money
gobbler before it was dropped by the Wilson Government, then settled on
buying American Phantoms. It is quite remarkable how much the later
American F111 looked like our first swing wing bomber.

I'm always fascinated by the all stainless steel 188, yes it actually
flew and at a hell of a speed apparently but once again, then dropped.

If you want to be proper anorak you can still stand under th wings of a
Vulcan Bomber when it's raining.

And let's not forget the English Electric/BAC Lightning the pilots
favourite and held the fastest airspeed record in the world for a few
years. The curators at the at the museum will proudly tell you it is
the only aircraft in the RAF inventory made every bit, nut and rivet in
the UK.

Chocks away.

omega
Pamela
2018-11-10 13:37:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Omega
Post by The Todal
Post by Omega
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
You really are outrageous even for a duck!
omega
Regardless of what was promised (and what you choose to think), in
UK law the result of the referendum is not binding.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yaafskua
But that is not to say that it should not be honoured - unless, of
course, there is good evidence that the result no longer represents
The Will Of The People - and that this will continue to be the
case. If this IS the case, then the result should not be
arbitrarily dismissed, but instead should only be changed by The
People again expressing Their Will.
You don't understand do you?
Whether the Referendum is binding or not legally the British
Government pledged beforehand, they would honour the majority vote.
Which is as valid as any manifesto promise. It can be broken at the
next Budget.
Post by Omega
The Brexiteers were the winners with a substantial vote and the
Government kept their word, now intending to take us from the EU.
A perfectly legal move!
You insist the decision was NOT legally binding but the Government
chose to make it legally binding BEFORE the Referendum.  That makes
it legal.
No, it really doesn't. It was an advisory referendum. The enabling
Act said that there shall be a referendum and didn't specify what the
consequences would be.
Even if you assume that it would be political suicide not to honour
the result of the referendum, the only obligation would be to leave
the EU. Signing up afresh to all the obligations and rules of the EU
would be entirely consistent with that, so long as technically we
have ceased to be members of the EU.
I agree that we must not have yet another referendum. There is no
justification for another referendum.
Okay, for brevity, I do understand now and did so before my previous
post, 'a referendum is not legally binding'. Let us say then, the
Government gave the majority vote credence by supporting them as soon
as the votes had been counted just as they had promised.
If the referendum was 'advisory' then the 'outcome' as supported by
Government, soon became legal when A50 was invoked.
What the other poster believes, I think, he will let us know no doubt,
because the referendum was advisory only, the Government acted
illegally in reacting to the result. They did not! They were
perfectly correct to support the result or not. Their promise in the
manifesto was succinct. Remain or leave, the Government had pledged
to support the majority vote. They did, just that.
You're raking over old ground. Parliament decides in whatever way it
chooses.
Post by Omega
Oh what an irony if there was some mechanism to have REF2 and the
Remainers somehow come away with the majority but the Government
having made no promises this time said, well that was only advisory
and as we are so near to leaving it would be far too messy to turn
back now.
omega
You're squirming. Parliament would decide by taking into account the
advice given by voters in the second referendum.
MM
2018-11-09 11:37:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Omega
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
You really are outrageous even for a duck!
omega
Regardless of what was promised (and what you choose to think), in UK
law the result of the referendum is not binding.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yaafskua
But that is not to say that it should not be honoured - unless, of
course, there is good evidence that the result no longer represents The
Will Of The People - and that this will continue to be the case. If this
IS the case, then the result should not be arbitrarily dismissed, but
instead should only be changed by The People again expressing Their Will.
You don't understand do you?
Whether the Referendum is binding or not legally the British Government
pledged beforehand, they would honour the majority vote.
Pledges are not law. Pledges are usually nothing more than
electioneering to persuade voters to vote for your party. Which is
what Cameron did.
Post by Omega
The Brexiteers were the winners with a substantial vote and the
Government kept their word, now intending to take us from the EU.
Until the whole shambles unravels totally and the House of Commons
rejects anything Theresa May offers them. Anything, that is, except to
write off Brexit and stay in.
Post by Omega
A perfectly legal move!
Please cite any legal document that confirms this.
Post by Omega
You insist the decision was NOT legally binding but the Government chose
to make it legally binding BEFORE the Referendum. That makes it legal.
It is not the government, but Parliament that passed the European
Union Referendum Act 2015. You cannot possible suggest that anything a
government may say is automatically legally binding. Especially when
in the case of the referendum, it wasn't and isn't.
Post by Omega
Had the Remainers won the vote, The Government was happy to honour that
vote, something you would have relished. The Government acted
completely legally and equally so had it been a Remain vote supporting
that!.
The government is NOT Parliament! What counts is the wording in the
Act, nothing else.

MM
Pamela
2018-11-10 13:34:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Omega
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
You really are outrageous even for a duck!
omega
Regardless of what was promised (and what you choose to think), in UK
law the result of the referendum is not binding.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yaafskua
But that is not to say that it should not be honoured - unless, of
course, there is good evidence that the result no longer represents
The Will Of The People - and that this will continue to be the case.
If this IS the case, then the result should not be arbitrarily
dismissed, but instead should only be changed by The People again
expressing Their Will.
You don't understand do you?
Whether the Referendum is binding or not legally the British
Government pledged beforehand, they would honour the majority vote.
Exactly what redress do you propose if that turns out to be yet another
politician's lie? It was an ultra vires commitment from the beginning
because the Supreme Court clarified that Parliament makes this decision.
Post by Omega
The Brexiteers were the winners with a substantial vote and the
Government kept their word, now intending to take us from the EU.
A perfectly legal move!
You insist the decision was NOT legally binding but the Government
chose to make it legally binding BEFORE the Referendum. That makes it
legal.
Nonsense. Where do you get such flakey logic from?
Post by Omega
Had the Remainers won the vote, The Government was happy to honour
that vote, something you would have relished. The Government acted
completely legally and equally so had it been a Remain vote supporting
that!.
It really is YOUR problem, you lost!
Keep crying, were leaving!
Your surmising, the vote would change if we have a new referendum is
irrelevant. The Government set a course of action as promised nearly
two years ago and we leave in less than four months.
Regarding your summation another Referendum would change the overall
vote is a view based on nonsense polls. Do remember your
consternation when you realised the Brexiteers won, your polls looking
utterly ridiculous!
Your 'New Referendum' campaign is being run by traitors.
The real traitors are those who want to leave a mutually benefical
membership of the EU in order to further their nonsensical beliefs and,
in some cases, to line their own pockets from Brexit.
Ian Jackson
2018-11-10 14:15:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by Omega
Your 'New Referendum' campaign is being run by traitors.
The real traitors are those who want to leave a mutually benefical
membership of the EU in order to further their nonsensical beliefs and,
in some cases, to line their own pockets from Brexit.
Many Brexiteer in-phoners say that the 17.3 million will feel 'betrayed;
if a second referendum is allowed, and they will be
angry/incensed/incandescent (and all shades in between).

I simply can't understand why they should feel like this. Will this
'betrayal' be by those who allow the referendum? On the other hand, will
it be by those voters who either continue to vote to stay, or by those
who originally voted to leave but this time decide to vote to stay?
--
Ian
Pamela
2018-11-10 15:04:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Pamela
Post by Omega
Your 'New Referendum' campaign is being run by traitors.
The real traitors are those who want to leave a mutually benefical
membership of the EU in order to further their nonsensical beliefs and,
in some cases, to line their own pockets from Brexit.
Many Brexiteer in-phoners say that the 17.3 million will feel 'betrayed;
if a second referendum is allowed, and they will be
angry/incensed/incandescent (and all shades in between).
I simply can't understand why they should feel like this. Will this
'betrayal' be by those who allow the referendum? On the other hand, will
it be by those voters who either continue to vote to stay, or by those
who originally voted to leave but this time decide to vote to stay?
That 17.3 million should feel very happy they have an opportunity to speak
up for which Brexit on offer they actually want - rather than the dreamy
nonsense promised in the campaign.

Leavers seem to dread a second referendum might stop Brexit because they
rightly judge that the majority of the country no longer supports leaving
the EU. Although it's not the purpose of the second referendum to vote on
the same grounds as the first one, they remain terrified.
Ian Jackson
2018-11-10 15:38:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Leavers seem to dread a second referendum might stop Brexit because they
rightly judge that the majority of the country no longer supports leaving
the EU. Although it's not the purpose of the second referendum to vote on
the same grounds as the first one, they remain terrified.
They certainly seem to be getting very angry at the possibility. But is
it just that their once-in-a-generation referendum vote (and therefore
'they') would be being 'disrespected', or is it the obvious prospect of
their will (the 'Will Of The People') has every chance of being thwarted
by a load unpatriotic traitors?
--
Ian
Norman Wells
2018-11-10 16:44:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Pamela
Leavers seem to dread a second referendum might stop Brexit because they
rightly judge that the majority of the country no longer supports leaving
the EU.  Although it's not the purpose of the second referendum to
vote on
the same grounds as the first one, they remain terrified.
They certainly seem to be getting very angry at the possibility. But is
it just that their once-in-a-generation referendum vote (and therefore
'they') would be being 'disrespected',
They would be. And that would be quite enough on its own. They won
when it mattered. Why should they have to undergo a replay and win that
as well? It wasn't a draw.
Post by Ian Jackson
or is it the obvious prospect of
their will (the 'Will Of The People') has every chance of being thwarted
by a load unpatriotic traitors?
There's no justification for a replay. The next round has already been
played.
Pamela
2018-11-10 17:31:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Pamela
Leavers seem to dread a second referendum might stop Brexit because
they rightly judge that the majority of the country no longer supports
leaving the EU. Although it's not the purpose of the second
referendum to vote on the same grounds as the first one, they remain
terrified.
They certainly seem to be getting very angry at the possibility. But
is it just that their once-in-a-generation referendum vote (and
therefore 'they') would be being 'disrespected', or is it the obvious
prospect of their will (the 'Will Of The People') has every chance of
being thwarted by a load unpatriotic traitors?
"Will of the people", "once in a generation", "traitors" and so on are just
debating fodder used to score points or save face. They have no value in
affecting the decisions made in the real world.
Norman Wells
2018-11-10 16:39:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
That 17.3 million should feel very happy they have an opportunity to speak
up for which Brexit on offer they actually want - rather than the dreamy
nonsense promised in the campaign.
Why should they have to fight again? They won when it mattered. There
are no grounds for a replay.
Post by Pamela
Leavers seem to dread a second referendum might stop Brexit because they
rightly judge that the majority of the country no longer supports leaving
the EU. Although it's not the purpose of the second referendum to vote on
the same grounds as the first one, they remain terrified.
Remainers want a second referendum on exactly the same question as was
decided in the first. They dress it up of course, but that's the truth.

Those who say oh no, it will be on the terms that have been negotiated,
have no answer to what it would mean or what should happen if the terms
were to be rejected. Re-negotiation? If so, of what? Leave with no
deal? Stay in if the EU will allow us to crawl back? Or what?

Any such referendum would involve an absurdly complicated question
hardly understandable by most of the electorate.
MM
2018-11-11 10:25:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Leavers seem to dread a second referendum might stop Brexit because they
rightly judge that the majority of the country no longer supports leaving
the EU. Although it's not the purpose of the second referendum to vote on
the same grounds as the first one, they remain terrified.
I think the dread of another referendum by Leavers is borne out by the
fact that right up to referendum night on 24/June/2018 most Brexiters,
including Nigel Farage, thought they wouldn't win. They just don't
want tor risk it again.

MM
Norman Wells
2018-11-11 10:31:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by Pamela
Leavers seem to dread a second referendum might stop Brexit because they
rightly judge that the majority of the country no longer supports leaving
the EU. Although it's not the purpose of the second referendum to vote on
the same grounds as the first one, they remain terrified.
I think the dread of another referendum by Leavers is borne out by the
fact that right up to referendum night on 24/June/2018 most Brexiters,
including Nigel Farage, thought they wouldn't win. They just don't
want tor risk it again.
There's no reason at all why they should. The first one wasn't a draw,
so there are no grounds for a replay.
Norman Wells
2018-11-10 16:28:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Pamela
Post by Omega
Your 'New Referendum' campaign is being run by traitors.
The real traitors are those who want to leave a mutually benefical
membership of the EU in order to further their nonsensical beliefs and,
in some cases, to line their own pockets from Brexit.
Many Brexiteer in-phoners say that the 17.3 million will feel 'betrayed;
if a second referendum is allowed, and they will be
angry/incensed/incandescent (and all shades in between).
I simply can't understand why they should feel like this.
Then let me explain. We were given a commitment in the 2015
Conservative manifesto that a simple in/out referendum would be held on
the basis of negotiations that would take place with the EU beforehand
to alter our terms of membership. We were promised that the result of
the referendum would be honoured whichever way we decided. On that
basis we elected a Conservative government with an overall majority.

The negotiations took place, but resulted in no change. We then had the
referendum on the ground rules set out in the government leaflet
delivered to every household in the country that said very clearly
indeed that it was our decision, it was just once in a generation, and
that the government would implement what we decided.

Against the odds, the polls, the government propaganda in the leaflet,
and the expectations of political commentators, Leave won with a
substantial majority of 1,269,501.

Of course those who voted Leave now hold the government to its promises.
If any of those promises are broken they will not only feel betrayed
but actually be betrayed.
Post by Ian Jackson
Will this
'betrayal' be by those who allow the referendum? On the other hand, will
it be by those voters who either continue to vote to stay, or by those
who originally voted to leave but this time decide to vote to stay?
The betrayal will be by those who break any of the promises of course.
As always.
Pamela
2018-11-10 17:35:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Norman Wells
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Pamela
Post by Omega
Your 'New Referendum' campaign is being run by traitors.
The real traitors are those who want to leave a mutually benefical
membership of the EU in order to further their nonsensical beliefs
and, in some cases, to line their own pockets from Brexit.
Many Brexiteer in-phoners say that the 17.3 million will feel
'betrayed; if a second referendum is allowed, and they will be
angry/incensed/incandescent (and all shades in between).
I simply can't understand why they should feel like this.
Then let me explain. We were given a commitment in the 2015
Conservative manifesto that a simple in/out referendum would be held
on the basis of negotiations that would take place with the EU
beforehand to alter our terms of membership. We were promised that
the result of the referendum would be honoured whichever way we
decided. On that basis we elected a Conservative government with an
overall majority.
The negotiations took place, but resulted in no change. We then had
the referendum on the ground rules set out in the government leaflet
delivered to every household in the country that said very clearly
indeed that it was our decision, it was just once in a generation, and
that the government would implement what we decided.
Against the odds, the polls, the government propaganda in the leaflet,
and the expectations of political commentators, Leave won with a
substantial majority of 1,269,501.
Of course those who voted Leave now hold the government to its
promises.
If any of those promises are broken they will not only feel betrayed
but actually be betrayed.
Post by Ian Jackson
Will this
'betrayal' be by those who allow the referendum? On the other hand,
will it be by those voters who either continue to vote to stay, or by
those who originally voted to leave but this time decide to vote to
stay?
The betrayal will be by those who break any of the promises of course.
As always.
You sound like the bar room drunk weeping into his drink and
repetitively moaning the same thing over and over. All those tears and
sorrows aren't going to make a blind bit of difference.

Move on. We have a future to decide, not commiserate about which
naughty person said what to who and when.
Norman Wells
2018-11-10 18:17:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by Norman Wells
The betrayal will be by those who break any of the promises of course.
As always.
You sound like the bar room drunk weeping into his drink and
repetitively moaning the same thing over and over.
Well, it does seem to take an awful long time to get it into your head.
Post by Pamela
All those tears and
sorrows aren't going to make a blind bit of difference.
No, there are no tears and sorrows. There don't need to be, you see.

As I see it, all the bleating come from Remainers who lost but are still
in denial about it and have no grace to accept it.
Post by Pamela
Move on.
To where?
Post by Pamela
We have a future to decide, not commiserate about which
naughty person said what to who and when.
And what difference do you think your never-ending posts here will make?
JNugent
2018-11-10 16:00:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by Omega
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
You really are outrageous even for a duck!
omega
Regardless of what was promised (and what you choose to think), in UK
law the result of the referendum is not binding.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yaafskua
But that is not to say that it should not be honoured - unless, of
course, there is good evidence that the result no longer represents
The Will Of The People - and that this will continue to be the case.
If this IS the case, then the result should not be arbitrarily
dismissed, but instead should only be changed by The People again
expressing Their Will.
You don't understand do you?
Whether the Referendum is binding or not legally the British
Government pledged beforehand, they would honour the majority vote.
Exactly what redress do you propose if that turns out to be yet another
politician's lie? It was an ultra vires commitment from the beginning
because the Supreme Court clarified that Parliament makes this decision.
Post by Omega
The Brexiteers were the winners with a substantial vote and the
Government kept their word, now intending to take us from the EU.
A perfectly legal move!
You insist the decision was NOT legally binding but the Government
chose to make it legally binding BEFORE the Referendum. That makes it
legal.
Nonsense. Where do you get such flakey logic from?
Post by Omega
Had the Remainers won the vote, The Government was happy to honour
that vote, something you would have relished. The Government acted
completely legally and equally so had it been a Remain vote supporting
that!.
It really is YOUR problem, you lost!
Keep crying, were leaving!
Your surmising, the vote would change if we have a new referendum is
irrelevant. The Government set a course of action as promised nearly
two years ago and we leave in less than four months.
Regarding your summation another Referendum would change the overall
vote is a view based on nonsense polls. Do remember your
consternation when you realised the Brexiteers won, your polls looking
utterly ridiculous!
Your 'New Referendum' campaign is being run by traitors.
The real traitors are those who want to leave a mutually benefical
membership of the EU in order to further their nonsensical beliefs and,
in some cases, to line their own pockets from Brexit.
Is there no-one at all who supports subservience to the EU because they
perceive it as being to their personal advantage, irrespective of the
damage it might do to others?

Not even all those who argue that they want the freedom to live, study
and work anywhere in Europe?
MM
2018-11-11 10:28:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Is there no-one at all who supports subservience to the EU because they
perceive it as being to their personal advantage, irrespective of the
damage it might do to others?
Membership of the EU is not subservience.

MM
JNugent
2018-11-11 14:11:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Is there no-one at all who supports subservience to the EU because they
perceive it as being to their personal advantage, irrespective of the
damage it might do to others?
Membership of the EU is not subservience.
More duplicity and ignorance* from MM.

[* I only ever use the words "ignorant" or "ignorance" in their exactly
correct sense.]
Pamela
2018-11-11 14:32:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Is there no-one at all who supports subservience to the EU because
they perceive it as being to their personal advantage, irrespective
of the damage it might do to others?
Membership of the EU is not subservience.
More duplicity and ignorance* from MM.
[* I only ever use the words "ignorant" or "ignorance" in their
exactly correct sense.]
Exactly what in MM's statement are you objecting to? He wrote this and
it seems perfectly acurate: "Membership of the EU is not subservience."
JNugent
2018-11-11 16:29:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Is there no-one at all who supports subservience to the EU because
they perceive it as being to their personal advantage, irrespective
of the damage it might do to others?
Membership of the EU is not subservience.
More duplicity and ignorance* from MM.
[* I only ever use the words "ignorant" or "ignorance" in their
exactly correct sense.]
Exactly what in MM's statement are you objecting to? He wrote this and
it seems perfectly acurate: "Membership of the EU is not subservience."
He was wrong.

If it were not subservience, the UK would not currently be subject to
rules made outside the UK by a body or bodies not elected by the UK's
electorate.

["Partly elected" doesn't mean "elected".]
Pamela
2018-11-11 16:40:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by Pamela
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Is there no-one at all who supports subservience to the EU because
they perceive it as being to their personal advantage,
irrespective of the damage it might do to others?
Membership of the EU is not subservience.
More duplicity and ignorance* from MM.
[* I only ever use the words "ignorant" or "ignorance" in their
exactly correct sense.]
Exactly what in MM's statement are you objecting to? He wrote this
and it seems perfectly acurate: "Membership of the EU is not
subservience."
He was wrong.
If it were not subservience, the UK would not currently be subject to
rules made outside the UK by a body or bodies not elected by the UK's
electorate.
["Partly elected" doesn't mean "elected".]
Agreeing to abide by the rules of the club we have joined is hardly
"subservience".

Get a grip.
JNugent
2018-11-11 17:39:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by JNugent
Post by Pamela
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Is there no-one at all who supports subservience to the EU because
they perceive it as being to their personal advantage,
irrespective of the damage it might do to others?
Membership of the EU is not subservience.
More duplicity and ignorance* from MM.
[* I only ever use the words "ignorant" or "ignorance" in their
exactly correct sense.]
Exactly what in MM's statement are you objecting to? He wrote this
and it seems perfectly acurate: "Membership of the EU is not
subservience."
He was wrong.
If it were not subservience, the UK would not currently be subject to
rules made outside the UK by a body or bodies not elected by the UK's
electorate.
["Partly elected" doesn't mean "elected".]
Agreeing to abide by the rules of the club we have joined is hardly
"subservience".
Get a grip.
It is subservience.
MM
2018-11-12 10:21:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by Pamela
Post by JNugent
Post by Pamela
Post by JNugent
Post by MM
Post by JNugent
Is there no-one at all who supports subservience to the EU because
they perceive it as being to their personal advantage,
irrespective of the damage it might do to others?
Membership of the EU is not subservience.
More duplicity and ignorance* from MM.
[* I only ever use the words "ignorant" or "ignorance" in their
exactly correct sense.]
Exactly what in MM's statement are you objecting to? He wrote this
and it seems perfectly acurate: "Membership of the EU is not
subservience."
He was wrong.
If it were not subservience, the UK would not currently be subject to
rules made outside the UK by a body or bodies not elected by the UK's
electorate.
["Partly elected" doesn't mean "elected".]
Agreeing to abide by the rules of the club we have joined is hardly
"subservience".
Get a grip.
It is subservience.
"Stamps feet. I'll squeam and squeam till I am sick!"

MM

MM
2018-11-09 11:12:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
Okay, so you wanna use that link to prove your case? Let's see:

First, the report states:

"David Cameron promises in/out referendum on EU"

But in that he was not promising we WOULD leave. Only that there would
be a referendum. In any case, he could never have promised we would
leave, since it wasn't his decision to make, hence the referendum
call.

In the HoC he stated that he would campaign "heart and soul" to stay
within the EU.

So no sign there that he was willing for us to leave. On the contrary,
he wanted, and wants, us to stay. His mistake was to assume that the
nation would agree with his view.

Moving on through the report that you highlight in defence of Brexit,
Mr Cameron "did not spell out what powers he would like to see the UK
take back as part of a new settlement or what would happen if the
negotiations did not go his way."

So absolutely no signal there of capitulating to voters who might want
to leave the EU.

Cameron even warned, repeatedly, that we should think very carefully
about the implications of leaving, saying it was a one-way ticket.

Eventually the referendum was held, though not many voters realised
that the result would NOT be binding. Now the Brexiters are grasping
at straws by using "the leaflet" as gospel to override whatever the
actual Act said. What the *Act* did not state was that the result of
the referendum would be mandatory.

Perhaps you should refer back to your own link above and read that
report in detail, then get back to me. In particular, try avoiding the
Humpty Dumpty approach. He was a character who stated "When I use a
word, it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less"

The ONLY words you have to go on is the wording in the European Union
Referendum Act 2015.

MM
Bod
2018-11-09 11:30:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
"David Cameron promises in/out referendum on EU"
But in that he was not promising we WOULD leave. Only that there would
be a referendum. In any case, he could never have promised we would
leave, since it wasn't his decision to make, hence the referendum
call.
In the HoC he stated that he would campaign "heart and soul" to stay
within the EU.
So no sign there that he was willing for us to leave. On the contrary,
he wanted, and wants, us to stay. His mistake was to assume that the
nation would agree with his view.
Moving on through the report that you highlight in defence of Brexit,
Mr Cameron "did not spell out what powers he would like to see the UK
take back as part of a new settlement or what would happen if the
negotiations did not go his way."
So absolutely no signal there of capitulating to voters who might want
to leave the EU.
Cameron even warned, repeatedly, that we should think very carefully
about the implications of leaving, saying it was a one-way ticket.
Eventually the referendum was held, though not many voters realised
that the result would NOT be binding. Now the Brexiters are grasping
at straws by using "the leaflet" as gospel to override whatever the
actual Act said. What the *Act* did not state was that the result of
the referendum would be mandatory.
Perhaps you should refer back to your own link above and read that
report in detail, then get back to me. In particular, try avoiding the
Humpty Dumpty approach. He was a character who stated "When I use a
word, it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less"
The ONLY words you have to go on is the wording in the European Union
Referendum Act 2015.
MM
Just heard on the news that Chunnel owners are ready for a no deal
and there will only be a small amount of extra paperwork. So that border
is sorted.
Chunnel bookings are up for next year.
--
Bod
R. Mark Clayton
2018-11-09 11:59:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bod
Post by MM
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
"David Cameron promises in/out referendum on EU"
But in that he was not promising we WOULD leave. Only that there would
be a referendum. In any case, he could never have promised we would
leave, since it wasn't his decision to make, hence the referendum
call.
In the HoC he stated that he would campaign "heart and soul" to stay
within the EU.
So no sign there that he was willing for us to leave. On the contrary,
he wanted, and wants, us to stay. His mistake was to assume that the
nation would agree with his view.
Moving on through the report that you highlight in defence of Brexit,
Mr Cameron "did not spell out what powers he would like to see the UK
take back as part of a new settlement or what would happen if the
negotiations did not go his way."
So absolutely no signal there of capitulating to voters who might want
to leave the EU.
Cameron even warned, repeatedly, that we should think very carefully
about the implications of leaving, saying it was a one-way ticket.
Eventually the referendum was held, though not many voters realised
that the result would NOT be binding. Now the Brexiters are grasping
at straws by using "the leaflet" as gospel to override whatever the
actual Act said. What the *Act* did not state was that the result of
the referendum would be mandatory.
Perhaps you should refer back to your own link above and read that
report in detail, then get back to me. In particular, try avoiding the
Humpty Dumpty approach. He was a character who stated "When I use a
word, it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less"
The ONLY words you have to go on is the wording in the European Union
Referendum Act 2015.
MM
Just heard on the news that Chunnel owners are ready for a no deal
and there will only be a small amount of extra paperwork. So that border
is sorted.
Chunnel bookings are up for next year.
--
Bod
Slightly maybe, but that's because Eurostar FINALLY got around to offering through journeys to places like Antwerp and Amsterdam.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/netherlands/amsterdam/articles/amsterdam-eurostar-return-journey-success/

Unfortunately the UK HO has its head so far up its **** that plans for direct trains from major UK cities to Paris and Brussels were scrapped and the expensive unused trains sold off dirt cheap to Canada.

Totally different story for ferry bookings of course: -

http://www.cityam.com/268360/brittany-ferries-boss-issues-brexit-warning-over-falling

One wouldn't want anything as unpleasant as stark reality to intrude on the Brextremist daydream would one?
Bod
2018-11-09 12:11:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Bod
Post by MM
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
"David Cameron promises in/out referendum on EU"
But in that he was not promising we WOULD leave. Only that there would
be a referendum. In any case, he could never have promised we would
leave, since it wasn't his decision to make, hence the referendum
call.
In the HoC he stated that he would campaign "heart and soul" to stay
within the EU.
So no sign there that he was willing for us to leave. On the contrary,
he wanted, and wants, us to stay. His mistake was to assume that the
nation would agree with his view.
Moving on through the report that you highlight in defence of Brexit,
Mr Cameron "did not spell out what powers he would like to see the UK
take back as part of a new settlement or what would happen if the
negotiations did not go his way."
So absolutely no signal there of capitulating to voters who might want
to leave the EU.
Cameron even warned, repeatedly, that we should think very carefully
about the implications of leaving, saying it was a one-way ticket.
Eventually the referendum was held, though not many voters realised
that the result would NOT be binding. Now the Brexiters are grasping
at straws by using "the leaflet" as gospel to override whatever the
actual Act said. What the *Act* did not state was that the result of
the referendum would be mandatory.
Perhaps you should refer back to your own link above and read that
report in detail, then get back to me. In particular, try avoiding the
Humpty Dumpty approach. He was a character who stated "When I use a
word, it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less"
The ONLY words you have to go on is the wording in the European Union
Referendum Act 2015.
MM
Just heard on the news that Chunnel owners are ready for a no deal
and there will only be a small amount of extra paperwork. So that border
is sorted.
Chunnel bookings are up for next year.
--
Bod
Slightly maybe, but that's because Eurostar FINALLY got around to offering through journeys to places like Antwerp and Amsterdam.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/netherlands/amsterdam/articles/amsterdam-eurostar-return-journey-success/
Unfortunately the UK HO has its head so far up its **** that plans for direct trains from major UK cities to Paris and Brussels were scrapped and the expensive unused trains sold off dirt cheap to Canada.
Totally different story for ferry bookings of course: -
http://www.cityam.com/268360/brittany-ferries-boss-issues-brexit-warning-over-falling
One wouldn't want anything as unpleasant as stark reality to intrude on the Brextremist daydream would one?
Lol.
--
Bod
Norman Wells
2018-11-09 12:30:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
"David Cameron promises in/out referendum on EU"
But in that he was not promising we WOULD leave. Only that there would
be a referendum. In any case, he could never have promised we would
leave, since it wasn't his decision to make, hence the referendum
call.
That's presumably why *his* government's leaflet said in no uncertain
terms 'This is your decision. The government will implement what you
decide'. Had it been merely an opinion poll as you suggest, there
wouldn't have been the greatest voter turnout in our history.

The people were under no illusions. They were making the decision that
mattered. To pretend otherwise is completely disingenuous.
Post by MM
In the HoC he stated that he would campaign "heart and soul" to stay
within the EU.
Which he did. And that makes the victory for Leave all the more
remarkable and convincing.
Post by MM
So no sign there that he was willing for us to leave. On the contrary,
he wanted, and wants, us to stay. His mistake was to assume that the
nation would agree with his view.
He put the question. He didn't get the answer he personally wanted, but
that's an occupational hazard of asking questions. The people were
clearly quite up for being asked.
Post by MM
Moving on through the report that you highlight in defence of Brexit,
Mr Cameron "did not spell out what powers he would like to see the UK
take back as part of a new settlement or what would happen if the
negotiations did not go his way."
He knew he wouldn't be leading any negotiations if Leave won. It was
for the Leave campaigners to highlight what could be achieved, not for
him. He was on the side of Remain. But he had of course already had
negotiations with the EU over our terms of membership, which came to
nothing, before the referendum was announced. He said quite clearly
that the referendum would be IN or OUT on the basis of the new terms he
would secure. And so the people voted.

It was the EU's miscalculation, not his, to assume that the people would
never vote to leave such a lovely organisation, which is why they
conceded nothing to him.
Post by MM
So absolutely no signal there of capitulating to voters who might want
to leave the EU.
Cameron even warned, repeatedly, that we should think very carefully
about the implications of leaving, saying it was a one-way ticket.
Which of course we did. And in saying that it was a one-way ticket, he
was confirming that it was our decision and would be binding. He was
not suggesting it was merely to gauge opinion, and we'd have a
neverendum until it gave the result he personally wanted. In that, he
was perfectly honorable, and some here could take lessons from him in that.
Post by MM
Eventually the referendum was held, though not many voters realised
that the result would NOT be binding. Now the Brexiters are grasping
at straws by using "the leaflet" as gospel to override whatever the
actual Act said. What the *Act* did not state was that the result of
the referendum would be mandatory.
It wouldn't have mattered even if it had. Parliament ultimately
decides, and could easily contermand any such provision. No, it's a
matter of honour, decency and respect. If you tell all the people it is
their decision and what they decide will be implemented, that's what has
to be done. Unless of course you're undemocratic, dictatorial,
paternalistic and controlling, none of which are very endearing.
Post by MM
Perhaps you should refer back to your own link above and read that
report in detail, then get back to me. In particular, try avoiding the
Humpty Dumpty approach. He was a character who stated "When I use a
word, it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less"
The ONLY words you have to go on is the wording in the European Union
Referendum Act 2015.
No they aren't.
Pamela
2018-11-09 12:38:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Norman Wells
Post by MM
Post by Omega
Re-writing history once again MM?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282
"David Cameron promises in/out referendum on EU"
But in that he was not promising we WOULD leave. Only that there
would be a referendum. In any case, he could never have promised we
would leave, since it wasn't his decision to make, hence the
referendum call.
That's presumably why *his* government's leaflet said in no uncertain
terms 'This is your decision. The government will implement what you
decide'. Had it been merely an opinion poll as you suggest, there
wouldn't have been the greatest voter turnout in our history.
Yada yada yada. Are you still bleating about that leaflet? Everything
has moved on and you should too. For the sake of your health.
Post by Norman Wells
The people were under no illusions. They were making the decision
that mattered. To pretend otherwise is completely disingenuous.
Post by MM
In the HoC he stated that he would campaign "heart and soul" to stay
within the EU.
Which he did. And that makes the victory for Leave all the more
remarkable and convincing.
Post by MM
So no sign there that he was willing for us to leave. On the
contrary, he wanted, and wants, us to stay. His mistake was to assume
that the nation would agree with his view.
He put the question. He didn't get the answer he personally wanted,
but that's an occupational hazard of asking questions. The people
were clearly quite up for being asked.
Post by MM
Moving on through the report that you highlight in defence of Brexit,
Mr Cameron "did not spell out what powers he would like to see the UK
take back as part of a new settlement or what would happen if the
negotiations did not go his way."
He knew he wouldn't be leading any negotiations if Leave won. It was
for the Leave campaigners to highlight what could be achieved, not for
him. He was on the side of Remain. But he had of course already had
negotiations with the EU over our terms of membership, which came to
nothing, before the referendum was announced. He said quite clearly
that the referendum would be IN or OUT on the basis of the new terms
he would secure. And so the people voted.
It was the EU's miscalculation, not his, to assume that the people
would never vote to leave such a lovely organisation, which is why
they conceded nothing to him.
Post by MM
So absolutely no signal there of capitulating to voters who might
want to leave the EU.
Cameron even warned, repeatedly, that we should think very carefully
about the implications of leaving, saying it was a one-way ticket.
Which of course we did. And in saying that it was a one-way ticket,
he was confirming that it was our decision and would be binding. He
was not suggesting it was merely to gauge opinion, and we'd have a
neverendum until it gave the result he personally wanted. In that, he
was perfectly honorable, and some here could take lessons from him in that.
Post by MM
Eventually the referendum was held, though not many voters realised
that the result would NOT be binding. Now the Brexiters are grasping
at straws by using "the leaflet" as gospel to override whatever the
actual Act said. What the *Act* did not state was that the result of
the referendum would be mandatory.
It wouldn't have mattered even if it had. Parliament ultimately
decides, and could easily contermand any such provision. No, it's a
matter of honour, decency and respect.
Rubbish. Those are nonsense notions which can be bent to suit any
argument from any direction. Is that what you now rely on?
Post by Norman Wells
If you tell all the people it
is their decision and what they decide will be implemented, that's
what has to be done.
Not if it was told as a mistake.
Post by Norman Wells
Unless of course you're undemocratic,
dictatorial, paternalistic and controlling, none of which are very
endearing.
Unendearing then. Sob sob. How will a politician ever manage to live
with telling a lie? Has it ever happened before?
Norman Wells
2018-11-09 16:23:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by Norman Wells
Post by MM
"David Cameron promises in/out referendum on EU"
But in that he was not promising we WOULD leave. Only that there
would be a referendum. In any case, he could never have promised we
would leave, since it wasn't his decision to make, hence the
referendum call.
That's presumably why *his* government's leaflet said in no uncertain
terms 'This is your decision. The government will implement what you
decide'. Had it been merely an opinion poll as you suggest, there
wouldn't have been the greatest voter turnout in our history.
Yada yada yada. Are you still bleating about that leaflet? Everything
has moved on and you should too. For the sake of your health.
No bleating. Just reminding you of inconvenient facts you'd rather
suppress because they don't suit your narrative.
Post by Pamela
Post by Norman Wells
The people were under no illusions. They were making the decision
that mattered. To pretend otherwise is completely disingenuous.
Post by MM
In the HoC he stated that he would campaign "heart and soul" to stay
within the EU.
Which he did. And that makes the victory for Leave all the more
remarkable and convincing.
Post by MM
So no sign there that he was willing for us to leave. On the
contrary, he wanted, and wants, us to stay. His mistake was to assume
that the nation would agree with his view.
He put the question. He didn't get the answer he personally wanted,
but that's an occupational hazard of asking questions. The people
were clearly quite up for being asked.
Post by MM
Moving on through the report that you highlight in defence of Brexit,
Mr Cameron "did not spell out what powers he would like to see the UK
take back as part of a new settlement or what would happen if the
negotiations did not go his way."
He knew he wouldn't be leading any negotiations if Leave won. It was
for the Leave campaigners to highlight what could be achieved, not for
him. He was on the side of Remain. But he had of course already had
negotiations with the EU over our terms of membership, which came to
nothing, before the referendum was announced. He said quite clearly
that the referendum would be IN or OUT on the basis of the new terms
he would secure. And so the people voted.
It was the EU's miscalculation, not his, to assume that the people
would never vote to leave such a lovely organisation, which is why
they conceded nothing to him.
Post by MM
So absolutely no signal there of capitulating to voters who might
want to leave the EU.
Cameron even warned, repeatedly, that we should think very carefully
about the implications of leaving, saying it was a one-way ticket.
Which of course we did. And in saying that it was a one-way ticket,
he was confirming that it was our decision and would be binding. He
was not suggesting it was merely to gauge opinion, and we'd have a
neverendum until it gave the result he personally wanted. In that, he
was perfectly honorable, and some here could take lessons from him in that.
Post by MM
Eventually the referendum was held, though not many voters realised
that the result would NOT be binding. Now the Brexiters are grasping
at straws by using "the leaflet" as gospel to override whatever the
actual Act said. What the *Act* did not state was that the result of
the referendum would be mandatory.
It wouldn't have mattered even if it had. Parliament ultimately
decides, and could easily contermand any such provision. No, it's a
matter of honour, decency and respect.
Rubbish. Those are nonsense notions which can be bent to suit any
argument from any direction. Is that what you now rely on?
So, honour, decency and respect are 'nonsense notions' where you're
concerned? That doesn't suprise me one bit, but they do matter to a
fair few, indeed to the vast majority of us who have access to a moral
compass.
Post by Pamela
Post by Norman Wells
If you tell all the people it
is their decision and what they decide will be implemented, that's
what has to be done.
Not if it was told as a mistake.
It was no mistake.
Post by Pamela
Post by Norman Wells
Unless of course you're undemocratic,
dictatorial, paternalistic and controlling, none of which are very
endearing.
Unendearing then. Sob sob. How will a politician ever manage to live
with telling a lie? Has it ever happened before?
They may well be able to live with all their lies. Their careers tend
to end early however, and then they're completely impotent.
Pamela
2018-11-09 18:20:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Norman Wells
Post by Pamela
Post by Norman Wells
Post by MM
"David Cameron promises in/out referendum on EU"
But in that he was not promising we WOULD leave. Only that there
would be a referendum. In any case, he could never have promised we
would leave, since it wasn't his decision to make, hence the
referendum call.
That's presumably why *his* government's leaflet said in no
uncertain terms 'This is your decision. The government will
implement what you decide'. Had it been merely an opinion poll as
you suggest, there wouldn't have been the greatest voter turnout in
our history.
Yada yada yada. Are you still bleating about that leaflet?
Everything has moved on and you should too. For the sake of your
health.
No bleating. Just reminding you of inconvenient facts you'd rather
suppress because they don't suit your narrative.
Post by Pamela
Post by Norman Wells
The people were under no illusions. They were making the decision
that mattered. To pretend otherwise is completely disingenuous.
Post by MM
In the HoC he stated that he would campaign "heart and soul" to
stay within the EU.
Which he did. And that makes the victory for Leave all the more
remarkable and convincing.
Post by MM
So no sign there that he was willing for us to leave. On the
contrary, he wanted, and wants, us to stay. His mistake was to
assume that the nation would agree with his view.
He put the question. He didn't get the answer he personally wanted,
but that's an occupational hazard of asking questions. The people
were clearly quite up for being asked.
Post by MM
Moving on through the report that you highlight in defence of
Brexit, Mr Cameron "did not spell out what powers he would like to
see the UK take back as part of a new settlement or what would
happen if the negotiations did not go his way."
He knew he wouldn't be leading any negotiations if Leave won. It
was for the Leave campaigners to highlight what could be achieved,
not for him. He was on the side of Remain. But he had of course
already had negotiations with the EU over our terms of membership,
which came to nothing, before the referendum was announced. He said
quite clearly that the referendum would be IN or OUT on the basis of
the new terms he would secure. And so the people voted.
It was the EU's miscalculation, not his, to assume that the people
would never vote to leave such a lovely organisation, which is why
they conceded nothing to him.
Post by MM
So absolutely no signal there of capitulating to voters who might
want to leave the EU.
Cameron even warned, repeatedly, that we should think very
carefully about the implications of leaving, saying it was a
one-way ticket.
Which of course we did. And in saying that it was a one-way ticket,
he was confirming that it was our decision and would be binding. He
was not suggesting it was merely to gauge opinion, and we'd have a
neverendum until it gave the result he personally wanted. In that,
he was perfectly honorable, and some here could take lessons from
him in that.
Post by MM
Eventually the referendum was held, though not many voters realised
that the result would NOT be binding. Now the Brexiters are
grasping at straws by using "the leaflet" as gospel to override
whatever the actual Act said. What the *Act* did not state was that
the result of the referendum would be mandatory.
It wouldn't have mattered even if it had. Parliament ultimately
decides, and could easily contermand any such provision. No, it's a
matter of honour, decency and respect.
Rubbish. Those are nonsense notions which can be bent to suit any
argument from any direction. Is that what you now rely on?
So, honour, decency and respect are 'nonsense notions' where you're
concerned? That doesn't suprise me one bit, but they do matter to a
fair few, indeed to the vast majority of us who have access to a moral
compass.
Realpolitik has always exploited such stirring notions.
Post by Norman Wells
Post by Pamela
Post by Norman Wells
If you tell all the people it is their decision and what they decide
will be implemented, that's what has to be done.
Not if it was told as a mistake.
It was no mistake.
Post by Pamela
Post by Norman Wells
Unless of course you're undemocratic, dictatorial, paternalistic and
controlling, none of which are very endearing.
Unendearing then. Sob sob. How will a politician ever manage to
live with telling a lie? Has it ever happened before?
They may well be able to live with all their lies. Their careers tend
to end early however, and then they're completely impotent.
Donald Trump disproves your claim.
Ian Jackson
2018-11-09 13:25:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Norman Wells
'This is your decision. The government will implement what you
decide'.
Unfortunately, 'The Government' didn't realise that they didn't have the
legal authority simply to decree that despite the result of the
referendum, they couldn't simply issue a decree that we were leaving the
EU. This required the approval of Parliament - and despite the better
personal judgement of most of them, the vote to allow The Government to
invoke A50 was carried.

But of course, you know this already.
--
Ian
Norman Wells
2018-11-09 16:33:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian Jackson
'This is your decision.  The government will implement what you decide'.
Unfortunately, 'The Government' didn't realise that they didn't have the
legal authority simply to decree that despite the result of the
referendum, they couldn't simply issue a decree that we were leaving the
EU.
Oh, but they could and they did. You see, the government is the body
that, according to all the rules, can command a majority in the House of
Commons. The government is therefore generally able to get its policies
enacted. It's how it works.
Post by Ian Jackson
This required the approval of Parliament - and despite the better
personal judgement of most of them, the vote to allow The Government to
invoke A50 was carried.
I don't much respect the 'better judgement' of MPs if 'most of them'
voted against their personal views, especially since 498 out of 612
(over 81%) did so. If you want something, you don't vote against it if
you have any scruples. You certainly don't in such overwhelming numbers.
Post by Ian Jackson
But of course, you know this already.
Of course. It's just that numbers count, and they don't support you.
pensive hamster
2018-11-09 18:21:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Friday, 9 November 2018 12:30:13 UTC, Norman Wells wrote:
[...]
Post by Norman Wells
The people were under no illusions.
That seems a brave assertion. How do you know whether or not
the people were under any illusions?

As far as I can make out, people are fairly frequently prone to
illusions. I can see no reason to suppose the referendum was
any different.
Post by Norman Wells
They were making the decision that
mattered. To pretend otherwise is completely disingenuous.
And it would obviously be completely undemocratic to allow them
any opportunity to change their mind on that decision.

[...]
Dean Jackson
2018-11-09 00:25:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
MM
Naturally the Remainers are trying to reverse the will of the people.
The winners have no need to do anything.
D.J.
R. Mark Clayton
2018-11-09 11:28:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dean Jackson
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
MM
Naturally the Remainers are trying to reverse the will of the people.
No just ask them again now that all the lying and cheating by Leave is so apparent.
Post by Dean Jackson
The winners have no need to do anything.
D.J.
Ian Jackson
2018-11-09 13:50:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Dean Jackson
Naturally the Remainers are trying to reverse the will of the people.
No just ask them again now that all the lying and cheating by Leave is so apparent.
Indeed. The only thing that can reverse the Will Of The People is the
Will Of The People.
--
Ian
MM
2018-11-09 11:54:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 00:25:11 +0000, Dean Jackson
Post by Dean Jackson
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
MM
Naturally the Remainers are trying to reverse the will of the people.
The winners have no need to do anything.
There's nothing they could do. Despite huffing and puffing from the
likes of Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg, they just have to accept
what *the government* finally gives them.

And if that isn't what they wanted, tough. Insurrection, no doubt.
Insurrection, my arse! There'll be a bit of grumbling, then it will
all die away, along with many more OAPs who voted to leave.

Referendums run out of steam as a side effect of natural wastage.

MM
Norman Wells
2018-11-09 12:35:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MM
On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 00:25:11 +0000, Dean Jackson
Post by Dean Jackson
Post by MM
Last night Channel 4 News ran an hour-long debate on Brexit. Towards
the end of the programme it was revealed that the largest poll ever
carried out on the Brexit issue found a significant swing towards
Remain on 54% against Leave on 46%.
Nigel Farage got quite ratty, claiming it was all a stitch-up etc etc.
Worth watching. The applause any Remain comment received was far
greater than for Leave after its defenders had spoken.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/remain-would-win-new-brexit-referendum-by-eight-points-major-new-poll-shows-a3981436.html
http://youtu.be/YKCrKtOsPNg
MM
Naturally the Remainers are trying to reverse the will of the people.
The winners have no need to do anything.
There's nothing they could do. Despite huffing and puffing from the
likes of Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg, they just have to accept
what *the government* finally gives them.
No, they could just vote down any agreed terms, leading to a no-deal
Brexit, which they may well feel is better than such a bad-deal Brexit.
That nice Mrs May has to consider and take very seriously such
considerations. She doesn't seem to have a lot of support from any side
at the moment.
Post by MM
And if that isn't what they wanted, tough. Insurrection, no doubt.
Insurrection, my arse! There'll be a bit of grumbling, then it will
all die away, along with many more OAPs who voted to leave.
Referendums run out of steam as a side effect of natural wastage.
Still hiding your head in the sand and hoping for divine intervention I see.
Loading...