Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

GBNews Brexit poll shock result


pellinore

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

So too were the Brexiteers when they were pushing to have the UK leave the EU. Not so much now, though, when they realise (even though there are some Brexit cultists who cannot admit it) that Brexit has been a disaster. Many of them are now obsessed with refusing to face facts. 

Why do you even care Ozy? Thought you were in Ireland, aren't you already reaping the many benefits of being in the EU?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

There is no "might" about it Ozy, and you know that, because all new EU members must commit to adopting the euro currency, so the question is already loaded to give them the answer they are looking for. 🤦

What are you talking about? What I know has nothing to do with it!

The word 'might' is the word used by Omnisis in the question they posed in the poll you quoted.

This is just another example of you making up windmills to tilt at.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

What are you talking about? What I know has nothing to do with it!

The word 'might' is the word used by Omnisis in the question they posed in the poll you quoted.

This is just another example of you making up windmills to tilt at.  

That's exactly my point Ozy, why did they deliberately choose to use the word "might", when there is no "might" about it, it is mandatory that all new EU members must commit to adopting the euro currency. Could it be because they know they would get a different answer if they'd rephrased the question as follows:

Q. A condition of rejoining "is" the mandatory commitment to adopting the euro as currency. Because the UK "would" have to adopt the euro, how do you think you would vote? 🤔

 

Screenshot_20240211_094711_X.jpg

Edited by Destination Unknown
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

You wouldn't accept the result even if "Stay Out" won 10 referendums, you'd still be screeching for another vote.

I have never asked for another referendum in the UK. That is a matter for the people of the UK. 

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

Unfortunately for you though, the UK won't be getting another referendum for several decades (possibly never) given how Remoaners have refused to accept the result of the EU referendum, and actively tried to have the result squashed, therefore, it is unlikely a referendum on anything will be held in the UK again, so it's all THEIR fault.!! 😂😂😂

So much for genuinely wanting the will of the people as part of your democracy. 

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

But if you seriously think the UK will vote to rejoin the EU, then let's start with talking about how the UK is even going to be able to meet the strict economic criteria for joining the EU anyway, considering how you Remoaners have been insisting all along that Brexit will render the UK an economic basketcase.

All the indications are that the UK is not doing well outside of the EU. What the UK will do in the future remains to be seen. Will it go back into the EU? Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Whatever it decides to do, the milk has been spilled and things will never be the same for you again. 

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

Once you've squared your own circle, we can then go on to discuss how you are ever even going to convince the British people to ditch the Pound and adopt the euro, as all new EU members are required to adopt the single currency, and those of us who are old enough remember all too well what a disaster it was when pro-EU John Major took the UK into the ERM (the pre-cursor to the euro) back in 1990, which proved absolutely disastrous for the UK's economy, being a key factor in the 1991 recession, and instead of pulling out of the ERM at the time he then decided it would be a great idea to pump billions of pounds worth of foreign exchange reserves into it in a futile attempt to try and save his pet (pro-EU) monetary project, ultimately resulting in 'Black Wednesday' when the UK finally did crash out of the ERM a year later.

So go on, over to you. The floor is all yours.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/black-wednesday.asp

I don't deal in ball-gazing, only what has happened and what is happening. Destination Unknown, I have no idea where the UK is going or how it will get there. Do you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ozymandias said:

I have never asked for another referendum in the UK. That is a matter for the people of the UK. 

So much for genuinely wanting the will of the people as part of your democracy. 

All the indications are that the UK is not doing well outside of the EU. What the UK will do in the future remains to be seen. Will it go back into the EU? Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Whatever it decides to do, the milk has been spilled and things will never be the same for you again. 

I don't deal in ball-gazing, only what has happened and what is happening. Destination Unknown, I have no idea where the UK is going or how it will get there. Do you?

Future generations may well vote to rejoin the EU Ozy, and if so, then I will actually respect that decision, unlike you, who has shown absolutely zero respect for our decision to Leave the EU.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

That's exactly my point Ozy, why did they deliberately choose to use the word "might", when there is no "might" about it, it is mandatory that all new EU members must commit to adopting the euro currency. Could it be because they know they would get a different answer if they'd rephrased the question as follows: 🤔

Q. A condition of rejoining "is" the mandatory commitment to adopting the euro as currency. Because the UK "would" have to adopt the euro, how do you think you would vote?

It was you who quoted this poll. Not me! I'm not the windmill you should be tilting at. You used this poll as a counter to the GBNews poll, so why are you arguing with me about it? 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ozymandias said:

It was you who quoted this poll. Not me! I'm not the windmill you should be tilting at. You used this poll as a counter to the GBNews poll, so why are you arguing with me about it? 

 

Yes, I quoted the poll as a counter to the GBNews poll, but it was you that chose to quote the phrasing of the actual question used, so why did you do that if you didn't want me to reply to it? 🤔

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

Future generations may well vote to rejoin the EU Ozy, and if so, then I will actually respect that decision, unlike you, who has shown absolutely zero respect for our decision to Leave the EU.

I think the referendum was poorly conducted by the sitting government who did not objectively ensure that both sides of the issue were clearly presented and properly debated. I also think it was a poor show that a simple straight majority should be allowed to dictate the future of three countries on such a small turn out in an advisory referendum. It was all so badly handled. It is an example of how not to conduct a referendum. And if that was not enough, the lies told by people who have no knowledge or expertise to be making pronouncements on the issue were awful.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

Yes, I quoted the poll as a counter to the GBNews poll, but it was you that chose to quote the phrasing of the actual question used, so why did you do that if you didn't want me to reply to it? 🤔

Like Brexiteers in general, you misrepresented the facts of the poll to make it look like a majority (53%) of those polled by Omnisis were unwilling to rejoin the EU. In fact, it was only 40% of those polled. In the interests of objectivity and fairness, I chose to present the results as fully as Omnisis did, without any manipulation or massaging of the figures. Your being as disingenuous and as dishonest as the £350 million on the Brexiteer bus was. I'm not surprised. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, itsnotoutthere said:

Why do you even care Ozy? Thought you were in Ireland, aren't you already reaping the many benefits of being in the EU?

Yes, I'm in Ireland. So what? This is an international forum. Anyone with an opinion can comment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

I think the referendum was poorly conducted by the sitting government who did not objectively ensure that both sides of the issue were clearly presented and properly debated.    

What, it was everywhere, more information than we have ever had before in our lifetime because of internet, public media, etc. 

Did the British people get a choice to join the EU.... No!

The EEC was the only organisation we opted to Remain in, our leaders have signed the other agreements without any democratic approval from its citizens.

John Major unilaterally signed us up to 'Maastricht', (the foundation of the EU) in 1992, which was during the 1987 - 1992 Parliamentary term. Where was the massive public scrutiny of that, and public vote?

There was no mention of joining a European political union in the 1987 Conservative Party manifesto, therefore, John Major never had a mandate from the British people to sign us into the EU in the first place.

Also, Gordon Brown unilaterally signed us up to 'Lisbon' in 2007, despite Labour's 2005 manifesto pledge to hold a referendum on the new 'European Union Reform Treaty' ('Treaty of Lisbon'). Again, where was the massive public scrutiny of that, and again, our vote?

We had more information and public debate from both sides on Brexit than we ever did with treaties signed by Edward Heath, John Major and Gordon Brown put together.

33 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

I also think it was a poor show that a simple straight majority should be allowed to dictate the future of three countries on such a small turn out in an advisory referendum.

Leave won by 51.89% to 48.11%, a 3.78% majority on a 72.21% turnout (which is more than most UK General Elections, so not a small turnout at all), but if you think the vote shouldn't stand because it wasn't enough of a majority for you then maybe you better tell the people of Wales they can't have their Assembly, which was created after a referendum held in 1997 voted in favour of it by 50.3% to 49.7%, a 0.6% majority on a 50.22% turnout. 🤔👇👇👇👇

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Welsh_devolution_referendum

Also, in 1992 France held a referendum on ratification of The Maastricht Treaty, which was won by 51.05% against 48.95%, a 2.1% majority on a 69.69% turnout. So should France never have ratified The Maastricht Treaty either then? 🤔👇👇👇👇

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_French_Maastricht_Treaty_referendum

Edited by Destination Unknown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

Like Brexiteers in general, you misrepresented the facts of the poll to make it look like a majority (53%) of those polled by Omnisis were unwilling to rejoin the EU. In fact, it was only 40% of those polled. In the interests of objectivity and fairness, I chose to present the results as fully as Omnisis did, without any manipulation or massaging of the figures. Your being as disingenuous and as dishonest as the £350 million on the Brexiteer bus was. I'm not surprised. 

Are you Remoaners still screeching about that £350 million NHS money?

If you did some very simple research you'd discover that in actual fact the NHS budget has increased by over £40 billion per year since 2016. That's more than on the big red bus you Remoaners keep on screeching about, so before you insult others, it's wise to just quickly check your facts, because you make it realy easy for me to discredit you as a fool. 👇👇👇👇

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/nhs-in-a-nutshell/nhs-budget

 

But speaking of the NHS, think on this:

. Major introduced PFIs.

. Blair and Brown increased their use, massively burdening the NHS with billions of debt and payments before any treatment can be paid for.

. Cameron and Osborne sold the trusts to private companies, most now owned by Richard Branson.

. All these people have one thing in common.

. They are ALL pro-EU.

👇👇👇👇

https://metro.co.uk/2016/01/14/privatisation-of-nhs-continues-as-hospital-contract-awarded-to-richard-branson-5622396/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

That's exactly my point Ozy, why did they deliberately choose to use the word "might", when there is no "might" about it, it is mandatory that all new EU members must commit to adopting the euro currency. Could it be because they know they would get a different answer if they'd rephrased the question as follows:

Q. A condition of rejoining "is" the mandatory commitment to adopting the euro as currency. Because the UK "would" have to adopt the euro, how do you think you would vote? 🤔

 

Screenshot_20240211_094711_X.jpg

Bearing the mind the mass re-join, to massive stay out, to where it is now, it highlights why people should not rush to accept a poll until a decent number of people have responded. The above seems to near enough mirror the original Brexit vote and doesn`t surprise me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

Yes, I'm in Ireland. So what? This is an international forum. Anyone with an opinion can comment. 

I have wondered why you are so focused on what another country is doing.

Are you an Irish farmer? Are you an Irish nationalist who wants Northern Ireland?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

What, it was everywhere, more information than we have ever had before in our lifetime because of internet, public media, etc. 

It's about balance and the quality and factual veracity of the information given. That is what properly informs the electorate. I'm afraid your 2016 referendum was a poor example of how to do it.

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

Did the British people get a choice to join the EU.... No!

No! Within the UK system of government, sovereignty lies with parliament not the people.

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

The EEC was the only organisation we opted to Remain in, our leaders have signed the other agreements without any democratic approval from its citizens.

Parliament does not need the people's approval. You are in NATO. Is that the will of the people? You went to war against Iraq. Was that the will of the people? Since when in the UK is the will of the people consulted on matters of major national importance. After all, wasn't it Churchill who said that democracy is a great thing, until you consult the electorate. Isn't that the excuse used by MPs in the UK parliament to appropriate sovereinty to themselves. Look at the history of parliament and the franchise. The British electorate cannot be trusted with such decisions.

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

John Major unilaterally signed us up to 'Maastricht', (the foundation of the EU) in 1992, which was during the 1987 - 1992 Parliamentary term. Where was the massive public scrutiny of that, and public vote?

He didn't. Your parliament did. If you are not happy with the manner in which your parliament ratified the Maastricht Treaty then you should be advocating for a better democracy and a reform that allows for the will of the people to be determined by referendum once the electorate has been properly, objectively and factually informed of the pros and cons of the matter.

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

There was no mention of joining a European political union in the 1987 Conservative Party manifesto, therefore, John Major never had a mandate from the British people to sign us into the EU in the first place.

Also, Gordon Brown unilaterally signed us up to 'Lisbon' in 2007, despite Labour's 2005 manifesto pledge to hold a referendum on the new 'European Union Reform Treaty' ('Treaty of Lisbon'). Again, where was the massive public scrutiny of that, and again, our vote?

Neither Major nor Brown needed a mandate under your system of government. It's parliament's decision. Their mandate comes from the sovereignty of parliament. 

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

We had more information and public debate from both sides on Brexit than we ever did with treaties signed by Edward Heath, John Major and Gordon Brown put together.

I watched it in horror and disbelief. The £350 million on the bus was an outright lie and was shown to be a deceit. The people were brainwashed into a completely false understanding of the EU. 

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

Leave won by 51.89% to 48.11%, a 3.78% majority on a 72.21% turnout (which is more than most UK General Elections, so not a small turnout at all), but if you think the vote shouldn't stand because it wasn't enough of a majority for you then maybe you better tell the people of Wales they can't have their Assembly, which was created after a referendum held in 1997 voted in favour of it by 50.3% to 49.7%, a 0.6% majority on a 50.22% turnout. 🤔👇👇👇👇

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Welsh_devolution_referendum

Also, in 1992 France held a referendum on ratification of The Maastricht Treaty, which was won by 51.05% against 48.95%, a 2.1% majority on a 69.69% turnout. So should France never have ratified The Maastricht Treaty either then? 🤔👇👇👇👇

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_French_Maastricht_Treaty_referendum

Completely agree. Slim majorities on matters of crucial national importance are not ideal. They are by definition divisive. But they are even more repugnant when the turn out is small, and even moreso again when those that do turn out are ignorant of the real pros and cons of the issue at play.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Electric Scooter said:

I have wondered why you are so focused on what another country is doing.

Are you an Irish farmer? Are you an Irish nationalist who wants Northern Ireland?

It does not matter who or what I am. What matters is what I say.

I think this thread has been hijacked long enough by these asides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ozymandias said:

It does not matter who or what I am. What matters is what I say.

I think this thread has been hijacked long enough by these asides.

Your motivation for motivation for a non-Brit is curious and strange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Electric Scooter said:

Your motivation for motivation for a non-Brit is curious and strange.

There are other non-Brits on here. Do you say the same about them?

Can I not have an opinion? After all, many 'Brits' (as you refer to them) have opinions about Ireland (including yourself) and and are not shy about expressing them. They have every right to hold an opinion about Ireland, and to express it, but I may not agree with what they say.

On a discussion forum, the issue is with what people say, not who they are.

 

Edited by Ozymandias
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

There are other non-Brits on here. Do you say the same about them?

Can I not have an opinion? After all, many 'Brits' (as you refer to them) have opinions about Ireland (including yourself) and and are not shy about expressing them. They have every right to hold an opinion about Ireland, and to express it, but I may not agree with what they say.

On a discussion forum, the issue is with what people say, not who they are.

There are two of you frequently at the pro-EU narrative.

You are Irish, and the other lives here but is not a Brit. Of course everyone has the right to express a view but those views need fact checking. Especially with the latter, he is at it near enough everyday distorting and posting wholly negative links about Brexit.

Where are the actual Brits so motivated to be against Brexit?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Electric Scooter said:

There are two of you frequently at the pro-EU narrative.

You are Irish, and the other lives here but is not a Brit. Of course everyone has the right to express a view but those views need fact checking. Especially with the latter, he is at it near enough everyday distorting and posting wholly negative links about Brexit.

Where are the actual Brits so motivated to be against Brexit?

There is more than just one Brit against Brexit here. Many have given up arguing with intransigent Brexiteers. Elsewhere on the internet the anti-Brexit brigade are everywhere. It is not an usual viewpoint to take, and now many Brexiteers are coming round to the Remainers view.

I am retired and have all the time in the world to comment here if I choose, though mostly I don't. You and other Brexiteers are on here more frequently than I am.

What did you think of Destination Unknown's poll that 37% of people in the UK would rejoin the EU even if that meant adopting the Euro whereas only 40% of people would not? A 3% difference and neither of them are a majority!! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ozymandias said:

It's about balance and the quality and factual veracity of the information given. That is what properly informs the electorate. I'm afraid your 2016 referendum was a poor example of how to do it.

No! Within the UK system of government, sovereignty lies with parliament not the people.

Parliament does not need the people's approval. You are in NATO. Is that the will of the people? You went to war against Iraq. Was that the will of the people? Since when in the UK is the will of the people consulted on matters of major national importance. After all, wasn't it Churchill who said that democracy is a great thing, until you consult the electorate. Isn't that the excuse used by MPs in the UK parliament to appropriate sovereinty to themselves. Look at the history of parliament and the franchise. The British electorate cannot be trusted with such decisions.

He didn't. Your parliament did. If you are not happy with the manner in which your parliament ratified the Maastricht Treaty then you should be advocating for a better democracy and a reform that allows for the will of the people to be determined by referendum once the electorate has been properly, objectively and factually informed of the pros and cons of the matter.

Neither Major nor Brown needed a mandate under your system of government. It's parliament's decision. Their mandate comes from the sovereignty of parliament. 

I watched it in horror and disbelief. The £350 million on the bus was an outright lie and was shown to be a deceit. The people were brainwashed into a completely false understanding of the EU. 

Completely agree. Slim majorities on matters of crucial national importance are not ideal. They are by definition divisive. But they are even more repugnant when the turn out is small, and even moreso again when those that do turn out are ignorant of the real pros and cons of the issue at play.

Whether YOU like it or not Ozy, the fact is that our Parliament voted in favour of giving the British people a say on the issue of EU membership in a straight In/Out referendum.

That was Parliaments choice, and for some strange reason you obviously don't like that, despite you claiming that sovereignty lies with parliament. You can't have it both ways.

Yes, the £350 million on the side of a big red bus was an outright lie, we actually sent more than that.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/articles/theukcontributiontotheeubudget/2017-10-31

 

You know what else was an outright lie as well Ozy? 🤔

That's right, it was Osborne's "Emergency Budget", and the immediate and prolonged recession that was supposed to happen just for merely voting to Leave the EU. Or how about Cameron claiming that ISIS would cheering for Brexit for some unknown reason, they were also outright lies, but strangely nobody mentions them, they all screech on about "Where's that £350 million NHS money" like the demented seals they are (which, if you actually bothered to do some research, you know, the exact same research you yourself claim was sadly lacking in the referendum, that money, and more, has already been allocated to the NHS since the vote anyway, see post #37 above), so I don't even know why you keep on throwing that in our faces at every single opportunity Ozy, whilst totally ignoring the blatant LIES that were spewed out by the Remain side on a daily basis.

I have never disputed that we were told outright lies in the run up to the referendum (name me one voting campaign that wasn't full of lies) - what I do dispute is the notion that it was only one side that did so.

Given that both sides lied, it was up to the voters to decide whose porkies they least preferred, because in the end lies were told by both sides, not just the Leave side. Have you ever even considered that maybe if Remain hadn't blatantly lied through their teeth, even more would have voted to Leave the EU?

Essentially, with the Remain sides great intellect and future seeing ability, your side abjectly failed to make a convincing case for the UK to stay part of the EU, and you can blame Cameron and Osborne for that. They spent all their time telling us how bad it would be if we leave the EU, they never spelt out what the future would be like if the UK had stayed in. They obviously had nothing positive to say about the EU, hence Project Fear. If the EU was such a good idea, they'd be trying to sell it to us, they wouldn't be bullying and threatening anyone who doesn't like it.

If you were trying to sell your car or your house, wouldn't you be highlighting the positive aspects of it to the potential buyer, instead of threatening them with how bad things would get for them if they didn't buy it?

Equally, would you be stupid enough to buy off someone if they were threatening all the ills of the world would befall you if you didn't buy what they were selling?

Of course not - So it's all the Remain sides fault.!!

Again, the turnout was NOT small, it was one of the largest turnouts for a vote in UK history ever, so if you arrogantly/stupidly think that was a reason to nullify the vote, then pretty much every single vote that has ever taken place in the UK should also have been nullified.

No minimum majority was set pre-referendum, and no minimum percentage of the population that had to vote was set pre-referendum either, everyone was fully aware of that and they still voted willingly.

The point is that after a long campaign, where both sides got to make their case regarding membership of the EU, and refute the claims of the other side, there was a clear winner under the rules that both sides agreed to at the time.

What makes me laugh is that you are stipulating what you "think" the rules of the vote "should" have been, after the vote has already taken place. You cannot change the rules of the vote retrospectively just because you don't like the result.

Edited by Destination Unknown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must admit I got the turnout wrong from memory. 72% is quite high, to be fair, but 52% of 72% is just over 37% of the UK electorate who decided the future for everybody in the UK and they did it while being poorly informed and even misled. It is not a good way to conduct a referendum or the affairs of state. That is my point.

The government should have been impartial and seen to it that every household was distributed with accurate and relevant information concerning the pros and cons of leaving. In other words, it should have laid out the case for staying and for going by promoting the facts and not opinion. If an electorate is properly informed, then a simple majority is OK no matter what the turnout. The way the 2016 referendum was conducted was divisive and contentious.     

As for lies, they are not a basis for making up one’s mind in a referendum. The £350 million on the side of a bus was a lie and irrelevant to the amount of money the Tories spent on the NHS after Brexit. Stating what you believe to be the case may be untrue, but you cannot say it is a lie. The 2016 referendum is a clear example of how not to do it. It was a fiasco and no basis for determining the destiny of a nation. It wasn’t even binding.

It is my view that Brexit is a mess and, for such a vital issue, the referendum could have been handled better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

I must admit I got the turnout wrong from memory. 72% is quite high, to be fair, but 52% of 72% is just over 37% of the UK electorate who decided the future for everybody in the UK and they did it while being poorly informed and even misled.

Which obviously means that just over 34% of the UK electorate voted in favour of remaining in the European Union. See if you can spin that figure to suit the stupidity of your argument. And what's more, according to you, they also did that whilst being poorly informed, and even misled. 🤦

57 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

The government should have been impartial

Yeah, like they were also impartial during the 1975 referendum campaign on EEC membership, when the then Labour Government under Harold Wilson also vociferously pushed the Remain agenda. 🤔

57 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

and seen to it that every household was distributed with accurate and relevant information concerning the pros and cons of leaving.

Every household was distributed with accurate and relevant information concerning the pros and cons of leaving when PM David Cameron spent £9 million pounds of UK taxpayers money on a booklet which was sent to every household in the land. 👇👇👇👇

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a8055a4e5274a2e87db9392/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk.pdf

 

57 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

As for lies, they are not a basis for making up one’s mind in a referendum. The £350 million on the side of a bus was a lie and irrelevant to the amount of money the Tories spent on the NHS after Brexit. Stating what you believe to be the case may be untrue, but you cannot say it is a lie. The 2016 referendum is a clear example of how not to do it. It was a fiasco and no basis for determining the destiny of a nation.

So was Osborne's Emergency Budget and the immediate and prolonged recession that was supposed to happen just for merely voting to Leave the EU as well, not to mention the rest of the Remain campaigns blatant lies that were spewed out on a daily basis, but if you are going to nullify the result of a vote because of lies, then the result of every single vote that has ever taken place in the history of voting would be invalid. 🤦

57 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

It wasn’t even binding.

Here we go again with that tired old Remoaner line that the referendum was only advisory - yes, we get that, you lot have never ceased reminding us of that one since the day of the result when it had finally dawned on you that you had lost the vote.

Unless otherwise stated, referenda in the UK are advisory until they are ratified through Parliament with a majority vote in the House of Commons.

After the EU Referendum result, Parliament debated and voted with a majority of 384 votes (498 to 114) in favour of activating 'Article 50' of 'The Lisbon Treaty' to start the process of leaving the EU.

Parliament also debated and voted with a majority of 372 votes (494 to 122) in favour of passing the 'European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill 2017'. Once the EU Withdrawal Bill attained Royal Assent, the result of the referendum to Leave the EU became an 'Act of Parliament' and binding in law.

The EU referendum was the perfect example of Parliamentary democracy in action.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2016-06-27/debates/1606275000001/OutcomeOfTheEUReferendum

Edited by Destination Unknown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Destination Unknown said:

Unfortunately for you though, the UK won't be getting another referendum for several decades (possibly never) given how Remoaners have refused to accept the result of the EU referendum, and actively tried to have the result squashed, therefore, it is unlikely a referendum on anything will be held in the UK again, so it's all THEIR fault.!! 😂😂😂

Yes, all the damage done to the UK by Brexit is the fault of Remoaners. If they had only believed enough, we'd have a trade deal with the US, the EU would have imploded, and we would be in the sunlit uplands with unicorns gambolling around. Pesky Remoaners! It's all their fault!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, pellinore said:

Yes, all the damage done to the UK by Brexit is the fault of Remoaners. If they had only believed enough, we'd have a trade deal with the US, the EU would have imploded, and we would be in the sunlit uplands with unicorns gambolling around. Pesky Remoaners! It's all their fault!

No pellinore, that's not what I meant at all, and what's more, you damn well know that's not what I meant.

You know full well that I meant the reason there won't be another referendum for several decades is precisely because of YOUR sides abject refusal to accept the result, actively seeking to have the result squashed.

That was entirely down to people like YOU, who would NEVER accept the result even if Leave won 10 referendums, so stop trying to make it look like I meant something else, because quite clearly I didn't. And you know it.

Edited by Destination Unknown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.