m
Well-known member
- Joined
- 8 Dec 2017
- Messages
- 8,186
An opinion poll is a small sample not 35.5 million. Remain lost simple as .
Where can I find the rules on opinion poll size limits?
An opinion poll is a small sample not 35.5 million. Remain lost simple as .
What people voted for in the 70’s was a common market for trade which worked well until the Eu was inflicted on us.There was a referendum back in the 70s with an overwhelming vote. Some people have been trying to overturn it for 40 years.
You wont get a referendum based on genuine info, politicians are at worst natural born liars and at best economical with the truth. All through the process of trying to leave we have had "experts" and politicians insisting that we are heading into the abyss. These are the same politicians that promised emergency budgets, worthless properties and pensions. Are the "experts" the same that told the same story, "experts" that thought it would be great for Greece to join the EU or another set of "experts" that want to peddle their opinion as fact (or are paid/told to)? History will tell the truth (if we ever leave).So lets have a referendum based on genuine info.
I agree on Cameron.
What people voted for in the 70’s was a common market for trade which worked well until the Eu was inflicted on us.
You wont get a referendum based on genuine info, politicians are at worst natural born liars and at best economical with the truth. All through the process of trying to leave we have had "experts" and politicians insisting that we are heading into the abyss. These are the same politicians that promised emergency budgets, worthless properties and pensions. Are the "experts" the same that told the same story, "experts" that thought it would be great for Greece to join the EU or another set of "experts" that want to peddle their opinion as fact (or are paid/told to)? History will tell the truth (if we ever leave).
So if the last referendum wasn't based on genuine information, should there be prosecutions of those involved into telling those alleged lies?
Would Remainers be happy if a Leave majority parliament took a 2nd vote and did nothing with it because they thought the people got it wrong?
Yes and No, respectively, but....In some respects, it gets to the core of the issue. Do we believe in democracy and not winning at times, or do we believe in democracy, but only when it's the result we believe in?
To be fair, the amount of money on the bus was proved to be valid on more than one occasion - yes, I know. Of course the use of how it is calculated is open for debate, but it's no different to some figures the Govt came out with or the EU.... Did Corbyn lie to students at the last election? Did Nick Clegg also do that in 2010?Should there be prosecutions in a GE would then be an equally valid question.
You know there were lies Gary, with the obvious being the slogan on the bus or the scare tactics about Turkey by Farage, Remain had theirs as well. They aren't 'alledged' as you well know, there were some absolute whoppers told.
I've already answered your 2nd question. A legally binding referendum as Parliament would know what the voters actually wanted rather than a myriad of vague, abstract (Sunlit Uplands rubbish) ideas, with no clear option.
It is... But we have to create rigour on how we choose to do it. The last 2 referenda in this country have caused the other side to scream re-vote as soon as it happened - like they cannot accept they did not win. We can't pick and choose how we use direct democracy as tool to back out of a decision that we don't like - especially when we've made other similar decisions with barely a whiff of direct democracy or care. Otherwise we would end up never doing anything?Yes and No, respectively, but....
....is there not a third element along the lines of a Democracy where we are allowed to revisit a decision when the reality of the result is not what the people who voted for it, errr..., voted for?
To be fair, the amount of money on the bus was proved to be valid on more than one occasion - yes, I know. Of course the use of how it is calculated is open for debate, but it's no different to some figures the Govt came out with or the EU.... Did Corbyn lie to students at the last election? Did Nick Clegg also do that in 2010?
Note that I used the term alleged to protect this forum in case someone wanted to take it further from the outside.
It is... But we have to create rigour on how we choose to do it. The last 2 referenda in this country have caused the other side to scream re-vote as soon as it happened - like they cannot accept they did not win. We can't pick and choose how we use direct democracy as tool to back out of a decision that we don't like - especially when we've made other similar decisions with barely a whiff of direct democracy or care. Otherwise we would end up never doing anything?
Once Brexit has been delivered, the country is stable, then perhaps there is a right time in the medium term for a 2nd vote with a set of clear items to vote. When we haven't even delivered it yet; it's hard and for a lot of the country, confusing and I dare say, not a big priority when the NHS needs sorting and the economy needs to grow. We have to move on and stop debating the vote that has long since gone.
The fact the people's vote crew cannot even agree on the basics suggests to me that now is not the right time.
It is... But we have to create rigour on how we choose to do it. The last 2 referenda in this country have caused the other side to scream re-vote as soon as it happened - like they cannot accept they did not win. We can't pick and choose how we use direct democracy as tool to back out of a decision that we don't like - especially when we've made other similar decisions with barely a whiff of direct democracy or care. Otherwise we would end up never doing anything?
I don't doubt both sides had serious sleights of hand but I did laugh when I saw 2 separate reports that said 350 million was actually correct, and one said it actually under estimated the figure.The bus was at best disingenuous. Boris (et al) carried on spouting the figure (including on the TV debates) from the bus long after it was challenged. This doesn't even take into account, Brexiteers making 'suggestions' for spending that money 20 times over.
Following your logic about direct democracy and using referenda, then the 2016 referendum has no democratic mandate so should be ignored.
What Brexit is to be delivered? How long until the country is stable (Rees-Mogg opined 50 years for the benefits from his no deal)? Something the 2016 Referendum didn't cover and nor did the Leave Campaign with its myriad of suggestions.
Brexit is the most important thing this parliament has to decide as it directly affects the NHS, economy etc basically everything. The effects will likely vary from nothing to major depending on what Brexit looks like.
Also, we would lose the veto, rebate etc if we leave and then applied to join the EU again.
The people on here who want another referendum seem pretty clear and similar on what they want.
We don't. I suspect Cameron thought after IndyRef, that it was a wheeze he could win easily. Except on Brexit, the answer he got wasn't the one he expected. And frankly, the vast majority of MPs were as clueless as the public then as they are now. And aren't enthralled with be asked to enact so direct instructions for us proles rather than using their judgement first. Quite a bitter pill to swallowPersonally, I think the last two years show (and this is something I've been banging on about for years) that Britain hasn't a clue how to do direct democracy. We have, after all, only done three referenda nationwide in our entire history.
The politicians asked an oversimplified question for a complex problem, got a small majority in the direction they weren't expecting, and three years later they still don't have a clue how to respond to it. But I'm really unconvinced that the answer is to hold another referendum.
We're a parliamentary democracy. We have been since 1215/1649/1689/1721/1918* (delete as appropriate, depending on your view of history). It's what we know how to do.
So our parliamentarians need to do their jobs, and make a decision - as they were elected to do - based on what they think is right for the country.
And if they think that's to overturn the referendum and stay in Europe, that's what they should vote to do. And they can make that argument to their constituents at the next election. If they think it's to leave without a deal, ditto.
If they overturn the vote in the referendum they are scoundrels and not fit to govern.
The country has been asked what do you think and if parliament goes against that I’d expect unrest to follow, and I’d personally hope it results in mass demonstrations.
I just hope the British don’t meekly accept staying in the EU is the only option.