Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35980771)

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35980752)

Mr K's value is that he almost accurately reflects the Terry Thomas I remember.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35980771)

See what I mean, everybody?

Mr M nicely equivocates on the divisions but won't accept the Referendum result. He ignores my comparison of a vote in Parliament with a majority of 1 to a Referendum result to which the guvmin commits, which Mr M doesn't like with a 4% majority.

That is perpetuating divisions and has to stop.

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35980767)

You need to have some level of evidence to support that.......

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35980780)

Ridiculing member's like this just adds fuel to the fire. I suggest you debate the points he raises instead?

---------- Post added at 12:42 ---------- Previous post was at 12:32 ----------



You really need to accept that, in this country, people are allowed to hold different views and importantly, allowed to voice them.

You believe that Germany, France and Ireland are in an evil EU conspiracy, etc. You are wrong of course but you are quite entitled to repeat such nonsense .. as you due ... regularly .. :)

What may possibly help to bring the two sides together are two things:

1. some honesty in admitting that there is no mandate for No Deal per the Leave campaign "manifesto"
2. stop treating Brexit as a "Winner Takes All" game. The vote was so close that imposing an extreme implementation of Brexit would be a severe mistake. History tells us this ..

Originally Posted by Angua (Post 35980784)

To be fair, remain whilst vocal has not attracted the yellow vest style of supporter.

Leave has support from both left and right, just not so much from the middle, with a small section of the right using leave to bolster their racism.

Either way, threats of violence should not be allowed to stifle debate or as an excuse to carry on as we are.



---------- Post added at 15:14 ---------- Previous post was at 15:12 ----------



It was the Remain side of the referendum said No Deal was an option. So it seems doubly ironic that the Leave side are trying to take ownership of the claim.

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35980780)

What may possibly help to bring the two sides together are two things:

1. some honesty in admitting that there is no mandate for No Deal per the Leave campaign "manifesto"
2. stop treating Brexit as a "Winner Takes All" game. The vote was so close that imposing an extreme implementation of Brexit would be a severe mistake. History tells us this ..

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35980790)

point (1) . . mandate or not, it's getting closer to it every day ;)

point (2) . . doesn't matter how 'close' the vote was, one side one, one lost.

If a horse wins a race by 10 mm they don't ask for a re-run because it was too close to be a result. If you avoid a car crash by 6 inches, nobody suggests having another try :D

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35980791)

If they find out the loser of the horse race gets shot, they might

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35980792)

You're confusing horse racing with that 'I'm a celebrity' stuff . . admittedly it would probably increase the viewing figures though :D

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35980792)

You're confusing horse racing with that 'I'm a celebrity' stuff . . admittedly it would probably increase the viewing figures though :D

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35980790)

point (1) . . mandate or not, it's getting closer to it every day ;)

point (2) . . doesn't matter how 'close' the vote was, one side won, one lost.

If a horse wins a race by 10 mm they don't ask for a re-run because it was too close to be a result. If you avoid a car crash by 6 inches, nobody suggests having another try :D

Originally Posted by Angua (Post 35980798)

For me a mandate = a majority of those who can vote. Not a majority of those who did vote.

Anything else is no more than slightly larger percentage of those who voted chose one particular option over another. Not a resounding approval of any one option.

This is, and always has been the problem with a binary vote referendum with a non binary answer.

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35980800)

would it help matters if we said that those who didn't vote (but could do so) actually abstained?

Does this alter anything now we've given it a posh word?

Any vote has 3 possible answers yes - no - abstain

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35980735)

Hope Brexiteers are listening as most of the vitriol/hate has come from that side.

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35980780)

Ridiculing member's like this just adds fuel to the fire. I suggest you debate the points he raises instead?[COLOR="Silver"]

<SNIP>

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35980769)

Come on man, you're better than that