Brexit (Old)

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Fiction. Say something useful, please.

He literally said the majority had made their minds up before any discussion or debate.

[Mythica]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

The Remainers would say that anyway. They are insinuating that the Leavers didn't know what they were voting for. Who are the Remainers to decide that?

What would you be saying if the Leavers were demanding another referendum because nothing further would have happened on a "what we know now" basis? Clearly that would be likely but the theoretical question is worth asking.

Many Remainers will stop at nothing to defy democracy just because they disagree with the Referendum result. That's bad.

Wanting another referendum based on what we know now isn't defying democracy. What if leave voters want another referendum? You speak for yourself and not millions of others. There simply wasn't enough true information to have a true result from a referendum based on what we know now.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Mythica

Wanting another referendum based on what we know now isn't defying democracy. What if leave voters want another referendum? You speak for yourself and not millions of others. There simply wasn't enough true information to have a true result from a referendum based on what we know now.

You don't speak for them either.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

That's ridiculous.

Vote Leave won. The half truths of the Leave campaign were easily offset by the Project Fear noise of the Remain campaign. Leave voters obviously took Project Fear into account.

You do realise that makes it worse not better, two wrongs don't make it right, it isn't some how evened up because everyone lied, it just makes the whole thing a complete sham and makes a mockery of the democracy some people claim to be so desperate to uphold

[Mythica]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

You don't speak for them either.

I never said I did. Again which you seem to be missing, is my point is it's not undemocratic to want a second referendum. I've not said personally I want one, just it's not undemocratic to want one based on what we know now.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Mythica

Wanting another referendum based on what we know now isn't defying democracy. What if leave voters want another referendum? You speak for yourself and not millions of others. There simply wasn't enough true information to have a true result from a referendum based on what we know now.

You don't get it. Whether or not I speak for myself (as is the case with you), the EU trick of gerrymandering events to force a second referendum is well document for three other countries.

As I've said several times, Remainers will use the argumental device your are deploying to defeat the outcome of the 2016 Referendum. We will never agree.

I tell you something else about what we know now. The EU as represented by their Commission, are hard nosed nasties who want to federalise Europe and make their parliament superior to ours. Nobody in their right mind should want that. What's the matter with you?



---------- Post added at 16:52 ---------- Previous post was at 16:47 ----------

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

You do realise that makes it worse not better, two wrongs don't make it right, it isn't some how evened up because everyone lied, it just makes the whole thing a complete sham and makes a mockery of the democracy some people claim to be so desperate to uphold

That cuts both ways. Remain lost.

How can you be so sure that the Referendum was "a complete sham and makes a mockery of the democracy"? That insults the voters on both sides who knew what they were voting for. Remainers seem to think that the Leavers did not know what they were voting for; they have no proof for this. Nor have they assessed the number of Remainers who are disgusted with the EU's high handed behaviour and who could change their vote to Leave.

That is one of the bases on which the Referendum result must stand. Many of the Remainers on this thread are very bad losers.

Originally Posted by Hugh

That's how it works in the Olympics...

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...al-doping.html

And in football

https://www.theguardian.com/football...ropeanfootball



And in the Tour De France

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/19369375

Cheats usually always get caught.

Yes but that has absolutely nothing to do with voting in an election/referendum, what happens in a campaign is irrelevant to votes legitimately cast - you have no proof of any votes being invalid whatsoever on either side and there was lies told on both sides!!!

I cannot bloody believe we are still damn arguing about the legitimacy of the referendum - it happened - leave won and leave we must - another vote is just there to overturn the first and a second one would be considered illegitimate, why should a second referendum supersede the first one, clue it should not?!?!

[Mythica]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

You don't get it. Whether or not I speak for myself (as is the case with you), the EU trick of gerrymandering events to force a second referendum is well document for three other countries.

As I've said several times, Remainers will use the argumental device your are deploying to defeat the outcome of the 2016 Referendum. We will never agree.

I tell you something else about what we know now. The EU as represented by their Commission, are hard nosed nasties who want to federalise Europe and make their parliament superior to ours. Nobody in their right mind should want that. What's the matter with you?



---------- Post added at 16:52 ---------- Previous post was at 16:47 ----------



That cuts both ways. Remain lost.

How can you be so sure that the Referendum was "a complete sham and makes a mockery of the democracy"? That insults the voters on both sides who knew what they were voting for. Remainers seem to think that the Leavers did not know what they were voting for; they have no proof for this. Nor have they assessed the number of Remainers who are disgusted with the EU's high handed behaviour and who could change their vote to Leave.

That is one of the bases on which the Referendum result must stand. Many of the Remainers on this thread are very bad losers.

And that's the dangerous thing with this argument. It's not a game, people didn't lose. People want what's best for the country.

Originally Posted by Mick

Yes but that has absolutely nothing to do with voting in an election/referendum, what happens in a campaign is irrelevant to votes legitimately cast - you have no proof of any votes being invalid whatsoever on either side and there was lies told on both sides!!!

I cannot bloody believe we are still damn arguing about the legitimacy of the referendum - it happened - leave won and leave we must - another vote is just there to overturn the first and a second one would be considered illegitimate, why should a second referendum supersede the first one, clue it should not?!?!

Funny you should say that...

https://www.theguardian.com/news/aud...today-in-focus

But now the National Crime Agency has said it is investigating Banks amid concerns that he was “not the true source” of £8m in funding to the Leave.EU campaign.

This week, Banks’s insurance company, as well as his Leave.EU campaign group, faced fines of £135,000 for breaches of data laws.

Meanwhile, the New York Times has reported that the US special prosecutor, Robert Mueller, is looking at records of Banks’s communications with Russian diplomats.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8649001.html

The High Court will rule as early as Christmas whether Brexit should be declared “void”, in a legal case given a turbo-boost by the criminal investigation into Leave funder Arron Banks.

Judges are poised to fast track the potentially explosive challenge, after Theresa May’s refusal to act on the growing evidence of illegality in the 2016 referendum campaign, The Independent can reveal.

Lawyers describe that failure as “absolutely extraordinary” – given the National Crime Agency’s (NCA) probe into suspicions of “multiple” criminal offences committed by Mr Banks and the Leave.EU campaign.

Originally Posted by Hugh

Funny you should say that...

https://www.theguardian.com/news/aud...today-in-focus

And?

That means Sweet FA!!

Try not to bring BS Robert Mueller stuff in to this thread either!

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Mythica

And that's the dangerous thing with this argument. It's not a game, people didn't lose. People want what's best for the country.

Nobody is calling the Referendum a "game". It was a Referendum.

The Leave choice won; the Remain choice lost.

Your assertion is just another blind alley attempt to have the valid result overturned by another Referendum where Remain might win.

Originally Posted by Hugh

Funny you should say that...

https://www.theguardian.com/news/aud...today-in-focus

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8649001.html

I see you did an edit - that is just more utter bullshit, it will be an absolute abuse of judicial power to overturn a democratic result based on campaign that was not even the official campaign.

[Mythica]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Nobody is calling the Referendum a "game". It was a Referendum.

The Leave choice won; the Remain choice lost.

Your assertion is just another blind alley attempt to have the valid result overturned by another Referendum where Remain might win.

Attempt? I haven't stated personally I want a second referendum. My point always has been that it's not undemocratic to want a second referendum based on what we know now from both sides.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Fiction. Say something useful, please.

I guess he might when you do

The "Project Fear" crap is a broken record and should be consigned to the playground where it belongs. Debate the reality that faces us today. Hiding behind childish name calling betrays a lack of imagination.

Hey, when Vladimir Putin, who is the last person on this earth to preach democracy, tells us to "respect" the referendum result then we have all we need to know.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Mythica

Attempt? I haven't stated personally I want a second referendum. My point always has been that it's not undemocratic to want a second referendum based on what we know now from both sides.

Then you're arguing for argument's sake - to be difficult. Not very useful to the debate.