True

Levaes campaign was almost entirely lies, from memory.

...it’s democratic to have a referendum vote based on lies...but un-democratic to have a re-vote based on truths...


...and that will help make ‘Britain Great Again...’...

people are obsessed with having another ref or a GE. The whole thing is completely pointless

Don't people understand that our future relationship with the EU is never going to go away. Why would a new ref be accepted as more accurate and legitimate than the previous one. If there was a GE and one side won a majority, they would force through an outcome that 50% of the population disagreed with, that's not a solution.

Even if Boris forces a no deal brexit, we still have to get a deal with the EU at some point and that could easily mean joining the customs union. Our relationship with the EU will reflect the political majority at the time and that will vary over the coming decades

The bottom line is that a new ref, a new GE won't solve anything. Politicians know this, and it never ceases to amaze me that people swallow what politicians are telling them so easily

Quite.

For a while now I have thought a second ref is the only way out of it. Options, no deal or revoke. Only thing that makes any sense. I know why the most ardent leavers would not want that though, given so many have changed their minds now that they know a deal is NOT infact easy to reach as they were told...

Darragh makes some good points particularly with regard to immigration, I don't agree with his sweeping generalisations about NI though, there will still be plenty who remember bombings 'on the mainland' and would not want to return to those dark days

One thing the leave campaign was absolutely adamant on was that if they won, the opposing side wouldn't accept it and try and make us keep voting until they get the result they want. That was something that was regularly said. Did the leave campaign lie about that?

But didn't Farage say the same thing? If remain won by a small majority, he would continue campaigning to get a second ref?

He also said unless its 33 to 66 the issue will still run. And so it does.

Yes! Continue campaigning, not block and obstruct what the people voted for.

Once our decision is implemented, leavers are free to campaign to re-join. But let's do what the country decided first, that would be a start, wouldn't it?

I cant believe am about to say this, but I agree with Farage on that one. What he said BEFORE the results though of course, as since the results the tunes been changed hugely.

Edit to add

Farage: In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it

Ha, edited yet again to say, my page had not refreshed so I didnt realise I was basically parroting annie :laugh:

I might be being thick here, but..whats the difference? Campaigning would be pointless if they weren't wanting another vote. Another ref was quite obviously what was meant by it

...I guess if the majority of Brexiters are anti-re-vote...then that would indicate that any knowledge or talks of the Irish borders../...potential jeopardising if the GFA, would have made no difference....which I guess also, makes me think of Dara’s words again...

I wonder, once we actively leave the EU, are Brexiteers going to be peeved when people start campaigning for re-entry? Will that still be "undemocratic"?

No, it will be fine for a Political party to put in their manifesto a new referendum. Then it will be down to the people to vote them into power.

...everyone is going to be too busy hating on Scotland for going for their independence ...you’re the next target, me dear...

In the words of Stephen Gethins:

The charlatans and chancers who led the Leave campaign did not even have the decency to set out their plans before the vote, which has led directly to the uncertainty and damage that we face today. The council president has hit the nail on the head with his remarks.

Before any election or referendum, it is a basic part of democracy that those seeking office or a change set out their proposals in a manifesto or white paper and can then be held to account based on what was said before a vote. Yet those who campaigned for leave, including senior UK government ministers, failed even in this basic democratic requirement.

Their action stands in stark contrast to the Scottish government that rightly opened up its plans to full scrutiny by producing a 650-page white paper and other position papers ahead of Scotland’s independence referendum.

Providing a blueprint for future plans as well as means of accountability is responsible politics. Instead, with Brexit, we are faced with a situation where even the UK government itself is warning of food and medicine shortages and the loss hundreds of thousands of jobs and a massive economic hit.

We are facing the worst crisis in peace-time because of senior government figures failing to hold themselves to account for their actions or have a plan for what comes next other than holding the
Tory party together. All the while the Labour party acts as a willing accomplice in inflicting this economic devastation.

The rest of Europe can clearly see that it is all of us in the UK who are paying the price for their continued failure.

This is an interesting one as well

It was not a decision, the referendum was advisory
So stop framing it as a decision

It was an ill-informed advice

David Starkey blows that argument out of the water, on a Brendan O'Neil podcast with Starkey.

Check it out, listen to someone who knows their history and facts.

It's not an argument, it is a fact

The ref was advisory, non binding :dance:

David Starkey agrees with what you're saying, he admits it's advisory, but gives you another angle.

I dont care for his angles.

And that's perfectly fine, you're free to. It makes no difference to me if you want to be ignorant of other people, that's your choice.

I dont care for leaver propaganda and lies.

The simple fact is the ref was advisory and non binding