Well I don’t know but you will answer it.
I’m sure boris pays his csa unlike millions who don’t give a sh!t and get away with it.

He can afford to-£47 billion!

No I knew which end of the stick I wanted and was attempting a bit of light banter - hideous failure!

As for your comments, argued to death elsewhere. On the vote, Leave definitely won. However, what annoys many Remainers is why they lost.

The two thirds principal applies with force here.

One third fully understood what they were voting and why and said in strong terms - LEAVE. You (and it would appear the majority on here) are of that third.

One third fully understood what they were voting and why and said so in equally strong terms - REMAIN. Me and a handful of others on here.

The other third I wish had stayed at home. They are genuine f*ck wits who voted remain as they feared change or some pop star said so. Or they voted Leave as they hate foreigners, or the Tories (!?!), or they were anti-austerity, or wanted to control immigration from non EU countries (!!!), or saw the vote as anti-elite as they felt they were not being listened to, and other stuff wholly unconnected with the referendum. There was also the enrichment of the NHS that people actually believed. To win, Leave needed more of these imbeciles - and boy did they get them.

Remainers hold the fantasy that many of the first third are dead - as there was a higher propensity of older voters wanting to leave - and that the young might actually turn up next time. They also hope that those who crawled out from their rocks may next time continue to further their usually self-imposed disenfranchised existence and stay under their bl00dy rocks.

Sadly, that is not how democracy works. On a referendum, you take a really big chance with a largely uneducated and impressionable electorate and, after the votes are cast and you lose, you have no right to question WHY people voted how they did.

Thus, I kind of agree with most of what you say... although the period when the Parliament was hung and there were numerous votes to reverse the result was perhaps the most polarizing and exciting period in our political history that I have lived through.

Well I would have to disagree with you (edit-about the exciting bit) Of course, I have my theory about Labours second referendum stance being primarily about a way of ensuring Corybn never reached number 10, primarily in light of how well he did in 2017.

But lets say that during that period of time, a 'Governement of National Unity' had emerged, as was the want of many Remainers. Now they would have had to hold it together long enough to pass the necessary legislation to get the second referendum held. Probably about a 6 month gap. So assuming this farce comes into play in November 2019, you probably have the second referendum in the May. Of course nobody could have predicted Covid so lets leave that to one side.

So you have your second referendum ahead with a Corbyn led coalition barely able to do anything else. The only issue is Brexit. Now I know for a fact that the policy towards any second referendum from the likes of Farage and so on would have been a boycott. After all, what would be the point? If your vote could be ignored the once, why bother voting again?

But come the May, we the vote. And its probably a less than 40% turn out. Remain win it but perhaps with less than 17.2 million votes that Leave got in 2016.

What is actually decided? Does the issue go away? Or does the country erupt? And in any future election, as we saw in December 2019, the Tories would have hammered away at the issue, and quite rightly so.

Throw in Covid itself, and lockdowns, and maybe an attempt to kick this ludicrous second referendum down the road (and to be fair, there might have been some valid reasons for that at the time) and the UK possibly fractures forever. Genuine real-world consequences. Deaths. Violence across the country.

I would have fought. In every sense of the word. I don't write that as hyperbole or boasting but as actual, cold, fact. Would have been trying to burn Parliament down. Willing to go to prison or even put my own life on the line. Again, people can feel free to mock this stance as macho posturing but I would be willing to look anybody in the eye and repeat my claims.

Thankfully it never happened but our politicians risked this.

I don't see it as exciting. I see it as playing with fire.

Edited by Matov (07 Jun 2022 6.13pm)

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Suspect the mechanism is already in place. What would happen would be an 'olive branch' from the EU. Probably headed by Macron. The people who back Hunt want us back in the single market/customs union.

It would not be presented as that, and 'freedom of movement' would probably come via an easy to navigate on-line visa system (which I actually favour but I am an exception on that) but ultimately it would have us back in the fold.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

'The UK rated the country least likely to honour its treaty obligations and commitments'.

That's a bit like saying that, internationally, the UK is a pain in the a***e you should avoid dealing with.

Hence matters like the USA trade deal, the NI protocol have a major drawback for the USA and EU.

Trusting us, and in particular, a PM with no integrity.