Quote Originally Posted by ramAnag View Post
So...
1) Leave semantics out of it...it was never mandatory...only ever advisory...that’s a fact. It was advisory, the Bill/Act permitting the referendum said so, but Cameron said he would abide by the result.... and that is also a fact.
2) That’s a ‘no’...what was irrelevant to a ‘good proportion’ of Leavers is itself entirely irrelevant to the question.
3) Sorry you’re just being stubborn. 37% can never be a genuine majority of 100% for a single issue Y/N (In/Out) vote. ... and so are you as 34.73% can never be a genuine majority of 100%. Prior to the result being announced, had you understood that the winner would be the first to attain 50% + 1 of the votes cast? I was and didn't even have a vote.
4) I did mean the Leave campaign, my mistake. There may have been ‘no clean hands’ but only one side has been fined for breaking electoral law. Why do we have these rules if breaking them is inconsequential? To take your football analogy a step further, the leaders of the Leave campaign are the political equivalent of QPR.
5) That’ll be another ‘no’ then.
6) You’re just not being honest with yourself there. Only recently you said that, in the event of a second Referendum, you’d vote ‘Remain’ again. You voted ‘Remain’ in 2016...you’ve done your best to put a positive slant on things since, but given all the circumstances and developments since you still recently admitted you’d vote ‘Remain’ again. It’s impossible to hold that view while still claiming to have been ‘encouraged’ by what the post Brexit future holds for the UK.
Again, hopefully with my neutral hat still on, votes not cast have never counted in UK elections/referenda/votes for committee members at Unions/Sports Clubs/Political Parties etc. Why should they count now in the EU referendum? That is the status quo in the UK.

IMO this is an issue that isn't going to go away any day soon. Whatever the eventual outcome there will be people wanting it overturned.

Some of those will be anti a no deal Brexit.

Some will be anti a Brexit that sees us leave both the Customs Union and Single Market.

Others won't accept a deal that sees us still in the CU and SM.

If we end up not leaving others will be against that because of 52/48. Some point to 63/37. Others to 34.73/65.27.

This whole episode will divide people for a long, long time.

My opinion on it? It was a good idea ruined by 2 years of total inactivity, apart from some in-fighting, on behalf of the government. The closeness of the vote was always going to lead to argument, especially with the 50% + 1 rules applied. In many votes which have far-reaching impacts, in many countries, you need 66% and sometimes as much as 75% of the votes cast to have a valid vote. It was an error not to have that kind of ruling in place for something as huge as Brexit. Finally, I think Cameron came out with his "I will abide by" comment and the 50+1 voting system simply because he was 100% convinced that Leave didn't have a cat in hell's chance of winning and 50+1 gave him a better chance of winning.

As it is, everybody loses out, especially the Dutch and the Germans as they are the only 2 countries left who can fill the hole left in the EU budget by Brexit. Ireland can't. Portugal, France, Italy, Spain and Greece are all as bankrupt, financially, as a country can get or very close to it. The former Eastern Bloc countries are being very protectionist and who can blame them. That, however, will see the Western countries being less forthcoming towards the East's wishes. Are we seeing the beginning of the end of this Monolith?