During the campaign there was a poster on here (I think Smiffy) who reposted a fake quote by Schulz basically saying the Brits could go **** themselves which I traced back to Sputnik, so that's anecdotal evidence of interference which reached its target and resonated.
Then there's the fact that the Russian ambassador to London acted as a go between to offer the largest contributor to the Leave campaign cheap gold mining concessions in Russia, which said businessman then lied about, which is suspicious but there's nothing concrete as yet.
Nothing to do with Russia but there's also the fact that non UK citizens (Commonwealth citizens) were allowed to vote while millions of Brits who live in Europe were barred from voting, I'll just throw that in there seeing as you brought up disenfranchisement.
See, any comments from the remainers are lies or ridiculous statements.
As I said earlier, if these experts genuinely believe what they are saying is the truth and the likely outcome, would they not be irresponsible to not say them?
What annoys me most about this whole Brexit thing is the attitude of some leavers which goes something like this:
'We won, you lost, you have no right to make any comments and even when you do, it's just lies and scaremongering '
I voted remain, but my standpoint now is that we should get out, but with the best deal possible. This will mean compromise with the EU.
Read the post properly please, or at least don’t deliberately misinterprete it. It didn’t imply that Russian interference on its own would trigger another referendum. It said that increasing evidence of interference may influence the result of any referendum held in 2019.
I know that no evidence of any sort will persuade the xenophobes and racists who want us out regardless of the economic cost, at least some of those will have died since 2016. I’ve just about got faith in the rest of the country that many will at last see sense in the coming months.
Strange view you have of people who disagree with you.
I voted leave because I do not like the idea of a Federal Europe.
I don't like where we are now with the EU project and certainly don't like where this may end up.
I voted yes in 1975 to remaining in the Common Market but a Federal EU wasn't on that ballot paper.
If the current EU structure had been on the 1975 ballot paper do you think the vote would have been the same?
By "see sense" do you mean agree with you?
Is democracy only sensible if you get the result you wanted.
I am optimistic about our future but time will tell which side of the argument is correct.
Nice to see, Mr Slack, that there remain a few Pies with political insight and sound judgement. Where on earth the Mexican pillock is going with his 'Socialism never works' rap, I don't know.
Socialism sure as hell worked in Sweden to give them one of the highest standards of living in the world. And it was socialism that created the welfare state in Britain. Without the influence of socialism and a social conscience, the free market would be making the gap between the haves and have-nots even wider.
All over the planet, there is evidence of the mess that unfettered capitalism can make. Such right wing thinking needs the constant challenge of socialist thought in the political, economic and moral spheres.
I’ve no idea if the current EU structure would have been voted for in 1975. As I said in the earlier post, despite promises made at the time, the 1975 referendum was overturned in 2016, just as that one probably will be in 2019.
I’ve also no idea why you think the UK is part of a “federal” EU, what laws we’re subjected to by that federal EU that you don’t like or what you base your optimism on for the future. I’ve certainly seen nothing in the negotiations that make me optimistic.