OT Petition for Second Referendum

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

--
"People don't buy Microsoft for quality, they buy it for compatibility
with what Bob in accounting bought last year. Trace it back - they buy
Microsoft because the IBM Selectric didn't suck much" - P Seebach, afc

Nightjar

2016-06-25 10:42:04 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

Post by Tim Streater
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

That would confirm that it really was the will of the people. However, I
rather doubt it would be the same. Those who thought they were just
registering a protest by voting leave might well change their vote and
the percentage of young voters would likely increase.

--
--

Colin Bignell

Adrian

2016-06-25 10:46:30 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

Yes. It was a straight two-way choice, and more people voted one way than
the other.

12m+ people shrugged and said "I'm easy either way - you decide for me."
16m people said "In".
17m people said "Out".

Decision decided.

Mike Tomlinson

2016-06-25 11:00:35 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

And when the vote split was 17 million vs 16 million?

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10
(")_(")

Capitol

2016-06-25 11:17:33 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

And when the vote split was 17 million vs 16 million?

Take off the 1M Irish votes and it's 17M vs 15M

Mike Tomlinson

2016-06-25 11:33:20 UTC

Post by Capitol
Take off the 1M Irish votes

Why? What makes them invalid? Just because they're Irish?

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10
(")_(")

Capitol

2016-06-25 15:31:51 UTC

Post by Capitol
Take off the 1M Irish votes

Why? What makes them invalid? Just because they're Irish?

Yes.

The Natural Philosopher

2016-06-25 16:28:56 UTC

Post by Capitol
Take off the 1M Irish votes

Why? What makes them invalid? Just because they're Irish?

Yes.

Probably a fair enough, if they are bob 'gack' geldof

--
"Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social
conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the
windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) "

Alan Sokal

Mike Tomlinson

2016-06-25 18:57:29 UTC

Post by Mike Tomlinson
Why? What makes them invalid? Just because they're Irish?

Yes.

Ah. OK. As you were. :)

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10
(")_(")

Chris Hogg

2016-06-25 11:52:31 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

And when the vote split was 17 million vs 16 million?

Take off the 1M Irish votes and it's 17M vs 15M

I'm passingly curious as to where the figure of 1m Irish resident in
the UK and qualified to vote comes from. I've had a quick Google for
it without any immediate success. Do you have a link?

--
Chris

Tim Streater

2016-06-25 11:57:43 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

And when the vote split was 17 million vs 16 million?

Take off the 1M Irish votes and it's 17M vs 15M

I'm passingly curious as to where the figure of 1m Irish resident in
the UK and qualified to vote comes from. I've had a quick Google for
it without any immediate success. Do you have a link?

Perhaps he means NI. If you take off NI and Scotland, then the gap
widens to over 2 million. FWIW.

--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

The Natural Philosopher

2016-06-25 12:04:51 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

And when the vote split was 17 million vs 16 million?

Take off the 1M Irish votes and it's 17M vs 15M

I'm passingly curious as to where the figure of 1m Irish resident in
the UK and qualified to vote comes from. I've had a quick Google for
it without any immediate success. Do you have a link?

Perhaps he means NI. If you take off NI and Scotland, then the gap
widens to over 2 million. FWIW.

Some one has started as petition to have Cambridge leave the UK and join
the EU

I wish they would

--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

Capitol

2016-06-25 15:37:04 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

And when the vote split was 17 million vs 16 million?

Take off the 1M Irish votes and it's 17M vs 15M

I'm passingly curious as to where the figure of 1m Irish resident in
the UK and qualified to vote comes from. I've had a quick Google for
it without any immediate success. Do you have a link?

Perhaps he means NI. If you take off NI and Scotland, then the gap
widens to over 2 million. FWIW.

Irish is Eire, NI is British.

Capitol

2016-06-25 15:35:23 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

And when the vote split was 17 million vs 16 million?

Take off the 1M Irish votes and it's 17M vs 15M

I'm passingly curious as to where the figure of 1m Irish resident in
the UK and qualified to vote comes from. I've had a quick Google for
it without any immediate success. Do you have a link?

Sadly no, I'm quoting from memory of a BBC statement of a total of
1.5M Irish people eligible to vote and I've guessed the 1M figure.
Either way, the number could swing a result from out to in under certain
circumstances.

The Natural Philosopher

2016-06-25 11:31:20 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

And when the vote split was 17 million vs 16 million?

The theory is that slightly less of the electorate are pissed off (about
36%) than would be with the other decision(37%)

--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

Chris Hogg

2016-06-25 11:17:29 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

You only improve on that if you make voting compulsory for all. In
those circumstances, a 'don't know' or a 'don't care' or 'none of the
above' or any other form of spoilt paper would get recorded as such,
to the benefit of the statisticians and analysts but few else. But
it's reasonable to assume that most of those who didn't vote came into
those categories anyway, given that everyone had plenty of time to
register if they so wished and there was no excuse for not registering
if you actually made the effort. So the actual numbers for or against
wouldn't change much.

--
Chris

2016-06-25 11:28:50 UTC

Post by Tim Streater
So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

100% of the electorate had the opportunity to vote, so yes.

--
F

Capitol

2016-06-25 15:31:03 UTC

Post by F

Post by Tim Streater
So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

100% of the electorate had the opportunity to vote, so yes.

So, I guess these petitioners want a new general election every few
days, as I don't recall a government in my lifetime which had a voter
majority of over 50%.

Steve Walker

2016-06-25 16:14:02 UTC

Post by F

Post by Tim Streater
So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

100% of the electorate had the opportunity to vote, so yes.

Well, almost. There will always be a few that have properly registered,
but who have not made it onto the list due to delays or errors in
processing. Not enough to make any difference though.

Andy Burns

2016-06-25 11:58:56 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

Registration was extended by a couple of days for those lazy enough not
to get on the register.

17.5m leave
16.1m remain
12.9m content to let others decide for them

Martin Barclay

2016-06-25 12:28:21 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

Registration was extended by a couple of days for those lazy enough not to
get on the register.
17.5m leave
16.1m remain
12.9m content to let others decide for them

Exactly!

Dave Plowman (News)

2016-06-25 13:05:37 UTC

Post by Andy Burns
Registration was extended by a couple of days for those lazy enough not
to get on the register.

That is your slant. It was actually extended because the site crashed due
to high demand.

But perhaps you think it would be OK to close a polling station early? For
those who couldn't be bothered to vote at a time you think they should
have?

--
*It's lonely at the top, but you eat better.

Dave Plowman ***@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Andy Burns

2016-06-25 13:26:57 UTC

Post by Andy Burns
Registration was extended by a couple of days for those lazy enough not
to get on the register.

That is your slant.

OK, some people will have moved during the 13 months since the last
general election, a few of those within the weeks before the deadline,
it's not as if they didn't know the referendum was coming.

Post by Dave Plowman (News)
It was actually extended because the site crashed due
to high demand.

High demand generated because someone realised the result was going to
be much closer than they feared, the young would tend to vote remain but
would tend not to be registered, so made sure the "get registered"
message was suddenly publicised close to the deadline.

Dave Plowman (News)

2016-06-25 15:05:06 UTC

Post by Dave Plowman (News)
It was actually extended because the site crashed due
to high demand.

You've obviously got plenty proof for that, given the outcome.

--
*Just give me chocolate and nobody gets hurt

Dave Plowman ***@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Tim Streater

2016-06-25 15:21:10 UTC

Post by Andy Burns
Registration was extended by a couple of days for those lazy enough not
to get on the register.

That is your slant. It was actually extended because the site crashed due
to high demand.

Not a slant at all. They were lazy enough to leave it to the last
minute.

--
"A committee is a cul-de-sac down which ideas are lured and then
quietly strangled." - Sir Barnett Cocks (1907-1989)

Roger Mills

2016-06-25 17:18:23 UTC

Post by Andy Burns
Registration was extended by a couple of days for those lazy enough not
to get on the register.

That is your slant. It was actually extended because the site crashed due
to high demand.

Surely, anyone serious about wanting to vote wouldn't have left it to
the last minute to register, anyway.

Post by Dave Plowman (News)
But perhaps you think it would be OK to close a polling station early? For
those who couldn't be bothered to vote at a time you think they should
have?

I believe that the rules now allow anyone who is in the queue to vote
before 10pm still to vote even if it's actually after 10pm when they do
so. What more do you want?

--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

Fredxxx

2016-06-25 12:10:58 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

Er yes. Wasn't there a majority vote to leave?

Anyone who couldn't be bothered, or chose not to vote, voted with the
majority.

Julian Barnes

2016-06-25 12:46:45 UTC

Post by Nightjar
That would confirm that it really was the will of the people. However, I
rather doubt it would be the same. Those who thought they were just
registering a protest by voting leave might well change their vote and
the percentage of young voters would likely increase.

In my ex-pat enclave there are many older retirees who were under the
erroneous impression that they were ineligible to vote, having moved away
from the UK many years ago. Having been informed that they can still vote
up to 15 years after leaving, however, I know they would welcome the
chance of another referendum so the OUT total can be made even more
emphatic.
There is also another constituency that you have overlooked: those who,
out of despair, believed voting Leave was a total waste of time as Brexit
could never happen. They won't make that mistake a second time!

Tim Watts

2016-06-25 13:12:03 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

here's something - how about the bunch who couldn't be arsed to vote,
bothered to vote?

It's not my problem if they are too lazy - then their view doesn't count
either way.

Post by Tim Streater
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

We've had the vote - that should be the end of it. This ridiculous
bleating to "have another" (until "we" get it right???) is pathetic.

The Natural Philosopher

2016-06-25 13:24:42 UTC

Post by Tim Watts

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

here's something - how about the bunch who couldn't be arsed to vote,
bothered to vote?
It's not my problem if they are too lazy - then their view doesn't count
either way.

Post by Tim Streater
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

We've had the vote - that should be the end of it. This ridiculous
bleating to "have another" (until "we" get it right???) is pathetic.

Noi, its that certain political forces dont see democracy as a way to
settle differences but as a way to be used until they get what they want.

Its the Violent Elizabeth Bott Leftycunt poodles who are typically
engaged in it

--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

Tim Streater

2016-06-25 15:22:32 UTC

Post by The Natural Philosopher
Its the Violent Elizabeth Bott Leftycunt poodles who are typically
engaged in it

Was she violent? I thought she just scweamed and scweamed.

--
HAL 9000: Dave. Put down those Windows disks. Dave. DAVE!

Tim Watts

2016-06-25 20:31:33 UTC

Post by The Natural Philosopher
Noi, its that certain political forces dont see democracy as a way to
settle differences but as a way to be used until they get what they want.
Its the Violent Elizabeth Bott Leftycunt poodles who are typically
engaged in it

I have a suggestion that should make everyone happy.

Let Sturgeon have her 2nd referendum, leave the UK, join the EU (in some
years, probably after Albania).

Then all the thick stupid Special Snowflakes who don't know how to vote
in a binary referendum and then whine about it afterwards, can sod off
to Scotland and do the rest of us a favour...

Mike Tomlinson

2016-06-25 13:34:08 UTC

Post by Tim Watts
We've had the vote - that should be the end of it. This ridiculous
bleating to "have another" (until "we" get it right???) is pathetic.

If the Scottish can do it, why shouldn't we?

:) for the humour-impaired (plenty of those here)

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10
(")_(")

Dave Plowman (News)

2016-06-25 15:08:10 UTC

Post by Tim Watts
We've had the vote - that should be the end of it. This ridiculous
bleating to "have another" (until "we" get it right???) is pathetic.

If the Scottish can do it, why shouldn't we?
:) for the humour-impaired (plenty of those here)

Interesting to speculate.
The online petition is now way above the number needed for it to be
considered by parliament.

If it was, there are more MPs pro EU than anti.

It gets passed.

The BREXIT lot would be incandescent. At an example of 'sovereignty' they
wanted oh so badly.

--
*Why do they put Braille on the drive-through bank machines?

Dave Plowman ***@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Tim Streater

2016-06-25 15:27:02 UTC

Post by Tim Watts
We've had the vote - that should be the end of it. This ridiculous
bleating to "have another" (until "we" get it right???) is pathetic.

If the Scottish can do it, why shouldn't we?
:) for the humour-impaired (plenty of those here)

Interesting to speculate.
The online petition is now way above the number needed for it to be
considered by parliament.
If it was, there are more MPs pro EU than anti.
It gets passed.

What gets passed? Being "considered for debate" does not mean a Bill
gets passed.

Post by Dave Plowman (News)
The BREXIT lot would be incandescent. At an example of 'sovereignty' they
wanted oh so badly.

--
"I am enclosing two tickets to the first night of my new play; bring a
friend.... if you have one." - GB Shaw to Churchill "Cannot possibly
attend first night, will attend second... if there is one." - Winston
Churchill, in response.

Cursitor Doom

2016-06-25 18:28:22 UTC

Post by Dave Plowman (News)
Interesting to speculate.

Not for anyone in the real world.

Post by Dave Plowman (News)
The online petition is now way above the number needed for it to be
considered by parliament.
If it was, there are more MPs pro EU than anti.
It gets passed.

Dream on, straw-clinger.

Tim Watts

2016-06-25 20:33:17 UTC

Post by Dave Plowman (News)
The BREXIT lot would be incandescent. At an example of 'sovereignty' they
wanted oh so badly.

That's an extremely dangerous place to be: expect a rapid shift to UKIP
or other far right candidates in the next election.

Steve Walker

2016-06-25 16:16:02 UTC

Post by Tim Watts

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

here's something - how about the bunch who couldn't be arsed to vote,
bothered to vote?
It's not my problem if they are too lazy - then their view doesn't count
either way.

Post by Tim Streater
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

We've had the vote - that should be the end of it. This ridiculous
bleating to "have another" (until "we" get it right???) is pathetic.

It'd be fully in line with past EU policy :(

Phil L

2016-06-25 14:06:37 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed,
already having over a million signatures, but if anybody feels like
signing it: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all
called Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for
the whole?

Apparently it is. what percentage voted Conservative last time or the time
before?

(answer: 36% in 2015 and 36% in 2010)

Post by Tim Streater
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

That would confirm that it really was the will of the people.
However, I rather doubt it would be the same. Those who thought they
were just registering a protest by voting leave might well change
their vote and the percentage of young voters would likely increase.

and the percentage of 'leave' voters would also increase, negating the
remain voters efforts.

There isn't going to be a second referendum, it's done and dusted

Capitol

2016-06-25 17:47:32 UTC

Post by Phil L

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all
called Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for
the whole?

Apparently it is. what percentage voted Conservative last time or the time
before?
(answer: 36% in 2015 and 36% in 2010)

Post by Tim Streater
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

That would confirm that it really was the will of the people.
However, I rather doubt it would be the same. Those who thought they
were just registering a protest by voting leave might well change
their vote and the percentage of young voters would likely increase.

and the percentage of 'leave' voters would also increase, negating the
remain voters efforts.
There isn't going to be a second referendum, it's done and dusted

There also isn't going to be an election this year. The
Conservatives have a majority and won't risk it until 2020.

Roger Mills

2016-06-25 17:05:29 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

If that's how the rules are defined - yes!

If 25% of the population chooses not to take part, that's *their*
problem. It doesn't detract from the decision taken by the 75% who *do*
bother to vote.

It's far more democratic than our first-past-the-post parliamentary
election system - which we had the opportunity to change a few years
ago, but flunked it!

--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

soup

2016-06-25 17:56:29 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

Yup

TimW

2016-06-25 17:58:26 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

Yup

No, it's a farce.

Chris Hogg

2016-06-25 18:13:34 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

Yup

No, it's a farce.

From which we gather you were on the losing side. I doubt you'd be
quite so vociferous about how farcical it was if the result had been
the other way around, but with the same numbers.

--
Chris

TimW

2016-06-25 18:37:12 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

Yup

No, it's a farce.

From which we gather you were on the losing side. I doubt you'd be
quite so vociferous about how farcical it was if the result had been
the other way around, but with the same numbers.

Major constitutional change requires a weighty mandate. It's a well
established principle, otherwise we are all over the place (which we
are). We have a tiny majority, nothing even resembling a mandate for
leave which will be reversed in a month. I don't blame Farage. Dave has
really badly fucked up because he valued power and the unity of his
party before everything else.

Capitol

2016-06-25 19:39:14 UTC

Post by TimW
Major constitutional change requires a weighty mandate. It's a well
established principle, otherwise we are all over the place (which we
are).

Never has in the past.

Roger Mills

2016-06-25 20:22:06 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

Yup

No, it's a farce.

From which we gather you were on the losing side. I doubt you'd be
quite so vociferous about how farcical it was if the result had been
the other way around, but with the same numbers.

They could have framed the referendum legislation in a way which
required more than a simple majority to cause us to leave. But they
*didn't* - end of!!

--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

Tim Watts

2016-06-25 20:40:34 UTC

Post by TimW
Major constitutional change requires a weighty mandate. It's a well
established principle, otherwise we are all over the place (which we
are). We have a tiny majority, nothing even resembling a mandate for
leave which will be reversed in a month. I don't blame Farage. Dave has
really badly fucked up because he valued power and the unity of his
party before everything else.

And if he doesn't honour the result, he will have damaged UK Politics
beyond the worst that could ever happen by invoking Article 50.

Because he will have said:

Here's the vote - 2 options;

Think carefully, there's no going back or second chances;

The result, if exit, will be implemented quickly.

AND THEN IGNORED THE WILL OF THE MAJORITY.

That's what tinpot dictatorships do.

Roger Mills

2016-06-25 20:18:53 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

Yup

No, it's a farce.

So how would *you* define democracy?

--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

Tim Watts

2016-06-25 20:38:02 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Is it democracy when 37.4% of the electorate can make a decision for the
whole?

Yup

No, it's a farce.

It's the best we have.

Or would you prefer Kindly Uncle Dave to simple tell you what to do?

The Natural Philosopher

2016-06-25 10:45:42 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

Oh they are saying that it has to be 66% with a turnout of 75% to be
valid. No political vote has ever got that mandate ever.

Its a petition so that an unelected minority can ensure we stay in the
EU, not to have another referendum.
There are losers, and there are bad losers.
And there are cunts who belong in Stalins politburo.

--
"In our post-modern world, climate science is not powerful because it is
true: it is true because it is powerful."

Lucas Bergkamp

T i m

2016-06-25 12:28:12 UTC

On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 11:29:12 +0100, Tim Streater

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy.

No, they are *using* democracy to potentially make democracy better.

Post by Tim Streater
Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Whoosh? ;-(

Post by Tim Streater
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

Because it would have to be a 'different' result to be the same as
this one and if it passed the second one (with a more representative
indication of the will of the / a real majority, not more like 50:50)
then they would have to proceed as is.

Maybe, a few days after post leave, some people might have a better
idea of the implications and may well vote differently.

All of this is just what I have been saying all along and it seems
more people think the same (so far) than made the difference between
Leave of Remain? ;-)

Cheers, T i m

Richard

2016-06-25 13:06:21 UTC

Post by T i m
On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 11:29:12 +0100, Tim Streater

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy.

No, they are *using* democracy to potentially make democracy better.

Post by Tim Streater
Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Whoosh? ;-(

Post by Tim Streater
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

Because it would have to be a 'different' result to be the same as
this one and if it passed the second one (with a more representative
indication of the will of the / a real majority, not more like 50:50)
then they would have to proceed as is.
Maybe, a few days after post leave, some people might have a better
idea of the implications and may well vote differently.
All of this is just what I have been saying all along and it seems
more people think the same (so far) than made the difference between
Leave of Remain? ;-)
Cheers, T i m

NOTA

T i m

2016-06-25 13:59:34 UTC

On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 14:06:21 +0100, "Richard"
<***@btinternet.com.invalid> wrote:

<snip>

Post by T i m
All of this is just what I have been saying all along and it seems
more people think the same (so far) than made the difference between
Leave of Remain? ;-)

NOTA

There you go, ok, it took a while but you got there in the end. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

Roger Mills

2016-06-25 17:12:08 UTC

Post by T i m
On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 11:29:12 +0100, Tim Streater

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy.

No, they are *using* democracy to potentially make democracy better.

Post by Tim Streater
Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Whoosh? ;-(

Post by Tim Streater
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

Because it would have to be a 'different' result to be the same as
this one and if it passed the second one (with a more representative
indication of the will of the / a real majority, not more like 50:50)
then they would have to proceed as is.
Maybe, a few days after post leave, some people might have a better
idea of the implications and may well vote differently.
All of this is just what I have been saying all along and it seems
more people think the same (so far) than made the difference between
Leave of Remain? ;-)
Cheers, T i m

So which bit of "once in a generation" - or "out is out" - or "there's
no going back" - didn't they understand?

--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

T i m

2016-06-25 18:40:41 UTC

On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 18:12:08 +0100, Roger Mills <***@gmail.com>
wrote:

<snip>

Post by Roger Mills

Post by T i m
Maybe, a few days after post leave, some people might have a better
idea of the implications and may well vote differently.
All of this is just what I have been saying all along and it seems
more people think the same (so far) than made the difference between
Leave of Remain? ;-)

So which bit of "once in a generation" - or "out is out" - or "there's
no going back" - didn't they understand?

All of it Roger.

How many people still get done for driving without a seatbelt, or
using their phones without hands free? They know it's illegal but they
still do it?

So how many of those same people would have *seriously* considered all
of the implications (to the point of not being able to decide one way
or another but wanting to vote so spoiling their paper like I did)?

How many people have I repeatedly recommend they 'do a backup' of
their valuable date but who don't and then later lose it all? Do they
carry on without the backup because they are fully aware of all the
mechanics (and therefore consequences) or because they aren't?

Even those who *thought* they had a good idea what might happen are
probably now a little bit surprised about *all* of the potential
shockwave's, from splitting up the United Kingdom to potentially
destroying much of the EU.

All they were told is 'we will be better off out', we pay in £350,000
a week ('that could be a new hospital a week') and leaving will stop
all the immigrants getting in, taking or jobs and raping our wives and
daughters. ;-(

However, those (scare) tactics are often what does grab peoples
attention and something I have used to 'hammer home' how important
doing a backup is on their personal data. The (true) tale of having to
explain to some parents that 'yes, you have just lost all the photos
of the kids you ever took' *sometimes* get's the point across. You
have to put things in real terms as they would affect them (the
worst). And by that I mean with the truth, not FUD (or we may all
suffer the consequences).

Cheers, T i m

Roger Mills

2016-06-25 20:36:25 UTC

Post by T i m
<snip>

Post by Roger Mills

So which bit of "once in a generation" - or "out is out" - or "there's
no going back" - didn't they understand?

All of it Roger.
How many people still get done for driving without a seatbelt, or
using their phones without hands free? They know it's illegal but they
still do it?
So how many of those same people would have *seriously* considered all
of the implications (to the point of not being able to decide one way
or another but wanting to vote so spoiling their paper like I did)?
How many people have I repeatedly recommend they 'do a backup' of
their valuable date but who don't and then later lose it all? Do they
carry on without the backup because they are fully aware of all the
mechanics (and therefore consequences) or because they aren't?
Even those who *thought* they had a good idea what might happen are
probably now a little bit surprised about *all* of the potential
shockwave's, from splitting up the United Kingdom to potentially
destroying much of the EU.
All they were told is 'we will be better off out', we pay in £350,000
a week ('that could be a new hospital a week') and leaving will stop
all the immigrants getting in, taking or jobs and raping our wives and
daughters. ;-(
However, those (scare) tactics are often what does grab peoples
attention and something I have used to 'hammer home' how important
doing a backup is on their personal data. The (true) tale of having to
explain to some parents that 'yes, you have just lost all the photos
of the kids you ever took' *sometimes* get's the point across. You
have to put things in real terms as they would affect them (the
worst). And by that I mean with the truth, not FUD (or we may all
suffer the consequences).
Cheers, T i m

The exaggerations from both sides got a lot of exposure - and rebuttals
- during the campaign but it was always made perfectly clear that we
were only going to get one shot at this.

There was certainly some market volatility on the first day - but that
is to be expected, and will soon settle.

Despite all the froth from the SNP, it's very unlikely that they would
win - or even hold - a second independence referendum. With the dramatic
fall in oil prices since the first one, they'd be mad. Also, they'd be
joining the EU as a new country - and would have to adopt the Euro and
be in the Schengen area. Add to that the fact that the question in the
first referendum was biased towards 'Yes' - but they'd have to have a
more neutral question (e.g. stay vs leave) in a subsequent one - so it
would be even harder to win.

--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

Richard

2016-06-25 20:36:30 UTC

Post by T i m
On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 11:29:12 +0100, Tim Streater

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy.

No, they are *using* democracy to potentially make democracy better.

Post by Tim Streater
Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?

Whoosh? ;-(

Post by Tim Streater
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

Because it would have to be a 'different' result to be the same as
this one and if it passed the second one (with a more representative
indication of the will of the / a real majority, not more like 50:50)
then they would have to proceed as is.
Maybe, a few days after post leave, some people might have a better
idea of the implications and may well vote differently.
All of this is just what I have been saying all along and it seems
more people think the same (so far) than made the difference between
Leave of Remain? ;-)
Cheers, T i m

So which bit of "once in a generation" - or "out is out" - or "there's no
going back" - didn't they understand?

I blame 'care in the community'.

Tim Watts

2016-06-25 20:37:04 UTC

Post by Roger Mills
So which bit of "once in a generation" - or "out is out" - or "there's
no going back" - didn't they understand?

I suspect most of the whingers are Generation Snowflake - who have never
been told "no", or been told off, or ever had to take any personal
responsibility for anything.

newshound

2016-06-25 12:58:37 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

Because the proposal is to require a larger differential before changing
anything. Seems quite sensible to me.

Cursitor Doom

2016-06-25 14:50:15 UTC

Post by newshound
Because the proposal is to require a larger differential before changing
anything. Seems quite sensible to me.

It's history already. Get over it.

Tim Streater

2016-06-25 15:19:56 UTC

Post by newshound

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

Because the proposal is to require a larger differential before changing
anything. Seems quite sensible to me.

You mean things have to get a whole lot worse before we'd vote for Out.
Of course it's true that it took the Winter of Discontent before we got
a government with the balls to stick to Scargill et al.

Luckily, it's too late now. We had this one under the existing rules.

Besides which, once the nation states are broken up into regions
there'd never be the chance for a referendum anyway. There would just
be civil war wholesale.

--
"If you're not able to ask questions and deal with the answers without feeling
that someone has called your intelligence or competence into question, don't
ask questions on Usenet where the answers won't be carefully tailored to avoid
tripping your hair-trigger insecurities." - D M Procida, UCSM

Steve Walker

2016-06-25 16:21:58 UTC

Post by newshound

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

Because the proposal is to require a larger differential before changing
anything. Seems quite sensible to me.

No, because that is giving a built in bias that would make it nigh on
impossible to leave, while making it easy for the remain side. How would
they feel if such legislation was enacted after we left, pretty well
ensuring that we could never rejoin, even with a sizeable majority?

Where there is a simple 2-way choice, having a mimimum majority may seem
fair, but not when one choice has the advantage of being the status quo
and effectively being able to win with a minority!

Roger Mills

2016-06-25 17:14:50 UTC

Post by newshound

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

So, over a million who don't understand democracy. Are they all called
Charlotte Church, perhaps?
And what good would another referendum do if the result was the same
second time round?

Because the proposal is to require a larger differential before changing
anything. Seems quite sensible to me.

Too late. Can't move the goalposts *after* the event. Should have
thought of this earlier and built it into the referendum legislation.

--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

Adrian

2016-06-25 10:29:35 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

Have you had a look at the name of the guy who started it, around the
same time in May as Farage's "We won't accept 52:48, it'll be unfinished
business" quote?

He's an English Democrat (ha!) former MEP and Leicester council
candidate. You know the English Democrats... They think all immigrants
and their descendents should be forcible deported, and that gay rights
are a "lunatics charter". Even UKIP think they're a bit much.

Nightjar

2016-06-25 10:44:17 UTC

Post by Adrian

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

Have you had a look at the name of the guy who started it, around the
same time in May as Farage's "We won't accept 52:48, it'll be unfinished
business" quote?
He's an English Democrat (ha!) former MEP and Leicester council
candidate. You know the English Democrats... They think all immigrants
and their descendents should be forcible deported, and that gay rights
are a "lunatics charter". Even UKIP think they're a bit much.

Which suggests he was not expecting leave to win. It would be amusing if
his petition resulted in a second referendum that produced a remain vote.

--
--

Colin Bignell

Andy Burns

2016-06-25 10:30:42 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
having over a million signatures, but if anybody feels like

... wasting their time.

Nightjar

2016-06-25 10:46:00 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
having over a million signatures, but if anybody feels like

... wasting their time.

Possibly. Petitions do not have a very good record of getting results.
However, the turnout is unusually high, which should send a message to
Parliament about the strength of feeling on the subject.

--
--

Colin Bignell

Phil L

2016-06-25 14:13:34 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed,
already having over a million signatures, but if anybody feels like

... wasting their time.

Possibly. Petitions do not have a very good record of getting results.
However, the turnout is unusually high, which should send a message to
Parliament about the strength of feeling on the subject.

They already know the strength of feeling on the subject - 16m people have
just put an X in the box to let them know, just like 17m put their X in the
box to let them know the opposite.

If the feeling was as strong as you say, why hasn't the petition got 16m
signatures? - the answer is that the majority of them know they've been beat
and accept it, you should too

Julian Barnes

2016-06-25 14:51:58 UTC

Post by Phil L
If the feeling was as strong as you say, why hasn't the petition got 16m
signatures? - the answer is that the majority of them know they've been
beat and accept it, you should too

Yeah, suck it up, you miserable cunts. You lost! LOLOL!!!!!! :-D
Seriously though, time to move on now.

Nightjar

2016-06-25 17:11:26 UTC

On 25-Jun-16 3:13 PM, Phil L wrote:
...

Post by Phil L
If the feeling was as strong as you say, why hasn't the petition got 16m
signatures? - the answer is that the majority of them know they've been beat
and accept it, you should too

Would you be giving the same advice to Farage et al had the vote gone
the other way?

--
--

Colin Bignell

Phil L

2016-06-25 18:48:07 UTC

Post by Nightjar
...

Post by Phil L
If the feeling was as strong as you say, why hasn't the petition got
16m signatures? - the answer is that the majority of them know
they've been beat and accept it, you should too

Would you be giving the same advice to Farage et al had the vote gone
the other way?

Yes, we can't replay every football or cricket match that doesn't go the way
it's expected to go neither, the losing side has to accept defeat

Roger Mills

2016-06-25 20:48:02 UTC

Post by Phil L

Post by Nightjar
...

Post by Phil L
If the feeling was as strong as you say, why hasn't the petition got
16m signatures? - the answer is that the majority of them know
they've been beat and accept it, you should too

Would you be giving the same advice to Farage et al had the vote gone
the other way?

Yes, we can't replay every football or cricket match that doesn't go the way
it's expected to go neither, the losing side has to accept defeat

You certainly can't move the goalposts after the event.

However, had Leave lost, I think they may have been able to mount an
objection based on the fact that the game wasn't played according to the
agreed rules:

1. Extending the registration period may have resulted in more Remainers
than Leavers registering after the official deadline

2. A case could be made for saying that it was unfair for taxpayer's
money to be spent on Remain propaganda and for civil servants to be able
to advise Remain ministers whilst withholding information from their
Leave colleagues

--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

TimW

2016-06-25 18:50:01 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed,
already having over a million signatures, but if anybody feels like

... wasting their time.

Possibly. Petitions do not have a very good record of getting results.
However, the turnout is unusually high, which should send a message to
Parliament about the strength of feeling on the subject.

They already know the strength of feeling on the subject - 16m people have
just put an X in the box to let them know, just like 17m put their X in the
box to let them know the opposite.
If the feeling was as strong as you say, why hasn't the petition got 16m
signatures? - the answer is that the majority of them know they've been beat
and accept it, you should too

the answer is that the petition itself is obviously a waste of time but
the business is totally unfinished. This has been an idiot's referendum
won by lies and lost by arrogance, no kind of a mandate and a
catastrophe for the UK. Mark my words.

Capitol

2016-06-25 19:40:28 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed,
already having over a million signatures, but if anybody feels like

... wasting their time.

Possibly. Petitions do not have a very good record of getting results.
However, the turnout is unusually high, which should send a message to
Parliament about the strength of feeling on the subject.

They already know the strength of feeling on the subject - 16m people have
just put an X in the box to let them know, just like 17m put their X in the
box to let them know the opposite.
If the feeling was as strong as you say, why hasn't the petition got 16m
signatures? - the answer is that the majority of them know they've been beat
and accept it, you should too

the answer is that the petition itself is obviously a waste of time
but the business is totally unfinished. This has been an idiot's
referendum won by lies and lost by arrogance, no kind of a mandate and
a catastrophe for the UK. Mark my words.

Loser.

T i m

2016-06-25 20:05:06 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed,
already having over a million signatures, but if anybody feels like

... wasting their time.

Possibly. Petitions do not have a very good record of getting results.
However, the turnout is unusually high, which should send a message to
Parliament about the strength of feeling on the subject.

They already know the strength of feeling on the subject - 16m people have
just put an X in the box to let them know, just like 17m put their X in the
box to let them know the opposite.
If the feeling was as strong as you say, why hasn't the petition got 16m
signatures? - the answer is that the majority of them know they've been beat
and accept it, you should too

the answer is that the petition itself is obviously a waste of time but
the business is totally unfinished. This has been an idiot's referendum
won by lies and lost by arrogance, no kind of a mandate

Yup.

Post by TimW
and a
catastrophe for the UK.

And not good for much of the EU either.

Post by TimW
Mark my words.

I hope not but fear you could be right.

Cheers, T i m

Tim Watts

2016-06-25 20:42:44 UTC

Post by TimW
the answer is that the petition itself is obviously a waste of time but
the business is totally unfinished. This has been an idiot's referendum
won by lies and lost by arrogance, no kind of a mandate and a
catastrophe for the UK. Mark my words.

I voted in this referendum on the basis I get to live with the result.

Therefore I wish to live with the result. And I would have said the same
if the situation had been reversed.

Andy Burns

2016-06-25 14:52:09 UTC

Post by Nightjar
Petitions do not have a very good record of getting results.
However, the turnout is unusually high, which should send a message to
Parliament about the strength of feeling on the subject.

I might simply indicate that they got it onto a particularly noticeable
section of social media, or that 38degrees promoted it, etc ...

The Natural Philosopher

2016-06-25 16:27:41 UTC

I might simply indicate that they got it onto a particularly noticeable
section of social media, or that 38degrees promoted it, etc ...

Its gone round all the lefty websites and got reported by the right ones
as well

--
"Women actually are capable of being far more than the feminists will
let them."

Richard

2016-06-25 12:08:34 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

WTF?!! Right now there are 1546 people in my constituency who are too stupid
to understand how democracy works.

Cursitor Doom

2016-06-25 12:52:54 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

WTF?!! Right now there are 1546 people in my constituency who are too
stupid to understand how democracy works.

Some nutters are claiming that a large number of Google searches for
"what is the EU for?" (or something like that) is proof that the voters
didn't understand what they were voting on. It doesn't seem to have
occurred to these morons that this was most likely just inquisitive
children trying to find out what all the fuss was about!!

T i m

2016-06-25 18:48:55 UTC

On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 12:52:54 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom

Post by Cursitor Doom

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

WTF?!! Right now there are 1546 people in my constituency who are too
stupid to understand how democracy works.

Bingo! ;-)

Like I said, a touch screen multiple choice 'Do you have a f'g clue'
pop political awareness test before the Vote now button pops up. 7/10
or less and no treat. ;-)

I believe we, as a nation are as apathetic towards politics as we are
religion and that's because our relatively safe and comfortable lives,
allows for that.

Hence, when something comes up (like this) we aren't ready for it.

Cheers, T i m

Richard

2016-06-25 20:24:36 UTC

Post by T i m
On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 12:52:54 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom

Post by Cursitor Doom

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

WTF?!! Right now there are 1546 people in my constituency who are too
stupid to understand how democracy works.

Bingo! ;-)
Like I said, a touch screen multiple choice 'Do you have a f'g clue'
pop political awareness test before the Vote now button pops up. 7/10
or less and no treat. ;-)
I believe we, as a nation are as apathetic towards politics as we are
religion and that's because our relatively safe and comfortable lives,
allows for that.
Hence, when something comes up (like this) we aren't ready for it.

If one is stupid/apathetic/simply pathetic, tough.

Capitol

2016-06-25 15:40:48 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed,
already having over a million signatures, but if anybody feels like
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

WTF?!! Right now there are 1546 people in my constituency who are too
stupid to understand how democracy works.

And who haven't read and understood what they are signing. Fancy
another 10 indecisive referendums anyone? I had assumed that Colin was
reasonably intelligent, if misguided, but I seem to have been mistaken!

TimW

2016-06-25 16:41:28 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

WTF?!! Right now there are 1546 people in my constituency who are too
stupid to understand how democracy works.

Democracy is not about half the people subjecting the other half to
their views. That isn't democracy at all.

The referendum was a fuck up from the beginning, should ever have been
50% threshold, should never have been during the footy. there wasn't any
need for it in the first place except that Cameron thought he could
silence the Tory Right.

Now we have a fuck up which is about to become a monstrous mega-fuck-up
when it becomes clear that Cameron (I love this country) despite leading
the Cons and Unionist Party is causing the break up of the United
Kingdom (which nobody thought they were voting for) and when they put
the border posts back across the North of Ireland again the talk of the
EEC being the reason for peace in Europe will become frighteningly and
obviously true as people begin to lose their lives for the rank
stupidity of Cameron and Farage and their ignorant little Englander
Followers

Tim W

The Natural Philosopher

2016-06-25 16:48:56 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

WTF?!! Right now there are 1546 people in my constituency who are too
stupid to understand how democracy works.

Democracy is not about half the people subjecting the other half to
their views. That isn't democracy at all.
The referendum was a fuck up from the beginning, should ever have been
50% threshold, should never have been during the footy. there wasn't any
need for it in the first place except that Cameron thought he could
silence the Tory Right.
Now we have a fuck up which is about to become a monstrous mega-fuck-up
when it becomes clear that Cameron (I love this country) despite leading
the Cons and Unionist Party is causing the break up of the United
Kingdom (which nobody thought they were voting for) and when they put
the border posts back across the North of Ireland again the talk of the
EEC being the reason for peace in Europe will become frighteningly and
obviously true as people begin to lose their lives for the rank
stupidity of Cameron and Farage and their ignorant little Englander
Followers
Tim W

I suggest you see a psychiatrist with that paranoia

--
“But what a weak barrier is truth when it stands in the way of an
hypothesis!”

Mary Wollstonecraft

Julian Barnes

2016-06-25 18:53:20 UTC

Post by TimW
Now we have a fuck up which is about to become a monstrous mega-fuck-up

Er, no. It's YOU and your ilk that are fucked-up, because you *still*
want to impose your loony collectivist views against the will of the
majority who have clearly stated they want nothing more to do with this
doomed experiment.
You should be bloody grateful that when the whole rotten lot collapses we
shall be insulated from the worst of the collateral damage thanks to this
very sensible and circumspect decision.

T i m

2016-06-25 20:17:06 UTC

On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 18:53:20 -0000 (UTC), Julian Barnes
<***@notformail.com> wrote:

<snip ranty expletives>

Post by Julian Barnes
because you *still*
want to impose your loony collectivist views

What, just here on Usenet?

Post by Julian Barnes
against the will of the
majority who have clearly stated they want nothing more to do with this
doomed experiment.

You call a 4% difference the people 'clearly stating' something do
you? More like 'by the skin of their teeth' and had the truths been
told, potentially a very different result.

Post by Julian Barnes
You should be bloody grateful that when the whole rotten lot collapses

A foregone conclusion then? Intentionally collapsed scrum you mean?

Post by Julian Barnes
we
shall be insulated from the worst of the collateral damage thanks to this
very sensible and circumspect decision.

You 'hope' we will be you mean (or please cite the guarantees).

Cheers, T i m

Roger Mills

2016-06-25 20:50:50 UTC

Post by Julian Barnes

Post by TimW
Now we have a fuck up which is about to become a monstrous mega-fuck-up

--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

Tim Watts

2016-06-25 20:35:18 UTC

Post by TimW
Democracy is not about half the people subjecting the other half to
their views. That isn't democracy at all.

Got news for you sweety - that's exactly how it works.

s***@gowanhill.com

2016-06-25 16:53:46 UTC

Post by Richard
WTF?!! Right now there are 1546 people in my constituency who are too stupid
to understand how democracy works.

You must live somewhere very intellectual.

Round here 1546 people would have difficulty understanding how a rubbish bin works.

Owain

Roger Mills

2016-06-25 17:00:03 UTC

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

It may have been reasonable to define some validity rules - minimum
turnout, minimum majority, etc - when the referendum was called.

But you can't do it after the event, for God's sake!

The way it was defined just needed a simple majority - so the winning
side only needed *one* more vote than the other side. In the event, they
got 1.3 million more votes!

--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

TimW

2016-06-25 17:46:16 UTC

Post by Roger Mills

Post by Nightjar
It doesn't actually need any more signatures to get discussed, already
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

It may have been reasonable to define some validity rules - minimum
turnout, minimum majority, etc - when the referendum was called.
But you can't do it after the event, for God's sake!
The way it was defined just needed a simple majority - so the winning
side only needed *one* more vote than the other side. In the event, they
got 1.3 million more votes!

I don't have crystal ball but I am sure that the referendum is no way
the end of it. It is very doubtful that we will ever have a government
that is prepared to act on the result and actually leave.

Even the people who voted leave - half of them will change their minds
when they see the econimic catastrophe that they have created, none of
them will feel good about breaking up the United Kingdom, quite a lot
will just die in the next 12 months, so any government tying to actually
implement a Brexit will be doing so against and not with the support of
a big majority of voters.

What a mess Cameron has made.

TW

polygonum

2016-06-25 18:42:50 UTC

Post by TimW
I don't have crystal ball but I am sure that the referendum is no way
the end of it. It is very doubtful that we will ever have a government
that is prepared to act on the result and actually leave.
Even the people who voted leave - half of them will change their minds
when they see the econimic catastrophe that they have created, none of
them will feel good about breaking up the United Kingdom, quite a lot
will just die in the next 12 months, so any government tying to actually
implement a Brexit will be doing so against and not with the support of
a big majority of voters.
What a mess Cameron has made.

I especially agree with the last point.

For something as huge as this, it is arguable that the bar should be set
to at least 50% of the electorate regardless of how many vote.

--
Rod

Roger Mills

2016-06-25 20:38:10 UTC

Post by polygonum

I especially agree with the last point.
For something as huge as this, it is arguable that the bar should be set
to at least 50% of the electorate regardless of how many vote.

Not unreasonable. But you have to do it up front - you can't introduce
rules like that *after* the event.

--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

Tim Watts

2016-06-25 20:41:33 UTC

Post by polygonum

I especially agree with the last point.
For something as huge as this, it is arguable that the bar should be set
to at least 50% of the electorate regardless of how many vote.

Why? That'll simply bias one outcome (the status quo).

Abstaining is abstaining. It implies nothing.

Julian Barnes

2016-06-25 18:55:12 UTC

Post by Roger Mills
It may have been reasonable to define some validity rules - minimum
turnout, minimum majority, etc - when the referendum was called.
But you can't do it after the event, for God's sake!

You can if you're a loony lefty and divorced from reality.

Post by Roger Mills
The way it was defined just needed a simple majority - so the winning
side only needed *one* more vote than the other side. In the event, they
got 1.3 million more votes!

"A commanding majority" I believe it's called.

T i m

2016-06-25 20:19:12 UTC

On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 18:55:12 -0000 (UTC), Julian Barnes

Post by Julian Barnes

You can if you're a loony lefty and divorced from reality.

Post by Roger Mills
The way it was defined just needed a simple majority - so the winning
side only needed *one* more vote than the other side. In the event, they
got 1.3 million more votes!

"A commanding majority" I believe it's called.

4% difference between Leave and Remain. 'By the skin of their teeth'
morelike.

Cheers, T i m

Roger Mills

2016-06-25 20:52:54 UTC