This is mainly to Michael. If it had been 52-48 in favour of remain you wouldn't be arguing about needing a 60% threshold then would you? 52-48 would be fine. Talk about double standards.

This is mainly to Michael. If it had been 52-48 in favour of remain you wouldn't be arguing about needing a 60% threshold then would you? 52-48 would be fine. Talk about double standards.

 

Well if it had been would you have accepted it?

This is mainly to Michael. If it had been 52-48 in favour of remain you wouldn't be arguing about needing a 60% threshold then would you? 52-48 would be fine. Talk about double standards.

 

Leaving the EU is a massive constitutional change, IMO a supermajority (2/3rds support) should have been a sensible prerequisite. In the 1979 Scottish devolution referendum YES won by 52 to 48 but that did not satisfy the conditions put because it was such a massive change to the status quo, and so was not implemented until a supermajority was reached in 1997.

Right... the sort of 'coup' done by the ballot box. :rolleyes:

 

Nazis also won 43% of the vote at their elections lol x

The SNP tried to put some form of qualifiers on it but dishface said it was only advisory so wasn’t necessary to put a super majority clause.

 

Stupid prick.

Well if it had been would you have accepted it?

 

 

Of course.

I don't get your point Chris.. the referendum was held to ask the public if they wanted a change. You're saying that if the result was 50% +1 person for remain that it didn't meet the threshold and therefore the UK should leave the EU.

 

Stop trolling please.

I’ve not decided if I’m going to the Brandenburg gate tomorrow for the event at 23:45 or if I’m going to hunker down with the German flag, a German grammar book and chart my path to German citizenship and the renouncement of my british citizenship

I'm saying that Michael keeps going on about it only being 52-48 for remain, well 50-50 he keeps saying, but him and other remainers wouldn't be complaining it was so close had it been the other way round.

Edited January 30, 20205 yr by Crazy Chris

I don't get your point Chris.. the referendum was held to ask the public if they wanted a change. You're saying that if the result was 50% +1 person for remain that it didn't meet the threshold and therefore the UK should leave the EU.

 

Stop trolling please.

 

 

Am not trolling. My point is very valid and isn't what you're saying I mean. Of course if it was 50-50 we'd either need another referendum or be remaining.

 

I'd have said 51-49 would be shaky ground too but not 52-48 as it's a clear majority.

Edited January 30, 20205 yr by Crazy Chris

I'm saying that Michael keeps going on about it only being 52-48 for remain but him and other remainers wouldn't be complaining it was so close had it been the other way round.

 

Remain is the status quo. Nazi Farage said, and I quote, that a 52-48 remain split would, "not be finished business by a long shot". With such a result, life would go on as normal, no major upheaval, and a dialogue could still continue. 52-48 happened in Norway ... Norway model, e.g COMPROMISE. 52 48 results have been overturned all over the world and indeed here as with Scotland, due to not reaching a super majority. A simple majority is just tyranny by a slight majority. 50+1 will be enough to join an EU superstate though and for Scot, N Irish and Welsh independence :cheer: it's been established :) Utter stupidity. Brexshit and your 51% has doomed the UK.

 

You didn't even get 52%. You got 51.8%. And you're right. It is very VERY shaky. Bring 60% and above for major change. It's really very simple. You lot wrte screaming the Nazi slogans the Tories taught you too and had our brainwashing media repeat - wrrl erf perperrl, perperrl have sperkerrn, on a 50 50 split with two of four nations and 20% youth support!!! f***ing LAUGHABLE.

I don't get your point Chris.. the referendum was held to ask the public if they wanted a change.

 

 

Yes and they said they did. It lanced the boil that had been festering for decades, ever since we joined in fact.

I'm saying that Michael keeps going on about it only being 52-48 for remain, well 50-50 he keeps saying, but him and other remainers wouldn't be complaining it was so close had it been the other way round.

 

Number 1- it was 52-48 for LEAVE. I'd thought you of all people would know that.

 

Secondly. Where is your evidence for this? You are presenting a counterfactual without anything to back it up. Did Michael say at any point that had it been a close result the other way around that it would have been settled for a generation and that we 'must respect the will of the people'.

 

Whereas... this actually exists.

 

Hope you enjoy your really sad celebration tomorrow of the beginning of the end of the UK. I will be largely considering how I can escape from this utter hellhole.

Yes and they said they did. It lanced the boil that had been festering for decades, ever since we joined in fact.

 

No one cared about the eu except for a tiny minority until the referendum forced people to pick a side. That's it. The press attacked it for 30 years! They whipped up this division.

 

Question, brexiter: was all this acrimony and division worth it? Was running away with 100% of the power on 50% of the vote, after PROMISING not to leave the single market to win in the first place, worth it? Was it? 27% voted for brexshit. That's all. The non voters, ans especially the youth who couldn't vote, we can assume were fine with the status quo. Brexshit is a minority pursuit.

This is mainly to Michael. If it had been 52-48 in favour of remain you wouldn't be arguing about needing a 60% threshold then would you? 52-48 would be fine. Talk about double standards.

As others have said, a threshold is only applicable to a vote to change something. Many golf clubs, for example, require a super-majority for a change to their constitution. Just a few years ago, one club's members voted comfortably to allow women to join. However, it wasn't carried as the vote in favour was below 2/3rds.

 

If the vote had been 52% to Remain, would you have accepted it if the government had interpreted that as a vote for "Hard Remain" and immediately signed up to Schengen and the euro?

No one cared about the eu except for a tiny minority until the referendum forced people to pick a side. That's it. The press attacked it for 30 years! They whipped up this division.

 

Question, brexiter: was all this acrimony and division worth it? Was running away with 100% of the power on 50% of the vote, after PROMISING not to leave the single market to win in the first place, worth it? Was it? 27% voted for brexshit. That's all. The non voters, ans especially the youth who couldn't vote, we can assume were fine with the status quo. Brexshit is a minority pursuit.

 

That's nonsense to say no one cared about the Eu before the referendum, a party like UKIP came from nowhere to winning a European election in 20 years.

How safe is that net exactly? Why would they want us back after this?

 

In one word - Money. :rolleyes:

Conservatives were crucial for the leave movement tho.

Funny how yoy forget them once its conevnient for you

 

But without pressure from UKIP, Tory Leavers would never have been emboldened, or Remainers frightened.

It is also worth mentioning that the Leave majority in Wales is believed to have been largely because of a lot of elderly English voters. The likelihood is that Welsh voters voted Remain.

 

You mean Welsh-speakers, or young Welsh in general? Either way, you can hardly have Brexit for *just* older voters, so the whole issue of age split is moot.

 

BTW, I found an interesting analysis of Brexit in *Scotland* :

 

http://ppiw.org.uk/files/2017/03/Ailsa-Henderson.pdf

Nazis also won 43% of the vote at their elections lol x

 

Making that false analogy is not helpful. :(

 

The SNP tried to put some form of qualifiers on it but dishface said it was only advisory so wasn’t necessary to put a super majority clause.

 

Stupid prick.

 

Or he know that a having Leave win, but the Bill fail by some qualifier, would just stir up more trouble long term - just as the 1979 Scottish Referendum did.

:mellow:

 

I don't get your point Chris.. the referendum was held to ask the public if they wanted a change. You're saying that if the result was 50% +1 person for remain that it didn't meet the threshold and therefore the UK should leave the EU.

 

Stop trolling please.

 

Surely that's the opposite of what he said?

 

Hope you enjoy your really sad celebration tomorrow of the beginning of the end of the UK. I will be largely considering how I can escape from this utter hellhole.

 

More hyperbole. :mellow:

 

 

No one cared about the eu except for a tiny minority until the referendum forced people to pick a side. That's it. The press attacked it for 30 years! They whipped up this division.

 

Question, brexiter: was all this acrimony and division worth it? Was running away with 100% of the power on 50% of the vote, after PROMISING not to leave the single market to win in the first place, worth it? Was it? 27% voted for brexshit. That's all. The non voters, ans especially the youth who couldn't vote, we can assume were fine with the status quo. Brexshit is a minority pursuit.

 

FFS, you're like a dog with a bone. :rolleyes:

 

Anyway, I disagree that no-one cared about the EU until recently. A lot of us *did* care, but until UKIP came along, we literally had no voice! Virtually the whole establishment was united in suppressing debate on the subject, using the same 'racist/uneducated' smears that we have come to know so well. :(

Edited January 31, 20205 yr by vidcapper