Wes Tender

If following the referendum, the Government ignore the wishes of the electorate, they do so at their peril. Cameron before he resigned had stated that a simple majority would suffice either way. Political expediency is hardly going to allow any successor as PM to attempt to ignore the will of the people by using weasel words, telling them that the Government were only asking for opinions that they would subsequently ignore, rather than directions that they would act upon. I realise that you lot who are sore at losing, will grasp at any straws in the vain hope that it can be wriggled out of, but as soon as the Tory leadership election is resolved, the process of leaving will be set in motion soon afterwards.

Where is "advisory" mentioned? So you also take the position that Referenda are only glorified opinion polls and should therefore be categorised as "advisory" and ignored if the Government so desires?

A giant opinion poll? You might have treated it as such, but the majority of the electorate were faced with a simple In/Out decision and having received a majority of around a million and a quarter votes, the Leave option is valid without any ridiculous re-running until you Remainians get the decision you want. Making comparisons between General Elections and Referenda in terms of what is more democratic is a poor argument. In a General Election, one either votes on a basket of policies set out in a manifesto, or many vote on traditional party lines. In any event, there was only one party proposing that we left the EU and that was UKIP. How much was the vote for the Conservatives based on the promise of a Referendum on our membership of the EU and how much was based on their manifesto promises on other policies, or the traditional support of the party regardless of the manifesto? Clearly though, the promise of a Referendum was forced on them to fend off the loss of votes to UKIP and having made that pledge, Cameron had to set in train the Referendum before the end of 2017. Yes, we have had 40 years of Euroscepticism and in terms of democracy, a referendum should have been held before we signed each subsequent treaty following our joining of the European venture. I'm amazed that despite the referendum being announced in early February, you claim that there were people who somehow didn't have sufficient information to make an informed choice, despite being bombarded with it on a daily basis. One must conclude that they hadn't bothered to apply themselves to finding out what they wanted to know, so either they should not have voted, or else they should not bleat about how they may have voted for a position that they subsequently didn't support.

I do not defend it, I just don't accept that referencing it makes Saxon necessarily any more anti-semitic than the Labour Party is. I realise that some of you Remain lot are a bit sore that the Brexit vote won and that in your anger you feel inclined to lash out, so I forgive you for the petty playground insults, pal. Santa Claus isn't real? Tell me that isn't true.

I don't accept that Saxon's mention of the Rothschild's NWO conspiracy proves that he is an anti-semite. Presumably you can't find anything else. Now, you might like to believe that you have joined up the dots to prove your case, but as you demonstrated when you predicted that Corbyn would never lead the Labour Party, your thought processes are not infallible. I think that you must be developing a bad case of Neil Allenitis which prevents you from answering my points taken all together, so you have to do it a few words at a time. I'm sorry, but I won't be taking any advice from you, as you are not a friend, pal.

Does John E Saxon's reference to Rothschild's NWO make him an anti-semite? As far as I can see, he links a Jew with the NWO, not the whole race. I have mentioned the conspiracy theory that the Remain campaign of propaganda about the economy was orchestrated by Bilderberg, also linked to NWO order, so I must also be an anti-semite too, but I'm not. Show me some real evidence that he is an anti-semite and I'll gladly withdraw, but I couldn't find anything. You have suggested that I read Mein Kampf. Does that make you a Nazi sympathiser?

I haven't found anything that suggests that Saxon is an anti-semite, unless the reference to Rothchild qualifies by some bizarre leap of imagination. What we have here is the ad hominem refusal by the usual suspects to argue the content of the piece. These protests by the yoof would have carried much more weight had more than a mere third of them bothered to vote, and of course within that third, a proportion had voted to leave.

I would certainly vote for Andrea if she emerges as one of the two final candidates. She is gaining momentum.

This was my immediate thought. As you say, what are they going to do about it?

All becomes clear..... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/646234.stm He did say Teresa without the "h"

Personally I favour Leadsom, as I said. I find very little to dislike about her and what she says

May has just been making the right noises about setting up a Ministry for Brexit, headed by a Minister who campaigned for that. Also that any future trade arrangements agreed with them should not have any basis of freedom of movement of peoples as a condition. There would be no austerity budget, there would be no second referendum, and no re-entry via the back door. These are the sound bites I was hoping to hear.

I'm with you on this one. I've been very impressed with how Leadsom came across during the referendum debates and if she doesn't come out in front for PM, then I would be surprised if she isn't in one of the top posts by the conclusion. I suspect that it might be May though

What a prize tool this bloke is and how easily his arguments can be picked apart, as already demonstrated by several other responses on here. By a logical extension, if he lauds the performance of O'Neill for the successful campaign of getting an unfancied NI team so far in the European Championships, then why hasn't he argued that we would be even better off appointing the part time manager/part time dentist that runs the Iceland team to even greater success. Why isn't Puel put off from accepting the role at Southampton, when they perennially sell off their best players every summer, the fat oaf asks. Well, could it be that recent history proves that we manage to do that, increase the bank balance and rise through the league subsequently, to the point where we actually overtake the glory club who has bought most of those players? At least it does penetrate his skull that we have appointed another manager previously whose record before he came here wasn't exemplary and who nevertheless did pretty well. Samuels has so much egg on his face, I am surprised that he doesn't just cut his losses and save himself further embarrassment when we will prove him wrong once more.

Thanks for cheering me up with your imaginative analogy where we Brexiteers are all up that abundant native tree, the Coconut Palm. Global warming has obviously crept up on us without us noticing. We managed to get up the Palm Tree, but somehow cannot get down because we do not have a ladder. Presumably we must have shinned up the tree and don't have the ability to shin back down again, or perhaps we rather stupidly kicked the ladder away. But the additional problem is that despite attaining a clear view of the surrounding geography from this lofty perch, the experience is nevertheless somehow disorientating when one descends to terra firma once more.

It is thinking about our nation that led us to leave. Surprised you didn't recognise that.

You'd think that their geography knowledge would be a bit better considering that lots of their fans live nearer to us than to Manchester.

Well, personally I don't believe in a system whereby one is obliged by law to vote. Looking at the countries who have it, apart from Australia, these are hardly a list of the countries which are shining beacons of democracy. Countering your argument that decisions which involved major constitutional changes ought to be settled with a majority of the total electorate in a referendum, then we probably wouldn't be having this argument, as we would have left what used to be the Common Market and became the EU as a result of these successive Treaties which involved major constitutional changes which would very likely have been rejected by the voters. We might not historically have a tradition of referenda, but there are issues like this which cannot be just buried in a political party's manifesto. The Government were forced into holding one by the UKIP success in the European Elections. Ignore the vote to leave the EU and they will face the further rise of UKIP as the only instrument of further protest in a General Election.

And he didn't score a single goal during that middle of the season slump.

Who did? You and Whitey, or GM? I don't dispute what GM says, but you and Whitey seemed to indicate that there is some validity in the argument that in the case of a referendum of only two options, that there is a case to be made that there should perhaps be a majority of the entire electorate, rather than a simple majority of those who can be bothered to vote.

It's unusual of somebody of your intelligence to not realise the clear distinction between a referendum where there is a choice between just two options and an election where there were several options available to the electorate because there were several party/candidate choices. I note that Whitey Granddad had also concluded that 63.5% of the electorate didn't vote for Brexit, but a clear majority did and it cannot be taken for granted that those voters who did not bother to vote would have voted to remain, can it?

:lol:

I'm delighted that we have once again managed to pull down Scousehampton's pants. When will they ever learn? The players they have bought from us have been patchy playing for them, and we have managed to replace them very nicely and to improve both our bank balance and our league position at the same time, finishing above them for the first time in our history. It must be that they believe that if they take what they see as our best players, they will buy our league position whilst simultaneously weakening a rival team. If their philosophy is along these lines, plundering the talent of a smaller but successful club, why don't they have a stab at denuding the Champions team? Or should they have a go at getting their manager instead?

It seems that if emerging reports are true, this second referendum petition is a 4Chan prank, which the Beeb has swallowed hook line and sinker.

Well, just to soothe the poor little darlings, perhaps they can pass a law to that affect for future referenda, so that there will have to be a 60% vote for us to rejoin the EU. They'll surely be content with that.