Can we stqrt calling it what is is?

[Itisnoteasybeingdifferent]

It's not exit, it's independence. Alternatively we should call it sovereignty or self rule.

Nobody is stopping you, iamwendy. By all means take to the streets.

Whilst within the EU the British Parliament has complete controlover more than 98 per cent of public spending, anddecides the vast majority of policy over the issues of greatest concern to the public

except immigration.

And re-nationalisation of railways.

No wailing on the streets for me kaija, I prefer a dignified acceptance of democracy. I'm classy like that.

I don't think it all boils down to immigration although I think this was an important factor for many voters.

My post was an attempt to demonstrate that lonelyplanetmums exasperated, didactic post was not the whole story. As seen by Semis post, there are plenty of other issues.

To be honest, due to the style of lonelys post, I wasn't minded to do a more lengthy response to where I think she is wrong - I am growing a little impatient with people who think that just because they believe something, this qualifies it with some sort of objective fact status and anyone who disagrees is wrong.

"No wailing on the streets for me kaija, I prefer a dignified acceptance of democracy. I'm classy like that."

Excellent. Then you will greet democratic protest with dignified acceptance. We all look forward to it,

I am growing a little impatient with people who think that just because they believe something, this qualifies it with some sort of objective fact status and anyone who disagrees is wrong.

Unless they're Remainers, in which case they're definitely wrong?

Notice that May can't tell the truth about nuclear missiles mis firing, bodes well for telling the truth about brexit.

The reporter Micha Glenny said that Yugoslavia would collapse and was criticised for being Micha Gloomy, but he knew the country well, so was speaking from an informed position, unlike his friends. Otherwise known as the right guess... with any binary choice you have a 50:50 chance of being right

As with all other areas of life the outcome of Brexit is uncertain. Only history will be able to analyse it, explain it, etc.

All the blathering, on both sides, is just hot air. Some of it seems to be simply a determined effort to be scared/angry/defensive/offensive. I don't understand why anyone would waste their time getting emotionally wound up when there are actions that can be taken.

Yes, get up, go protest. Have your say, be heard, make any difference you can. That's what the democratic process is for, after all! But all the posting of vitriol, here, facebook and anywhere else, does is heighten negative emotions... no solution for anyone!

I do, as Kaija seems to insist of Leavers but not Remainers, accept a democratic decision with dignity... even if I disagree and am plotting useful, effective protests!

Margaret Thatcher:
"Lord Attlee was right, when he said that the referendum was a device of dictators and demagogues."

accept a democratic decision with dignity

What does this, in practical terms, actually entail? Drinking cups of tea with my little finger sticking out and uttering the occasional "tsk"? Or is it just, don't ever write or post anything (social media, Facebook etc) where somebody who has an alternate view might (shudder) see it, and thus have their feelings bruised?

I didn't quite understand your post Elements

I don't think leavers are right and remainers are wrong. I think we disagree.

When we have a general election, we don't spend months arguing about why people voted the wrong way - we accept (on the whole) that people have different values, desires, fears, situations, experiences and political beliefs, and vote accordingly.

I believe it is the same with the referendum. I am finding the attitude that there was some kind of objective correct answer to the referendum question and leave voters got it incorrect a bit wearing.

I am finding the comparisons with the Referendum and a General Election a bit wearing. With a General Election we now vote every 5 years, or sooner if the Govt loses the confidence of Parliament. With Referenda, as practiced in the UK, they have been one off votes. That is until the noisiest faction decides that they didn't like the first vote.

I am still wondering what sensible Tories feel about Manifesto promises being blatantly ignored. Two I met in Witney back in October, were incandescent that after 30 years of party membership they were treated with such contempt and tore up their membership cards. They seemed pretty sensible people to me.

The point of my GE analogy was not to say the referendum is the same as a GE. It was to say that we do not all want the same thing, and people vote according to what they want and what matters to them most. My point is that we usually, in politics, accept this. For some reason with the referendum, some people seem unable to accept that people with their own views, desires, fears etc, etc came to the conclusion that they do not want to be in the EU.

I think remainers have felt like leavers have treated it as a general election, a chance to vote against the government of the day, rather than what it actually was, a vote on whether to remain in the EU

I completely disagree with this. It seems odd, if this is the case, that TM and the Tories are getting the approval ratings she is in the polls. I think people voted leave because they want to leave.

I think a lot of people in the north and Wales voted Leave because they wanted to give Cameron and Osborne a kick in the teeth. As it happens they got that.

referendum is not the same as a GE it has no legal status

referendum is not the same as a GE it has no legal status

Doesn't it?!
I didn't realise...

Didn't realise that this Referendum and a GE were different?

This Referendum was advisory - it says so in the Legislation authorising it. Hansard is put online for those who are interested in reading about legislation passed. The Referndum on PR wasn't advisory, as laid down in that particular piece of legislation - if that had been voted for it would have been acted upon.

Sorry Peregrina, I was being facetious.

Of course I realised - it's repeated ad infinitum on these threads:
The result was ADVISORY!!!!
As if Leave voters need to be reminded every day, just in case they somehow forgot after sleeping.

It being advisory only is just one of the examples of Cameron's arrogance over assuming Remain had it in the bag.

It being advisory only is just one of the examples of Cameron's arrogance over assuming Remain had it in the bag.

That's illogical to start with! Keeping it advisory meant that a Leave vote didn't mean automatically leaving - exactly what a PM with a Remain agenda would want if he didn't think it was in the bag.

But anyway, if it had been binding then there's every chance the referendum Bill wouldn't have gone through without all sorts of safeguards being added in case of a small majority or a split vote between Scotland/Ireland/England. Your small majority, E&W only, leave vote wouldn't have counted.

A more sensible approach then would have been to make it binding with the safeguards. I suppose that Cameron thought that this wouldn't get past the Eurosceptics, who both then and now, are the only ones who appear to matter.