Jump to content

Mass UK protest demanding second EU referendum planned days before Brexit


webfact

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Estrada said:

We are the 63% who did not vote to leave. The referendum was supposed to have been advisory and the law requires a majority of 55% of those who voted before the Government should action Brexit. In other words the referendum result was to Remain. Foreign influence, illegal campaign contributions by millionaires and lies such as  the GBP350Million/week payable to the EU and immigration swayed the vote. Many ex-pats in Europe and overseas were not given a chance to vote. Most jurisdictions require a majority of 60% (EU55%) for such an action as Brexit which has already done severe damage to the UK economy. As for having a second referendum, if the Government can have three votes on it and consider a fourth, why should the public not have a second referendum based on the real facts and not the lies spread by Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage? This time let's follow the law on referendums and enforce the 55% majority rule, then Remain will win by a clear majority. Clearly we have "Leave" to "Remain".

brexit-chart.jpg

Like I said before sophistry.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 181
  • Created
  • Last Reply
11 minutes ago, Pedrogaz said:

So what? If the silly arrogant Remainers had got behind the idea of leaving the pound would not be in the state it is in. Instead they sowed disunity and this uncertainty has resulted in damage to the economy. 

And he blames those who support Remain.

 

I’ll remind you, it is Brexiteer pumping out the ‘us against the elite’ politics of division.

 

But hey ho - It’s always somebody else’s fault.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Estrada said:

We are the 63% who did not vote to leave. The referendum was supposed to have been advisory and the law requires a majority of 55% of those who voted before the Government should action Brexit. In other words the referendum result was to Remain. Foreign influence, illegal campaign contributions by millionaires and lies such as  the GBP350Million/week payable to the EU and immigration swayed the vote. Many ex-pats in Europe and overseas were not given a chance to vote. Most jurisdictions require a majority of 60% (EU55%) for such an action as Brexit which has already done severe damage to the UK economy. As for having a second referendum, if the Government can have three votes on it and consider a fourth, why should the public not have a second referendum based on the real facts and not the lies spread by Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage? This time let's follow the law on referendums and enforce the 55% majority rule, then Remain will win by a clear majority. Clearly we have "Leave" to "Remain".

brexit-chart.jpg

Don't you lot ever tire of the taste of sour grapes?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bizboi said:

What a ridiculous argument!!! Do you really want to claim that all people not on the electoral roll should have a vote? does that include every random foetus? and shall we apply that to election results next time Labour crawl into power? By the way - maybe you would like to produce the SAME diagram with one of your little red circles round the "remain" vote - you would find it would be smaller!! The lengths that remainers will go to in order to try to overturn a democratic legal result are truly sad. But we all know where it comes from - just have a look at the fiddled Liebour vote in Peterborough last week!!

 

Yep. Foetuses. sperms, eggs and under age bots!

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, david555 said:

Same moment Brexiteers understand no re opening negotiations as said multiple times by E.U. End station !

The tory elections are not gone change anything for that , fake promises full daydreaming ..

And the EU negotiated with fake faith. They said "no cherry picking"! Well there are bunches of ripe cherries for them in their fake WA. Total bullies and untrustworthy. Time to go.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Remind me what Farage said about a 48:52 result immediately prior to the referendum?

Irrelevant, as is the tired old Remoaner argument about whether the referendum was "advisory". Farage is not even a member of Parliament, which committed to the referendum result with the triggering of Article 50 in March 2017.

Both the EU and the British government accepted this decision as irrevocable, with the 

EU Commission stating, "Once triggered, Article 50 cannot be unilaterally reversed. Notification is a point of no return".

Parliament has dragged its Remainer heels long enough, in the process doing untold damage to the economy and the people's faith in our political system. Unless the government wants a revolution on its hands, we must leave by October 31 - deal or no deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Basil B said:

The second vote has to be clear on what form of Brexit or Remain.

As I see it there are at this time only 3 options. What has been negotiated, no deal or remain.

Nothing like clearing the air.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, nauseus said:

And the EU negotiated with fake faith. They said "no cherry picking"! Well there are bunches of ripe cherries for them in their fake WA. Total bullies and untrustworthy. Time to go.

you must feel very disappointing that you couldn't win , was from the beginning made very clear …, just that to high self esteem  from  U.K. is the reason for your situation , but you see even E.U. said that no transition period get you a nice cliff edge bonus at 9 billion , with no discussion from their side  :thumbsup:

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Another family day out for the Europeans walking around parts of London. March all you want the British majority voted to leave. Accept it and do something better with your time.

 

It has now been debunked that a million people marched last time. Over inflated figures yet again.

 

More hash from the pro EU Reuters.

I suppose you changed your mind probably comparing to issues three years or more ago? So please grant your country fellows the same. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sawadee1947 said:

What are you afraid of? A more desasterous government (?) as now is not possible. 

You have managed to misquote me. These words are from Bizboi's post. 

 

Please desist. Besides, I would never spell disastrous like that!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sawadee1947 said:

........said by a Brit who favoured BJ As PM Hahahaha Rediculous 😂😂😂

When did I say favoured BJ as PM? Another fake observation.  Rediculous ridiculous.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...