Because you are selecting the evidence you want to present of the way "black" entertainers/politicians behave and presenting it at face value when it cannot be. There is a background and a history which requires everything to be seen in it's context before racism can really be understood and tackled.

No I am not white. I am a British human being with diverse ethnic roots.

Because you are selecting the evidence you want to present of the way "black" entertainers/politicians behave and presenting it at face value when it cannot be. There is a background and a history which requires everything to be seen in it's context before racism can really be understood and tackled.

No I am not white. I am a British human being with diverse ethnic roots.

How is 52% not a 'true majority'?

The comment was not addressed to a referendum result but the weakness of the FPTP method of determining a result which almost always results in a government chosen by a minority of the voters.

I don't disagree that there is a case to be made for PR but I do wonder if you would then be so accepting of the 80 or so UKIP MP's who would have been returned in 2015?

I would have been delighted. My enthusiasm for PR goes back well before UKIP emerged. They deserved to be represented in Parliament. As they would have taken most, if not all, of those seats in previous Tory strongholds, it would have denied the Tories a majority. No-one can be sure what would have resulted but another coalition looks most likely and the need for a referendum on EU membership made much less likely as the issue could be thrashed out where it needed to be. In Parliament.

And you did wnat my vote rendered worthless. On June 23rd 2016 I voted in good faith. A complete and total belief that the result should be acted upon no matter which way it went. That the matter was settled for at least a generation (lets measure that in say a 25 year term).

But people like you refused to accept that. And that takes a lot of forgiving that can only truly start when you acknowledge your wrong doing.

You are unhealthily angry. Some of this is old ground but permit me to try to explain why I think that anger is misplaced. We both know that no referendum has any direct legal application in the UK. It could only ever be given any legitimacy by Parliament. Not by Cameron promising to "respect" the result. Not by the political parties undertaking to deliver it in their 2017 manifestos. Not by any government. Only by Parliament passing laws. Which they did when they triggered Article 50.

Your anger is not justified. Nor were your expectations. Too many people put too much trust in what individual politicians promise in order to gain your trust and I suggest that's where your anger is more correctly directed.

Where as if parliament compromised we would have had Mays soft Brexit. However as they failed to do there duty as you put it, an election had to be held and the people voted and elected mps that would act in the best interest of the country. MPs are now doing there duties in what's best for the UK regardless of what me and you think.

Anybody who describes themselves, or anyone else, by their skin colour gets criticised by me. That includes the media who do it all the time.

I think it just perpetuates the problem. It is unnecessary unless someone is giving a description to the Police. What relevance is a person's skin colour to anything? There are other much more relevant descriptors available in every case.

That's true but that doesn't mean that those who fought so hard last year to stop it happening were doing anything wrong. Which was the accusation.