Accepting the result and accepting the outcome are different things.

Too much now on Brexit. Also too many ad hominems.

I am beginning to think you are actually a Watford supporter the way you like to play the man and not the ball.

If you bother to Google it there is plenty out there. This from one of the many court cases they brought against leavers and lost.

""An investigation by The Sunday Telegraph found that four out of ten of the quango’s commissioners had openly criticised Brexit or called for a rethink, amounting to almost half the entire board commissioners, including the Chairman. In 2019, the police claimed that the Commission had failed to supply “potentially relevant” documents required in order to determine whether criminal charges could be brought against me and others.""

But no I don't know how they voted.

Edited by Badger11 (16 Oct 2020 3.06pm)

So you are claiming that there was no Remain propaganda and that Trumps opponents don't need to use every form of media and the stiring of civil unrest to win the election?

And you expect people to take that seriously?

The remain campaign was weak. They clearly underestimated the veracity and style of leave. Defending the status quo is always a harder sell than selling jam tomorrow. It's why we get roller-coaster politics. But no, their campaign tried hard to be factual, because they had facts. Leave didn't. They had dreams.

You have swallowed too much Trump bs for your own good. The Dems aren't stirring up the unrest at all. Trump is doing that and then using it to claim he is the "Law and order" candidate. That most of the media oppose him is obvious. That's though solely because he deserves to be opposed. The worst POTUS in history attracts opposition.

Not true both sides had assumptions based on the best available evidence and a large amount of prejudice the voter picked the assumptions they liked.

Rather than repeat it, especially as we are off thread, read my last reply. It serves.

Coronavirus will have a huge impact on the world's economy and trading back in 2016 neither side took that into account so whatever assumptions both sides had are now outdated.

True and I can hear the excuses already.

This post really sums you up Wisbech.

We had years of what being a member of the EU offered and an idea of what continued membership would potentially mean in the future. The majority didn't want that. That is pure democracy whether you like it or not.

Dealing with factual evidence is what I am talking about. Expressing opinions about the past performance of the EU is obviously a legitimate debating point. Leave though went well beyond that as they suggested many things that were simply aspirations presented as fact. You have only to look at the way the "trade deals" were handled and how easy they would be to achieve. "Within days" of leaving was the promise. Countless new agreements with the rest of the world would flow like milk and honey into our sceptred isle. Del Boy garbage sold to the gullible.

PR has as many problems as advantaged and that is why sensible voted against that as well.

PR ensures genuine representative democracy and stops either the right or the left gaining, usually only temporily, any kind of handle on power. It avoids roller coaster politics and produces slow but steady progress. Much the better alternative. Nothing is perfect.

Trump's presidency will always leave opinions divided as politics always does. You seem to have an issue with differentiating between fact and what you think.

That anyone can still support this idiot is the puzzle. Which will engage historians for years to come as they try to analyse the reasons why it has happened. Different opinions are normal but there is nothing normal about Trump.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (17 Oct 2020 11.40am)