Second referendum

Who is Hugh?

 

You dont feel that there is anything iffy about someone handing £625k in cash in a carrier bag to a fashion student who then hands it over to an online ad firm?

 

think he's a remainer.

 

In political terms, probably not, this has been leaked though.

You have to believe there is more emphasis on dissing the leave side in a desperate bid to force a second ref.

 

Oh it is definitely suspect about the cash handover.

I personally just think VoteLeave were at it.

There is a lot more to come out too.

 

Or approximately 2.3 minutes membership of the EU, Yes that's a massive fine.

 

Its pretty big.

The fashion student also got the maximum personal fine too.£20k

 

LOL!

 

Bearing in mind, Remain spent more than double what the Leave group did. Not one reply saying why this is fair and equitable from anyone. Specially as the vote could only go one way or the other. Perhaps the Electoral Commission ( all pro EU) itself, needs investigating ?

 

It is extremely unlikely that the 'excess' money spent by the Leave campaigns made any actual significant difference to the outcome; chances are the Leave vote would have scraped home regardless.

That doesn't negate the cynically lax attitude of their directors, though - a bit of a common theme. Like them not attending Parliamentary committee questioning, being evasive, glib, flippant; as I said, a common theme amongst them and their supporters.

 

If the money spent on advertising didn't work they wouldn't spend it.

 

Anyone care to comment on just how the Remain camp spent over double yet ? Or am I to assume your silence to be agreement that Remain were indeed entitled to waste as much money as they liked on their campaign and Leave were not . ?

 

Dave was reported to the electoral commission for the six million he spent on those daft leaflets, no action was taken.

 

There you go jj.

 

No JJ. This about law and rules, not fairness. Rights, not right.

The lead campaign is allowed more latitude, and this was a transfer from an organisation that had more freedom to one that was more restricted.

But it’s also rules that also mean that the referendum need not be re-run. The referendum was advisory, not binding. It was a massive opinion poll, not actually an election. So it can’t overturn the result.

(Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, the value of my comments may go down as well as worse, please speak to your doctor before swallowing my nonsense)

 

My doctor is a remainer and a fervent believer in limiting alcohol intake to 21 units per week (when he first gave me this advice I said "surely that's the limit for children and pregnant women), I speak to him as little as possible.

 

Ahh, makes perfect sense now.......... (not)

 

The great problem with democracy is that any "idiot" can vote, and most do. Also the vote is open to others, so if you don't like the way the "idiots" vote, cast yours every time.
Our politicians must bare the blame for this mess, the initial question asked in the referendum was vague, the guidance given was useless and driven by "Project fear", and now we have a "remainer" PM trying to negotiate our exit from the club. BTW, the sky is still up in the air.

 

Yup.

It was a simple - emphasis on simple - "'in' or 'out' of the EU" choice referendum. No detail whatsoever. (And not even legally binding, of course.)

No surprise that many of the population thought of it as zero-bad-consequence decision; many on here (I'm referring to the u-s, of course) literally referred to the EU as a 'club' to which we just paid large sums for membership, and from which we could simply walk away at will and without issue and become BIG.

As you so concisely say, 'idiots'.