Quote Originally Posted by Stolly View Post
The essence of the FT article by the way was that the outlook and motivations of leave vs remain voters was leave voted for cultural and anti immigration reasons whilst remain voted for economic reasons. So arguments since from either side never really have any traction with the opposing view. And hence why never the Twain shall meet.

Also a lot of the leave voters being retired were not, in their minds, directly effected by the economy in any event. That too with the referendum taking place right at the height of a massive refugee crisis, heightening peoples concerns right at the wrong time over immigration

All the same the article goes on to say that a second referendum is absolutely the best next step before any Brexit gets finalised due to the growing stats and polls that say that remain would comfortably win this time. In other words the “will of the people” might well be different now and, in pushing through Brexit based on the will of the people nearly three years ago, the government would quite probably be going against “the will of the people” 😊
Stolly you have such a short memory and expect us to have the same. The real reason you oppose Brexit is because you're afraid of war. It's on this forum from some years ago. You didn't vote Remain for essentially economic reasons as you imply, you voted Remain because of fear.

And since you've jumped on Wheeze's silly idea of having to have a bigger majority in a referendum of this importance I'd like to ask you a question. If this country leaves the European Union and in say ten years time has another vote on rejoining would you approve of say a 60% in favour of that for it to be enacted? So if 41% wanted to stay out and 59% wanted to rejoin we'd stay out. Would you be for that Stoll?