On Thu, 23 Aug 2018 18:20:50 +0100, RJH wrote:

snip

No, those of us with common sense realised that at the beginning and
therefore required more information before we would be able to vote on
it.


Quite. I really don't understand why Tim S and others don't see that.

Because they are on their own crusade and have no concerns re any
collateral damage all of us may suffer, as long as they get what
*they* (1/3rd of the electorate) want.

To
say 'vote leave' means one of several very different things,

Of course, and if someone voted purely because they wanted £360M/w to
the 'NHS instead' or the fear of hordes of immigrants pouring in (both
formal posters from the leave campaign) and didn't look behind the
lies to find the real truth.

but we
won't tell you which one, is not much use in a vote.

And those of us with common sense (and a dab of empathy which allows
us to differentiate between what's legal, formal and what's right (or
wrong) etc), see that there is no way that only 1/3rd of the
electorate should be allowed to decide what happens to the rest (given
the question was really, 'Hands up who want's to leave the EU?',
especially when it's still far from clear that 'forging ahead' *is*
the right thing to do (especially in light of the papers published so
far today).

It would be enough of a disturbance to go though if everyone (or at
least a supermajority) actually wanted it but considering the country
is split, the government needing support from the DLP just to retain
power and all the other things that are far from certain over it, I
really can't see why we should perceiver with it.

But the option of another public vote is being aired more and more
(and both Farige and Mogg have suggested it should happen over the
period). Let's hope if they do give us the option of a more informed
vote, they actually publish all the information they have so far and
make it a criminal act to print or post bogus information and lies.

Cheers, T i m