If that vid you linked to is typical of what is shown on your media then I have to say no. Its awful. Two of the major issues the UK must resolve both revolve around referendums. Both referendums were really badly worded which have led to these problems. Cameron and his party made a total cock up of this along with everything else.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49798197 Yet people still see the Tories as the solution, weird.
Nope, if you had read the bbc link, the chap is called darren grimes, he was in one of the smaller unnoficial leave brexit groups and was accused by the electoral commission of taking excess money through non allowed means and fined £20k, he has appealed and his case has found to be incorrect and the fine dropped.
You asked who did the video, I gave you the name within a post, I can't be blamed if that single point still takes a page of questions before it sinks in with you forest
Just four months ago David Gauke was a cabinet minister and regarded as one of the safest pair of hands in the Tory Party. He is now urging voters to stop Boris Johnson from winning a majority.Former justice secretary says a Conservative majority at the upcoming election would be a "bad outcome for the country". Mr Gauke said "one simply cannot renegotiate a trade deal in that time period", and leaving without a deal would be "disastrous for the prosperity of our country… [making] whole sectors unviable".
Gauke also lost the whip as he is an extreme remainer and like Dominic Grieve , sought to sink the party before abiding by their own promise in the manifesto, the one they signed upto, to respect the brexit referendum wish of the British people to leave the eu
Maybe you mean well, and would like to participate in normal conversation. Perhaps you should check your posts to ensure they make literal sense prior to pressing post? your 1. belonging to or associated with the person or people that the speaker is addressing. "what is your name?" You might find social grace and nuance difficult, but a dictionary should be well within your abilities. Having said that I'm personally only hopeful rather than confident about that.
tbh, i think both where worded well. the opposition are trying to change the wording of our next reff because it avoided confusion. we had a white paper to debate, vote lerave learned from that and chose not to publish one. re the media up here, sorry, the way the news is presented to us. (we have no pro SNP MSM, and appart from the national we have no pro indi MSM) is trully disgusting. ex bbc exectutive paul mason. said he hadnt seen anything like it since the iraq war. any devision or agro that arose from these reffs lay squarely at the feet of our media. BBC making and funding propoganda? i'm gonna post this up again, if you can get past the first several mins its actually a really well made documentary on the bbc. if they are doing it to us, dont think they are not doing it to you.it never stoped. they have only ramped it up. i
Re the "Wording" I would find it preferable that a clearer understanding of the terms of an Independance Referendum were made. Something along the lines of this vote will not be repeated within for example ten years unless specific changes within the UK happen eg departing the EU etc. With Brexit itself, I think it would have made complete sense to have a referendum to explore and negotiate leaving and mandating a confirmatory second after the completed negotiatons. This would ensure misrepresentaion by anyone campaigning could be reviewed in the fullness of time. The UK citizens aware of what the actual cost, benifits & risks could then proceed. Everyone who buys a car or double glazing is entitled to a cooling off period, and the purchasecontracts are subject to stringent rules. Not so for pivotal decisions on the countries direction which after all is the citizens future. Still its easy for me to say this after the fact...
