I don't do short but in short probably* yes..................although it all depends on the question. May;s deal vs remain. The Leave voters say "pfft" and you can then argue a mandate on a 40% turnout to overturn the original decision on a 72% turnout. No deal vs remain and then it becomes competitive because there is something to vote for and you can bet that the message will be spread and people will be ready to vote again. *probably because the liklihood is that those with the power to decide these things know the above and are going to go for the remain vs remain option.
Fullfact? They were brought out a few times when people disputed things I said!!! Which expert do you prefer? Owen Jones and Lord Adonis? Oh and Mr Tusk today. lol. Even the BBC (who usually just quote these things) said it was disputed today. For them to admit the figure is disputed is admission in reality. Did you read the full fact article? Manchester Metropolitan University’s Professor Keith Still, said “based on the visuals from the helicopter image, it’s between 312,000 and 400,000 people.” This type of crowd estimation, called the Jacobs method, is done by dividing a crowd site area into sections, measuring the size of each section and then multiplying each area by the estimated density of people within that subsection. The people's vote said they used the formula above but even at a density where you are stood and can't walk he says it would be 700k max............and it wasn't that density across the board. I have been in that kind of density. Away at football games. You guys in Milan looked like that from those pictures from first story windows. a few thousand. If the Prof says 312k to 400k then I think he must be right..............after all he is the expert, not someone(s) with a vested interest in making out their march hit the magic million.
No, you’re right. From now on I’ll just believe everything you say Imps. I can confidently say I have never once “brought out” Fullfact or any other fact checker. As a rule I generally leave fact checking to qualified experts in the field in question..
I think that this sums up my view of Brexit. "I could agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong" I'd like to pretend Nigel Adkins said that. But he didn't.
So professor Keith Still must have been a professor of gardening then and not a qualified expert in the field of crowd estimation or whatever his specialist subject that covers that is? We have had this before Chilcs. I state that "it" has been brought up before and you reply you never have. I am not searching back the pages, there are far too many but fullfact has been used several times against me before yet when the boot is on the other foot then it don't count. EDIT: Just read this back and I meant to say I am not pinpointing you as saying it, more that as a collective on here Fullfact has been used to argue against me. And people question us "not believing the experts" when all along, as you have just admitted, you only believe the experts that you want to believe. touché much? And today's "expert" in the field of crowd estimation is...........Lord Adonis and his able assistant Alistair Campbell, who has been able to attend because there's no Premier league football today.
Talking is often futile. Listening rarely is. Unfortunately everyone seems to be doing the former, while no one is doing the latter.
Please explain why TFL sold 1.5 million tickets more than a normal Saturday. Were all those people going to the Finnish Easter Fair, or the Exhibition of Railway Modelling?
"So the biggest mandate given the country would be reversed by one of the smallest" Bloody nonsense Surely not the 2016 referendum at stay 48.1% - go 51.9% Compare with:- United Kingdom European Communities membership referendum, 1975, stay 67.23% - go 32.70% United Kingdom Alternative Vote referendum, 2011, No 67.90% Yes 6,152,607 32.10% https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendums in the United Kingdom, verifiable numbers here 2016 described as the thinnest of mandates I'm sure the turnout for a 3rd referendum will be as high if not higher particularly in the young vote also the overseas vote which I'm part of. You're trotting out the Mogglodyte, express etc line re civil unrest, fear factor 5. Jab
Ok (no blue ink) do you remember Pompey had half a million on Southsea common?They knew cos they were there!
Now there’s a thought; 2nd referendum with some caveats such as, must be higher # votes than previous by x% & will only reverse 1st vote if by y% That would spice it up. Jeez, just realised, even if in theory that would work, it would take parliament years to decide upon the %’s
It would be a 3rd EU referendum and must be based on the same criteria as the 2nd.. But and however, in future a QM of between 60-65% for referenda please, plenty of examples of other countries votes out there. PR the way to go in my view for elections. Jab
