>”quite rightly, be able to say that democracy in the UK is a sham" //
A marginal advisary vote on which headline campaign points on the winning side were demonstrable lies? I don't think that demonstrates our representative democracy is a sham.
It is a shambles, but your conclusion is unsound.
If the populous now would vote the other way, how is pressing for exit of the EU democratic. All you're proving is that good liars can pervert a vote.
The losing side made many, many more lies, much more severe and important. Just a few:
David Cameron, "I will not resign even if the vote is out". He resigned immediately.
Osborne, "if you vote out there will be a 'punishment budget' of huge spending drops and tax rises". Reality: he was gone immediately.
"If out wins Boris will be Prime Minister". Reality: May is PM.
"You will go to the back of the queue", Obama. Reality: State Department immediately reversed the US position. "I think given what has happened, the president is going to try and do both [trade deals with the EU and UK] at the same time," Kerry said. "He knows how to multitask."
Osborne again: "EU will cost every household £4300 a year". Reality: this claim was garbage and was quietly retired after focus groups showed that nobody believed it, not even pro-EU campaigners.
"Leaving the EU means migrant camps moving from Calais to Dover". Reality: Le Tocquet agreement is independent of the EU, exists for practical reasons and France has confirmed it will remain in place.
Economists in general: "here are some models. believe them". I posted about what Krugman thinks of this elsewhere in the thread, as he has shown the problems with the way economists have behaved better than I can:
We will see in one year how much it will cost.
For me personally it costed just after one month more than that amount just in contract rate reduction and pound purchase power lost.
The only lies that mattered is at the end that politicians from remain tagged as "scaremongering" one, as for now, undeniable truth: the decline of uk economy.
>this claim was garbage and was quietly retired after focus groups showed that nobody believed it
The public believing something is totally unrelated to how true it is. This kind of facile populist attitude is what people are criticising about the Leave campaign.
It was a claim about the (distant) future, making it impossible to say whether it's true or not. The only thing that matters about such a claim is therefore plausibility, and it had none. They were right to retire it.
A marginal advisary vote on which headline campaign points on the winning side were demonstrable lies? I don't think that demonstrates our representative democracy is a sham.
It is a shambles, but your conclusion is unsound.
If the populous now would vote the other way, how is pressing for exit of the EU democratic. All you're proving is that good liars can pervert a vote.