Consistency and fairness aren't high on their list of priorities; showing themselves to be massive hypocrites would be of little concern to anyone willing to expose themselves as being anti-democratic in backing the overthrow of the referendum. It would be like an openly proud mass murderer being cripplingly ashamed of getting a parking ticket.

That you clearly can't imagine the anger when/if the result of the referendum is overturned is quite terrifying. Even more terrifying is that you would consider an act that would shatter millions of your fellow citizen's belief that they live in a democracy proof that our political system is working.

"Isn't it wonderful that we live in a country where my side can completely disregard democracy when it doesn't go our way without fear of any repercussions." Good luck with that.

Some of the comments have been deleted, which confuses matters.

Anyway, your comment accusing me of being a politically correct, emotional liberal is quite honestly insane. I'm generally significantly to the right of the modern conservative party on social issues.

Your repeated assertions of "facts" that fly in the face of the stated and undisputed statistics, without any evidence to support your claims, is laughable and shows quite severe levels of dogmatism, which is ironic given your profile bio.

And then we get to the really interesting bit. Your claim that the victims were complicit in their gang rape and enslavement. Have you ever actually read any of the accounts of this? Many of the gangs were using blow torches and bent pieces of metal to brand the underage girls with their mark to signify ownership. You think that shows complicity? Insane.

Finally you give a load more waffle about me being a politically correct liberal and resisting my "politically correct urges". The things I am saying are so far from being politically correct that they are in fact the very antithesis of political correctness. As shown by their repeated deletion from this board by the moderators. Actual liberals would be utterly aghast at my opinions I'm sure. Your responses generally show such a severe up is down, black is white, 1984 level of disconnect from reality that I'm not gonna bother responding any further, because you're either a troll or a nut case.

"Which policies sanction enslavement and rape?" I never made any claim that they did. The persistent cross-party policy of allowing mass immigration is undeniably responsible for the 1400 girls (the official number concluded by the inquiry) that were gang raped and enslaved in Rotherham. These heinous actions were committed almost exclusively by the immigrant community (another inquiry conclusion), on an organised and industrial scale that is unheard of among the native population of this country. And it is happening across the land, not just where I live.

"Why is the religion of rapists of particular concern?"
Because it is the obvious distinguishing factor that identifies this pattern of behaviour. This is the case all across Europe, with the non-indigenous Muslim population rate of each country corresponding almost without exception to the sexual assault rate.

But anyway, back to the UK; According to the Quilliam report published last year, "Researchers, who analysed 264 convictions of grooming gang members since 2005, had initially expected to find Asians had been unfairly singled out.
However, they discovered that 222 of those convicted, or 84 per cent, were men of Asian origin. Only 22 were black and 18 were white."

Asians hmm? Who do they mean by Asians? They don't mean Koreans do they? How about Chinese? No, we all know they mean Muslims predominantly from Pakistan and Iraq. And that is looking at actual numbers, make those figures per capita and it's even more horrific.

So, why is this of particular concern? Well I would have thought it beyond obvious that if you have any serious intention of addressing a problem caused overwhelmingly by one group of people, you have to know and admit who that group is.

1 MP. Statistically, MPs are less likely to be murdered than the young girls where I live are likely to be gang raped and enslaved by the Muslim immigrants allowed here by the policies of those MPs. That may be an unpalatable thing for some to hear, but it is factually undeniable.

"Corbyn will become PM" really is a meaningless threat at this point. Corbyn's Labour vs May's Tories is akin to asking if you would rather be stabbed in the front or the back. Many people will simply refuse to participate in such a situation.

Personally I'm seriously considering voting for Corbyn purely to give our party the kicking it deserves; if enough people do the same maybe then those at the top will finally learn the lesson that they can't s**t on the plebs forever without a backlash. Or they won't and the country will be swallowed by populism like the rest of Europe.

Either way, the threat of Corbyn is not going to be enough to justify and dismiss any and all Conservative party failings and betrayals indefinitely.

Interesting. Stalin said something similar when he emphasised the importance of the intelligentsia in forcing socialism onto the "simpletons" of the proletariat. How did that work out for the working classes?

Ahh yes, those damn uneducated masses. Are they even fully human, or some kind of subhuman filth I wonder? /s

Please, can somebody tell me when it became acceptable to hold the working class in such disdain? Because lets all be honest here, when liberals say “Uneducated, intuitively patriotic populists” that’s who they’re talking about. Then they wonder why so many people hate their guts?

This whole “better educated liberals” thing that has developed over the last few years, both here and in the US, is quite honestly disgusting. Not because it isn’t true (though I’m not sure it is, given that Trump has a degree, at least in this case it is simply a lie), no. It’s disgusting because it asserts, or at least implies, that someone’s political opinions should not be judged on their merit alone, but rather on the quality of the person that holds them.

This article speaks about the “liberal establishment” and the “metropolitan elite” as if they’re some kind of conspiracy theory, simply a boogey man invented by the uneducated scum to justify their inherrent inadequacy. But then it goes on to bemoan the fact that people wont just shutup and submit to the sneers of their “betters”. Who are these betters you might ask? Ohh yes, the liberal establishment.

The reality is, too many self professed “liberals” believe that a very large part of the population are untermensch, whose opinions can and must be guided, perverted, or ultimately banned for the greater good, and this article and today’s article by Dominic Walsh reek of it.

Personally I would have had more sympathy for this request if it had openly admitted the current problems are a direct result of socialism. Is that partisan? Certainly. Is it petty? Perhaps. But until the lesson is learned there's no point throwing British taxpayers' money at cleaning up the mess of an ideology that destroys people and nations, only for its proponents to say "But that wasn't REAL socialism.". Until socialism admits it has a problem, capitalism should not come to the rescue.

Young people, in general, are stupid, entitled, vain, and overly led by their emotional whims. I say that as a 26 year old. I would happily see the minimum voting age raised to 30, even at the expense of my own vote.