Forum menu
Take that away and the whole thing collapses.
You have given an argument against the government unilaterally binning it off (although even then it is weak). I am not sure though how a second referendum is undemocratic? The one vote and its it is generally assigned to undemocratic regimes.
Please explain how on earth a second referendum is undemocratic?
Much as we like to protest that things have changed, they really haven’t.
Well we know what we will be voting for now.
I’m pretty sure it won’t be as bad as what happens if we open the Pandoras box of resentment, hatred and bottled up aggression that exists in these places.
I am pretty sure it will be when they realise that it hasnt helped them and in fact they have been taken for idiots by a bunch of hard right elitists
I can also assure you that the anger they had before the vote which resulted in them voting the way they did, is small fry compared to how they’ll feel if they are again ignored.
How are they going to feel if parliament decides to withdraw A50 without a second vote?
I wonder how many voted leave at JLR and would like to change their mind now? 🤔
I do find opposition to a 2nd referendum bizarre.
First vote was a vote for an untested concept. I'm happy enough to admit that voters on both sides were voting more from a gut reaction and to a greater extent preconception and prejudice perspective. A second vote would/should be a vote on a concrete proposal - to take the best deal/compromise we have been able to negotiate to get the best of leaving whilst retaining healthly ties with the EU; to walk away with no deal at all but leave and see where that takes us or (having tested what the other options would look like in reality) vote to stay within the EU.
Part of growing up and maturing is appreciating that compromise is an inherent part of getting by. Getting everything your own way is rarely an option and holding out for it is often a recipe for being marginalised and permanently dissatisfied with your lot. Sadly I don't believe the voting population have the intellect, the assimilation of knowledge or the maturity to understand that. The last few years (looking across the pond too) have seen me fall out of love with the concept of democracy. Too many voters feel 'entitled' to have their say but feel no responsibility to inform themselves beyond social media rhetoric. This plays into the hands of the very worst kind of people to be our leaders. It's all thoroughly depressing.
A reminder - if Brexit happens, it will still be seen as a "betrayal" by many (most?) people who voted Brexit… because it's not the Brexit they voted for. They'll be complaints of "Brexit in name only" from some, and "where is the frictionless trade" from others, and "this was meant to help our fishing/farming industry" from others, and "we still can't bring in more curry chefs" from others… and so on. Avoiding a referendum, or avoiding cancelling A50, will not suddenly make people who voted Brexit feel that the mandate they gave the government has been honoured.
Very few people "want" a second referendum. Most people know we have to have one. Sadly. But urgently.
I still say cancelling A50, and then putting a real plan for replacing EU membership to the people is a way forward that avoids all the brinkmanship that's about to happen. Leave are likely to win that, but then they have a real mandate for a real plan, and the time to inact it.
I am pretty sure it will be when they realise that it hasnt helped them and in fact they have been taken for idiots by a bunch of hard right elitists
'they realise' are the two words which undercut your argument. I'm sure that some of them will have twigged, but the majority won't, and the danger of another vote is that ignoring the result of the last one will harden the leave vote, while fatigue and apathy will weaken the remain vote. Leave will have a field day.
The only way to improve the chances of remain is to split the leave vote with a three-option poll. Let the nutters plump for no-deal, the weary and more moderate the May deal, and a bigger chunk remain. But even then you have a bigger percentage voting for some kind of Brexit, and a smaller one to stay in the EU.
I can't see many scenarios in which a second ref would deliver what most of us want it to. Don't get me wrong, a second ref may well be worth a shot, and I'd love a reversal of the original result, but if the last two years has taught me anything, it is not to overestimate the capacity of the British electorate for reasonable analysis. People vote on an emotional level, and admitting you are wrong, even internally, is one of the hardest things for anyone to do.
with the rhetoric coming from number 10 the maybot is setting it up for a her deal vs no deal ref
but the majority won’t, and the danger of another vote is that ignoring the result of the last one will harden the leave vote, while fatigue and apathy will weaken the remain vote. Leave will have a field day.
Where as momentum is building against Brexit, against the deal and against the government?
As I asked above - what is your practical way out of this?
I am not sure though how a second referendum is undemocratic?
I'm not sure it matters what we think, only what those who voted for it thinks, and I'm pretty sure they see it as the very opposite of democratic.
How are they going to feel if parliament decides to withdraw A50 without a second vote?
No better obviously, and that would be equally if not more dangerous.
Well we know what we will be voting for now.
They knew what they were voting for before. In or out. The only people who are confused are those arguing about what 'out' means, hence the growing frustration and anger, fuelled by the patronising dismissal of what they think by calling them gammons. We may be deadlocked but really, calling them silly names and ignoring them is not going to solve the problem.
What does "out" mean?
well there is out, and out out....
admitting you are wrong, even internally, is one of the hardest things for anyone to do
You should be a politician mate, however using that kind of logic you wouldnt last 20 seconds.
As I asked above – what is your practical way out of this?
There is no clean way out of this. The only roadmap I can see involves Parliamentary chaos (tick), rejection of May's Brexit (tick soon), prospect of no deal looming, A50 put on hold for a year or so to avoid no deal. Momentum may well be building, but it needs time to build.
The problem with May's deal falling is that she will quit, and everything then depends on what flavour of Tory takes the hotseat, and whether the Tories can cling on.
You could possibly see an SNP/Labour coalition as the means to hauling us back, but that would require a GE and a 2nd Indyref to be promised.
They knew what they were voting for before. In or out. The only people who are confused are those arguing about what ‘out’ means, hence the growing frustration and anger, fuelled by the patronising dismissal of what they think by calling them gammons. We may be deadlocked but really, calling them silly names and ignoring them is not going to solve the problem.
They keep getting asked what they want!!
The problem with May’s deal falling is that she will quit
sure about that?
And if there was a second referendum and the result was to leave with No Deal what do you then do?
Agree with Dazh in that people knew what they were voting for. Whether they understood the implications or the complexities is another matter but leaving the EU clearly means leaving all aspects of the EU (customs union, FoM, ECJ etc,)
Some of the implications have become clearer but that may make no difference to someone who doesn't believe them, i.e project fear along with a misguided view of how great Great Britain is.
And if there was a second referendum and the result was to leave with No Deal what do you then do?
accept this isn't a country i want to live in and emigrate.
How are they going to feel if parliament decides to withdraw A50 without a second vote?
Honestly who gives a shit, it was not legally binding some trigger happy bint pulled the trigger, its parliaments job to do whats best for the country not one woman.
Whichever way this goes half the people are going to be ****ed off its going to be a lot worse when the half that voted to leave start whining the country is ****ed
sure about that?
Yeh, I know, she doesn't take the hint very well, but even for her, getting slaughtered on this particular vote MUST be a bridge too far. The only reason she'd stay on is to keep BoJo out. I suppose in the spirit of public service and taking one for the team she could be the one who revokes A50 then disappears. She is a remainer, after all.
I do love the idea that if a50is cancelled there wll be riots! Not a chance. No leave demo has had any significant numbers of people at it and given the demographic of leave voters its simply a laughable idea
Whether they understood the implications or the complexities is another matter but leaving the EU clearly means leaving all aspects of the EU
The flaw here is the leave campaign was busy promising that it didnt actually mean that. When it was pointed out they were talking shit that was "project fear". Now you could try claiming that the people really did know the full details but if so then easily resolved by a second referendum when they really would know the full details.
And if there was a second referendum and the result was to leave with No Deal what do you then do?
Get my Irish passport and speak to HR about options to relocate. We are an international team anyway.
Agree with Dazh in that people knew what they were voting for. Whether they understood the implications or the complexities is another matter but leaving the EU clearly means leaving all aspects of the EU (customs union, FoM, ECJ etc,)
Not to all the people, not to all MP's not according to some of the leave organisations campaigning for it. If you missed that then you were not paying attention.
Honestly who gives a shit, it was not legally binding some trigger happy bint pulled the trigger, its parliaments job to do whats best for the country not one woman.
THIS, very much THIS. Parliament need to consider what is in the best interest of the nation since, whatever happens, half the population are going to be pissed off.
Our parliament is on very shaky ground right now, weak, divided and ineffective.
Now you could try claiming that the people really did know the full details but if so then easily resolved by a second referendum when they really would know the full details.
Which full details do they know now?
only what those who voted for it thinks, and I’m pretty sure they see it as the very opposite of democratic.
Then they are idiots or ideological extremists pretending to be idiots. Its an incoherent moronic position. Hell working on that logic we can just call it off since what is being proposed is a third referendum.
fuelled by the patronising dismissal of what they think by calling them gammon
Apart from gammon is a lot more specific. This move from the specific to general is just playing to the hard right agenda.
calling them silly names and ignoring them is not going to solve the problem.
For those who use it I suspect it gets rid of some of the frustration at dealing with people who are trashing their futures.
Which full details do they know now?
What the maybot has negotiated. Admittedly it still isnt the full details but is a tad closer than the hard rights lies about not only having our cake and eating it but that we would be having cake delivered daily.
https://www.voteleavewatch.org.uk/leave_campaigners_try_to_drop_their_false_promises
Looking over those, even I hadn't realised just how detached from reality the Leave campaign was.
Just a thought, and apologies if this has been done already, but does Maybot's deal allow for us to say, sometime in the transition period, "hang on, we don't like this, can we stay in Europe after all, please"?
If it does, is it worth considering it as a "trial separation", as opposed to a straight out divorce...?
Not really. If May's deal is accepted, we formally leave the EU next March. We are no longer a member. Even in a transition period, it's not simply a question of revoking A50, that no longer applies, we've left.
We would have to apply to rejoin, get approval from the 27, and quite frankly, at that point I imagine they'd tell us to do one.
The whole thing is a farce - only 28% of the population want out, or want to inflict this on us. So why should we leave?
We would have to apply to rejoin, get approval from the 27, and quite frankly, at that point I imagine they’d tell us to do one.
It would certainly be at full fare, no discounts and no veto, not to mention that tricky issue about currency.
So basically 3 months to come up with something. Best have a holiday then.
So we had a general election, David Camera promised to hold an in/out referendum then won after people voted for him.
Then the referendum was held, and people voted to leave.
Then another general election was held, Theresa May promised to honour the result, and people voted for her too.
And people want another vote?
The whole thing is a farce – only 28% of the population want out, or want to inflict this on us. So why should we leave?
Democracy. In the same way that we are governed by a party that a similar number voted for in 2017.
For all the talk about Ref 2.0, the promise of it may simply be the mechanism that is used to justify revoking A50 in the New Year.
'We need to go back to the people, let's put things back for a bit.'
But holding it too quickly would be a serious mistake. Time's winged chariot is our friend here, let's try to get a couple more hard winters behind us to adjust the demographic.
Then another general election was held, Theresa May promised to honour the result, and people voted for her too.
Not so much if you look at the results, but I take your point.
2nd vote won't fix the problem while the vocal Brexiteers are still pedaling the same myths scapegoating the EU for the country's issues.
Doesn't help that Labour are still too scared to be honest about it either.
More to the point JLR are now moving production, ASOS figures show that even online shops are being hurt by brexit & trade woes.
Labour (Corbyn) have to step up & help fix this mess.
Meanwhile May now so screwed she's asking Cameron for help!
Then another general election was held, Theresa May promised to honour the result, and people voted for her too.
A minority voted for her. As most people who look at elections objectively said it was always going to go down to party political issues not just the EU.
Since all of that TM has come back with a very controversial deal that looks nothing like any of the leave options, she refuses to allow parliament to vote on it at the moment.
At some point they will, if that vote fails what comes next?
How can you push this through
We are an international team anyway
You are virgil tracey and i claim my 5 euros.
Seriously however a friend of mine who works for a very large tier 1 automotive parts supplier into europe is saying pretty much the uk aspect will go the way of the dinosaur and i have no doubt it will
Did i just read in this mornings papers she will summon the eu27 to london? If so 15 quid says lots of them will be washing their hair
And a lot of people (me included) suspect that it would be another win for Leave.
I don't believe this is the case. However, I didn't think that we'd lose last time either. Another referendum is a very dangerous idea because if Leave wins again we are truly humped, and all it'll take is for Aaron Banks to get out his cheque book and Putin to fire up the Twitterbot network.
Sadly though, it's looking increasingly like we've no option other than a third referendum, the chances of parliament growing a backbone and doing its job are slim.
I know we are in a nice bubble on here but does anyone know a remainer who would now vote leave?
I've seen a few online, mostly who have been seduced by the will of the people / something something democracy something mantras. Not many though, and who knows how many are genuine rather than moles.
I can also assure you that the anger they had before the vote which resulted in them voting the way they did, is small fry compared to how they’ll feel if they are again ignored.
So? There will be riots, with about six people.
And people want another vote?
I wasnt aware that Cameron and May were elected on a single issue platform. Thanks for enlightening me (lets skip over the misuse of Cameron vote).
Lets not forget the words of St Farage ""In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way"
Why are the brexiteers no longer in favour of a vote?
Labour (Corbyn) have to step up & help fix this mess.
After we've left. Corbyn wants Brexit, and thinks he can take Labour into power afterwards. He's lost my vote. It's down to his successor to get a Labour government now. Labour MPs might step up to the plate before March, but they won't be led by him to do so.
So we had a general election, David Camera promised to hold an in/out referendum then won after people voted for him.
Then the referendum was held, and people voted to leave.
Then another general election was held, Theresa May promised to honour the result, and people voted for her too.
And people want another vote?
Are there some other facts missing in this fairytale, asking for my labour friend
Why are the brexiteers no longer in favour of a vote?
Because voting is undemocratic.
Erm...
He’s lost my vote
And mine.
However bad brexit may be, in whatever flavour, I’m pretty sure it won’t be as bad as what happens if we open the Pandoras box of resentment, hatred and bottled up aggression that exists in these places.
I suspect somewhere, someone (a grown-up, maybe?) is running an assessment of the likely impact of a period of disorder caused by upsetting a group of right wing pensioners and some racists* vs the actual impact of Brexit in its various forms and deciding which would be easier to bear.
The other problem is that the impact of an 'undemocratic' revoking / referendum is likely to hit politicians harder; the loss in trust right through to the (let's face it) potentially violent / stabby factions of the Leave contingent.
As to the question of the Remainer who'd now vote leave. That would have been me a few months ago, on the basis that no matter the rights and wrongs of the process in 2016, there was a vote and that needs respect. But the last few months, specifically now we know the shitness of the shit sandwich that is on offer and the lack of any credible alternative/the danger presented by the likes of the ERG, etc., has brought me back to thinking that democratic or not, sometimes people need protecting from themselves.
I don't see it as desperately undemocratic that now we know what's on offer, that we are asked again if we still want it. If the answer is still yes...... as distressing as that is, then we have to deal with it, that is then properly democratic.
assessment of the likely impact of a period of disorder caused by upsetting a group of right wing pensioner
They will be dead soon anyway with no NHS
All these logical gymnastics about what does or doesn't constitute a majority, or whether people knew what they were voting for are fairly disturbing. Would those of you advocating a new referendum answer a simple question. Would you prefer to live in a functioning democracy or be a member of the EU?
I know the two things aren't mutually exclusive, but the way you are all talking it sounds like you'd happily sacrifice the former for the latter. If that's the case then you're only adding fuel to the argument of those who erroneously portray the EU as some sort of malevolent foreign force seeking to do what many before them have failed to do. That's not going to end well.
Would you prefer to live in a functioning democracy or be a member of the EU?
Surely you dont mean a fuctioning democracy like the eu?
All these logical gymnastics about what does or doesn’t constitute a majority, or whether people knew what they were voting for are fairly disturbing.
Are you seriously claiming people made an informed decision last time round?
Would you prefer to live in a functioning democracy or be a member of the EU?
I assume you mean an exclusive or? In which case whilst the question is simple it is also wrong.
How on earth is a third referendum undemocratic?
Seriously?
Please explain this in simple words?
Would you prefer to live in a functioning democracy or be a member of the EU?
Yes, I think you have no idea what a functioning democracy looks like.
Is having a referendum a normal part of our functioning democracy, or an admittance that our democracy needs to be done differently to normal due to elected officials not being able to sort an issue amoungst themselves? Apply this question both to the 2016 referendum and any possible future one. I'd suggest that your answer should be the same in both cases.
democratic or not, sometimes people need protecting from themselves.
Would you prefer to live in a functioning democracy or be a member of the EU?
I know the two things aren’t mutually exclusive, but the way you are all talking it sounds like you’d happily sacrifice the former for the latter
The answer to both these points is the same, and we covered it on like page 2 of this thread.
We live in a representative democracy. As such, we vote for our parliamentary representatives who we trust to make decisions in the country's best interests. We do not vote on individual policies - that's not a democracy, it's an ochlocracy (mob rule).
The Leavers have contorted words like "democracy" beyond recognition, and sadly it seems to have worked for a lot of people. "Undemocratic" is now synonymous with "anyone who disagrees with us." That's not democracy either, it's fascism.
Despite what Leave, Cameron and May will have us believe, let us not forget that the 2016 referendum was advisory. It was an opinion poll. They can promise free gold houses for everyone but that doesn't make it law, and the law is very clear in regards to referendums.
It is not undemocratic to reject an opinion poll (though the sensible thing to do would be to address why people voted the way they did rather than just ignore it completely. Reform Not Remain, go stick that on a bus).
It is not undemocratic to have another opinion poll (it's arguably stupid but that never stopped us before).
It is not undemocratic to act in the country's best interests over what some of the public think they want (I'd wager most would vote in favour of abolishing tax, that doesn't make it a good idea).
Yet, is it not undemocratic to lie to parliament and attempt mass cover-ups of information which would otherwise empower MPs to do their jobs?
I’m suspicious that a functioning bureaucracy is preferable to a dysfunctional democracy.
But then I’m a dangerous subservient - in a middle class, Orange riding sort of way.
Would you prefer to live in a functioning democracy or be a member of the EU?
The Job of the government is not just to act on behalf of the populace but also in the best interests of the country and its economy. On this occasion, less than 50% of the countries eligible voters voted in a none legally binding referendum, a referendum which was clouded with some extremely questionable marketing (does anyone else remember the disgraceful vote leave broadcast show at primetime showing a 50/50 split screen of the NHS of in and out of the EU?) all reasonably conducted research shows leaving the EU with a deal or without will harm the countries economy in ways which will seriously impact the countries GDP and therefore the working populace. Of course, they should take it on the chin and revoke article 50, will they do that? I doubt their inflated ego's would allow them to admit they were that wrong.
dazh - the EU is farmore democratic than Westminster - where we have a completely unelected chamber, we have majorites of representation on minorities of the vote. Whereas the EU everyone is elected either directly or via a delegate process and we have proportional representation.
The only reason May is poo pooing a 2nd referendum is because she knows if remain were to win, it would be the absolute end of the tory party. She must think that's a strong possibility so she needs to shout it down as much as possible.
The whole thing is a farce – only 28% of the population want out, or want to inflict this on us. So why should we leave?
Democracy. In the same way that we are governed by a party that a similar number voted for in 2017.
Yes, democracy, except I wasn't having any rights permanently removed after the 2017 vote.
Anything that amends peoples rights significantly should only be carried by a supermajority (much like the first referendum in 1975 was).
I visited my elderly parents this weekend. In the referendum my Mum didn't vote because she felt that she didn't understand enough about the issues to make a decision (I understand and respect this). My Dad voted Leave. I asked him what he would vote if there was another referendum, thinking that he couldn't possibly still want to leave. He said he would still vote leave. His reasons were mainly about "taking back control", "a country like the UK, with 70million residents should be able to go it alone", and of course "the immigrants are overwhelming the country". I asked him where all the immigrants were in the small rural town in Somerset, and how that was affecting him? Apparently they are all in Bristol. He was particularly concerned about the immigrants from Somalia. I think it came as a shock when I pointed out that Somalia wasn't in Europe, and they could still come after with leave the EU.
My Dad ticks most of the stereotypes when it comes to Brexit:
Reads the Daily Mail - tick
Old (83) - tick
So I came home with the uneasy feeling that a second referendum isn't necessarily going to go they way I would like. There are still a large number of people with these views, who won't admit that they are wrong despite all the evidence indicating otherwise.
So May is absolutely against a second ref and suggesting it's a total disaster. However with so many others in parliament lining up behind the idea, surely her position is becoming untenable? She's pitting herself against parliament, it's a final showdown isn't it?
Would those of you advocating a new referendum answer a simple question. Would you prefer to live in a functioning democracy or be a member of the EU?
Easy-peasy. You switch off democracy while we have an other referendum, and then another if the right answer isn't reached, and another, and another until we get the right answer. Then democracy gets switched back on. Job done. If people act like children they deserve to be treated like children.
My Dad ticks most of the stereotypes when it comes to Brexit:
Reads the Daily Mail – tick
Old (83) – tick
Not being morbid but I know 4 people who tick those boxes that are no longer with us.
Time is on our side.
Except it's not turning off democracy is it, it's bringing the updated options to the people.
It's a well known fact to those who know it well that in a democracy, once you have a vote everything stops. That's why the Whigs are still in power.
We really should start teaching critical thinking in schools.
"all reasonably conducted research shows leaving the EU with a deal or without will harm the countries economy in ways which will seriously impact the countries GDP and therefore the working populace."
This argument was made numerous times in 2016 before the referendum took place.
People decided there are more important things than the countries GDP. Why would it be different a 2nd time around?
"Invoking the gods of economics, the King’s College London professor invited the audience to imagine the likely plunge in the UK’s GDP. Back yelled the woman: “That’s your bloody GDP. Not ours.”"
“That’s your bloody GDP. Not ours.”
And yet I am constantly being reminded that I 'must respect' the result of a vote where that was the level of the people who 'won'.
No.
This argument was made numerous times in 2016 before the referendum took place.
People decided there are more important things than the countries GDP. Why would it be different a 2nd time around?
It might not be.
Many people, after all, are demonstrably idiots.
The only reason May is poo pooing a 2nd referendum is because she knows if remain were to win, it would be the absolute end of the tory party.
You mean May is putting party politics ahead of the country?
Well I never!
You mean A politician is putting party politics ahead of the country?
Well I never!
Fixed that for you :]
Why would it be different a 2nd time around?
Because the lies of the leavers are now exposed. So those who were pursuaded by those lies might change their minds and also demographic changes have made a differnce. Remain in Scotland has increased significantly for example
Are you seriously claiming people made an informed decision last time round?
No, but that's irrelevant for the reasons I gave above.
the EU is farmore democratic than Westminster
I agree, but that's also irrelevant because that's not what people were voting on, they were voting in or out.
We live in a representative democracy. As such, we vote for our parliamentary representatives who we trust to make decisions in the country’s best interests.
True also, but referenda are direct questions to the people where the usual rules of representation are suspended.
Honestly, paint this however you want, but you'll never get away from the the fact that people voted to leave. We can either choose to ignore that or not. But if we do, the consequences in both the short and long term are impossible to predict and could result in something far worse than leaving the EU either with a deal or without. Democracy is a fragile thing. If the government or other interest groups seek to ignore it then what we have instead is the breakdown of the rule of the law, and government by whoever is strongest. I'm no fan of leaving the EU but I'm also not a big fan of the UK turning into a tinpot authoritarian oligarchy. If we start ignoring democratic votes because we disagree with them we're well on the way to that.
Honestly, paint this however you want, but you’ll never get away from the the fact that people voted to leave. We can either choose to ignore that or not. But if we do, the consequences in both the short and long term are impossible to predict and could result in something far worse than leaving the EU either with a deal or without.
#ProjectFear
We have been doing loads about trying to leave, how's that going?
Honestly, paint this however you want, but you’ll never get away from the the fact that people voted to leave. We can either choose to ignore that or not. But if we do, the consequences in both the short and long term are impossible to predict and could result in something far worse than leaving the EU either with a deal or without.
Ok - excuse me why I don my blousey thing and a beret.
"Give us what we want or we'll kick your head in".
Notable how only one side have a significant element who are threatening to 'kick off' if they don't get what they want. But then that was always the way, wasn't it......
#ProjectFear
Hardly, I'm about as remain as it's possible to be. But really think about this. You're arguing that the sensible thing to do is remain in the EU because the alternatives are much worse. Yet at the same time you're arguing that we should unilaterally suspend the single most important principle and foundation of our system of government because we don't like the results of it. That doesn't sound very sensible or grown up to me. More like throwing the board up in the air because you're losing the game. And yet accuse the leavers of being the irresponsible ones?
Notable how only one side have a significant element who are threatening to ‘kick off’ if they don’t get what they want.
There's only one side threatening to rip up the rules and ignore a democratic vote. They'd be well within their rights to kick off, just as we would if it were the other way round. Like I said, who is it being sensible and grown up here?
True also, but referenda are direct questions to the people where the usual rules of representation are suspended.
That's not true though, is it. You don't say "hang on lads, we're having a referendum, democracy and English Law no longer applies." #WhyDoYouHateDemocracy
Honestly, paint this however you want, but you’ll never get away from the the fact that people voted to leave. We can either choose to ignore that or not.
We can, yes. But.
1) Having another vote is not ignoring the first one, that's just Daily Express speak. It's obtaining more up-to-date information.
2) We can honour the referendum, as I've said repeatedly, by analysing why people voted the way they did and addressing those concerns. We can change our domestic immigration policy right now, for instance. Again, this is Page 2 arguments. The vote told us that we are a country divided and a lot of people are unhappy, that needs tackling rather than ignoring. We can "respect the vote" and still remain in the EU by fixing what people are complaining about. As I said a couple of posts back, proposing to Reform rather than Remain (and do nothing) will please all but the most rabid gammons, and **** those guys, they're lunatics.
Yet at the same time you’re arguing that we should unilaterally suspend the single most important principle and foundation of our system of government because we don’t like the results of it.
That isn't a referendum is it?
More like throwing the board up in the air because you’re losing the game. And yet accuse the leavers of being the irresponsible ones?
PMSL, you what, we have repeatedly asked for a leave plan, we have a leave plan and nobody likes it. So what comes next? Which vision of brexit should you force through parliament?
Threatening violence and violent consequences is project fear.
More like throwing the board up in the air because you’re losing the game.
Obviously the start of a circular, boardgame-based, theoretical argument here..........
But what if in 'winning' you then can't afford the rent or mortgage on the house you are sitting in whilst 'playing the game'?
What if it turns out that what you thought was the end of the game (sovrunty) was actually illusory and you end up out in the street trying to play the game with a soggy board and missing pieces because the bailiff trashed your front room?
There'll be all sorts of bleating about 'not wanting this', but it'll be too late by then.......
You’re arguing that the sensible thing to do is remain in the EU because the alternatives are much worse.
Correct, if oversimplified. The sensible thing to do is remain in the EU is because it provides us with an absolute shitload of benefits and advantages.
Yet at the same time you’re arguing that we should unilaterally suspend the single most important principle and foundation of our system of government because we don’t like the results of it.
Incorrect. A referendum has little place in a representative democracy. I've literally just said this, we elect politicians to make decisions for us, if that weren't the case then we wouldn't need or have politicians.
You're conflating an advisory referendum with a mandatory election vote. They are very different things.
we should unilaterally suspend the single most important principle and foundation of our system of government because we don’t like the results of it
No. That we should question votes cast off the back of campaigns based on lies, bigotry, cheating and uninformed opinion.
The vote told us that we are a country divided and a lot of people are unhappy, that needs tackling rather than ignoring.
And tackling it will need basically need cash, inward investement, call it what you will. Where is that going to come from if we basically torpedo our own economy?
if you can bear it, take a look at the mail homepage. i thought i'd step outside my echo chamber and see how the other half see it. its fascinating...
https://www.****/home/index.html