ghrh
Well-known Member
Exactly. The same as for the 2016 referendum.It wouldn't, but I never said it would be.
Exactly. The same as for the 2016 referendum.It wouldn't, but I never said it would be.
Only because those on the opposing side haven't aligned themselves with democracy and would rather suppress it in this case. No surprises there.For the exact same reason it is different to other national referendums. No surprises there.
![]()
Britain against Brexit as poll of polls says most now want to stay
Britain has turned against Brexit and would now vote to stay in the European Union, according to the biggest ever poll-of-polls. The YouGov analysis for the Evening Standard of 300 surveys shows “concrete” evidence that the country shifted against quitting the European bloc in the year after the...www.standard.co.uk
Why would a Government of National Unity be any less democratic than the rump of the Conservative Party?
The people are more for brexit than against. If our parliament was representative they would be for leaving.
View attachment 1205177
We've had a General Election since those stats.
I challenged Sonic to find links because, if you actually read the 2017 manifestos of the Conservatives and Labour, it becomes abundantly clear that the unequivocal mandate for any Brexit is not nearly as clear cut as suggested by our Brexiteers. Sonic either missed the point or came across my previous post to Squiffy which explained it, hence the charity nonsense.And you constantly posted in the past that as we voted for remain EU parties we must want to remain. In 2017 the vote was over 80% for leave parties. By your own argument we must want to leave.
Want links to all that?
Interesting that you pick that one. Yet again. Wasn’t that tested in courtA red bus emblazoned with empty promises springs to mind.
That's what democracy is. Not sure why you think "alignment" is democratic when there is a split decision.Only because those on the opposing side haven't aligned themselves with democracy and would rather suppress it in this case. No surprises there.
And they can keep voting and change their minds over and over again.We have seen previous referendums in the EU overturned by the overlords in Brussels, countries like Ireland, Denmark and France were made to vote again because they initially voted against something the technocrats were in favour of. Britain, and its democracy is now at risk of repeating this undemocratic folly because it's what our better-ers demand. By going down this route and on this principle alone the UK was right to vote leave.
That's my point. Sonic asked if it was fine for politicians to mislead. The red bus example- along with the court judgement - says yes it is.Interesting that you pick that one. Yet again. Wasn’t that tested in courtPerhaps you can share the result of it?
Hmm interesting interpretation.That's my point. Sonic asked if it was fine for politicians to mislead. The red bus example- along with the court judgement - says yes it is.
You really should read all posts rather than cherry pick.
As you have just found by not reading the whole threadAnd remember assumptions are the mother of all fudgeups.
Both manifestos were to leave the EU.I challenged Sonic to find links because, if you actually read the 2017 manifestos of the Conservatives and Labour, it becomes abundantly clear that the unequivocal mandate for any Brexit is not nearly as clear cut as suggested by our Brexiteers. Sonic either missed the point or came across my previous post to Squiffy which explained it, hence the charity nonsense.
For the benefit of everyone, the key highlights from the manifestos on Brexit:
Conservatives
Britain needs..to get the best Brexit deal for our country and its people.
We need to deliver a smooth and orderly departure from the EU and forge a deep and special partnership with our friends and allies across Europe.
Labour
We must...build a close new relationship with the EU, protect workers’ rights and environmental standards, provide certainty to EU nationals and give a meaningful role to Parliament throughout negotiations.
We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union.
We will end Theresa May’s reckless approach to Brexit, and seek to unite the country around a Brexit deal that works for every community in Britain
Britain needs to negotiate a Brexit deal that puts our economy and living standards first.
We cannot put at risk our links with our largest trading partner. Instead we need a jobs-first Brexit that allows us to upgrade our economy for the 21st century.
In light of such comments in the manifesto, it is rather clear that the 2017 General Election provides absolutely no mandate for no deal. Indeed, it is a categorical rejection of it by 80%+ of the electorate and exposes the reason why Brexiteers are terrified of another referendum.
But all were for a close relationship with the EU which absolutely puts no deal off the table. Even putting aside the Tory votes, the combined might of tthe remainder, there is a 50%+ number against no deal. That is why Brexiteers are scared stiff of another referendum.Both manifestos were to leave the EU.
Hence pointing out that that over 80% of the vote was to leave in 2017.
And from YouGov too. YouGov is special in that you deliberatly sign up to it. It doesn't stop people at random and ask their intention.Hmm... so we need to do something else as a poll of polls has shown that a majority want to stay in the EU.
Of course we had 6 different companies each doing a 'poll of polls' for the referendum - and every one of them got the result wrong..![]()
I'm not scared, my objection is the first one had an instruction that has not yet been honoured.But all were for a close relationship with the EU which absolutely puts no deal off the table. Even putting aside the Tory votes, the combined might of tthe remainder, there is a 50%+ number against no deal. That is why Brexiteers are scared stiff of another referendum.
Because even those who oppose the democratic vote of preference align with democracy. It really is quite simple. When the Conservative party win a GE, Labour voters don't take to the streets, media, courts and parliament itself to overturn the result. They abide by the result. That's how democracy for centuries used to work in this country.That's what democracy is. Not sure why you think "alignment" is democratic when there is a split decision.
"Close relationship" can be interpreted in a lot of ways.But all were for a close relationship with the EU which absolutely puts no deal off the table. Even putting aside the Tory votes, the combined might of tthe remainder, there is a 50%+ number against no deal.
1. Who?That is why Brexiteers are scared stiff of another referendum.
And your post indicates you don't believe in democracy full stop.And they can keep voting and change their minds over and over again.
I am not sure if you are aware of the results of previous national UK referendums as your reply doesn't seem to indicate this.
You answered your question already.Why should anyone abide by a 2nd one?
You must be living in a different country as you don't understand how parliamentary democracy works.And your post indicates you don't believe in democracy full stop.
Not until you get the right answer you want.
Now, where have you learnt to take that en vogue disposition from, I wonder. Sham democrat.
The same point as the first referendum and any subsequent ones. A large scale, national opinion poll. Unless there is strong change in opinion in one way or the other nothing will change."Close relationship" can be interpreted in a lot of ways.
Again you are saying specifically "no deal." I know what the manifestos said and the parties stances.
Hence why I said over 80% was "to leave." I never said over 80% was for "no deal."
![]()
Fact check: Did 80% of voters back parties that accept the Brexit decision?
The Brexit secretary David Davis said 80 per cent of voters backed parties who will back Brexit. His claim is misleading.theferret.scot
1. Who?
2. What's the point? If people don't respect the first one, they won't respect a second. Some MPs have admitted they won't.
3. Why does it take two votes to leave?
4. The evidence is it will be leave again.
5. And what will it ask anyway?
And you must be living on a different planet as you don't understand parliament has no sovereignty higher than a popular mandate.You must be living in a different country as you don't understand how parliamentary democracy works.
Well apart from the Tory manifesto that also stated 'we believe no deal is better than a bad deal' it should also be noted what a "close relationship" means in the eyes of the EU.But all were for a close relationship with the EU which absolutely puts no deal off the table. Even putting aside the Tory votes, the combined might of tthe remainder, there is a 50%+ number against no deal. That is why Brexiteers are scared stiff of another referendum.
We have already established that there has been a General Election since the referendum result and therefore the latter is refined by the former. The GE put no deal off the table so the public should now be asked to endorse a deal or revocation. It is only how that question should be asked that is up for debate.And you must be living on a different planet as you don't understand parliament has no sovereignty higher than a popular mandate.
I don't agree with your interpretation - I would describe it as close alignment for mutual gain - but, ultimately, it is what the British people chose in 2017.Close relationship is a euphemism for subordination and acquiescing to EU demands. The only thing close about it, is keeping the UK locked into its political and economic sphere of influence.
No it didn't take no deal off the table. That's a complete lie. No deal is/was and still is the legal default. And the Tory manifesto also stated 'we believe no deal is better than a bad deal'.We have already established that there has been a General Election since the referendum result and therefore the latter is refined by the former. The GE put no deal off the table so the public should now be asked to endorse a deal or revocation. It is only how that question should be asked that is up for debate.
The Tory manifesto first and foremost promised a deal. Checkout my link and you will see it throughout the document. But even then, the Tories only secured 42% of the vote so they lack a majority for no deal. It might be the enduring legal default but the people haven't agreed to it which is why Parliament, acting on their behalf, won't allow it.No it didn't take no deal off the table. That's a complete lie. No deal is/was and still is the legal default. And the Tory manifesto also stated 'we believe no deal is better than a bad deal'.