If there is a second referendum ...

Herzlos

What lisyloo said; the 2016 referendum result can hardly be said to be ignored - pretty much all of Westminster has done nothing but try to figure out how to make it work for approaching 3 years, they've created a new cabinet post and government department for it, we've spent millions in paperwork, travel, man-hours and so on. I'm not sure they've spent that much effort on anything else in history.


It hasn't been achieved yet, because there are some contradictory goals, and no real direction to work in.


It'll be a lot easier to do something with a definitive result - whether that's for a no deal brexit or not.

p00hsticks

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

LOL...

First everything was the EU's fault and now everything is Remainer's fault.

Denial at it's finest...

Next will be leavers because we went with 'the wrong kind of leave'

Matt_L

lisyloo wrote: »

I don't know how anyone can say the result has been ignore when 28 countries have spent a great deal of time, money and effort trying to negotiate it.


Not acheived - yes
ignored - absolutely not

Over the last few weeks countless Labour MP's have stood up in Parliament and made clear that they believe ANY deal would be worse than remaining in the EU and would therefore vote against ANY deal. The same goes for the LibDems and SNP.

In the days after the 2016 referendum result many Labour, SNP and LibDems immediately called for a 2nd referendum as well as claiming that they had suddenly become experts in knowing the thoughts reasonings to why each individual leave voter vote the way they did.

Would you say they have ignored the referendum result or accepted it?

Herzlos

They've accepted it. Any deal with absolutely be worse than remaining, no-one has made any claims otherwise that hold up to any scrutiny.


Parliament still needs to determine what they want to compromise on and who they want to upset.


SNP are acting on behalf of their constituents; Scotland voted to Remain.

Matt_L

Herzlos wrote: »

They've accepted it. Any deal with absolutely be worse than remaining, no-one has made any claims otherwise that hold up to any scrutiny.


Parliament still needs to determine what they want to compromise on and who they want to upset.


SNP are acting on behalf of their constituents; Scotland voted to Remain.

:doh: So in conclusion you believe that MP's stating that they won't vote for any deal, whether it be hard Brexit or soft are accepting the result of the referendum.

:rotfl::rotfl: And they wonder why we don't trust another referendum..

Ive seen and heard all I need....

Herzlos

You can accept the result of something and then still determine it's in the best interests to do something else.


The fact that a lot of these MP's seem to have changed their minds since voting to trigger A50 and now would imply that a lot of them have (hopefully) looked at the details and decided we'll be worse off which is in direct contradiction to many claims from before the referendum.


They still need to consider the wishes of the 48% too.


A clear majority in a 2nd referendum would force their hand.

movilogo

A clear majority in a 2nd referendum would force their hand.

So if there is 2nd ref and Remain:Leave is 52:48, then will you

1. Discard this result as there is no "clear" majority.
2. If #1 is true, then 1st ref result remains valid.
3. How many years later there will be 3rd ref to see if people changed minds again?

Enterprise_1701C

Filo25 wrote: »

They are the opposition of course they are voting against, the reason for May's catastrophic defeat though is mainly that she couldn't get the leavers in her party and the DUP to vote for her WA.

Of course some on here prefer to blame Remainer sabotage and treachery for everything....

I heard someone say that you could ask Khorbyn what he wanted, package it up and hand it to him and he would vote against it. He is playing politics with peoples lives, all he wants is to get the unions into power. You think the country has problems now? With Momentum in power the country would be paralysed because everyone would be on strike supporting everyone else. Someone gets fired for being drunk on the job in Poland, everyone out.

Herzlos wrote: »

You can accept the result of something and then still determine it's in the best interests to do something else.


The fact that a lot of these MP's seem to have changed their minds since voting to trigger A50 and now would imply that a lot of them have (hopefully) looked at the details and decided we'll be worse off which is in direct contradiction to many claims from before the referendum.


They still need to consider the wishes of the 48% too.


A clear majority in a 2nd referendum would force their hand.

They need to consider the wishes of the 52% which means NOT consider the wishes of the 48%

movilogo

I can understand why Leavers didn't support TM's deal - as it was effectively remaining in EU.

What I don't understand, why Remainers didn't support the deal. If they want to remain, then TM's deal effectively kept UK in EU indefinitely.

But the commons vote, bother Leavers and Remainers rejoiced.

Leavers are hoping for no-deal Brexit.

Remainers are hoping for revoking Article 50 and simply remaining.

Both sides think they have hope.

How?

kabayiri

The only real way to make progress is some kind of amnesty I reckon.

They could ... postpone A50 with the agreement of the EU; and go back to the people to ask them some serious honest questions as to why they voted to Leave in such large numbers.

If someone voted for xenophobic reasons, let them answer honestly. If they voted because they can't compete for work, let them answer honestly.

Right now, you have 2 entrenched positions, and a lot of mistrust between these positions as to the motives of the other.