If there is a second referendum ...

Herzlos

adindas wrote: »

As always, it is a very interesting way of thinking, conclusion.

Are the people who are allowed to vote in the UK only UKIP. How many UKIP supporters are they how many people how many people are eligible to vote.

How did you know for certain that there is hardly any great support for brexit. What we already know for sure more people provided support for brexit based on the referendum. Vast majority of the parliament support brexit. The other things is just prediction which has been proven wrong in the past. Prediction reman prediction until proven it is correct.

I'm saying that if you use the 2017 GE as a windvane for Brexit, then instead of cherry picking that the 'anti-Brexit' parties lost seats and the 'pro-Brexit' parties gained seats, then you need to use the figures appropriately.


Lib-Dems and SNP were the only 'anti-Brexit' parties. They lost seats, because Lib-Dem is a wasted vote in a lot of places, and there's a serious anyone-but-SNP campaign up here (where Labour were encouraging people to vote Tory!).
The only truly 'pro-Brexit' party, UKIP, essentially stopped existing.

The Tories, with a 'brexit means brexit' stance, lost enough seats to lose a majority and needed propped up by the DUP.
Labour, with a jobs-first Brexit, gained seats, but not enough for a majority.


So how can you take that to mean the 2017 GE provides a mandate for a no-deal brexit, without selective use of the data and serious squinting.

How did you know for certain that there is hardly any great support for brexit

We don't, which is exactly the point. We don't know and won't without asking, but apparently it's anti-democratic to have a referendum.

adindas

Herzlos wrote: »

We don't, which is exactly the point. We don't know and won't without asking, but apparently it's anti-democratic to have a referendum.

For that reason there should not be any referendum before the result have been carried out.

I agree it will be democratic to have a referendum and allow some time after the mandate of the referendum which is also ratified in the parliament (legally binding) has been carried out Not before.

Herzlos

adindas wrote: »

For that reason there should not be any referendum before the result have been carried out.

I agree it will be democratic to have a referendum and allow some time after the mandate of the referendum which is also ratified in the parliament (legally binding) has been carried out Not before.

Why should we need to enact something we don't know what people want, before asking what people want? Why not do it before hand?


In the business world, you'd be laughed out of any conference room for suggesting something like that, so why not the political world?

adindas

Herzlos wrote: »

Why should we need to enact something we don't know what people want, before asking what people want? Why not do it before hand?


In the business world, you'd be laughed out of any conference room for suggesting something like that, so why not the political world?

It is called democracy.

AlanP_2

Thrugelmir wrote: »

One thing to promise. Another to fund. The devil is in the yet to be released detail. Where's the tax going to raised from?

I totally agree, but of one thing I am certain - Boris isn't going to drive his bus to Brussels and get it from the EU as was "promised".

Herzlos

adindas wrote: »

It is called democracy.

You're going to need to help me out here. Why is is democratic? Is there something inherent to democracy that something is fine before asking if it's a good idea?

adindas

Herzlos wrote: »

You're going to need to help me out here. Why is is democratic? Is there something inherent to democracy that something is fine before asking if it's a good idea?

Generally accepted referendum is the highest order in a democratic nation.

In some countries like Australia the national referendum is even the highest order in the constitution.

UK is leaving the EU is the result of referendum. Before the result is delivered there should not be another referendum.

.string.

The idea of having a second referendum was brought up, to put it bluntly, by those that wanted to reverse the decision.

They still do.

Paradoxically, the idea that the UK should enter a Customs Union with the EU should require a new Referendum. Having a Custom Union is the unrefined policy of the Labour Party who make claims that it will be something other than a supine UK accepting all of the strictures of the Holy Market. No deals with other countries, Free Movement, European Court suoremacy and so on.

The latter is very clearly incompatible with the Brexit Referendum of which the major argument was about "bringing back control".

In that situation, as I wrote, Paradoxically, Parliament would have reversed[/] the decision of the Referendum. In that event I think the approval of the people is necessary; hence a new Referendum.

I voted Remain, but by now support Leave due to all that has happened; in the event of a new Referendum I would have to think carefully on which way I would vote the next time around.

kabayiri

.string. wrote: »

The idea of having a second referendum was brought up, to put it bluntly, by those that wanted to reverse the decision.

They still do.
...

No no!

Not "second referendum".

It's a "people's vote".

The slur is obviously intentional. This time it is "the people" who get to decide...the right sort, presumably.

It's a branding which a marketeer like Cameron would be proud of. Package it up into something with a cuddly title, and sell it to the masses.

mayonnaise

.string. wrote: »

Having a Custom Union is the unrefined policy of the Labour Party who make claims that it will be something other than a supine UK accepting all of the strictures of the Holy Market. No deals with other countries, Free Movement, European Court suoremacy and so on.

A Customs Union does not mean accepting all 'strictures' of the Single Market.
A Customs Union does not mean Free Movement.
A Customs Union does not mean ECJ oversight.

.string. wrote: »

in the event of a new Referendum I would have to think carefully on which way I would vote the next time around.

In the event of a new referendum, I'd suggest you base your decision on facts.