If there is a second referendum ...

MobileSaver

Guerillatoker wrote: »

there won't be another referendum whilst May is in power. I'd bet on it.

Would you bet on May still being in power on 29 March 2019 though?

Arklight

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

So, if we had voted to remain, the the eu had turned around and said "oh, by the way we are having an eu army and the British army will make up 50% of it, and we are going to QM voting so no vetoes will count and, as you have now comitted to being in the eu you will be expected to join Schengen and the euro" you would be happy for there to be a second vote? Or would you be shouting that we have had our one referendum and that it should be enacted?

We joined the common market way back when, we are leaving a protectionist political union that wishes to control all parts of everyday life. It wants to become a nation rather than a union of nations. Can you imagine forcing countries into the euro, it has destroyed quite a few that joined willingly, and i suspect that was the intention in order to further tie those countries to the eu.

Pointless whataboutery. The UK had opted out of the euro and there was no prospect of that being reversed. It was one of the many parts of the sweetheart deal we had that other countries could only dream of.

The EU army mono-myth is the new tinfoil hat of the British Right. You need to stop worrying about the Germans coming and snatching you from your beds to stand guard outside the Champs Elysee and start worrying about who is going to fund your pensions after the self inflicted pipe bomb your economy is going to take.

Guerillatoker

MobileSaver wrote: »

Would you bet on May still being in power on 29 March 2019 though?

Yes, she has survived thus far, but I don't know why anyone is kicking up a fuss about the second referendum (to the point of treating it as the only important issue in UK politics) until that happens.

MobileSaver

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

So, if we had voted to remain, the the eu had turned around and said "oh, by the way we are having an eu army and the British army will make up 50% of it, and we are going to QM voting so no vetoes will count and, as you have now comitted to being in the eu you will be expected to join Schengen and the euro" you would be happy for there to be a second vote?

Of course I would. I actually believe in democracy unlike many here who don't when they think it might not give them the result they want.

badmemory

Matt_L wrote: »

You suggest that it would be undemocratic to ignore the 14 million remain votes but seem more than happy to ignore the 17.4 million votes.

The figures were actually 16.1 million & 17.4 million!

BLB53

The figures were actually 16.1 million & 17.4 million!

Good memory...

Matt_L

badmemory wrote: »

The figures were actually 16.1 million & 17.4 million!

What figures?? I was responding to mobilesavers post..

Matt_L

MobileSaver wrote: »

Of course I would. I actually believe in democracy unlike many here who don't when they think it might not give them the result they want.

Its not democracy when you wish to ignore a vote because you didn't like the result. Thats just a bad loser who is anti democratic....

Arklight

Matt_L wrote: »

Its not democracy when you wish to ignore a vote because you didn't like the result. Thats just a bad loser who is anti democratic....

What about if Brexit can't happen because it is just physically impossible?

Post Suez, shorn of Empire, hugely dependent on the USA for economic and military security, Britain was only notionally independent in the 70s, which is what you all want to return to.

Several of the trade federations that existed then don't exist now. The EU is the only game in town for European trade. Regardless of what promise the Commonwealth may have held once the last rapidly retreating British soldiers had left 50 years ago, that boat has well and truly sailed now.

Most of the things that we will gain are pointless duplication of regulations we helped make as part of the EU, in the meantime we lose our biggest trading partner. Why?

Matt_L

Arklight wrote: »

What about if Brexit can't happen because it is just physically impossible?

Post Suez, shorn of Empire, hugely dependent on the USA for economic and military security, Britain was only notionally independent in the 70s, which is what you all want to return to.

Several of the trade federations that existed then don't exist now. The EU is the only game in town for European trade. Regardless of what promise the Commonwealth may have held once the last rapidly retreating British soldiers had left 50 years ago, that boat has well and truly sailed now.

Most of the things that we will gain are pointless duplication of regulations we helped make as part of the EU, in the meantime we lose our biggest trading partner. Why?

But it is quite possible to leave, we have it set in law that on the 29th of March we will leave, with or without a deal. To say it is, "impossible" is a little silly.....

Why do you persist on saying we will lose our biggest trading partner, do you, hand on heart believe that even if we leave with no deal all trading will stop?