A Question for Tory Supporters

SpiderLegs

lisyloo wrote: »

If parliament are not prepared for us to leave without a deal then why should it be on the ballot paper.
We shouldn’t be offering undeliverable options, it does great damage when people can’t have what they voted for.

What a bizarre suggestion.

When has there ever been an electoral manifesto produced that has been fully ‘prepared’ for beforehand?

No change of any kind would ever be initiated, but oh hang on, that’s the idea isn’t it. Silly me.

lisyloo

SpiderLegs wrote: »

What a bizarre suggestion.

When has there ever been an electoral manifesto produced that has been fully ‘prepared’ for beforehand?

No change of any kind would ever be initiated, but oh hang on, that’s the idea isn’t it. Silly me.

I was talking about referendum not manifesto.
Why would you offer undeliverable options in a referendum if you know that’s going to be really divisive.

SpiderLegs

lisyloo wrote: »

I was talking about referendum not manifesto.
Why would you offer undeliverable options in a referendum if you know that’s going to be really divisive.

In what way is a documenting outlining what happens after a referendum different to a document outlining what happens after a general election?

Anyway no deal clearly is deliverable since that is what we will get unless something changes in the next month.

So what you actually mean is you just want to remove options that you don’t like.

lisyloo

SpiderLegs wrote: »

So what you actually mean is you just want to remove options that you don’t like.

No - options that parliament doesn’t like.
I don’t believe parliament will allow it, but that remains to be seen whether they are successful.

SpiderLegs

lisyloo wrote: »

No - options that parliament doesn’t like.
I don’t believe parliament will allow it, but that remains to be seen whether they are successful.

Of course they wouldn’t allow it. That’s the point.

If they were following a democratic mandate they would have a second referendum based purely on deal vs no deal.
The fact that most of them just want a second shot at getting the ‘right’ answer is what has shown parliament up to be unfit for purpose.

Herzlos

SpiderLegs wrote: »

You are defending a corbyn based second referendum without any apparent knowledge of what that looks like.
To clear it up for you -
He says he will give a referendum on revoke or leave with some kind of deal (that they will negotiate :doh:)
That is the choice. There is no option for no-deal.

That is not, in any sense of the word, democratic.

You're accusing the party that's proposing another referendum of being undemocratic? So how do you feel about the party who refuse to ask the people? More or less democratic?

phillw

SpiderLegs wrote: »

When has there ever been an electoral manifesto produced that has been fully ‘prepared’ for beforehand?

During Boris recent court case there were several conservative MPs that said it was unacceptable to expect politicians to tell the truth during an election campaign.

SpiderLegs wrote: »

If they were following a democratic mandate they would have a second referendum based purely on deal vs no deal.
The fact that most of them just want a second shot at getting the ‘right’ answer is what has shown parliament up to be unfit for purpose.

Not only that, we have to keep voting MPs into parliament every 5 years. We've done it once, why do we have to keep doing it again and again? We voted once and that is good enough.

This is our true Prime Minister forever https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Pitt_the_Younger and any other usurpers since are undemocratic

SpiderLegs

Herzlos wrote: »

You're accusing the party that's proposing another referendum of being undemocratic? So how do you feel about the party who refuse to ask the people? More or less democratic?

As I have said but you have ignored....

One party has asked for a general election. All other parties have denied that.

lisyloo

SpiderLegs wrote: »

Of course they wouldn’t allow it. That’s the point.

If they were following a democratic mandate they would have a second referendum based purely on deal vs no deal.
The fact that most of them just want a second shot at getting the ‘right’ answer is what has shown parliament up to be unfit for purpose.

So should an MP follow the national vote or their constituency?
I’d say their duty is to their constituents.

Sailtheworld

SpiderLegs wrote: »

If they were following a democratic mandate they would have a second referendum based purely on deal vs no deal.

All politicians claim a mandate for what they do so it doesn't really mean anything.

If Corbyn ran a GE campaign based on a platform of another referendum where revoke was an option and found himself as PM and called the referendum that's democracy. The will of the people.

Not the democracy you would want but that's life. The mandate to leave the EU (such that it is) fades every day. If the Tories hadn't totally messed this up you could've had this away by now and sunning yourself on the uplands.