It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Liberal Democrats Want To Stop Brexit. Can Someone Help Me With This.

page: 10
23
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 07:52 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82

Well, can't help you there but come voting time the people will vote out the sods who deny us our Brexit.




posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 07:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: ScepticScot

The result was not legally binding but morally and politically it cannot just be ignored. So, a bit more than just an opinion poll. The country was asked to make a choice and it did.


And the country can change its mind.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

You speak for the Country, when it has already spoken?



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 08:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: ScepticScot

You speak for the Country, when it has already spoken?


No, you are the one saying we don't need another referendum.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 08:11 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

Yes, 'cos we already got one.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 08:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: ScepticScot

Yes, 'cos we already got one.


We are just covering the same ground. 3-years have passed, it's perfectly legitimate to see if the majority still want to leave.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

Three years have passed and we were supposed to leave on 29th March. The people's wishes have been overridden by the Westminster corrupt cabal. Which you seem perfectly OK about.

So, if we have another vote and we vote to stay I trust that you will be perfectly OK in agreeing to another vote three years later to see if the majority still want to remain?


edit on 30-4-2019 by oldcarpy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 10:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: ScepticScot

Three years have passed and we were supposed to leave on 29th March. The people's wishes have been overridden by the Westminster corrupt cabal. Which you seem perfectly OK about.

So, if we have another vote and we vote to stay I trust that you will be perfectly OK in agreeing to another vote three years later to see if the majority still want to remain?



to have another vote will simply be an exercise in degrading our dying rights further and will nail us all to the ground whilst the politicians enjoy golden showers.

don't the remainers understand what they are attempting is nothing short of stripping us of all rights for the benefit of those politicians with skin in the euro project?

if the remainers cannot recognise the dark arts at play here then I genuinely have sympathy for their mindset and zero tolerance for what will eventually manifest from the assault and devious moves on enshrined law.

f.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 10:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

Not in UK law.



David Cameron the PM at the time called the referendum.......

Two choices *leave* or *remain*

At NO time was it ever said then or since that the result would not

be legal or a poll or simply an opinion of the people.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 11:32 AM
link   
As it stands the UK is leaving the EU. If the ' corrupt cabal' is trying to stop us leaving they are doing an extremely poor job.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: ScepticScot

Not in UK law.



David Cameron the PM at the time called the referendum.......

Two choices *leave* or *remain*

At NO time was it ever said then or since that the result would not

be legal or a poll or simply an opinion of the people.






It was always to judge if the majority of people wanted to leave the EU. If that is no longer the case then there is no moral or legal obligation for us to do so.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

It was always to judge if the majority of people wanted to leave the EU. If that is no longer the case then there is no moral or legal obligation for us to do so.



And why would they want to judge IF? The people were clear in that they DID


There were much cheaper ways to find out IF people wanted to leave the EU than

the just under £30 million it cost to hold the referendum.





edit on 30-4-2019 by eletheia because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 12:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: ScepticScot

It was always to judge if the majority of people wanted to leave the EU. If that is no longer the case then there is no moral or legal obligation for us to do so.



And why would they want to judge IF? The people were clear in that they DID


There were much cheaper ways to find out IF people wanted to leave the EU than

the just under £30 million it cost to hold the referendum.






As stated multiple times 3 years have passed.

I think you 30 million figure is low but If so that's about half a day of what the leave campaign claimed the EU cost. Hardly a significant barrier to another referendum.

What do you think a better way of judging if people want to leave would be?



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 01:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
What do you think a better way of judging if people want to leave would be?

Well it's pretty simple, we must properly leave (as we voted for) then the political parties can campaign for joining the EU and put it in their manifesto's if they want, but none of them will, as they know they'll get hardly any votes.



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 01:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: 83Liberty

originally posted by: ScepticScot
What do you think a better way of judging if people want to leave would be?

Well it's pretty simple, we must properly leave (as we voted for) then the political parties can campaign for joining the EU and put it in their manifesto's if they want, but none of them will, as they know they'll get hardly any votes.


The transition costs of leaving will dwarf the cost of another referendum.

Not sure how you get the idea that no one would vote for a party that campaigns to remain.

If a majority still want to leave we should leave, if not we shouldn't. The idea that must leave because of a vote 3 years ago is fundamentally undemocratic.



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 02:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
As stated multiple times 3 years have passed.



Yes three bloody years.......and nothing has been done to fulfil the

will of the majority of people who could be bothered to vote!!!


an analogy.......

If you moved into a house with a bare earth garden and your other half

said they wanted it completely hard landscaped. After months ordering

collecting and getting the workforce, they change their mind. They now

want lawns beds flowers pergola's etc., so you now have to get rid of the

hard landscaping and reorder. Then just as you are set to start the flower

garden its all stop again your o/h has decided they now want a large

conservatory instead........

When one flip flops and cannot make up their minds nothing ever gets

accomplished and its costly





I think you 30 million figure is low but If so that's about half a day of what the leave campaign claimed the EU cost. Hardly a significant barrier to another referendum.


You being a Scot I would have thought you would have been well aware of

*many a mickle makes a muckle?*




What do you think a better way of judging if people want to leave would be?



They were asked in a referendum and they gave an answer.....

However those who didn't agree with the result of that consider them stupid

and incapable and are undermining the carrying out of that result. If that

result is not carried out first.......

What exactly was the referendum about What are elections for? We have

a system and if it is not adhered to, whats the point of a system



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 02:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: ScepticScot
As stated multiple times 3 years have passed.



Yes three bloody years.......and nothing has been done to fulfil the

will of the majority of people who could be bothered to vote!!!


an analogy.......

If you moved into a house with a bare earth garden and your other half

said they wanted it completely hard landscaped. After months ordering

collecting and getting the workforce, they change their mind. They now

want lawns beds flowers pergola's etc., so you now have to get rid of the

hard landscaping and reorder. Then just as you are set to start the flower

garden its all stop again your o/h has decided they now want a large

conservatory instead........

When one flip flops and cannot make up their minds nothing ever gets

accomplished and its costly





I think you 30 million figure is low but If so that's about half a day of what the leave campaign claimed the EU cost. Hardly a significant barrier to another referendum.


You being a Scot I would have thought you would have been well aware of

*many a mickle makes a muckle?*




What do you think a better way of judging if people want to leave would be?



They were asked in a referendum and they gave an answer.....

However those who didn't agree with the result of that consider them stupid

and incapable and are undermining the carrying out of that result. If that

result is not carried out first.......

What exactly was the referendum about What are elections for? We have

a system and if it is not adhered to, whats the point of a system




As it stands at the moment the UK is leaving the EU. How is that 'nothing has been done'?

Do you think we should still leave even the majority now want to stay?



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 02:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

Not sure how you get the idea that no one would vote for a party that campaigns to remain.



Do you never ask yourself why Cameron got spooked by the rise of

Ukip party and why the support for the new Brexit party is so high

so quickly?


Major hint they were for leave NOT remain!!



If a majority still want to leave we should leave, if not we shouldn't. The idea that must leave because of a vote 3 years ago is fundamentally undemocratic.



What is really undemocratic is that we are not out YET!!!!!



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 02:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: ScepticScot

Not sure how you get the idea that no one would vote for a party that campaigns to remain.



Do you never ask yourself why Cameron got spooked by the rise of

Ukip party and why the support for the new Brexit party is so high

so quickly?


Major hint they were for leave NOT remain!!



If a majority still want to leave we should leave, if not we shouldn't. The idea that must leave because of a vote 3 years ago is fundamentally undemocratic.



What is really undemocratic is that we are not out YET!!!!!




Cameron offered referendum to keep his own parties Euro sceptics in line.

Remind me again how many seats at Westminster UKIP have ever won?



posted on May, 1 2019 @ 02:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

Cameron offered referendum to keep his own parties Euro sceptics in line.
Remind me again how many seats at Westminster UKIP have ever won?



He saw their quick rise in popularity and cut them down before they got

a hold..... and just maybe fragmented the two party strangle hold.

Many Euro sceptic conservatives are now migrating to the NEW Ukip party!!

*The Brexit party*

Perhaps now the people will finally get what they have voted for.




top topics



 
23
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join