The United Kingdom doesn’t exist.

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: ScepticScot

The certainty rof a change to the outcome seems to be from brexit supporters many of whom seem utterly terrified by the prospect of a second referendum.

Not at all

If democracy is to be observed the first result needs to be delivered

before anything else.


As usual its the 'remainers' who are flouting democracy.

Do you think we should still leave even if the majority of people now wanted to stay?

originally posted by: ScepticScot

Do you think we should still leave even if the majority of people now wanted to stay?

Fact no. 1 The majority however big or small voted leave that result

needs to be honoured otherwise democracy IF it ever existed ceases to exist.


Fact no. 2 Where is the evidence the majority of people now want to stay Its

"pie in the sky" ...... just because some people want it to be so doesn't mean it is.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

I think you are basing your view on the negotiations too much on tabloid media coverage of May

Thats all anyone has to go on?. That is, unless 'you' have some special privvy

information?

The UK had a whole negotiating team and the cream was the end result of months and months detailed negotiations.

The dream team of a remainer leading the other remainers

The reason it is viewed as a 'bad deal' is because it's worse than our current deal (membership of the EU).

Too right!!!! Leaving *IN NAME ONLY* Why would that satisfy anyone

who voted to leave

The EU was never going to give The UK a deal.That gave the UK everything it wanted as that was going to be detrimental to the remaining EU members.

The EU was never going to give us anything like a FAIR deal ....... who likes losing

their 'cash cow'?

And for all Boris Johnson's bluster he still hadn't explained what magic trick he is going to produce to give us a better deal.

You're obviously no poker player......and at least he is making the effort to give the

people what they voted for.

a reply to: eletheia

But what if a second referendum said 60% wanted to remain and the majority are having their voices ignored?

Is that then not undemocratic?

How can asking the public again then to confirm their vote be undemocratic, a simple remain or leave with no deal question would put an end to all of this. If your so confident in your views that brexit is best for the country then why is this a problem.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I think best out of three?

The problem with the current situation is that people (Remainers) assume that the continuous and unchallenged mantra of “Brexit-Bad” will have led to people changing their minds. While that may be true the opinion surveys are still neck and neck. There is a risk that all a second referendum will do is alienate and further divide.

I am not unsympathetic to a second referendum, just highly cynical of the way the politicians and the chattering classes are engineering a situation which may lead to the UK remaining in the EU. Too much dishonesty.

I am also deeply suspicious of the EUs motives in helping to create division by creating a deal which would never be accepted by Parliament.

a reply to: galadofwarthethird

This hit to the uk economy after brexit will be felt by the world.

a reply to: Forensick

But doesn't boris being elected and brexit happening mean democracy DID happen, eventually.

Once brexit happens that means the vote was upheld.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Forensick

If you want democracy lets have some. The UK is made up of nations. Two of which voted to stay within Europe. The simplies thing to do would be England leaves the UK.

Then you would have 2 new countries who are not part of the EU or the UK. Scotland and NI never joined the EU - The UK did. They would have to go through the application process and meet the criteria to join the EU as independent countries.

They would have to adopt the Euro (a stipulation of all new joining countries), have to exist as independent nations for a set time, be able to demonstrate economic levels as sovereign nations etc. Its not just a matter of one part of the UK staying and the rest leaving.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: eletheia

But what if a second referendum said 60% wanted to remain and the majority are having their voices ignored?
Is that then not undemocratic?

How can you eat a second course before you've eaten your first?

And like all remainers you're so sure that a large number of people have

changed their minds in the same way as you never believed that the vote

would be LEAVE .....In the same manner as David Cameron did.

How can asking the public again then to confirm their vote be undemocratic, a simple remain or leave with no deal question would put an end to all of this. If your so confident in your views that brexit is best for the country then why is this a problem.

It isn't a problem for those who voted to leave...... It IS a problem for those

who wanted to remain they couldn't conceive of the fact that more

people wanted to leave, its time they (the remainers) came to terms with that

and get over it. They need to stop 'imagining' that vast numbers of leavers have

changed their minds (I don't know where they get that idea from) I hear it the

other way around.

The remainers are totally indoctrinated in the EU frame of mind ....... "keep on

voting till you give us the answer we want"

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: ScepticScot

Do you think we should still leave even if the majority of people now wanted to stay?

Fact no. 1 The majority however big or small voted leave that result

needs to be honoured otherwise democracy IF it ever existed ceases to exist.


Fact no. 2 Where is the evidence the majority of people now want to stay

Its

"pie in the sky" ...... just because some people want it to be so doesn't mean it is.

Fact 1 we are making the biggest constitutional change in decades based on a simple majority vote. There are very good reasons why we are a representative not a direct democracy.

Fact 2. I didn't say there was evidence, I asked if you thought we should still go even if the majority now wanted to stay. Do you?

originally posted by: ScepticScot
I asked if you thought we should still go even if the majority now wanted to stay. Do you?

From another post on this page my reply to OSC........

How can you eat a second course before you've eaten your first?

And like all remainers you're so sure that a large number of people have

changed their minds in the same way as you never believed that the vote

would be LEAVE .....In the same manner as David Cameron did.

I think that should answer your question

a reply to: eletheia

Here is the thing, thats not really an answer thats just rhetoric.

There isn't really any good reason not to have a second referendum. The arguments are pretty poor, one argument is that somehow it goes against the will of the people to have a confirmation vote given that almost 3 years have passed and its having a impact already on our country. The other argument is about how many votes are you going to have which again is a bit daft, we can have multiple votes there is nothing against it, there is nothing to stop us having a second vote or even a third, other countries have had multiple referendums why is this any different.

Honestly I have yet to see a single good argument against a second referendum.

Also you have failed to answer my question so I will rephrase it.

Given that a no-deal Brexit is consistently shown as being only supported by a small minority is it not then undemocratic to not only go against the will of parliament but the will of the people. A No-Deal Brexit has virtually no public support and it does not have the support of parliament so surly then that is the most undemocratic route to be taking?

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: ScepticScot
I asked if you thought we should still go even if the majority now wanted to stay. Do you?

From another post on this page my reply to OSC........

How can you eat a second course before you've eaten your first?

And like all remainers you're so sure that a large number of people have

changed their minds in the same way as you never believed that the vote

would be LEAVE .....In the same manner as David Cameron did.

I think that should answer your question

Not really as this isn't a meal.

Would you like to actually answer the question?

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: ScepticScot
I asked if you thought we should still go even if the majority now wanted to stay. Do you?

From another post on this page my reply to OSC........

How can you eat a second course before you've eaten your first?

And like all remainers you're so sure that a large number of people have

changed their minds in the same way as you never believed that the vote

would be LEAVE .....In the same manner as David Cameron did.

I think that should answer your question

Not really as this isn't a meal.

Now to be fair some would say that they have made quite "a meal" of the entire Brexit process...

originally posted by: ScepticScot
Fact 1 we are making the biggest constitutional change in decades based on a simple majority vote. There are very good reasons why we are a representative not a direct democracy.

It seems to me that through our membership of the EU we have been making massive constitutional concessions and changes without any democratic scrutiny whatsoever. The European union the UK joined bears no resemblance to what it has become, all without any direct conversation with the population of the UK, or often without any real scrutiny from Parliament.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Take for instance the millions Farage and his hedge fund companies have already made from this Brexit mess.

The rich will get richer whilst the rest are bent over the barrel, nothing new there i suppose, rince and repeat really.

originally posted by: ScepticScot and reply to OtherSideoftheCoin


Not really as this isn't a meal.

Would you like to actually answer the question?

I'm sorry you're both so intransigent .......

Which ever way you look at it there is no second anything before a first.

I have just heard Corbyn's speech and he said *Let the people decide*

Well I have news for him.......

THE PEOPLE DID DECIDE in 2016 shame he wasn't listening

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: ScepticScot and reply to OtherSideoftheCoin


Not really as this isn't a meal.

Would you like to actually answer the question?

I'm sorry you're both so intransigent .......

Which ever way you look at it there is no second anything before a first.

I have just heard Corbyn's speech and he said *Let the people decide*

Well I have news for him.......

THE PEOPLE DID DECIDE in 2016 shame he wasn't listening

Yup am not denying that.

I am just proposing that they could change their mind now that they know we are not getting a deal and have a clearer understanding of the consequences of no-deal.

So why are you denying the people the right to confirm their vote?

Surly if you are so confident in the case for a no-deal Brexit that the vote should pass, if nothing else a second referendum that confirms that the people want to leave just gives the government the mandate they currently lack to push through a no-deal.

So answer the question,

Why are you denying the people the right to confirm their vote?

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: ScepticScot
Fact 1 we are making the biggest constitutional change in decades based on a simple majority vote. There are very good reasons why we are a representative not a direct democracy.

It seems to me that through our membership of the EU we have been making massive constitutional concessions and changes without any democratic scrutiny whatsoever. The European union the UK joined bears no resemblance to what it has become, all without any direct conversation with the population of the UK, or often without any real scrutiny from Parliament.

I don't disagree with any of that. One of the problems is that there isn't any formal structures of what is a constitutional change or what the mechanics of agreeing a change should be.

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: ScepticScot and reply to OtherSideoftheCoin


Not really as this isn't a meal.

Would you like to actually answer the question?

I'm sorry you're both so intransigent .......

Which ever way you look at it there is no second anything before a first.

I have just heard Corbyn's speech and he said *Let the people decide*

Well I have news for him.......

THE PEOPLE DID DECIDE in 2016 shame he wasn't listening

Still not an answer. Do you think we should still leave even if the majority now wanted to stay?