That's the mindset,the liberal Democrats just skip democracy and would revoke article 50,total hypocrites,they proposed a referendum for years before brexit,your vote just doesn't count with them.
Last edited:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A Second Brexit Vote?
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
That's the mindset,the liberal Democrats just skip democracy and would revoke article 50,total hypocrites,they proposed a referendum for years before brexit,your vote just doesn't count with them.
Heyo
Veteran Member
Shouldn't that be the same thing?
No deal should have been on the table from the beginning imo,we would have been out ages ago.
And already been learning better now.
I have to admit that it feels tempting after a fashion.
But I have been working at being less cruel as of late.
How is that hypocrisy?
Anyway the way things are going the EU have plenty to worry about of their own,it's not as strong as believed,I forsee turmoil for them.
The lib Dems promised a referendum for years,the lib Dems in this coming election have stated that if elected they would revoke article 50 to remain thus ignoring the very referendum they promised.
I have been reading such things for years now, but it keeps being a promise - a Project Fear, if you will - without facts to back it.
To their credit, they are not being ambiguous about it. That is one way in which they are being better than Corbyn and, by extension, Labour.
Also to their credit, that means that they revised their stance according to discernible facts.
Macrons in trouble so is Merkel,Germany and France have been the inner circle of the EU for a long time,both governments and their makeup will be changing,le Penn for example is polling ahead of macron,the old guard of the EU will be gone,barnier too,the people waiting in the wings in France and Germany have different views on the EU and it's workings.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
I consider this of little significance since the Leave campaign also misled voters. I will say just two terms: NHS and Turkey.
Did they promise not to have more than one referendum?
Augustus
…
A common refrain from remainers, always educated middle class centre-left, is basically the vote shouldn't count because those who voted leave are too stupid to have a say.
Both sides told some whoppers during the campaign, yet there seems to be an assumption that politicians from across the political divide (including Tories) suddenly became entirely virtuous when supporting remain and remain voters studiously fact checked their own assumptions based on pure reason.
Almost none of the electorate really has much of an understanding about the EU and generally voted on emotion and identity, it's not like one side was based on pure reason and the other were easily fooled simpletons.
When people can't see any logical reason to favour the other side, that's more telling of their lack of intellectual curiosity and critical insight than the other side.
Even if you disagree with Brexit, if you can't see any logical reason in favour you probably shouldn't be looking down on people for being badly informed.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
They should, but they are not always the same, for multiple reasons. For instance, if I were to vote for Brexit, should that be understood as a vote for Brexit under absolutely any conditions no matter the actual cost or should that be understood as a vote for a Brexit on the terms I have been promised ? How do you figure what was my will ? What if, rather than that, I vote to Remain just because I am too scared of a hard Brexit but would love other forms of Brexit ?
I am starting to believe that and to understand why that happens.
The clarifications on why Brexity only seems to be a terrible idea have certainly been missing so far.
I don't get that impression at all. Instead, I get the sense that while it may be in their immediate political interest to appear to support Brexit, MPs realize that it will come back to haunt them big time soon enough.
I attribute that to a certain level of awareness and proper access to qualified counsel. The readers of the Daily Telegraph may feel passionately about Brexit, but it is the MPs who will hold the actual responsibility one way or the other.
Until demonstrated otherwise, that is.
Except when it isn't. Brexit is quite remarkable and unusual in many ways. This is one of the lesser among those.
Uh, why not, pray tell?
So either we shouldn't have had a referendum in the first place, or we should have had an impartial authority informing us all of the benefits and deficits as honestly as possible - rather than what we had - some interested parties doing their best to misinform and cloud the issues.
As a general rule, I usually consider the side arguing against a vote (i.e. for less democracy) to be the undemocratic one, not the side arguing for one (i.e. for more democracy).
Good argument if there hadn't been a vote already.
The lib Dems have a lowly status in UK politics for good reason so I don't really care but if you have a referendum that produces a definite result should you need another?.