But only if you view full political integration as a benefit. Leave voters largely do not clearly.
In the UK, these invisible faceless nasty people from the EU, where do these people come from, what is their ultimate goal and why ( the British press have a lot to answer for) pushing the UK around whereas in the other 27 it's those 27 countries who decide the future between them.
Do you also insist that a government honours all election mandates before another election is held?
And what's wrong if they do? 44 million people don't want it. It's not the will of the people.
Did I say political? I didn't.
LBC, Barnsley, you say. A pub? Whoopidoo.
So you're argument is based on hypothetical policies of further integration the UK has veto powers on and democratically elected representatives of the people to discuss these potential future policies?
I think that's because he didn't.
That's not how I see them Paul and none of my posts have ever alluded to that and yes, the british press have a hell of a lot to answer for on all sides of all arguments.
No but that is slightly different. We don't elect a Government then before they hold power quickly re-vote and get someone else in. We allow them to either succeed or fail with their manifestos before either keeping them or removing them.
Nothing wrong with wanting to stop Brexit sammsky, but more people voted for Brexit than against it.
No, I did. Integration with the EU is political.
The same nonsense was mentioned a few days ago, it defies any logic.
Literally, says you.
Simply because of my job. My work is so closely intertwined with the EU that I didn't really contemplate voting any other way.
If I voted Leave I would be quite comfortable admitting it Massive Spanner, why would I not? I'm just neither a die-hard remainer like a lot of you on here. I've got people who i love massively who all voted Leave.
But the UK would play a major part in where the EU would be heading if they stayed.
No you wouldn't because there are loads of posters over the last three years in here just like you, who said they voted remain because they know 95% of posters in here are very pro-remain but then proceeded to spout nothing but support for leave and defend leave and criticize remain and the EU etc.
Eurosceptic MEP's were voted in largely because rightly or wrongly the UK has a very large Eurosceptic population.
But we have allowed them to succeed or fail and it's been the latter, it's been 3 years. How have they not had that opportunity to pass this policy in the same way as with any other policy?
Yes but what is achieved by turning up once in a blue moon having a rant in the EU parliament and not contributing to the interests of the UK
I assure you I would tell the truth. I'm here as a Man Utd fan nothing more, I don't need to lie to make friends on here as I ultimately don't care what people on a phone screen or monitor think of me. It's not compulsory for me to post or read what others say. I enjoy politics and largely enjoy the banter but I hold very centrist views so as a result I seem to piss off both sides of most arguments.
Those are not good points though, that's just personal opinion, not points.
Absolutely nothing.
Look, I can't speak for all leave voters about why the UK has so much eurosceptisism but My Mum and Dad (not just them obviously) were asked in 1975 if they wanted to join the EEC, nothing more than a free trading bloc so they were told. Over they years they have seen successive governments signing treaties, ceding huge swathes of our sovereignty away without their consent. Now I don't care what people think of me for saying it but I sympathise with their view.
Despite Norway being part of Schengen?
Norway has a hard border. Schengen does not follow the same border laws as the GFA/CTA
The likelyhood that remain would now win rather than a concern for democracy or some notion of the will of the people is what seems to behind most objections to.a second referedum.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I also voted in the 1975 referendum. It was never just a trading bloc. The number one reason, although there were many reasons, I voted for staying was freedom of movement not so that British Leyland could sell their cars more easily - Whatever treaties or laws have been signed by successive British governments are signed by governments which presumably voted for by the British electorate and by the EU parliament with British representation.
I said this recently r.e. Kuennsberg but it's true for the rest of them: I just don't think the majority are very good at their job; they find Parliamentary mechanisms confusing and, worse, a solid portion seem to find the whole thing just a bit tedious. There's many things that this Brexit shit show has been, but if you're a political nerd (which you damn well should be if it's your fecking job) boring is far from one of them. It's a bit like Sky employing a pundit to watch the football to tell everybody that it's shit and that rugby is a better sport. Too many of them are in it because it's a jolly jape and they can continue to hang around with their university mates at the HoC as long as they write up some tosh now and again to meet a deadline.
Its always notable that when those who advocate a second referendum, always have to state and... "Remain should be an option on the ballot", because they are fundamentally aware that Remain as an option to solve Brexit has now gone, it has no legitimacy. Unfortunately the consent of the loser's was not forthcoming and therefore it is now only about 'a deal' (May's or Boris's, or if he ever gets into power, Jeremy's).
Cede huge swathes of sovereignty? Don't be daft.
It was a contentious affair even back then Paul, if you voted in it (I won't call you old by the way, I was literally only born in that year
) you should know. Ted Heath, addressing Eurosceptic concerns (don't quote me exactly) stated something along the lines that there would be no more integration without consent. That consent was never specifically given and here we are.So you can't use words to explain what you want anymore because if you say what you want it lacks legitimacy?
It would mean Real are still CL champions, not Liverpool, so don't discount it.
Nobody wants any of that. I am saying that vote has to be honoured else why would any vote will ever be honoured again. Why should a 2nd ref with a majority to remain be honoured? Was the 2016 referendum illegal? Can that be shown? Sure a lot of lies were told. But are lies not told in every election there has ever been? Fundamentally there were problems in this country that Cameron either did not understand or underestimated. If we are a democracy and referendums are going to be used to settle issues then they need to be honoured. Even if it is painful. If it is that painful, have another one to reverse it. But having a 2nd before the first is enacted will have the effect of rendering it meaningless.
Goddamit
I know this is a bit of an over-worn example now, but I think it works quite well.
So have I, some of my closest relatives. We don't fall out about it because we don't really talk about it. And yet oates and I are two of those die-hard Remainers and we've turned our lives upside-down because of Brexit - we've left the UK because we want to stay in Europe as long as we want, we have no British home anymore, aren't British residents, etc etc.
Maybe they need a referendum on if they need a second referendum?
I too voted to join in that referendum; gosh, where has all that time gone, endless debating Brexit aside.
