David Cameron: Britain's EU Referendum to be held June 23

They said it might take decades for the economy in Europe to even out... The heck with everywhere else...

 

Apparently a pro-leave campaigner started this petition. He originally thought the remain side won the vote & started this petition to force 2nd vote.

 

The feelings of the Brexit voters are not why the EU is rushing the UK. Certainty is better than uncertainty. It will simply be a negotiation with two opposing sides now, and delaying that negotiation for months while a lame duck sits in Downing No. 10 is not what the EU perceives to be in its best interests, now that a decision has been made.

 

He created it in May so that certainly isn't true.

 

Except plenty of EU leaders have said the opposite too. In particular, the single most powerful one in Merkel. If a few statements are evidence that the EU is pushing them out, are a few opposing statements then evidence that they are not? It's interesting that you have to selectively pick quotes from some leaders and not others to make your argument.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36630326

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said the European Union has "no need to be particularly nasty in any way" in the negotiations with Britain about its exit from the bloc.

She insisted that deterring other countries from leaving the EU should not be a priority in the talks.

And she added she was not in favour of pushing for a speedy withdrawal.
Britain narrowly voted to end its membership in a historic referendum last Thursday.

Mrs Merkel was speaking after several EU foreign ministers - including Germany's - had urged Britain to quickly implement its exit.

"It shouldn't take forever, that's right, but I would not fight for a short timeframe," she said.

She added that she was seeking an "objective, good" climate in the talks with Britain, which "must be conducted properly".

Boris Johnson was generally quietly pro-Remain for the last 4 years until 2016. He even wrote a pro-Remain article under a pseudonym while also writing a pro-leave article under his own name. He's now saying that the UK should take their time and not rush into an exit after previously pushing to leave. All the evidence points to the guy who is likely to be their next PM joining the Leave movement for political purposes and suddenly having a "oh crap, now what?" moment.

Of course, you completely made that up because you read what you want people to say instead of what they actually say. UK voted to leave. They will leave. Their leaders are just realized they are going to pay the political price if the **** hits the fan and thus trying to slow things down.

 

Nigel Farage... on May 16th:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017

Nigel Farage wants second referendum if Remain campaign scrapes narrow win


Nigel Farage warns today he would fight for a second referendum on Britain in Europe if the remain campaign won by a narrow margin next month.

The Ukip leader said a small defeat for his leave camp would be “unfinished business” and predicted pressure would grow for a re-run of the 23 June ballot.

Farage told the Mirror: “In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it.”

...

 

Merkel is the German chancellor. She is not technically a leader of the EU. Schulz and Juncker have both come out pushing for a fast resolution.

 

I was mistaken about the timing, he created this petition when he thought remain would win

"Healey, an activist for the English Democrats -- a fringe, nationalist political party -- wrote on Facebook Sunday that he had created the petition "when it was looking unlikely that 'leave' were going to win." The petition had since been "hijacked by the remain campaign," he wrote."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/26/europe/uk-second-referendum-petition/

 

The part where you used the subjective bolded phrase:

To which he replied:

So y'all are arguing over subjective semantics about "rushing" "bullying". Seems those are hard to quantify things in this situation and relies more on the perspective of the observer.

Which exactly describes what I said here in bold:

 

But has a decision truly been made?

 

What a meltdown. I "selectively picked quotes" from the EC President and the EP President. HOW BIASED! These guys statements are relatively important to EU politics, which is obvious to anyone not trying to desperately dig themselves out of a silly irrelevant hole.

 

That's your view. He says I have "selectively pick quotes" and the EU isn't truly rushing because Merkel isn't lowering herself in that rhetoric.

Moving on, by your question here

I think you have kinda verified this which to me is a far more interesting discussion.

 

As is Merkel, who always will be single most powerful voice in this whole thing as the head of the most powerful country in the EU. We repeatedly saw this in all the Greece negotiations over the last 6 years. But hey, keep living in your little alternative bubble and pretend otherwise so you can stick with the narrative you want to believe.

 

Well that's my point, y'all were arguing over subjective semantics that depends on ones perspective.

 

Well sure. It seems you view this as un-democratic, that is a second vote to leave or stay.

What is democratic? True democracy is not "majority rule" in my opinion, but rather a people that is governed according to a set of rights and principles to which they have consented. Where public opinion is divided, the preferences of the minority must be respected and reflected in governance. Otherwise, you get results like Slavery and Jim Crow laws to use hyperbole.

Even more of my opinion, is that what you have here is a 52/48 vote that has set in motion a massive change to which half of the country (including a vast majority of the young) are opposed, based on a vote of an ill-informed public voting not out of reason but as a protest against a host of ills which have nothing to do with the subject of the referendum itself.

 

EU will eventually just be productive Germany with all their residual guilt, and a bunch of deadbeat welfare states feeding off it

 

So your argument is that even though she is german chancellor, she is the real voice of the EU. What a poor advertisement for the EU when the EC and EP Presidents voices don't speak for the EU. And are nothing compared to the power of a single member states chancellor. I wonder why the UK would want out lol. I don't buy your BS backpedaling though. It's silly.

Yes I view having a second vote because the first vote did not go the way the government wanted as un-democratic.

I guess they should have shown up when it was time to vote then? Actually voting is sort of important in a democracy. Disagree?

 

Yup. And David Cameron responded:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The Leave campaign is wrong to say there'll be a 2nd referendum if we vote to remain in the EU. This is a referendum and not a neverendum.</p>&mdash; David Cameron (@David_Cameron) <a href="https://twitter.com/David_Cameron/status/732562392131997697">May 17, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Now Remain can't possibly demand for a second referendum. I'm starting to think Farage looked that far ahead.

 

What if it's the will of the people? 52/48 decide to remain in the EU second referendum are you going to say best out of 3?

It is important. But does it make it right? You simply just going to ignore the rest of my response to the notion of how 52/48 split triggered UK's leaving the formally 3rd largest economic bloc and how that is democratic.

You going to be truthfully cool if 51/49 decide to stay?

 

The will of the people just decided to leave the EU by over a million votes. Your logic is ridiculous.

In what reality did Remain win? You are up to three referendums now and you already have results. Once you have the referendum, you have the results of that vote. You can make an argument a referendum should have never taken place and still be sane. An argument for a second and third referendum is insane. You also previously said "ill-informed public" when the only thing on Newsnight, Question Time, and prime time special debates on every channel was the EU. The only condition you like about a second referendum better is Remain might win a second one. No other special conditions exist.