so why should a future referendum be not taken seriously? especially when more information is known about the consequences.
Well, if you set a precedent that the government can simply ignore the results of referendums if they want to, then why would anyone take them seriously? If you can simply keep having votes till you get the desired result, you don't actually have democracy anymore.
But they would not be ignoring it so that invalidates your entire point. Voting is the entire point of a democrocy, especially if you cannot get the votes needed in parliament.
I live in Houston. I have always been interested in international affairs. Brexit is just the hot topic right now within that larger topic. If tomorrow something big happens in China, or Chile or Egypt or somewhere else, I will very likely be similarly interested in that topic as well.
When I see countries on the verge of giving up their sovereignty and self governance to an undemocratic superstate it is concerning because if it can happen there, that kind of foolish could spread here. I know there are people who would love nothing more than for the US to give up their sovereignty and become just a member state of a UN type body with precedence over US law. The UK rejecting that kind of thing IMO is a good thing. I would love to see the EU fail entirely because I despise what it represents. Well, if the people voted to leave the EU, and the UK doesn't leave the EU, it means they ignored the results of the referendum. If they decide to ignore the results of referendums until they get the result they want....what's the point? It's not true democracy at that point.
LOL, not the case at all, but it's cool if that's all you took away from it. I don't know if this is a shtick you are doing right now, but for the time being, thanks for the laughs.
Then he should fully support it so people will stop arguing and they can move forward. I'm not sure what the negatives are to a 2nd referendum if both sides think they'll win it, and it will provide certainty and end any kind of argument as to where the people stand.
Two referendums? Why not 6 or 17 or have referendums ad nauseum? The British never voted to join the EU but they certainly have voted to leave it. This would be a massive betrayal of democracy to not honor the vote.
From Reuters: May - We are leaving the EU on March 29 LONDON (Reuters) - Prime Minister Theresa May said on Wednesday that Britain will be leaving the European Union on March 29, and that the bloc would only consider extending the ‘Article 50’ negotiating period if there was a credible alternative exit plan. “The government’s policy is that we are leaving the European Union on the 29th of March. But the EU would only extend Article 50 if actually it was clear that there was a plan that was moving towards an agreed deal,” she told parliament, a day after her proposed Brexit deal was rejected by a large margin.
Why would a second referendum "provide certainty" if the first did not? Why not then call for a 3rd? Why not keep voting till you get the result you want? Either you respect the vote of the people and leave the EU, or the vote of the British people does not matter and they no longer have a democracy.
Well for one because the first one had people from one side breaking the laws? May's government ran around desperate to block at the last minute the courts proclaiming it illegal. The pro leave broke the financing rules. So much for respecting the vote of the people when you don't even respect the laws of the country.
People who lose elections can always come up with excuses like that for why they lost, if you start invalidating elections for weak nonsense like that you'll never stop doing it.
I saw today that May opted to unite the Torry party instead of seeking unity. By immediately ruling out any sorts of custom union and putting another red line, it will polarise even more the parliament instead of trying to find a common ground.
