Your sour grapes ranting is super fascinating, but as near as I can tell, it has no relation at all to my post.
Ah, typical of the debate free individual, ignore the substance of a post, cherry pick one tiny part, take it out of context and rebut it - just about sums up the average Remainer doesn’t it?
I didn’t rebut it. I pointed out that nothing you wrote was responsive to my post, and I didn’t feel it was necessary to quote your entire screed to make that point.
Casdave, I’m sorry, but I’m not going to try to respond to such a long rant. Try making one point and putting that up for debate rather than spewing out everything in your brain.
The decision was narrowly made to leave. The terms of how we leave were not known. Boris has been divorced a couple of times so he must know that leaving a partnership doesn’t just mean saying I’m leaving, and that’s it, done and dusted.
Then my point was lost on you, because I had intended it to illustrate that democracy does not operate in the way you tried to explain, although perhaps it should.
You stated that democracy (if I may summarise - and feel free to comment if the summary is not your intended meaning) is not just a one vote deal without possibility of change -
I had intended my post to show that this may desirable, but in fact in practice it just does not happen, that representations and campaigns after a vote has been held are almost always useless and don’t change a thing.
I then mentioned some things where campaigns and representations were made in the face of bald faced lies and yet nothing changed despite the urgent need for changes to be made - with pretty dire consequences for the criminal justice system.
Just because a vote is secured upon a lie, it does not mean there is any imperative to reverse the policy, and in the Brexit/remain debate there have been lies aplenty on both sides - the decision was made there is no imperative to run roughshod over the voting wishes of the majority - despite democratic representations and campaigns
To which “majority” would you be referring? Certainly not the electorates of Northern Ireland and Scotland. Surely you’ve heard of Northern Ireland and Scotland - you know, two of the four constituent polities of the United Kingdom?
I noticed that within your lengthy diatribe, there was only one passing reference to Ireland, specifically its finances. No mention at all of that whole pesky border thingy. In fact, it’s curious that your vaunted esteem for the virtues of democracy doesn’t seem to extend to honoring the results of two earlier (and actually binding, not advisory) referenda which created the Good Friday Agreement.
So… a 2nd Brexit referendum is bad because “Democracy 2016!”, but Brexit is good because “Fuck Democracy 1998!”?
Kudos to your brilliant, rational and AFAIK correct explanation, I wish I could be as analytical and legalistic. But I can only express my anger with this: picture: this is allowed in the PIT, right? So I do :mad: Is the world falling for the biggest bluff ever? 
Oh yes there has, in Spain. The referendum on the Spanish Constitution (6 December 1978). The referendum resulted in 91.8% of voters supporting the bill on a turnout of 67.1% and was estimated to be quite fair by international observers. As a matter of fact, I would argue that this referendum is what turned Spain into a democracy. A very rare thing, a *democratic *referendum.
Stonekettle/Jim Wright says Boris is what you get if Benny Hill tried to imitate Donald Trump.
We were inveigled into what is now the EU by outright lies, about national sovreignty, by two conservative PMs in the 70’s. We were given a referendum, which is designed as a single issue non party political vote, on the matter. We voted Leave by a reasonable majority (you can bet it would have been claimed as a great victory if it had gone the other way). We had two Geneneral Elections in which both major parties campaigned to honour the result of the Referendum. 7 out of 9 areas of the U.K. voted leave, nearly 2/3 of constituencies (80% conservative, 70% labour voted leave) and in the EU elections the Brexit Party pretty much wiped the board. What part of “Democracy- the will of the people” do you not understand? The very few people on this thread who have tried to present a reasoned debate have simply been “shouted down” vilified and sworn at, typical of comedy programmes on the BBC actually. The opponents of Brexit on this thread are just that - foul-mouthed comedians, proponents of exactly the sort of mob abuse violence we’ve come to expect. Those of us who genuinely believe in the power of a secret vote and not mob rule on the streets will wait our turn and hope that also is not stolen from us by the religious blindness of the remainders.
That’s true to a point, because remain means remain, whereas unlike the slogan, Brexit doesn’t mean Brexit. The inability to get behind one plan is evidence of this.
Notes join date, and post count.
You realise this website has nothing to do with the BBC… and this isn’t a comedy thread?
Best I can tell, ‘Brexit’ means ‘We’re gonna do something, dunno what, but it’ll be great and that’ll show Johnny Foreigner who’s boss!’ That’s why they got the votes- appealing to people’s sense of superiority while keeping plans as vague, constantly changing hints, so everyone can imagine their own amazing outcome, ignoring things like laws and basic reality. There wasn’t a plan for Brexit, there were millions of contradicting plans.
Anyone pointing out that things just aren’t going to work out like they are in people’s imaginations is being mean and ruining everything. It’d be funny, if it wasn’t already having an impact on people’s lives that’s only likely to get worse.
Oh, and no-one would have hailed a 52% remain vote as a ‘huge victory’. That’s a tiny margin and would have been seen as such; it’s well within the idiot error bar. To put it in perspective, a breakdown of voters by political party indicates 7% of UKIP voters, a single issue anti-EU party, stated that they voted remain.
5% of Gibraltans voted leave, despite the fact that’s clearly insane.
Around 5% of people, if given a poll choice between ‘getting a nice cup of tea’ and ‘being stabbed’ would panic and tick the ‘being stabbed’ box.
Seeing British democracy take a body blow is only slightly more tolerable if “Yakety Sax” is playing in the background.
Don’t forget the scantily-clad ladies prancing about. That also helps.
**Webfoot75 **needs to review his history. The European Union was (a lot but not all) Winston Churchill’s idea, and he started talking about it in 1946.
I take it you mean like this?
At the time of this writing, he doesn’t have one.
There is some grim satisfaction for this American that when a country chooses a path to Shit Town on clear lies there will exist a conservative in that country whose only defense will be, “well liberals do it too!”