Did you all know it's incredibly hard to find relatively well priced low profile (none sticky outy) door handles for a bathroom door. I know, ridiculous isn't it? Sheeeeesh......... Bloody Brexit
It appears to be the definition of democracy to a few people on here, at least until they are dead and gone.
the same question you posted in your question doughnut It would be interesting to see what justification a second vote could even be considered (although I know the silly one of others didn't know what they voted for but I know they were wrong brigade). Then how their suggestion/precedent, the same excuse, could not be used to challenge any further and all democratic votes?
If the House of Commons passes a motion requiring a referendum is put to the people of the country, that would be legal and sufficient would it not?
fin you don't count, the snp said the people of scotland cannot be ignored, they then had a vote, they voted to stay in the uk, and the snp ignored the scottish people asking for indi 2. You haven't got a great history of respecting specific result votes
You don't like my answer so you keep on asking until you get one you prefer? I personally have no insider knowledge of the workings of the MPs in the House. However if they in their wisdom decide to put a vote to the people of the country, as is their right as MP's - who am I to say it should or should not happen. You're getting weirder doughnut ol' boy.
Now you know what it feels like when we had a peoples vote and some want another, welcome to the club
TBH you are describing the remoaners there... I'd d=go with democracy being a second vote, if the terms were materially changed from the existing Eu, providing it was IN being the 'deal' or OUT being just exit. No more deals, refining or whatever. But that was before all this nonsense for the last two years, of which this thread (at page 210!) is a top notch example of how both sides ignore facts and simply restate what they want to hear. Borris for PM.
The referendum was a "Once in a generation" vote. Now once we've moved on a generation, if whatever govt. wants to hold another referendum on rejoining the EU taking on all the rules and the Euro as currency, I've no problem with that. I'd cast my vote and let democracy take its course. I'd willingly go along with what was decided by the majority, even if I was on the opposite side of the debate. I doubt I'd be happy about it, but that's what you get with a democratic binary vote. I hope I'd have more dignity than to cast a vote and if I lost, begin to bang on about the winning side "Being stupid", "Telling lies", "Not knowing what they were voting for", "The referendum being only advisory", "Buses" et al and attempt to overturn the democratic result by whatever means.
The rules say the MP's have the right to place motions, which if carried/ approved by a vote, become law. If they vote for another referendum so be it. The laws change all the time, think of Osbourne and the balance the books law. I'm sure Labour made a laws which have been summarily dropped too - wasn't there one stopping the number of Grammar schools being increased? I don't see the point in complaining about the legal system being used within the rules. I won't ever support all the laws, I might even on occassion defy some. I can't reasonably complain about something being done legally by the majority of the representatives of the entire country. I think personally that the majority is never wrong, and if the MP's put a vote to the people, their current opinion should prevail whatever it might be. Of course I would hope that the feelings and aperations of the minority are taken into consideration and some compromise given.
