I included you all as I feel you represent three very different spectrums of leave, not because I presume to know why you voted leave. In fact, I asked you earlier in the thread why you did vote Leave, to which you haven't, as I type this, replied.
On the second point within your reply, it doesn't really matter if you do or not, we don't have direct democracy, it's a parliamentary de mocracy in the UK. Members represent their constitutes (they aren't a delegate). So I'm slightly confused, constitutionally, given the leave sides (as a broad stroke) championing of sovereignty and democracy, what they actually mean by it?
Forgive me if I misunderstand, but you seem to be saying that because we have a parliamentary democracy, we should stand by the decisions that parliament makes. And that it is wrong to question it. Even if you believe that decision is completely the wrong one. And that a politician who is totally opposed to that decision should accept it and not speak out against it. I think that is wrong and has nothing to do with either democracy or sovereignty. Farage, love him or hate him, is entitled to say what he wants within legal parameters and people are equally entitled to support him if they so wish. Let's turn this on it's head. Just say parliament voted to leave on a no deal should a deal not be agreed with the EU by the deadline day. An MEP who was totally against a no deal brought up in Brussels a plea for the EU to give parliament more time so they can sort out a deal. Would you consider this a disgrace, anti democratic and against UK sovereignty? Talking of democracy and sovereignty, they are phrases I rarely if ever use to support my arguments. Having already been chastised on 3 fronts for speaking on behalf of the leave collective without possibly knowing their true views, I respectfully have no comments to make on the views of my colleagues.
Because so far what seems to be the case is that leave want democracy, but not parliamentary democracy. They (I mean this as a veiw from within) want the will of the people, but not a second referendum. They want the EU to leave the UK to manage it's own laws, but now are hoping the EU politicians and foreign electorate will frustrate the will of UK parliament (ergo our democracy). They want a sovereign country, while failing to recognise that if you are positioned to make laws within your own country whilst also having a role in shaping laws which govern an entire political and economic Union, you have actually increased your autonomy - although I accept you balance this against your own de jure sovereignty.
See above. Also, again turning this on it's head, just say remain won the last referendum and now the Brexit supporters were bringing pressure for a new referendum. How would you feel?. I've made my views clear on why I believe a second referendum will not solve anything and it has nothing to do with being scared of losing it. I've said repeatedly that if we can't get a deal thought by the deadline day then we need a general election in the hope than one side can get a majority in parliament so something get's done one way or the other.
Now you might say, the British people want to leave, to which I would say that's not th e 'will of the people' fully as only a third voted for Leave and it completely disregards the will of the rest of the country. You might say, parliament isn't representing my interests or the interests of leave - well then why not push for another GE? Tip the balance of parliamentary democracy in favour of leave.
That's no difference to saying that whoever gets a majority parliament gets to make policy, but very often 75% of the electorate have not voted for them. It's upto people who have the right to vote to exercise it. If they don't, they can't cry wolf afterwards.
Help me out here, because I'm genuinely struggling to understand what Leave voters now actually want.
