LibDems wanting a second referendum - Please explain the logic

[optionalrationale]

The LibDems believe the UK should remain part of the EU. While they accept the outcome of the the June 2016 Referendum, they also want the final terms of our exit deal to go to a second Referendum in the hope that we say "OK let's Remain after all".

Can anyone explain the logic of this position at this stage of the negotiations? Surely this encourages the EU to make our exit terms the very worst they can make them, basically holding us to ransom until the second referendum would be deliver the capitulation they and the LibDems are hankering for.

Kaija
"Well you know, little decisions - buying a car, signing a job contract, even buying a sandwich"

SNORT

What's your point?

Today 21:57 Bearbehind
Q: what other aspect of your life is governed by answers, promises and guarantees?

*Bearbehind: "Pretty much every aspect of my life is determined by weighing up the pros and cons. The sums don't add up with Brexit"

Please answer the question...Where do you have (in your words) answers, promises and guarantees?

There are answers, promises and guarantees in pretty much any transaction you make where you're handing your money over either directly or through your taxes. How have you missed this?

"Please answer the question"

This is such a weird thing to say immediately after your question had been answered.

As kaija said, pretty much all the big ticket items in life, job contracts, mortgages etc.

Stop being a fuckwit OP.

Arguing for the sake of it is pointless.

Either convince us why you're right or potter off. All this twisting questions back at people is playground level.

FFS Kaija (notice I am not actually swearing there because I know it makes you Snowflakes anxious)

My point is ... your OWN words....little decisions
Buying a sandwich is a little decision. Reshaping the destiny of a nation is a big decision.

Nobody expressed any anxiety about your swearing, just bemusement. I wondered what was making you so upset.

So you acknowledge there are guarantees got the little decisions, but think this shouldn't apply to the big ones?

I love that you are still using the word "snowflake" like that though - makes me a bit nostalgic for 2016.

Still fighting the good old alt-right fight

The desire for Answers, Promises, Guarantees is a child's question. It reveals your naivety. Most big questions of importance require people to interact as adults in the realisation that there are no easy answers. We have to work things out. Promises are for teenage lovers. Guarantees are what you get with a toaster - not with the future of a nation or economy.

Grow up.

Optional, that is quite funny.

Promises and guarantees are the substance of all agreements, whether on a commercial, national or international level, where historically they have been regarded as preferable to war.

Classic Bearbehind, you make a point and she answers a completely different point.

Some might call it MPs expenses a bit of bureaucratic nonsense, others will call it corruption.

MPs expense were a legal gravy train perceived by many to be corruption and indicative of what MPs do in general. The EU circus (with dozens of trucks full of files and paper) between BRUSSELS AND STRASBOURG every fourth week are a legal gravy train perceived by many to be corruption and indicative of what MEPs do in general. The UK was able to address the former but not the latter. The corruption therefore continues and by giving the EU the power to make decisions on our behalf we are enabling that gravy train of corruption.

The UK says NO. NO MORE.

Kaija (who makes sensible points)
Why oh why are those poor UKIP MEPs just not managing to exert their influence
I dont support UKIP however despite being the largest EU party in the UK have zero power to initiate laws in the EU. Its irrelevant how they vote if they can only vote on things that Juncker says they are allowed to affect.

A case of "Of course you choose a sweetie, but the choice is between the orange and the apple."
What happens when the choice is between debt and debt. Which was rejected by Greece but imposed by Juncker?

FFS Kaija (notice I am not actually swearing there because I know it makes you Snowflakes anxious)

It makes me piss myself laughing actually. I'm a born again sailor.

The thing is, there is literally no reason for the EU to offer us a good deal regardless of a second referendum. I would personally like one just because I think once we see the terms they will be unambiguously bad. However, even in the case that we could rule out a second referendum right now and for good, there still isn't a reason for the EU to offer us a deal that improves on our current position as a member.

I cannot understand what pro-Leave people think our bargaining chips are.

It's quite something when it's openly said that campaign strategies in a democracy include demotivating certain groups so much they don't turn out to vote.

It's not just apathy but deliberately engineered apathy to make people feel hopeless and like their voice is worthless.

Cos that's really healthy in a democracy.

there is literally no reason for the EU to offer us a good deal regardless of a second referendum

If that is literally true (and I dont believe it is) then we walk away. Goodbye EU, it wasn't fun while it lasted. We will always have Paris.

Have the EU said that already? No they haven't, they want to negotiate! Duh!

Finally someone has answered the question of what remainers need to do to get behind Brexit. I think I can get on board with most of this.

Kaija, Can you post link, its to small to read.

Yesterday 22:26 Kaija
"Promises and guarantees are the substance of all agreements, whether on a commercial, national or international level, where historically they have been regarded as preferable to war."

And any Answers, Promises, Guarantees of substances need to be discussed and agreed through a process. Begging, bleating for them six weeks after Article 50 has been triggered is not going to be productive. You have almost two years ahead. Chillax.

Yesterday 22:15 Motheroffourdragons
"You compare eu elections to former Soviet Union elections. Voting in eu elections is nothing like that, it is disingenuous to compare as you've done optionrationale"

I raise the example of the co-location of the EU parliament as just one example (there are many), which clearly demonstrate that when it comes to the crunch the only institution within the EU which is directly elected by EU citizens has almost no power. Ask any (non-French) MEP what they think of it and they will all tell you it's a nonsense and makes them look stupid. Ask them why they don't fix it. They are "running Europe" after all. Surely this £100m detail of admin should be within their power. And you get a very Gallic shrug in response.

The European parliament is symbolic. MEPs have no power. Trends in turnout figures from every single country including the Czech Republic 18.2% demonstrate that most EU citizens are saying "What's the point? It doesn't matter anyway".

Today 00:04 Kaija
Finally someone has answered the question of what remainers need to do to get behind Brexit. I think I can get on board with most of this

I could just about read it. It all sounds very reasonable to me too. Most Reluctant Remainers (my OH), and likely significant sections the UK's negotiation team, and possibly even some Enthusiastic Remain voters in the June 2016 referendum have accepted that there is now no going back and want to get us out with as much goodwill and order as possible.