From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 30 Sep 17 - 07:11 AM
You're talking past me, Nigel. Read my post again.
Okay, I've re-read your post. It still says "If the EU was more democratic" my arse. We have absolutely nothing to teach the EU about democracy.
I stick with my response that we can teach the EU a lot about democracy: "that when 'the people' are allowed a vote then the result should be accepted even when it's not the one the EU wanted.
It seems the EU might have realised that that ploy wouldn't work with the UK, but they've used it with other countries, and would probably be prepared to use it again." (I'm not quite sure where your arse comes into the discussion, but if you must mention it that's your prerogative.)

Perhaps you should re-read your own post. Aren't teachers supposed to encourage their pupils to read what they are responding to? Or are you past that stage?

I could go on about your post: "what was "democratic" about a shitty coalition that excluded the second-largest party, a referendum that was called by a government frightened to death of both UKIP and its own right wing, nothing to do with the interests of this country,"
The referendum was not called by the coalition. It was called by parliament. The coalition only allowed the referendum to take place once it had been voted on in parliament. The referendum vote had massive support from the labour party (your 'second-largest party'). The vote to hold a referendum was passed (ayes) 544 (noes) 53. (so with 650 MPs, if the only ones to abstain were from Labour, and all the votes against were from Labour that's only (650-544) 106 Labour MPs who didn't vote for a referendum (either by voting against, or by abstention). That means (and I'll spell it out for you) that at least 150 Labour MPs voted to hold a referendum on the possibility of the UK leaving the EU.

Try responding to facts, with facts, rather than your somewhat one-sided suppositions.