summitclaret wrote:You have missed the point. We could have a party that has democrat in it's name that would very clearly be anti democratic. Anyway it would be good news for Boris if they were daft enough to agree such a policy.
I had a conversation with taio about this very scenario a good few months back.
If a party stands on a manifesto in a general election, and wins enough seats to form a government, in what way would it be anti-democratic to then follow through with those manifesto commitments?
You could argue that it's less direct than a referendum, and that thanks to our FPTP system, it isn't proportionally representative, but it would not be anti-democratic.
In fact, in our Parliamentary system, this is exactly how it should work. Referendums don't really sit well within our representative democratic system, but that can of worms has been opened, and I think the only way this eventually gets resolved is with another referendum.
But until then, any party can legitimately stand on a manifesto to revoke article 50, to offer a referendum or to leave with no deal. They are all valid positions to take ahead of a general election.
This user liked this post: Hipper