1) Deny that EU membership has any significant impact upon British policy-making or the ability of national electorates to influence national policy via the ballot box. At the same time, argue that EU membership is absolutely vital for Britain’s future economic prosperity and national security.
2) Deny that EU membership has any significant impact upon popular sovereignty or self-governance. At the same time, argue that without EU institutions to supervise national electorates, employment protections would disappear, workhouses would return and Tory politicians would be stuffing women up chimneys and denying children the vote.
3) Be viciously anti-Tory and anti-Cameron, yet neglect to call out any of his absurd lies about EU membership and the consequences of EU withdrawal.
4) Accept at face value that prior to receiving a promissory note with no legal force from Brussels, David Cameron really did “rule nothing out”, even as you observe him repudiate precisely the kind of new relationship for which he has always argued—trade and co-operation without political integration.
5) Obsess over the kind of “trade deal” that Britain would have post-exit—as if trade is all that EU membership entails—yet also infer that Britain’s bureaucracy would be unable to cope/does not have sufficient expertise to administrate independent trade, justice & home affairs, agricultural, fisheries, energy, environmental, transportation and telecommunications policies, without the involvement of 27 other EU Member States, each with competing and sometimes contradictory interests.
Unless you care to argue the “positive case” for Britain’s acceptance of supranational representation on the global stage and less say for British voters than equivalent electors in Australia, Canada, Japan, etc., then your support for continued EU membership is little more than hypocritical posing.
In fact, you’re probably a politician or a legacy media journalist.