24hrs later, It strikes me that ...

ronnyb

I think we should have a referendum to decide whether we should have another referendum or not.

TTony

Emp_Fab said:

No politician in their right mind

I'm not sure that we are blessed with many of those.

Rocker

digitalscream said:

The question was right, but the information available for a solid decision was absent; it strikes me that the rules give us an opportunity here, and @clarky was right in one of the other threads - once negotiations are well underway and we know what we're in for, have another referendum based on actual facts, with no campaigning allowed.

Either way it went, we'd see a markedly more emphatic result from that referendum with which to get an actual mandate to do something.

Got it in one @digitalscream. The almost complete absence of facts amazed me. No country can live in isolation. Unless you want to be another North Korea. The simplistic view that a U.K. free from the shackles of the EU, will be "Great" again is, IMHO, a fallacy. Voters bought into the hard right spin about immigration. The U.K. Is Ireland's nearest neighbour and our closest ally. That relationship has been changed in one day. Only time will tell if it is ever the same again.

Nitefly

digitalscream said:

The irony of all this is that because the cutoff is after our turn to take the EU presidency, we'll still get it in 2017.

I don't know, but won't there be some provision in the Article 50 trigger mechanism that would preclude this?  I can't see Juncker and his pals letting us cock a snook like that...

Richardj

It would be interesting to now list all of the backpedalling and reasons to leave that might not have necessarily been entirely factual (being generous).

Article 50 to leave has to be invoked now.  It's what the majority in the UK, by the result, voted for.

From the news over here the EU wants the UK out asap now that their decision has been made.

Good luck.

dindude

The decision is the decision, I don't see what was complicated about it. Do you want to be part of the EU or don't you? The debate debacle and miss-information is par for the course and no different to a general election campaign. I agree with @Wazmeister, those voting leave can't now claim ignorance. 

The problem is that the decision (due to its complexity) should never have been put in the hands of the general public, it was political suicide and Cameron needs to (and has) taken full responsibility for it, although he's left us in the shit.

If you cut through the BS, it was clear to see that any political leader and any business leader of any substance and integrity was saying remain. The signals weren't hard to see, but armchair Britain nethertheless knew best.

A new referendum would be a joke. We'd be better off if a strong leader came in and said, sorry, I'm ignoring this result, hate me now, thank me in 10 years.

quarky

Wazmeister said:

It was obvious before the voting, and obvious since... There were enough warnings, from every source of interest, power and influence that it would rent the country assunder...

Please dont spout ignorance if you voted out.

And that is the problem. The arrogance of the minority who think they know the best for the majority, based on what, 24 hours and the FTSE dropping to it's lowest level for about a week.

Richardj

dindude said:

The decision is the decision, I don't see what was complicated about it. Do you want to be part of the EU or don't you? The debate debacle and miss-information is par for the course and no different to a general election campaign. I agree with @Wazmeister, those voting leave can't now claim ignorance. 

The problem is that the decision (due to its complexity) should never have been put in the hands of the general public, it was political suicide and Cameron needs to (and has) taken full responsibility for it, although he's left us in the shit.

If you cut through the BS, it was clear to see that any political leader and any business leader of any substance and integrity was saying remain. The signals weren't hard to see, but armchair Britain nethertheless knew best.

A new referendum would be a joke. We'd be better off if a strong leader came in and said, sorry, I'm ignoring this result, hate me now, thank me in 10 years.

This seems the way.

cacophony

the eu will go one of two ways because of this. it'll either fragment and eventually dissolve if other countries demand their own referenda, or it'll reform and get stronger. personally i think it'll be the former.

in the long term i think we've made the right choice, but the short term could be fun.the truth is, no-one knows, everything, all the opinions espoused as fact, all the gloomy doom-laden forecasts we're hearing now, are nothing more than guesswork. we just have to get on with it.

the fact that we've seriously pissed off a lot of politicians though, that i like.

guitarfishbay

The winning post is first person over 50% - personally I would have wished for higher than 72% turnout but everyone had their chance to vote if they so wished to do so. This is direct democracy.

I would also agree with the points raised in Tony's first post except you can act because this was a majority. It is also too late and the consequences are here now and will remain even if there is another referendum. A second Scottish referendum would likely be pushed for even if England changed its mind on the EU.

Personally I want this to be a springboard for electoral reform. We are clearly a divided nation on many areas so FPTP and single party majority governments should no longer be our goal. Getting stuff done quickly isn't always best, a majority of 4% is a majority but fully ignoring a 48% block on day to day non binary legislative changes is not acceptable and we need to ensure a fairer representation of all groups in parliament. I'd rather break up the major political parties than the UK. This referendum has quickly answered a question on Europe - look at the potential consequences, it may lead to a break up of the U.K. (though I would accept that as the will of the electorate, I personally would not like this). If we need another referendum it should be on how we vote for our MPs, and finally to reform the House of Lords in to a second elected house.

TTony

The petition is here

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

Sign it.

I've also accepted the invitation to contact my MP (first time in my life) to explain why we need a second attempt at this.  Not because the Y/N result was wrong in itself, but because the question was wrong, the process was pathetic, the outcome is unnecessarily divisive and insufficiently clearcut, and that you can't hope to lead a United Kingdom in a direction that 48.1% of the population thinks is wrong.

ICBM

I'll repeat what I've said several times already - 37% of the electorate is not a democratic mandate for this level of change to our national future. It should need a majority of the electorate, not little more than a third.

It's worth also mentioning that proportionally *more* Scots - 38% of the electorate - voted for independence.

The off-the cuff decision to hold a simple majority referendum was extremely foolish, and the blame is entirely on David Cameron. He got cocky after defeating PR, then the Scots, and then UKIP - the price for the last being this referendum.

I don't think it would be any less democratic for parliament to overrule the result than it would be to insist on respecting it. The danger is that doing so will cause massive civil unrest. We're in the shit either way, basically.

guitarfishbay

TTony;1125041" said:

siremoon said:



bodhi said:



siremoon said:

Yes let's keep having referenda until the voters get it right.










Come on.  It's not the politicians asking for another go.





No it's those who think the result we got first time is inappropriate












The point is that the result was inconclusive if you look at it rationally.

The question was simplified to a black/white option.  The campaign was led by politicians who were already heavily vested in one or the other and who saw, presented, or allowed for no middle ground (which is where the truth usually lies).

We got division.  Socially, Demographically, Economically, Geographically, even Politically (this wasn't a traditional left vs right or Labour vs Tory situation).  Creating a country that is so fundamentally divided is not a good basis for then adopting the apparent view of either side of that division.  The country would remain divided and recriminations will continue for generations.

We were encourage to believe black OR white.  We had to vote black OR white.

Admittedly, there will be a % of the voters who believe, absolutely, that either black OR white is correct, and they'll never change that view.  That's reality.  But I'd like to believe that the UK population is capable of considering and assessing more than two simplistic options.  

I believe that, if there was another vote where we were asked for our level of satisfaction with the process and the result, there'd be a resounding vote for dissatisfied.

The politicians - our alleged leaders - got this completely wrong.  Just because they made a grave mistake, doesn't mean that we should now follow through with the consequences of their incompetence.  

We need a more intelligent question, a more informed debate (preferably excluding politicians) and an outcome that a significant majority of the population accepts.  

A referendum has to be black or white, yes or no. There can be no middle ground as a decision must be made.

More technical politics and negotiation requires fewer voices - essentially representation, what we have in theory with our elected MPs. Cameron tried to get us a better deal before this referendum, and the electorate was clearly still unhappy.

I share all your fears but this is a consequence of direct democracy.

TheMarlin

We were asked a specific question with 'response A or Redponse B'.

It was a very specific agenda. It was marketed from day one as 'Brexit', and referred to as Brexit in the media. It makes me think that the powers that be wanted the result they got.

I would have liked response C - complete reform of our political system. ' First past the post' rarely benefits the working man.

koneguitarist

We had a decision with a good turn out of voters, end of story. How about we keep having a vote until you get the "right" vote that you want? Is that democracy ?

quarky

koneguitarist said:

We had a decision with a good turn out of voters, end of story. How about we keep having a vote until you get the "right" vote that you want? Is that democracy ?

Well, that would be the EU way

koneguitarist

Would we all be asking for another vote, if the decision had been reversed? Definitely not. Hence the arguments and petition are meaningless.

WezV

koneguitarist said:

Would we all be asking for another vote, if the decision had been reversed? Definitely not. Hence the arguments and petition are meaningless.

Farage would:

Farage told the Mirror: “In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-previously-said-would-8273721

 

guitarfishbay

ICBM;1125071" said:

I'll repeat what I've said several times already - 37% of the electorate is not a democratic mandate for this level of change to our national future. It should need a majority of the electorate, not little more than a third.

It's worth also mentioning that proportionally *more* Scots - 38% of the electorate - voted for independence.

The off-the cuff decision to hold a simple majority referendum was extremely foolish, and the blame is entirely on David Cameron. He got cocky after defeating PR, then the Scots, and then UKIP - the price for the last being this referendum.

I don't think it would be any less democratic for parliament to overrule the result than it would be to insist on respecting it. The danger is that doing so will cause massive civil unrest. We're in the shit either way, basically.

100% had the chance to vote though. Choosing not to vote is a political action in itself. Unless voting was compulsory we were not likely to see a higher turnout, and compulsory voting has its own set of issues

guitarfishbay

koneguitarist;1125079" said:

Would we all be asking for another vote, if the decision had been reversed? Definitely not. Hence the arguments and petition are meaningless.

Based on what? There is likely to be a second referendum in Scotland, many have wanted that since the last result