That petition...

Fretwired

lloyd said:

Fretwired said:

Rumours circulating at Westminster that the Petition has won a debate in Parliament on holding a second referendum. Given the there are more pro EU MPs than Brexiters we could be on for round two.

Pathetic.

If it reaches enough signatures it "has" to be discussed really doesn't it? It's their duty to. The discussion should go something like-what do we think of this petition? Well the stay lot lost last time so the people have spoken. Next topic.

In the 20th century you shouted at the TV - these days you sign an e-petition and goad all your mates to sign via social media. 

1980

Child: So what have you done for Britain granddad?

Granddad: I fought in WW2 to protect our freedom from tyranny and oppression.

2050:

Child: So what have you done for Britain granddad?

Granddad: I signed the 2016 e-petition demanding a new referendum to remain the EU. The old people of the day removed my right to travel around the EU - it was so unfair. I cried for days.

chrispy108

Child: wow, did you campaign against it to try to stop Leave winning?
Granddad: yes! I shared three Facebook statuses calling them stupid racists, no idea why it didn't help!

10thumbs

Why not a referendum on whether or not to have another referendum?

Modern democracy , if you don't like what the people say, keep asking them until you get the answer you want.

A bit like Nicola Sturgeon and the Scottish independence referendum, do it again every few years until you get your way.

Heartfeltdawn

Fretwired said:

In the 20th century you shouted at the TV - these days you sign an e-petition and goad all your mates to sign via social media. 

Do you consider that to be a pointless pathetic waste of time? 

Fortheloveofguitar

If remain had won I'd have been hugely dissapointed just as I was when the conservatives held a majority at the last general election

However I would'nt have or didn't cry like a fucking baby thinking the world would come to an end and abusing all manner of people across social media and acting like a complete cunt.

Change is good and I'm optimistic that once all the hate and abuse blows over people with club together and get on with things

Fretwired

Heartfeltdawn said:

Fretwired said:

In the 20th century you shouted at the TV - these days you sign an e-petition and goad all your mates to sign via social media. 

Do you consider that to be a pointless pathetic waste of time? 

It's made possible by technology. Young people are upset - but why did so many of them not bother voting? They couldn't be arsed but it's easy to use your smart phone to click on a website and register your protest over a skinny latte in Starbucks. And most of those voting are in London.

So yes, it's a pathetic waste of time. At the last general election when Cameron was elected I didn't need an e-petition to tell me that millions of people were pissed off. That's how the system works.

Ro_S

Fretwired said:

Some whingers having a melt down ... they just can't get over their own self-importance and sense of entitlement .. "let's start a petion and get the result changed .. let's no platform Boris"

she can f@ck off then to the eu then

Fretwired

Ro_S said:

Fretwired said:

Some whingers having a melt down ... they just can't get over their own self-importance and sense of entitlement .. "let's start a petion and get the result changed .. let's no platform Boris"

she can f@ck off then to the eu then

There's a camp in Calais she might like .. lots of interesting people from around the world.

Heartfeltdawn

Fretwired said: It's made possible by technology. Young people are upset - but why did so many of them not bother voting? They couldn't be arsed but it's easy to use your smart phone to click on a website and register your protest over a skinny latte in Starbucks. And most of those voting are in London.

I haven't seen any turnout data sorted into age groups. Any link would be appreciated. 

As to whether it's pathetic: I've wasted hours debating Europe in this forum over the last month. That's way more pathetic than filling in a petition in a minute

 

Limehouse_Blues

Enough with the referenda already! This isn't Switzerland or the USA. The UK doesn't (normally) do popular sovereignty. The Crown in Parliament is sovereign. I think that this referendum was only the third UK-wide referendum in this nation's very long history of parliamentary democracy. I suspect future governments of all political stripes will be extremely reluctant to resort to referenda, especially on constitutionally significant questions.

While the focus now is understandably on Article 50 of the treaty it shouldn't be forgotten that our Parliament and sovereign must also, eventually, enact legislation to complete the formalities of exit. Imagine if Brenda, apprehending the disintegration of the much older union, decided not to sign that legislation! 1640s redux.

All this said, it's politically inconceivable that Parliament and monarch would ignore the result of Thursday's plebiscite. It's now down to our elected representatives and the civil service to secure the best terms of exit. Only (a very long) time will tell whether they manage to do a good job on that score.

Fretwired

Heartfeltdawn said:

Fretwired said: It's made possible by technology. Young people are upset - but why did so many of them not bother voting? They couldn't be arsed but it's easy to use your smart phone to click on a website and register your protest over a skinny latte in Starbucks. And most of those voting are in London.

I haven't seen any turnout data sorted into age groups. Any link would be appreciated. 

As to whether it's pathetic: I've wasted hours debating Europe in this forum over the last month. That's way more pathetic than filling in a petition in a minute

 

It was polling data .. the people signing the e-petition probably did vote and from what I've seen 73% of 18-24s voted to remain. However, many working class kids aren't engaged with politics and didn't vote. Young people are outnumbered by older people who voted to leave.

I'll find a link.

Sporky

Fortheloveofguitar said:

However I would'nt have or didn't cry like a fucking baby thinking the world would come to an end and abusing all manner of people across social media and acting like a complete cunt.

Nor have the vast majority of those who don't want to leave.

Sporky

Chalky said:

Its easy to demonstrate the limits of democracy by an ad absurdium argument. Are you suggesting we have a referendum every month? A general election every year?

I didn't suggest either of those things at any point - you're the one using reductio ad absurdum, not me.

But there has to be a practical limit to how often and on what topics you hold a vote. Thats not anti-democratic, just a practicality.

It seems you set that limit at the point where you get your way, which is exactly what you're complaining about others doing...

Seriously, if there is another referendum, and it goes to remain, will you accept that as the will of the people? And if this one had gone remain, would you have opposed the question ever coming up again?

Heartfeltdawn

Limehouse_Blues said:

All this said, it's politically inconceivable that Parliament and monarch would ignore the result of Thursday's plebiscite. It's now down to our elected representatives and the civil service to secure the best terms of exit. Only (a very long) time will tell whether they manage to do a good job on that score.

They won't ignore it. But that doesn't mean they have to follow it whilst giving the result enough lip service to keep the plebs happy. Just wait until the headlines appear about "EU delays our exit" in the usual tabloids...

Heartfeltdawn

Fretwired said:

It was polling data .. the people signing the e-petition probably did vote and from what I've seen 73% of 18-24s voted to remain. However, many working class kids aren't engaged with politics and didn't vote. Young people are outnumbered by older people who voted to leave.

I'll find a link.

I've seen polling data, it's actual turnout data that is hard to find at the minute. Bristol's got sod all out yet. Anecdotally the young person turnout was pretty much the same to the May 2016 local election turnout. Definitely more oldies out for the referendum though. The oldies unsurprisingly vote more in the daytime. At 1430, the halfway point of polling, my numbers were 50% up on the May elections at the same time and most of that increase was down to the grey vote. 

siremoon

One man straw poll:

We're in South London.  There's five of us in our house.  Mrs Moon and myself are in our late 50s and we have three still at home sons in their 20s (I know, I know - We've tried everything to get rid of them!).  Anyway Mrs Moon and I both voted as did the youngest lad.  The other two couldn't be bothered.  Our borough was one of only five in London to vote Leave.

As an aside one of the two who didn't vote has been very vocal in his condemnation of the outcome.  Needless to say he is getting short shrift from me for complaining about something he declined to participate in.

Chalky

Sporky;1125693" said:

Chalky said:

Its easy to demonstrate the limits of democracy by an ad absurdium argument. Are you suggesting we have a referendum every month? A general election every year?



I didn't suggest either of those things at any point - you're the one using reductio ad absurdum, not me.

But there has to be a practical limit to how often and on what topics you hold a vote. Thats not anti-democratic, just a practicality.





It seems you set that limit at the point where you get your way, which is exactly what you're complaining about others doing...



Seriously, if there is another referendum, and it goes to remain, will you accept that as the will of the people? And if this one had gone remain, would you have opposed the question ever coming up again?

Are you being serious? The first referendum in how many decades and you're suggesting "it seems you set the limit"?

One is the usual limit set for a referendum. Now some unhappy folks are petitioning for a second one with undemocratic rules (changing the majority measure from 50%+1 vote). That is not democracy - thats just a mob shouting "Not fair! We didn't get our way".

By definition if you are changing the rules to two, why not change it to three? Or monthly?

You're like the kid who loses a game on the pool table and instead of accepting, says "Best of 3?"

By the way, I fully accepted and expected that Remain would win.

Limehouse_Blues

Heartfeltdawn said:

Limehouse_Blues said:

All this said, it's politically inconceivable that Parliament and monarch would ignore the result of Thursday's plebiscite. It's now down to our elected representatives and the civil service to secure the best terms of exit. Only (a very long) time will tell whether they manage to do a good job on that score.

They won't ignore it. But that doesn't mean they have to follow it whilst giving the result enough lip service to keep the plebs happy. Just wait until the headlines appear about "EU delays our exit" in the usual tabloids...

I agree that's how they will try to spin it. It seems clear though that the rest of the EU is ready to crack on with this quickly. While it's up to the UK whether or when to invoke Article 50, the government must realise that if its EU interlocutors are already saying "Let's get on with this right now" then the longer they're made to wait, the lower the likelihood of friendly negotiations and a positive settlement for the UK. 

Heartfeltdawn

Limehouse_Blues said:

I agree that's how they will try to spin it. It seems clear though that the rest of the EU is ready to crack on with this quickly. While it's up to the UK whether or when to invoke Article 50, the government must realise that if its EU interlocutors are already saying "Let's get on with this right now" then the longer they're made to wait, the lower the likelihood of friendly negotiations and a positive settlement for the UK. 

I really think Leave believed they would lose. The reaction to winning was pretty muted from the Tory camp. The combination of Cameron resigning rather than allowing Leave some time to figure out the next move combined with the EU desire to kick the UK out quickly has really dropped the pressure onto them. It's one thing to promise a load of stuff as the opposition (which they essentially were against Remain) and another thing entirely when you're in the hot seat (as Nick Clegg would testify). 

Waiting is not an option. There are too many Leavers who expect that Leave means leave and it means tight borders. Any failure to deliver this will be reported. Just like the Republicans did for years before it bit them on the cock this year. 

TTony

If you make a mistake, it's better to learn from it rather than to repeat it.

If there was a decision to have a second referendum, we really should try to do it better.

That means avoiding all the hyperbole and scare stories and instead having a reasoned debate, presented by reasonable and credible people who know what they're talking about.

It means finding an opportunity for an outcome that isn't so marginal and divisive.

The simplistic in/out choice forced us to choose between "In, I'm happy with everything that the EU has done, is doing, and plans to do, including that our PM appeared to have completely failed in getting any recognition of the UK view" and "Out, I don't want anything to do with anything EU based, even accepting that the consequences won't all be pleasant".

There has to be a third option that doesn't force everyone into one entrenched position or the other.  

We should have learned that trench warfare really isn't an intelligent way to settle an argument.