Well fine. In which case the referendum returned an unclear verdict and it should return to Parliament as such.
I also believe taking voting rights and citizenship away from people by leaving should certainly require a greater mandate than 52/48
Sign this Petition!
- Thread starter Sigma
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Well fine. In which case the referendum returned an unclear verdict and it should return to Parliament as such.
I also believe taking voting rights and citizenship away from people by leaving should certainly require a greater mandate than 52/48
I'd say because one side can try again, the other can't.
The leavers already said before the referendum they'd just try again if it ended 52-48 against them. They could try again and again as often as they want till they get the result. It's the advantage of the side that wants to change the status quo. The remain side won't get a 2nd chance. England leaves the EU it's out and that's it. You can't just come back. Sure you can apply at some point in the future but even then it would take very long to get back in and it would be far from certain that there wouldn't be a country vetoing it.
So as it is one side already has an advantage.
Don't be ridiculous. I know it isn't legally binding but why have the referendum in the first place then? If this vote is ignored or overturned then democracy is dead and there will likely be riots.
To get the consensus of the general public obviously. Isn't that self explanatory. The result was close and deciding either way is perfectly plausible.
Perhaps. But if this was wanted so strongly, it should've been done before the referendum took place. It wasn't - you can't add in a clause after the result has been decided.
Yes to get the consensus and then follow through with the decision made my the winning majority. Deciding either way is plausible? What deciding to stay in the EU is plausible when the majority voted to leave? are you joking?
Democracy doesn't mean 48% of people should just sit down and not have a voice because 52% felt differently.
You don't understand, it doesn't count because those old uneducated idiots voted the wrong way, and the bloomin' racists. 17 million of 'em!
It was hardly a landslide victory...
Especially when the decision is irreversible and Yes/No
that makes sense...... gives the leave campaign a good case to dismiss this petition
Yes and no.
It should have been brought up before the referendum, I agree with that. Maybe it was but it was largely ignored? I don't know, I'm not british nor do I live there so didn't follow the whole thing that much.
But the point is still valid so I don't see why it shouldn't be brought up. Especially as the referendum was not legally binding.
I can also understand people fighting this decision. Yes a majority said leave but that doesn't mean the rest have to just put up with it.
Democracy does not mean a majority dictates terms to a minority and they have to obey. There's a reason why every democratic constitution I know of has defense systems against the tyranny of majorities.
So what do you do about the 52%, then? We've held a referendum in which it was quite clearly stated the majority would be the winner. That has happened - we can't reverse that because we don't like it. I hate it too, but it's what has happened and we need to either make it work, or campaign for another referendum to get back in once the dust has settled. Or leave the UK, as my country's hopefully gonna do.
Best of 3? 
It doesn't matter. If it was a victory by just 10 votes it still stands....It was a leave victory by 1.27 million votes.
I agree, it isn't. But if we were to reverse the decision now, we'd be ignoring the small majority and obeying everyone else. How does that work out?
Cos he is useless and out of touch with people, just like all eu pm's
If.he had instructed osborne to have a give away budget then remain would have won easily
Will need 20m signatures for any genuine legitimatmacy
you'd have to give each referendum their own gimmick though, like this time was a vote, next time a running race, ad if it goes to a tie break a big game of capture the flag!Best of 3?
Nothing has happened yet though, a referendum is merely a suggestion to Parliament. Farage even said before the poll that if the result was so close the other way he would fight for a second referendum.
We are still members of the E.U. Why should people not fight right now when they see the lies coming out from the leave campaign. 48% of people are going to their rights changed, their passports, they should be allowed to make their voice heard.
i think mainly because i don't think it crossed his mind that he might lose
Or perhaps Cheesy, this is one of the most important decisions of our lives and we don't actually want to sit round and let something go ahead that we disapprove of? So why exactly should we accept the shitshow?
I mean look at it from your perspective Cheesy, you live in Scotland. There is a very high chance that you'll break from the United Kingdom, but us poor saps living in England, Wales or Ireland won't be able to do that. Personally I like our country as it is, I like Scotland being part of the UK. What I don't want is all of that to collapse on my watch so to speak. It's a depressing time to be young and living in this country.
Out of a population of 65 million, meaning that around 30% of the people in the country actually voted for this. So by your logic that isn't a majority is it.
The fact is irrefutable, a referendum is simply a gauge of public opinion, in no way is it an absolute. Parliament will use the result and base their final decision on it, weighing it up with what they also think would be the best decision because after all that's what they're elected to do.
You disapprove of it. I disapprove of it. The majority who voted do not disapprove of this though, and have gotten their democratic right granted. From what you've posted, I could genuinely turn all of that around and apply it to leaving the EU; this is happening, and the majority of those who voted do approve of it.
I agree that it's incredibly shite to see happening, but then more should've been done beforehand. Any passionate Remain voter who was wary of a referendum should not have voted Tory in 2015. People should've been campaigning against one. People should've been campaigning for double locks, or greater mandates for it to pass. They didn't, though. You can't just decide you want to change the goalposts after the goal's been scored.
And, again, I say that as someone who thinks this debate has been farcical...farcical to the point where if I get the chance, I'll probably be an active campaigner in breaking away from the UK.
So what if Cameron had been anti-EU, we had voted Remain, and he had decided to take us out of the EU anyway, because he didn't see the vote as absolute? People would be going fecking bananas about it on here.
Yes and as much as many wouldn't like it it wouldn't be 'against the rules' of a referendum would it.So what if Cameron had been anti-EU, we had voted Remain, and he had decided to take us out of the EU anyway, because he didn't see the vote as absolute? People would be going fecking bananas about it on here.
What do you expect me to say. Farage said that he would have wanted another vote if they would have lost...
Because he's a fecking idiot. But the first point I made is the important one: if you hold a referendum, the results should be respected. If you'd be angry at being in the majority and having the decision reversed...well, I don't see how you can argue for the same the other way around.
It's a problem, I agree. It's why this point should have been discussed before.
However imo you can interpret the result of the referndum in two ways. You can see it as a clear "we want to leave" or as "we are split on that" because imo the reality is the latter, not the former.
I just think that in a case like that it wouldn't be irrational to try to find another solution maybe? I don't think just repeating the referendum would be a good idea, don't get me wrong on that.
But when you see that the country is split on a topic - really actually split, maybe try to work something out that doesn't exclude one half of the country as currently it's the case either way.
The way I look at it is that the margin of victory was relatively small and it was based on lies and misinformation that caused the win to go to Brexit. Your hypothetical situation isn't exactly the same.
For me the manner and the margin of the victory make it acceptable for a decision to go either way.
This isn't a simple yes/no argument, the Leave campaign ensured it went far, far beyond a simple yes/no out of Europe. It's become a far bigger issue and it's an issue that I am completely against.
I won't simply lie down and accept something that I am completely against and although you are correct the majority did vote this in. It's a clear issue of us v them. I don't want myself associated at all with the type of politics that have been approved in the Leave campaign. It's as simple as that. It's weird, I feel like I have no connection at all with 52% of my country. I see that as worrying and a sign that perhaps I need to move elsewhere. Not only that but I am personally livid that I've had to grow up in a country when Tuition fees sore, a global recession hit, first time buyers get absolutely shagged and now this? There's a lot of resentment frankly. My patience is wearing thin.
Yet Brexit supporters will argue that the lies and misinformation came from both sides. David Cameron was giving bullshit warnings concerning our national security on a regular basis. Yeah, I'd say the Leave campaign's were worse, but that's not really something you can measure.
You can measure it because Leave won considerably more votes than they would have with their immigration lie.
In your opinion. Is there any concrete proof of this? And even if there was, Boris can just turn round and say, "Actually, that wasn't a lie." Farage could claim he'll get into power in 2020, and he will reduce immigration.
Does it matter whose lies were worse though?
Do they not cross ref the name against the electoral roll?
Not sure but they would have the data to hand
Probably says on their website if anyone can be bothered to check
It's a pretty well accepted opinion. Many, many people were badly mislead about immigration and it's common knowledge if you look at the news.
What big referendums and vote campaigns aren't full of lies though? Obviously what they did was wrong, but Remain knew it was wrong and ultimately they failed to convince the public that it was wrong because they were too focused on their own silly arguments. You can't redo a referendum like this just because the opposition didn't do well enough in disproving these 'lies' and/or the public themselves weren't smart/researched enough to figure it out for themselves. Hell, I'm not a UK citizen but it was pretty damn easy for me to figure it out with a quick google.
Not really. All I'm saying is that you can't redo a referendum on the basis of lies when both sides were guilty of it.
"Well accepted opinion" isn't concrete, though, and it's not something that people who voted to Leave are going to agree with.
There was no convincing these people and you know it. The leave campaign was exactly what they wanted to hear and dismissed everything else as "Project Fear" because they were so focused on "taking back control"
That's just blind ignorance then isn't it.