The people's vote

[Jasandjules]

And if it was a second vote to leave, should we then have a third? What if it was a second vote but this time to stay, should we then have a third?

[alfie2244]

Zetec-S said:

I voted remain.
I still think leaving is a stupid thing to do.

But FFS I thought the whole point of the referendum was to decide if we were in or out. We voted leave. Lets get on and do it and make the best we can of it. I'm fed up hearing about it now.

[dromond]

Tankrizzo said:

Let's not forget that a driver for a second referendum is that apparently "a large part of the country has changed its mind", according to polls.

Yet polling for major political decisions in the UK over the last few years has been wrong - spectacularly so, in some cases. Polling for the 2015 GE showed a coalition government was likely; instead we had a Tory majority. Polling in 2017 showed a clear Tory majority and instead we had a hung Parliament.

Even the polling for the EU Referendum itself showed a narrow win for Remain.

I take the claim of "the country has changed its mind" with a pinch of salt. Who can honestly say that Remain would almost certainly win if you asked the same question again? Even Remainers can't.

Correct, polls can never be taken as gospel, as we all know most of them are based on bias. We hear it every day that the Country
has changed its mind, how the hell do they know that from just a sample?, a sample isn't the Country, the word I hear more often
in speaking to many people on a daily basis is that many remain voters would now vote leave going by the way the EU is handling
brexit and showing their true colours, occasionally I hear someone say they would now vote remain instead of leave but truthfully
its not very often.

[amusingduck]

Jasandjules said:

What if it was a second vote but this time to stay, should we then have a third?

Of course, that's one of the many flaws with a 'Peoples' vote. The plan goes as far as a second referendum and no further, it seems. Everything beyond that point will naturally just fall into place .

Most (all?) of the arguments in favour of a second referendum apply equally to a third referendum if Remain wins. Would everyone just pause, swap sides, and then start spewing the opposite side's arguments?

[Bullett]

So when the vote happens and we vote out again by an even bigger margin.
Will that be the end?

It was the total arrogance of the political elite that got us to this position, the 'we know best' attitude.
It was a protest vote.
Having spent the last 2 year being told that Brexiters are all stupid racist idiots who don't understand is not really going to change anyone's mind.

[anonymous-user]

Bullett said:

So when the vote happens and we vote out again by an even bigger margin.
Will that be the end?

It was the total arrogance of the political elite that got us to this position, the 'we know best' attitude.
It was a protest vote.
Having spent the last 2 year being told that Brexiters are all stupid racist idiots who don't understand is not really going to change anyone's mind.

You never know, some people might look and see what Brexit actually is is now instead of thinking that people are calling them stupid racists.

[Europa1]

However divisive the 2016 referendum, sorry, people's vote was, I can only think another would be only worse.

[Kccv23highliftcam]

Ghibli said:

You never know, some people might look and see what Brexit actually is is now instead of thinking that people are calling them stupid racists.

Hohoho that ship sailed a LONG time ago.

Some fking neck to post that pal, I'll give you that.

Or did you just limit yourself to calling them knuckle draggers ?

[Deptford Draylons]

vonuber said:

Deptford Draylons said:

Endorsed too by respected Brexit expert, Gabby Logan.
Grown ups know democracy isn't a game of dare where just keep asking for another vote until you achieve the result you would like, at which point you stop. Loon Remain dolts don't get that.

Is that why May called a snap election?

Do you see that as a true comparison, or just chucking anything out as a deflection ? Helicopter would call it extra democracy btw...
Trying the reverse the result the minute the result is announced looks a bit sad, no ? Do people on here who say 'what you afraid of, have another vote ' sound all that grown up to you in their approach to democracy ?
If they did the same at an election result and tried to reverse the result before Corbyn's car rolled in to Downing St with calls of ' another election this morning, what you afraid of ' , how much respect for that would you have ? The answer is none, but I doubt you'd say it without some silly deflection.

[dromond]

Ghibli said:

You never know, some people might look and see what Brexit actually is is now instead of thinking that people are calling them stupid racists.

You have just manipulated those words to make it appear that being called 'stupid racists' is only a thought in peoples heads, whereas
the actual truth is that people have been called stupid racists because they voted leave. Just another example of the poor rhetoric that is so
apparent in your posts, you might want to take a look at Russian Troll Bot's post to see how logical, informed, and intelligent debate is
constructed, it might even help you with the grammar mistakes you make like the one above, seeing that you are mentioning stupidity.

As expected RTB's post has been ignored by the normally vociferous remainers of the board, I wonder why that would be .

[CAPP0]

I really don't want to add yet another Brexit thread, but unfortunately in the main one, every time someone asks a question, it gets buried in half a dozen pages of the usual suspects waving their handbags at each other. I've asked this twice in there and both times it gets swamped and therefore ignored.

My question is:

This People's Vote thing (or 2nd referendum, or whatever it's being called today: insummary, the resuest to hold a vote on the UK's exit deal):

- if this went ahead, and
- if the result was binding, rather than just being an opinion poll (and what would be the point of that anyway?) and
- if, as seems likely, the People voted No to the proposed deal,

would we not then just simply crash out with no deal anyway? Because there surely wouldn't be time for another round of negotiations, plus presumably yet another People's Vote on the outcome of that. And at present there is still no stated process for aborting Article 50. On that basis, whether you're a leaver or a remainer, is the People's Vote thing not just a massive waste of everyone's time and money with no potentially-useful outcome whatsoever?

Is it just a case of people trying to find yet another way to demonstrate their disapproval of Brexit?

I can't fathom the answer to this.

[Roboraver]

When you have blatant lies being told like this:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Jim_Cornelius/status/10...

Yes I would demand another vote as so many people have changed their minds.

[CAPP0]

Roboraver said:

When you have blatant lies being told like this:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Jim_Cornelius/status/10...

Yes I would demand another vote as so many people have changed their minds.

But that doesn't answer my question: given who's pushing for it, how could the outcome be anything but to reject, and therefore what would be the point of the vote?

[sidicks]

Roboraver said:

When you have blatant lies being told like this:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Jim_Cornelius/status/10...

Is this where you ignore all the lies told by Remain in the run up to the referendum?

Roboraver said:

Yes I would demand another vote [b]as so many people have changed their minds.[b]

Evidence doesn’t suggest that to be the case.

[CAPP0]

Can you not just read my OP and answer the fking question instead of dragging this into the same mire as the other one? Or simply fk off and leave this one to the grown-ups?

[Europa1]

CAPP0 said:

I really don't want to add yet another Brexit thread, but unfortunately in the main one, every time someone asks a question, it gets buried in half a dozen pages of the usual suspects waving their handbags at each other. I've asked this twice in there and both times it gets swamped and therefore ignored.

My question is:

This People's Vote thing (or 2nd referendum, or whatever it's being called today: insummary, the resuest to hold a vote on the UK's exit deal):

- if this went ahead, and
- if the result was binding, rather than just being an opinion poll (and what would be the point of that anyway?) and
- if, as seems likely, the People voted No to the proposed deal,

would we not then just simply crash out with no deal anyway? Because there surely wouldn't be time for another round of negotiations, plus presumably yet another People's Vote on the outcome of that. And at present there is still no stated process for aborting Article 50. On that basis, whether you're a leaver or a remainer, is the People's Vote thing not just a massive waste of everyone's time and money with no potentially-useful outcome whatsoever?

Is it just a case of people trying to find yet another way to demonstrate their disapproval of Brexit?

I can't fathom the answer to this.

I wonder about this as well. For all those wanting a vote on the terms of the Brexit deal, what do they think is going to happen? The terms of the deal are put to the public, the public votes no as it doesn't like them. What then? Is the EU going to say "Oh well, in that case, here are some better terms to see you on your way; sorry we didn't offer better terms first time round"?

[B'stard Child]

Russian Troll Bot said:

The entire strategy of this People's vote seems to be let's try again, we will win this time, then the matter will be sorted.

<snip>

Finally, given that Remain have done nothing but attempt to undermine and overturn the result since day 1, why should they expect people to respect the outcome if it does go their way?

Excellent Post - but I can't see anyone calling for "extra democracy" reading it

[Andeh13]

I'm also keen to know OP!

[99dndd]

CAPP0 said:

I really don't want to add yet another Brexit thread, but unfortunately in the main one, every time someone asks a question, it gets buried in half a dozen pages of the usual suspects waving their handbags at each other. I've asked this twice in there and both times it gets swamped and therefore ignored.

My question is:

This People's Vote thing (or 2nd referendum, or whatever it's being called today: insummary, the resuest to hold a vote on the UK's exit deal):

- if this went ahead, and
- if the result was binding, rather than just being an opinion poll (and what would be the point of that anyway?) and
- if, as seems likely, the People voted No to the proposed deal,

would we not then just simply crash out with no deal anyway? Because there surely wouldn't be time for another round of negotiations, plus presumably yet another People's Vote on the outcome of that. And at present there is still no stated process for aborting Article 50. On that basis, whether you're a leaver or a remainer, is the People's Vote thing not just a massive waste of everyone's time and money with no potentially-useful outcome whatsoever?

Is it just a case of people trying to find yet another way to demonstrate their disapproval of Brexit?

I can't fathom the answer to this.

If the one deal brokered between the UK and the EU was rejected, there would not be another. That would be a no-deal* Brexit.

• technically a WTO deal Brexit but y'know.

[abzmike]

gooner1 said:

Gluten too I'll warrant.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I have a full range of tolerances. It’s almost as if there must be something wrong with a stance that doesn’t agree with Brexit.