Brexit Referendum - top two choices
Poll: Brexit Referendum - top two choices
Total Members Polled: 443
Discussion
Funny that the people who say we were confused, ill informed and misled by the first referendum now want to have a 3 way referendum with 3 unknown options to be confused, ill informed and misled about.
I presume that "lessons have been learned" and whatever the choices available in the next referendum they will be much more careful about who gets to campaign, donate money, have media coverage and vote in future.
I presume that "lessons have been learned" and whatever the choices available in the next referendum they will be much more careful about who gets to campaign, donate money, have media coverage and vote in future.
JuanCarlosFandango said:
Funny that the people who say we were confused, ill informed and misled by the first referendum now want to have a 3 way referendum with 3 unknown options to be confused, ill informed and misled about.
I presume that "lessons have been learned" and whatever the choices available in the next referendum they will be much more careful about who gets to campaign, donate money, have media coverage and vote in future.
I'll eat my hat if that ever happens!I presume that "lessons have been learned" and whatever the choices available in the next referendum they will be much more careful about who gets to campaign, donate money, have media coverage and vote in future.
Helicopter123 said:
We regularly have elections in this country. Any party winning an election with a manifesto pledge to hold a referendum on any matter should be allowed to proceed. Tories and SNP both recent examples.
You seem to forget that the Tory manifesto was quite clear on how it would implement Brexit too, yet now (conveniently) want to ignore that.City_boy said:
You seem to forget that the Tory manifesto was quite clear on how it would implement Brexit too, yet now (conveniently) want to ignore that.
Then maybe you should ask yourself if the tories included any declaration of aims or policy in that manifesto that they clearly had little control over. Surely you don't believe everything a political party says just to gain votes?
Piha said:
Then maybe you should ask yourself if the tories included any declaration of aims or policy in that manifesto that they clearly had little control over.
Surely you don't believe everything a political party says just to gain votes?
There were some quite explicit requirements, yes. Can I assume you don’t know what these were?Surely you don't believe everything a political party says just to gain votes?
Russian Troll Bot said:
PRTVR said:
Helicopter123 said:
NoNeed said:
philv said:
It doesn’t hurt to double check and ask again.
funny how remainers say this yet didn't want us aske when the treaties like lisbon were signed.Why is that?
City_boy said:
Piha said:
Then maybe you should ask yourself if the tories included any declaration of aims or policy in that manifesto that they clearly had little control over.
Surely you don't believe everything a political party says just to gain votes?
There were some quite explicit requirements, yes. Can I assume you don’t know what these were?Surely you don't believe everything a political party says just to gain votes?
Biker 1 said:
Helicopter123 said:
We regularly have elections in this country. Any party winning an election with a manifesto pledge to hold a referendum on any matter should be allowed to proceed. Tories and SNP both recent examples.
Not sure that was in the tory 2017 manifesto. In fact, I seem to recall something about leaving the EU.Brexit is no different. And why should it be?
City_boy said:
Helicopter123 said:
A democracy where the people cannot change their mind is no longer a democracy.
Limited evidence that the people have changed their mind.Kermit power said:
amusingduck said:
Your proposed 2nd ref question doesn't meet the guidelines IMO.
A referendum question should present the options clearly, simply and neutrally. So it should:
• be easy to understand
• be to the point
• be unambiguous
• avoid encouraging voters to consider one response more favourably than another
• avoid misleading voters
• Is the question written in plain language? That is, language that:
– uses short sentences (around 15–20 words)
– is simple, direct, and concise
– uses familiar words, and avoids jargon or technical terms that would not be easily understood by most people
• Is the question written in neutral language, avoiding words that suggest a judgement or opinion, either explicitly or implicitly?
• Is the information contained in the question factual, describing the question and the options clearly and accurately?
• Does the question avoid assuming anything about voters’ views?
The first referendum failed on those grounds, so it's a bit of a moot point, surely?A referendum question should present the options clearly, simply and neutrally. So it should:
• be easy to understand
• be to the point
• be unambiguous
• avoid encouraging voters to consider one response more favourably than another
• avoid misleading voters
• Is the question written in plain language? That is, language that:
– uses short sentences (around 15–20 words)
– is simple, direct, and concise
– uses familiar words, and avoids jargon or technical terms that would not be easily understood by most people
• Is the question written in neutral language, avoiding words that suggest a judgement or opinion, either explicitly or implicitly?
• Is the information contained in the question factual, describing the question and the options clearly and accurately?
• Does the question avoid assuming anything about voters’ views?
How?
Leicester Loyal said:
No deal then remain.
But by having 3 choices, it's splitting up votes.
It should be leave with no deal or leave with May's deal, we've already chosen to leave.
not everyone who votes in the 2nd referendum will have been able to vote in the first, so it's essential that those voters are given the opportunity to express their opinion whether 'to Brexit, or not to brexit?' right? It would be democratically unfair to do otherwise. But by having 3 choices, it's splitting up votes.
It should be leave with no deal or leave with May's deal, we've already chosen to leave.
Polite M135 driver said:
not everyone who votes in the 2nd referendum will have been able to vote in the first, so it's essential that those voters are given the opportunity to express their opinion whether 'to Brexit, or not to brexit?' right? It would be democratically unfair to do otherwise.
not everyone who votes in the 3rd referendum will have been able to vote in the second, so it's essential that those voters are given the opportunity to express their opinion whether 'to Brexit, or not to brexit?' right? It would be democratically unfair to do otherwise.City_boy said:
Helicopter123 said:
A democracy where the people cannot change their mind is no longer a democracy.
Limited evidence that the people have changed their mind.Personally I do think it's important that, if we are going to make decisions by referendum, the referendum is enacted in a timely way. Because otherwise you are acting on outdated information. If we found out the government were making policy decisions on information that is 2 years out of date, we would rightly be angry. So now we have a deal, put it to the people to vote on, now we have (more, although still scant) details. That way we get the highest possible fidelity decision.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff