I feel, most of the extreme remainers have largely whittled away to a smaller number, were there a second vote, the leavers are still, more so I would suggest, angry at politicians who do not listen so for politicians to now believe a peoples democratic vote can be trampled over, would see a greater determination to attend a second vote and show the level of anger. Were there a second vote, I have no doubt brexiteers would win again. However, to have a second vote would fall into the pattern of votes against the eu that the eu do not like of being involved of keep voting till we get the vote the eu want and even then if they can't win, they just launch what they want anyway. This is why I said many moons ago, for most of us, we are worker ants(not always a bad thing) but the one thing we do have that is powerful as a voice, is our vote and if they start to pick and chose which democratic majority votes they want to abide too, then we should hoof the feckers out.
As nice as that would be I can't see politicians doing that. They all seem to have other motives for what they want to do, usually to benefit themselves or family/friends.
This. People voted leave on the basis of pie in the sky promises and a completely unlikely scenario, ie that they could have their cake and eat it. 2 years later they are wiser. In other words, they actually now know what they are voting for. There won't be countless billions for the NHS, they are all going to be poorer. So let's have another vote and if the turkeys still want to vote for Xmas (as the sentiment on this thread implies they would like to) then fine. At least it will be a proper vote with people in possession of many of the facts, unlike last time. The leavers can still vote leave. What is the problem? The problem is that the Leave side (I still can't figure out their anti-EU vehemence - why do they think that life will get better?) are shit scared that about 3% of the electorate will have come to their senses and will reverse the decision. Because their view of "Brexit whatever the cost", like it's some sort of 2nd World War, doesn't want to take into any account the almost half of the population who didn't want to leave in the first place. It's not a football match -"One-nil, one-nil, one-nil, one-nil". The good news is that I don't have to live in the UK, but a dive-bombing pound doesn't currently do me any favours. It seems far more democratic to me to really check up that the population does indeed think that a no-deal Brexit is better than no Brexit.
So the democracy of a nation is ignored and you think 1 person can make the difference - how about you stand up when 17 million people say no to being deceived and lied to and hit the streets in protest if they try and engineer 'remain', your convictions will see you on the street shouting that the majority of the country are fascists I'm sure - you fascist You are very Childish btw... nah nah nah nah nah
Good point, sadly I am not very eloquent, and for sure do not understand enough about politics to become a candidate.
It's the only topic of conversation on R4 or on the Beeb. I'm quite interested to see how it will all pan out. I can't see that the Vote of No Confidence and a new GE is going to solve anything. That's just kicking the can down the road. Both Lab and Con aren't prepared to back a second vote (although I think they'll be forced to) so a GE is irrelevant. What I like is that the phrase "Meaningful Vote"must imply that all the other votes are meaningless. That amuses me.
hi glid. long time no see. some of us are putting their money where their mouth is btw. many many hundreds of monies btw
Hi Fin. As things currently stand, I'm putting some of my money where I don't have a mouth. I don't have any choice about this. It's already there. People seem to be doing their damnedest to make it worth as few Swiss francs as possible. BTW, Mr Grieve says you'll be on your bike once Brexit is confirmed, so a silver lining for you, eh?
No doubt you know this but this phrase was coined because Parliament wanted a vote on whatever deal was thrashed out by government but wanted to make sure they weren't fobbed off with a vote whose wording made it irrelevant or meaningless. Hence the admittedly horrible term meaningful vote.
Not quite, the majority of people leaving saw what the eu was becoming, warned the eu of our unease, they decided to take no notice and the good ship eu was sailing a course most brits did not want to go on, so we decided to use the polite way of choice, the democratic vote. I wonder if you saw the other day where £20 billion was announced for the nhs? I will still earn the same wage should I go back to work a day after leaving the eu as I would have before leaving the eu so what point do you think joe public will actually be poorer? as to "then fine" in regards to your second vote comment, let me show you how much of a hypocritical statement that is, we the losing side think you, the poorley educated and ill informed didn't know jack so we the losing side are insisting on a second vote and if you win again, then we will respect it, but probably not Perhaps you living in Switzerland may account for that inability to understand? war, football? I think I can see where your difficulty is happening, we in the U.K. had a peoples democratic vote on our future with the eu, no other country dares to ask their people this question even more so given the rise of the far right in europe and with the May mep elections coming. This ties in what has been suggested a few years ago, brexiteers see a we future, many remainers are asking what about me We did, they told us, those who lost have spent 2 and a half years refusing to accept it.
Vehement. Vehement. There is a lot wrong with the EU (although the UK has always been spectacularly poor at making friends within it to change and influence things). But do I think that a friendless Britain out of the EU will be better off? No. Nonetheless, I am coming around to the idea that people really do deserve what they get. The French political class is deeply corrupt, but that is surely a reflection on France. Much of the US actually likes Donald Trump and is happy enough about constant massacres just so long as they can keep shooting. And about half of the UK is happy to scurry lemming-like over a cliff just so long as they don't have to have any interference from Johnny Foreigner. It's all good.
Switzerland had such a referendum. The people voted to relinquish ties due to their dislike of free movement. The government deliberated for a while, then decided that cutting loose would be so economically disastrous, they decided to ignore the vote.
I think they had a vote on some parts of their eu partnership such as the ecj, and free movement but did not have a vote similar to brexit because we as a member wanted to leave, Switzerland last time I looked, is not an eu member state so would not be leaving. Quite different
Essentially Old Rider is right. We did vote to end free movement, largely because Switzerland is very small, 25% of the population are foreigners and there isn't a lot of room to put more people. But, the EU was most unhappy about this and said, once again, "you can't cherry pick, you can't have your cake and eat it". So essentially, the government has sat on its hands and hopes that the problem will go away. Which it may. No one seems to be talking about it much. The difference between the Swiss and UK positions is that indeed, Switzerland has never been part of the EU, even if there are a zillion bilateral agreements meaning that it's a bit like being a member. Still, no lawbook of 50 years standing to unpick. Also, Swiss democracy is in a different league to that in the UK. The people get a people's vote on pretty much everything here, so you wouldn't want to trade that in for an EU vote. When I look at the UK, on the other hand, I often think, would the EU parliament really make much worse decisions, on balance than the Westminster one? And I suspect the answer is no.
Hello Glidd, good to see you after a long gap, or have you just been posting in threads I have not read ? I voted leave because I felt and still feel it was the right option based on my experience of life, work, travel etc. I did not believe much that either side put out as most people seemed far to one sided in their reasoning. There are undoubtedly benefits to staying in and benefits to leaving. Everyone seemed to be so tribal and determined to shout the other side down. I`m sure millions on both sides just thought all the politicians were behaving like lying turds as usual. Anyway, here we are with the possibility that the result will be overturned or ignored. That should horrify all fans of democracy regardless of what they voted for. It is wrong. By all means lets have another referendum but as with the last one, it should be after we have enacted the result. I`m all for referendums if they get the public involved but to make them worthwhile they should be binding. Is that not the case in Switzerland ?
