If there is a second EU referendum

I sort of get where you're coming from too Angry and I agree about the fact that criticising the 'Leave' vote as being 'uneducated' is elitist crap.
Having said that I don't believe 'the people spoke'. Approximately 36% (52% of 71%) of the people are being listened to representing something like a 3.8% majority of those that voted and obviously a minority of the electorate as a whole. The rest are being ignored.
In a General Election where there may be five or more candidates such 'minority majorities' are to be expected and are acceptable, but surely not in a 'two horse race'.
Some say, 'who cares about those that didn't vote...sod 'em'...but, imo, that isn't fair. There are four principle reasons for 29% not voting...1) disinterest 2) inability through illness, work, holidays...whatever 3) those who genuinely didn't feel they knew enough to decide 4) the notorious and long standing difficulty of getting a sizeable student population to be sure of where their electoral role address should be...home or college base.
Surely if there's going to be a referendum, and I admit I think they're a bloody stupid idea...when else do we let 'the people' decide in this way...which war to support, how high vat should be, should Education or the NHS get more?...then both the level of participation and the result itself have got to be conclusive. In this case they weren't. The resulting likely action is only supported by a minority of the electorate and that for me is not democratic.
I also believe there are questions that must be asked about who is eligible to vote. The last time there was anything like this was forty one years ago. By that reckoning today's seven**** year olds who had no say will be nearly sixty next time there's a chance. Now I know there are plenty of six**** and seven**** year olds who aren't sensible enough to vote - although old enough to join the Army - but there's plenty who are and, with respect to the elderly, there's as many octogenarians who wouldn't have had a clue what they were doing and would have forgotten what they'd done by the time they'd left the polling booth and yet they're entitled. So someone who is going to have to live with this decision for the next half a century gets less say than someone who might have a couple of years left. Bit brutal I know but somethings not right.
All in all we've had a taste of the chaos and I fully accept things have to change but not, imo, like this. This isn't fair and it isn't democratic. I know some will say I'm a bitter loser but this isn't a last minute disputed goal, it's all our futures that people are currently playing politics with and too important to make such a huge mistake over.
Sorry...rant over...bloody Southgate...don't believe it!

P.S. 100% in agreement with Swale about people being misled by the lies that have been told and yes, I wouldn't have agreed, but if this decision had been taken by a Parliamentary democracy I wouldn't have felt wronged.

Absolutely Anagram, and what makes me mad is that this referendum was nothing to do with what people thought about the EU and all about a split between two factions of the Tory party, ****ing Johnson only backed leave because he thought it would help him succeed Cameron at the end of his term, now he has won he hasn't a ****ing clue what to do!

What exactly are Leaves plans for "making this country great again"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

Those in favour of Remain have by and large expressed distaste for the EU as an institution whilst recognising that on balance the UK was better off as a full member with a voice and a veto - I note you have avoided answering what the ****ing point of voting leave was if we essentially are stuck with the issues which those who voted leave thought they were getting.

Well in a parliamentary democracy you vote Politicians to run the country, so if a party ran an election campaign on a leave the EU ticket and got elected then yes I'd accept that.

what I can't accept is the likelyhood that the 4% and majority was achieved by lies and falsehoods, people I know say they voted leave as they thought £350 million would go to the NHS, aint going to happen and anyway the £350 million is false and proven to be so and admitted now by the Leave side.

Others thought that immigration would stop, no say those on the Leave side who just days ago were saying that a vote for leave would cut immigration!

---

Okay I will answer the question. You don't know what the deal will be going forward.. Are you telling us lies?
I accept people would have been misguided in their perception of staying and visa versa leaving.
The close vote is the biggest problem, now that is a problem going forward.

My biggest reason for wanting to leave was that I don't like what Europe is becoming.. What will it be like in 30 years? What legacy would we be leaving our children? The answer is nobody is sure either way..
If you write down positives and negatives on either side both lists would be quite long.. For me the list to leave was slightly bigger than the remain one. It was a hugely complex question and as I said before, I know where Anag is coming from.. But you've already told us our politicians have lied to us and now you say you want them to be able to make massive decisions without a mandate from the people?
:mad:

I am merely outlining what most informed people are saying is the likely outcome, why? because those who actually influence how the country is run, the establishment, the elite, global business will ensure that the deal is in their interests, which is access to the single market and free movement of labour, but feel free to come back and point out I was wrong.

No i said if in a general election a party which made leaving the EU if elected as their policy and they were elected then they would have a mandate!

Politicians have always made massive decisions without having a referendum everytime, wars, spending decisions, laws etc. Thats how it is in a democracy, some they get right some they get wrong thats what happens, not perfect, neither was europe but better than the alternative surely?

Whilst I was a remain I have to agree about concerns over how the EU has evolved since the Common Market was created. It's rather like a rolling snowball that keeps growing uncontrollably until at the bottom of the hill it will hit something with unknown consequences. The thought of Turkey joining positively terrifies me, apart from the internal instability it's already coping with the effect upon radical Muslims across the Middle East is a further unknown in an already unstable relationship with the west. Unfortunately, the same feathering of your own nest that applies to our politicians applies (without apparent accountability) to the powers that be in Brussels and that should worry us all!! I don't recall being given a say on who joins this Union that I am supposed to be an enthusiastic supporter of!! Indeed, I don't recall any prospective EU candidate mentioning that during MEP elections. As for a Euro Army God help us!

A supporter yes but enthusiastic based solely on the economic benefits to this country definitely not. Dr Frankinstein sought progress but created a monster!!

The problem for me is that even though I voted for remaining in the EU because I'm against isolationism and 'looking after yourself first' in this ever globilized world, I still can't quite decide whether being in or out is for the best.

Which is one of the reasons I feel the referendum is unsafe, as I don't think the majority of people know either - even though they think they do. Or at least, a difference between being firmly in one camp but being in possession of enough facts to be able to make that informed decision. A friend of mine who uses Twitter a lot has run a poll to see how how many people she knows who voted to leave have since changed their minds, and the result was around 10%. That doesn't mean anything because for all she knows the people who say they voted leave might not have done and are just scewing the result and obviously one personal poll by one person of a few hundred people doesn't mean anything at all. But I do think there are people who have since changed their minds and regret their decision.

Does that warrant a new referendum? No, I don't think it does. What bothers me is that in my opinion the rules should have been clearly set out beforehand that for such a monumental decision we would need a clear majority of a certain amount - I'd prefer 60% before any change to be adopted. I thought the same about the Scottish independance vote. It's bizare to base such an important alteration on just a few percentage points. Vote to remain and you can revisit it easily enough at another point if things don't improve (as the Scotts are threatening to do now) but vote leave and once you're out it's going to be a bloody nightmare to switch back. So you have to be absolutely sure before doing it, and 52% isn't a clear enough margin for my liking. Especially as the people who this is going to effect the most during their working lifetimes are the younger voters yet the pension age voters were the ones that swung it. Not wishing to be harsh but some bloke who's 80 plus probably isn't going to have to live with the long term consequences, yet the clear majority of younger voters wanted to stay in the EU. This is why accepting a narrow margin to adopt such a massive change is flawed.

Having said that, I watch the behaviour of MEP's in Brussels today, including Mr Juncker, and the arrogance and attitude and lack of respect that they demonstrated was breathtaking. Farage maybe a class **** but that doesn't mean the others have to behave like children. There were scenes that actually reminded me of FIFA. And it made me wonder if we're best out of it anyway.

But regardless, I just think the process was flawed.

Anag, forgive me for not quoting your whole post... But, on your point of people not voting, I seem to remember when there was trouble in France yourself and Swaley were posting that hopefully these thugs had not registered to vote. Seems strange that now you are distressed that you were missing people who voted. Are we only distressed about missing voters who would have possible voted Remain?

Nobody has answered my point that all of a sudden the politicians who you guys have said have lied to us will all of a sudden become super human Lycra clad hero's who won't lie.. And that you trust that 100%..

So let's say we left it to the politicians for a second.. How would that work? Votes along party lines? What happens if as in this case the parties were split? Party WIPs forcing votes.
Okay a free vote.. In theory the elected representative of that area should vote as his/her constituents feel.. If you follow that logic and look at the voting patterns, what would the result have been.. To be honest I don't know as London would have a larger amount of constituencies.. Someone has probably worked that out.. If an elected representative had voted against the majority of his constiuants, how would that have been received?
Would that whole process have not raised as many questions as you have now? Both sides could bleat that this or that in unfair.
Lastly, I did not hear too many of these arguements pre the referendum...
:mad:

And the end of the day we had a vote to stay or leave. We voted, the votes were counted and the leave vote won.

Now all we have to do is stick together into making this work for all of us!

.....meanwhile, back in the real world, real people are 'getting on with it'. I was listening to the radio earlier, and after a succession of interviews with bureaucrats expressing doom and gloom, the boss of Dixons came on expressing a wholly positive view that his business, which has presence throughout Europe, will deal with whatever comes its way and survive and prosper, and he made a point of saying 'of course the business world moves more quickly than politicians/bureaucrats'.

Also interesting, and bear in mind part of the argument to 'Leave' was to stop the EU telling us what to do, Donald Tusk was also interviewed, about Article 50, and repeatedly said 'UK must do this, UK must do that', thus reinforcing that argument

Just observations

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ramondo

The problem for me is that even though I voted for remaining in the EU because I'm against isolationism and 'looking after yourself first' in this ever globilized world, I still can't quite decide whether being in or out is for the best.

Which is one of the reasons I feel the referendum is unsafe, as I don't think the majority of people know either - even though they think they do. Or at least, a difference between being firmly in one camp but being in possession of enough facts to be able to make that informed decision. A friend of mine who uses Twitter a lot has run a poll to see how how many people she knows who voted to leave have since changed their minds, and the result was around 10%. That doesn't mean anything because for all she knows the people who say they voted leave might not have done and are just scewing the result and obviously one personal poll by one person of a few hundred people doesn't mean anything at all. But I do think there are people who have since changed their minds and regret their decision.

Does that warrant a new referendum? No, I don't think it does. What bothers me is that in my opinion the rules should have been clearly set out beforehand that for such a monumental decision we would need a clear majority of a certain amount - I'd prefer 60% before any change to be adopted. I thought the same about the Scottish independance vote. It's bizare to base such an important alteration on just a few percentage points. Vote to remain and you can revisit it easily enough at another point if things don't improve (as the Scotts are threatening to do now) but vote leave and once you're out it's going to be a bloody nightmare to switch back. So you have to be absolutely sure before doing it, and 52% isn't a clear enough margin for my liking. Especially as the people who this is going to effect the most during their working lifetimes are the younger voters yet the pension age voters were the ones that swung it. Not wishing to be harsh but some bloke who's 80 plus probably isn't going to have to live with the long term consequences, yet the clear majority of younger voters wanted to stay in the EU. This is why accepting a narrow margin to adopt such a massive change is flawed.

Having said that, I watch the behaviour of MEP's in Brussels today, including Mr Juncker, and the arrogance and attitude and lack of respect that they demonstrated was breathtaking. Farage maybe a class **** but that doesn't mean the others have to behave like children. There were scenes that actually reminded me of FIFA. And it made me wonder if we're best out of it anyway.

But regardless, I just think the process was flawed.

---

Cant argue with much of that to be honest.. If ever there was a reason to leave the EU, I give you Mr Juncker...:mad: