Brexit thread

[Eric Cartman]

So if the 2nd ( or 3rd or 4th ) vote was still leave, the remainers would be happy with that and not whine about 30% of the population didnt vote, so they might not want to leave, so we should remain ?? ?

I can't speak for all people who voted remain but a vote on the deal makes sense to me given how turbulent the negotiations have been compared to how the public were told they would be.

A second vote also puts to bed your final point, if people don't vote after knowing how close it is then they clearly dont care. I would imagine there were remainers and leavers who were convinced not to vote by polls that suggested a clear win for remain so a second vote would give a clearer picture all round.

I would then be in favour of following the public's choice. At the moment we don't know what the public's choice is. It certainly isn't chequers, I don't think people want a no deal (although I would prefer that to a half way solution like chequers).

The main logical criticism of a 2nd vote is really simple but not somewhere Brexiteers want to go because it smears then as much as anyone else. The public is still horribly uninformed about brexit, they don't know what any of the outcomes entail. They don't even know what no deal means ( and we would obviously need a clear picture of what remaining means too for the vote to be legitimate)

[life on mars]

Brexit solved :


Irish ministers have dismissed a suggestion from a radio presenter that the best way to end the Brexit impasse is for an “Irexit” which would see the country leave the EU to join the UK.

[life on mars]

I can't speak for all people who voted remain but a vote on the deal makes sense to me given how turbulent the negotiations have been compared to how the public were told they would be.

A second vote also puts to bed your final point, if people don't vote after knowing how close it is then they clearly dont care. I would imagine there were remainers and leavers who were convinced not to vote by polls that suggested a clear win for remain so a second vote would give a clearer picture all round.

I would then be in favour of following the public's choice. At the moment we don't know what the public's choice is. It certainly isn't chequers, I don't think people want a no deal (although I would prefer that to a half way solution like chequers).

The main logical criticism of a 2nd vote is really simple but not somewhere Brexiteers want to go because it smears then as much as anyone else. The public is still horribly uninformed about brexit, they don't know what any of the outcomes entail. They don't even know what no deal means ( and we would obviously need a clear picture of what remaining means too for the vote to be legitimate)

I would agree to a simple yes or no vote on the deal May , nothing else on the ballot paper .


In my view it gets us over the undemocratic way of changing a vote that has been delivered by a lot of people .

[Taunton Blue Genie]

I would agree to a simple yes or no vote on the deal May , nothing else on the ballot paper .


In my view it gets us over the undemocratic way of changing a vote that has been delivered by a lot of people .

Democracy is all well and good but very few people who voted for Brexit knew what they were actually voting for and the ramifications thereof. There are very good arguments for leaving the EU (a concept that has enormous flaws and which will probably end in tears) but the vast majority of Brexit voters I come across or see interviewed in vox-pops on the TV are incredibly ignorant of the economic and other consequences but our fate was put in their hands.

I don't pretend that I knew all of the ramifications myself and I can't say I know anyone on the Remain side that did. All I know is that I wouldn't put my trust and future in the average voter on the street.