Britons would now vote to stay in EU, want second referendum: poll

[Enoon]

4 hours ago, RotBenz8888 said:

If you go for a second referendum, you'd better plan a third one when you're at it. Third time's the charm????.

 

Make it a regular thing, every year for next 5 years.

 

Because the more young people get to vote, the more old people die........the stronger becomes the remain vote.

 

Tally-ho!

 

 

[Moonlover]

3 hours ago, NE1 said:

You can't have a second vote , that is not democratic. 

It would set a very expensive and trouble making precedent. 

The vote was put to the people and the people voted , that is the end of it.

Otherwise you will end up with a " Red shirt / Yellow shirt scenario" .

General election , Tories won ,  we want another vote. Labour won , we want another vote.

 

 

Why not? The precedent has already been set. Because the referendum in 2016 was not the first one anyway. It was the second one, the first being in 1976.

 

I believe that in the end May will have no choice but to go back to people and allow them to have the 'final say'.

 

One of the main reasons I have for saying that is because parliament is in no fit state to make this decision. I believe that most parliamentarians do not believe in, or want Brexit to happen.

 

They are being asked to vote between their own conscious and their party loyalties. An impossible dilemma for any democratic process.

 

Hell, even May herself voted for Remain.

 

Give in to reality May and give the people the vote.

[NE1]

They already had it.

[NE1]

5 minutes ago, Moonlover said:

Give in to reality May and give the people the vote.

Wasn't it the people who voted last time ?

[vogie]

15 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

According to the recent ECJ ruling, it can be done unilaterally. 

"Almost certainly that will require some extension of the article 50 deadline beyond 29 March. The treaty is very clear about this – it can be done but requires unanimity among all EU states. If our purpose in asking for an extension was to allow time for a referendum, there is no doubt that all would agree. Brexit would be bad for everyone, though obviously worst for us."

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/06/drafted-article-50-brexit-referendum-eu-state

 

Mrs May said on the Andrew Marr show yesterday that it needed all 27 EU countries to agree to a delay, but if you know better, so be it.

 

 

[melvinmelvin]

22 minutes ago, vogie said:

I don't think extending article 50 is as simple as it seems, I believe all of the other 27 countries of the EU have to agree to the UKs request, and like another referendum, time is running out.

agree, not easy

it has been established that UK unilaterally can revoke/cancel A50,

whilst prolonging the A50 period requires agreement by all current EU members.

 

further difficulties,

prolonging with a view to sort a deal that can be eaten

requires that involved parties recognizes that the current deal is a failed project

takes some integrity and honesty to do that

 

but what have you now,

 

Labour say they hate the deal

large portions of Tory hates it

UKIP hates it, but not in HoC

LibDem - dunno

SNP dunno

DUP hates it

(cant remember having read about the views of the other NI parties)

 

 

[melvinmelvin]

23 minutes ago, Enoon said:

 

Make it a regular thing, every year for next 5 years.

 

Because the more young people get to vote, the more old people die........the stronger becomes the remain vote.

 

Tally-ho!

 

 

UK has a long tradition with America's Cup,

adopt the same scheme

 

first to 7 wins gets the cup

 

 

[Tchooptip]

4 hours ago, NE1 said:

You can't have a second vote , that is not democratic. 

It would set a very expensive and trouble making precedent. 

The vote was put to the people and the people voted , that is the end of it.

Otherwise you will end up with a " Red shirt / Yellow shirt scenario" .

General election , Tories won ,  we want another vote. Labour won , we want another vote.

 

 

Many voted because they were hidden 3/4 of the truth and it was used many populist arguments like this red bus with written in big letters "All the billion that we give to Europe lets give them to our service of health and our hospitals" and all the grandpas and grandmas believed it with delight. 

[Mavideol]

4 hours ago, inThailand said:

Britons would now vote to stay in EU, want second referendum: poll

 

Not a surprise on both accounts. 

sure, the original referendum was misleading, they didn't know the cons they only told them the possible "pros"

[OJAS]

1 hour ago, whatsupdoc said:

Maybe it is the fault of the FPTP system in the UK, but when there is no willingness to reach compromises in politics you end up with a very divided society and all the conflict it brings.

Would not be my choice.

 

43 minutes ago, vogie said:

I agree, but how are you going to get the big two political parties agreeing to a PR voting system when FPTP favours both of them, with PR UKIP would have amassed about 60 seats in Parliament, can you imagine what a difference that would have made to brexit, that is assuming that the Tories would have formed a coalition with them of course.

FPTP was, in fact, resoundingly defeated at, guess what, a referendum held in 2011 - which, as I recall, was insisted upon by the Lib Dems as a condition of their participation in the 2010-2015 coalition government:-

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-13297573

 

 

[RichardColeman]

Most of this rubbish is due to A. Project Fear from the Remoaners. B. May's (and all her remoaner coleagues) deliberate acts of sabotage to try and stay in and C. Europe's project  of trying to punish anyone that wants to leave their club.

 

Remoaners lost - get over it, make the best of it, move on, because that's exactly what the remoaners would have said to the Brexiteers !

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, OJAS said:

 

FPTP was, in fact, resoundingly defeated at, guess what, a referendum held in 2011 - which, as I recall, was insisted upon by the Lib Dems as a condition of their participation in the 2010-2015 coalition government:-

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-13297573

 

 

I think you mean that PR was resoundingly defeated - but maybe this is another example of the general public voting in favour of something ultimately detrimental to their own interests. 

[OJAS]

3 minutes ago, RichardColeman said:

Most of this rubbish is due to A. Project Fear from the Remoaners. B. May's (and all her remoaner coleagues) deliberate acts of sabotage to try and stay in and C. Europe's project  of trying to punish anyone that wants to leave their club.

 

Remoaners lost - get over it, make the best of it, move on, because that's exactly what the remoaners would have said to the Brexiteers !

Yep, Project Fear has the same familiar ring to it as did the Y2K non-event almost 20 years ago!

[Mavideol]

4 hours ago, NE1 said:

You can't have a second vote , that is not democratic. 

It would set a very expensive and trouble making precedent. 

The vote was put to the people and the people voted , that is the end of it.

Otherwise you will end up with a " Red shirt / Yellow shirt scenario" .

General election , Tories won ,  we want another vote. Labour won , we want another vote.

 

 

that maybe correct for England, what about Scotland and Ireland they are some how independent, they have their own government, they should be heard and they voted to stay, the vote should be respected per individual UK members not as a group

[Jingthing]

Now that the public knows the actual details of the deal or no deal that are actually possible, a new vote can be based on much better information. Again … what are Brexiters afraid of? The truth hurts. The actual options are total crapola. It should be OK to change your mind. 

Edited January 7, 2019 by Jingthing

[evadgib]

12 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Now that the public knows the actual details of the deal or no deal that are actually possible, a new vote can be based on much better information. Again … what are Brexiters afraid of? The truth hurts. The actual options are total crapola. It should be OK to change your mind. 

TBH I believe we'd win by a much bigger margin (unless tampered with) but we won't re-run anymore than US did when Gore was robbed.

Edited January 7, 2019 by evadgib

[RuamRudy]

7 minutes ago, OJAS said:

Yep, Project Fear has the same familiar ring to it as did the Y2K non-event almost 20 years ago!

I think that there are a few people on TV who would be able to explain to you in quite some detail why the predictions of doom around Y2K never came to pass - mainly because of the huge exercise undertaken in advance to identify concerns and mitigate them. That you never experienced calamity is not down to hyperbole or scaremongering, but, rather, the efforts of many people around the world working to resolve it before it affected you. 

 

Now, however, with only a few weeks until Brexit doomsday, we don't have the faintest clue what we are going to be facing. 

[Moonlover]

9 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

that maybe correct for England, what about Scotland and Ireland they are some how independent, they have their own government, they should be heard and they voted to stay, the vote should be respected per individual UK members not as a group

You mean, of course Northern Ireland. And therein lies the real ball crushing dilemma. There will never be satisfactory Brexit solution that satisfies the requirements of the 'border issue'.

 

The people of N. I. voted 'remain' for a good reason. Neither they, nor the south can accept a hard border. End of Brexit IMO.

[evadgib]

10 minutes ago, Moonlover said:

You mean, of course Northern Ireland. And therein lies the real ball crushing dilemma. There will never be satisfactory Brexit solution that satisfies the requirements of the 'border issue'.

 

The people of N. I. voted 'remain' for a good reason. Neither they, nor the south can accept a hard border. End of Brexit IMO.

I saw a recent article that suggested the border isn't really our problem but that of the EU ie they want it, they fund it & have it on their side.

Edited January 7, 2019 by evadgib

[Jingthing]

21 minutes ago, evadgib said:

TBH I believe we'd win by a much bigger margin (unless tampered with) but we won't re-run anymore than US did when Gore was robbed.

Sorry, but I call B.S.

Bush vs. Gore was a presidential election.

There is no legal way under the U.S. constitution for a redo presidential election.

Brexit vote was a totally optional issue referendum. 

There is no legal reason to block a new referendum based on new information. 

[Jingthing]

13 minutes ago, markaoffy said:

“Crapola “ defines the post


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

I smell the fear of the will of the people being armed with much better information revealed in a new referendum,  so all you've got are insults. 

Edited January 7, 2019 by Jingthing

[welovesundaysatspace]

1 hour ago, vogie said:

"Almost certainly that will require some extension of the article 50 deadline beyond 29 March. The treaty is very clear about this – it can be done but requires unanimity among all EU states. If our purpose in asking for an extension was to allow time for a referendum, there is no doubt that all would agree. Brexit would be bad for everyone, though obviously worst for us."

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/06/drafted-article-50-brexit-referendum-eu-state

 

Mrs May said on the Andrew Marr show yesterday that it needed all 27 EU countries to agree to a delay, but if you know better, so be it.

 

 

See above:

1. Cancel A50

2. Invoke A50 again 

 

None of that requires consent from the other 27 or the EU. 

[evadgib]

11 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Sorry, but I call B.S.

Bush vs. Gore was a presidential election.

There is no legal way under the U.S. constitution for a redo presidential election.

Brexit vote was a totally optional issue referendum. 

There is no legal reason to block a new referendum based on new information. 

Your expertise in my countries affairs mirrors mine in yours with the interesting footnote that Bush secured the same outcome.

Edited January 7, 2019 by evadgib

[Snow Leopard]

5 hours ago, NE1 said:

You can't have a second vote , that is not democratic. 

It would set a very expensive and trouble making precedent. 

The vote was put to the people and the people voted , that is the end of it.

Otherwise you will end up with a " Red shirt / Yellow shirt scenario" .

General election , Tories won ,  we want another vote. Labour won , we want another vote.

 

 

Correct. A vote is a vote. Lets get on with it. 

[Jingthing]

2 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Your expertise in UK's way of doing things therefore mirrors mine in the opposite direction. Bush did get to be president tho didn't he...

You are incorrect. I know enough to know that it certainly is legally possible for there to be a second Brexit referendum. So stop with the idiotic digs about nationality. It is not ever legally possible to have a redo U.S. presidential election. That's why Bush vs. Gore was decided in the supreme court. Don't wave around your special knowledge that actually isn't special and isn't true. You can't show me one bit of evidence that it isn't legally possible to redo a Brexit vote because it doesn't exist. It is a political decision and I fully support that it be made. 

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, Snow Leopard said:

Correct. A vote is a vote. Lets get on with it. 

A vote may indeed be a vote, but if the majority of the UK public is actually against going ahead with deal or no deal Brexit now that they know much better what that really looks like, there is no legal reason to block a revote. I understand why Brexiteers don't want it. They know they will lose. Doesn't sound very democratic to me. Sounds like they are trying to force a very bad decision to stand when the public now doesn't want it to stand. 

[vogie]

5 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

See above:

1. Cancel A50

2. Invoke A50 again 

 

None of that requires consent from the other 27 or the EU. 

I have showed you in black and white, another member has also said this, if you don't want to believe anything that anyone tells you, that is your prerogative, you just love to be in control, I'm done with you.

[dick dasterdly]

48 minutes ago, OJAS said:

 

FPTP was, in fact, resoundingly defeated at, guess what, a referendum held in 2011 - which, as I recall, was insisted upon by the Lib Dems as a condition of their participation in the 2010-2015 coalition government:-

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-13297573

 

 

I was already living in Thailand at the time, so didn't follow the campaign/politics - but was suprised to hear that the FPTP system won the referendum vote.

 

IIRC, I wondered as to how this happened on another thread and (again, IIRC!) was told it was because the system put forward as an alternative to FPTP was extremely bad.

 

Edit - Back on topic, which makes me think of May's 'deal' with the eu.  Nobody other than May (and the eu) think otherwise ????!

Edited January 7, 2019 by dick dasterdly

[welovesundaysatspace]

17 minutes ago, vogie said:

I have showed you in black and white, another member has also said this, if you don't want to believe anything that anyone tells you, that is your prerogative, you just love to be in control, I'm done with you.

No, you didn’t show “in black and white” that canceling A50 and invoking A50 requires consent from the other 27 or the EU. In fact:

 

1. The ECJ recently ruled that cancelling A50 can be done unilaterally (source: see article posted in this very same forum here);

2. Article 50 says it can be invoked unilaterally (did the UK require consent from anyone when it revoked A50?) (source: see the legal text of article 50). 

 

So, there you have it. Maybe get sober before posting. 

Edited January 7, 2019 by welovesundaysatspace

[Snow Leopard]

4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

A vote may indeed be a vote, but if the majority of the UK public is actually against going ahead with deal or no deal Brexit now that they know much better what that really looks like, there is no legal reason to block a revote. I understand why Brexiteers don't want it. They know they will lose. Doesn't sound very democratic to me. Sounds like they are trying to force a very bad decision to stand when the public now doesn't want it to stand. 

No, you are wrong. The fact that it has been a fiasco on the leave negotiations is bye the bye. What did anyone expect from the EU in the first place?

 

The vote was to leave or to remain. Leave won.

 

If the situation is not to peoples liking after we leave then start a party with rejoining in the name. The same as UKIP did.