From London, with love: tens of thousands rally against Brexit vote

[Basil B]

No. England were beaten by Iceland.

Wales beat Belgium.

An appalling performance by England, a magnificent team effort by Wales.

Back to the topic.

Well first as an English man, I am British too so I will be routing for Wales...

And I wish Iceland well too, as they knocked us out it would be just more egg on the face of the English team if Iceland were well and truly thrashed by France.

[MissAndry]

Do to those who say we should have another vote,if there is a general election and one party wind by 52 to 48 ,we should go to the polls again? And what if the vote is exactly the same ,do we try yet again?

52% would be an astounding victory, the last British government (Cameron) was formed with a 36.7% Conservative vote.

Tony Blair's best win was only 43% in 1997, almost the same as Maggie Thatcher's win at 42% in 1983.

Edited July 3, 2016 by MissAndry

[nontabury]

A 2nd vote could come along. Don't be so quick to diss the peaceful protestors. It was peaceful protesters against the US war in VN which influenced that war. Initially, powers-that-be were chiding the protesters as a bunch of bedraggled hippies who didn't know how to brush their hair.

I think a 2nd vote would reverse Brexit.

...and then do we have a third for best of 3? On and on and on and on!

Yes, until a result which is in the best interests of the people is reached

Is't that what all dictators think?

[Basil B]

Do to those who say we should have another vote,if there is a general election and one party wind by 52 to 48 ,we should go to the polls again? And what if the vote is exactly the same ,do we try yet again?

I have felt for this and other referendums they should be a clear win not a simple win to force change.

Therefore should there be another referendum I think there needs to be a clear and decisive win to overturn the last referendum, I doubt that would happen.

[Steely Dan]

Perhaps the best response to this 'March for Europe' is to open the channel tunnel to pedestrians so they can vote with their feet.

[NumbNut]

Do to those who say we should have another vote,if there is a general election and one party wind by 52 to 48 ,we should go to the polls again? And what if the vote is exactly the same ,do we try yet again?

52% would be an astounding victory, the last British government (Cameron) was formed with a 36.7% Conservative vote.

Tony Blair's best win was only 43% in 1997, almost the same as Maggie Thatcher's win at 42% in 1983.

Only because you have a first past the post voting system in the UK. Maggie's win in 1983 would have been a cliffhanger if the UK used a preferential voting system.

A first past the past vote does not reflect the true will of the people.

[mommysboy]

Look 'Leave' won and that's all there is to it regarding the result.

If ifs and ands were pots and pans, there'd be no work for tinkers' hands.

Edited July 3, 2016 by mommysboy

[teatree]

You know the other name for a "non-binding referendum"?

Opinion poll.

If that were the case, Cameron would have carried out an opinion poll - not a referendum.

Miss Andry provided the correct definition of referendum "a general vote by the electorate on a single political question that has been referred to them for a direct decision".

Even Cameron is saying that it was a binding decision! There was never any implication that the referendum was actually just an opinion poll....

And yet, with the clear mandate from a 2% majority of the people (yes, that's sarcasm), Cameron won't pull the trigger. (Or can't pull the trigger?) Because neither a referendum nor a word from the PM is adequate in a representative democracy.

I'm not arguing the merits of the decision. It's the flawed process and false expectations- on both sides.

My belief? Cameron floated the "referendum" to put the issue to bed once and for all. Imagine his shock when his pollsters missed their forecast and it bit him in the ass.

Cameron miscalculated badly in calling the referendum without some additional "rules" in place, such as having a 75% voter turnout, and also needing a clear 60% majority. They weren't included though, so it's too late now to cry over spilt milk.

It's done and finished with, the referendum has been concluded, with the "majority" (however small) choosing to leave the EU.

It's now up to Parliament to vote to actually approve this mandate, trigger Article 50 and then start the negotiations. That's how "democracy" and "the law" work. Anything else will make a mockery of "democracy" in the UK and make the UK even more of a laughing stock around the world.

For those that voted without knowing what they were voting for, well, that's down to you. Your choice. If people can't be bothered to research and understand the implications of what they are voting on/for, then don't vote in the first place, or at the very least, don't complain later that you were lied to or misled. This is "politics", it's been around long enough for everyone to know how it works. Both sides made outrageously inaccurate statements (and many outright bald faced lies), but ALL voters had more than enough opportunity to research things independently and come to their own conclusions/decisions, without blindly accepting all that was said to them.

Cameron's resignation has given the Government a much needed 2 month breathing space at a complicated and emotional time. I also assume he doesn't want to oversee something he didn't agree with, another reason why he chose to resign.

The 1975 referendum in the UK for joining the then Common Market had a turnout of under 65%.

[7by7]

What's all this about 52% : 48% being a result that must be accepted?

Farage himself does not think so. Refer link below:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681

That article is actually dated 17th May.

However, I sat and watched him say essentially the same thing on TV after the polls had closed and exit polls indicated a remain victory.

He conceded defeat, but went on to say that as the margin of victory for remain was only 52% to 48% that it meant nothing and so another vote should be held.

Friday morning, after a 52% to 48% victory for Leave, he had forgotten what he said the night before and was declaring his magnificent, irreversible victory!

The only good result of this disastrous vote by the British people is that this buffoon will soon be consigned to a footnote of history.

Remember, too, that the petition calling for another referendum if the result was close was started by Leave supporters.

I voted Remain, but agree with Cameron that, close as it was, the result should and must stand. If democracy in the UK is to mean anything we cannot have referenda after referenda until the 'right' result is obtained.

Although as England and Wales voted to leave but Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain, the future of the UK as a union is debatable.

I can't see the majority of Northern Irish ever agreeing to becoming part of the RoI; but union with an independent Scotland inside the EU?

[JHolmesJr]

Because the decision to leave was motivated by racial bigotry and not on economic rationale. So outline the economic advantages of leaving the EU? Include the economic modelling and numbers that underpin the reasons for leaving? No one seems to be able to do this even after the vote has been carried.

Don't you $#%@^&* get it?

It was a vote against the very economic progress that you are in favour of…..the fake economic progress that looks good only on a company's balance sheet but isn't reflected in the lives of ordinary workers and people. The progress that is reserved for the elite few….political bigwigs and their owners -- big and small business interests that use these kind of arrangements to create cheap labor to enrich themselves, while flooding the country with all kinds of undesirable immigrant dross.

The numbers you are demanding will come soon enough, but they are not the first priority for the country. First they have to start planning the exit process and all it entails.

Then they will have to set out a vision for the kind of trade they want with the rest of the world.

And come up with ideas that support that vision….it's a huge undertaking but it isn't as impossible and tragic as you make it out to be.

Europe can't ignore the huge UK consumer market….or it will be to their own detriment.

[tomacht8]

Do to those who say we should have another vote,if there is a general election and one party wind by 52 to 48 ,we should go to the polls again? And what if the vote is exactly the same ,do we try yet again?

52% would be an astounding victory, the last British government (Cameron) was formed with a 36.7% Conservative vote.

Tony Blair's best win was only 43% in 1997, almost the same as Maggie Thatcher's win at 42% in 1983.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

The referendum was a simple yes / no question.

And not the election result of a party with a complete election program.

There is no united Brexit party.

Politicians serve the desire of voters for simple solutions.

Complex problems are broken down into simple questions and answers.

That does not work! Politics is not so easy.

At the end the populist politicians left scorched earth and citizens who are wondering what they have done.

Edited July 3, 2016 by tomacht8

[Basil B]

Perhaps the best response to this 'March for Europe' is to open the channel tunnel to pedestrians so they can vote with their feet.

One way...

[tomacht8]

What did the populist politicians and media journalists have reached?
All involved parties have lied to the voters, and warped and twisted facts and figures.
Now the UK has the most serious political crisis after the 2nd World War.

The Kingdom is threatening to fall apart.
200 years ago the populist masterminds would have been hanged in the tower for it.

[JHolmesJr]

A hung parliament....wouldnt that be grand?

[ozyjon]

I didn't win the lottery,

can you draw again please

and if i don't win that one

can you keep drawing till i win

PS: i'm not up until 11 am

[up2u2]

Because the decision to leave was motivated by racial bigotry and not on economic rationale. So outline the economic advantages of leaving the EU? Include the economic modelling and numbers that underpin the reasons for leaving? No one seems to be able to do this even after the vote has been carried.

Don't you $#%@^&* get it?

It was a vote against the very economic progress that you are in favour of…..the fake economic progress that looks good only on a company's balance sheet but isn't reflected in the lives of ordinary workers and people. The progress that is reserved for the elite few….political bigwigs and their owners -- big and small business interests that use these kind of arrangements to create cheap labor to enrich themselves, while flooding the country with all kinds of undesirable immigrant dross.

The numbers you are demanding will come soon enough, but they are not the first priority for the country. First they have to start planning the exit process and all it entails.

Then they will have to set out a vision for the kind of trade they want with the rest of the world.

And come up with ideas that support that vision….it's a huge undertaking but it isn't as impossible and tragic as you make it out to be.

Europe can't ignore the huge UK consumer market….or it will be to their own detriment.

So absolutely no idea how this will effect the UK's economy. Just that it will keep those filthy foreigners out (racism). 'Cheap Labour' has nothing to do with being part of the EU it is about strong government regulation and Union oversight.

The 'vision' should have been clearly set out prior to the vote not after.

Pretty stupid thinking.

[teatree]

Do to those who say we should have another vote,if there is a general election and one party wind by 52 to 48 ,we should go to the polls again? And what if the vote is exactly the same ,do we try yet again?

52% would be an astounding victory, the last British government (Cameron) was formed with a 36.7% Conservative vote.

Tony Blair's best win was only 43% in 1997, almost the same as Maggie Thatcher's win at 42% in 1983.

+1

Obama's popular vote in his last election was less than the Leave vote.

Merkel has been voted in several times in Germany with the popular vote varying from 33% to 41.4% - considerably lower than the leave vote and not even half of the electorate.

[teatree]

Do to those who say we should have another vote,if there is a general election and one party wind by 52 to 48 ,we should go to the polls again? And what if the vote is exactly the same ,do we try yet again?

I have felt for this and other referendums they should be a clear win not a simple win to force change.

Therefore should there be another referendum I think there needs to be a clear and decisive win to overturn the last referendum, I doubt that would happen.

This is the whole point, we are not overturning the last referendum!

The referendum in 1975 was totally different - it was to join the Common Market, a TRADING UNION.

Since then it has morphed by stealth in a POLITICAL union.

The people had never been asked about this, until June 23, and rejected it with a majority of nearly 1.5 million people.

If the people want another referendum they can vote in a pro referendum party in the 2020 election, but until then the result must stand.

[teatree]

What's all this about 52% : 48% being a result that must be accepted?

Farage himself does not think so. Refer link below:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681

That article is actually dated 17th May.

However, I sat and watched him say essentially the same thing on TV after the polls had closed and exit polls indicated a remain victory.

He conceded defeat, but went on to say that as the margin of victory for remain was only 52% to 48% that it meant nothing and so another vote should be held.

Friday morning, after a 52% to 48% victory for Leave, he had forgotten what he said the night before and was declaring his magnificent, irreversible victory!

The only good result of this disastrous vote by the British people is that this buffoon will soon be consigned to a footnote of history.

Remember, too, that the petition calling for another referendum if the result was close was started by Leave supporters.

I voted Remain, but agree with Cameron that, close as it was, the result should and must stand. If democracy in the UK is to mean anything we cannot have referenda after referenda until the 'right' result is obtained.

Although as England and Wales voted to leave but Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain, the future of the UK as a union is debatable.

I can't see the majority of Northern Irish ever agreeing to becoming part of the RoI; but union with an independent Scotland inside the EU?

The petition was not started to ask for a 2nd referendum, it was started to set certain rules to follow (minimum of 60% approval and a minimum of 75% turnout).

It was started by a Brexiter, but was started more than a month before the referendum was carried out (best to change the rules before a game/vote etc). It gained little support and should have died out.

It was after the referendum that the Remainers got interested and it became a big story, when they wanted to move the goal posts because they were unhappy with the result.

[vogie]

What's all this about 52% : 48% being a result that must be accepted?

Farage himself does not think so. Refer link below:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681

That article is actually dated 17th May.

However, I sat and watched him say essentially the same thing on TV after the polls had closed and exit polls indicated a remain victory.

He conceded defeat, but went on to say that as the margin of victory for remain was only 52% to 48% that it meant nothing and so another vote should be held.

Friday morning, after a 52% to 48% victory for Leave, he had forgotten what he said the night before and was declaring his magnificent, irreversible victory!

The only good result of this disastrous vote by the British people is that this buffoon will soon be consigned to a footnote of history.

Remember, too, that the petition calling for another referendum if the result was close was started by Leave supporters.

I voted Remain, but agree with Cameron that, close as it was, the result should and must stand. If democracy in the UK is to mean anything we cannot have referenda after referenda until the 'right' result is obtained.

Although as England and Wales voted to leave but Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain, the future of the UK as a union is debatable.

I can't see the majority of Northern Irish ever agreeing to becoming part of the RoI; but union with an independent Scotland inside the EU?

The "buffoon" got 4 million votes in the election and got 1 seat, the SNP got nearly 1.5 million votes and got 56 seats, think about it.

[teatree]

There's a racist component to it, no doubt. But even limiting the discussion to immigration, there are legitimate concerns about throwing the borders wide open to people who come from countries where they're willing to work for a pittance, to compete with our kids for a dwindling number of decent paying careers as our leaders preside over the mass offshoring of good careers- to be replaced with marginal and low wage, low security service jobs.

And that has nothing to do with racism or filthy foreigners, or even the current events related to terrorism. Just dwindling career opportunities for our kids for the benefit of the corporations who love importing low wage labor.

Edit: Corporations who love importing low wage labor and then exporting all the profits to countries where they won't have to pay taxes on it.

So nothing really to do with being part of the EU. More to do with the requirement for strong workplace wage regulations and strong Union oversight to ensure workers wages are protected. Oh that's right Maggie smashed all the Unions didn't she. Damn straight Employers will import cheap skilled tradesmen. Ask how many welders a Company that is importing a qualified welder from overseas have trained over the past four years. Answer ZERO. Cheaper just to import them from overseas. If you think UK Companies give a rats about the children your living in fairy tale land. They don't. Of course Austerity measures mean cuts to Trades training programs, right? Plenty of money for Corporate Tax cuts and tax cuts for the wealthy. Right?

So really nothing to do with being part of the EU.

Now eat your lumpy porridge.

Always interesting to hear from a remainer that has no idea of the actual arguments and prefers to rely on their own uninformed opinion.

You really must watch the youtube video shown earlier in this thread. You'll love her.

Well so far 41% of people who voted to leave did so based on racism and nothing to do with the economics of staying or leaving. So you tell me the economic benefits of leaving. I am yet to hear any person quantify the economic benefits of leaving the EU. Increase in GDP? increase in employment? increase in wages? strengthening of the Pound? AAA+ Credit Rating? Reduced inflation? Increased Foreign trade? Payment of national debt? Balanced budget forecast? Removal of Austerity? New Export deals? New Trade Deals that favour UK citizens and increase their wealth? Not just 'pie in the sky' some tangible numbers on the table.

If you can provide economic modelling that demonstrates the above it was a sensible vote to leave rather than stay in the EU.

When will the extra 350 million pounds a month start flowing into the NHS?

I have a big serving of lumpy porridge set aside for you.

Why don't you change your tag to 'Everyone who disagrees with me is a racist'.

[Laughing Gravy]

I have only read the first few pages but just looking at the picture makes me laugh. We love EU. Most probably someone who isn't from the UK. the march in London is not a representation of the whole of the UK. I am not racist, I do have a different opinion to some but I don't play and use the racist card when someone disagrees with me. Shame on those that do. I don't love the EU, I feel everyone should have their won identity and sovereignty. We can be friends but it doesn't mean I have to do and be the same as you. For those who really can't do without the EU well there are 27 countries for now who agree with you. There are options for you.

I am also going to tell some home truths that no doubt some here will play the bigot and racist card which I am not, far from it. You look at recent pictures of Europeans in the National Health Srvice (NHS) and education from Spain, Greece, Poland etc. Why are you in the UK working? I will tell you. You can't get a job that pays the same or indeed a job in your own country, as the economies are in the gutter. So I can see why you don't want the UK to leave the EU, as your 'gravy train is about to stop'.

[teatree]

This guy has a lot of interviews with the protesters on his YouTube channel. Interesting to get a 1st hand perspective.

[SgtRock]

Because the decision to leave was motivated by racial bigotry and not on economic rationale. So outline the economic advantages of leaving the EU? Include the economic modelling and numbers that underpin the reasons for leaving? No one seems to be able to do this even after the vote has been carried.

A decision to leave the EU and its various institutions is sod all to do with racism.

A desire for controlled immigration is sod all to do with racism.

This is from 2012. A bit out of date, but it highlights perfectly that the current Economic model is not working and they better come up with a new one PDQ.

In reply to your comment about Austerity.

Austerity is caused by the mismanagement of Public funds by incompetent politicians and Civil Servants throughout the EU as a whole.

[bkkcanuck8]

The petition was not started to ask for a 2nd referendum, it was started to set certain rules to follow (minimum of 60% approval and a minimum of 75% turnout).

What drugs are you on? You want us to believe your fairytale that a brexiter started a petition a month before the vote to MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT to exit???

Some here are beginning to sound like they believe in Sharia style law, where one persons word (vote) is worth 3/5 of someone else word (vote).

[SgtRock]

The petition was not started to ask for a 2nd referendum, it was started to set certain rules to follow (minimum of 60% approval and a minimum of 75% turnout).

What drugs are you on? You want us to believe your fairytale that a brexiter started a petition a month before the vote to MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT to exit???

Some here are beginning to sound like they believe in Sharia style law, where one persons word (vote) is worth 3/5 of someone else word (vote).

Might be better to ask what drugs you are on

Another referendum should be held, it says, "if the remain or leave vote is less than 60 percent based a turnout less than 75 percent." In a startling result, the Leave campaign won Thursday's referendum with 52% of the vote, with 72% of voters turning out.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/26/europe/uk-second-referendum-petition/

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/revealed-second-eu-referendum-petition-was-started-by-rightwing-activist-who-backed-brexit-a3281026.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/27/petition-calling-for-second-eu-referendum-was-created-by-a-leave/

[bkkcanuck8]

The petition was not started to ask for a 2nd referendum, it was started to set certain rules to follow (minimum of 60% approval and a minimum of 75% turnout).

What drugs are you on? You want us to believe your fairytale that a brexiter started a petition a month before the vote to MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT to exit???

Some here are beginning to sound like they believe in Sharia style law, where one persons word (vote) is worth 3/5 of someone else word (vote).

Might be better to ask what drugs you are on

Another referendum should be held, it says, "if the remain or leave vote is less than 60 percent based a turnout less than 75 percent." In a startling result, the Leave campaign won Thursday's referendum with 52% of the vote, with 72% of voters turning out.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/26/europe/uk-second-referendum-petition/

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/revealed-second-eu-referendum-petition-was-started-by-rightwing-activist-who-backed-brexit-a3281026.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/27/petition-calling-for-second-eu-referendum-was-created-by-a-leave/

And the person that started it said the reason why HE started it was BECAUSE he was going to LOSE, not because he thought there was a flaw. In other words he had already given up on winning and just coming up with an excuse to rerun the referendum. I take him at his word when he first explained it (obviously at the shock at having it hijacked).

[SgtRock]

What drugs are you on? You want us to believe your fairytale that a brexiter started a petition a month before the vote to MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT to exit???

Some here are beginning to sound like they believe in Sharia style law, where one persons word (vote) is worth 3/5 of someone else word (vote).

Might be better to ask what drugs you are on

Another referendum should be held, it says, "if the remain or leave vote is less than 60 percent based a turnout less than 75 percent." In a startling result, the Leave campaign won Thursday's referendum with 52% of the vote, with 72% of voters turning out.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/26/europe/uk-second-referendum-petition/

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/revealed-second-eu-referendum-petition-was-started-by-rightwing-activist-who-backed-brexit-a3281026.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/27/petition-calling-for-second-eu-referendum-was-created-by-a-leave/

And the person that started it said the reason why HE started it was BECAUSE he was going to LOSE, not because he thought there was a flaw. In other words he had already given up on winning and just coming up with an excuse to rerun the referendum. I take him at his word when he first explained it (obviously at the shock at having it hijacked).

He asked for parameters to be put in place, as has been pointed out to you. Those parameters would potentially have worked for / against both camps, but it would have stopped the garbage that is going on now with demands for 2nd referendums.

It may well be that he thought he was going to be on the losing side, that does not make him wrong

This was pointed out by teatree. which in turn had you asking what drugs he was on. Pretty childish and certainly uncalled for.

[bkkcanuck8]

He asked for parameters to be put in place, as has been pointed out to you. Those parameters would potentially have worked for / against both camps, but it would have stopped the garbage that is going on now with demands for 2nd referendums.

It may well be that he thought he was going to be on the losing side, that does not make him wrong

This was pointed out by teatree. which in turn had you asking what drugs he was on. Pretty childish and certainly uncalled for.

People will word things to sound balanced in isolation of other elements even when the reason WHY they are doing it is out of bias and not getting their way. I can word anything to make it sound like I am only being fair even if I say something completely asinine and motivated out of bias.

When was it created, what was the motivation are as important - sometimes more important than what is written.

His motivation was the vote was not going his way.

It is the same logic that gets into a loop of 1 out of 1, 2 out of 3, 3 out of 5, 5 out of 7.... etc. It is an attempt to move the goalposts which in this case he moved in the wrong direct in hindsight.

[bkkcanuck8]

I mean if I believed in segregation, I could write something like:

In order to be racially fair and to ensure ensure the same percentage of blacks are allocated seats on public transit that based on local census data that the there will be a that portion of seating reserved for people who are not white, and the rest of the bus will be reserved for the rest of the people (white). This will ensure that black people are not discriminated against.

Woo wooo! see that I was only looking out for the best of everyone..... not out of racism... that would be bad...