The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Why did you vote for Brexit?

Scroll to see replies

A Polish girl stole my cleaning job and an Indian guy stole my contractor work at a building site. Leaving the EU means I don't have to compete against Poles and Indians that work for pennies- easier life innit? Because there's less competition, Brit borns like us don't need to fanny about in school or university.
I voted for sovereignty, and I don't want the UK to be tied to an undemocratic, unaccountable and power hungry organisation for the next thirty years or so.

Then you have things like the CAP, which encourages agriculture to take place on unproductive land that would be better off under some sort of conservation scheme, and encourages farmers to clear scrub from rough pasture land. I have no faith in the Conservatives to change that, but at least now CAP reform is something we can campaign for with reasonable chance of success, as we'd just be up against our own government and farming lobby, rather than that of 20-something other countries who all have strong vested interests in keeping it the same.

I would have voted remain if there were ambitious but realistic proposals for reform from the remain side, rather than token "reforms", but they seemed more interested in smearing anyone who has issues with the EU as racists and xenophobes, which sadly seems to have continued after the referendum as a post in this thread demonstrates.

Torpidphil sums up some good reasons above as well.
Original post by JRKinder
The government aren't revealing exactly what they're going to be aiming for in the upcoming negotiations with the EU, but appear to be leaning towards a 'hard' Brexit (for those who don't know, this generally means leaving the single market and thus having full control over immigration).

As we all know, the three key points in the the referendum campaigns were:

- The economy (staying/leaving the single market)
- Immigration (linked to the single market, also about things like housing, wages, the NHS being overcrowded etc.)
- Sovereignty (to end the supremacy of the EU courts and parliament over the UK)

So, which of these reasons did you vote leave for? Was it a combination of two or three, or maybe something else? I think it will be interesting to gain some perspective on this, so we can determine what the majority of people think the government should be aiming for in these negotiations. For example, some Brexiters may want to regain sovereignty but aren't so bothered about free movement restrictions, but others may be solely concerned with restricting immigration even if that entails economic damage (and, indeed, some may think that the single market is holding the UK back from trading with the world).

Please expand on your thoughts below, and for those of us who voted for remain: what do you think the government should be aiming for (presumably a soft Brexit with single market membership, unless your opinion has changed over the summer)?

Edit: Sorry, I forgot to add an 'all three' option to the poll. Just put the most important issue to you in the poll, and then elaborate below. Sorry once again!


To a large degree it's because the more i read, the more i became convinced that membership of the EU was not the defining factor in our success or failure (we will thrive or die whether we are In or Out), hence i was fairly neutral on the economy side of things.

With the economic advantage removed the question for me then was whether i really believed that we should cede sovereignty and further integrate ourselves (which is the direction i think the EU should go in) and i concluded the answer was No.

So for me it was mostly sovereignty once the economic advantage was removed. Immigration was only a factor in so far as i have a general dislike of Merkel polluting the continent with third worlders.
Thanks for all the responses everyone! I was inspired by Question Time last night to start this thread, because a very important point was brought up: people just voted for 'Brexit', rather than any particular model of Brexit (as this was not an option on the ballot obviously). I therefore thought it would be good to try and work out the primary reason that people did indeed vote for Brexit, so we can better determine what the majority view between both Remainers and Brexiters is towards things such as single market membership, and therefore what we should be pressuring the government into negotiating.

At the time of writing 'sovereignty' is the leading reason in the poll, which indicates that at least some people who voted to leave are either ambivalent or supportive of single market membership as well. Having said that, you could also argue that single market membership erodes sovereignty due to the laws/regulations you must subscribe to (and as Britain will no longer be an EU member, we won't be able to help shape those laws to the same extent as before). That's the problem really with the issues surrounding this whole debate: they're all somewhat interlinked so it's hard to have one eventuality without impacting on another area. Still, this is all interesting to hear guys and should help to provide a little bit more of a detailed reason behind the leave vote, so thanks for sharing your thoughts :smile:
To get the immigrants out, seriously, our system can't cope with the numbers coming over. We should have a quota system and let in the immigrants we need.
I hate it when people asked why I voted for Brexit because for any intelligent voter the decision is going to be based on all the arguments and evidence on both sides of the debate.

My decision was an evaluation of a wide array of complex and interlinked information. I could literally write about my reasoning all day. But I am just 1 of 17 million leave voters who will each have their own circumstances and perspective on the world and will have come to their decision in a different way. There is no point trying to explain my reasons because nobody is interested enough or has time to listen to something that can't be described in a few sentences.

Simply listing 1 or 2 basic arguments or worse still, clicking a vote button, doesn't come close to explaining why I voted Brexit. Such a simplification is meaningless.

All you will get in this thread is people listing out arguments you have heard before. You may as well have just read a pro brexit leaflet.
Original post by Sternumator
I hate it when people asked why I voted for Brexit because for any intelligent voter the decision is going to be based on all the arguments and evidence on both sides of the debate.

My decision was an evaluation of a wide array of complex and interlinked information. I could literally write about my reasoning all day. But I am just 1 of 17 million leave voters who will each have their own circumstances and perspective on the world and will have come to their decision in a different way. There is no point trying to explain my reasons because nobody is interested enough or has time to listen to something that can't be described in a few sentences.

Simply listing 1 or 2 basic arguments or worse still, clicking a vote button, doesn't come close to explaining why I voted Brexit. Such a simplification is meaningless.

All you will get in this thread is people listing out arguments you have heard before. You may as well have just read a pro brexit leaflet.
Did you even read the first post? Obviously I know the arguments for and against Brexit; what I'm trying to establish is what is the principle 'thing' that a majority of people (Remainers included) think the government should be aiming for in negotiations. Should we remain in the single market? You will find people on both sides arguing for and against that now that the voting has occurred. What things should we draw a red line for, and what should we be willing to compromise on? Without establishing this then negotiations are going to be very poor, and the government needs to know what the overall consensus on the way forward is from the public. This is my way of shedding some light onto the matter.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by JRKinder
Did you even read the first post? Obviously I know the arguments for and against Brexit; what I'm trying to establish is what is the principle 'thing' that a majority of people (Remainers included) think the government should be aiming for in negotiations. Should we remain in the single market? You will find people on both sides arguing for and against that now that the voting has occurred. What things should we draw a red line for, and what should we be willing to compromise on? Without establishing this then negotiations are going to be very poor, and the government needs to know what the overall consensus on the way forward is from the public. This is my way of shedding some light onto the matter.


We should prioritise immigration. Forget the single market, we don't need it, if anything they need us more than we need them, so they will make trade deals that benefit us.

If the EU ditches us, like a spoilt child, we can just make better deals with china, US, india and japan (who's combined GDPs outstrip most of the world).
Original post by JRKinder
Did you even read the first post? Obviously I know the arguments for and against Brexit; what I'm trying to establish is what is the principle 'thing' that a majority of people (Remainers included) think the government should be aiming for in negotiations. Should we remain in the single market? You will find people on both sides arguing for and against that now that the voting has occurred. What things should we draw a red line for, and what should we be willing to compromise on? Without establishing this then negotiations are going to be very poor, and the government needs to know what the overall consensus on the way forward is from the public. This is my way of shedding some light onto the matter.


There's been a lot of polling done on the reasons people voted (your poll is actually very similar in results so far) and what they've found is that primary reason for 50% of Leave voters was sovereignty and for about 30% of Leave voters, to end free movement.

What this means for the government essentially is that this was a vote to leave the ECJ and end free movement. If we cannot remain in the single market free of those things then the single market is a price which must be paid.

Basically, the government should peruse the Canada option (a medium to hard Brexit).
Original post by JRKinder
Did you even read the first post? Obviously I know the arguments for and against Brexit; what I'm trying to establish is what is the principle 'thing' that a majority of people (Remainers included) think the government should be aiming for in negotiations. Should we remain in the single market? You will find people on both sides arguing for and against that now that the voting has occurred. What things should we draw a red line for, and what should we be willing to compromise on? Without establishing this then negotiations are going to be very poor, and the government needs to know what the overall consensus on the way forward is from the public. This is my way of shedding some light onto the matter.


Red lines should be an end to free movement, an end to UK contributions and an end to supremacy of EU law.

People voted for the UK to be an independent country and independent countries control their borders, spend their own money and have their own law.

Those things need to be delivered on and if that means restrictions on trade, so be it. It's not like voters weren't warned about the economic risk, it was all the remain side talked about.
Because since I am poor anyway I wanted to make the vast vast majority of people poor too. I don't care about a few super rich profiting from the whole episode.
Original post by Rakas21
There's been a lot of polling done on the reasons people voted (your poll is actually very similar in results so far) and what they've found is that primary reason for 50% of Leave voters was sovereignty and for about 30% of Leave voters, to end free movement.

What this means for the government essentially is that this was a vote to leave the ECJ and end free movement. If we cannot remain in the single market free of those things then the single market is a price which must be paid.

Basically, the government should peruse the Canada option (a medium to hard Brexit).
What complicates matters though is that as people voted both ways for a variety of reasons, there may not be a majority in favour of certain outcomes when the population in its entirety is considered.

-> We know that a majority of people voted to leave the EU, so therefore that is what we must do.
-> However, presumably nearly all people who voted remain wish to stay in the single market. Some people who voted leave favoured a soft Brexit, preferring also to stay in the single market but instead wanting to end the supremecy of EU law. Put together, this may mean that a majority of people favour staying in the single market.

Thus, we end up with a situation where the majority of people favour leaving but a majority also favour single market membership. By the nature of the vote, the situation is highly complex and it isn't really clear how the government should react. I think it is fairly certain that the majority reason for voting leave was either immigration or sovereignty, but if a majority of people (from both sides) still favour single market membership then what should be done? Both are counterproductive to one another and there is a strong case to be made for both of them. We can't ignore the voices from either side of this debate, so somewhere we're going to need to compromise.
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 32
Avatar for Luneth
Luneth
12
Frankly, the single market and immigration have absolutely nothing to do with each other, that was just the EU holding an ultimatum against us. It's entirely possible to be a part of the single market so long as we follow the rules that regard it and are held accountable to those, doesn't mean we have to let thousands of immigrants in just because the insane German dictator of the EU thinks we need to.
Original post by Luneth
Frankly, the single market and immigration have absolutely nothing to do with each other, that was just the EU holding an ultimatum against us. It's entirely possible to be a part of the single market so long as we follow the rules that regard it and are held accountable to those, doesn't mean we have to let thousands of immigrants in just because the insane German dictator of the EU thinks we need to.
Whilst I agree with you that, in theory, the two should be separate, the problem is that in reality the politics behind it most likely won't allow compromise on this issue. If it did it would likely be better for all parties involved, but the political reality means that the two are interlinked.
Original post by JRKinder
What complicates matters though is that as people voted both ways for a variety of reasons, there may not be a majority in favour of certain outcomes when the population in its entirety is considered.

-> We know that a majority of people voted to leave the EU, so therefore that is what we must do.
-> However, presumably nearly all people who voted remain wish to stay in the single market. Some people who voted leave favoured a soft Brexit, preferring also to stay in the single market but instead wanting to end the supremecy of EU law. Put together, this may mean that a majority of people favour staying in the single market.

Thus, we end up with a situation where the majority of people favour leaving but a majority also favour single market membership. By the nature of the vote, the situation is highly complex and it isn't really clear how the government should react. I think it is fairly certain that the majority reason for voting leave was either immigration or sovereignty, but if a majority of people (from both sides) still favour single market membership then what should be done? Both are counterproductive to one another and there is a strong case to be made for both of them. We can't ignore the voices from either side of this debate, so somewhere we're going to need to compromise.


Good post.
This is exactly why parliament should determine how we leave.

Personally I think as the vote was close and a number of leave voters wanted access to the single market, that a fair compromise would be to get out the EU but stay in the single market.
Original post by JRKinder
Whilst I agree with you that, in theory, the two should be separate, the problem is that in reality the politics behind it most likely won't allow compromise on this issue. If it did it would likely be better for all parties involved, but the political reality means that the two are interlinked.

It wouldn't be better for the EU if a member that left was seen to be getting a better deal than when they were in the Union.
Original post by Bornblue
It wouldn't be better for the EU if a member that left was seen to be getting a better deal than when they were in the Union.
Exactly. This obviously prompts responses of the union "being held together by fear", which may well have some validity to them, but for better or for worse this is the reality of the situation. If the UK gets a better deal outside then everyone will want to leave, and the EU will fall apart. The EU doesn't want that to happen. Therefore, even if there is a case to be made that this is irrational behaviour, we can't just ignore this. As a result it seems likely that they won't compromise on the freedom of movement, so Britain has to make a choice between single market membership or not, which as I said above complicated things because the principle reasons for the Brexit victory were immigration and sovereignty, yet these views towards single market membership aren't echoed in the population at large when both sides are considered.
To stop freedom of movement. It is ridiculous you do not need freedom of movement to have the benefits of tariff free trading- You only think that if your name is John Claude Juncker or Donald Tusk. We have been cleansed for around 60 years now, now the action is to stop immigration from the continent of Africa then Asia. When the EU implodes we can do trade deals with individual countries. Its not far off doing that either! all it takes is for the Germans to leave and then the EU has lost its two biggest funders.
I felt like it was the one and only time we would ever get a say. We were promised a say on the Lisbon treaty that was just a copy of the European constitution(rejected by France among others) and Europe went ahead anyway. More and more powers were going to the EU without our approval and sooner or later the elections we hold for Westminster would be as relevant as my local ones. Everyone at the top of the EU is a federalist. I'm not.

What do I think should happen now? We should leave the single market. As long as we are members the rules for it made by the EU will still be law here. That isn't what I voted for.

The ballet paper said "leave the European union" and I took that as fully leaving as the remain side sad it would have to. It's only since the vote they have changed their opinions on this.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you