Sir Richard Branson talks about brexit

[siz]him and his other champagne socialist chums (i.e bob geldof) can quite frankly [/siz]**** off, not to mention the yank pricks like obama, lindsay lohan et al getting involved. Just **** off the lot of you.

[si="5"]people like him make me sick. The guy's a multi-billionaire, of course he's concerned about losing 1/3 of his company's worth! Staying in the eu benefits him, so of course he'll want the uk to stay in.[/si]

[si="5"]the country asked for [/si]one referendum, not 2, not 3, not 12 - one, and the country spoke. 17 million people voted leave - with a 72.2% turnout, the highest ever in uk politics. not to mention the lazy 18-24 year olds who backed 'remain' who failed to even ****ing vote 65%.

[si="5"]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/how-did-turnout-affect-the-eu-referendum-result/[/si]

[siz5]if by the off-chance we have a 2nd referendum - be it highly undemocratic - what would happen if the results were 58.1% remain and 41.8% leave - would we have a 3rd referendum?

A second referendum would be undemocrartic because the majority of people, however close the race was, voted to leave the European Union. We just need to stop complaining about the result if you are unhappy about it and move on.

Nothing like a second referendum to send our economy into a spasm.

People like him make me sick. The guy's a multi-billionaire, of course he's concerned about losing 1/3 of his company's worth! Staying in the EU benefits him, so of course he'll want the UK to stay in.

How can giving people a second chance to vote in light of new information, and the outing of blatant lies ever be "undemocratic"?

Brexiters are so against the idea because they are well aware that the tables could well turn. Many people regret their decisions, which were uninformed and influenced by media propaganda and dirty tactics in the first place.

The people's decision on the 24th of June was a (slim) majority of 51.8%. Having a second Referendum would go against that (slim) majority and therefore against Democracy.

Nothing like a second referendum to send our economy into a spasm.

If we have a second referendum, it sets a precedent of the all future referendums necessarily consisting of two rounds, since the first will always be a protest vote, the second the serious one

We don't get to vote twice in general elections, why then in a specific referendum?

I don't know why everyone keeps banging on about big businessmen wanting to stay in like no **** Sherlock??

It would be undemocratic to have another referendum because there is no legitimate reason to have one other than the fact that loud people are unhappy with the result. What faith can anyone have in voting if we are going to start setting a precedent to have second votes when some people don't like the outcome? If you refuse to accept first time round that more people voted to leave than to stay that's your own personal problem. Why should we all have to vote again just because some people won't accept that not everyone agrees with them, it's truly pathetic

Except that it wouldn't, because if remain won a second referendum then the majority would clearly have changed. That's perfectly democratic.

You only don't want a second referendum because you know you'd lose now that all your lies have been revealed, it's nothing to do with democracy.

While I agree that a second referendum is unlikely to be the best course of action, the probable result of that would be a vote to Remain and the economic result of that would be very positive.

On the other hand in the chance that it is a vote to Leave then the debate would have to end and even I would accept that the UK must leave the EU. And then I'd be looking to leave the UK at the first opportunity because what remains of the country after Brexit will not be worth living in.

Are you telling me that if the 2nd Referendum results were 51.8% Remain and 41.8% Leave,you'd be content and wouldn't want a 3rd Referendum?!