Stupid voting Watch

That'sGreat
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#21
Report 1 week ago
#21
(Original post by DoritoEvie)
Well, it's also because they're assuming that EVERYONE in the country wants the same thing, which is to leave, even though the vote was 51% to 49%. That's what half the country wants without even considering what the other half wants. With a chance of a no-deal brexit, it's pretty much saying "f you" to all of those who voted to remain.
51% of the vote might be the majority, but it's not democracy. Democracy is "the belief in freedom and equality between people, or a system of government based on this belief, in which power is either held by elected representatives or directly by the people themselves", but there's hardly any equality towards remainers at the moment.
And with all the crap that's been going on, and with nobody getting anywhere, with May rushing a deal and it not being accepted, Brexit should not continue in the state that it's at.
A no-deal Brexit should also be out of the question. Everyone saying "LEAVE, just LEAVE already" is not considering what this will do to the country. All EU trades to the UK will end. UK citizens will need a visa to go anywhere in the EU. It will be a very tough few years if this is what happens. The UK is NOT strong enough to stand on its own like Switzerland or Norway, they are not ready to be an independent country and the ONLY way that Brexit will work is if they have way more time to come up with a solid plan - they haven't delivered so far. What makes you think they'll deliver in less than 2 months now?
We’re stronger than Switzerland and Norway by about 10 economy sizes at least. And it’s called a direct democracy, still democracy.
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#22
Report 1 week ago
#22
(Original post by Vinny C)
Should we remain... then the Scots have no grounds.
That is exactly the point that people dont seem to understand. The Scotland question is not just about Europe. Besides it is all hope.
0
reply
Vinny C
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#23
Report 1 week ago
#23
(Original post by Wired_1800)
That is exactly the point that people dont seem to understand. The Scotland question is not just about Europe. Besides it is all hope.

The entire referendum was without meaning. It was not to determine should we leave or remain... it was to seal a rift in the Tory party. That is why the question of leave or remain cannot heal it.
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 week ago
#24
(Original post by Vinny C)
The entire referendum was without meaning. It was not to determine should we leave or remain... it was to seal a rift in the Tory party. That is why the question of leave or remain cannot heal it.
This is deeply wrong. People like you continue to belittle the concerns of others as mere “political disturbances”. No, the referendum had meaning for the millions of voters, who came out to make a decision. It is the reason that it had the highest turnout of any political decision in recent history.

The political establishment and gullible people continue to argue that we did not know what we voted for. That it was not clear cut. That we should have “one final say”, to make a decision.

I voted remain the first time round, but with another vote, I think I will vote leave. I am not alone in this, there are few people, who I spoke with that would change their votes. Not because of any intention against the EU or Europeans, but because of the ridiculous plot being made by politicians to destroy the democratic institution that has existed for decades.

We knew what we were voting for. If some
people did not, it was their fault for being ignorant. Next time, they should read and research before casting a ballot. There are no second chances.
Last edited by Wired_1800; 1 week ago
1
reply
Revolver72
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#25
Report 1 week ago
#25
(Original post by pe-goose)
Why is it ....on a large scale, we are a democratic national. England,Northern Ireland,Scotland,Wales. We vote for something and the majority win. We accept it and move on.
Yet when it comes to things like referendums, like the EU referendum or Scottish polls to leave or stay...people keep demanding again.
We voted leave, yet people demand another vote...but if we were to vote again and we voted out again would the remainers demand another vote ....until they got the answer they wanted? If the remaining side did get vote stay then it would change. I guarantee they would not allow a 3rd vote to leave....it would be 1 rule for them another rule for everyone else. Same with Scotland they have asked if they wanted to stay or go, they said stay....yet that nutty woman keeps pushing for a vote.
...I thought we were a democracy
...yet they seem to forget this. When primeministers get voted in and we don't want them in,....why does noone else ask for another vote? May can now be forced out of office by the public....yet she remains. People seem dumb....
I just don't get it...
We have general elections every five years. Referendums are not frequent, and therefore people who don't the result they wanted will feel like it was a lost opportunity, rather than a 'better luck next time'.

In terms of the two referendums, it's better to split them into two. I stress, here, I'm not advocating any opinion here, just trying to reasonably answer your question.

Scottish Referendum:
The Scottish polls were shifting in favour of independence, at which point Westminster promised 'the vow', which was broken immediately following the 'No' vote. The growth in support for a second Scottish referendum comes as a direct result of Brexit, and includes a reasonable cohort who voted no before. Scotland is a traditionally a very politically different landscape than that of England, say. I think if Brexit hadn't happened, there wouldn't be quite so much discussion of a second referendum. However, given the significant political and economic change in the 4 years since the 2014 referendum, there is a resurgence. Many people in Scotland care more about their EU Citizenship than their UK Citizenship. [TLDR; Brexit has played a massive part in people wanting a second chance to vote].

Brexit:
I think the want for a second referendum is that the campaign for leave worked on the premise that Article 50 was to be triggered, and the UK would leave with new favourable deal. This clearly isn't going to be the case, and the risk of either a poor deal or, indeed, a no deal means that the campaign promised something unattainable. I think, also, given the interference and dirty money proven to be injected in the leave campaign, I think there are undeniably people questioning the integrity of the campaign.
I think, given the direction just now, people feel it is not undemocratic to offer a second referendum given the demonstrable difference between what was proposed through the leave campaign, and what the tangible end-product looks to be now. If the will of the people is still leave the EU with the current deal or no deal, then that would be democratic. If the will of the people has changed, in light of the Brexit Process, then that would also be democratic.

I'm sure different people have different feelings, but I'd guess that's a lot of people's thoughts.
0
reply
Abaddon rex
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#26
Report 1 week ago
#26
(Original post by Revolver72)
We have general elections every five years. Referendums are not frequent, and therefore people who don't the result they wanted will feel like it was a lost opportunity, rather than a 'better luck next time'.

In terms of the two referendums, it's better to split them into two. I stress, here, I'm not advocating any opinion here, just trying to reasonably answer your question.

Scottish Referendum:
The Scottish polls were shifting in favour of independence, at which point Westminster promised 'the vow', which was broken immediately following the 'No' vote. The growth in support for a second Scottish referendum comes as a direct result of Brexit, and includes a reasonable cohort who voted no before. Scotland is a traditionally a very politically different landscape than that of England, say. I think if Brexit hadn't happened, there wouldn't be quite so much discussion of a second referendum. However, given the significant political and economic change in the 4 years since the 2014 referendum, there is a resurgence. Many people in Scotland care more about their EU Citizenship than their UK Citizenship. [TLDR; Brexit has played a massive part in people wanting a second chance to vote].

Brexit:
I think the want for a second referendum is that the campaign for leave worked on the premise that Article 50 was to be triggered, and the UK would leave with new favourable deal. This clearly isn't going to be the case, and the risk of either a poor deal or, indeed, a no deal means that the campaign promised something unattainable. I think, also, given the interference and dirty money proven to be injected in the leave campaign, I think there are undeniably people questioning the integrity of the campaign.
I think, given the direction just now, people feel it is not undemocratic to offer a second referendum given the demonstrable difference between what was proposed through the leave campaign, and what the tangible end-product looks to be now. If the will of the people is still leave the EU with the current deal or no deal, then that would be democratic. If the will of the people has changed, in light of the Brexit Process, then that would also be democratic.

I'm sure different people have different feelings, but I'd guess that's a lot of people's thoughts.
What about the constant propaganda from the remain side of the debate which has been constantly and consistently promoted via the media since the whole issue of Brexit began. ( i.e. since before the actual vote.) Also what dirty money where did it comes from can you prove it was dirty and from the source you claim? If you can answer all these points, with a yes on the last two, and providing reliable accurate objective proof then I might begin to take this serious. After all I could claim aliens from Triangular told me Brexit would save the world, without proof it means nothing.
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#27
Report 1 week ago
#27
(Original post by Revolver72)
We have general elections every five years. Referendums are not frequent, and therefore people who don't the result they wanted will feel like it was a lost opportunity, rather than a 'better luck next time'.

In terms of the two referendums, it's better to split them into two. I stress, here, I'm not advocating any opinion here, just trying to reasonably answer your question.

Scottish Referendum:
The Scottish polls were shifting in favour of independence, at which point Westminster promised 'the vow', which was broken immediately following the 'No' vote. The growth in support for a second Scottish referendum comes as a direct result of Brexit, and includes a reasonable cohort who voted no before. Scotland is a traditionally a very politically different landscape than that of England, say. I think if Brexit hadn't happened, there wouldn't be quite so much discussion of a second referendum. However, given the significant political and economic change in the 4 years since the 2014 referendum, there is a resurgence. Many people in Scotland care more about their EU Citizenship than their UK Citizenship. [TLDR; Brexit has played a massive part in people wanting a second chance to vote].

Brexit:
I think the want for a second referendum is that the campaign for leave worked on the premise that Article 50 was to be triggered, and the UK would leave with new favourable deal. This clearly isn't going to be the case, and the risk of either a poor deal or, indeed, a no deal means that the campaign promised something unattainable. I think, also, given the interference and dirty money proven to be injected in the leave campaign, I think there are undeniably people questioning the integrity of the campaign.
I think, given the direction just now, people feel it is not undemocratic to offer a second referendum given the demonstrable difference between what was proposed through the leave campaign, and what the tangible end-product looks to be now. If the will of the people is still leave the EU with the current deal or no deal, then that would be democratic. If the will of the people has changed, in light of the Brexit Process, then that would also be democratic.

I'm sure different people have different feelings, but I'd guess that's a lot of people's thoughts.
This is false though.

First, how do you know that any money was dirty? Did you check the sources of all funding on both sides to conclude that the leave campaign had “dirty” funding?

Second, some people seem to forget the progress towards the vote. David Cameron came out to say that he would go back to Brussels and try to negotiate better terms with the EU. Afterwards, offer the British people a simple vote to decide whether they wish to be in the EU or not. That was in or out. The subsequent arguments was that leave meant completely leaving and remain meant completely remaining.

Funnily enough, Cameron got slapped down by Germany and the EU, which made he look like a fool. His “deal” was so bad that even his closest allies abandoned him, when the media turned him apart.

This was in February and the vote was in June. Throughout we were fed extremities from both sides. The Remainers argued that Brexit would cause Armageddon. That we would become a third world country the very next day after the vote. The Leavers promised utopia. They argued that life outside the EU would be like life during the peak of the British Empire. We would be back at the top without the shackles of the European Union.

With all the nonsense and lies being fed from both sides, people voted leave. Then we were told that the leave voters were deceived. That they were either misinformed or plain racist. That they were not intelligent enough to fully understand the weight of their decision. However, those who voted remain were the good kids, they were informed and intellectuals who could see beyond the debate.

The arguments against Brexit has now reached full circle that the politicians and the media are ready to bring in another vote. Their reason? To give people a “final say” because they did not know what they were doing the first time round.

Yet, we dont seem to see how undemocratic this nonsense is. It is funny how gullible we have all been.
Last edited by Wired_1800; 1 week ago
0
reply
Revolver72
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#28
Report 1 week ago
#28
(Original post by Abaddon rex)
What about the constant propaganda from the remain side of the debate which has been constantly and consistently promoted via the media since the whole issue of Brexit began. ( i.e. since before the actual vote.) Also what dirty money where did it comes from can you prove it was dirty and from the source you claim? If you can answer all these points, with a yes on the last two, and providing reliable accurate objective proof then I might begin to take this serious. After all I could claim aliens from Triangular told me Brexit would save the world, without proof it means nothing.
What about it? It's irrelevant to this question. I simply focused on the leave campaign because it was pertinent to the OP's question; what you have stated is not, as it would not be justification for someone wanting a second referendum. I stated clearly that I'm not advocating either way, I was merely trying to subjectively collate general opinion from those who I have heard from who wish for a second referendum. It is not representative of everyone, but it is at least anecdotally representative of some.

You are, however, correct in saying that it has not been proven, my apologies for my incorrect phrasing. It is 'suggested that it's more than likely'. However, my point was to do with people's doubts over the integrity of the campaign, and that point holds true regardless of whether unequivocal or not. Your point about 'aliens' as an attempted reductio ad absurdum fails because it is convoluted and evidently false, whereas there are multiple credible sources that suggest the leave campaign was one of illegitimacy, a subset of such sources I have detailed below for your perusal.

The reference I was making to interference was in terms of Russian Involvement in Brexit:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-senate-report

https://www.channel4.com/news/factch...ment-in-brexit

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ment-in-brexit

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/15/w...-facebook.html

My dirty money comment references a number of significant cash injections to the leave campaign, many of which have questions of illegitimacy hanging over them:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/bre...y-brexit-donor

https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/pet...mpaign-adverts

https://www.channel4.com/news/brexit...-whistleblower

If you want to have an argument about whether Brexit, or indeed a second referendum is right or wrong, we can have that discussion elsewhere. However, it is off-topic for this thread. The OP asked why some people want second votes for the respective referendums, rather than 'accepting the vote and moving on', and subsequently I tried to answer with why people may feel that way. If the question had been 'why do people still support Brexit', I'd have given a balanced view on why there are plenty of people still believe Brexit will be beneficial for the country. But I didn't, because it doesn't contribute towards the answer to this question.
0
reply
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#29
Report 1 week ago
#29
People hate losing. That's it! Remainers lost and they want to get their way. A people's vote isn't about democracy. It's having a second chance to manipulate the electorate to get your own way
3
reply
Abaddon rex
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#30
Report 1 week ago
#30
(Original post by Revolver72)
What about it? It's irrelevant to this question. I simply focused on the leave campaign because it was pertinent to the OP's question; what you have stated is not, as it would not be justification for someone wanting a second referendum. I stated clearly that I'm not advocating either way, I was merely trying to subjectively collate general opinion from those who I have heard from who wish for a second referendum. It is not representative of everyone, but it is at least anecdotally representative of some.

You are, however, correct in saying that it has not been proven, my apologies for my incorrect phrasing. It is 'suggested that it's more than likely'. However, my point was to do with people's doubts over the integrity of the campaign, and that point holds true regardless of whether unequivocal or not. Your point about 'aliens' as an attempted reductio ad absurdum fails because it is convoluted and evidently false, whereas there are multiple credible sources that suggest the leave campaign was one of illegitimacy, a subset of such sources I have detailed below for your perusal.

The reference I was making to interference was in terms of Russian Involvement in Brexit:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-senate-report

https://www.channel4.com/news/factch...ment-in-brexit

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ment-in-brexit

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/15/w...-facebook.html

My dirty money comment references a number of significant cash injections to the leave campaign, many of which have questions of illegitimacy hanging over them:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/bre...y-brexit-donor

https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/pet...mpaign-adverts

https://www.channel4.com/news/brexit...-whistleblower

If you want to have an argument about whether Brexit, or indeed a second referendum is right or wrong, we can have that discussion elsewhere. However, it is off-topic for this thread. The OP asked why some people want second votes for the respective referendums, rather than 'accepting the vote and moving on', and subsequently I tried to answer with why people may feel that way. If the question had been 'why do people still support Brexit', I'd have given a balanced view on why there are plenty of people still believe Brexit will be beneficial for the country. But I didn't, because it doesn't contribute towards the answer to this question.
Prove I have not been visited by aliens then
0
reply
Abaddon rex
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#31
Report 1 week ago
#31
(Original post by Revolver72)
What about it? It's irrelevant to this question. I simply focused on the leave campaign because it was pertinent to the OP's question; what you have stated is not, as it would not be justification for someone wanting a second referendum. I stated clearly that I'm not advocating either way, I was merely trying to subjectively collate general opinion from those who I have heard from who wish for a second referendum. It is not representative of everyone, but it is at least anecdotally representative of some.

You are, however, correct in saying that it has not been proven, my apologies for my incorrect phrasing. It is 'suggested that it's more than likely'. However, my point was to do with people's doubts over the integrity of the campaign, and that point holds true regardless of whether unequivocal or not. Your point about 'aliens' as an attempted reductio ad absurdum fails because it is convoluted and evidently false, whereas there are multiple credible sources that suggest the leave campaign was one of illegitimacy, a subset of such sources I have detailed below for your perusal.

The reference I was making to interference was in terms of Russian Involvement in Brexit:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-senate-report

https://www.channel4.com/news/factch...ment-in-brexit

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ment-in-brexit

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/15/w...-facebook.html

My dirty money comment references a number of significant cash injections to the leave campaign, many of which have questions of illegitimacy hanging over them:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/bre...y-brexit-donor

https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/pet...mpaign-adverts

https://www.channel4.com/news/brexit...-whistleblower

If you want to have an argument about whether Brexit, or indeed a second referendum is right or wrong, we can have that discussion elsewhere. However, it is off-topic for this thread. The OP asked why some people want second votes for the respective referendums, rather than 'accepting the vote and moving on', and subsequently I tried to answer with why people may feel that way. If the question had been 'why do people still support Brexit', I'd have given a balanced view on why there are plenty of people still believe Brexit will be beneficial for the country. But I didn't, because it doesn't contribute towards the answer to this question.
Ok here’s the reason why they want a second vote,
for years our governments have systematically worked to increase voter apathy in the lower classes which makes it easier to predict the result because one large section of society is basically tended moot.( Roman republic anyone?).
Those that vote regularly generally fall into those in the lower classes still determined to vote, the middle and upper classes. This referendum more people voted than expected because the lower classes finally voted and the remainers got a shock. They don’t like losing especially to the lower classes and have spat their figurative dummies out and now demand a recount after months of negative Brexit propaganda to hopefully sway the lower classes to their side so having a second referendum would be unfair because.
a) It is a slap in the face to all those who voted leave and
b) because the propaganda campaign means that the referendum would not be a fair playing field.
Of course if being in the EU is better for the well off they want to maintain their prosperity but just because it works for them doesn’t mean it works for all.

As an an aside I wasn’t accusing you of taking either side I was just showing that both sides have made dubious decisions and have both had funding controversy.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#32
Report 1 week ago
#32
The label of 'the lower classes' I take it is a metaphor for how these self righteous bunch view them?
0
reply
Abaddon rex
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#33
Report 1 week ago
#33
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
The label of 'the lower classes' I take it is a metaphor for how these self righteous bunch view them?
Precisely
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#34
Report 1 week ago
#34
(Original post by Abaddon rex)
Precisely
I thought so mate, I just wanted clarity on that. You are not far wrong mate, in fact I don't think you are wrong at all.
0
reply
Abaddon rex
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#35
Report 1 week ago
#35
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
I thought so mate, I just wanted clarity on that. You are not far wrong mate, in fact I don't think you are wrong at all.
Thank you
0
reply
Vinny C
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#36
Report 1 week ago
#36
(Original post by Wired_1800)
This is deeply wrong. People like you continue to belittle the concerns of others as mere “political disturbances”. No, the referendum had meaning for the millions of voters, who came out to make a decision. It is the reason that it had the highest turnout of any political decision in recent history.

The political establishment and gullible people continue to argue that we did not know what we voted for. That it was not clear cut. That we should have “one final say”, to make a decision.

I voted remain the first time round, but with another vote, I think I will vote leave. I am not alone in this, there are few people, who I spoke with that would change their votes. Not because of any intention against the EU or Europeans, but because of the ridiculous plot being made by politicians to destroy the democratic institution that has existed for decades.

We knew what we were voting for. If some
people did not, it was their fault for being ignorant. Next time, they should read and research before casting a ballot. There are no second chances.
I'm referring to the decision to hold the referendum in the first place, not what motivated the voters. Most leavers voted as they did because they felt ignored and disenfranchised... a spot of attention seeking.
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#37
Report 1 week ago
#37
(Original post by Vinny C)
I'm referring to the decision to hold the referendum in the first place, not what motivated the voters. Most leavers voted as they did because they felt ignored and disenfranchised... a spot of attention seeking.
That is not true. You don't know “most” leave voters, so you should not speculate as to the reasons for their decision to leave. You are peddling the same narrative that the media and remainers continue to share with the public.
0
reply
thestudent33
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#38
Report 1 week ago
#38
(Original post by pe-goose)
Why is it ....on a large scale, we are a democratic national. England,Northern Ireland,Scotland,Wales. We vote for something and the majority win. We accept it and move on.
Yet when it comes to things like referendums, like the EU referendum or Scottish polls to leave or stay...people keep demanding again.
We voted leave, yet people demand another vote...but if we were to vote again and we voted out again would the remainers demand another vote ....until they got the answer they wanted? If the remaining side did get vote stay then it would change. I guarantee they would not allow a 3rd vote to leave....it would be 1 rule for them another rule for everyone else. Same with Scotland they have asked if they wanted to stay or go, they said stay....yet that nutty woman keeps pushing for a vote.
...I thought we were a democracy
...yet they seem to forget this. When primeministers get voted in and we don't want them in,....why does noone else ask for another vote? May can now be forced out of office by the public....yet she remains. People seem dumb....
I just don't get it...
Don't worry you don't need to get it
0
reply
Vinny C
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#39
Report 1 week ago
#39
(Original post by Wired_1800)
That is not true. You don't know “most” leave voters, so you should not speculate as to the reasons for their decision to leave. You are peddling the same narrative that the media and remainers continue to share with the public.
Most/many... if your only criticism is petty semantics then I'm doing quite well. No objection to the first bit, then?
0
reply
Vinny C
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#40
Report 1 week ago
#40
(Original post by pe-goose)
Why is it ....on a large scale, we are a democratic national. England,Northern Ireland,Scotland,Wales. We vote for something and the majority win. We accept it and move on.
Yet when it comes to things like referendums, like the EU referendum or Scottish polls to leave or stay...people keep demanding again.
We voted leave, yet people demand another vote...but if we were to vote again and we voted out again would the remainers demand another vote ....until they got the answer they wanted? If the remaining side did get vote stay then it would change. I guarantee they would not allow a 3rd vote to leave....it would be 1 rule for them another rule for everyone else. Same with Scotland they have asked if they wanted to stay or go, they said stay....yet that nutty woman keeps pushing for a vote.
...I thought we were a democracy
...yet they seem to forget this. When primeministers get voted in and we don't want them in,....why does noone else ask for another vote? May can now be forced out of office by the public....yet she remains. People seem dumb....
I just don't get it...
Ah... that's why Scotland wanted its own parliament. So the UK one could vote on stuff and they would accept it and move on.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you give blood?

Yes (49)
9.37%
I used to but I don't now (14)
2.68%
No, but I want to start (188)
35.95%
No, I am unable to (122)
23.33%
No, I chose not to (150)
28.68%

Watched Threads

View All