Should we have a Second Referendum? Watch

Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#21
Report 1 month ago
#21
Yea here's the options:

1. Are you sure? We're more intelligent than you. Our views are superior. We're right you're wrong. Accept we know best. Are you really sure you know what you're talking about? We want to remain. Leaving will be terrible. You're too stupid to know what you want. You don't get it. Vote to remain. Let us make the decision for you?

2. I'm a sensible human who knew what I wanted when I voted leave in 2016. I'm intelligent. I've weighed up the options. I'm entitled to my view. I know as much as you do. My views are as valid as yours. I stand by my vote to leave.
0
reply
TensorTympani
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#22
Report 1 month ago
#22
I will lose my faith in democracy if we have a second vote on Brexit.
2
reply
geoking
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#23
Report 1 month ago
#23
You don't understand democracy. Anything over 50% is enough for action to be taken.
2
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 month ago
#24
(Original post by Hiphophup)
Having a second referendum would highly undemocratic
Just as having general elections at least every five years is undemocratic.

As a leaver voter in the previous two referendums, I support further votes to confirm the view of the electorate is unchanged.
0
reply
LostAccount
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#25
Report 1 month ago
#25
(Original post by RogerOxon)
1.9% isn't enough for a multi-year process, during which many issues have been found that voters simply could not have appreciated. We now have a lot more information about what Brexit could mean, so it is, IMO, entirely appropriate to have a referendum on which of the main options to take, e.g. current deal, no deal, remain. However, I would not have supported having a referendum on this at all - we don't vote on what treatment the NHS should give for cancer, which the average voter probably knows as much about as they do about the EU.
Yes, let's put all of our trust into intellectuals such as Diane Abbott and the academic guiding light that is Stella Creasy.
1
reply
RogerOxon
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#26
Report 1 month ago
#26
(Original post by LostAccount)
Yes, let's put all of our trust into intellectuals such as Diane Abbott and the academic guiding light that is Stella Creasy.
What percentage of voters do you think did any research into what Brexit would mean? MPs have time and resources that most voters don't. I would assume that, on average, they're more intelligent and better educated than the average person - they are elected to make informed decisions. Given that they obviously cannot agree on Brexit, it wouldn't have happened, which, IMO, is the correct course.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
Hiphophup
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#27
Report 1 month ago
#27
I believe having general elections every five years is very democratic, without elections we would be living in a dictatorship... As times change we need an evolving government to harness the changes and solve new problems. General elections are also a way of holding MPs to account for their actions.

(Original post by Quady)
Just as having general elections at least every five years is undemocratic.

As a leaver voter in the previous two referendums, I support further votes to confirm the view of the electorate is unchanged.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
Last edited by Hiphophup; 1 month ago
0
reply
Hiphophup
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#28
Report 1 month ago
#28
Although MPs are in theory better informed they can easily become corrupt, organisations seek and pay MPs to vote a certain way, MPs are also told how to vote by party whips..

(Original post by RogerOxon)
What percentage of voters do you think did any research into what Brexit would mean? MPs have time and resources that most voters don't. I would assume that, on average, they're more intelligent and better educated than the average person - they are elected to make informed decisions. Given that they obviously cannot agree on Brexit, it wouldn't have happened, which, IMO, is the correct course.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#29
Report 1 month ago
#29
(Original post by Hiphophup)
As times change we need an evolving government to harness the changes and solve new problems.
Indeed, hence the justification for further in/out referendums.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#30
Report 1 month ago
#30
(Original post by Quady)
Indeed, hence the justification for further in/out referendums.
Referendums are not comparable with General Elections.

May I ask if you have read May's deal?
0
reply
Hiphophup
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#31
Report 1 month ago
#31
(Original post by Quady)
Indeed, hence the justification for further in/out referendums.
No that does not justify another referendum, circumstance has not changed since the first referendum we are still facing the same EU.

You cannot compare a Brexit referendum and a general election... We don't need another referendum, having another referendum would be undemocratic because it rules out what the electorate have already voted for. This new referendum would not be peoples true opinions it would be people trying to end the constant bickering in parliament. We need general elections otherwise we would be living in a dictatorship.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
Last edited by Hiphophup; 1 month ago
0
reply
Little Popcorns
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#32
Report 1 month ago
#32
Noi absolutely waste of time and money there’s no indication the result would change.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
RogerOxon
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#33
Report 1 month ago
#33
(Original post by Hiphophup)
No that does not justify another referendum, circumstance has not changed since the first referendum we are still facing the same EU.
Wrong. There was not a concrete deal on the table before, nor did the question differentiate between leaving with or without a deal. Given that parliament cannot agree on a way forward, something needs to be done to break the deadlock - a referendum on the detailed deal available would seem like a good way to do that. The leave vote was obviously fragmented between different visions of what "leave" would mean, some of which have been shown to be wrong, so that's another thing that has changed.

It's also been almost 3 years since the referendum. How long does a 1.9% margin give a mandate for?
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#34
Report 1 month ago
#34
(Original post by RogerOxon)
Wrong. There was not a concrete deal on the table before, nor did the question differentiate between leaving with or without a deal. Given that parliament cannot agree on a way forward, something needs to be done to break the deadlock - a referendum on the detailed deal available would seem like a good way to do that. The leave vote was obviously fragmented between different visions of what "leave" would mean, some of which have been shown to be wrong, so that's another thing that has changed.

It's also been almost 3 years since the referendum. How long does a 1.9% margin give a mandate for?
Untill it is carried out.

What is your problem with May's deal and hold a general election.after?
0
reply
BlueIndigoViolet
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#35
Report 1 month ago
#35
Yes
0
reply
RogerOxon
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#36
Report 1 month ago
#36
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Untill it is carried out.
The problem is that 'it' wasn't clearly defined, and Parliament cannot agree on 'it'.

What is your problem with May's deal and hold a general election.after?
I have no issue with May's deal being the Brexit pathway, but Parliament does. I don't see the link with a general election if it can be done before.

I am against Brexit though, especially based on a 1.9% margin on a vague question. We obviously know lots of details now that weren't known in the first referendum. Brexit is a multi-year process, so multiple votes along the way, at key decision points where Parliament cannot agree, should be expected.
Last edited by RogerOxon; 1 month ago
1
reply
Doones
  • Volunteer Section Leader
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#37
Report 1 month ago
#37
(Original post by geoking)
You don't understand democracy. Anything over 50% is enough for action to be taken.
Perhaps, except 50% of the electorate didn't vote to Leave. It was just 37%.

And see this previous referendum for precedent:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_S...ion_referendum

It set a 40% of the electorate requirement (not even 50%). On that basis the 2016 referendum would also have failed.
Last edited by Doones; 1 month ago
2
reply
Indy315
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#38
Report 1 month ago
#38
No matter what they decide to do, some people won't be happy with the result. This is the consequence of any debate, I think they should just work out the best deal for all.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#39
Report 1 month ago
#39
(Original post by RogerOxon)
The problem is that 'it' wasn't clearly defined, and Parliament cannot agree on 'it'.


I have no issue with May's deal being the Brexit pathway, but Parliament does. I don't see the link with a general election if it can be done before.
The link is our future relationship with Europe, you said we have not been able make a clear view of what we want. May's deal is framework for future negotiations to build what Europe we want.

A general election would provide that mandate.
0
reply
Doones
  • Volunteer Section Leader
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#40
Report 1 month ago
#40
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
The link is our future relationship with Europe, you said we have not been able make a clear view of what we want. May's deal is framework for future negotiations to build what Europe we want.

A general election would provide that mandate.
Putting May's WA to a referendum would be a truer demonstration of it though. The process started with a referendum, so testing the proposed agreement with a referendum is the logical final step.

I was saying this 2 years ago...
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

How did your AQA A-level Psychology Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (5)
35.71%
The paper was reasonable (3)
21.43%
Not feeling great about that exam... (2)
14.29%
It was TERRIBLE (4)
28.57%

Watched Threads

View All
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