The EU have used the words punishment!
Current Affairs EU In or Out
- Thread starter micknick
- Start date
- Status
Charlie Sweet
Player Valuation: £35m
You've hit the nail on the head there!
The very idea that this could ever have been done on a 50.1% vote is ridiculous
Gwladysstreetlad
Player Valuation: £50m
You misunderstood my point. My fault for not being clear, a super majority wouldn't of been unworkable had it been suggested right at the start of all this but it would be completly unworkable at this stage. You can't just dismiss the previous referndum because it was so poorly thought out that the idea of the super majority never occurred to the powers that be. Had we all gone into the first Referndum with the rules of a super majority clear to everyone that it would be in place it would of been fine. We didn't however so how could we make it work at this stage? Leave will inevitability argue that they shouldn't be the ones required to achieve the super majority since they already won under the orignal terms of the first referndum and that it should be remain who are required to achieve it since they are the ones arguing to block/change somthing this time. This of course won't be accepted by remain realistically so we'll be stuck at an impasse. It might of been a good suggestion once but I'm affraid it's simply to late in the day for it now.
To be honest, the whole thing has been a shambles. Neither remain or leave campaigned with a clear 'manifesto' in mind, so we've been left with a government largely making things up as they go along and an electorate hugely divided, even among those who actually voted to leave. There's certainly no uniform vision of what leaving means, even you suspect in the cabinet itself. It all smacks of amateur hour from a government that never thought in a million years they'd actually be where we are now. That we're supposed to put our faith in such a crowd to make everything alright beggars belief.
Charlie Sweet
Player Valuation: £35m
Agreed completely. Add in the fact that a number of the leading protagonists have since stepped away from public office and it gets even more ridiculous. Likewise how the likes of Theresa May can get away with a 180* turn on her view on the impact of Brexit - without proper challenge leaves me fuming. It's not as if the expert advice to the government has changed (i.e. that something has happened and now all of a sudden Brexit will be good...).
It's largely incoherent. May started off by railing against globalisation with her 'citizens of nowhere' type rhetoric, and the cabinet were bashing big business and largely following the line that Brexit was a protest vote by the 'left behind' and that capitalism needed to change to be more equitable. Now you've got Boris touting his Singapore-upon-Thames vision of greater openness. As you say, the civil service that have attempted to provide impartial advice, both before and after the referendum, haven't changed their tune, but the politicians above them are blowing with the wind. If they're the ones we're taking back control for then I despair.
As I have previously stated I don't think a second referendum is healthy for your country. However, by not achieving a super majority the country will remain divided...probably even more so as time passes.
I am just over here lobbing random thoughts at the whole thing and just kinda shaking my head wondering how it came to this. Any vote that requires a simple majority just shows that team A got their base more motivated than team B. I am fine with that when it comes to say the Presidential election. It's only a four year term.
Something like brexit that becomes more or less permanent should have required both sides to sell their ideas to those who opposed them. That's how you achieve a super majority.
Last edited:
NilSatisOptimum
Player Valuation: £70m
Best of 3 4 5 6... Democracy, it’s ongoing, that’s the will of people. Does not stop because the winning group gets the result, it has to deliver the outcomes it suggested it could, once election process is won.
All I understand from Brexit, accountability is low down on priority.
And losing side in UK democracy does not pack up and go away, it critiques on proceedings.
Gwladysstreetlad
Player Valuation: £50m
Well at least your honest about you intention of completly disregarding any referndum result that you disagree with. There's absolutely nothing democratic about demanding Referndum/election after Referndum/election until your desired result has been achieved.
? What's that
on that basis a third of the voters were unhappy!
It was a massive turnout hit your head with a book or something to realise the Remoaners like you lost!
Yes and two third were happy. A super majority.
Massive turnout really means nothing though. It could have been 17,000,000 to 16,999,999. The point being massive long term policy shouldn't be decided by a simple majority.
You either win or lose the remain lost - we leave on negotiating terms end of unless democracy is thrown out of the door!
Do you want a dictatorship state?
Old Blue 2
Player Valuation: £40m
It is in the House of Commons...
Thinking that a super majority is the wise and prudent way to handle a permanent decision that effects an entire nation, is hardly wanting a dictatorship.
- Status