Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[danny la rouge]

Cos they voted for a vague thing

They voted Leave.

What evidence will you bring that they aren’t getting “Leave”?

ETA. Actually, don’t bother.

 

[danny la rouge]

You think government should be run partly by opinion polls? Really? I must say I disagree.

You are making everything up.

From now on leave me out of it and argue with imaginary people. Seriously you are utterly dishonest.

Goodbye.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Cos they voted for a vague thing.

Like Obama and New Labour!

Re-run the 1997 GE and the 2008 Presidential Election NOW!

 

[SpackleFrog]

More people who own outright without a mortgage voted leave than remain. One of the many ways to cut this particular pie. It's in your link.

Yes I know. More people in social housing voted Leave too. What's your point? Can you back up your claim?

 

[andysays]

It seems to me that the question of whether there should be a second referendum isn't primarily a constitutional question but a political one.

What would be the political consequences of an attempt to overrule the original decision to leave the EU by calling another referendum asking essentially the same question (and it would be essentially the same question) simply because the decision went the wrong way according to the majority of the political establishment?

I suggest that one of the consequences would be to further increase the sense of disenchantment among large numbers of those who feel that they have been abandoned, economically, socially, politically, the very unrecognised (by the political class) disenchantment which contributed to the unexpected (ditto) Leave vote in the first place.

This post sums it up pretty well

I doubt the anger will be reserved for the Brexiteers. There will be a continuation in anger with the political class generally, a continuation of cynicism about politics in general, and an increased propensity to vote (if they vote at all) for populists with easy answers.

Those posters arguing for another ref to attempt to overrule the first one because they claim that conditions are totally different now (although I haven't seen anyone really back up the claim in a substantive way) really need to think about whether this is a reasonable or acceptable price to pay, because that is where we'll be going

 

[danny la rouge]

I doubt the anger will be reserved for the Brexiteers. There will be a continuation in anger with the political class generally, a continuation of cynicism about politics in general, and an increased propensity to vote (if they vote at all) for populists with easy answers.

I suggest that one of the consequences would be to further increase the sense of disenchantment among large numbers of those who feel that they have been abandoned, economically, socially, politically, the very unrecognised (by the political class) disenchantment which contributed to the unexpected (ditto) Leave vote in the first place.

Indeed.

 

[stuff_it]

They won't back off, we're all screwed, so does anyone want a dog for 6-8 months? (not joking about the dog)

 

[billbond]

What would be undecromatic about getting people to vote?

If they feel the same way, same outcome, double confirmation - job done, end of.

weve already had one
Maybe you missed it, it was all over the news
#notoanothervote

 

[mauvais]

I suggest that one of the consequences would be to further increase the sense of disenchantment among large numbers of those who feel that they have been abandoned, economically, socially, politically, the very unrecognised (by the political class) disenchantment which contributed to the unexpected (ditto) Leave vote in the first place.

Whereas the short-to-medium term consequences of Brexit will be what exactly, an outbreak of sweetness and light?

I don't disagree with you as such, it's simply that every option at this point has massive problems, so why feel overly constrained by a particular one?

 

[mauvais]

Also, what do you actually want to happen? Because if you've no plan to somehow reform post-EU Britain, and your Brexit is more about blowing up institutions - fair, perhaps - then what's wrong with mass disenchantment? Isn't that ideal?

 

[redsquirrel]

This is one of my big criticisms of both referendums. There was a simple (simplistic) one-line question that contained no detail whatever of any constitutional arrangement. What does Scottish 'independence' really mean? It's as vague as brexit in that regard.

And of course governments never renege on their election promises, parties never use slick soundbites to obscure what they really mean.

As danny la rouge 's pointed out numerous times this is no different to any election.

 

[pocketscience]

More people who own outright without a mortgage voted leave than remain. One of the many ways to cut this particular pie. It's in your link.

So they do have a stake then. What if those people believe remaining in the EU would be a threat to thier secure situation?
and I'll ask again about the flipside:
Do those on or vering towards the poverty line that voted remain deserve your sympathy?

 

[Dogsauce]

More people who own outright without a mortgage voted leave than remain. One of the many ways to cut this particular pie. It's in your link.

That’s likely to be a correlation with age, older voters more likely to have finished paying mortgage, older voters voted leave more strongly.

I seem to recall seeing some graph that showed likelyhood to vote leave against class, and there were spikes at both ends, the lower end (I guess nothing to lose) and the higher end (I guess golf club bigots, small business owners frustrated by red tape etc., well off and able to ride out a loss). This data doesn’t really match that and I can’t remember where I saw it.

 

[Kaka Tim]

Are you saying that this therefore means you can just keep asking until you get the “right” answer? Don’t be surprised if people take exception to that.

Thing is - what if a clear majority of people now think that the brexit they are getting is actually quite shit and would prefer to stay? How beholden should the UK be to the referendum result?
Its not like a general election where you get to enjoy the results of the majority vote immediately - its 2 and half years - or more - down the line.
I think there are solid philosophical and democratic arguments for both "respecting the result" and a 2nd ref and whatever outcome we get is going to be bitterly resented by a significant chunk of the population.
And it is reasonable to argue that seeing as what people voted for - a UK that would be better off out of the EU then in - is very clearly not going to be delivered - then the referendum result loses a degree validity.
I dont think there is any sort of right answer - the referendum should never have been held in the first place - but at some point (i.e. crashing out into a ruinous no deal situation) adhering to the referendum result out of principle becomes almost a fetishisation of the democratic will to the point of self harming absurdity

 

[danny la rouge]

what if a clear majority of people now think that the brexit they are getting is actually quite shit and would prefer to stay?

I’ve no intention of repeating yet again what’s already been said about asking again and again until you get the answer you want. So let’s put that to one side.

OK, let’s assume it’s OK to rerun the in-out referendum (it isn’t, but let’s pretend). Is there any evidence people want a rerun of the in-out choice? Sustained evidence?

And how would you see it working? A three-way ballot: deal, no deal, remain? I don’t think that’s tenable, because it gives two leave options but one remain option. In practical terms it’s a problem. In legitimacy terms it’s a problem. And I just think people will be irritated by it at best. It’ll look like a stitch-up by the dodgy elite. And frankly that’s exactly what it would be.

 

[pocketscience]

And it is reasonable to argue that seeing as what people voted for - a UK that would be better off out of the EU then in - is very clearly not going to be delivered - then the referendum result loses a degree validity.

You can't know whether the people of the UK will be 'better off' or not. 'Better Off' means completely different things to different people.
For some, the meaning of it will be based on purchasing power but for others it may simply be having a roof over your head. The attitude of the former is exactly the reason why the UK doesn't vote for socialist governments.
Were you advising voters in the last GE that there's a serious risk they'd not be 'better off' if Corbyn were to win?

and even in the neo-liberal consumer 'better off' world of purchasing power there's the scenario that if the EU (or more precisely the Euro) was to drive living standards down to the point of being 'ruinous' for its citizens you'd still be able to argue that the UK would be better off inside the union and that any democratic decision to leave is "self harming".
What's the point of democracy if all we do is obsessively worry about the negative effects of change?

 

[mojo pixy]

better off dead

 

[Kaka Tim]

I’ve no intention of repeating yet again what’s already been said about asking again and again until you get the answer you want. So let’s put that to one side.

OK, let’s assume it’s OK to rerun the in-out referendum (it isn’t, but let’s pretend). Is there any evidence people want a rerun of the in-out choice? Sustained evidence?

And how would you see it working? A three-way ballot: deal, no deal, remain? I don’t think that’s tenable, because it gives two leave options but one remain option. In practical terms it’s a problem. In legitimacy terms it’s a problem. And I just think people will be irritated by it at best. It’ll look like a stitch-up by the dodgy elite. And frankly that’s exactly what it would be.

I wasn't saying this should happen - i was putting forward a hypothetical scenario.
Is there evidence that people want a re-run? some people do clearly. the majority are more likely just want the whole thing out of the way.
There's evidence that people going more remain - but not by huge margins. But if they do? At what point does that tip the scale of democracy towards a re-run?
And yes - there are problems with it. yes it would - in part - be a stitch up by a ruling class that dont want brexit.
But all the other options are fucking shit and divisive as well. And as far as i see it there are only two - a BINO brexit where the UK is still under EU rules and regulations but has no say.
Or a no deal crash out that fucks up millions of lives and fatally undermines the likes of NHS.
There is nothing "fair" or "legitimate" in any of the outcomes - its a cluster fuck.

 

[Kaka Tim]

You can't know whether the people of the UK will be 'better off' or not. 'Better Off' means completely different things to different people.

There are no tangible benefits to anyone in Mays likely final deal. its just damage limitation.

A no deal crash out has some potential upside for some people in time - but its hugely disruptive and will clearly and demonstrably cause a lot of shit for a lot of people straight away - and most of those people will be the poor and working class.

 

[pocketscience]

better off dead

maybe so, whwn you consider where all this 'better off' stuff started:

 

[pocketscience]

There are no tangible benefits to anyone in Mays likely final deal. its just damage limitation.

A no deal crash out has some potential upside for some people in time - but its hugely disruptive and will clearly and demonstrably cause a lot of shit for a lot of people straight away - and most of those people will be the poor and working class.

I think for a lot of working class have weighed it up and decided it's better to end it ruinously than to live with endless ruin.

 

[Kaka Tim]

I think for a lot of working class have weighed it up and decided it's better to end it ruinously than to live with endless ruin.

i think most people haven't weighed anything up. the in and outs of brexit are for political spods only. and a lot of working class people didn't vote or voted leave.

 

[Dogsauce]

There's evidence that people going more remain - but not by huge margins. But if they do? At what point does that tip the scale of democracy towards a re-run?

I’m not certain there is much of a change - polling before the referendum indicated a lead for remain, probably even stronger than current polling, and may have been a genuine measure of public opinion at that time despite the result. Democracy’s problem is that people are always more motivated to vote against something than for it, so leave was always going to fire people up more. Hence the result probably wasn't an exact picture of public mood.

Not many people are that enthusiastic about the EU, it’s a bureaucratic thing in the background of most people’s lives, voting for it for many would have felt a bit like voting in support of your gas and electricity supplier or something like that, hence why ‘project fear’ became necessary to get people out (which seemed to work to some extent given the turnout), backed up by those who felt the anti-immigrant nature of some of the forces behind brexit was something to take a stand against.

A re-run would have people fired up on both sides, remain would now have something to fight against, and the backing of more of industry/establishment which didn’t expect the result first time round and sat on the fence so as not to piss off at least 40% of the population. Leave would be angry about potentially having victory taken from their hands, and the also have the recent arrogance of the EU in negotiations to point at. I think it would be hugely more divisive and dirtier than first time around, and not much good would come of it whatever result.

 

[Poi E]

England doesn't know what the fuck it is or where its going and will drag all other countries down during its reactionary voyage of discovery. Another Brexit vote won't change a thing.

 

[danny la rouge]

I wasn't saying this should happen - i was putting forward a hypothetical scenario.

OK, fair enough. But my points still stand.

 

[Kaka Tim]

I’m not certain there is much of a change - polling before the referendum indicated a lead for remain, probably even stronger than current polling, and may have been a genuine measure of public opinion at that time despite the result. Democracy’s problem is that people are always more motivated to vote against something than for it, so leave was always going to fire people up more. Hence the result probably wasn't an exact picture of public mood.

Not many people are that enthusiastic about the EU, it’s a bureaucratic thing in the background of most people’s lives, voting for it for many would have felt a bit like voting in support of your gas and electricity supplier or something like that, hence why ‘project fear’ became necessary to get people out (which seemed to work to some extent given the turnout), backed up by those who felt the anti-immigrant nature of some of the forces behind brexit was something to take a stand against.

A re-run would have people fired up on both sides, remain would now have something to fight against, and the backing of more of industry/establishment which didn’t expect the result first time round and sat on the fence so as not to piss off at least 40% of the population. Leave would be angry about potentially having victory taken from their hands, and the also have the recent arrogance of the EU in negotiations to point at. I think it would be hugely more divisive and dirtier than first time around, and not much good would come of it whatever result.

id pretty much agree with that.

 

[Celyn]

England just declaring independence and sorting all this bullshit out would be a fresh start.

Then Scotland can remain in the EU. Could England take the Trident submarines, please? ktxbai

 

[danny la rouge]

I’m not certain there is much of a change - polling before the referendum indicated a lead for remain, probably even stronger than current polling, and may have been a genuine measure of public opinion at that time despite the result. Democracy’s problem is that people are always more motivated to vote against something than for it, so leave was always going to fire people up more. Hence the result probably wasn't an exact picture of public mood.

Not many people are that enthusiastic about the EU, it’s a bureaucratic thing in the background of most people’s lives, voting for it for many would have felt a bit like voting in support of your gas and electricity supplier or something like that, hence why ‘project fear’ became necessary to get people out (which seemed to work to some extent given the turnout), backed up by those who felt the anti-immigrant nature of some of the forces behind brexit was something to take a stand against.

A re-run would have people fired up on both sides, remain would now have something to fight against, and the backing of more of industry/establishment which didn’t expect the result first time round and sat on the fence so as not to piss off at least 40% of the population. Leave would be angry about potentially having victory taken from their hands, and the also have the recent arrogance of the EU in negotiations to point at. I think it would be hugely more divisive and dirtier than first time around, and not much good would come of it whatever result.

That’s a fair assessment.

 

[ska invita]

I dont think there is any sort of right answer - the referendum should never have been held in the first place - but at some point (i.e. crashing out into a ruinous no deal situation) adhering to the referendum result out of principle becomes almost a fetishisation of the democratic will to the point of self harming absurdity

Why do you think there shouldn't have been a referendum? The role of the press aside it was in the tory manifesto and people (in theory) voted for it.
I don't think there shouldn't have been a referendum, but the way it was done was a sick joke.

There should have been what Scotland had in Indyref, a big document that spelled out in detail what Brexit would mean, what the negotiation would hope to achieve, and that document should have formed the basis of the Brexit debate ahead of a referendum. Any serious deviation from that document would then be accountable and resulting processes clear. Its not hindsight this - referendum happen around the world and there's precedent for good practice.

instead we got nebulous mood boards, and brexit colour pallettes

 

[Pickman's model]

Why do you think there shouldn't have been a referendum? The role of the press aside it was in the tory manifesto and people (in theory) voted for it.
I don't think there shouldn't have been a referendum, but the way it was done was a sick joke.

There should have been what Scotland had in Indyref, a big document that spelled out in detail what Brexit would mean, what the negotiation would hope to achieve, and that document should have formed the basis of the Brexit debate ahead of a referendum. Any serious deviation from that document would then be accountable and resulting processes clear. Its not hindsight this - referendum happen around the world and there's precedent for good practice.

instead we got nebulous mood boards, and brexit colour pallettes

If we're going by what should have happened, the referendum should have been on the question, do you want to remain in an unreformed eu, been purely and simply advisory, and undertaken before Cameron went to Brussels to beg for crumbs. At a stroke he'd have got rid of the referendum bugbear, had a democratic mandate to seek genuine reforms of the eu, and managed to look like an intelligent human being instead of a thick as pigshit pig fucker