Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[MoskvaRed]

I agree with other posters that MPs are unlikely to seek to overturn the result of the referendum. However, the parliamentary vote makes it more likely that May will have to offer a workable exit strategy to get the required Commons majority. To my mind, that must include continuing access to the single market (with the corresponding guarantee of freedom of movement for EU workers). In other words, I think something like the Norway model becomes more likely after today's vote, which, while a downgrade on the status quo, is at least a concrete plan and would be immeasurably preferable to the wishful thinking and castles in the air of the Brexit side.

 

[Adisa]

Brexit logic.

Hey Brexiteers, you lost the court case, stop appealing, GET OVER IT!

 

[EyeInTheSky]

I agree, what a joke country.... making sure everything that happens is constitutional and not letting anyone push something through that they don't have the power to...

Which is ironically what the leavers want us to believe they voted out for...

 

[Luke Parker]

What was the result of the referendum of the number of constituencies that voted to leave v the number that voted to stay. does anyone know?

I guess thats what this will come down to now as the MPs will have to vote in line with their constituents.

Okay, this is how the numbers work - the ref results can be found here for any geeks like me who like to play around in Excel:

http://www.electoralcommission.org....u-referendum/electorate-and-count-information

But of the areas counted, there were 382 in total of which 263 voted to leave and 119 voted to remain.

However, in terms of actual voting numbers this worked out as 16,141,241 who backed remain to 17,410,742 who backed leave a difference of 1,269,501 people. That difference accounts for less than 2% of the estimated 65million population (this percentage increases if you consider the voting population, 18 and over).

Interestingly, 637 MP's declared their stance prior to the referendum, of which 479 backed remain and 158 backed leave.


To me the key points show:

• Huge discrepancy between the general public and elected politicians
• Relatively minor difference in terms of the numbers of people for each argument
• Big difference in the total number of areas for each side (due to smaller populations in more rural areas)

The courts ruling today essentially puts the entire result in the hands of those who prior to the election overwhelmingly declared preference to remain but who are now almost certainly going to have to support leave.

What a clusterfeck of a situation our political class has created.

Big lesson number one - don't leave complex legal, economic and logistical decisions in the hands of the general public and expect them to know enough in a matter of weeks to make a fully informed decision. It's not fair and the parliamentary system was created to prevent this kind of situation.

An emotional middle finger to the establishment if ever I saw one, should never have been possible.


EDIT: To add, the size of the electorate was 46,500,001 of which 33,551,983 voted (72% turnout). Interestingly it would only have taken 634,751 voters (a mere 1.89%) to change their minds to have gotten a different result. That's how close this ref was and that is why parliament needs future involvement in how this all pans out. In my humble opinion of course.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

So lets say parliament votes 52 v 48% to go ahead with brexit hard style

Will the remain camp be happy with a game of paper scissors rock to try and overturn it? Or draw lots, or anything that will get the result I want

Of course they won't be happy. Their country has taken a massive decision they don't agree with. Why would they suddenly be happy about it? Don't pretend the exact same wouldn't be going on from Leave voters if the opposite outcome had happened.

 

[Sphaero]

I think that they take France more seriously then these pack of amateurs who went kicking a hornet's nest while hoping that lovely puppies will come out instead. Look at them. Most of them have resigned, had turned against one another or have vanished in obscurity. Farage had even been spotted in the German embassy while working on his second passport while a remainer PM have given the task to clean the mess the leavers had created with their lies. The EU will leave them to flounder in darkness only to offer them a take it or leave it deal which will be heavily stacked towards the EU.

Regarding your last part. Its a known thing. Even the Brits admit that and joke about it. A unified and strong Europe was never in the UK best interest

Wait, the idiot wants to come over here? Oh, hell no!

 

[Adisa]

I agree with other posters that MPs are unlikely to seek to overturn the result of the referendum. However, the parliamentary vote makes it more likely that May will have to offer a workable exit strategy to get the required Commons majority. To my mind, that must include continuing access to the single market (with the corresponding guarantee of freedom of movement for EU workers). In other words, I think something like the Norway model becomes more likely after today's vote, which, while a downgrade on the status quo, is at least a concrete plan and would be immeasurably preferable to the wishful thinking and castles in the air of the Brexit side.

Yes I agree, parliamenty oversight makes a hard Brexit a very difficult proposition. That's what is making prominent leavers jumpy.
My opinion is that even without parliamentry oversight, a hard brexit would be a shit outcome when 48% of the electorate voted to remain.

 

[Adisa]

I think thats what she will do - but I actually think her best option (not the one I want her to take) would be to call an election - to say she is going to the people for a mandate to trigger article 50 and she would expect any mp elected on that mandate to back it in a vote - given the state of labour she would probably walk the election with a very workable majority and then have 5 full years to take us out of europe and not have to face a vote too soon afterwards (should the negotiations go as badly as I suspect they will) - not sure the has the metaphorical balls to do it though.

She risks UKIP taking an uncomfortable number of seats.
The feeling among Leave voters, that the government and labour are trying to screw them is growing. I think UKIP would capitalise on that.

 

[Stanley Road]

Of course they won't be happy. Their country has taken a massive decision they don't agree with. Why would they suddenly be happy about it? Don't pretend the exact same wouldn't be going on from Leave voters if the opposite outcome had happened.

No-one has to be happy with any result they don't like but they should accept it and deal with it. Referendum result was clear, accept and move on. I am not able to vote in the uk or in NL, I live with whatever outcome.

 

[Red Defence]

I find it slightly hilarious that considering how much effort Nick and his ilk have spent in here and elsewhere arguing that this is all about parliamentary sovereignty they're now incredulous that the very body they want to hand ultimate power to gets to have a say in the matter.

Then again:

"Predictably, the same people now quoting 'parliamentary sovereignty' are the very same people who were happy to give it away for last 40yrs."

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/72...xit-vote-parliament-Eurosceptics-UKIP-furious

 

[Adisa]

Vote leave campagin director

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

What leavers are saying is that, parliament should not be allowed to vote on the biggest treaty change in half a century.
In which universe does that make sense?
The count case was only going to have one outcome.

Do you recall how the Labour government and many of its MPs acted regarding the Lisbon Treaty? Hardly events which instil confidence in the integrity of these people.

The scenario which @MoskvaRed outlined, will be seen as a betrayal by much of the electorate. It would be extremely damaging for credibility of the Commons, and foster an even worse political climate in this country than exists at present.

 

[Smores]

Labour should call for a general election, let the country vote on the parties chosen direction of implementing brexit rather than a slogan. No one voted for whatever May's interreptation of Brexit may be.

If its shown anything its that referndums are a terrible idea especially those asking non-specific questions. Lets hope we never have one on the death penalty or we'll be asking if the public voted for death for littering or just murderers

 

[Adisa]

 

[Adisa]

 

[Adisa]

 

[Coxy]

No-one has to be happy with any result they don't like but they should accept it and deal with it. Referendum result was clear, accept and move on. I am not able to vote in the uk or in NL, I live with whatever outcome.

How was it clear? 52% of the vote - roughly a third of the country voted for leave. It's not clear at all.

Also we live in a democracy - we shouldn't just accept it and deal with it, instead we should still be debating. Especially when the campaign was so awful - so many lies and run awfully.

 

[Untied]

Labour should call for a general election, let the country vote on the parties chosen direction of implementing brexit rather than a slogan. No one voted for whatever May's interreptation of Brexit may be.

If its shown anything its that referndums are a terrible idea especially those asking non-specific questions. Lets hope we never have one on the death penalty or we'll be asking if the public voted for death for littering or just murderers

Or for remoaning traitors, probably

 

[Coxy]

Labour should call for a general election, let the country vote on the parties chosen direction of implementing brexit rather than a slogan. No one voted for whatever May's interreptation of Brexit may be.

If its shown anything its that referndums are a terrible idea especially those asking non-specific questions. Lets hope we never have one on the death penalty or we'll be asking if the public voted for death for littering or just murderers

Labour are still in too much of a mess right now.

 

[Adisa]

Labour should call for a general election, let the country vote on the parties chosen direction of implementing brexit rather than a slogan. No one voted for whatever May's interreptation of Brexit may be.

If its shown anything its that referndums are a terrible idea especially those asking non-specific questions. Lets hope we never have one on the death penalty or we'll be asking if the public voted for death for littering or just murderers

Labour would still be in a tight spot. Analyst speculate that up to 9m labour voters voted for leave.

 

[Untied]

Then again:

She misses the point which is that if you have been moaning about losing British parliamentary sovereignty you cannot complain about today's result.

I personally would have been happy with the EU parliament voting on whether we can submit Article 50 given it's the only parliament in which I have elected representatives.

Do you recall how the Labour government and many of its MPs acted regarding the Lisbon Treaty? Hardly events which instil confidence in the integrity of these people.

The scenario which @MoskvaRed outlined, will be seen as a betrayal by much of the electorate. It would be extremely damaging for credibility of the Commons, and foster an even worse political climate in this country than exists at present.

At least you now have to admit that the referendum wasn't at all about regaining British parliamentary sovereignty but about enforcing your own views on the country

 

[JPRouve]

Which is ironically what the leavers want us to believe they voted out for...

If the remainers didn't acted like complete idiots and wasted their credibility and time calling the leavers racists and idiots, they could have destroyed the "democratic" and national sovereignty arguments.

 

[MoskvaRed]

Do you recall how the Labour government and many of its MPs acted regarding the Lisbon Treaty? Hardly events which instil confidence in the integrity of these people.

The scenario which @MoskvaRed outlined, will be seen as a betrayal by much of the electorate. It would be extremely damaging for credibility of the Commons, and foster an even worse political climate in this country than exists at present.

Remember that much of the 48% feel a sense of betrayal as, in their view, the leave vote majority was obtained by spreading falsehoods. There is also a frustrating assymetry to the debate in that, while the remain camp can articulate what they want, the Brexit side seems unable to propose any coherent plan. If they could articulate what they want (in a realistic sense rather than have cake and eat it), then it might be easier to find some solution that doesn't leave half the country feeling alienated fron the other half.

 

[Red Defence]

Funny, watching brexiters lose their shit.

No need for them to lose their "shit". Brexit will happen and we will leave.

 

[Stanley Road]

How was it clear? 52% of the vote - roughly a third of the country voted for leave. It's not clear at all.

Also we live in a democracy - we shouldn't just accept it and deal with it, instead we should still be debating. Especially when the campaign was so awful - so many lies and run awfully.

52 v 48, clear?

Democracy? So the govt has been asked to take uk out the eu and some impartial judges have said not without PM vote, democracy.

I actually hope now that the whole idea is rejected and whatever carnage follows that in civvy street can be traced back to one man, Cameron.

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

At least you now have to admit that the referendum wasn't at all about regaining British parliamentary sovereignty but about enforcing your own views on the country

Do you accept the point, that MPs and previous governments (Labour in particular) have actively misled the public on th EU in the past? And that there are grounds to question the future conduct of MPs, as they would seek to undermine/dilute Brexit?

 

[ThierryHenry]

I agree with other posters that MPs are unlikely to seek to overturn the result of the referendum. However, the parliamentary vote makes it more likely that May will have to offer a workable exit strategy to get the required Commons majority. To my mind, that must include continuing access to the single market (with the corresponding guarantee of freedom of movement for EU workers). In other words, I think something like the Norway model becomes more likely after today's vote, which, while a downgrade on the status quo, is at least a concrete plan and would be immeasurably preferable to the wishful thinking and castles in the air of the Brexit side.

I think that's the very optimistic approach to looking at today's result, but what I'm going for too.

I think thats what she will do - but I actually think her best option (not the one I want her to take) would be to call an election - to say she is going to the people for a mandate to trigger article 50 and she would expect any mp elected on that mandate to back it in a vote - given the state of labour she would probably walk the election with a very workable majority and then have 5 full years to take us out of europe and not have to face a vote too soon afterwards (should the negotiations go as badly as I suspect they will) - not sure the has the metaphorical balls to do it though.

Another option May has is, calling a snap GE.
In that case, she risks opening the door again to UKIP.

It seems the obvious solution/ tactic for May. I'm wondering if she's not doing it to avoid receiving too much responsibility for drawing up Brexit. At the moment with a slim majority she has plenty of ways to shift blame if we don't get the type of deal the country hopes for (i.e. restrictions on immigration with no economic drawbacks), which is the very likely outcome to negotiations. If she called an election promising all sorts of outcomes to Brexit which then failed to materialise, she then becomes a failure with no-one else to blame.

Again, this might just be wishful thinking. Maybe the Tories are just committed to the fixed term act for some reason.

 

[Adisa]

No need for them to lose their "shit". Brexit will happen and we will leave.

That's a given. Some are losing their shit because a their dream of a "hard brexit" is being threatened.

 

[rcoobc]

Another option May has is, calling a snap GE.
In that case, she risks opening the door again to UKIP.

UKIP would almost certainly do more harm to Labour (the part of European negligance) than to the Tories (the party implementing Brexit).

 

[Coxy]

52 v 48, clear?

Democracy? So the govt has been asked to take uk out the eu and some impartial judges have said not without PM vote, democracy.

I actually hope now that the whole idea is rejected and whatever carnage follows that in civvy street can be traced back to one man, Cameron.

I agree Cameron is to blame.

However 52 v 48 is not clear no. That's roughly half - that is NOT a clear majority. Roughly a third of the county voted to leave. A third voted to remain and a third couldn't be arsed to vote.

Yes democracy - so this mess will have to properly be debated and voted in the commons now, as it should be as our law states...

 

[ThierryHenry]

Remember that much of the 48% feel a sense of betrayal as, in their view, the leave vote majority was obtained by spreading falsehoods. There is also a frustrating assymetry to the debate in that, while the remain camp can articulate what they want, the Brexit side seems unable to propose any coherent plan. If they could articulate what they want (in a realistic sense rather than have cake and eat it), then it might be easier to find some solution that doesn't leave half the country feeling alienated fron the other half.

Exactly. If a logical, coherent strategy to Brexit was outlined, agreed on and voted for then we would be in a completely different place. But it wasn't and we're not - mis-truths and vague statements of nothingness are all we've gotten since the campaign started.

 

[Smores]

Labour would still be in a tight spot. Analyst speculate that up to 9m labour voters voted for leave.

Yeah Labour certainly wouldn't be in an ideal position but if it was a case of Labour leading the charge for us to remaim in the single market (with some policy on immigration which Corbyn might not permit to) against May's hard Brexit then who knows. Of those 9m how many regret it and how many wouldn't be willing to lose single market access.

The risk that Corbyn is too unpopular and Tories would win on a hard brexit campaign is worth it considering they're progressing that way anyway. As least it would bring it to public debate and any action to prevent the worst outcome should be taken by the opposition.

 

[Luke Parker]

52 v 48, clear?

Democracy? So the govt has been asked to take uk out the eu and some impartial judges have said not without PM vote, democracy.

I actually hope now that the whole idea is rejected and whatever carnage follows that in civvy street can be traced back to one man, Cameron.

I agree Cameron is to blame.

However 52 v 48 is not clear no. That's roughly half - that is NOT a clear majority. Roughly a third of the county voted to leave. A third voted to remain and a third couldn't be arsed to vote.

Yes democracy - so this mess will have to properly be debated and voted in the commons now, as it should be as our law states...

It's semantics, what do you mean by clear?

Yes, more people voted leave than voted remain if that's what you mean.

If what you mean by 'clear' is a substantial proportion of the electorate, then no, not clear at all. There were approximately 13 million people who didn't exercise their right to vote, and of those who did it would have taken a mere 1.9% swing to change the result (mathematically).

This is a lose lose situation now.

 

[Stanley Road]

I agree Cameron is to blame.

However 52 v 48 is not clear no. That's roughly half - that is NOT a clear majority. Roughly a third of the county voted to leave. A third voted to remain and a third couldn't be arsed to vote.

Yes democracy - so this mess will have to properly be debated and voted in the commons now, as it should be as our law states...

Right ok

You're version of 50% is different to mine so we'll leave it there

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

Remember that much of the 48% feel a sense of betrayal as, in their view, the leave vote majority was obtained by spreading falsehoods. There is also a frustrating assymetry to the debate in that, while the remain camp can articulate what they want, the Brexit side seems unable to propose any coherent plan. If they could articulate what they want (in a realistic sense rather than have cake and eat it), then it might be easier to find some solution that doesn't leave half the country feeling alienated fron the other half.

And i would say to you that Remain used its goodly share of falsehoods, doubtless persuading some voters to continue with the status quo out of fear. I've also heard my fair share of nonsense about the future from those advocating In. They would sell the line of a reformed EU for example, while lacking any practicable means of achieving their ends.

EUrophiles, be they elected or voters like yourself, have been more than happy to ignore and override Eurosceptic sentiment for years. That was perfectly okay of course.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

UKIP would almost certainly do more harm to Labour (the part of European negligance) than to the Tories (the party implementing Brexit).

Look at how well the Lib Dems did in the recent by-election. I think a snap general would be an absolute disaster for Labour and would see the Dems and UKIP gain.

 

[Bury Red]

Do you accept the point, that MPs and previous governments (Labour in particular) have actively misled the public on th EU in the past? And that there are grounds to question the future conduct of MPs, as they would seek to undermine/dilute Brexit?

All MPs lie more easily than they breathe, if you're not used to that by now then you really shouldn't invest this much time in politics Nick.

Will you accept that the Brexit referendum was only won by MPs lying to the public about the EU? That those lies skewed the referendum and have left over half this nation feeling betrayed and fearing we are going to be dragged down the pan with the Brexiteers, I welcome any opportunity to undermine/dilute this ludicrous political charade before any lasting damage is done.

 

[Adisa]

UKIP would almost certainly do more harm to Labour (the part of European negligance) than to the Tories (the party implementing Brexit).

Yes UKIP would take more seats from labour but I doubt the tories will want its policies in anyway influenced by the UKIP. Going into bed with UKIP, even if it's just for brexit might be a price the tories are unwilling to pay. Most tory MPs are remainers and I'm sure the government would feel more comfy with a disorganised labour than a poisonous parliament with UKIP in it.

 

[Stanley Road]

I agree Cameron is to blame.

However 52 v 48 is not clear no. That's roughly half - that is NOT a clear majority. Roughly a third of the county voted to leave. A third voted to remain and a third couldn't be arsed to vote.

Yes democracy - so this mess will have to properly be debated and voted in the commons now, as it should be as our law states...

Right ok

You're version of 50% is different to mine so we'll leave it there

 

[Smores]

Look at how well the Lib Dems did in the recent by-election. I think a snap general would be an absolute disaster for Labour and would see the Dems and UKIP gain.

They spent a fortune on that seat and couldn't have campaigned harder. It was never a seat Labour were going to win and nor should it be taken as a sign of Lib Dems progress