Brexit--Should there be a do over vote?

I hope so. I can’t see anything good for the UK in Brexit.

What makes you think that Lucy? 

Dottyscrapper - do you disagree? Genuinely curious because most of the people I know in real life or just "know" via the internet etc. do wish it was not happening.They believe it will serve as more of a limitation than something positive.

I wish we could have a revote here in America.

Totally agree. The cry of 'stop the immigrants taking over the country and our jobs' was very loud in the run up to the referendum as was the fact that the NHS would benefit hugely by leaving because the financial savings would be redirected to it. Both were inaccurate, shall we say.

But I also agree with RosieKat to a degree. It was all very badly presented to the British public and the question itself (basically in or out) was a mistake.  But sadly I don't think it can be re-done because the cry that it's undemocratic would always dog it despite there being a genuine and compelling reason for it in this case. 

Giving people a binary choice on such a complex situation is inevitably deficient.

In essence:

Compare the question: ‘Do you still beat your mother ?’
When you are allowed only a Yes or No answer, then you are blocked from answering:

‘I will not answer that question because if I say No then it suggests that I agree that I have beaten her in the past.’

In the case of Brexit, the hidden complexity concerned:
— Leave, and adopt an EFTA or WTO framework?
— Leave, while the UK remains intact or while it splits up?
— Remain, in what manner?


London School of Economics

But his argument doesn't cover all of the complexities of being part of the EU though. The first only covers trade, the second only covers the "United" Kingdom and if the third was the questions on the ballot box, what would be the answer to that one - hypothetically? It would be a mile long with people picking and choosing different aspects of our membership. There is far more to being a member of the EU than what is covered in that article and that is what people should have been researching before they answered the yes or no to a straight forward question. We were given enough warning from both sides as to the importance of making the right decision in a simple question of  "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?"

If the people didn't do their research, on both sides ,that's on them and not an excuse for the remainers' to now say the question put to us was wrong. It wasn't, if people had thought about the implications of what that question meant and all the different aspects of being a member or not, that came with it.

@dottyscrapper I think you are being a little dismissive in saying "If the people didn't do their research, on both sides ,that's on them". Politicians know, without a shadow of a doubt, that Joe Public, in the main, does not do any research but follows the herd mentality.

I may have mentioned it before but I am English and have lived in Scotland for about 25 years. The townsfolk think I am a local. When we were going through the independence vote I would ask the locals why they wanted independence "to get away from England" "because it's England" "anyone but England" "'cos me dad says" and so we went round in circles. Not one could explain to me exactly why they thought it would benefit Scotland, not one had any clue as to how it would work in practice. They didn't care, they just wanted to get away from England.

Same, imho, with the referendum. The responses I got when chatting to people was "we let too many people into the country" "they take all our jobs" "me dad says".. . . . in the main Joe Public does not care until it affects him very personally, normally in his wallet. Joe Public can not be bothered doing any research because a) it's not written in terms Joe Public understand NOR did ANY one have any clue what would happen and so could not put any of it in layman's terms and b) Joe Public is inherently lazy.

I don't disagree with you that there are a large number of the general public that do that for a lot of decisions, not just elections.....they'll go with the status quo. The point is, there's no telling that the results would have been any different to what we got. They would have still been thinking the same way even if the question would have been worded differently. Using the validity of the question and could it have been written any different wouldn't necessarily have change the results.

I'm not being dismissive about suggesting that all people didn't do their research but it gets very weary when the people that did are telling the leavers that they didn't know what they were voting for or that the question wasn't written the right way. I can't see the same rhetoric from the leavers telling the remainers that they only voted no because of the many reasons you quoted above. Some of us did do our research in the same way as. no doubt, some of the remainers did. One side came to the conclusion that we would be better out and the other side decided that they prefer to stay. Nothing wrong with that but don't put the blame on the other side with excuses because you ( general you)didn't get the result you wished for.

As for the inaccurate information or lies as some say they are, both sides are guilty of that, in the same way as the baseless fear mongering and the speculation that some are peddling since the results.  

No @dottyscrapper, I'm not saying that. This was a one off - general elections are a known quantity. The politicians involved will almost always have been in the public eye for a fair while so it's much easier to know what they stand for, their moral compass, their hot buttons, their voting record etc etc. This was different.

And the fact that you don't know anyone who listened to Mr F just kind of makes my point - you're smart and educated, not everyone is.

Anyway, I'm bowing out of this now. I doubt either of us will change our positions and I'm sure we both have more enjoyable things to do