:brexit: Brexit - The Ramifications

:brexit: Brexit - The Ramifications


So, you’re basically saying pig fucker cut all our hands off. Bet your glad you never voted for him, because he did promise a referendum, so anyone that voted for him, voted for a referendum.
Then, like the spineless cunt that he is, he fucked off and the freak party offered us the living dead to deal with it.
Look at it like that and you have to say, that as a nation, we got what we deserved :lou_facepalm_2:


This is difficult one as from a pure democratic standpoint the vote was clearly won by the Leavers.

However, I really do feel that Cameron in his arrogance thinking that this would never happen really fucked things up so that no one really paid any attention to the process or ensuring a rational and thought provoking campaign… on both sides

Firstly, if you are going to make a referendum non binding and advisory only … as this one was, you can’t let the result be hijacked by those screaming ‘it’s the will of the people’ and then running scared of dealing with the result more rationally.

What should have happening IMHO is that:

  1. the fact the ref was advisory only should been made much clearer so that everyone knew it was not binding
  2. A clear framework of how such an advisory vote would be managed if it went this way should have been set up well in advance and communicated as part of the referendum communication eg. That if Leave won the followings steps would happen. There would be an independent review of the implications including the challenges faced by NI border and a clear position on the exit deal presented to the people.
  1. If article 50 needed to implemented… prior to teal negotiation, I am 100% convinced that the UK Govenermen could have held discussions on Workable deal framework had it wanted to before article 50… I believe the EU wants us to remain so would have played ball … not negotiations, but discussions. Instead UK government was swept up in the whipped up shit spouted by Boris and Gove et al and the right wing media with the ‘will of the people’ repeated as frequently as possible to cement it as a truism (the truth is that it was the will of 52% of those that voted, which is different) in addition it was also the will of the older generation, those least likely to be impacted on and least likely to care about future opportunity… but that is another issue
  2. I believe that with Such discussion, all the key issues would have surfaced as they have now and a realistic forecast of what kind of deal we were likely to get and all the pros and cons would have been much easier for all to digest…
  3. Then we should have a binding vote on it

There are a number of folks on both sides of the debate that have principled reasons, political or ideological that voted as they did because of them and nothing will change their opinion. That is fair enough and I can respect that.

But I believe the Vast majority of voters did so based on a number of specific concerns ranging from battle bus slogans, to fears of immigration or fears of economic collapse… and many generally to kick the establishment they feel has let them down - the impact of the last Global banking crisis and the austerity that has followed has left millions on or below the breadline and that is unacceptable. BOris and the Brexit clan knew exactly when to strike and use the underlying political climates to ram that home very effectively

I have no idea how the British public would vote IF they had a potential deal placed in front of them and a real open and honest debate about the key issues such as the NI border, immigration, the waste and excess of EU commission etc

I believe this should also have included a clear policy of how the UK would engage with the EU going forward. The improvements and change it would look to influence and bring about etc… ideally with commitment from the major EU nations…a long term view on our position and engagement

Only then would the British people be really able to determine what was in our best interests long term.

If they then voted leave, so be it, I would still not have liked it but at least I would feel comfortable the decision had been made from an informed position, not brought about by local fear mongering and the manipulation of fact and BS to stoke up fear from immigration to economic collapse… and All campaign material including such utter shit as was written on the Boris bus should have been approved by a neutral body…

I would then also accept the result as the will of the people of voting age…


Absolutely, as a nation, we got what we deserved.

And yes, I am glad I didn’t vote for him in his second election.


There are huge problems with “the referendum was non-binding”. I don’t know the details, @Map-Of-Tasmania, but I’m certain they rest upon some technicality of law.

The problem is, the government told us that it would implement whatever we decided. That same government’s leading proponents of a Remain outcome made it very clear that we’d be leaving the single market and customs union.

The other problem is that trying to get out of Brexit based on this technicality is hugely anti-democratic. It’s not just the referendum. It’s the general elections either side of it. In the 2015 election, the party that put a cast-iron pledge on a referendum secured a majority. In the 2017 election, over 80% of the votes went to parties upholding the referendum result; the one party that campaigned on reversing the result got eviscerated, even though they’d spin it as an improvement on 2015 (a very low bar to clear).

I’ve said recently that there are no Leavers and Remainers anymore, just democrats and anti-democrats.

Among the democrats, count Leave voters, Remain voters that accept the result, and Remain voters that don’t accept the result, but are prepared to use democratic means after we leave to rejoin, such as a general election or a new referendum, to achieve said outcome.

The anti-democrats are an easier camp to identify. They are Remain voters that don’t accept the result, don’t want the result implemented and don’t respect the votes of the 33m people that took part in the 2016 poll.


53% of people who actually voted - just remember that only 17m of our 66m population of the UK voted for it.

Ok the 66m does include some ineligible people eg kids and such like, but for something so important it’s hardly a ringing endorsement is it? Well I guess it is if you want to leave the EU

The simple majority rule was farcical and has left the uk divided.


Don’t know or don’t care are perfectly valid options.

No-one was complaining about the threshold before the referendum. The post-event moans seem shallow and rather self-serving.


I disagree but you’d just respond with the opposite- sums the whole Brexit argument up nicely

A country divided

Great eh?



To be fair Cobs the largest demographic that didn’t vote (for whatever reason) are the youngsters and they are the ones being most voiceforous about Brexit. If they had been bothered to get off of social media and actually put pen to paper then the vote would have gone the other way.

So maybe the blame should be put at the door of the under 30s!!


It was the highest turnout for any poll in the last 50 years percentage wise save the 1992 general election. That should be good enough for anyone.

Also, the idea of a threshold was mooted. How could that ever not tip the outcome in favour of the status quo?

It always had to be a simple majority. There was no point doing anything else.


Why does a democratic exercise (2nd vote) become undemocratic if it overturns a previous democratic exercise? More democracy is good, right?


Hmmmm :thinking:

Nope. Not with you on that, likewise with Pap’s view on a simple majority which, whatever way you look at is crazy. If that’s acceptable for Brexit then would people be happy having that for everything in politics?? Scary thought.



From the BBC website.


Umm, isn’t politics about a simpe majority. otherwise nothing would ever get passed through parliament. 650 MPs vote, is more MPs vote yes than no then it happens (and vice-versa)

FFS it’s like Birtain was land locked before the EU happened and no one ever went anywhere?


It’s fine as long as the first result is implemented, which is why I have no conceptual problem with people campaigning for re-entry once we leave.

To ignore a poll of 33m and not implement the result is profoundly anti-democratic. Not only would we become some kind of joke nation, like the Irish appeared when they had to vote until they got it right, it would also drive people toward political extremists, who would be able to bang the drum about democracy being dead in this country with legitimacy.

Precedent is a bitch. You start ignoring democracy and people will seek worse forms of political redress.


Sorry fella, you’re going to have to qualify that.

Why is a “simple majority” crazy, when more than half the voting electorate has gone for an option in a binary poll?

What saner way is there of getting a result?


I Think we should be very careful of this type of comment… its a bit of a flippant remark, surely you see that Pap? Otherwise, anyone that speaks up against or protests against a national or governmental action would be considered ‘undemocratic’ if said government had been voted in…if anything it is a democratic right to be able to speak out against such things if its what you truly believe… Would you say the same had we just had a referendum on the death penalty and we were now going to reintroduce hanging or lethal injection? Would you ‘accept it’ ? How would you feel if you were told you were not a ‘Againster’ you were just an anti-democrat?


How many people rely on sixteen year olds for their political opinions?

How many people over sixteen rely on sixteen year olds for their political opinions?

I was a fucking idiot at sixteen, but I was smart enough not to paint a sign up advertising the fact :slight_smile:


This looks a good book and there’ll be some reasons in there, Londoncentric, liberal attitudes at patting the underclass on the head and dictating is key for me why the Labour party traditional voter feels so alienated.


I can’t claim credit for the overall sentiment. For that, see Paul Embery of the Fire Brigades Union.

I think it is a vital point.

There are few on here that would be supportive of the last eight years of Conservative led rule, but we live with it, and use appropriate democratic structures to address it.

The results of those elections, for better or worse, and they really have been worse, have been implemented.

Re-joiners have every right to campaign for re-entry, to build a political consensus that takes them over the line.

Anyone seeking to prevent a democratic result from being implemented is, by definition, an anti-democrat, if only in an ephemeral sense.