To ask if you see a second EU ref as a sleight against democracy?

[VladmirsPoutine]

Is there anyone that thinks that the 2016 outcome should be respected regardless of anything else? If so - how do you square that with the fact that Theresa May has tested her 'exit' deal to Parliament twice and both times been shot down?

How can this be the 'WILL OF THE PEOPLE' given the initial result was 48%/52%.

Just curious where people now stand given we are 9 days away from Brexit. No judgement here just curious how people are interpreting the various outcomes and ongoings...

[EmmaGellerGreen]

I see May’s tactic of continuing to seek votes on her Bill after 2 big failures as being more of an issue. MPs are being browbeaten into changing their minds which can not be right.

Seemingly it is fine for MPs to rethink ( or be forced to do so) but “The People” can not be allowed to do so.

[Whatafustercluck]

I think it would be the most democratic thing to do. Democracy isn't static and the advisory referendum was nearly three years ago and things have changed considerably - not least Parliament's inability to agree a way forward.

[Theworldisfullofgs]

I dont think you can break democracy with more democracy

[TheMobileSiteMadeMeSignup]

It was an advisory referendum with no idea what, if any, deal was likely to look like. I don't see how giving the facts on what leaving will entail and allowing the public an informed decision is anything other than democracy.

[KC225]

Yes

[spanishwife]

I don't think the original vote was particularly democratic. The government gave us no clue as to what the plan would be, so we were all voting blind. Both campaigns used at best guess work and at worst flat out lies and illegal tactics.

In my opinion second vote with facts and clear outcomes would be the right thing to do.

[FunnyTinge]

I guess most people will now agree that the first referendum was a mistake, another one will be a complete shitshow from start to finish and do nothing to close the Pandora's box that the first one opened, even if it does resolve the immediate Brexit question.

Politicians created this mess - they need to clean it up (even if that means acting in the best interests of the UK, revoking A50 and then taking their punishment in the next GE).

[MeredithGrey1]

@KC225 Genuine question, what do you think should happen then? I don't think a second referendum is a great solution (but not because I think its undemocratic, which I don't), but I also don't think any of the other suggestions are great solutions either.

[SapphireSeptember]

Definitely not! New things have come to light, people have changed their minds, and we know leaving is going to be a shower of shite, especially as no one can agree on anything! I know a lot of people* who are pro no deal, which I can't wrap my head around. (Why I get stuck with these people? I've had to block people on Facebook because I'm sick of looking at their stupid, badly spelt memes.)

*One of these people has a son on an extended gap year (a mission) in Germany. I wonder how pissed off she'll be if he gets sent home early.

[FudgeBrownie2019]

Theresa May has asked MP's to reconsider their decision, so it makes sense that the public be allowed to reconsider theirs.

I'm sure Ireland held a referendum recently that they later reneged on, and Finland (?). It's no big deal to think things through and reconsider. It's even less of a big deal to admit when you're wrong - people do it all the time.

[Chickychoccyegg]

At this stage the most democratic thing to do is hold another referendum, with clear facts on outcomes on both sides, people have a better idea what it is they're voting for.

[ForalltheSaints]

I don't object to one, especially as the deal is not what anyone voted for.

[totallyrandom]

Having a second referendum is by definition democratic as you are asking the people what they think. However, the problem is what exactly are you asking the people to vote for? Remain vs withdrawal agreement? Fine by me. If you add in the 3rd option of a “no deal Brexit” no way will parliament agree to this. All their professional advice goes against this. The interesting thing for me is whether the EU will try and meddle and say yes you can have a delay if you put remain vs withdrawal agt to your people. If they do that they would in effect be showing that they really do have all the power and that could backfire!

[Rottencooking]

I don't think a second referendum goes against democracy as what was promised and what people voted for seems to be vastly different to the actuality. The whole thing is invalid. You can't ask people to vote on something they're clueless about and then fuck up our country as well as the rest of Europe because "DEMOCRACY".

The referendum was a lie and should never have happened the way it did.

Cancel this mess and give people a chance to vote on what would ACTUALLY happen.

[themoomoo]

I'm surprised you haven't encountered this yet to be honest.
many people think a second referendum would be a sleight against democracy. many people don't.
if you listen to radio 4 or 5 or maybe a buy a broadsheet newspaper you will find all the various reasons behind each opinion.
I am jealous that you have managed to avoid this whole debate so far!!

[SapphireSeptember]

I think some people are only going to understand why No Deal is a Really Bad Idea until it starts to effect them. I'm all for a second vote, I know some people are saying "Why should people keep voting until they get the outcome they want?" Haven't people been moaning since we first joined the EEC? And also what do they think of General Elections? Cos I keep voting in those hoping I get the result I want!

[madeyemoodysmum]

I would be happy to vote on the content of a deal in a new ref.

I voted leave but I’m not happy with TM deal or the behaviour of parliament as a whole.

I feel very let down and won’t be voting labour or Tory in the next GE.

[Frenchfancy]

The referendum was advisory and as such it didn't have to follow rules such as spending limits during the campaign. Treating it as law is imo undemocratic. The only democratic thing to do is to have a referendum which is binding and therefore has to follow the rules.

[Youseethethingis]

Yes, because the precedent will be set that if the voters give government instructions it doesn’t like, all the government has to do is make a complete arse of implementing those instructions, shrug their shoulders and say “hey, silly People, is this really what you wanted?”.
In 10 years time, once the post Brexit landscape for the UK and the EU itself is known, if there is still enough support for a return back into the EU, of course it would be undemocratic to deny that. Just as I believe it was undemocratic of the last Labour government to deny a vote on the Lisbon treaty.

[KidLorneRoll]

The idea that holding another referendum is undemocratic is patently nonsense. The only reason leavers don't want another one is because they are scared they will lose. If they believed in Brexit, the arguments for it and could articulate them, then they would welcome a chance to put it to bed once and for all.

The fact is, fewer people than in 2016 believe in Brexit and those that are left sure as hell can't come up with a convincing argument as to why it's a good idea, so they oppose another vote.

[themoomoo]

frenchfancy in the whole lead up to the referendum was it ever announced to the public that this vote could be meaningless? do you not think people would feel a little peeved?
And before you say everyone should know the difference between a referendum and a vote; do you really think people gave that any thought before this whole mess.
we were told we were voting whether to stay in or out

[themoomoo]

The fact is, fewer people than in 2016 believe in Brexit
I would dispute that as there is no hard evidence one way or another

[scaryteacher]

I am against a second referendum; if leave wins again, then would we have to have a third go, until the desired result was achieved?

I haven't changed my mind whatsoever about how I voted, and would vote the same way again, given how we can see (if we bother to look) how the EU operates - Switzerland anyone?

I am very angry that the MPs all blithely voted for article 50 to be triggered, and are now wanting to reverse that. Wtf did they think the end result was going to be if a WA couldn't be negotiated, or was a stinker like the WA May had brought back? Did they think that if they all put their fingers in their ears and sang la la la, that the 'nasty' Brexiteers were going to disappear?

I think we have been shown just what a shower of shite most of our MPs are. and how fragile our democracy is. The trust between the governed and the governing was already stretched thinly...I think it is at breaking point now. If the referendum result is not honoured, then it gets interesting, as no-one will trust politicians and won't vote for the established parties, or won't vote at all.

I think we are almost at the point that we are no longer active participants in a democratic process, but rather acted upon by those who pull the levers, and that is not necessarily those whom we have elected.

[Gronky]

I would dispute that as there is no hard evidence one way or another

I would also dispute it on the basis that these are the same pollsters who predicted Remain enjoying a clear victory.

[GrubbyHipsterBeard]

Not undemocratic at all. I think it would have been undemocratic to re run it straight after the first one to try to get a different result but I think thing have clearly moved on, and the first result wasn’t ignored because we’ve spent all of our time and energy trying to sort it out since. Not undemocratic to ask the people if they think it’s working.

Problem is if remain wins, leave will want another referendum in a few years and it’ll be a perpetual cycle. Referendums(a?) are a stupid idea. We are a parliamentary democracy.