To ask what people are afraid of with a People's Vote?

[Bearbehind]

Estimates reckon there were nearly a million people at the Peoples Vote march yesterday so support for it is high.

Why is it such a threat to others though?

If you're so convinced Leaving is the right thing to do for the country, why wouldn't you want that to be endorsed now people have a clearer idea of what is to come?

Or is it that you're worried Leave would now lose as it's been made clear there are no upsides?

In which case why do you want to go ahead with it anyway?

My dad had a conversation with Tony Benn about the need to nationalise the banks (this was the 70s). Tony blustered and said we couldn't do that. Tony ain't so rock and roll.

I think his questions on democracy remain sound.

I have no interest in rock and roll.😁😉

No one is scared of a second vote. Leave would win again unquestionably. The issue is that it It would not stop at ONE people's vote, because whoever lost the people's vote would campaign for another, and why stop there, we could keep having them until the right answer was produced (and probably never would be but we would waste years doing it)

We had a referendum, the vote was to leave.

We are not in the business of just keep voting until you get a different answer (as is the case in some other EU countries one has noted, just because it didn't suit the EU)

We stand by the vote, we stand by democracy and if it is the wrong decision we will have a vote in ten/fifteen years time and vote to rejoin.

maidsrus

1 frictionless trade* - only with those entities that 27 other nations also wish to trade with. And is it really such a good thing to be able to buy VWs, BMWs and Audis without being able to impose our own environmental checks and protections? I don't see the EU ensuring the those companies are compensating the UK for years of being sold fraudulent vehicles.*
2 freedom of movement both ways - disastrous for poorer and smaller nations, who now face brain drain and ageing populations due to their young and skilled workers choosing to move en masses to larger and wealthier countries
3 collaboration and investment in science, crime prevention etc - we collaborate with the US, Canada, Australia and many other nations, without paying membership fees
4 collaboration in big issues like employment protections and global warming - we collaborate with the US, Canada, Australia and many other nations, without paying membership fees on big issues like global warming. Employment protections are entirely different and should not be lumped in to the same category as global warming; global warming will affect every single living thing on the planet, and cannot be conflated with whether you should have four weeks off or five in a year (to fly somewhere and contribute to global warming ). The UK has often been a leader in employment protections and standards and there's no reason to believe this would not continue, within or outwith the EU.
5 influence and allies* - we were and had allies during 1914-18 and 1939-45, without being a member of the EU.*

I haven't rtft. Just to answer the op though - we already had a 'people's vote' it was called a referendum. People voted Leave..

Haven't read the full thread, but although I voted to remain, I instinctively shy away from anything that weakens democracy.
We should never have had a referendum on such an important issue in the first place, but the fact is we did, and we should now live with the result. That's democracy.
I can just about live with another vote on the terms of leaving, but definitely not a second vote on whether we should leave it not
What next? Demands for another election if the 'wrong' Government was voted in?
It's the thin edge of the wedge and people just have to cope with the idea that things don't always go their way.

We already had a vote in 1975. We said yes to staying in the European Union. I think the 2016 Referendum was therefore undemocratic.

The European union came into existence in 1992, I think.

"Do you think that the United Kingdom should stay in the European Community (the Common Market)?" was the question.

So yes, EC rather EU. It's not like we know what any of it means anyway, is it? I mean all these people who voted. Can they tell the difference?

Actually those that voted leave may have done so for sound (to them at least) reasons. However to say that all 17.2 million who voted leave voted for the same thing is just wrong. Some will have voted to leave the EU, CU and FTA, some will have voted for leaving the EU, but staying in the CU, some will have voted for a Norway style relationship with the EU. Some I know voted for leaving to get rid of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights (which will still have jurisdiction after we leave).

To now assume, as this government have done, that everyone who voted leave was of one mind is just foolish, they clearly were not. Also it is undeniable that the leave group have made a complete hash of any negotiations, and are now encouraging us to drive over the cliff with them.

Whenever I have asked any leave voter for a positive reason for leaving, I get the soundbites that were spouted by Farage et al, but actually none of them stand up to any form of scrutiny at all. I still have not found one benefit to leaving.

Er, speak for yourself Faffette.

Then why don't they come up with solutions since they understand what it is all about. Clearly all the Brexiteers have a good grasp of what the European Union is and how it works in all its complex glory, so why don't they come up with a bit more than "we have voted, just get on with it".

I speak for myself yes. I don't presume to know that much about the economy, law, regulations. (And also I have only paid my taxes for the past 20 years so I wasn't allowed to vote)

Why do we the general public have to solve this?
We voted told our government what we wanted by winning the vote.
Just to make sure we had a general election in which both sides said they would do it.
They got elected. And are now getting us out.
Just cos I have got pregnant doesn't mean I don't need a midwife...

I've said this on another thread but it's becoming very clear there are going to be a lot of very angry people if we end up with no deal and the expected consequences that come with that.

The utter nonsense spouted like mummmys post above isn't going to cut it when people are suffering economically because of other people's choices.

People are going to direct their anger at all those who said 'we won, everything else wasn't our problem, or 'I don't care what the consequences are as long as we leave'.

Bear you still hide in your what if world.
NO second vote sorry.

mummmy it's not 'what if'

The choices are

• no deal in which case, even the government have said, the shit will hit the fan

• soft Brexit which means all the time and expense has been pointless and we'll still be worse off

Either way, the damage has been done. Businesses will not choose to invest in the UK if they need an EU presence.

We have shown we can't organise a piss up in a brewery and can't be trusted not to go back on our word.

We've even shown we'd breach international treaties if it suits us.

Those things are not 'what if' they are facts.

Why do we the general public have to solve this?
We voted told our government what we wanted by winning the vote.
Just to make sure we had a general election in which both sides said they would do it.
They got elected. And are now getting us out.

Mummy, you have been saying this for months now. However, the government is clearly unable to 'do it' - not only because they're incompetent, but because implementation is virtually impossible because of Ireland, etc. Yes, we could crash out, but that's going to be detrimental to the country. So what do you think their options are now?

Mummy

So what did you want? just out of interest, did you want out of the EU, CU and FTA, or did you still want to be able to trade with europe on the same terms as now, and just not be a part of the EU.

I really am interested to know.

I also have to say, bearing in mind the complete mix of opinions as to what the Tory party wanted at the last election compared to what labour wanted (see their 6 tests) in terms of Brexit and that neither won an overall majority to enact their version, it does seem there is some disparity as to what in terms of Brexit was voted for.

We could tell the government that we want to survive if we jump off a cliff. Doesn't make the government able to overcome the laws of gravity

The Leave voters voted for mutually incompatible things (even if you accept that they all voted for the same undefined thing).

So, to continue the metaphor, you can either jump and die (and no, I'm not meaning literally, before someone accuses me of wishing death on Leave voters), get the government to work out some way of overcoming the laws of gravity unlikely , or recognise reality and retreat from the cliff edge. There is a bridge - continued membership of EFTA (although NI would still need a special CU) - but at the moment, it would appear that many of the Leavers want to block the route to that and instead want to push everyone off the cliff.

At least a second vote would confirm if the people of the UK as a whole wish to commit economic suicide

See? One argument: "But we voted!"

Bobbywash

Ah yes, labours six tests

Or effectively sitting on the fence to see which way the wind blows.

Brexit was a political question about the future direction of the country. This whole thread is a Uber whinge by europhiliacs who don’t like it. Well guess what - tough. You didn’t convince in 2016 and you don’t convince now.

If your that worried about your medicines and other assorted scaremongering then bog off to Brussels.

I agree with @10degreestostarboard that Labour's six tests are meaningless. However @10degreestostarboard 's comment about going to Brussels if you need vital meds is shameful.