Why the the leavers so scared of a second vote?

[StrumALum]

I don't get it.

The leavers were fed some lies, that much is obvious.

What I don't get though is that if the leavers are so sure of themselves then why are they so worried about a second vote? If it's 'the will of the people' then it will be the same outcome anyway.

Or are they panicking because now the lies (like the bus) have been exposed, people are now more clued up and they were relying on people not being clued up to get the vote through in the first place?

I do not know one leave voter that feels it necessary to re-evaluate their reasons for voting leave. Not one believed it would be a walk in the park and one thing they were sure of was that the eu were not going to make it easy and that we would be made an example of. The country knew that if the eu gave us everything we asked for that other countries would follow.
All this furore and deflection is just embarrassing.
To do another vote at this stage would undermine democracy in the most damaging and devastating way.
If any vote is put before the people, it should be to take or leave the deal and only that. However, let's be clear. Facts not opinion or speculation, are needed. The media is as guilty as the politicians in their scaremongering. Solutions instead of derision are desperately needed. This country needs to stop fighting with itself. The decision was made so let's just get on with it.

Because if we walked away we would be breaking the GFA which is an international treaty. We would break international law.

Would you trade or agree treaties with a country that simply walks away from its international obligations.

Do you want to be the country equivalent of a dead beat dad walking away from his children?

We need to face up to our responsibilities as a country. That's what grown ups do.

Mouse, because:

1. It unnecessarily complicates matters
2. It will always split the leave vote.
3. Because the UK overwhelmingly voted against using AV in 2011 for parliamentary elections so would suggest it’s not a method preferred by the majority of the uk

I have no evidence AV will be used. It has been mention and it is clear some people do not understand it. I have explained it to overcome confusion.

I think it may well prove too complicated for the British public.

The EU, the UK and Ireland have all said that in the event of a 'no deal' Brexit they would not put a hard border up. But some how if we leave the EU some mythical 4th party is going to swoop in, rip up the Belfast agreement and build a wall between Ireland and N.Ireland.

No remainer has ever explained who this 4th party is that will be imposing a 'hard border'.

Listing 3 preferences is complicated?

Unfortunately, I think your low opinion of the British public may be correct.

It doesn't split the vote as I have explained ad Infinitum.

In the U.K. we already use a variety of different systems in different elections.

Moussemoose

You appear to have responded to your own post.

I’m not scared. I believe we’ve already voted, we don’t need another vote.

Mouse if we walked away from the EU and the did not put a physical border in place between the uk and Ireland, instead tracked the movement of goods and people which specific article of the GFA would we be breaking, dead beat dad walking away from his kids. Don’t make me laugh. If we are going to use that analysis, maybe a person walking away from afinancially abusive relationship and being continuing to suffer financial abuse whilst being gaslighted and the abusive partner telling everyone, well it’s amazing the stories the escaping partner is coming up with. It’s amazing the people who believe these stories!

I voted remain.

Another vote would would make this country undemocratic.

I would have to vote leave this time because the above angers me.

I don't understand the reasons why we can't have another vote. Many referendum have been rerun - do we really think Scotland won't try again? Or Falklands won't be asked the same question another time etc. Who is to say in 5 years there won't be a referendum to re-join the EU? Personally I don't think the public should have been trusted to vote on this issue - I don't see how Joe Bloggs can make such a fundamental decision about every single aspect of our national identity, economics, politics (the list goes on) - all of which are inextricably linked to being a member of the EU. The amount of times I hear people saying they want to "Take our country back" or "leave means leave". The UK has changed so comprehensive and integrally since we joined the EU - how could anyone think it would be easy to just leave?!

Another vote would would make this country undemocratic.

Nonsense.Even David Davis said " If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy."

The 2016 vote was for a pig hidden in a poke. At that stage no details were available.The referendum could only be an instruction from the 52% to ask the government to explore the process for relinquishing EU membership.

2018 we now know from the government's (initally suppressed) impact assessments that each scenario leaves us much worse off. Another vote is merely confirmatory. Do people want to slice circa 8% off the economy? If that's what you believe is right, then why be so scared of standing up to be counted? If you are right then your point of view will be victorious again..

I'm not sure that 'leavers afraid of a referendum' is the real issue here. We'd need primary legislation through the House god a 2nd referendum. Only the Govt can bring that forward, and currently they have not shown any willingness to do so.

Even if we got the legislation through - I think we'd need an extension of A50 in order to have time to run it.

No remainer has ever explained who this 4th party is that will be imposing a 'hard border'

That’s because it’s going to be the EU. We’re being told that there is going to be no food or medicine entering the country.

Do you really think that will be because a UK government will sitting at the border insisting that they search everything, tick multiple boxes and count beans while their own electorate starved? That could only happen if the EU enforced it at every border with the UK.

Remainers like waving the threat of shortages, death and starvation. They’re very rarely honest that this could only come about if the EU effectively blockaded us and committed what would amount to a crime against humanity.

Saudi Arabia is doing something similar to Yemen to international condemnation.

While many would prefer to remain they consider the idea that the expressed will of voters can be just ignored to be very dangerous;

Voters are not being ignored, utterly disingenuous to say so. They would be being ignored if they were prevented to vote again when others were able to. I will never understand how being asked to now vote on the deal now we know more is undemocratic. If you still prefer to leave even after it’s clear the UK economy will be badly effected for a long time and all the misery that will bring then just vote to leave.

Not sure how having a second vote to determine change of policy isn't democratic, or acknowledging that people change their minds, or external factors require the electorate to rethink previous stances... isn't that what we do every time we have a general election?

Or do we just vote the once and then have to live with the consequences forever?

I should add I support EU not just for economic reasons. Is EU perfect, of course not, but I don’t think we would be better out of it.

These five reasons given by an Irish professor succinctly describe the benefits of the EU.

1. It has helped to maintain peace after a 20th century where European countries killed each other in the millions. NATO has contributed but EU has played a big part too by

1. fostering cooperation and collaboration

1. Collective action on issues that can’t be solved by one country - tackle deregulation of social standards, environment, cross border crime and terrorism

1. Through collaboration identifies a set of values built over centuries. Wants to develop a successful social market economy that promotes and rewards competition but also protect against the destructive tendencies that can come with it. Commitment to protection of workers, environment and social solidarity, recognising it has a responsibility to its most vulnerable members.

1. It doesn’t take away sovereignty away from national states. Each nation has firm Constitutional command and Eu only has power gifted by each state. EU is not a state nor wants any claimto be. By cooperation it increases nations’ individual power so increases sovereignty and allows members to defend our values and interests on the world stage

The question is now - "Do you want to leave with:
A) May's agreement?
B) No deal?
C) Or remain? "

Sneaky way to split the leave vote and make remain a majority. Would completely negate the original leave or stay and dismiss/remove the vote of everyone who voted leave.

I don't think there should be a remain option in there.

I voted leave and am praying for a referendum where I can vote remain this time round

Lonely but I answered the very clear question do you want to leave the EU. I was not asked do I want the UK to explore the options to leave!!! Such astounding revisionism!

Remainers are so adamant they are right and everyone else is just thick they are willing to set dangerous precedents and ignore what people voted for by rewriting the question which was asked!

I don't understand why if remainers are so keen on a second referendum they dont just follow the proper democratic process to have one.

Just put it in the manifesto of a political party, get enough votes for that party to win a general election and then legislate for another referendum. Just like leavers did.

Seems like remainers dont give a shit about democracy and are having a tantrum because they are not getting their own way.

Aaaarrrghhh. If I read ‘it’s undemocratic’ one more time....

Seriously, how? How is it undemocratic to ask people to vote now that more known about what Leave is actually going to be like. Are people not allowed to change their mind because they voted on lots of hypotheticals nearly 3 years ago? It was supposed to be advisory anyway.

(Putting aside the fact that the Leave campaign broke the bloody law. Leavers aren’t so worried about whether that’s fair. Ugh)

I think there should be two questions:

Do you want to:

Leave
Remain.

If the U.K. leaves the EU should it be with

Theresa’s deal
No deal

That doesn’t split the leave vote and gives everyone a chance to say whether they’d prefer to leave with or without a deal.

A poster earlier in the thread helpfully gave a link to the transcript of a talk given by Sir Ivan Rogers this week. He breaks the talk down into nine lessons that can be drawn from the last 2.5 years ranging from sovereignty to what is means to be outside the EU trade wise. It’s a very balanced and informative read for all people regardless of whether you are a remainer or Brexiter. I highly recommend. Thanks to the person who posted it.

news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/12/13/full-speech-sir-ivan-rogers-on-brexit/