To think that a People Vote has to have 3 options, not just 2

Bearbehind · 2019-10-20T17:07:16+00:00

There’s talk of a People Vote, if it ever happened, just being between Boris’s deal or Remain. I am a massive Remainer but even I think that is a really bad idea. It has to include No Deal. Much as I think that’s a shite idea, excluding it from the options will only make things worse. It should just be a simple majority of the 3.

Borris · 20/10/2019 18:10

I'm a remainer too but a 3way vote would split the leave vote in half, making it unfair. A referendum has to be a 2 way choice

marmitedreams · 20/10/2019 18:13

Why would you respect the result of a second referendum when you want to ignore the result of the first? Shall we keep voting until it goes your way? I would like the result implemented before we have more votes.

OddBoots · 20/10/2019 18:14

It needs two questions.

Q1: Leave or Remain

Q2: Is we leave Deal or No Deal.

If Q1 is remain then Q2 result doesn't matter but is Q1 is leave then we know which type of leave it is.

MsJaneAusten · 20/10/2019 18:15

I’ve always said it should be a two stage vote.

leave or remain
if we are to leave, deal or no deal?

MIdgebabe · 20/10/2019 18:16

Because the first referendum was about 25 years ago and was for in. Because in 3 years people change their minds?
Could a vote be tiered?
Question 1 stay or go
Question 2 assuming go, deal or no deal?
Question 3 if deal, may or boris

StripeyMonkey1 · 20/10/2019 18:20

A ranking system of preferences would be fairer.

Some people who support hard Brexit see no point in a soft Brexit and would prefer Remain. Likewise some soft Brexiters would prefer Remain to a hard Brexit.

A single transferable vote could achieve this. The lowest scoring option is eliminated first and those who voted for it then have their second choice in play. It should be better at getting a genuine consensus.

Mookins14 · 20/10/2019 18:21

It's been 3.5 years. It is okay (and democratic) to ask a question again after a period of time. Circumstances and knowledge and opinions change and that is your right when you are allowed to choose for yourself so why not run the question through the populace again and give everyone the opportunity to either reiterate their original views or to say, I've learned x,y and z and that changes my position.

SinkGirl · 20/10/2019 18:22

Why would you respect the result of a second referendum when you want to ignore the result of the first? Shall we keep voting until it goes your way? I would like the result implemented before we have more votes.

Why? Because it’s not possible to leave without doing serious damage to the country. Have you really not figured this out yet? The reason no one has been able to get a deal through is because every scenario leaves us worse off than what we have right now.

Mookins14 · 20/10/2019 18:22

Oops, I'd would be for 2 options, not three. Too much choice!

rebbonk · 20/10/2019 18:36

We have already voted to leave.

The only option (if we go down this second referendum route) should be for whatever the negotiated deal is, or leave with no deal.

Hefzi · 20/10/2019 18:56

Two options, if you insist on another vote, given that leave or remain was covered in the first referendum:
1 Boris' deal
2 No deal

Original poster

Bearbehind · 20/10/2019 18:59

A 3 way vote would be fine if the majority required was 33.3% not 50%

It’s shit in that we’d only get what 1/3 of the population wants but it’s the least worst option

OP posts:

Original poster

Bearbehind · 20/10/2019 19:02

A vote without Remain as an option is a decisive as one without no deal

The fact is, no deal want what most Leavers had in mind - this was supposed to be the easiest deal in history.

Likewise BJs deal is far from Utopia.

The 3 choices if the only fair option.

OP posts:

tequilasunrises · 20/10/2019 19:06

I think @OddBoots has it right.

I don’t understand why people are so against a second referendum - if the will of the people is still to leave the EU then question 2 will solve the deadlock. But if it isn’t and 1 ones it doesn’t matter anyway.

If you voted Leave and are genuinely convinced it’s still what the public want then what’s the harm in another vote?

tequilasunrises · 20/10/2019 19:06

*1 wins

Original poster

Bearbehind · 20/10/2019 19:07

Divisive not decisive

OP posts:

user1471453601 · 20/10/2019 19:15

There is also the question of leaving the EU, but remaining in the CU. Should that appear on the ballot?
I'm a remainer, but would compromise by leaving and staying in the CU.

we seem to have the following on the hypothetical ballot paper.

Leave with Johnson's deal
Leave with no deal
Leave but stay in the CU
Revoke 50
Remain and try to negotiate changes from within the EU.

I guess the last two could be joined together.

HostessTrolley · 20/10/2019 19:15

We have 3.5 years worth of young people who were not eligible to vote at the last referendum. The majority of young people appear to not want to leave. At the other end of the scale we have had 3.5 years of voters dying. My mum and her husband have both died since the referendum. They both voted to leave, they said ‘because we should be able to control our own borders and say who can come into the country’. I asked what about the impact on businesses? Jobs? Travel? Health? Education? Trade? Supply chains? Etc etc. They said ‘well we don’t know about that stuff but look at all the extra millions they said the NHS would get’

Plus we are now all better informed about what brexit would look like, rather than believing the promises of people who just didn’t know.

Original poster

Bearbehind · 20/10/2019 19:16

user we can’t roll back the last 3 years, not least because the EU are fed up with us and needs us to get on with it

The choice has to be between the only 3 things that are possible now

OP posts:

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 20/10/2019 19:16

Single transferable vote makes more sense than having two binary questions.

Anothernotherone · 20/10/2019 19:23

marmitedreams as MIdebabe says the 2016 referendum was already a second referendum.

Why is the 2016 one definitive? Could it be because the result was very narrowly to leave? The margin to stay in 1975 was far more decisive (about 66% remain, 33% leave), yet people think 52% leave, 48% remain in the second referendum in 2016 means there can never be another (third) referendum.

Where's the logic?

Butterisbest · 20/10/2019 19:28

I don’t understand why people are so against a second referendum - if the will of the people is still to leave the EU then question 2 will solve the deadlock. But if it isn’t and 1 ones it doesn’t matter anyway

If the result of the second referendum is the same as the first, that'll be ignored too.
And the third, fourth, fifth.
The first referendum was not 25 years ago midgebabe that was a vote to join the Common Market

MaMaMaMySharona · 20/10/2019 19:28

Why would you respect the result of a second referendum when you want to ignore the result of the first? Shall we keep voting until it goes your way? I would like the result implemented before we have more votes.

Have you been asleep for 3 years?? They have been trying to implement the result, it’s not happened because it’s impossible for us to leave in a way which makes us better off than we are now. Leaving is not a good idea.

The answer to this “keep voting until you get your way” thing has been answered SO many times I’m getting fed up of it now.

tequilasunrises · 20/10/2019 19:30

@Butterisbest it can’t be ignored if we have clarification on which way to leave in the form of the second part of the vote.

FinallyHere · 20/10/2019 19:35

I spoke to a black cab driver yesterday (on my way home from the march). The driver was a string leave voter. Keeping iron control of my voice, I asked him what he expected to be different after we left the EU. He said that was a very ... big.. question. Then told me that he lived in Harriet Harnan 's constituency.

Every chance he got, he voted to oust her and felt his vote counted for nothing. Now, finally a vote had gone his way and still nothing happened.

My feet were very sore and I felt all warm from being with so many like minded people in the march so I didn't offer any challenge.

But this is my explanation why no deal should not be on the ballot paper. Sigh