Why is a second referendum undemocratic?

[MotherOfDragons90]

I genuinely don’t understand.

By the same logic we shouldn’t have general elections every 4 years because the people have already voted before.

I didn’t vote for a few reasons, I was on holiday but also couldn’t really make head nor tail of what the truth in amongst all the information being spread was. My close friend voted leave and would now vote remain.

So I don’t understand the argument that it isn’t democratic - if it’s still what The People want, leave will win again? If they don’t it’s because it isn’t what the people want now they are in full position of the facts.

{It's undemocratic because Brexit hasn't been implemented. It's a mandate. The will of the majority of the British Public. }
So someone suggests jumping out of a plane with no parachute is just great fun.
While the plane is getting up to height someone else suggests it would be near fatal to jump without a parachute, which will you do?

I think it's time to end the silly references

It is very noticable that the people who object to a second referendum have nothing whatsoever to say about the serious irregularities of the first one

Not sure why people are so for a referendum - even labour are saying leave is likely to win!

It's not undemocratic, but I'm against it for other reasons. It wouldn't solve any of the main issues of brexit. Certainly wouldn't stop it, that's for sure. Just further division and confusion.

@twofingerstoEverything what irregularities?

@1tisILeClerc that's a terrible analogy. Not comparable at all.

Campaign group Leave.EU has been fined £70,000 for breaches of election law in the 2016 EU referendum
The Electoral Commission said the group - which was separate from the official pro-Brexit group Vote Leave - failed to report "at least" £77,380 it spent
It has also referred Leave.EU chief executive Liz Bilney to the police following its investigation into what it calls "serious offences".

That's from the BBC.

This is from the Independent:

We know that the Leave campaigns broke electoral law during the referendum. Leave.EU overspent by at least £77,380 and VoteLeave funnelled more than £500,000 in donations to another campaign group, BeLeave. Not only has the Electoral Commission confirmed this, but the Met’s legal counsel, Bob Posner, agreed that the evidence against VoteLeave and others is “clear and substantial”

Read more at: https://inews.co.uk/opinion/comment/brexit-vote-leave-electoral-spending-rules/

Evidence shows that BeLeave spent more than £675,000 with Aggregate IQ under a common plan with Vote Leave. This spending should have been declared by Vote Leave. It means Vote Leave exceeded its legal spending limit of £7 million by almost £500,000
Vote Leave also returned an incomplete and inaccurate spending report, with nearly £234,501 reported incorrectly, and invoices missing for £12,849.99 of spending

This from The Electoral Commission.

These would be the irregularities that make the referendum void.

ideally i would like article 50 to be revoked as Brexit is so clearly going to fuck the country up. MPs have a duty to do what they think is best for the country, not just their oen careers or party.

as a second option, a second referendum should be run, with PR style options. How can it be undemocratic if you're asking the same people after a lot of new information has come to light ? In an ideal world this would be funded in part by millionaires like boris johnson who lied to us all.

i just don't understand how Teresa May, who voted remain, can think Brexit in any form is the best idea. Nothing has come to light to suggest Brexit is a better deal than we did in 2016, so how can she have changed her mind???

It means Vote Leave exceeded its legal spending limit of £7 million by almost £500,000

The government conveniently managed to get 9m of tax payers money spent on a pro-remain leaflet just before the official campaign started so they spent £9m on top of the £7m campaign allowance.

Not illegal I’ll grant you but just saying.

I wonder how people would feel now if their was another referendum and prior to the start of the official campaign the current government spent £9m of tax payers money on a leaflet to every household telling them why we have to Brexit?

If the leaflet was legal and approved by the electoral commission I would be fine with it - I doubt it would be though.

The point is Leave committed electoral fraud this nullifies the referendum. I don't think the referendum was binding so it doesn't bother me.

If you feel the referendum was binding (you'd be in the wrong legally) then you MUST insist on another referendum.

If you think (incorrectly) it was a binding referendum you must, for the sake of democracy, insist on another referendum.

And don’t forget the National Crime Agency investigation:

The NCA has initiated an investigation concerning the entities Better for the Country (BFTC) and Leave.EU; as well as Arron Banks, Elizabeth Bilney and other individuals. This follows our acceptance of a referral of material from the Electoral Commission.

Our investigation relates to suspected electoral law offences covered by that referral, as well as any associated offences.

While electoral law offences would not routinely fall within the NCA’s remit, the nature of the necessary inquiries and the potential for offences to have been committed other than under electoral law lead us to consider an NCA investigation appropriate in this instance.

I don’t recall any campaigns on the Remain side being referred for criminal investigation?

If it had been a legally binding referendum the referral to the NCA would have been much, much sooner.

If you feel the referendum was binding (you'd be in the wrong legally) then you MUST insist on another referendum

If you think (incorrectly) it was a binding referendum you must, for the sake of democracy, insist on another referendum

It’s not legally binding but would appear to be politically binding. I feel no need to insist on a second one and neither does TM (to date).

I don’t recall any campaigns on the Remain side being referred for criminal investigation?

Neither do I, but in terms of the result I think the impact of those irregularities would not have made any difference to the end result. Nor Putin/Trump or anyone else whose name has been banded about as a reason for the result. Just a complete misjudgement of how a large part of the country felt, pure and simple.

Neither do I, but in terms of the result I think the impact of those irregularities would not have made any difference to the end result.

But £8million buys a lot of influence, especially when it’s directed at those who are disaffected and can be persuaded who is to blame.

www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/24/eu-referendum-spending-official-campaigns-investigation-opens-electoral-commission
NI voted remain by 60+% but the DUP support Brexit - I think the only NI party to do so. The DUP allowed a Brexit supporting body to channel funds through them - I assume to circumvent spending rules.

But £8million buys a lot of influence, especially when it’s directed at those who are disaffected and can be persuaded who is to blame
.
Wow, that’s a bloody expensive bus!! What other influences were bought? and how were people persuaded?

Just 650k voters needed to be swung, Leave carried on (illegally) spending for 2 weeks after remain had run out of money by the start of june.

If advertising made no difference, no one would waste money on it.

The £9 million leaflet drop was essentially true information.
Much of the 'information' in Leave campaign material was untrue or at best very selective.

Just 650k voters needed to be swung, Leave carried on (illegally) spending for 2 weeks after remain had run out of money by the start of june

If advertising made no difference, no one would waste money on it

If you had said six months Jas fair enough but just two weeks.

What sort of advertising and where? It won’t be anything comparable to a £9m leaflet to every household (plus another £7m).

The £9 million leaflet drop was essentially true information

Yes it was and I particularly like this bit in the leaflet

This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide

time4chocolate why do you think Banks spent so much on targeted social media campaigns?

time4chocolate why do you think Banks spent so much on targeted social media campaigns?

But I thought the majority of people who voted leave were more senior in age (or at least that’s what we keep being told) so anything on SM would have passed them by surely?