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.

I don’t think it’s wrong to have a second vote. First ref was completely in the abstract asking about the principle of leaving Europe at all. Second vote would be ‘is this (deal) how you want to leave .. or would you prefer to stay in Europe if that’s the best deal we can get?’

Those are two massively different questions and I think we do really need another vote for how to proceed from here.

And if Leave wins again but by eg a smaller majority than in 2016, what then?
We were told it was a once in a generation vote?
Most Leavers I know are even more certain to vote Leave again.

I’ll Ignore your inference that older people don’t use social media. There was a range of people that voted Leave that were quite capable of being active social media users (and available to influence) - look at the NatCen report:

We find three distinct groups that made up the vote to Leave:

• Economically deprived, anti-immigration. Those with least economic resources and who are most anti-immigration and nationalistic. Various labels can be attached to this group, such as the ‘left behind’ or ‘just about managing’. They form the bedrock of UKIP support and have been politically disengaged in the past.

• Affluent Eurosceptics. This group are more Conservative than UKIP and more middle class. Yes, they are antiimmigration but they are also interested in Britain’s indepedence and are noticeably anti-welfare

• Older working classes. They are on low incomes and have little in the way of formal qualifications – but don’t feel poor or badly educated. They are concerned about immigration and changing identity but are socially different to the first group

natcen.ac.uk/media/1319222/natcen_brexplanations-report-final-web2.pdf

It isn't wrong as the first one was based on misinformation, lies and gaps in information. The latter is just coming to light, and is extremely worrying.

You can ignore what you like, I haven't said the age range that I represent.

I don't go much on grouping people to be honest, for a start I don't fit into any of those three groups and I can't think of anyone I know who does.

There was a range of people that voted Leave that were quite capable of being active social media user (and available to influence)

Yes there were and available to influence cuts both ways.

.

time4

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?

I don’t care what age you are - it’s your comment above that I was ignoring.

Yes there were and available to influence cuts both ways.

Well no, not really. The Remain campaign didn’t harvest Facebook data and target users in the last few days of the campaign with dog whistles - like Turkey joining the EU for instance.

It doesn't matter who said what. It doesn't matter which side acted in an illegal manner.

There were election irregularities - the result of the referendum is void.

This is basic democracy. Illegal elections can not be upheld.

Well no, not really. The Remain campaign didn’t harvest Facebook data and target users in the last few days of the campaign with dog whistles - like Turkey joining the EU for instance

A lot of people were 'influenced' to remain by the George Osborne's 'emergency budget' 'every family will be £4K worse off' speech and that went across all media/tv not just Facebook/SM.

I think you are clutching at straws at the difference harvesting info from Facebook would have really made to the end result.

If you run a campaign based on what you think the country are thinking then it's going to end badly if you have completely misjudged that, with or without data harvesting or Putin or whoever else you want to blame.

There were election irregularities - the result of the referendum is void
This is basic democracy. Illegal elections can not be upheld.

Grey area because while it was an 'election irregularity' under election rules that's not what we were running so you can't treat it as one. We had a referendum which is politically binding, or so we were told in the leaflet.

It is a grey area and the only reason it has not been investigated as rigorously as in a GE is because it was only an advisory referendum.

The question is - is a second referendum undemocratic - the answer is clearly no.

An advisory referendum was held, many believe it to be politically binding but this has no standing in law. The result of this referendum are questionable and have not been fully investigated so to enforce the result is dubious politically and legally.

The point is there are questions, issues and areas for discussion and very little clarity. Can a major political decision be made on belief and speculation?

I don't think we need a second referendum, I did initially for political reasons. However, the utter mess that is Brexit and the real threat to the country that is no deal means I now think Parliament should take charge.

I think you are clutching at straws at the difference harvesting info from Facebook would have really made to the end result.

Really? Not what Dominic Cummings is on record saying at all.

I’ve read through all the posts and while I take everyone’s points on board, I still cant see how it wouldn’t be advantageous to ask the public again, theee years on, how they feel. If Leave is still what the people want then we will still leave. But unless we have another referendum how will we know that we aren’t implementing something that the People no longer want?

Even a Leaver shouldn’t be able to argue with that.

And if Leave wins again but by eg a smaller majority than in 2016, what then

Then leave win. But at least it will have been stipulated exactly what kind of Leave the public voted for.

But unless we have another referendum how will we know that we aren’t implementing something that the People no longer want?

Even a Leaver shouldn’t be able to argue with that

Oh yes they would!!! as it stands Leavers have got what they wanted, there is no way they would risk a 2nd vote that could undo their prize.
If the polls swung to 90% remain, they would still say the 2016 has to be implemented and we can have another vote in 45 years time.

I don't think it's undemocratic at all and I think most leavers would be happy to have one. The problem I have with it is that it is unlikely to give a clear result and then the problems we have now will just be magnified. Also, it's hard to imagine a simple yes no question that would keep all parties happy. If we can solve those two problems, yes it's the way forward.

Ok I have been giving it some further thought, would people who want a second referendum be happy with ‘no deal’ being one of the options?

Controversially, two years on I would be more likely to support one if that was an option.

I think the potential for no deal to be seriously damaging is so high Parliament wouldn't pass legislation which included no deal.

So it would be another in/out referendum then? Campaigning would be very interesting in that scenario.

A second referendum would be dangerously divisive.

Parliament acting to revoke A50 would be dangerously divisive.

No deal Brexit would be dangerously divisive.

There is a pattern.

If there is another referendum it can only be Remain or No deal. Everyone will know exactly what they are voting for!

So it would be another in/out referendum then

Surely it would have to be stipulated exactly what Leave means (Norway, Canada etc) otherwise you end up with 17 million versions of Brexit (yes I’m exaggerating).

Looks like a new election is more likely than a second ref.