Reasons as to why you voted leave?

[Firstimemam]

Ladies & Gents,

This is really old news but I am new to mumsnet & would be interested as to why exactly you voted "leave" rather than "remain". Just your very honest opinion, I am not here to judge, just very intrigued.

Our government could have controlled immigration but chose not to.

Foreigners are not making it harder for "English" people to get jobs. Have you tried taking the issue up with employers? Have you asked those architects you worked with why they chose immigrants over you? If they said it's to cut costs, have you told them in no uncertain terms, it's a shitty thing to do?

I feel like you're attacking the wrong people in this scenario. The foreigners who "make it harder" are NOT the perpetrators.

Now you're asking about maths, so I feel like you are deliberately missing that PP's point

Incorrect. Just highlighting again that remain supporters like to think that those who did not vote were all remainers in an attempt to divert attention from fact that of those that did vote more than half voted leave. The correct quote is 52% voted leave as opposed to 37%

@life if we are doing a comprehension test, there was nothing factually incorrect or misleading about the PPs post that 37.5% of the electorate voted leave.

Don't see why you take issue with this.

{ I'm lucky DH has a very well paid job but I can't just move abroad.}

Life is a series of choices and it is unreasonable to expect others to make your life 'easy'.

if we are doing a comprehension test, there was nothing factually incorrect or misleading about the PPs post that 37.5% of the electorate voted leave.

What percentage of the electorate voted remain? Clearly less than voted to leave.

No one know how those that did not vote would have voted. But it doesnt discredit the fact that 37.5% of the electorate have chosen to strip the rights of 100% of the UK population. I'm including children and those not eligible to vote in this.

37.5% who voted leave and want to follow through with leaving have stripped the rights of 100% of the population. I don't see what there is to argue there. If there was 100% vote turnout and 100% voted to leave I would still be saying 100% of the electorate voted to strip the rights of 100% of the population.

Both are valid, the numbers are irrelevant.

Yes, we've established that decomposing. Do keep up with point

{37.5% of the electorate voted leave.}
And 100% of the population of the UK, and those that live overseas, are being negatively impacted by the voting choice of the 37.5%.

I'm glad some people on this thread understand basic English

Yes, we've established that decomposing. Do keep up with point

The point you made 3 minutes ago you mean?

I really don't see the point in saying 37% of the electorate, or even worse, of the population even those not entitled to vote. That's what happens in elections. If people felt that strongly about their rights they should have voted, if eligible.

I'm angry that a minority of voters of the entire population voted to implement student loans, but it was a majority of the people who voted - that is democracy.

How do you know what the wishes of the other 63% were anyway? Most of them might have wanted to leave. Point is, no one knows what they wanted because they didn't vote. You can't presume to guess now.

The 37.5% population theory really is a straw man's argument.

1tisleclerc - what the fuck are you going on about?!

Do you expect me to move countries and uproot my family to get work or vote leave (which I didn't do) so that others may leave, which a few have done. No brainer.

Closertotheheart - yes the MD of the architects did say off the record to the PR/marketing manager that he hired foreign architects as they were cheaper. Actually I didn't work with them or compete for jobs with them (the architects), so they weren't chosen over me.

If you read my original post then I agree the government should have controlled immigration.

I don't blame the foreigners for doing what they did but I can get slightly annoyed if then when I'm up for work there are less jobs available because of them.

Democracy requires that majorities prevail.

I think you have a very simplistic view of democracy.

Do you think it's fine that a slim majority can vote to take away the rights of the minority? To what extent?

Point is, no one knows what they wanted because they didn't vote. You can't presume to guess now.

I've already said that. See above.

Don't see why you take issue with this

Because it is an attempt to water down the fact that 52% of those that were sufficiently interested in whether or not UK remained in the EU voted leave. Had the poster said:

37% of the eligible electorate voted leave it would be more accurate

Do you think it's fine that a slim majority can vote to take away the rights of the minority? To what extent?

What you're saying is; no, the slim minority should come before the slim majority, which is just ludicrous thinking. Just accept the result. I'm dismayed we are still having these same arguments three years down the line about the result rather than talking about what to do next with the result.

*If you read my original post then I agree the government should have controlled immigration.

I don't blame the foreigners for doing what they did but I can get slightly annoyed if then when I'm up for work there are less jobs available because of them.*

Then I think you need to lay blame squarely where it lies, which is the governments door. They should have implemented the 3 month rule, but they ignored this. Theres nothing wrong with FOM, i see it as progressive and sometimes a necessity in some cases.

I also think employers have the onus on them to ensure they pay fairly regardless of nationality. Otherwise its discrimination.

Do you think it's fine that a slim majority can vote to take away the rights of the minority? To what extent?

To all extents. How can 52% losing their right to please 48% be fairer?

{Do you expect me to move countries and uproot my family to get work}
If you want a particular job, yes, as I have done several times.

Just accept the result. I'm dismayed we are still having these same arguments three years down the line about the result rather than talking about what to do next with the result.

Hmmm what to do next with the result..... I wonder

37% of the eligible electorate voted leave it would be more accurate

If that passes your strict comprehension test, fine, have at it. It's not an attempt to "water down" anything.

37% of the eligible electorate voted to strip the rights of 100% of the population. Is that better?

{ How can 52% losing their right to please 48% be fairer?}
100% are losing their rights. It is not incompatible with democracy however as through negotiations citizens could keep their rights while the UK leaves. Unfortunately the bastards in Whitehall are playing silly buggers with peoples lives and livelihoods.
It is obviously just a 'game' to leave voters and Brexiteers but there are millions who are at risk of losing homes, jobs and family due to this Brexit crap.

To all extents. How can 52% losing their right to please 48% be fairer?
Ok, so if the majority voted to make a minority group be on some sort of register, or be barred from owning property say, that's fine?

Cos I saw on big red bus tons of money would go NHS.

So what else caused both conservatives and labour to lose almost half their support in two years other than failing to deliver Brexit?

As far as Labour votes are concerned - lack of money for the NHS, and lack of money for Education are regarded as being two big vote losers. Sitting on the fence over Brexit won't help either.

I imagine with the Tories that the moderates who supported the EU will have voted for Remain parties.