6 ms·

The point is there WAS a vote. A democratic vote. I'm looking at it from the outside and don't care either way - except that the way some very vocal ones of the

The point is there WAS a vote. A democratic vote. I'm looking at it from the outside and don't care either way - except that the way some very vocal ones of the so-called "remainers" dislike democracy and voting as soon as they don't get what they want disgusts me. Remember your attitude when some day - inevitably - it will be the other way around, you won a vote and the other side comes up with the same arguments.

sandbags 10y ago
Yes there was a vote. But it was a vote on a very ambiguous set of terms that was also an advisory vote, not a binding vote. This vote has been taken by an unelected Prime Minister serving out a term won on a mandate to protect UK interests in Europe. The current PM's actions are quite illegitimate.
- Noseshine 10y ago
  You can twist and turn it any way you like, there WAS a vote, it was democratic, and you just keep complaining and whining about democracy when you don't like the outcome. The current PM's actions are quite illegitimate. If that is so go to the courts. Otherwise whatever you say is just an empty bag of hot air. Of course, you won't do that - because you know very well the current UK government is perfectly legitimate. And "brexit" was voted for by the people. People like you only start complaining when they dislike the result - or please show me your similar complains when the result was to your liking, because there always are people who abstain. Only votes from people who vote count, what a huge surprise.
  - sandbags 10y ago
    Why do you have to take such a tone? Can we not disagree and argue without adhominem attacks? Your argument is a fallacy. In any division there are going to be those who agree and disagree with the outcome. Of course the people who get what they "wanted" don't argue against it. But they also shouldn't argue against the legitimacy of those who don't to continue to argue their point. That is the difference here. Yes, there was a vote on an advisory referendum that had not specific details about what the outcome should be. What does that make legitimate? If Theresa may had decided that to leave the EU we had to go to war with Europe, would that be legitimised by the vote? This argument is about the terms of any such approach and how to legitimise those.
  - sandbags 10y ago
    I will add that there are two current legal challenges and I suspect there will be more.
  - misnome 10y ago
    > If that is so go to the courts They did. The court sided against the government. They appealed to the supreme court, whom we are currently awaiting a judgement from.
- SixSigma 10y ago
  Which election had "I want David Cameron as PM" on the ballot? I only remember having the option to vote in parliamentary elections for my local MP.
  - sandbags 10y ago
    On the leadership of the party I concede, strictly, your point. We don't vote for a PM, although clearly people knew who they were voting to be the PM. But the government was elected with a manifesto commitment to protect our interests in Europe and hold a referendum. It was not, to my knowledge, invested with a mandate to act on that referendum in the way that it is doing.
  - misnome 10y ago
    Almost as though we don't directly get to elect the people who administer the whole thing. Sounds a bit like the EU, but we all know[1] how that's a completely different out-of-control unelected bureaucracy[2]. [1] Have been told [2] The EU parliament doesn't count, for vague reasons that change every time you hear it.
matthewmacleod 10y ago
I don't think that's a fair assessment of the situation. Yes, there was a referendum – but it wasn't a good one. It was advisory only – i.e. not binding – there was a narrow margin, no minimum turnout or majority requirements, and no concrete plan which was being voted on, or even any set of proposals from government. Two of the four countries in the UK voted to remain in the EU. It think it's wholly reasonable to question a decision of such huge magnitude being made on the basis of a referendum in those circumstances.
- raesene6 10y ago
  However the majority of the people who voted (and remember here that the turnout was higher than most UK elections) voted to exit which clearly included border controls. Border controls cannot be achieved without leaving the single market, so if we're honouring the democratic process this is the only possible path.
  - gpderetta 10y ago
    The was no reference to border control in the referendum ballot.
    - raesene6 10y ago
      it was a key stated pledge of the leave campaign, so unless you were watching some other referendum campaign the suggestion that border control had nothing to do with it is disingenuous at best. In case anyone wants to argue that immigration wasn't a key part of the leave campaign... https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/27/eu-referendum-reality-check-leave-campaign-promises https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/27/eu-referend... a key pledge related to immigration directly and another was closely associated
      - Chestofdraw 10y ago
        > it was a key stated pledge of the leave campaign Which leave campaign? There was a few of them and they didn't give a consistent message. None actually have any power to implement anything so how can they make pledges anyway? Also, that link has the picture of the bus as the first image... a 'pledge' completely based on lies that was dropped literally minutes after the vote.
kamjam 10y ago
Maybe you've misunderstood how democracy works with a dictatorship. Just because your "side" lost the vote does not mean you cave in and blindly follow down a blind alley. By your reasoning, the other opposition parties (Labour, Liberal Democrats et al) should just sit idly by and not question or argue against any Tory policies for that term of Government? I agree with you that the vote has been cast, the UK is leaving the EU. But to state people are not allowed to have a voice on the terms of leaving is naive at best. Had the result of the vote been the other way (48% leave, 52% remain) would be be having a "hard remain" and telling the leavers to shut up?
- gaius 10y ago
  Maybe you've misunderstood how democracy works with a dictatorship. Just because your "side" lost the vote does not mean you cave in and blindly follow down a blind alley But that is exactly what Remain would expect Leave to do, had Remain won, and everyone knows it.
  - kamjam 10y ago
    When the vote is as close add it was, there is no high ground. It's a win/loss by a tiny majority. If remain had won I would like to think that people would have had enough sense to know that almost half the population is disgruntled and done something to make them happier instead of throwing insults everytime "they complained". I guess no one will truly now know.

sandbags 10y ago

Yes there was a vote. But it was a vote on a very ambiguous set of terms that was also an advisory vote, not a binding vote. This vote has been taken by an unelected Prime Minister serving out a term won on a mandate to protect UK interests in Europe. The current PM's actions are quite illegitimate.

Noseshine 10y ago
You can twist and turn it any way you like, there WAS a vote, it was democratic, and you just keep complaining and whining about democracy when you don't like the outcome. The current PM's actions are quite illegitimate. If that is so go to the courts. Otherwise whatever you say is just an empty bag of hot air. Of course, you won't do that - because you know very well the current UK government is perfectly legitimate. And "brexit" was voted for by the people. People like you only start complaining when they dislike the result - or please show me your similar complains when the result was to your liking, because there always are people who abstain. Only votes from people who vote count, what a huge surprise.
- sandbags 10y ago
  Why do you have to take such a tone? Can we not disagree and argue without adhominem attacks? Your argument is a fallacy. In any division there are going to be those who agree and disagree with the outcome. Of course the people who get what they "wanted" don't argue against it. But they also shouldn't argue against the legitimacy of those who don't to continue to argue their point. That is the difference here. Yes, there was a vote on an advisory referendum that had not specific details about what the outcome should be. What does that make legitimate? If Theresa may had decided that to leave the EU we had to go to war with Europe, would that be legitimised by the vote? This argument is about the terms of any such approach and how to legitimise those.
- sandbags 10y ago
  I will add that there are two current legal challenges and I suspect there will be more.
- misnome 10y ago
  > If that is so go to the courts They did. The court sided against the government. They appealed to the supreme court, whom we are currently awaiting a judgement from.
SixSigma 10y ago
Which election had "I want David Cameron as PM" on the ballot? I only remember having the option to vote in parliamentary elections for my local MP.
- sandbags 10y ago
  On the leadership of the party I concede, strictly, your point. We don't vote for a PM, although clearly people knew who they were voting to be the PM. But the government was elected with a manifesto commitment to protect our interests in Europe and hold a referendum. It was not, to my knowledge, invested with a mandate to act on that referendum in the way that it is doing.
- misnome 10y ago
  Almost as though we don't directly get to elect the people who administer the whole thing. Sounds a bit like the EU, but we all know[1] how that's a completely different out-of-control unelected bureaucracy[2]. [1] Have been told [2] The EU parliament doesn't count, for vague reasons that change every time you hear it.

matthewmacleod 10y ago

I don't think that's a fair assessment of the situation. Yes, there was a referendum – but it wasn't a good one. It was advisory only – i.e. not binding – there was a narrow margin, no minimum turnout or majority requirements, and no concrete plan which was being voted on, or even any set of proposals from government. Two of the four countries in the UK voted to remain in the EU. It think it's wholly reasonable to question a decision of such huge magnitude being made on the basis of a referendum in those circumstances.

raesene6 10y ago
However the majority of the people who voted (and remember here that the turnout was higher than most UK elections) voted to exit which clearly included border controls. Border controls cannot be achieved without leaving the single market, so if we're honouring the democratic process this is the only possible path.
- gpderetta 10y ago
  The was no reference to border control in the referendum ballot.
  - raesene6 10y ago
    it was a key stated pledge of the leave campaign, so unless you were watching some other referendum campaign the suggestion that border control had nothing to do with it is disingenuous at best. In case anyone wants to argue that immigration wasn't a key part of the leave campaign... https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/27/eu-referendum-reality-check-leave-campaign-promises https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/27/eu-referend... a key pledge related to immigration directly and another was closely associated
    - Chestofdraw 10y ago
      > it was a key stated pledge of the leave campaign Which leave campaign? There was a few of them and they didn't give a consistent message. None actually have any power to implement anything so how can they make pledges anyway? Also, that link has the picture of the bus as the first image... a 'pledge' completely based on lies that was dropped literally minutes after the vote.

kamjam 10y ago

Maybe you've misunderstood how democracy works with a dictatorship. Just because your "side" lost the vote does not mean you cave in and blindly follow down a blind alley. By your reasoning, the other opposition parties (Labour, Liberal Democrats et al) should just sit idly by and not question or argue against any Tory policies for that term of Government? I agree with you that the vote has been cast, the UK is leaving the EU. But to state people are not allowed to have a voice on the terms of leaving is naive at best. Had the result of the vote been the other way (48% leave, 52% remain) would be be having a "hard remain" and telling the leavers to shut up?

gaius 10y ago
Maybe you've misunderstood how democracy works with a dictatorship. Just because your "side" lost the vote does not mean you cave in and blindly follow down a blind alley But that is exactly what Remain would expect Leave to do, had Remain won, and everyone knows it.
- kamjam 10y ago
  When the vote is as close add it was, there is no high ground. It's a win/loss by a tiny majority. If remain had won I would like to think that people would have had enough sense to know that almost half the population is disgruntled and done something to make them happier instead of throwing insults everytime "they complained". I guess no one will truly now know.