People's Vote?

[mushroom25]

lots of chatter on here (and elsewhere) for a "people's vote" - a second referendum, it's also been described as. well now Mr Corbyn is looking to get behind the campaign:-
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47363307

with both parties polarised by Brexit, what chance of the "people's vote" receiving a parliamentary majority? and, more importantly, what would the question be - a simple yes/no choice, or more options to choose from?

ignore, for now, the charge that a second vote cold be "undemocratic".....

[Old_Geezer]

It would have been unfinished business because in a couple of decades' time the question would need to be asked again to see if the public had finally wised up.

[jim360]

In fairness, it's very difficult to ignore the charge that a second referendum could be undemocratic, because that debate helps to shape the question. For example, OG's version, ie a vote between two versions of Brexit, is equally arguably an undemocratic choice*, by removing one option from consideration. Then again, having a straight three-way fight between two versions of Brexit and remaining probably risks splitting the Leave vote and allowing Remain to win, unless some rule is put in place that requires the decisive option to obtain 50%+1 of the vote.

If Parliament cannot find a majority for any given version of Brexit, or (if such a version does after all exist) if Government is incapable of negotiating it in time, that at some point the only sensible resolution is to return the decision to the people. Otherwise, we end up with the most undemocratic option of all: namely, a future that not even Leave voters wanted, let alone Remainers.



*Citation: I have argued this

[jim360]

"if the public had finally wised up"... oh, do stop that nonsense, OG.

[ichkeria]

I wonder what leave supporters would reckon to a referendum that had a choice between two Brexit deals (and no Remain option)?

[ToraToraTora]

No TCL he was not, the stated aim of NF and UKIP, was to get us out of the EUSSR, UKIP existed only for that purpose. By definition you expect them to keep battling for their objective. You would not expect them to disband until they achieved that aim. The aim of remoaners is to maintain the status quo at any cost. Not the same thing at all.

[jim360]

Very much is the same thing: we're still fighting to support our opinion. Oddly, some Leavers deny that they would have done the same -- which I don't believe for a second, and I don't mean that disrespectfully either.

[THECORBYLOON]

He was talking about a 52-48 vote to remain. Why would it be wrong to ignore a leave vote but not a democratic vote to remain?

[ToraToraTora]

I'm just explaining why UKIP would never stop pushing for independence. Would you expect the other great innovators to give up at the first failure to change what they set out to change? Pankhurst? Wilberforce? Bevan?

[jno]

Corbyn will only support it once he's certain it won't succeed.

It won't be yes/no as before, it would be more likely to include some of the options that are on the table or could be. It really should involve transferable votes, but another referendum ruled them out.

[THECORBYLOON]

It would be fine for a second vote if Farage had wanted to campaign for one? Why would a remain vote have been less democratic than the real outcome?

[ToraToraTora]

who said it would be less democratic? I'm just explaining that like it or not remoaners et al are the establishment in this story, UKIP the plucky campaigners trying to change things.

[gulliver1]

Wonder if Bonkers Boris will bring his Bus back, along with his , Waste of Public Money Water Cannons in the event of a second referendum?.

[Old_Geezer]

Because, as has been pointed out many times, being told you got it wrong and must vote again, is disrespecting the initial democratic vote. i.e. It's antidemocratic.

And again, as pointed out, it would be fine for a second vote in the far future if Farage had wanted to campaign for one in the meanwhile, but clearly not hold another one until the public had wised up to the consequences of their last decision.

[ToraToraTora]

I wonder if remainers will learn English this time and apply it to the sentence on the bus.

[Old_Geezer]

If they don't, can we use the water cannons on them ?

[Baldric]

Not a chance TTT

[jim360]

Being asked to vote again on a topic is not the same as being told you were wrong the first time, so you are again mistaken in your labelling of a second referendum as antidemocratic for that reason.

[Baldric]

FYI
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/19/boris-johnson-unused-water-cannon-sold-for-scrap-at-300000-loss

[ichkeria]

It isn’t a question of being ”told you’ve got it wrong” tho is it. It might be that a referendum is needed to solve an impasse in parliament.
And I’m not sure how “democratic” it is to cling to a single narrow vote in favour of something that was ill defined in a poorly planned referendum by a complacent prime minister.

[Old_Geezer]

Oh yes it is the same. That would be the only reason one is hoping to get another revote again this early. Not falling for that one.