If we vote for Brexit what happens

beecher2

CLAPTON wrote: »

There is no credible democratic principle which says that the loser can reject the result, if in their opinion, the other side told lies.

Of course Trump has been trumpeting this view point.

For once Clapton I completely agree with you.

Yamumuk

"I seriously doubt there'll be a GE of the back of this. Long way to go yet before the govt feels it has no choice. TBH even the threat of one would probably make a few on both sides of the house think twice.

Problem with all this pre-50 debate is that most of it will be a waste of time anyway. The EU aren't involved so coming up with some soft-brexit strategy that gets through parliament is all very well right up to the point that the the EU say it's a no-goer.

I think it's a straight choice between forcing a vote asap or playing a *very* long game and lining up all the trade strategies and details while the EU and businesses get more and more frustrated.
People tend to forget that while we're all arguing the toss, EU decision making is crippled too. Pressure will be building more and more.

Will all depend on the on-side numbers in the Tory party I guess..."

You should have thought about what it involved before voting for something you did not know what it was !

Did you think this would be sorted out in 5 mins, naive and unthoughtful.

Conrad

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Fine, then run an honest Leave campaign based around immigration, stating the truth. That we can't be part of the single market and reject free movement from the European Union, meaning that trade will be hit, companies will relocate and we will be poorer.

Brexiteers can't have it all ways. You can isolate yourself as a country and be isolated, or be part of the global community as it exists in the geographical location in which you are and have access to it.

Europe doesn't want European countries who reject Europe to have access to free trade without free movement. Its pointless banging on about Canada and Botswana because they aren't in our position.

If a majority of people vote to be poorer because it stops Pavel the Plumber, Bruno the Banker and Enrico the Highly Skilled Engineering PhD "getting in" then I will accept it. Not with good grace, but I will accept it.

I am not going to accept a vote based on fantasy where people actually think they can close the borders and reap £350 million pounds a week.

Project Fear 2 is even less potent than PF 1.


Thinking people realise the Europeans have enough on their plates without also placing barriers on trade that would be self harming.

ruggedtoast

CLAPTON wrote: »

There is no credible democratic principle which says that the loser can reject the result, if in their opinion, the other side told lies.

Of course Trump has been trumpeting this view point.

Er, no. Democracy is predicated on lobbying for changes in policy.

Fascism is that the majority bullies the minority into acquiescence regardless of how wrong they are.

I appreciate, being a UKIP member, that you aren't terribly understanding of the difference.

Yamumuk

"Once more the arrogance of the liberal for all to see, he that see's his role as handing down wisdom tickets to the grateful masses so that they might awaken from false conciseness, lol, no wonder the people of Europe are turning away from arrogant liberals"

I am arrogant when I am right and I will tell you brexiters you are deluded until Brexit is not happening. You are so blinkered, misguided and stubborn and full of ill will towards the least well off you have ZERO sympathy from this decision to put it to parliament. Instead that energy will be used to continuous tell you how utterly useless you are at making decisions.

You risk so much and see nothing. Idiots. Wake the **** up.

Herzlos

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Not asked, not eligible to vote you mean. That's not an outcome is it.

No, I never said it was an outcome, but it's a large number of people who still need to be considered. No?

ruggedtoast

Conrad wrote: »

Project Fear 2 is even less potent than PF 1.


Thinking people realise the Europeans have enough on their plates without also placing barriers on trade that would be self harming.

Then why doesn't the EU have a free trade agreement with the entire world?

mrginge

Herzlos wrote: »

No, I never said it was an outcome, but it's a large number of people who still need to be considered. No?

How do you consider them if you don't know what they think?

TrickyTree83

Herzlos wrote: »

No, I never said it was an outcome, but it's a large number of people who still need to be considered. No?

I was talking about outcomes of the vote since it was implied that Leave was somehow invalid because it didn't represent more than half of the eligible vote.

For the fourth or fifth time, this time hopefully semantically correct for all you pedants out there...

The possible outcomes were:

- Leave the EU
- Remain in the EU
- Abstain

There was no other alternative outcome from the ballot other than the 3 listed above.

The vote to Leave the EU had the highest percentage of the 3, and so was the winner. Although having read about referenda I don't think the UK has any legislation similar to other countries where if the turnout was less than 50% (i.e. 50%+ abstain) that the vote is invalid. So the argument for including abstain as an outcome isn't on a sound legal basis. Which is probably why the whole chuffing world (apart from bitter people) only refer to the two percentages for Leave and Remain.

mayonnaise

jimjames wrote: »

I just find it incredible that Brexiteers are in such a meltdown over democracy which is all this is about. The whole point of their campaign appeared to be giving Parliament control over our destiny yet when that actually happens they don't like it!

'Appeared' being the key word here.
Today has made it crystal clear that our brexiteer friends aren't that fussed with restoring parliamentary sovereignty.