Referendum: which way are you voting?

RikM

Remain

Risteard wrote: »

Indeed. As with all so-called referenda within the so-called "UK".

Depends on how it's legislated. The Scotland vote was binding, for example, because the bill was written that way. Any vote can be made binding if the law enacting it is drafted to make it so.

robin58

Leave

donnac2558 wrote: »

I vote I Just Want It To End Seriously I lost the will weeks ago, sick of the bloody leaflets through the door.

A) You must stay or we are !!!!!!ed

You must leave or we are !!!!!!ed.

I know the feeling.

I've had politicians telling me this and that for the last ten weeks if you also include the Local elections.

All I know if any politician after Friday comes within 20 feet of me for the next 4 weeks, he/she will be told to go away in an impolite manner!

qwert_yuiop

Risteard wrote: »

I believe there is actually precedent for it.

That's a "No", then.

RikM

Remain

But in this case, with a majority pro-EU parliament, and a question which should never have gone to a referendum (just that Dave was running scared)?

Scenario in the event of a leave vote: parliament refuses to exit, a vote of no confidence forces an early election, which is campaigned heavily along leave/remain lines, UKIP makes huge advances and splits the Tory vote, and bingo, a new Labour government takes power...

qwert_yuiop

We'll know soon enough, but I don't believe ukip to be any more likely to do well than they were last year. Farage couldn't get himself elected then. It wouldn't take the tories long to ditch any leaders seen as a liability. Expect a lot of born again brexiteers in that case.
Anyway, the bookies think it's getting less likely to be a Leave vote.

Cotta

Undecided

Opting for leave as I feel the EU have too much power now particularly as many people within the UK don't know who exactly holds the power within the EU. I know the "Remain" vote will score an easy win but I'll still register my disapproval.

Tammykitty

Leave

qwert_yuiop wrote: »

Can you think of any where the result was ignored?

Risteard wrote: »

I believe there is actually precedent for it.

qwert_yuiop wrote: »

That's a "No", then.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_devolution_referendum,_1979

qwert_yuiop

That was where a percentage of the electorate was required, not of those who voted. It was well flagged at the time that to fail to vote was effectively to vote No, and that's what happened.
Since they all knew the deal, it seems reasonable.

qwert_yuiop

Remain now at 2/9. I'm off to bet the farm on it.

Tammykitty

Leave

qwert_yuiop wrote: »

That was where a percentage of the electorate was required, not of those who voted. It was well flagged at the time that to fail to vote was effectively to vote No, and that's what happened.
Since they all knew the deal, it seems reasonable.

So in other words they fixed the result before the election by ensuring the turnout mattered.