David Cameron: Britain's EU Referendum to be held June 23

Relevance? Typing on a phone sometimes prevents me from catching errors.

 

Wrong if you are sticking with the notion that majority rule is democratic.

 

For 4th time..... Referendums are terrible for decisions of this type of significance. Is that good enough English for ya?

 

Based on all the talk of the EU trying to create a United States of Europe run by Germany, I would say it worked out pretty well.

 

Which is why referendums are terrible for significant decisions like this where emotions and sound bites prevail. Turned out many people didn't truly understand what they were voting for, they heard buzzwords like "immigration" and "sovereignty" and started salivating without putting much thought into it.

 

Sounds like any election. So should we just stop asking the electorate what they want at all?

 

Everything operates on a sliding scale I suppose... I will just say that there is a reason the USA doesn't have referendums for something so significant. Hell the USA has an 18 month "season" for picking the President. There are pros and cons for every system, I just find a referendum for something so important to be naive.

 

So in addition to the economic fallout so far, looks like hate crime and racial incident are on the climb. Not very surprising when anti-immigration was one of the pillar of brexit.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ported-latest-leave-immigration-a7104191.html

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/27/europe/racist-attacks-post-brexit/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...after-brexit-vote_us_57713b71e4b0f168323a16df

 

UK credit downgraded. Economic forecasts now include possible recession.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/06/28/news/economy/uk-economy-brexit-taxes-spending-austerity/index.html

 

That's what happens when uninformed voters vote on important matters. Look for similar results if the Donald is elected this fall.

 

Lol, EU's coming to the table with a chip on their shoulder. They're going to want to stick to Britain as much as they can.

A do-over seems undemocratic, as has been pointed out. But, maybe they can do a referendum on whether or not they should have a do-over. It's ridiculous, but winning permission for a do-over legitimizes trying again. If you fail to even get permission to have a do-over that means Britain really is determined to do this to itself.

 

Why can't they just do a poll and see if people have shifted their position significantly, and then if so do a do-over. Democracy doesn't mean that one vote means you can't change your mind and vote again in light of new information.

 

I think they did do one very shortly after. If I recall... 1.1M regretted their vote and wanted to switch back to remain. 400K regretted their vote and wanted to switch back to leave. So, net net, leave still win.

 

No they won't. Sticking it to the UK means sticking it to themselves too. At the end of the day, they aren't going to cut off their nose to spite their face.

It's not really undemocratic in the sense that it's not a binding referendum. That said, it would be pretty silly. I think a more possible outcome is that they hold snap elections given all the political turmoil there, and it gives people the opportunity to vote in leadership that doesn't want to leave. If that happens, the new leadership will claim a new mandate to stay.

There's still the problem that none of the political leaders in the UK wants to actually give formal notice. Without that, they can just delay the exit forever.

 

you base this on what?

I imagine the EU will do everything in its power ensure the UK struggles economically. Not out of spite, just so other members don't leave. Mobs responds the same way.

 

How so, if what you are saying is true, that is a shift of 1.4 million - greater than the leave margin. (1.1 - .4) x 2 = 1.4 million which is greater than the 1.3 million margin.

 

History. While voters often make terrible economic decisions, it's rare that leaders knowingly and intentionally destroy their own economies. The job of leaders is to do what's in the best interest for their country, not to be spiteful or bitter or whatever. Besides, there are still lots of mutual security interests involved and continuing trade, so it's not like they are trying to cut ties with the UK entirely..

Merkel and other European leaders' comments thus far have already indicated such:

Merkel: "The negotiations must take place in a businesslike, good climate. Britain will remain a close partner, with which we are linked economically."

Punishing the UK is the worst thing they could do to prevent people from leaving. The way to get the people of those countries to want to stay is to show how great the EU is. Being a vindictive group that doesn't actually care about anything but itself probably isn't going to convince angry voters to stay - they vote on emotion, not economics. Punishing the UK is probably just going to piss them off more and re-emphasize why they think the EU sucks.

 

Are presidential elections decided by a simple majority?

Do we put gun ownership up to a simple majority vote?

It's called priorities.

 

They are large trading partners. The EU still holds the strength but the global economy is down and this would be cutting off one's nose to spite one's face as Major said.

 

Why x2???

Either way, it's more of an instant poll shortly after. If they do another one in 2-3 months when things settle a bit, you'll get a better sense.