Adventure Gamers - Forums

So, a second referendum to cancel the first one and avoid the Brexit?

It seems like the best thing to happen for the “Remain” campaign was losing. Suddenly people are aware of the dangers of leaving.

Intense Degree - 24 June 2016 11:08 AM

I am not a fan of the status-quo. The UK is a money focused, billionaire haven which prevents normal people getting on the property ladder and the wealth gap here is pretty extreme, not because we have so many of the world’s poorest (comparatively we have none of them) but because we have so many (percentage wise) of the world’s richest, at least in terms of investments and property ownership. Living a “normal life” as a “normal person” is borderline financially unsustainable here already. This is partly due to the sense of entitlement that people here have (and why we need immigration to fill the jobs that we won’t do) and partly to the almost sole focus on monetary gain. Making money justifies pretty much everything here now. I’m sure the position is similar in other places but that doesn’t mean I like it any more.

As leaving the EU is the situation we are now in, I only hope it can lead to some change of focus if it can be seen that making less money isn’t a necessarily a bad thing. We (like any country) can rally and adapt and be better for it. Maybe we can start to make things again and lose a little bit of the materialism.

Whether any of that actually happens though is another thing entirely of course, but it would certainly take a huge event to push things in that direction. Just possibly this could be it.

You could get such a push from a less economically hazardous event, imo. Tony Blair won by a landslide in the 90s more or less through the impact of the movie Brassed Off alone. A dumb disaster movie like The Day After Tomorrow did more for global warming awareness than anything Al Gore ever did. Sometimes something as simple as the right movie at the right time can cause such a push. Doesn’t always need something drastic, imo…

TimovieMan - 27 June 2016 02:57 AM

So, a second referendum to cancel the first one and avoid the Brexit?

It seems like the best thing to happen for the “Remain” campaign was losing. Suddenly people are aware of the dangers of leaving.

Wonderful idea, let’s have a second referendum to cancel out the first one and show everybody the real value of referendums. Great-Britain will be the laughing stock of Europe. And hopefully more Europeans may realize that crucial decisions should NOT be made by referendum. That’s the job of elected representatives. Brexit is for the most part based on subjective emotions on the part of the voters instead of objective facts, and like Chrissie said, on lies by politicians with their own agenda.

Karlok - 27 June 2016 07:43 AM

Wonderful idea, let’s have a second referendum to cancel out the first one and show everybody the real value of referendums. Great-Britain will be the laughing stock of Europe. And hopefully more Europeans may realize that crucial decisions should NOT be made by referendum. That’s the job of elected representatives. Brexit is for the most part based on subjective emotions on the part of the voters instead of objective facts, and like Chrissie said, on lies by politicians with their own agenda.

Over 3 million people signed a petition for a second referendum, so it wouldn’t be out of the question if they held it.

That said, a referendum is just an advice to the government. The government is actually under no obligation to follow the referendum, so they could basically say “to hell with the referendum, we stay in the EU”.

What the crowd reaction will be, and the consequences the next time people have to vote, that’s another matter…



I think the collapse of the Pound these last days, as well as the massive uproar, is going to be enough deterrent for other countries to try and leave now.

TimovieMan - 27 June 2016 09:15 AM

That said, a referendum is just an advice to the government. The government is actually under no obligation to follow the referendum

In 2009 a referendum was held in Romania to consult the population about turning the parliament into a unicameral body and reducing the number of representatives to 300 and although the referendum passed, the Romanian government not only didn`t reduce the number but now we have… wait for it… 588 representatives in a country of less than 20 million people. In comparison, Germany has 611 and a population of 80 millions.

So true, a referendum is not the law… also true that Great Britain is not Romania

TimovieMan - 27 June 2016 09:15 AM

Over 3 million people signed a petition for a second referendum, so it wouldn’t be out of the question if they held it.

That said, a referendum is just an advice to the government. The government is actually under no obligation to follow the referendum, so they could basically say “to hell with the referendum, we stay in the EU”.

That’s 3 million people who obviously have no idea what democracy means. They didn’t get what they wanted so let’s ignore the majority and have another go until we get what we want. Very immature. And Damon Albarn’s quote at Glastonbury: “Democracy let us down”. What planet is the man on?

Whilst the UK Government is not legally tied to the referendum outcome any government of any persuasion wouldn’t last very long here if they ignored it. Should that very unlikely scenario happen then there’s a reasonable chance UKIP would become a major player within Westminster, something I devoutly hope never happens.

BTW. With regard to that petition it was actually started prior to the referendum by someone from the “English Democrats” because he thought that leave would fail by a narrow margin and, up to the referendum itself had, I think, only attracted 32 signatories. Three things from that. Firstly it was proposing retrospective legislation which isn’t allowed. Had the motion become law it would only take effect for any future referendum. Secondly don’t prejudge outcomes and try to protect yourself from it. Look what happened.  And thirdly. As said the petition only had 32 signatories until it became apparent that the result would be leave. Then millions (plus sock-puppets) signed up. Shows what hypocrites they are otherwise they would have signed up at the beginning. It also sadly shows what an incredibly immature country we’ve become which saddens me greatly and the behaviour of both sides (both within Parliament and the general population) after the fact adds to that sadness immeasurably.

TimovieMan - 27 June 2016 09:15 AM

That said, a referendum is just an advice to the government. The government is actually under no obligation to follow the referendum, so they could basically say “to hell with the referendum, we stay in the EU”.

What the crowd reaction will be, and the consequences the next time people have to vote, that’s another matter…

Let’s be realistic. No way they could ignore the outcome of the referendum. No way.

I think the collapse of the Pound these last days, as well as the massive uproar, is going to be enough deterrent for other countries to try and leave now.

Hm, I think you’re being far too optimistic. But fortunately I’m a hundred percent sure there won’t be a referendum in Holland.

Karlok - 27 June 2016 10:02 AM

Let’s be realistic. No way they could ignore the outcome of the referendum. No way.

The many voices of regret that are coming from the “leave”-voters makes me think otherwise. Which is exactly why a second referendum wouldn’t be such a bad thing.

Hm, I think you’re being far too optimistic. But fortunately I’m a hundred percent sure there won’t be a referendum in Holland.

How many people will Wilders get behind him if there ever was one? Would he reach 20%?
The guy’s a joke pretty much in the same vein as Trump is a joke.

TimovieMan - 27 June 2016 10:59 AM

The many voices of regret that are coming from the “leave”-voters makes me think otherwise. Which is exactly why a second referendum wouldn’t be such a bad thing.

I think you’re being a little naïve Tim if you actually believe the few quotes about that. Some, for sure. However it’s a very easy media trick to get quotes from people who want to use the chance to blacken their opposition particularly with a media keen to exploit the situation and look for people to support their standpoint. That does of course apply to both sides of the referendum to say nothing of standard political biases.

chrissie - 27 June 2016 11:28 AM

Jabod - 27 June 2016 10:00 AM

That’s 3 million people who obviously have no idea what democracy means. They didn’t get what they wanted so let’s ignore the majority and have another go until we get what we want. Very immature. And Damon Albarn’s quote at Glastonbury: “Democracy let us down”. What planet is the man on?

To put that petition into perspective (aside from the origins of it that Jabod has explained) the protest is more about a major decision that determines the future of the UK based on a small majority vote of 52% from less than 75% of the population & less about being immature on disagreeing with the outcome.
I doubt whether there’s many criminals (if any) that have been sent to jail on a 7 - 5 majority from a jury & the greater majority needed for a conviction set by the judge BEFOREHAND!
Unfortunately David Cameron didn’t give any thought to this idea & so just under half of us that voted have to now put up with the consequences of what just over half of the total voters decided.
That doesn’t seem right but I won’t be signing any petition.

So why weren’t there complaints about the laid out rules immediately after the referendum standards were announced? It couldn’t be because those wishing to remain expected a reasonably comfortable win could it? As I said, there were only 32 signatories to that petition prior to the remain camp finding that they were losing the vote. And that’s why I think the attitude being displayed is immature. Would it have happened if the votes were the exact reverse? I expect it would have done

chrissie - 27 June 2016 11:28 AM

TimovieMan - 27 June 2016 09:15 AM

I think the collapse of the Pound these last days, as well as the massive uproar, is going to be enough deterrent for other countries to try and leave now.

On the subject of that there were no GBP prices on GoG earlier when I looked - it’s all dollars!

I’ve just logged on to my GOG account and my prices are showing as GBPs

chrissie - 27 June 2016 12:23 PM

Jabod - 27 June 2016 11:55 AM

So why weren’t there complaints about the laid out rules immediately after the referendum standards were announced? It couldn’t be because those wishing to remain expected a reasonably comfortable win could it? As I said, there were only 32 signatories to that petition prior to the remain camp finding that they were losing the vote. And that’s why I think the attitude being displayed is immature. Would it have happened if the votes were the exact reverse? I expect it would have done

There’s no doubt that no-one expected the outcome including the government as they otherwise wouldn’t have been stupid enough to have had the referendum!

This is, I’m afraid to say, factually wrong. The referendum was a Conservative Party manifesto commitment prior to the last election. They felt that they had to commit to one due to the inroads of UKIP and serious unrest amongst the voters. They also felt that it would go their way of course which shows how badly they (and Labour for that matter) misjudged how the population as a whole (you know, those people the Government are meant to serve ) were thinking.

chrissie - 27 June 2016 12:23 PM

The ‘Brexiteers’ had already stated in the event of them losing within a small margin they wouldn’t accept it & demand another referendum - there you have immaturity!

I would politely ask you to re-read the final two sentences of what you quoted from me above.

Jabod - 27 June 2016 11:55 AM

I’ve just logged on to my GOG account and my prices are showing as GBPs

chrissie - 27 June 2016 12:23 PM

My account is still showing dollars.

Just checked again and I’m still in £s. What happened to me a while ago my account suddenly started showing my preferred currency as dollars so changed it back to pounds. Lost a couple of quid’s worth of credit in the process but it saved me paying international banking charges by my bank.

chrissie - 27 June 2016 01:25 PM

Yes, you are right Jabod in that the Conservative Party were committed to holding this referendum on being elected! I’m just sorry that they didn’t lay out rules to make sure that the outcome was reflective of a greater majority rather than the minor one it turned out to be & yes, I can see that you acknowledged that in a reverse situation the same protest would have happened, but it had already been STATED beforehand in newspapers & on the internet that it was a certainty!
For what it’s worth to me there’s a big difference between sticking with the ‘status quo’, & going in a direction with NO PLAN & a future unknown with major implications which I feel should have had more support from than just over half of voters.

Thanks for the tip about GOG – yes, perhaps my settings need re—setting!

N.B. I’ve had the news on for much of the day & it seems that there’s quite an increase in racial attacks & I hope that the ‘plebs’ amongst the more idealistic voters cease to see ‘Brexit’ as an excuse for this.

What do you think about Steven Crabb for Prime Minister?

Before I respond Chrissie I’d like to make something clear. Where politics are concerned I’m absolutely, totally and completely apolitical. I can see both good and bad among all the major players with only those on the extreme right or extreme left abhorrent as pretty much all they espouse is based on hatred.
Having said that and moving on

As far as setting the “pass mark” for the referendum goes then the Conservatives (and Labour would have had the exact same problem) needed to be seen as being absolutely fair to all of the electorate. If it was seen as being loaded in favour of staying in then they would still be risking an almighty backlash from the voting public moving towards UKIP (something for many reasons I would hate to see but too involved to bother with here). Further, all previous referendums were set at +50% which, obviously, included the last one on what was then the EEC. Any changes to this would have been seen as loading the dice and probable political suicide.
Now you mention the leap into the unknown and there’s a couple of points I’d like to make. From memory (and I’m perfectly happy to have my memory corrected if false) when Harold Wilson’s Labour Government tried (twice?) to get us into the EEC and was blocked by de Gaulle of France I don’t think that was in their election manifesto nor, again I think, was it in Ted Heath’s Conservative Party manifesto when they took is in. Since this was major leap “into the dark” I strongly believe that membership of the EEC should have been at the forefront of any party manifesto. The second point is that of the voting age groups. Here, in an earlier post by your good self, which I chose not to respond to, by inference, you deemed I was a racist. You’re not the only one of course stating that all the old people were that way inclined and, to be fair, a small proportion of them are. My Grandfather most certainly was (not known until after his death but you should have seen the letters we found that he’d written to all the major establishment leaders. Nasty and very embarrassing). Sadly, my parents weren’t much better. They were very much less than impressed when they discovered that my very first girlfriend had an Italian father and, wait for it, an Indian mother! However, what you also have to take into account is that anyone voting this time over the age of 59 was eligible to vote first time round and the vast proportion of those in the younger age group voted for remain. But they were voting for the EEC and were categorically told that it was all about trade and nothing to do with political union. Then in 1992 along came the Maastricht Treaty which reversed that statement completely and for many of those that voted to remain they felt very betrayed which is why, this time round, they voted leave to try to reclaim control of the UK back to Westminster. Not necessarily a good thing of course but we can, at least, vote out the incumbents. Anyone vote for Juncker or any of his colleagues? As for the youth of today complaining about their voice not being heard and it’s their future after all then a couple of points on that too. I think the figure there was 66% for remain but this was based on only a 24%(?) turn-out by the group which drops to an actual percentage of about 20. Not exactly a ringing endorsement. And for those youngsters who think they should have had a vote because “it’s their future” well, loads of laws, rules, god knows what, came into being when I couldn’t vote which affected me later in life but that’s how life is. Boundaries/lines have to be set somewhere.

On to the PLAN for Brexit and where is it please? This is a perfectly fair question but, in its way, unanswerable. Once Brexit is in place no-one knows which political party will be in power, who the leading politicians will be etc. As the referendum was across all political arenas and there was cross-party support for both remain and leave (minimum from Labour of course, at least in public, as the party were told to push for remain so well done Kate Hoey for deciding principles come first) by the time they separated into their normal warring factions agreement on the way forward would be nigh on impossible and, to be fair to Labour, at this time they wouldn’t be in a position to have relevant up-to-date information. What should have happened during the referendum was that a template of how Brexit could be worked to the satisfaction of all with the best interests of the Country at the forefront. This, as we know, didn’t happen. But then again, the debate (Hah! What bloody debate. I have never come across such an absolutely appalling lack of coherent and structured argument in all of my days. Both sides should be utterly ashamed of themselves) had nothing of substance in it anyway.

Out of characters
More to come