News BREXIT - more good than bad or more bad than good?

[mheslep]

However you analyse it, the populace of the UK have voted for a sharp right turn,and personally I think it could get ugly and am glad I no longer live there.

How is the outcome sharply "right"? Would the referendum make things "ugly", vs the outcome of no referendum?

 

[mheslep]

The advertisements made it seem that the net cost of being a member of the EU was £350 million a week which could have been spent on the NHS instead. As stated on the quoted fact-checking site, that was ignoring the rebate, and also ignored all EU payments back to the UK, so it wasn't really the actual cost. In addition to those payments, there are services provided by the EU which the UK would otherwise have to provide itself, but it's difficult to estimate those. However, it's not the specific amount which is the biggest lie; it's the suggestion that if we left the EU that amount of additional money could be spent on the NHS, which is ludicrous.

With respect to the general point that the UK Parliament might have spent the money elsewhere, the payments back to UK don't matter - they go to where the EU wants them spent, none of it goes to the NHS. Where is the advertisement by Leave that said *all* of the UK'S EU money would go to NHS. I've not found it; if so I agree that's propaganda.

 

[Jonathan Scott]

With respect to the general point that the UK Parliament might have spent the money elsewhere, the payments back to UK don't matter - they go to where the EU wants them spent, none of it goes to the NHS. Where is the advertisement by Leave that said *all* of the UK'S EU money would go to NHS. I've not found it; if so I agree that's propaganda.

They didn't say it directly, but they implied it in a way which many people consider extremely misleading.
For example, see images of the Vote Leave battle bus, e.g. http://media.gettyimages.com/photos...-reidsteel-a-christchurch-picture-id530956310
The writing on the side says:

We send the EU £350 million a week
Let's fund our NHS instead - Vote Leave

Alternatively, see their web page at http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_cost which includes the following two points in sequence:

FACT
The EU now costs the UK over £350 million each week - nearly £20 billion a year
FACT
Our EU contributions are enough to build a new, fully-staffed NHS hospital every week

 

[Jonathan Scott]

There's a BBC news article which goes into some reasons why they think Leave won. It specifically mentions the £350 million NHS claim: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36574526
It also seems that there was a strong back-reaction to all the forecasts by the Remain side of the doom and gloom that Brexit would cause, which seemed too overblown (and definitely included some serious exaggeration).

This referendum seems to have been a big mistake. It's true that the EU has been having problems recently, and many including myself feel something needs to be done about it. Perhaps Cameron thought that scheduling a referendum would put pressure on the EU to fix some things. However, the public called Cameron's bluff and it all blew up.

All the speculation about whether the average UK citizen would be better off was mostly irrelevant to me. The world needs all the unity it can get, and this referendum is creating disunity not only at the European level but also within every community in the UK, over issues which were extremely unclear from the beginning.

 

[rootone]

How is the outcome sharply "right"? Would the referendum make things "ugly", vs the outcome of no referendum?

The referendum in itself is not ugly, what worries me is that the argument seems to have been won on the basis of stirring up racist sentiment, more general xenophobia, and the notion that this will somehow restore the UK to the position of being a global economic power ruling over an empire full of readily exploitable resources.
I didn't vote personally though I could have made a postal vote. IMO the remain campaign was weakly managed, and both sides based their arguments almost entirely on fears and negatives.

 

[ZVdP]

How is the outcome sharply "right"? Would the referendum make things "ugly", vs the outcome of no referendum?

The referendum in itself is not ugly, what worries me is that the argument seems to have been won on the basis of stirring up racist sentiment, more general xenophobia, and the notion that this will somehow restore the UK to the position of being a global economic power ruling over an empire full of readily exploitable resources.

I wouldn't necessarily classify the stereotypical (which I mention so that it's clear that I don't think everyone can be described as this) leave-voter as right wing. If you look at the extreme right, Eurosceptic parties in Europe, they are right in 1 aspect only; immigration. For all other categories, they would register left to nearly extreme left. Look at the economic programs -as far as they have any serious plans- of these parties; UKIP in the UK, FN in France, VB in Belgium, PVV in the Netherlands. They would be branded as communists by some of the less nuanced people in the US.
This can be seen in the suggestion that the £350m could be used to fund the NHS, not really a right wing statement.

They are difficult to classify in a simple left-right division, since their opinions are sometimes all over the place to fit with what the people want to hear. (This is not necessarily bad of course. I'm always more suspicious of people who identify with a specific party. I don't think all problems are best solved by adhering to one particular strategy, be it conservative, progressive or something else. But that's another discussion.)

I can only offer anecdotal stories of my uncle during the dreaded family dinner discussions. While not living in the UK, my uncle (and most of that branch of the family) would be susceptible to Eurosceptic arguments. And what I can extract from his statements is a quite self-centered worldview filled with negativity bias. He votes for parties on the right because the left has given too much handouts to people. 5 minutes later he is complaining about the current center-right government, because they have cut spending on one of the social programs he benefitted from... He was a hard working person, so he doesn't see those benefits as handouts. But when his neighbour receives state support, it's unfair because why should he be paying for his neighbour's undeserved luxury. Add immigration, unemployment, austerity, corrupt and selfish politicians (forget the story 5 minutes earlier when he himself evaded taxes and sort of defrauded the insurance company, that's not corruption or selfishness on his part of course, not at all) and you get a very negative worldview where other people are benefitting at your cost and all that could be changed when the (unselfish) working classes take back control.
I think I'm reasonable when I say my uncle is an uneducated selfish idiot with very little self-knowledge, but I wouldn't dare to put all leave-voters in this pigeon hole, although I do think people like this are more attracted to the leave camp. And they tend to be more vocal than more moderate voters so you can easily get a certain impression when looking at internet forums or interviews.

There are idiots on both sides that haven't got a clue what the implications of their vote are. I would say 99% of people have no idea of the exact economical implications (economists themselves are providing contradictory estimates), which is why I'm not exactly a fan of referenda on complex matters as these. But you easily sound condescending when you try to argue this, although I must admit I probably am condescending from time to time and definitely biased against uncles :)

I share the opinion with others in this topic that the campaign on both sides was quite poorly executed. Everyone knows that fearmongering doom scenarios are counter effective, so why even bother? While reading some articles with statements from Cameron during the weeks before the referendum, I almost had to conclude he had to be a mole :)

Well, there is at least one thing I'm glad for, and that is that conspiracy theorist have less material now. A week before the referendum, the local lower class newspaper comment section was filled with comments about how the corrupt EU would never allow the UK to leave and the voting would surely be manipulated.
At least we won't have to read all that now.

 

[mheslep]

[QUOTE="rootone, post: 5506613, member: ] what worries me is that the argument seems to have been won on the basis of stirring up racist sentiment, more general xenophobia,[/quote]
Before Brexit, EU immigration law required, for example, that a non-English speaking Bulgarian convict with no means be allowed permanent entry while, say, an American or Australian musician in London is told to get out because he made less than the required $52K, the limit placed on non Europeans. This is done because immigration numbers are so high (net 300 thousand per year) and beyond British control, that immigration from anywhere else must be being squashed to maintain a reasonable flow (Cameron wants 100K per yr).

It is not xenophobic to recognize that some repair is required to the policy.

and the notion that this will somehow restore the UK to the position of being a global economic power ruling over an empire full of readily exploitable resources...

Restore an empire of readily exploitable resources? Do you have a basis or reference?

 

[micromass]

I wouldn't necessarily classify the stereotypical (which I mention so that it's clear that I don't think everyone can be described as this) leave-voter as right wing. If you look at the extreme right, Eurosceptic parties in Europe, they are right in 1 aspect only; immigration. For all other categories, they would register left to nearly extreme left. Look at the economic programs -as far as they have any serious plans- of these parties; UKIP in the UK, FN in France, VB in Belgium, PVV in the Netherlands. They would be branded as communists by some of the less nuanced people in the US.
This can be seen in the suggestion that the £350m could be used to fund the NHS, not really a right wing statement.

I would love some evidence as to how Belgium's VB can be seen as communists.

 

[ZVdP]

I would love some evidence as to how Belgium's VB can be seen as communists.

I was a hyperbole of course (referencing how some call Obama a communist), but if you focus on their economic and social programs (which typically isn't much I have to admit) it's quite socialistic, because that's what their voters like to hear; more government spending on them (less on their neighbour).

 

[micromass]

if you focus on their economic and social programs (which typically isn't much I have to admit) it's quite socialistic

Proof please.

 

[Buckleymanor]

The whole issue of Brexit is turning into a complete farce.The main proponents Bojo Gove and Farage are spiralling into a morass of more lies and deceit.
They appear like rabbits caught in headlights, they never believed they would win the vote and as a consequence they had no plan as to what they would do if they did.
This is now being played out to the despair and incredulity of all.The pledges they made before the vote are turning out to be false or with strings.
It turns out there never was a migrant issue because if there is students and the like won't be able to work and travel within the EU in the future when some kind of deal is to be struck.
Meanwhile the PM won't sign any formal exit from the EU so the process of Brexit can not begin much to the anger of the politicians in the EU because this might cause them problems with there own electorate wanting to leave.The EU is not even sure if we are going to leave.
Any money that might have been saved from the payments to the EU is dwindling away as the stock market crashes and city jobs move from capital to Europe.
It goes on and on like teeth being extracted, these muppets between them have caused mayhem because of a personal jape, they should be totally ashamed.

 

[mheslep]

There's a BBC news article which goes into some reasons why they think Leave won. It specifically mentions the £350 million NHS claim: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36574526

Yes though I still don't see how the over step of the ad carries much weight. If the ad had said $250 million per week, *some* of which could be spent on the NHS as is clearly the case, then what difference?

This referendum seems to have been a big mistake.

Clearly you've made the case that this is what you believe. Fair enough. But I've seen little reason as to why. Because misinformation had some play? When does it not. Unity? One does not create unity by force via far away and nameless bureaucrat.

The immediate outcome of the referendum is that a *majority* of an increasingly unsatisfied populace has had its voice heard and the issue resolved. Without the referendum or equivalent resolution, that problem could have only grown worse. I think one would have, for instance, increasingly seen single issue MPs elected which the electorate disagrees with otherwise.

 

[ZVdP]

Proof please.

I think it's getting quite off topic, but look at the VB election program on their website: increasing pensions, improve social housing, improve healthcare and waiting lists, reduce costs of retirement homes, reduce poverty with maximum billing, ...

A part of the appeal of leaving seemed to be that money spent on others could be better spent on ourselves. But the problem is that 'others' will always be redefined and people who fixate on this will never be happy and keep blaming others for internal or global problems. If it's not refugees, it's eastern Europeans. If it's not Eastern Europeans, it's other easily definable groups in the country (Wallonians in Belgium for example), if it's not that...

Negativity is another; I just saw an interview with an English woman who was asked why she voted leave and if she's not worried of possible economic consequences. Her answer was no, because she has nothing now so has nothing to loose, her situation could not become worse, so it can only improve by leaving...
I know, I have an easy life with an engineering diploma and no financial worries, but my goodness, the sheer lack of realisation of how good a life she can lead even with all the problems she is undoubtedly facing.

I think the EU has a big PR issue. We almost never hear any of the accomplishments of the EU, mainly costs and bureaucratic issues.
I very much like the USB phone chargers though :)

 

[micromass]

I think it's getting quite off topic, but look at the VB election program on their website: increasing pensions, improve social housing, improve healthcare and waiting lists, reduce costs of retirement homes, reduce poverty with maximum billing, ...

Yep, but if you know their track record in parliament, it looks nothing like what you listed.

Also, some other things:
- Abolish trade unions
- Reduce role of government
- Reduce taxes
- Make it easier for companies and entrepreneurs

Not really a left-wing program, is it?

 

[ZVdP]

Yep, but if you know their track record in parliament, it looks nothing like what you listed.
Also, some other things:
- Abolish trade unions
- Reduce role of government
- Reduce taxes
- Make it easier for companies and entrepreneurs
Not really a left-wing program, is it?

But it's what they sell to the people. The original post was about a push to the right. I think that if you question the people that voted leave, you will find a reasonable portion of them will be quite left leaning regarding to welfare for the working class (after applying a nationalistic filter), maybe more than they realize themselves.

 

[Jonathan Scott]

The immediate outcome of the referendum is that a *majority* of an increasingly unsatisfied populace has had its voice heard and the issue resolved. Without the referendum or equivalent resolution, that problem could have only grown worse.

Unfortunately nothing has been "resolved" so far, and plans to do so seem sketchy at best; it all seems to be descending into chaos.
I'm sure just about everyone would agree that major EU reform was necessary, but the form of this referendum was far too polar; a vote for Remain seemed like a vote to accept the status quo, and it seems that many voted Leave simply to register their protest against that.
If it had for example been extremely close the other way, that would have registered the extreme dissatisfaction with the current situation in a less destructive way, and might well have helped to push forward reform.
In the longer term, I would have agreed that if reform continued to prove impossible then we should investigate alternatives including leaving, and perhaps have a referendum on it, but that should be based on positive preferences to select between multiple specific options which have been fully worked out, clearly identifying the way in which UK wished to continue to work with the EU. (The consequences of the options may be difficult to predict, but this time we didn't even know what the options were). It always seems better in principle to vote for something rather than against something.

 

[epenguin]

I absolutely agree with that and if I could have voted for a 51.1% Remain vote I would have. I would even have been open to argument for 51.2%.

 

[epenguin]

The whole issue of Brexit is turning into a complete farce.The main proponents Bojo Gove and Farage are spiralling into a morass of more lies and deceit.
They appear like rabbits caught in headlights, they never believed they would win the vote and as a consequence they had no plan as to what they would do if they did.
This is now being played out to the despair and incredulity of all.The pledges they made before the vote are turning out to be false or with strings.
It turns out there never was a migrant issue because if there is students and the like won't be able to work and travel within the EU in the future when some kind of deal is to be struck.
Meanwhile the PM won't sign any formal exit from the EU so the process of Brexit can not begin much to the anger of the politicians in the EU because this might cause them problems with there own electorate wanting to leave.The EU is not even sure if we are going to leave.
Any money that might have been saved from the payments to the EU is dwindling away as the stock market crashes and city jobs move from capital to Europe.
It goes on and on like teeth being extracted, these muppets between them have caused mayhem because of a personal jape, they should be totally ashamed.

I think much of that is unfair, or at least I would put it another way.

There cannot be a policy for the moment, in that there is no government with authority to act In this matter. Cameron has quite rightly said that he would not himself initiate the article 50 procedure. He could not undertake delicate negotiation on behalf of the policy he was against, so it has to wait until there is a new Prime Minister, which means essentially a new leader of the Conservative party, which could take even three months. The system consists of the Parliamentary party whittling down by successive votes an initial list until only two candidates remain, then party members in the whole country decide between them. If Boris Johnson makes it onto this final duo, then he will certainly be elected. So most of what this election will be about will be substantial group of MPs doing all they can to ensure that he does not make this final duo.

Buckleymanor is right in the sense that it is true that in the campaign, whereas what the Brexiters wanted to be free of was a clear and well-defined entity , what they wanted in its place was scarcely mentioned and there are different ideas about it. Realistically I don't see how that could have been expected to be different. Nor realistically could it be immediately clarified within 3 days of the referendum result. Participants in single issue campaigns are usually coalitions. You will remember that it was for quite some time in dispute what organisation was going to represent Brexit in the referendum campaign..

Then the vote having been made, the responsibility comes down not to people who were important in the campaign necessarily, but primarily to the government. And for this purpose for now there isn't one, see above. The government will have to form strategy, negotiation tems etc. And as well as the government, everybody and his dog is demanding also to participate – UKIP, the Scottish government, Labour, Unions, even The London mayoralty and the regions.

As to what the strategic aims could be, I have long thought that the end result would most probably be what you would expect of Establishments’ natural tendency - that is something as little different from the present as possible. An example would be what I expect to happen with the science programmes , as I stated on other posts. The most key question it would be do we remain in the Single Market? Many would assume yes. This would also involve continuing to pay the expensive subscription, and according to what commentators say, would require us to maintain the Freedom of Movement principle. That is difficult is to do rigidly, since this is what the anti– vote was all about. A different option, advocated by Michael Gove, (Minister of justice and one of the few intellectual politicians who has thought about it) is to exit also the Single Market and adopt the option called the WTO rules, which would involve tariffs in trade to and from Europe. From a political point of view I don't personally think that there is any urgency to make these choices, which in any case are going to take Time. I think that leaving these options open for a time seems to be no bad thing, in order to drive some sense into the heads of the leaders of the European bureaucracy and certain European national leaders, who have in the last day or two been trying to lay down somewhat peremptory orders of what Britain should do when. I think they need to let sink in the magnitude and consequences of the possible loss of the British net financial contribution to the EU budget, the second biggest of all countries' - and that a decisive cause of the referendum going the way it did was their own obdurate rigidity.

 

[Astronuc]

Just three days after a shocking vote to leave the European Union, millions of Britons are asking for a do-over. But is it possible to stop the process?

Technically, yes. While the chances are slim, there are several ways the UK could reverse course.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/britain-revote-stop-brexit-081452041.html

Over 3 million UK residents signed a petition on Parliament's site demanding a second vote take place, the largest petition the government's website has ever seen. Parliament must debate any proposal with over 100,000 signatures.

The petition, which launched before the referendum, asked for a second vote on EU membership if support for the remain or leave vote was below 60% with turnout under 75%.

Thursday's British exit vote had only 52% backing on a 72% turnout. While the petition must be considered by Parliament, members do not need to act on it.

It seems the vote should have been on reforming the EU or modifying the relationship between the UK and EU rather than breaking that relationship.

I'm amazed at the number of folks who voted to leave thinking that the Leave side would lose. It seems they voted as a protest, but did not intend to see the UK split from the EU.

 

[mheslep]

Just three days after a shocking vote to leave the European Union

Shocking? The polls predicted as much or at least indicated exit was very possible. Shocking to whom?

I'm amazed at the number of folks who voted to leave thinking that the Leave side would lose. It seems they voted as a protest, but did not intend to see the UK split from the EU.

Reference please. There's no such indication in the Yahoo link.

 

[Jonathan Scott]

http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/26/more-than-a-million-people-regret-voting-leave-poll-shows-5968048/

 

[Jonathan Scott]

And another one:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...hought-uk-stay-in-eu-remain-win-a7102516.html

 

[mheslep]

Why scientists are worried about the Brexit
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601721/why-scientists-are-so-worried-about-brexit/

Unfornutely neither the editor nor the reporters of the modern TR have any scientific or engineering experience or advanced scientific training.

Here's an essay from an emeritus Harvard physics professor and native Czech.

http://motls.blogspot.com/2016/06/worries-about-british-science-are.html

 

[mheslep]

http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/26/more-than-a-million-people-regret-voting-leave-poll-shows-5968048/

Comes from a Survation poll, 33 people regret exit vote, 19 regret leave vote. Same pollster was wrong on referendum outcome.

http://www.markpack.org.uk/files/2016/06/Survation-post-Brexit-poll.pdf

And another one:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...hought-uk-stay-in-eu-remain-win-a7102516.html

Man on the street interviews, anecdotes.

 

[Astronuc]

Reference please. There's no such indication in the Yahoo link.

I was listening to various interviews on the broadcast news. I'll see if I can find references in print.

Man on the street interviews, anectodotes.

More than anecdotes. They are testimonies of those who voted to leave and now regret that vote.

Apparently, many were angered after "Nigel Farage admitted on Good Morning Britain it was a "mistake" for the Leave campaign to claim the £350 million reportedly given to the EU each week would go to the NHS instead."

Meanwhile a sampling -

http://www.vox.com/2016/6/24/12024634/brexit-supporters-regret-vote
http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/peopl...leave-the-eu-heres-what-they-told-us-5965067/
http://www.people.com/article/brexit-voters-regret-uk-leave-eu

The petition for all those with second thoughts quickly flew past the 100,000 signatures needed to force a debate in Parliament. How many of those are those who voted to Leave vs those who voted to Remain, I don't know. Perhaps Cameron should have taken it more seriously and started negotiating on the Open Borders matter.

http://www.newsweek.com/brexit-leave-voters-wish-vote-remain-regret-eu-referendum-474306

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...extraordinary-moment-brexit-voter-changes-he/

And one which claims - more than a million regret voting to leave,
http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/26/more-than-a-million-people-regret-voting-leave-poll-shows-5968048/

In total, 7% of those surveyed said they wished they had not voted for Britain to leave the European Union – equal to around 1,130,000 people.

Around 4% said they regretted voting Remain, which works out at around 696,000 people.

but nearly 700,000 regret voting to remain.

 

[Buckleymanor]

I think much of that is unfair, or at least I would put it another way.

There cannot be a policy for the moment, in that there is no government with authority to act In this matter. Cameron has quite rightly said that he would not himself initiate the article 50 procedure. He could not undertake delicate negotiation on behalf of the policy he was against, so it has to wait until there is a new Prime Minister, which means essentially a new leader of the Conservative party, which could take even three months. The system consists of the Parliamentary party whittling down by successive votes an initial list until only two candidates remain, then party members in the whole country decide between them. If Boris Johnson makes it onto this final duo, then he will certainly be elected. So most of what this election will be about will be substantial group of MPs doing all they can to ensure that he does not make this final duo.

Buckleymanor is right in the sense that it is true that in the campaign, whereas what the Brexiters wanted to be free of was a clear and well-defined entity , what they wanted in its place was scarcely mentioned and there are different ideas about it. Realistically I don't see how that could have been expected to be different. Nor realistically could it be immediately clarified within 3 days of the referendum result. Participants in single issue campaigns are usually coalitions. You will remember that it was for quite some time in dispute what organisation was going to represent Brexit in the referendum campaign..

Then the vote having been made, the responsibility comes down not to people who were important in the campaign necessarily, but primarily to the government. And for this purpose for now there isn't one, see above. The government will have to form strategy, negotiation tems etc. And as well as the government, everybody and his dog is demanding also to participate – UKIP, the Scottish government, Labour, Unions, even The London mayoralty and the regions.

As to what the strategic aims could be, I have long thought that the end result would most probably be what you would expect of Establishments’ natural tendency - that is something as little different from the present as possible. An example would be what I expect to happen with the science programmes , as I stated on other posts. The most key question it would be do we remain in the Single Market? Many would assume yes. This would also involve continuing to pay the expensive subscription, and according to what commentators say, would require us to maintain the Freedom of Movement principle. That is difficult is to do rigidly, since this is what the anti– vote was all about. A different option, advocated by Michael Gove, (Minister of justice and one of the few intellectual politicians who has thought about it) is to exit also the Single Market and adopt the option called the WTO rules, which would involve tariffs in trade to and from Europe. From a political point of view I don't personally think that there is any urgency to make these choices, which in any case are going to take Time. I think that leaving these options open for a time seems to be no bad thing, in order to drive some sense into the heads of the leaders of the European bureaucracy and certain European national leaders, who have in the last day or two been trying to lay down somewhat peremptory orders of what Britain should do when. I think they need to let sink in the magnitude and consequences of the possible loss of the British net financial contribution to the EU budget, the second biggest of all countries' - and that a decisive cause of the referendum going the way it did was their own obdurate rigidity.

And there was me trying my upmost to be restrained
If Boris does make the cut it's doubtful after being a popular mayor of London to becoming one of it's most hateful figures at least by the morning rabble who gather outside his London residence.
You cannot imagine him relishing the prospect of becoming PM with so many discontents banging on his door every morning after bathing in the limelight.
As for staying in the single market it makes sense but when has any sense prevailed in this election.
Like war truth has been a casualty in this referendum and will probably continue to be.
As for the intellectual capability of Mr, Gove the Mr,Gove who was sacked for being unpopular towards teachers when he was education minister and who recently compared experts with Nazis I agree he had the intellectual foresight to apologise but I suspect his intelligence for having said it in the first place.
Before joining the EU Britain was considered the poor man of Europe and now has the second biggest economy within the EU.
The heads of the European bureaucracy must have been of some help as you cannot imagine it's all down to likes of our MPs and parliament after you see in full flight the type of actual performance they contribute.

 

[Evo]

Comes from a Survation poll, 33 people regret exit vote, 19 regret leave vote. Same pollster was wrong on referendum outcome.

http://www.markpack.org.uk/files/2016/06/Survation-post-Brexit-poll.pdf

Man on the street interviews, anecdotes.

Over 3 million Brits sign request to redo Brexit vote.

2) A re-do referendum
Over 3 million UK residents signed a petition on Parliament's site demanding a second vote take place, the largest petition the government's website has ever seen. Parliament must debate any proposal with over 100,000 signatures.

The petition, which launched before the referendum, asked for a second vote on EU membership if support for the remain or leave vote was below 60% with turnout under 75%.

Thursday's British exit vote had only 52% backing on a 72% turnout. While the petition must be considered by Parliament, members do not need to act on it.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/britain-revote-stop-brexit-081452041.html

A petition calling for another referendum on whether Britain should stay in the European Union has quickly received millions of signatures (more than 3 million as of Sunday morning) — a level that means it must now be debated by British politicians. It was apparently so popular that the British Parliament's website, where the petition was hosted, briefly crashed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...r-referendum-they-shouldnt-hold-their-breath/

 

[WWGD]

Shocking? The polls predicted as much or at least indicated exit was very possible. Shocking to whom?Reference please. There's no such indication in the Yahoo link.

According to : https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...6/23/brexit-exit-polls-dont-hold-your-breath/
there were no exit polls, so what polls are you referring to?

 

[rootone]

So who is going to be obliged to trigger the article 50 divorce process then?, a referendum in the UK is not legally binding, it's considered as 'advisory', a govt still has to declare it as being the official policy of the govt.
Until such time as a new pm is appointed who announces this, nothing actually has changed.
For some reason I have not yet fathomed, the loudest proponents for 'leave', are now arguing that there is no rush to set the actual mechanism for departure in motion.

 

[mheslep]

Over 3 million Brits sign request to redo Brexit vote.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/britain-revote-stop-brexit-081452041.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...r-referendum-they-shouldnt-hold-their-breath/

Some 16.1 million voted to Remain. They lost by 1.3 million. Now some are signing petitions for another go, despite PM Cameron saying before the vote that there would not be another vote after THE vote. Feels a little fascist to me. Petitioners appear to be hanging their hats on misinformation before the fact.

Are there examples of misinformation before votes?

Leading into the US election 2012, the thankfully former Majority Leader of the US Senate Harry Reid lied on floor of the Senate about the GOP candidate Romney paying no federal taxes. We know Reid lied because Reid is proud of the smear, has boasted about its effects, is retiring, and remains immune to liable since the statement was made in the Senate. Thus I now consider a petition for a redo of the US 2012 election, and expect 3 million names quickly gathered.