EU Referendum, would you change your vote?

[Berberis]

It would have been better if both sides had been honest. Of course it would.

But the claims of both sides were heavily dissected by the media, and by their opponents. As a leaver, I found the dishonesty of the remain side angering, and I'm sure it was the same going the other way.

It's over now. Move on. You don't see me whinging about the AV referendum result.

 

I personally think it would have been better to have had 4 choices.

 

• Leave entirely, no more connections to the EU.
  
• Leave but remain part of the economic union (Norway/Switzerland model)
  
• Remain but stay as we are and legislate for no further integration or monetary union
  
• Remain with ever closer ties/become part of the monetary union.
  

This would have given everyone a choice rather than the narrow remit we had. Whichever had the most votes would have been the way the country went.

[unbeliever]

I personally think it would have been better to have had 4 choices.

 

• Leave entirely, no more connections to the EU.
  
• Leave but remain part of the economic union (Norway/Switzerland model)
  
• Remain but stay as we are and legislate for no further integration or monetary union
  
• Remain with ever closer ties/become part of the monetary union.
  

This would have given everyone a choice rather than the narrow remit we had. Whichever had the most votes would have been the way the country went.

 

I don't think so.

Suppose that the combined "leave" vote was greater than the combined "remain" vote, but more evenly split. e.g. 28% first option, 28% second option, 32% third option and 12% fourth option or perhaps the reverse. What do you do then?]

 

We could have done as you suggest with an AV approach. Have voters rank the 4 options in order of preference. That would have left one option ultimately with over 50% support.

Edited July 6, 2016 by unbeliever

[Lex Luthor]

I personally think it would have been better to have had 4 choices.

 

• Leave entirely, no more connections to the EU.
  
• Leave but remain part of the economic union (Norway/Switzerland model)
  
• Remain but stay as we are and legislate for no further integration or monetary union
  
• Remain with ever closer ties/become part of the monetary union.
  

This would have given everyone a choice rather than the narrow remit we had. Whichever had the most votes would have been the way the country went.

 

What? With all our 'thick' voters!? Four options to read and no pictures? Or aren't we that thick after all?

[Berberis]

I don't think so.

Suppose that the combined "leave" vote was greater than the combined "remain" vote, but more evenly split. e.g. 28% first option, 28% second option, 32% third option and 12% fourth option or perhaps the reverse. What do you do then?]

 

We could have done as you suggest with an AV approach. Have voters rank the 4 options in order of preference. That would have left one option ultimately with over 50% support.

 

Well the combined votes for either side are for different outcomes. I can see how some people might wish to spin it that way, but it wouldn't have much value as an argument. Needless to say its all hypothetical anyway. I just think if people had more choice the vote would not have polarised opinion so much. I blame Cameron for this as it was him who demanded an In/Out vote. I would have supported an AV approach too.

 

---------- Post added 06-07-2016 at 11:28 ----------

 

What? With all our 'thick' voters!? Four options to read and no pictures? Or aren't we that thick after all?

 

Given the ambiguity of the current thinking and no actual remit for anything other then to leave, having a vote that had more guts to it would have given any government more of a mandate to implement such a result.

 

What we have now is a situation where no one knows what is coming. This is leading to the uncertainty in the markets, which is causing all the problems. We wont know how this will pan out for a long time.

[Lex Luthor]

Given the ambiguity of the current thinking and no actual remit for anything other then to leave, having a vote that had more guts to it would have given any government more of a mandate to implement such a result.

 

There is no better known or recognised mandate than a majority decision in a referendum.

 

 

What we have now is a situation where no one knows what is coming. This is leading to the uncertainty in the markets, which is causing all the problems. We wont know how this will pan out for a long time.

 

This is why Article 50 needed to be triggered straight after the referendum. The longer this is left, the more uncertainty we have. This is why Cameron should have not resigned, thus bringing more uncertainty and instability. This is why the economic fear campaign that was put about by the Remain camp before the referendum and continues, including by the government, big business and the media, talking down the economy needs to stop as it just serves to cause further damage.

[chalga]

There is no better known or recognised mandate than a majority decision in a referendum.

 

 

 

This is why Article 50 needed to be triggered straight after the referendum. The longer this is left, the more uncertainty we have. This is why Cameron should have not resigned, thus bringing more uncertainty and instability. This is why the economic fear campaign that was put about by the Remain camp before the referendum and continues, including by the government, big business and the media, talking down the economy needs to stop as it just serves to cause further damage.

 

 

Markets and businesses are reacting to the Brexit vote,not the talking down or economic fear campaign continuing.The result is in,they know what they want to do,they don't need any campaign,fear or otherwise,to take action.

The egg has just been taken out of the fridge now,it's not even started to boil.and how it comes out is still to be determined,markets will continue to act on all the processes leading up to that,including the Article 50.

The result put all this in motion,nothing to do with a fear campaign.

[Lex Luthor]

Markets and businesses are reacting to the Brexit vote,not the talking down or economic fear campaign continuing.The result is in,they know what they want to do,they don't need any campaign,fear or otherwise,to take action.

The egg has just been taken out of the fridge now,it's not even started to boil.and how it comes out is still to be determined,markets will continue to act on all the processes leading up to that,including the Article 50.

The result put all this in motion,nothing to do with a fear campaign.

 

I'm afraid you cannot possibly imply that all the things I have stated above don't have an effect on economies.

 

Unfortunately, Cameron and Osborne's aims to frighten the people didn't serve to frighten the people after all, but they did frighten the markets.

 

It all points to an urgent need to invoke Article 50 as soon as possible. Delay = uncertainty.

Edited July 6, 2016 by Lex Luthor

[chalga]

I'm afraid you cannot possibly imply that all the things I have stated above don't have an effect on economies.

 

Unfortunately, Cameron and Osborne's aims to frighten the people didn't serve to frighten the people after all, but they did frighten the markets.

 

It all points to an urgent need to invoke Article 50 as soon as possible. Delay = uncertainty.

 

That's probably why I'm not saying that any of the things you stated don't have an effect on economies,but if you like moving goalposts or spinning words to mean something that hasn't been said,you go right ahead.

[Lex Luthor]

That's probably why I'm not saying that any of the things you stated don't have an effect on economies,but if you like moving goalposts or spinning words to mean something that hasn't been said,you go right ahead.

 

That's how I read the first sentence of your post quoted above. There's no 'spin' on my part, just an honest response to what you posted.

[chalga]

That's how I read the first sentence of your post quoted above. There's no 'spin' on my part, just an honest response to what you posted.

 

Just shows how wrong you can be then.