Cabinet coup happening in UK to remove May as PM

[Nokra]

9 hours ago, TheGreatGamble said:

Claiming it’s racists and morons who want to leave the EU is ridiculous.

I don't know about the racist part, but since leaving the EU is moronic, saying that it's only morons who want to do so is a bit of a tautology.  

[TheGreatGamble]

4 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

The Netherlands aren't exactly Eastern Europe...

 

 

It’s my bad, I meant Western Europe, but the point still stands (in reverse) that many Western European people want out of the EU. Their countries are not going to vote on it, but there’s a lot of people who feel that it has hurt their countries. 

 

12 hours ago, Jason said:

 

The Brexit vote was a non-binding referendum. The UK government never actually had to honor the results. 

It should still be honored. It was voted on by the people, and leave won. The stakes were very clear on voting day.

[Jason]

1 minute ago, TheGreatGamble said:

The stakes were very clear on voting day.

 

Were voters not told it was a non-binding referendum?

[Greatoneshere]

6 minutes ago, Jason said:

Were voters not told it was a non-binding referendum?

 

It shouldn't have been punted by the government into a referendum to the (ignorant) people in the first place. That's why it's a democratic republic and not a pure democracy. 

[Jason]

7 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

It shouldn't have been punted by the government into a referendum to the (ignorant) people in the first place. That's why it's a democratic republic and not a pure democracy. 

 

The US is a democratic republic, the UK is a constitutional monarchy.

[Greatoneshere]

2 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

The US is a democratic republic, the UK is a constitutional monarchy.

 

Sorry, I should have been more accurate / clear: you are correct, I merely meant that even the UK government is meant to work in that intermediaries (politicians) who are presumably informed and whose job it is to handle these more complicated matters, make the decisions for the people, but they represent the people through being voted for by them. Hence, it should not have been up to the people in the first place in this case. 

[TwinIon]

21 minutes ago, TheGreatGamble said:

It should still be honored. It was voted on by the people, and leave won. The stakes were very clear on voting day.

I don't think the stakes were clear, and I don't even think they're clear today.

 

If people had been voting on Stay, Leave with May's deal, or a hard Brexit, maybe the stakes would have been clear. As it stands today, it remains uncertain just what leaving actually means since we still don't know how it will play out. How many votes would have swung if they knew there was a chance at a hard border in Ireland? How many votes would have swung if they had been clear what any of the deal's provisions actually meant?

 

I think the original referendum was fundamentally flawed to such a degree that it's worth trying again.

[Rodimus]

Well she inherited this mess and hasn't made much of it. So this is likely a relief to vote her out. The question is having May out will that clean up the vote on Bexit or are they really trying to go for the worst option. Looking to burn it all down.

[Jason]

9 minutes ago, TwinIon said:

I don't think the stakes were clear, and I don't even think they're clear today.

 

If people had been voting on Stay, Leave with May's deal, or a hard Brexit, maybe the stakes would have been clear. As it stands today, it remains uncertain just what leaving actually means since we still don't know how it will play out. How many votes would have swung if they knew there was a chance at a hard border in Ireland? How many votes would have swung if they had been clear what any of the deal's provisions actually meant?

 

I think the original referendum was fundamentally flawed to such a degree that it's worth trying again.

 

This is true. Everyone voting "leave" was voting for their own personal conception of "leave". They should have done it like the New Zealand flag referendum: have two referendums, with the first one being about "do you want to have a referendum about whether to stay in the EU?"

[TwinIon]

8 minutes ago, Jason said:

This is true. Everyone voting "leave" was voting for their own personal conception of "leave". They should have done it like the New Zealand flag referendum: have two referendums, with the first one being about "do you want to have a referendum about whether to stay in the EU?"

That makes sense. Ask if there should be a referendum, and if the answer is yes, ask that question with a real plan in place. It also has the advantage of not enacting article 50 and the clock that it puts them on. Of course, you don't get into this whole mess by thinking it all through.

[CitizenVectron]

The referendum was incredibly flawed, and a flawed and unclear referendum should never be held to be binding. In fact, Canada went through this exact same thing in 1995 when Quebec had a referendum to secede. This was the question given to voters (by the sovereigWhat ntist Quebec government):

 

Do you agree that Quebec should become sovereign, after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership, within the scope of the bill respecting the future of Quebec and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1995?

 

I mean, what does that even mean? Fortunately it was defeated 50.6% to 49.4%, but if it had swung the other way, would it really have been a pro-secession vote? The Quebec government would have said yes, but polls at the time showed that many people took it more as "we want a better deal within the Canadian federation, and this will get us that." The same has been shown to be true of the Brexit vote, with many people saying afterward that they didn't think it would be binding, and that they were using it as a protest vote to get better deals for the UK on issues from the EU.

 

In Canada's case, we passed The Clarity Act a few years later which set out the rules for any legally-binding secession referendum (had to be a clear question, had to be a "clear" majority [left up to the courts], etc). It hasn't come up and the issue is basically dead now, but these things are important to set out ahead of time. They weren't in the UK because all parties involved assumed that the vote would be a solid No, but they were wrong.

 

As an aside, I saw a great summary of the UK right now on reddit:

 

Quote

What do you want?
UK: No

 

[Jwheel86]

 

[Chairslinger]

56 minutes ago, Jwheel86 said:

 

 

 

It's really time for May to do this.....

 

 

 

 

 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

 

[Jason]

[SuperSpreader]

America looks to it's mother country for inspiration.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

 

[CitizenVectron]

Didn't New Referendum get the most votes?

[TwinIon]

11 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

Didn't New Referendum get the most votes?

I believe so, but Customs Union got a higher % I think.

 

Going for a fourth vote on the deal just seems pointless. It's dead.

 

It remains a bit shocking to me that May has lasted this long.

[Jason]

2 minutes ago, TwinIon said:

It remains a bit shocking to me that May has lasted this long.

 

She's always been the fall woman for Brexit. Everyone was trying to let this just tank her career so they could be the one to govern afterward. 

[SaysWho?]

Is it even possible for them to remain in the EU? 

[Jason]

1 minute ago, SaysWho? said:

Is it even possible for them to remain in the EU? 

 

As long as nobody looks and collapses the wave function.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

6 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

Is it even possible for them to remain in the EU? 

Parliament would have to revoke their Article 50 execution.

[Anathema-]

 

[Greatoneshere]

On 3/29/2019 at 12:45 PM, SaysWho? said:

Is it even possible for them to remain in the EU? 

 

It is, and it wouldn't even be that hard to do. But the UK has apparently gone full stupid, so who knows what'll happen.