Brexit: Revoke Article 50 petition crashes Parliament website

originally posted by: Rewey
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I think a huge part of the problem is the EU making it as difficult as possible to leave. If the EU was a girlfriend, you'd have called the police long before now. Breaking up was never meant to be this hard.

Disagree mate. As we are officially still members, we still get the benefits - so, in your analogy, we would still be getting plenty of post break up sex. Now if that had already stopped, the Police would have been rung long ago!

originally posted by: SocratesJohnson
So the people who lost the vote are now trying to turn their country into a...what, fascist state where democracy dies? Since it’s for a good cause, so I guess a little fascism never hurt anyone. Heil remain!!

emmm...no.

what's happening is that the people of the UK are using this system to express what they would like to be done with the Brexit crisis we are facing.

I personally believe we should retract article 50 have a second referendum that is simply Remain or leave with no deal choice and take it from there.

Its not going to happen but in my opinion I think that would be the best way forward for the country.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

For the americans you should maybe explain what article 50 is and break this down. Ive tried searching and cant make sense of what article 50 is other than a notice and that it allows you to leave eu without notice.

Its basically the bit of paper that says we are leaving the EU, the government have the power to revoke it, to say "sorry lad but we don't want leave, we are going to revoke our article 50 notice lets all be friends again"

and what about those 51 % that voted to leave ? to hell with them ?

No not at all, I think its one of the best grounds for a second referendum, 3% isn't a particularly large majority. I think we are heading towards a very hard Brexit and that is not what over 16 million voted for am pretty sure that of the 17 million who voted to leave quite a few of them may now have changed their minds.

This is the problem its so divisive, if there was a clear 10% or so who wanted to leave then I think it would be different, which is also why I personally think the vote should have been by super-majority. The country is split pretty much right down the middle on this and its going to cause a lot of hurt if we leave.

Ridiculous.

As we saw with the Libson treaty, the argument is always if the globalists lose a democratic vote, they demand a revote until they get the result they want.

The people that voted to leave won, and their voice has yet to be respected.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

It could have been resolved if they had done what they done before in the first referendum for Scottish devolution whereby to win a yes or in this case to leave you would have to have 60% of the vote. Interestingly there was a petition at the time for something like this (can't recall exact details) which holds the record for the most number of sigs at something like 4 million.

Which is what i stated on here before the Referendum took place and what Farage himself was calling for before the Referendum. It's one of the reasons that referendums have never carried much weight in Britain.

a reply to: Grambler

The vote wasn't legally binding, VoteLeave have been found guilty of all kinds of shenanigans, Arron Banks (need I say more), the public opinion has changed drastically and there is nothing undemocratic about a second referendum so its not as simply as you might think.

If you want to take a look at the "globalists" then have a look at JRM and Banks.

originally posted by: Flavian

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

It could have been resolved if they had done what they done before in the first referendum for Scottish devolution whereby to win a yes or in this case to leave you would have to have 60% of the vote. Interestingly there was a petition at the time for something like this (can't recall exact details) which holds the record for the most number of sigs at something like 4 million.

Which is what i stated on here before the Referendum took place and what Farage himself was calling for before the Referendum. It's one of the reasons that referendums have never carried much weight in Britain.

It should have been by super-majority the fact that it wasn't is a utter embarrassment in my view.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I disagree here too mate. I am very pro EU but we lost. Parameters should have been set in place for a close vote but weren't. We can't moan now after the event.

I don't put any weight behind people now saying "but we didn't understand what it would entail". If you didn't understand what you were voting for then, frankly, you have no business voting. It is irresponsible and disingenuous to whine after the event.

Despite being very pro EU, i will lose all respect for democracy in our nation if this is overturned.

And its just 1 million!

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Grambler

The vote wasn't legally binding, VoteLeave have been found guilty of all kinds of shenanigans, Arron Banks (need I say more), the public opinion has changed drastically and there is nothing undemocratic about a second referendum so its not as simply as you might think.

If you want to take a look at the "globalists" then have a look at JRM and Banks.

We know that the remain camp had all of the power with it; the media was all in, the establishment politicians.

You can parse it anyway you want.

The people voted to leave, the establishment has done everything possible to avoid that.

If there is another vote, and remain wins, how many petitions should it take to have another vote until leave wins again? Or is it just the remain side that gets to keep having revotes until they get the result they like?

How about leave the EU for say 5 years, thereby adhering to the will of the people in their vote.

Then have another referendum.

a reply to: Flavian

Thats fine I totally get why you might feel that way.

I struggle with it myself but fundamentally I do not believe that there is anything undemocratic about a second vote and I believe that this kind of petition demonstrates how strong the will of the people of the UK is for drastic change in how we are dealing with the EU.

a reply to: Grambler

You dont leave then just turn up a few years later and ask to get back in.

If we done that we would probably have to sign up to all the stuff we don't want like Shengin and the Euro.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Grambler

You dont leave then just turn up a few years later and ask to get back in.

If we done that we would probably have to sign up to all the stuff we don't want like Shengin and the Euro.

So you dont do that.

But you do vote to leave, then revote because you dont like the result?

Just to be clear, is it your stance that any referendum should be never enforced and constantly revoted on, or just when it comes out a way you dont like?

a reply to: Grambler

But you do vote to leave, then revote because you dont like the result?

You do when the country is in crisis.

There is nothing undemocratic about a second vote, not a thing.

I sincerely hope this site isn't binding in any way, because the only check and balance on this petition site is a checkbox saying "I am a British citizen or UK resident". All I need to do is make up a name, find a postcode, and click that checkbox, and hurray my vote counts. How would you say that other nations aren't impacting the results of this petition?

a reply to: Hypntick

Na it's not binding in anyway.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Pretty easy to get a few million bots with fake uk emails and names to overrun the system. They must think everybody is stupid. I seem to remember it was around 17 mil to leave and 16 mil to stay. Is the website an effort to fraudulently overturn the previous referrendum by having new referrendums until the government idiots get the answer they want? Seems a lot like the government is gaming the system.... again.

Cheers - Dave

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Grambler

But you do vote to leave, then revote because you dont like the result?

You do when the country is in crisis.

There is nothing undemocratic about a second vote, not a thing.

I noticed you avoided the question I asked.

I will retype it.

"Just to be clear, is it your stance that any referendum should be never enforced and constantly revoted on, or just when it comes out a way you dont like?"

The country is in crisis because the globalist that are in charge are dragging tehir feet leaving the EUU, as we knew they would.

a reply to: Grambler

"Just to be clear, is it your stance that any referendum should be never enforced and constantly revoted on, or just when it comes out a way you dont like?"

No it is my stance that we should revoke article 50, have a second referendum that is a choice between remain and hard Brexit and that should be the end of it.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

If you revoke this and don't leave the EU half the population is gonna be really pissed for a long long time.

Just reach a compromise and make both parties happy so you don't enrage everyone. Why even call a vote to leave?

I think after all the useless political wrangling the government may be surprised at the swing to a No Deal Brexit.

I'd bet if they were stupid enough to have another Brexit vote, they would now lose by a bigger majority.

The people are pissed off. If they don't make a decision soon there will be riots.