Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
EU Google United Kingdom Technology Your Rights Online

Web Petition For 2nd EU Referendum Draws Huge Interest (ap.org) 634

From an Associated Press report:An online petition seeking a second referendum on a British exit from the Europe Union has drawn more than 1.6 million names, a measure of the extraordinary divisiveness of Thursday's vote to leave the 28-nation bloc. The online petition site hosted by the House of Commons website even crashed Friday under the weight of the activity as officials said they'd seen unprecedented interest in the measure, which calls on the government to implement a rule that stating if that if "remain" or "leave" camps won less than 60 percent of the vote with less than a 75 percent turnout "there should be another referendum."According to reports, this is the biggest surge of support Parliament's website has ever seen. Looking at the keywords people were hitting up on Google after the news first broke, it was clear that a considerable portion of the population was clueless about the whole situation.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Web Petition For 2nd EU Referendum Draws Huge Interest

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 25, 2016 @11:40AM (#52388585)

    Might as well go pray. Has about the same effect.

    • by Fire_Wraith ( 1460385 ) on Saturday June 25, 2016 @06:30PM (#52390437)
      My anecdotal experiences have clearly shown that prayer has at least a 50% chance of success, far better than web petitions.
  • Cute (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 25, 2016 @11:41AM (#52388591)

    How cute, the democratic result didn't go our way so we'll make a new referendum with skewed option balance. This surely will make our way the only way!

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by houstonbofh ( 602064 )
      Why not? It is happening with gun control bills in the US that keep getting voted down...
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by PopeRatzo ( 965947 )

        Why not? It is happening with gun control bills in the US that keep getting voted down...

        The people never voted on a referendum on gun control.

        It would be interesting to see what a referendum on the issue would look like if you took out all the people who are being funded by the NRA.

        http://fortune.com/2015/12/03/... [fortune.com]

        • Why not? It is happening with gun control bills in the US that keep getting voted down...

          The people never voted on a referendum on gun control.

          It would be interesting to see what a referendum on the issue would look like if you took out all the people who are being funded by the NRA.

          http://fortune.com/2015/12/03/... [fortune.com]

          erm... you mean that big scary organization that is really mostly funded by average citizens? (https://www.quora.com/Where-does-funding-for-the-National-Rifle-Association-NRA-come-from [quora.com]). I'm not a fan of lobbyists and I wish we could get rid of all of them but the NRA is one that is actually working as intended (giving a group of average citizens a collective voice).

          So you're suggesting we exclude the people average gun owners have chosen to support (through donations to the NRA) when it comes to the speci

          • So you're suggesting we exclude the people average gun owners have chosen to support

            No, I'm saying that a public referendum has never on gun control has never been put to the American citizens. The only ones who have gotten to vote on the issue are people who get paid directly by the NRA.

            And I don't think you want it put to a referendum, because the NRA (and its members) will lose:

            http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/20/... [cnn.com]

    • Why not? It works for our elected representatives, why shouldn't it work for direct democracy?

    • Re:Cute (Score:5, Informative)

      by MightyDrunken ( 1171335 ) on Saturday June 25, 2016 @06:06PM (#52390359)

      How cute, the democratic result didn't go our way so we'll make a new referendum with skewed option balance. This surely will make our way the only way!

      Well not really, the petition states:

      We the undersigned call upon HM Government to implement a rule that if the remain or leave vote is less than 60% based a turnout less than 75% there should be another referendum.

      The petition does not state how the new referendum should be phrased. What is most interesting is that this petition was started a month ago by an ex political student who supports Leave. This is not the only Leave supporter to suggest a second referendum [mirror.co.uk] if the vote was close. Of course now they have got the result they wanted, suddenly no more are needed. ;)

      The leave side suggested many things like taking back control of our borders, sovereignty and saving money but there is no plan and no definition of what leaving the EU means. When people realise that immigration will be about the same, that things cost more and the short term financial volatility harming the UK. They may feel that the Leave campaign "promises" were a bunch of wishful thinking

  • Clueless? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by chispito ( 1870390 ) on Saturday June 25, 2016 @11:45AM (#52388603)
    How could anyone have remained clueless with the wall to wall coverage? More importantly, why should anyone that apathetic be taken seriously now?
    • Re:Clueless? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Zocalo ( 252965 ) on Saturday June 25, 2016 @12:08PM (#52388741) Homepage
      Willful ignorance and frustration. There have far too many interviews with people who admitted to not paying any attention to the media coverage because they either didn't care what the talking heads thought or because they wanted to be told the facts and make an informed choice rather than listen to politicians launching personal attacks on each other. Both campaigns actually did present some cherry picked "facts" to support their case, but the rebuttals were either lost in the noise or came too late.

      I do agree that the reason the result went the way it did is apathy though. Apathy on behalf of the politicians who have ignored the growing disconnect between themselves and the electorate rather than trying to address it, and apathy on behalf of all the voters who couldn't be bother to look up a few things for themselves, or even vote. Given the impact and importance of the vote I'm still amazed that the turnout was a "mere" 72% which, while well above a typical general election turnout, pales compared to the 84% turnout of the Scottish independence referendum.
  • by frovingslosh ( 582462 ) on Saturday June 25, 2016 @11:46AM (#52388605)
    We didn't get the vote we wanted. Lets vote again.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by houstonbofh ( 602064 )
      Just to be clear... Are you talking about Brexit, or the Democrat sit in to vote again on removing Due Process?
  • There is no such clause in the legislation that governed the referendum; he's asking the government to "implement a rule" by changing the rules after the fact, not implement a clause that was present in the legislation.
  • Super majority (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kwelstr ( 114389 ) on Saturday June 25, 2016 @11:49AM (#52388623)
    This is a perfect example of why life changing decisions should be by a super majority of votes, 60% or more. Making such a big change like exiting the EU on the whim of a 50% vote is moronic. :/
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I came here to say that as well. Most "country-altering" things in the USA (constitution changes, adopting new states, etc) are done with a 2/3 supermajority, usually at the state level. It isn't a perfect solution, and you could argue 2/3 is arbitrary, but it's got to be something. Making sure there's a really solid majority behind the biggest decisions seems like a good idea.

      As an American watching from across the pond, I was surprised a mere majority was sufficient.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Constitution is changed all the time by a single elderly judge
      • In my country of the Netherlands, a change in the constitution requires a 2/3d majority vote in parliament, a re-election of parliament, followed by a majority vote. The insertion of the re-election gives the voters sufficient power to elect representatives that can counter the vote if they don't agree. I think the UK should also go for a re-election of parliament to give the voters a chance to speak about how important they really think this issue is wrt all other issues that the country is facing. That's
    • by Teun ( 17872 )
      Spot on!

      Would the UK have a constitution there would no doubt be a clause it can only be changed by a +66 or75% majority and after two consecutive parliamentary elections.

      But they don't have a constitution and the establishment prefers to keep it that way.
    • What was the voting standard to enter the pre-morphed EU?
    • I'm as horrified about this result as anyone, but it's hard to argue it's undemocratic.
      52% voting LEAVE on a 72% turnout is 37% of the entire population of the nation.
      Even the most historic wildly popular presidential victory like Reagan in 1984 only got 59% on a 53% turnout: 31% of the nation. No-one would argue that Reagan didn't have a mandate to govern.
      I wish it weren't true, but this is a mistake made decisively.

  • And so what ?!? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LordHighExecutioner ( 4245243 ) on Saturday June 25, 2016 @11:52AM (#52388647)
    About 22 million of people voted for "stay". They can have all of them to sign the petition, they still remain the minority. This is supposed to be they way democracy works, or is internet changing the rules ?!?
    • by Teun ( 17872 )
      Your question is similar to statements a few hours after the results were fixed by both Cameron (Remain) and Boris (Brexit), "at this point there is no need to invoke EU paragraph 50".

      For those not aware, that's how you cancel your EU membership, the Brexit boys in the establishment had never expected this outcome and are shitting themselves.
    • About 22 million of people voted for "stay". They can have all of them to sign the petition, they still remain the minority. This is supposed to be they way democracy works, or is internet changing the rules ?!?

      This is not internet changing rules, this is using internet as medium to lay their rules, this is not a random internet petition, it is part of the uk democratic system.

    • Well, it is "on the internet", so if the legislation of the past few years is any indicator ... yes, yes it does.

  • No (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ilsaloving ( 1534307 ) on Saturday June 25, 2016 @11:56AM (#52388665)

    You know what? Tough shit. You had plenty of time to research the issue *before* the vote. But no, it only occurred people to even do something as paltry as a freaking google search, AFTER the vote had already taken place.

    It's about fucking time people actually started taking responsibility for their actions. It's this "Oh whoopsie! I didn't mean to do that! I want backsies!" bullshit that is the reason why the entire world is deteriorating before our very eyes.... because people can't be bothered to spend two lousy seconds to stop and think about what they're going to do, before they actually do it.

    What's the phrase? Measure twice, cut once? Well guess what... That little rule applies to a hell of a lot more than just cutting wood.

    But of course, I'm just pissing in the wind. (Which is amazingly difficult to do from a squatting position, let me assure you...) The average person isn't going to make any effort to change, and the world is going to get even more fucked up than it is now.

    The only thing that is going to happen is that those with both the foresight and the means to protect themselves, will hunker down and wait while everyone else blows a gasket and likely start killing each other.

    • If a large enough fraction of any electorate wants a do-over on a referendum, then why not? Why does this have to be a winner-take-all scenario?

    • Ah, so you want to screw over a entire country of people so that they learn a lesson? Let's face it, if they could not see that the capital classes were using the racists as a smokescreen to dismantle labour laws - it is not because they have failed to learn from experience. It is because they are terminally stupid. A lesson is not going to help and you are simply being a giant dick about the whole thing.

      The Leave campaigners did not call out "no take backs" before the vote, so fuck that result right in the

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      You had plenty of time to research the issue *before* the vote.

      They did. And people chose to leave. This is just butthurt remainers trying to fuck the system until they get the result they want, regardless of majority opinion.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        I doubt it's a minority any more. The Leave campaign has reneged on many of their key promises and been proven wrong on any of their predictions. Buyer's remorse is completely understandable.

  • No deal (Score:5, Interesting)

    by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * on Saturday June 25, 2016 @12:02PM (#52388711)

    I'd prefer a united Ireland and an independent Schotland in the EU and a high Trump-like wall between Scotland and England to secure the EU outer frontiers, like the Brits always wanted. :-)

    Germand car companies repatriating their English car factories (Mini, Vauxhall, Rolls Royce, Bentley etc) is a given, 5 Chinese banks already moved to Luxemburg, others will follow.

    It will be a mighty small empire when this is finished.

    • Re:No deal (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 25, 2016 @12:24PM (#52388831)

      England and Wales should do the decent thing and secede from the United Kingdom, taking themselves out of the EU that way. Note: I'm English.

      Edit: This is priceless - the CAPTCHA was 'penance'!

    • I'd prefer a united Ireland

      Ain't gonna happen. There might be a republic of Northern Ireland though.

      and a high Trump-like wall between Scotland and England

      We've already got one. It's very nice.

      No really, the Romans build it, since those pesky Picts wanted their independence so badly. It's called Hadrian's wall and you can walk along it.

  • by Hognoxious ( 631665 ) on Saturday June 25, 2016 @12:39PM (#52388907) Homepage Journal

    a rule that stating if that if

    Is that perl?

  • by radarskiy ( 2874255 ) on Saturday June 25, 2016 @07:56PM (#52390663)

    The leaders in the Leave groups have gotten very bitchy when asked about when the UK will leave and how they will conduct the negotiation. You would think that if they were campaigning for a Leave result in the referendum they would be eager about getting to the leaving part.

Don't tell me how hard you work. Tell me how much you get done. -- James J. Ling

Working...