Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 249 posts

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#221

Post by thefounder »

misnome wrote: post #140
frutiger wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But it’s not as though we’ve been listened to in any way. I get the sentiment (as a pro-Euro Brit), but surely the original referendum counts as being listened to in some way?

> surely the original referendum counts as being listened to in some way? Even ignoring all the illegality and fraud about the referendum, and ignoring that because it was advisory large portions of british citizens living abroad were prevented from having a say, and ignoring the arguments about 16-year-olds who it would be directly affecting because of the time lags, and ignoring the arguments around the fact that t…

Nothing good happens when you cancel election results. See all these African countries with elections canceled...you better make sure the vote is not frauded in the first place.

As far as I'm aware nobody got convicted(unlike in the U.S) so your fraud argument is weak even today. I can see a second referendum on no-deal vs May's deal though.

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#222

Post by jlokier »

tomp wrote: post #139
matthewmacleod wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Building a deliverable, realistic consensus approach with cross-party support, reflecting the relatively close outcome of the initial referendum and the diversity of opinion within the "leave" movement.

But that's my question, what's a "realistic consensus"? Mind you, consensus within the UK isn't enough, you need consensus with the EU as well - and I don't think anything better than the current deal is even possible.

The EU are (or would have been) open to other models than the one TM settled on.

They have suggested they would be open to alternatives when Corbyn approached them earlier this year. If a general election or new referendum had taken place, I think the EU would have granted an extension to hear what new alternative would emerge.

They are saying TM's deal is the only deal now, but that's because it was negotiated exhaustively in private already, and TM told them, essentially, she would take it to the MPs to get it rubber-stamped.

The MPs said no, it's their job, not hers, to hash out the big important compromises for the country, she should have consulted them before getting to that point and they don't like the deal she made, and they rejected it with the strongest defeat in parliamentary history.

The problem is leaving consensus building so late, so the EU spent all their negotiating efforts on TM's version of things, and they don't want to negotiate twice (unless a really good reason shows up that lines up with their principles).

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#223

Post by frutiger »

misnome wrote: post #140
frutiger wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But it’s not as though we’ve been listened to in any way. I get the sentiment (as a pro-Euro Brit), but surely the original referendum counts as being listened to in some way?

> surely the original referendum counts as being listened to in some way? Even ignoring all the illegality and fraud about the referendum, and ignoring that because it was advisory large portions of british citizens living abroad were prevented from having a say, and ignoring the arguments about 16-year-olds who it would be directly affecting because of the time lags, and ignoring the arguments around the fact that t…

There are lots of things to unpack here.

Your original claim was that the people had "[not been] listened to in any way". My singular claim was that in fact they had been listened to at least in some way.

> Even ignoring all the illegality and fraud about the referendum

Something is illegal if deemed so by law and potentially affirmed by courts. If this is indeed the case, there should be proceedings that show this to be so. Something doesn't become illegal just by declaring it as such.

> large portions of british citizens living abroad were prevented from having a say

This is merely an anecdote, but I am a Brit living in the US and I got the chance to submit my Remain postal vote.

> ignoring the arguments about 16-year-olds who it would be directly affecting because of the time lags

This is the nature of every election and every vote. e.g. the poll tax was introduced in 1990 which had widespread ramifications for years to come, and impacted many people that couldn't vote in the prior 1987 general elections. The referendum is no different. This is just the way of democracy.

> Democratic governments aren't supposed to have one vote then completely ignore the rest of the population.

The government actually held a second vote - the general election requested by May in 2017. In that vote, despite winning a smaller plurality, the Tories were still re-affirmed. If everything you say is true, then the popular will would have selected Labour as an overwhelming majority. While the Tory victory was marginal, they still beat Labour.

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#224

Post by isostatic »

coldtea wrote: post #179
isostatic wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You ask 66 people today, About 16 will have voted to leave, 16 to remain, 11 who didn't vote but could have, and 23 didn't get to vote because they were too young or aren't British citizens (even if they've lived here for 20 years and have British kids) (based on 1 million births and deaths a year, with about 2:1 ratio of people dying voting leave (in line with surveys that the older you were the more likely you were…

> and 23 didn't get to vote because they were too young or aren't British citizens Those are also not meant to vote, and rightly so. If you aren't a citizen (or aren't yet), you shouldn't decide of the country's matters. And if you're not an adult, you are considered not mature enough to have an opinion. That's part for the course in every democracy. In a democracy, "X of the the country wants Y" = "X of people quali…

The problem in this case is that europe has spent 40 years welcoming people from elsewhere in europe. Doesn't matter where you're born, you have the right to live there and build a life.

Imagine if Texas had a vote for independence, but only people born in Texas, and not those that moved from say Chicago, were allowed to vote.

> In the sense that all of the above wouldn't be considered a problem if the majority had voted to remain.

Except it would have been Farage was already calling for a second referendum before the results from the first came in. Rees Mogg and Owen Patterson were also big fans of two referendums, one to start the process, and one to confirm it 3 years later.

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#225

Post by tomp »

jlokier wrote: post #222
tomp wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's my question, what's a "realistic consensus"? Mind you, consensus within the UK isn't enough, you need consensus with the EU as well - and I don't think anything better than the current deal is even possible.

The EU are (or would have been) open to other models than the one TM settled on. They have suggested they would be open to alternatives when Corbyn approached them earlier this year. If a general election or new referendum had taken place, I think the EU would have granted an extension to hear what new alternative would emerge. They are saying TM's deal is the only deal now, but that's because it was negotiated exhau…

> They have suggested they would be open to alternatives when Corbyn approached them earlier this year.

Ah, that's news to me. Do you have any more info, like an article explaining the potential alternative models?

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#226

Post by jonplackett »

Zenst wrote: post #89
Jarmsy wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"half the country wants to leave" A slim majority of those who voted, several years ago, stirred up by masses of illegal propaganda, especially in the last days before the vote. Now after getting some idea of the reality, the tides look to have significantly changed. Current opinion polls are showing significant majority for remain.(61% in the last YouGov poll) (Also, it was 17 not 33)

Please do remember, polls prior to the referendum got it wrong then, probably still will as well. I have found betting odd's to be far superior insight than public opinioin polls and with that, ring up a betting shop and ask them what odds they will give that the UK stays as an EU member, that should give you a fair perspective as unlike polls, any mistake they make costs them money. But for me and many others, polls…

You could have got 8 to 1 on the eve of brexit putting a bet on leave - and that was AFTER they called sunderland which was way more brexity than expect. Still kick myself for not taking that bet. It was similar for Trump too!

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#227

Post by ahje »

EForEndeavour wrote: post #212
ahje wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alas, history tells us that the people with "rational" opinions are no better to rule than the ones with "irrational" ones. At least not in the long run. As a fellow EU-citizen I am absolutely horrified by the chaos currently unfolding in the UK, but dismissing the entire voting process while referring to "democracy yada yada" is far scarier than the outcome of a democratic election will ever be.

I think the above poster's point is that plenty of government decisions are not voted on by referendum, and shouldn't be. The consequences of Brexit are complex and far-reaching, more so than countless other types of decisions that are not directly voted on. So why should we expect The People to know any better?

Why should we expect random politicians to know better?

After all, a stupid decision taken by uninformed politicians isn't necessarily better than a stupid decision made by the people.

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#228

Post by lm28469 »

lazyjones wrote: post #192
lm28469 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> worst anti-democratic statements Direct democracy isn't the only form of democracy. We're all irrational and biased, that's inherent to being human. Some people are more informed than other and there are processes to mitigate biases (direct democracy isn't one of them). The problem comes from people who have no business in the vote, no knowledge of the issues, are not even aware of what biases are, and drink the pr…

> The problem comes from people who have no business in the vote, no knowledge of the issues, are not even aware of what biases are, and drink the propaganda kool aid. Of course, that's always the other people... > Well first off London only strives because of international financial businesses London isn't the UK and "international" doesn't mean "about the EU-27". > Since the vote Brexit cost the UK much more than w…

> Of course, that's always the other people...

I never said that. It's all about intellectual honesty.

I know that I'm not qualified for my opinion to matter on the topic (I'm just debunking low quality propaganda here) despite the fact that I did hours of research on it.

We don't ask random people about their opinion on string theory, do we ?

> Laughable nonsense.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-economy/brexit...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/29/britain-bil...

https://qz.com/1477680/brexit-is-a-bad-idea-whichever-way-yo...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-22/u-k-brexi...

https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million...

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#229

Post by lm28469 »

ahje wrote: post #227
EForEndeavour wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the above poster's point is that plenty of government decisions are not voted on by referendum, and shouldn't be. The consequences of Brexit are complex and far-reaching, more so than countless other types of decisions that are not directly voted on. So why should we expect The People to know any better?

Why should we expect random politicians to know better? After all, a stupid decision taken by uninformed politicians isn't necessarily better than a stupid decision made by the people.

> random politicians to know better?

They're not random, you're supposed to vote for them.

And they're supposed to represent your general opinion. They're supposed to have an education in politic/economics/&c. which makes them better equipped to make informed decisions. And it's supposed to be their full time job.

Just like anyone can bake bread at home with no tools / minimum knowledge but the bakery at the corner of the street will make better bread.

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#230

Post by coldtea »

isostatic wrote: post #224
coldtea wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and 23 didn't get to vote because they were too young or aren't British citizens Those are also not meant to vote, and rightly so. If you aren't a citizen (or aren't yet), you shouldn't decide of the country's matters. And if you're not an adult, you are considered not mature enough to have an opinion. That's part for the course in every democracy. In a democracy, "X of the the country wants Y" = "X of people quali…

The problem in this case is that europe has spent 40 years welcoming people from elsewhere in europe. Doesn't matter where you're born, you have the right to live there and build a life. Imagine if Texas had a vote for independence, but only people born in Texas, and not those that moved from say Chicago, were allowed to vote. > In the sense that all of the above wouldn't be considered a problem if the majority had v…

>Except it would have been Farage was already calling for a second referendum before the results from the first came in.

Sure, hypocrisy on both sides ensure it would be called a problem by the other side.

But it wouldn't be called a problem from _the same_ people today calling it a problem.

So, it's the kind that's only a problem when your side loses -- in which case, it can be discarded as the usual complaint of any losing side ever.

Post reply on HN