Revoke Article 50 Petition

[Atheist]

I trust that most here are aware of the petition. A chance for remainers to show that there is a lot of support for their position. Have you voted yet?

[Atheist]

4,445,616.

[Spicerack]

The ̶f̶r̶a̶u̶d̶s̶t̶e̶r̶s̶ er, passionate Remainers are sharing post-codes on twitter.

[klazomaniac]

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1103918/brexit-petition-cancel-brexit-news-article-50-postcode-remainers


How low can you go. lol

[Togo]

//Remainers are sharing post-codes on twitter.//

Should think that most of em are living in "multi dwelling" bedsits or squats anyway Spice. Or their mam's attic.

[JF85]

tiggerblue10: "Without starting another thread, are there any on here who voted to remain or should I not ask?"

Yes, I voted to remain. I don't usually bother with the second 'discussions' though, for the reason you have highlighted. I would love somebody to convince me that I will be better off after we leave the EU, but nobody seems bothered about persuading me.

[dannyk13]

jf85 //EU, but nobody seems bothered about persuading me.//
I would have thought that it as self evident.

[klazomaniac]

I have just posted this on another thread.
Have a peruse and see what you all think. It may even start some fresh debate.

https://www.derekthomas.org/news/factcheck-26-questions-eu

[jim360]

Like I say spicey, I shouldn't be surprised if there's *some* fraud -- but it's just nonsensical to pretend that in some sense it represents anything more than a tiny fraction of the total signatures. The march in London demonstrates that too: around a million turning up, and that only represents those who could be bothered to march.

[Arrods]

As a Remainer I can't wait for the opportunity to vote Leave.

[Old_Geezer]

Have I voted ? Yes, I voted in the referendum. I'm happy to abide by it's result. Unlike many it seems.

[Atheist]

4,685,918

[pixie374]

7% of the population. Some way to go then?

[jim360]

Largest petition on the site ever is saying something, though. Since other petitions that have attracted less volume include far less controversial topics such as increased funding for schools, it is still notable. In essence the mistake is to assume that only those signing the petition believe in it, rather than, what is slightly more likely, many people agreeing with the petition but viewing it as a waste of time.

And in any case, is the implication that the petition can only be taken seriously the instant it exceeds the 2016 referendum result? That seems unlikely. A more reasonable comparison might be to the current opposing petition, ie one calling to leave without a Deal this Friday, which is not yet at half a million votes. I would guess that this doesn't represent the total number of leave voters either.

[pixie374]

What is it exactly are you hoping for, by it "being taken seriously" Jim? Do you actually want it overruled so we end up staying in?

[pixie374]

Even without taking bots and multiple votes into account, it would not mean much if it did exceed the entire brexit vote. We already know it was close and that many didn't vote. Also that people are far more likely to react strongly when they don't get what they want. It is not difficult to sign a form, but anyone eligible will already have voted if they wanted to.

[jim360]

At the moment I can't see that there exists a route for leaving the EU that is worth pursuing. It's generally accepted that the current Withdrawal Agreement is crap, for multiple reasons, and No Deal is economically damaging in a way that cannot be held sensible either: No Country should be obliged to pursue a policy that is known to be so dangerous to its own prosperity. Any claimed benefits to No Deal are tenuous at best and will certainly not be seen for many years or decades to come.

At this point I think that means that the best question is something like: is there still a way to respect the 2016 result that doesn't take the country on either of those two paths? Only once we are definitely sure the answer is "no" should we withdraw notification under Article 50, and then only by a result that can definitely be said to overrule the 2016 Referendum. That means a further referendum, or a General Election where at least one of the parties with a realistic chance of winning runs on a "rescind notification" manifesto.

Or, in short: yes, I think Article 50 should be rescinded, but only if the country can be shown to agree with me on that point.

[pixie374]

While I disagree with them, I can understand why some may have wanted to remain. What I can't understand is the sheer arrogance of those wanting to stop a public decision because their views are so much more important than other people's. The pure lack of morals. This is not democracy.

[jim360]

Oh, and to add to the short version of my answer: I don't think this petition on its own is enough to show that the country has changed its mind. But it's further weight to the idea that there is a strong, and vocal, and incredibly engaged, section of the country hoping that it will get an opportunity yet to undo the damage that's already been done.

[pixie374]

Vocal doesn't necessarily mean right...

[Khandro]

jim; Regardless of the rights and wrongs of holding another referendum, the 2011 United Kingdom Alternative Vote referendum was the quickest to set up and that took (if memory serves) nearly a year. This proposal would probably take longer in order to simply frame the questions and at the end of which we may have a similar 'leave' result to start the whole process again.

The EU itself would not comply with such nonsense, so it really, despite all the shouting, is a non-starter.