|
And ignoring the result of one of the biggest UK votes ever doesn't show any respect as well.
I sort of went with the whole, "This is you decision, the government will enact what you decide." Sent to everyone.
And "It's a referendum not a neverendum."
And everything else that was used to bring home that it was an important decision and not to take it lightly.
I sort of thought that if we can have more votes straight after people will then vote one way, "just to try it," knowing that there will be a follow on vote. So just using a vote to "send a message."
Why bother investigating the implications of your vote? Just vote how you like and then do it properly next time.
So undervaluing the importance of making a considered vote is a big thing to me.
Also odd that everyone who wants a vote now was rather quiet over Maastricht, the Lisbon Treaty and everything else that has happened when the common market we joined became the EU. No calls for a referendum then but suddenly everyone wants a losers vote once they've lost one.
Also I'm not against another vote. I'm in favour of more. We voted to leave so we leave, and then have another in ten years once we've seen what the result is.
And why are you stopping at a second referendum? Frankly only having two is not respectful. How about a third three years after? And a fourth after that?
After all the British electorate could have changed their minds. Or not going to allow that?
For someone who is against referenda you effectively wanted the Queen to have a long series of referenda on her.
First time she lost a vote she was out for ever and we'd be a republic:
|
|