UKIP

[Broomhill Ultra]

As will the other parties. If a General Election is held with the main issue being Brexit, either to seek a mandate to overrule the Referendum result or hold a second referendum after juicy new bribes from the EC, Leave campaigners won't be able to claim £350 million a week anymore because they've admitted telling porkies over that and other issues. The Remainers will have learnt a lot of lessons and will be able to rejig their campaign accordingly. This is quite good on why Remain would have the advantage on a second ballot:

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2015/10/19/asking-the-public-twice-why-do-voters-change-their-minds-in-second-referendums-on-eu-treaties/

Maybe, did those treaty rejections lead to the type of upheavals we're seeing in Labour, the Tories and Scotland tho? Everything just feels incredibly unpredictable just now.

[welshbairn]

There is no way a GE victory gives you the mandate to reverse a single issue referendum vote.

 

I agree they'd probably have to hold another referendum, which they could gain a mandate for. I don't see how Parliament as it stands is going to push forward with Brexit with a huge majority in favour of Remain. Boris or whoever takes over would lose every relevant vote, and in the House of Lords. It's going to be chaos.

[strichener]

I agree they'd probably have to hold another referendum, which they could gain a mandate for. I don't see how Parliament as it stands is going to push forward with Brexit with a huge majority in favour of Remain. Boris or whoever takes over would lose every relevant vote, and in the House of Lords. It's going to be chaos.

The problem with running the next GE on the basis of EU membership is that the people that see this as a high priority will swing towards UKIP. The remain voters would be split between the other parties. This would be worst of all worlds.

[WILLIEA]

There is no way a GE victory gives you the mandate to reverse a single issue referendum vote.

The referendum is not legally binding.

You could argue that it is morally binding, but not legally.

[USTon]

The worry is that up here when we became disaffected with the establishment parties, we had the SNP to turn to.  In England other than Tory or Labour they have only the Liberals and Greens.  Other than that its all UKIP, BNP, etc.  If a snap election is called, as Boris has suggested, there could well be a big swing towards such parties.

[Granny Danger]

There is no way a GE victory gives you the mandate to reverse a single issue referendum vote.

I totally agree. A single issue referendum trumps any other form of public decision making. Talk of a GE or a second referendum because people don't like the result is a nonsense.

[welshbairn]

The problem with running the next GE on the basis of EU membership is that the people that see this as a high priority will swing towards UKIP. The remain voters would be split between the other parties. This would be worst of all worlds.

 

That's why they'll have to form a new party. The Tories are ripped in two, Labour and Lib Dems are a broken mess. 

[welshbairn]

I totally agree. A single issue referendum trumps any other form of public decision making. Talk of a GE or a second referendum because people don't like the result is a nonsense.

 

What if the people change their minds?

[CowdenConvert]

There is no way a GE victory gives you the mandate to reverse a single issue referendum vote.

Of course it does if it's a clear manifesto commitment. If people feel that strongly about it they'd vote for a different party.

[strichener]

Of course it does if it's a clear manifesto commitment. If people feel that strongly about it they'd vote for a different party.

Will these manifestos only have one policy?

Can I vote for UKIP on the basis of their policy on the EU and vote for the SNP on the policy for Scottish Independence? This is the reason that a GE cannot be presumed to be about a single issue.

[strichener]

What if the people change their minds?

How many times are we willing to ask the question? As I previously posted, it is a standing joke about EU referendum - keep voting until we give the answer they want. Only on this occasion, I think that may have just happened.

[CowdenConvert]

Will these manifestos only have one policy?

Can I vote for UKIP on the basis of their policy on the EU and vote for the SNP on the policy for Scottish Independence? This is the reason that a GE cannot be presumed to be about a single issue.

Don't be so fucking stupid. It would be a manifesto commitment and a strong campaign point. Personally I think it's the most important issue in the country at the moment so being the main plank of a GE campaign is perfectly reasonable.

Are you naive enough to think people don't vote for a party because of a single issue? That's what the SNP have been about since they existed. They put other stuff in their manifesto but when you vote SNP the overwhelming majority are in it for one single policy.

[welshbairn]

How many times are we willing to ask the question? As I previously posted, it is a standing joke about EU referendum - keep voting until we give the answer they want. Only on this occasion, I think that may have just happened.

 

As Nicola says, if there is a material change in circumstances. This was Boris's intention all along, to screw some more out of the EU. Some cosmetic rewriting of the opt outs Britain gets would probably do it.

[Broomhill Ultra]

I totally agree. A single issue referendum trumps any other form of public decision making. Talk of a GE or a second referendum because people don't like the result is a nonsense.

I think the prospect of a GE is being raised because there will be a change of prime minister and it gives the new one a chance to get a mandate not because of disagreement worth result of referendum.

[Granny Danger]

Of course it does if it's a clear manifesto commitment. If people feel that strongly about it they'd vote for a different party.

You're wrong. Certainly there will be many people who will vote for a political party solely or primarily on one issue. There will be many others who will vote for a party, or possibly even a candidate, for a collection of issues.

Anyway the idea that we should have a General Election because we didn't like the result of the EU referendum is ludicrous.

[welshbairn]

You're wrong. Certainly there will be many people who will vote for a political party solely or primarily on one issue. There will be many others who will vote for a party, or possibly even a candidate, for a collection of issues.

Anyway the idea that we should have a General Election because we didn't like the result of the EU referendum is ludicrous.

 

How can you have a Parliament that is overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the EU forcing through Brexit? 

[Granny Danger]

I think the prospect of a GE is being raised because there will be a change of prime minister and it gives the new one a chance to get a mandate not because of disagreement worth result of referendum.

We don't, and never have had, a presidential system of government in this country. The prime minister has always been chosen from and by the majority political party, or at least for the last hundred years or more.

If Cameron had walked under a bus and the Tories had to select someone to replace him there would be no talk of another GE to give the new PM a mandate.

[strichener]

Don't be so fucking stupid. It would be a manifesto commitment and a strong campaign point. Personally I think it's the most important issue in the country at the moment so being the main plank of a GE campaign is perfectly reasonable.

Are you naive enough to think people don't vote for a party because of a single issue? That's what the SNP have been about since they existed. They put other stuff in their manifesto but when you vote SNP the overwhelming majority are in it for one single policy.

So a single commitment in a manifesto filled with commitments is a greater mandate than directly asking the question? I don't think I am the one being fucking stupid here TBH.

[welshbairn]

We don't, and never have had, a presidential system of government in this country. The prime minister has always been chosen from and by the majority political party, or at least for the last hundred years or more.

If Cameron had walked under a bus and the Tories had to select someone to replace him there would be no talk of another GE to give the new PM a mandate.

 

There was when Gordon Brown took over. As it happens if he had called an election straight away he would probably have won it for how he handled the financial crisis. His popularity soon plummeted after he dithered and by then it was too late.

[Granny Danger]

How can you have a Parliament that is overwhelmingly in favour of remaining in the EU forcing through Brexit?

This may sound flippant but that's their problem. It's not as big a problem as a Parliament trying to undermine a massive democratic decision. You could quite easily have another GE, another EU referendum and still end up with a result that the majority of MPs disagree with.