Anyone know what time we're supposed to trigger Article 50 tomorrow?

[Sir C]

I had two thoughts yesterday, one of which is not original but strikes me as sensible, that there should be a threshold for a referendum victory of something that means a 52-48 result does not automatically mean victory for the 52.

The other more original idea is that one solution to all this bickering would be to hold a second referendum on the final Brexit deal with the EU, but only among those who voted Out. Would that not be quite a neat idea?

Yes, I suppose for such a major constitutional issue a threshold margin for victory might be considered sensibel; however, as one wasn't imposed, the point is moot.

To my mind the original referendum was a single, simple question, do you want to stay in, or get out. The 'electorate' voted out. It's now up to our elected politicians to decide how, and under what terms that happens. We can't keep asking hoi polloi to decide on these issues, mainly because most of them are as thick as mince.

[Burney]

I had two thoughts yesterday, one of which is not original but strikes me as sensible, that there should be a threshold for a referendum victory of something that means a 52-48 result does not automatically mean victory for the 52.

The other more original idea is that one solution to all this bickering would be to hold a second referendum on the final Brexit deal with the EU, but only among those who voted Out. Would that not be quite a neat idea?

1. No. A margin of victory in a popular vote is still a margin of victory. Anywhere else you draw the line is perforce arbitrary and unfair. Equally, such a rule would always favour the status quo. After all, had the vote percentages been reversed, do we think we'd have left the EU? Of course not. We'd have stayed in, meaning that, whichever way the vote went, the Leave voters were effectively disenfranchised.

2. This is a bit retarded. You realise we have a system of secret ballots, yes? And that there is therefore no way of knowing who did or didn't vote to leave?

[Monty92]

Well since when you vote your name doesn't show on the paper i would suggest your second idea is as **** as most of your thoughts

Obviously my idea would require some system in place to that you could prove which way you voted in order to vote in the second referendum. Seems workable in theory.

[Sir C]

Well since when you vote your name doesn't show on the paper i would suggest your second idea is as **** as most of your thoughts

I was surprised to note the last couple of times I voted that the ballot paper had a reference number printed on it, against which my name was ticked in the electoral roll. Your vote is easily identifiable.

[Pat Vegas]

Obviously my idea would require some system in place to that you could prove which way you voted in order to vote in the second referendum. Seems workable in theory.

They tick you off the list when you arrive at the polling station.

[Sir C]

1. No. A margin of victory in a popular vote is still a margin of victory. Anywhere else you draw the line is perforce arbitrary and unfair. Equally, such a rule would always favour the status quo. After all, had the vote percentages been reversed, do we think we'd have left the EU? Of course not. We'd have stayed in, meaning that, whichever way the vote went, the Leave voters were effectively disenfranchised.

2. This is a bit retarded. You realise we have a system of secret ballots, yes? And that there is therefore no way of knowing who did or didn't vote to leave?

'Secret ballots'

[Monty92]

1. No. A margin of victory in a popular vote is still a margin of victory. Anywhere else you draw the line is perforce arbitrary and unfair. Equally, such a rule would always favour the status quo - after all, had the vote percentages been reversed, do we think we'd have left the EU? Of course not. We'd have stayed in, meaning that, whichever way the vote went, the Leave voters were effectively disenfranchised.

2. This is a bit retarded. You realise we have a system of secret ballots, yes? And that there is therefore no way of knowing who did or didn't vote to leave?

1. But I don't think there can be anything more arbitrary than a 52-48 vote meaning victory for the 52. Because we know full well that a result of that small a margin is simply no more meaningful than tossing a coin to decide. A 60-40 victory, however, would tell us a lot more.

2. I'm surprised it would have needed me to qualify that OBVIOUSLY my idea would require a new system where you could retrospectively prove which way you originally voted in order to vote in the second referendum.

[Pat Vegas]

I was surprised to note the last couple of times I voted that the ballot paper had a reference number printed on it, against which my name was ticked in the electoral roll. Your vote is easily identifiable.

Remember don't use pencil or they will alter your vote or something.

[Pokster]

Obviously my idea would require some system in place to that you could prove which way you voted in order to vote in the second referendum. Seems workable in theory.

I can't see the public wanting a syatem where you could find out which wasy you voted... it is a crap idea as youa re alos stopping anyone who voted stay changing their mind... so in other words it is a loaded idea that is completely against 1 side

[Burney]

Yes, I suppose for such a major constitutional issue a threshold margin for victory might be considered sensibel; however, as one wasn't imposed, the point is moot.

To my mind the original referendum was a single, simple question, do you want to stay in, or get out. The 'electorate' voted out. It's now up to our elected politicians to decide how, and under what terms that happens. We can't keep asking hoi polloi to decide on these issues, mainly because most of them are as thick as mince.

I think your second point is a good one and too often overlooked. This was at heart actually a very simple issue: do we wish to be governed within the framework of the EU or not? The fact that its ramifications are complex does not alter the essential simplicity of the core issue. To say people didn't know what they were voting for is absurd - they absolutely did. That one may or may not like the various reasons they voted Leave is neither here nor there.