The thing is the issue is so divisive. It is something that seems to be genuinely split down the middle, so I honestly think that the results would never be by an overly significant margin. How many times would you want to hold a vote before saying enough is enough? What's would you define as a definite margin?
What if it was held again, and this time the Remain side won by 2%? Would that suddenly be fine because it's Remain? Would there then need to be yet another one because of slim margins? It could go on forever.
That wasn't the point I was trying to make, that if Remain won by 2% it would be fine and dandy and we should just leave it at that, but that we should keep voting over and over if Leave wins by the same margin. But fact of the matter is that it is
a split down the middle, so what's fair? Is it fair to dramatically alter the lives on one side because the other is looking for some new adventure, or is it fair to ensure that everyone stays the same way they are now because one side doesn't want this change?
As said, my point isn't that we should leave it at that if Remain won by 2% or less, but it feels like your
argument is that the UK should definitely eject itself from the EU no matter the cost because Leave won by that margin.
If a second referendum was had and Leave yet again won, even with as tiny a margin as they have now, then it would be decided: The UK leaves the EU because the Leave-side has won twice in a row, proving that there are
indeed more people dedicated to that cause than to the other. On the other hand, if Remain wins by a similar margin or less, then it's proof that this issue has divided the UK to the point where some kind of alternative solution is required.
This really is a prime example of perhaps the biggest issue with democracy: What is
But leaving the EU is such a drastic choice that it hardly feels right for me to say that the UK should just go ahead with it, even if it potentially won by a fluke or because a bunch of Remain-supporters felt confident enough in victory that they didn't bother heading out in the rain to deliver their vote. This is extremely serious, and I don't think that such a tiny lead is convincing enough in the grand scheme of things to just forge ahead.
I think enough Leave-supporters have been sufficiently alarmed by, for example, the comments made by Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson immediately following the Leave victory to have second thoughts. If, by the time push comes to shove, the majority feels it's not
the right thing to do.. Then what? "Oh well, too late! You set out on a ship with no rudder and now you'll just have to see what happens."
Yeah, this is the sort of big change that's legitimately scary. I have a lot of dear friends who are UK residents and some family who are all Remain-supporters who have no idea what to do now, because this is going to fundamentally change their lives and they basically have to either get out and leave said life behind or stay on for the ride. You really can't compare this to a general election, because it's so much bigger than that.
Thus my point is that leaving all of this
to a single vote
that was almost a tie
just seems irresponsible and haphazard. I know that you might argue that Remain would get the long end of the stick by waiting, because they get to be a part of the EU for longer, but all the Leave-supporters can't just regret this and annul it if the worst case scenario turns out to be the case. I feel like the UK has to be sure
that this is what it wants, and a less than 2% win doesn't feel much like certainty to me, with Northern Ireland and Scotland ready to consider jumping ship at this point.