> Decided by something like 1 million people as of right now.

I'm not sure I get this part. Are you just counting the difference in votes? How about the millions that voted for Brexit?

This was decided by %50+ of the populace. If you didn't agree to the terms, why did you come to the voting?

> This was decided by %50+ of the populace.

Not true. The electorate was 46,501,241 and the leave vote was 17,410,742, so about 37%. You're forgetting to take into account those who didn't vote.

I didn't agree to the terms, I didn't vote for Cameron and I still voted (remain). Why wouldn't I?

> You're forgetting to take into account those who didn't vote.

Those who didn't vote but could of effectively decided "I don't care enough to participate. You decide for me".

If they were too lazy go out in the rain, mark a piece of paper with a pencil or use a postal vote then they can't really complain after the fact.

I'm sorry if I sound a bit annoyed, this is not directed specifically at you, I just don't like the result.

The issue was important and the voting procedure for those eligible to vote was not onerous.

Yeah, I agree with you. It's particularly frustrating for me, as I'm in Edinburgh where 74% voted remain.

It's the second highest turnout in history. You can't assume everyone who didn't vote agrees with you, that's dumb.

I didn't. I also didn't assume they voted against me.

I completely agree. 2% of the population deciding something of this magnitude is ridiculous.

In some countries the 2% votes to join different EU treaties and no one complained that 2% was to little to decided something that important. In most cases the people of the EU member countries was never even asked in they wanted to join the different treaties.

If the UK had voted to leave, with only a 2% margin, would you have complained that it was to little to determine something of this magnitude and called it ridiculous?

Regardless of the outcome, the EU needs to re-evaluate how it operates and if it needs to change drastically. I'm a fan of the idea of an EU, but in it's current form it's an almost unmitigated disaster and a role model for people wanting to circumvent democracy.

That's unfair, it wasn't 2% but 52% of the voting population.

I am curious why this was down voted? Slightly cynical, perhaps, but not completely disbelievable?

Very believable to me. Sinn Fein has predictably already called for a vote in Northern Ireland. Calls are growing for a second referendum in Scotland. There are even those wanting independence for London...

Scottish independence is likely - the question is just how firm the polls need to be before the SNP go there again.

The Northern Ireland potentially rejoining The Irish Republic is a bit surprising to me. Does anyone know if there's actually any chance of that happening?

The chance is very low given the amount of unionists, but that won't stop this being used for what its worth to force re-assessments of agreements etc. Expect the Northern Ireland government to be given a slew of new devolved powers etc. over the next few years as concessions to prevent growing calls for it.

What are the odds of violence popping up again?

We've recently had the threat level for that type of violence raised.

Depends on the number of unionists who are more pro-EU than pro-UK. It's not as likely as Scotland leaving (which is very likely), but I suppose it could happen.

It's not cynical at all. Look at the media reports coming out now from Scotland and Northern Ireland. Leaders are already talking it up and it's hard to deny the strength of their vote to remain within the EU.