[xkemp]

It still aptly demonstrate the ability of the UK to shoot itself in the foot. Nobody believes that this necessary reflects badly on any individual British citizen. Unfortunately, in a democracy it only takes the barest of majorities to make bad decisions.

But to cheer you up: it's still better than in the US, where it's entirely possible to screw the country with slightly less than a majority (or even plurality).

[mc32]

In ‘92 Clinton won with barely 43% of the vote. I don’t hear people saying it didn’t reflect the mood of the country: https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_United_States_presi...

[randomsearch]

> where it's entirely possible to screw the country with slightly less than a majority (or even plurality)

I'm afraid that also applies to the UK's antiquated electoral system. Conservatives got 43.6% of the vote share, and they are screwing the country (if you think that Brexit, and particularly the hard Brexit they are heading for, counts).

[CalvinSlime]

I'd rather not be part of an organisation that feels the need to set an example to scare other members from the idea leaving. Yea the UK will suffer but partly because the EU is being vindictive.

[ben_w]

> set an example to scare other members

Ok, that attitude is fine. If I thought the EU was doing that, I would‘ve moved to Canada.

Trouble if, the only thing the EU has the power to do is to remove U.K. access to EU membership benefits. That’s not “vindictive”, it’s what the UK voted for after being repeatedly told this would happen.

[QuesnayJr]

The EU has gone out of its way to not be vindictive, even though this would be popular with voters. The only thing they haven't done is completely abandon the self-interest of its members and its principles.

[celticninja]

It hasn't been vindictive at all, it is protecting the interests of its member states, just as it did when the UK was a member. The UK left the EU, not the other way round.