EU Referendum Discussion, Thursday 23rd June |
Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum |
14th August 2017, 08:14 AM
Post
#481
|
|
Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,092 User: 3,474 |
A second referendum in an environment where the press are legally obligated to print the truth and misleading and manipulating lies are punished by a proper regulator would be interesting. As would the BBC actually calling out the leave sides bullshit instead of believing that impartiality means permitting half truths and outright lies to go unchallenged.
Would be a game changer to see Farage strapped to a polygraph the entire campaign. |
|
|
14th August 2017, 08:14 AM
Post
#482
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364 |
Not to be pedantic Vidcapper but in terms of UK population, the referendum was won by 1.93%, so judging by your estimate it *could* have been "right-wing Hitler lovers" that swung the referendum. Ah, but you're assuming that if that they hadn't voted for Leave, they would have voted for Remain - a very unsafe assumption given their opinions on Foreigners! |
|
|
14th August 2017, 08:43 AM
Post
#483
|
|
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
Joined: 6 February 2010
Posts: 12,908 User: 10,596 |
"Swinging" the referendum isn't the same as being a swing voter. If there was enough of them to fundamentally change the outcome, it doesn't matter that they were never going to vote any other way. It matters that they exist.
|
|
|
14th August 2017, 01:30 PM
Post
#484
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364 |
"Swinging" the referendum isn't the same as being a swing voter. If there was enough of them to fundamentally change the outcome, it doesn't matter that they were never going to vote any other way. It matters that they exist. Ah, but the referendum was won by 3.86%, not 1.93% - so the loss of a hypothetical 2% extreme-right votes would still have Leave leading by 1.86% since they wouldn't have switch to Remain, as you yourself acknowleged. |
|
|
14th August 2017, 01:50 PM
Post
#485
|
|
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
Joined: 6 February 2010
Posts: 12,908 User: 10,596 |
Ah, but the referendum was won by 3.86%, not 1.93% - so the loss of a hypothetical 2% extreme-right votes would still have Leave leading by 1.86% since they wouldn't have switch to Remain, as you yourself acknowleged. That's if you assume that those views are only held by around 2% of the voting population. |
|
|
14th August 2017, 03:13 PM
Post
#486
|
|
Howdy, disco citizens
Joined: 16 January 2010
Posts: 12,775 User: 10,455 |
In other EU related news, a former Daily Mail hack, James Chapman, has been trying to build up momentum for a new political party called "Democrats", which from what I can gather is a Macron-inspired centrist party which is avowedly pro-EU, which hopes to pick up support both from Remain-leaning Tories, as well as from Labour members unhappy about Corbyn's gung-ho attitude towards a hard Brexit. They're due to launch next month, and despite them not technically existing as a political party yet, they've had some "success", so to speak, with one betting firm giving them 200-1 odds of getting the most seats at the next general election (for comparison's sake, Ukip is currently as 250-1).
I will be surprised if this takes off beyond the initial momentum for several reasons. The main one being that an avowedly pro-EU party, the Lib Dems, barely made any gains in June when they ran on that platform. Secondly, the FPTP system would keep them from gaining any real seats, unless they were able to gain a few defections from current MPs (and if they did, the two that have been mentioned as possible turncoats, Heidi Allen & Anna Soubry, would go down like a lead balloon among quite a few people). And let's not forget what happened to the SDP. The other issue is that I'm not sure whether the name would get past the Electoral commission, as they may view the name "Democrats" as too generic, and possibly too similar to current UK parties, so I imagine a change of name may be in order before next month. Of course, I could be completely wrong, and Prime Minister Chapman could be elected in 2022, keeping the UK in the EU, and returning the Elgin Marbles to Greece (which is apparently one of their policy items). |
|
|
14th August 2017, 04:46 PM
Post
#487
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364 |
|
|
|
14th August 2017, 05:42 PM
Post
#488
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,856 User: 17,376 |
re: a second referendum, there would be no point having one until people know what they firmly have in the way of a concrete Ex-EU deal on the table. At that point there would be no bullshit, it would be there in black & white, warts and all (including how much it is or isnt hurting/going to hurt the economy).
A second centre-party would only split the centre vote and the pro-EU vote - they would have to have the momentum (cough) to appear instantly electable for anyone to abandon the Tory/Labour axis as they are both so extreme compared to previous recent-ish incarnations no-one would risk letting the other side in by not voting for the party likely to keep the other one out. |
|
|
14th August 2017, 08:48 PM
Post
#489
|
|
#38BBE0 otherwise known as 'sky blue'
Joined: 27 October 2008
Posts: 16,173 User: 7,561 |
In other EU related news, a former Daily Mail hack, James Chapman, has been trying to build up momentum for a new political party called "Democrats", which from what I can gather is a Macron-inspired centrist party which is avowedly pro-EU, which hopes to pick up support both from Remain-leaning Tories, as well as from Labour members unhappy about Corbyn's gung-ho attitude towards a hard Brexit. They're due to launch next month, and despite them not technically existing as a political party yet, they've had some "success", so to speak, with one betting firm giving them 200-1 odds of getting the most seats at the next general election (for comparison's sake, Ukip is currently as 250-1). I will be surprised if this takes off beyond the initial momentum for several reasons. The main one being that an avowedly pro-EU party, the Lib Dems, barely made any gains in June when they ran on that platform. Secondly, the FPTP system would keep them from gaining any real seats, unless they were able to gain a few defections from current MPs (and if they did, the two that have been mentioned as possible turncoats, Heidi Allen & Anna Soubry, would go down like a lead balloon among quite a few people). And let's not forget what happened to the SDP. The other issue is that I'm not sure whether the name would get past the Electoral commission, as they may view the name "Democrats" as too generic, and possibly too similar to current UK parties, so I imagine a change of name may be in order before next month. They'd get more votes by simply rebranding the Liberal Democrats as the following: |
|
|
15th August 2017, 05:25 AM
Post
#490
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364 |
re: a second referendum, there would be no point having one until people know what they firmly have in the way of a concrete Ex-EU deal on the table. At that point there would be no bullshit, it would be there in black & white, warts and all (including how much it is or isnt hurting/going to hurt the economy). But a vote on the deal would be rather different from a simple in/out referendum. If the question was 'Accept/Reject the deal?', that still leaves open as what a rejection would mean - stay in, or get out without a deal? I can't see any wording with a 'default Remain' option getting past the Leavers in the HoC. QUOTE A second centre-party would only split the centre vote and the pro-EU vote - they would have to have the momentum (cough) to appear instantly electable for anyone to abandon the Tory/Labour axis as they are both so extreme compared to previous recent-ish incarnations no-one would risk letting the other side in by not voting for the party likely to keep the other one out. A new centrist party along the lines suggested would be a total non-starter - the LD's already occupy that ground, and the last GE shows there's barely room for one party there, let alone two! |
|
|
15th August 2017, 06:52 AM
Post
#491
|
|
Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,092 User: 3,474 |
There's numerically more remainers than leavers in the HoC so default remain wording would be a breeze to get past. However it wouldn't happen because of May
|
|
|
15th August 2017, 08:51 AM
Post
#492
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364 |
There's numerically more remainers than leavers in the HoC so default remain wording would be a breeze to get past. However it wouldn't happen because of May There was a similar Remain majority in the HOC for the Article 50 vote, yet that passed by 498-114. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/l...u-politics-live The point you sidestep is that MP's are still very mindful of the number of Leavers around, so any attempt to scupper Brexit will go down very badly with such voters! This post has been edited by vidcapper: 15th August 2017, 08:52 AM |
|
|
15th August 2017, 12:10 PM
Post
#493
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,856 User: 17,376 |
But a vote on the deal would be rather different from a simple in/out referendum. If the question was 'Accept/Reject the deal?', that still leaves open as what a rejection would mean - stay in, or get out without a deal? I can't see any wording with a 'default Remain' option getting past the Leavers in the HoC. A new centrist party along the lines suggested would be a total non-starter - the LD's already occupy that ground, and the last GE shows there's barely room for one party there, let alone two! 1. Why would there be only 2 options? Surely it would be "stay in the EU" "leave the EU without a deal" "accept the deal and leave the EU" or "stay in the EU until a better deal is constructed". Life is complex, but I think we could cope with getting our tiny brains round the concept of 4 options rather than the blank slate in/out which caused the current situation - a divided nation. 2. Yes, that's what I said. |
|
|
15th August 2017, 01:12 PM
Post
#494
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364 |
1. Why would there be only 2 options? Surely it would be "stay in the EU" "leave the EU without a deal" "accept the deal and leave the EU" or "stay in the EU until a better deal is constructed". Life is complex, but I think we could cope with getting our tiny brains round the concept of 4 options rather than the blank slate in/out which caused the current situation - a divided nation. 2. Yes, that's what I said. But the trouble with 3 options is that none are likely to reach 50%, and that means none with have a decisive mandate. |
|
|
15th August 2017, 03:36 PM
Post
#495
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,678 User: 3,272 |
I suspect the Electoral Commission would reject the idea of effectively having s many as four options.
|
|
|
15th August 2017, 06:18 PM
Post
#496
|
|
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
Joined: 6 February 2010
Posts: 12,908 User: 10,596 |
I've no reason to doubt that, since that's what extreme-right parties tend to get in general elections. I would wager on there being a small but not insignificant share of Tory voters (and UKIP ones, although that's becoming less relevant as their vote share shrinks) with similarly extreme views. |
|
|
15th August 2017, 10:22 PM
Post
#497
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,678 User: 3,272 |
We've finally got a hint of the sort of regulation Leavers want to scrap. David Davis has described as "mad" the decision, on health and safety grounds, not to subject people working on Big Ben to the sound of its chimes every 15 minutes. Maybe he would like to volunteer to subject himself to that noise every 15 minutes for the next four years.
Maybe he could start slowly and build up to the full four times an hour. To begin with, he should have the sound blasted out next to him whenever he is interviewed on radio and television. At least it would mean we wouldn't have to listen to his lies and obfuscation any more. I would be prepared to make an exception. I would quite like to hear what he thinks the residents of Grenfell Tower's attitude to health and safety regulations might be. |
|
|
16th August 2017, 06:51 AM
Post
#498
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364 |
I would wager on there being a small but not insignificant share of Tory voters (and UKIP ones, although that's becoming less relevant as their vote share shrinks) with similarly extreme views. Are you suggesting they would instead vote for the extreme-right under a more proportional voting system? |
|
|
16th August 2017, 07:01 AM
Post
#499
|
|
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
Joined: 6 February 2010
Posts: 12,908 User: 10,596 |
|
|
|
16th August 2017, 08:20 AM
Post
#500
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364 |
|
|
|
Time is now: 27th April 2024, 02:34 PM |
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 BuzzJack.com
About | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service