BuzzJack
Entertainment Discussion

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register | Help )

Latest Site News
4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> What next for the UK?, Post referendum discussion
Track this topic - Email this topic - Print this topic - Download this topic - Subscribe to this forum
Anita Hanjaab
post Sep 24 2014, 09:40 PM
Post #41
Buffy/Charmed
*******
Group: Members
Posts: 43,885
Member No.: 18,639
Joined: 18-April 13
   No Gallery Pics
 


I was against including them in the referendum for the sleazy and political reasoning behind that decision, but then against most things about the YEs campaign were sleazy and dreadful, matching Salmond's personality to a T, I'd say.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post Sep 24 2014, 09:54 PM
Post #42
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Veteran
Posts: 36,580
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


The only opinion poll I saw which showed how 16- and 17-year-olds intended to vote showed them to be firmly against independence (or freedom if you are Silas).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Qassändra
post Sep 24 2014, 09:57 PM
Post #43
DROTTNING!
********
Group: Members
Posts: 63,953
Member No.: 480
Joined: 15-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Sep 24 2014, 10:54 PM) *
The only opinion poll I saw which showed how 16- and 17-year-olds intended to vote showed them to be firmly against independence (or freedom if you are Silas).

There was the Ashcroft demographic analysis which got reported a lot which showed a 72:28 split for 16/17 year olds in favour of independence. Unfortunately, most people reporting it neglected to mention that it was based on the responses of 14 16-17 year olds.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Doctor Blind
post Sep 24 2014, 09:59 PM
Post #44
#38BBE0 otherwise known as 'sky blue'
******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 16,163
Member No.: 7,561
Joined: 27-October 08
   No Gallery Pics
 


Oops, I did not see that it was only 14!

n not equal to or greater than 30 makes it statistically meaningless of course (and me quite sad that it was even reported). Of course that doesn't change the fact that Alex Salmond most likely expected that age group would be more likely to vote yes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Qassändra
post Sep 24 2014, 10:26 PM
Post #45
DROTTNING!
********
Group: Members
Posts: 63,953
Member No.: 480
Joined: 15-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Doctor Blind @ Sep 24 2014, 10:59 PM) *
Oops, I did not see that it was only 14!

n not equal to or greater than 30 makes it statistically meaningless of course (and me quite sad that it was even reported). Of course that doesn't change the fact that Alex Salmond most likely expected that age group would be more likely to vote yes.

n ≤ 50 isn't it?

And yeah, it makes me boil. Particularly as you had those vile 'we are the 45%' lot going on about how the elderly had robbed the kids of their future etc. on the basis of one shoddy report.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Silas
post Sep 24 2014, 10:28 PM
Post #46
Queen of Soon
********
Group: Moderator
Posts: 74,015
Member No.: 3,474
Joined: 24-May 07
 


They could actually work out exactly who voted for what. I'd be really interested in seeing the actual vote breakdown between ages.

City of Glasgow Council today revealed that in all 8 Glasgow Holyrood constituencies the Yes vote won.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Anita Hanjaab
post Sep 24 2014, 10:31 PM
Post #47
Buffy/Charmed
*******
Group: Members
Posts: 43,885
Member No.: 18,639
Joined: 18-April 13
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Silas @ Sep 24 2014, 10:28 PM) *
They could actually work out exactly who voted for what. I'd be really interested in seeing the actual vote breakdown between ages.

City of Glasgow Council today revealed that in all 8 Glasgow Holyrood constituencies the Yes vote won.


Irrelevant.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Qassändra
post Sep 24 2014, 11:00 PM
Post #48
DROTTNING!
********
Group: Members
Posts: 63,953
Member No.: 480
Joined: 15-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Silas @ Sep 24 2014, 11:28 PM) *
They could actually work out exactly who voted for what. I'd be really interested in seeing the actual vote breakdown between ages.

Not quite. It is a secret ballot!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Silas
post Sep 24 2014, 11:04 PM
Post #49
Queen of Soon
********
Group: Moderator
Posts: 74,015
Member No.: 3,474
Joined: 24-May 07
 


Is it shit. Your number gets written down next to the ballot paper you're given. How else do you think they found the 10 fraudulent votes in Glasgow so easily and quickly? They looked out for specific numbers.


Would not be too difficult to work backwards from those numbers to see who voted Yes and who voted No.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Soy Adrián
post Sep 24 2014, 11:24 PM
Post #50
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
******
Group: Members
Posts: 12,908
Member No.: 10,596
Joined: 6-February 10
 


QUOTE(popchartfreak @ Sep 24 2014, 08:30 PM) *
Good to see other parties adopting Lib-dem policies laugh.gif

Well the Lib Dems have stopped doing it, so someone's got to.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Qassändra
post Sep 25 2014, 12:39 AM
Post #51
DROTTNING!
********
Group: Members
Posts: 63,953
Member No.: 480
Joined: 15-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Silas @ Sep 25 2014, 12:04 AM) *
Is it shit. Your number gets written down next to the ballot paper you're given. How else do you think they found the 10 fraudulent votes in Glasgow so easily and quickly? They looked out for specific numbers.
Would not be too difficult to work backwards from those numbers to see who voted Yes and who voted No.

Yeah, it's okay to use polling numbers to trace lost or fraudulent votes. It's the absolute HEIGHT of illegality (and electoral immorality) to try and breach the secret ballot! There's a reason we use the British Election Study for these things.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post Sep 25 2014, 09:30 AM
Post #52
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 22,697
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Kärenfanghoney @ Sep 25 2014, 01:39 AM) *
Yeah, it's okay to use polling numbers to trace lost or fraudulent votes. It's the absolute HEIGHT of illegality (and electoral immorality) to try and breach the secret ballot! There's a reason we use the British Election Study for these things.


It's also ageist. Assuming people change their voting habits due to being older or younger. The main reason for changing parties is feeling economically disadvantaged or unrepresented, and that appears to match up with the results.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post Sep 25 2014, 09:33 AM
Post #53
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 22,697
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(¿ REY CARLOS ? @ Sep 25 2014, 12:24 AM) *
Well the Lib Dems have stopped doing it, so someone's got to.


Yes, maybe they should rebrand themselves as New Libdem and adopt Tory policies. Oh, hang on, that's been done already...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Doctor Blind
post Sep 25 2014, 10:02 AM
Post #54
#38BBE0 otherwise known as 'sky blue'
******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 16,163
Member No.: 7,561
Joined: 27-October 08
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(popchartfreak @ Sep 25 2014, 10:33 AM) *
Yes, maybe they should rebrand themselves as New Libdem and adopt Tory policies. Oh, hang on, that's been done already...


Yes. It's pretty much what the Liberal Democrats have been doing for the past 4 1/2 years, and why they are polling at lows of just 7% currently.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Steve201
post Sep 25 2014, 11:39 AM
Post #55
Shakin Stevens
*******
Group: Members
Posts: 45,994
Member No.: 5,138
Joined: 29-December 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(!Khimaros! @ Sep 24 2014, 10:40 PM) *
I was against including them in the referendum for the sleazy and political reasoning behind that decision, but then against most things about the YEs campaign were sleazy and dreadful, matching Salmond's personality to a T, I'd say.



You seem to only see one side of view here.

Yes Alex Salmond wanted 16/17 year olds added to the poll (because he thought they would be more likely to vote yes) but this was a collective agreement called "The Edinburgh Agreement" where Cameron & Salmond made an agreement on the question and nature of the ref so they came to an agreement that the voting age would be lowered because cameron refused to have devo max as an option to kill the independence option stone dead if the vote was No. As we have seen he agreed to devo max a week before the poll out of sheer panic. Basically politically once again cameron played a blinder politically and showed him to be a poor politican.


This post has been edited by steve201: Sep 25 2014, 11:44 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post Sep 25 2014, 04:51 PM
Post #56
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 22,697
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Doctor Blind @ Sep 25 2014, 11:02 AM) *
Yes. It's pretty much what the Liberal Democrats have been doing for the past 4 1/2 years, and why they are polling at lows of just 7% currently.


Except that they aren't adopting Tory policies, they have been accepting some through necessity in a joint Tory government. I expect them to do the same when/if Labour don't get that full majority either, (and especially if UKIP dig into both Labour and Tory seats). Then they can get criticised for giving up policy manifestos in favour of some of the Labour manifesto. Happily, reducing the voting age to 16 won't be a sticking ground, it seems.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Doctor Blind
post Sep 25 2014, 05:08 PM
Post #57
#38BBE0 otherwise known as 'sky blue'
******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 16,163
Member No.: 7,561
Joined: 27-October 08
   No Gallery Pics
 


I expect a hung parliament in 2015, but I really don't think the Liberal Democrats will be in power again - how can they be with such low voter support?

Minority government will be favoured by Labour (less so by Tories), and I expect there is even the possibility of a small majority for Labour should UKIP decimate the Tories support.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post Sep 25 2014, 05:17 PM
Post #58
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 22,697
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


well you may be right about the Lib dem support being so low as to be irrelevant, but then again a minority government could be much worse, as they would get nothing difficult through, the only changes would be cross-party MOR ones, or else in effect even if not in government relying on LibDem policies not being a million miles away from Labour's and assuming they won't vote against crucial ones. LibDems of course, not really being a position to not stick to the manifesto once not in government to avoid any further sell-out claims.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Soy Adrián
post Sep 25 2014, 08:09 PM
Post #59
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
******
Group: Members
Posts: 12,908
Member No.: 10,596
Joined: 6-February 10
 


QUOTE(popchartfreak @ Sep 25 2014, 06:17 PM) *
well you may be right about the Lib dem support being so low as to be irrelevant, but then again a minority government could be much worse, as they would get nothing difficult through, the only changes would be cross-party MOR ones, or else in effect even if not in government relying on LibDem policies not being a million miles away from Labour's and assuming they won't vote against crucial ones. LibDems of course, not really being a position to not stick to the manifesto once not in government to avoid any further sell-out claims.

That's on the assumption that Labour would want to introduce policy too radically lefty for the Greens, the SNP or Plaid. There's quite a lot of things which the party isn't pushing now for fear of losing suburban target seats under the knowledge that even if we fall short of a majority the nationalists will vote along social democratic principles even without a full coalition.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post Sep 25 2014, 08:52 PM
Post #60
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Veteran
Posts: 36,580
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


The Lib Dems will be asked at the next election which coalition policies they would be happy to reverse. They have already indicated that they would support abolition of secret courts, the bedroom tax and elected PCCs which is an encouraging start. At least two of those three should make a deal with Labour easier to negotiate.

Of course the Tories should be asked the same questions but I doubt they will be. Therefore, they won't be asked whether they will, for example, continue the pupil premium.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post


4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 08:11 PM