You don't need to be rude can you not just answer without capitals letters

 

 

I keep telling him that. Maybe we should club together and buy him a new keyboard. :D

51.9% I think was the actual figure from one of the biggest mandates in British electoral history (73% or nearly 34m people well above an average GE turnout). The votes per age group doesnt count just because they are younger that's not how it works. Also it was a UK wide referendum so the national split is irrelevant as well.

 

 

He won't listen. The Remoaners never do. He's like a broken record. :D

 

I'd have been fine about us remaining if Remain had won by the same margin exactly.

Edited September 19, 20195 yr by Common Sense

The referendum was a moment in time just like all referendum and elections are. A discussion about age groups and results changing because of this is utterly pointless imho.

 

And again it was 51.9% voted leave stop rounding the figures downward to suit yourself. Also it was 72% mandate not 73%.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu_referendum/results

Edited September 19, 20195 yr by Steve201

The referendum was a moment in time just like all referendum and elections are. A discussion about age groups and results changing because of this is utterly pointless imho.

 

And again it was 51.9% voted leave stop rounding the figures downward to suit yourself. Also it was 72% mandate not 73%.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu_referendum/results

The massive difference between age groups, though, makes the case for a threshold (had the referendum been binding) even stronger. It means that it is even easier to put the result down to an accident of timing. That is no basis on which to press ahead with such a massive change.

I do disagree with the comments against Laura. The same people in an uproar (meaning those on Twitter) are the same who are annoyed when a Tory party member goes viral and it’s not mentioned that they’re a Tory. It’s all hypocrisy.

This whole story is being used, once again, to deflect attention from the real story - the state of the NHS. As ever, Kuenssberg is playing a willing part in this.

 

First, the man in question was speaking primarily as a concerned father, not a Labour activist. If the PM wants to spend his time electioneering (rather than preparing the Queen's Speech - which is why he said he needed a five-week prorogation of parliament - or negotiating with the EU), this is what he should expect.

 

Second, he blustered in his usual way and said that there was no press present. He said this in front of a television crew, presumably one arranged by Downing Street. Surely even his most blinkered supporters have to concede that he wasn't being entirely truthful.

OTOH, the fact that there was such a massive difference between age groups makes acting on such a small majority seem even more reckless. It was obvious on the night of the referendum that the Leave majority would have disappeared by the time we actually left if nobody changed their mind.

 

Maybe - but who's to say they wouldn't have changed their minds again later? That's *why* it's not a good idea to hold referenda too often - which result do you take as 'definitive? :unsure:

 

The massive difference between age groups, though, makes the case for a threshold (had the referendum been binding) even stronger. It means that it is even easier to put the result down to an accident of timing. That is no basis on which to press ahead with such a massive change.

 

At least we actually *asked* this time, rather than having it presented as a fait accompli...

 

That raises an interesting thought though - say the 1975 referendum had rejected our membership of the (then) EEC - would we have had as much trouble extracting ourselves as we've had this time?

Edited September 19, 20195 yr by vidcapper

Our would any future referendum on PR ever be enacted. Maybe we would just have to wait until a majority Liberal government to enact changes like this. So basically it would never happen, there's always more important issues at the time.

Maybe - but who's to say they wouldn't have changed their minds again later? That's *why* it's not a good idea to hold referenda too often - which result do you take as 'definitive? :unsure:

At least we actually *asked* this time, rather than having it presented as a fait accompli...

 

That raises an interesting thought though - say the 1975 referendum had rejected our membership of the (then) EEC - would we have had as much trouble extracting ourselves as we've had this time?

Of course we wouldn't, First, we had only been a member for 2 1/2 years. Second, there were only eight other members. There was also no Good Friday Agreement to complicate matters. On the last point, I would prefer not to go back to those days.

 

On your point about people changing their minds, that is another reason why going full-steam ahead after such a small majority is such a stupid idea.

Our would any future referendum on PR ever be enacted. Maybe we would just have to wait until a majority Liberal government to enact changes like this. So basically it would never happen, there's always more important issues at the time.

The AV referendum (which, of course, was not about PR) was binding. Any referendum on actual PR could also be binding if parliament legislates for it to be so.

In some ways, such a system is like an electoral college, except that they produce questionable results too, like Trump winning, while trailing in the popular vote...

 

Let's face it - people almost only complain about electoral systems when the person/party/choice they support has lost narrowly... :rolleyes:

 

And yet you always go on about Trump "winning".

 

Quick history lesson: each country here was once independent, with NI part of an independent Ireland. It's a little bit different x It is also only in relation to referenda, i.e major constitutional change. I the US major change needs ratification of 2/3s of the senate and changes to the voting system requires approbation by 2/3s of thr STATES.

 

Once again, I see what you were doing here, but you weren't intelligent enough to pull it off :(

 

The referendum was a moment in time just like all referendum and elections are. A discussion about age groups and results changing because of this is utterly pointless imho.

 

And again it was 51.9% voted leave stop rounding the figures downward to suit yourself. Also it was 72% mandate not 73%.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu_referendum/results

 

It was a non binding opinion poll with 51%. Mwaa. Sorry. Bring 66%, which is a fair bit higher even than a rounded up 52% :rofl: and three nations. Thanks. Otherwise, trying to force us out when it has 20% youth support, ie. utterly RIDICULOUS when the % is so low, and with 2 of 4 countries is anti democratic af.

 

Alsooo, leave promised a Norway model. They lied. Revoke. The end. They lied about the NHS and said they wouldn't have "won" without it. Revoke. The end.

 

See comment above - talking about age group votes is irrelevant in all this.

It was a non binding opinion poll with 51%. Mwaa. Sorry. Bring 66%, which is a fair bit higher even than a rounded up 52% :rofl: and three nations. Thanks. Otherwise, trying to force us out when it has 20% youth support, ie. utterly RIDICULOUS when the % is so low, and with 2 of 4 countries is anti democratic af.

 

Alsooo, leave promised a Norway model. They lied. Revoke. The end. They lied about the NHS and said they wouldn't have "won" without it. Revoke. The end.

 

It's absurd to demand the result be ignored on the basis the result '*might* have been different if something in the campaign had been done in a different way'. That's mere speculation. :rolleyes:

 

If we're playing that game, then one could argue that Leave would have had a larger winning margin if Jo Cox had not been tragically murdered...

Edited September 19, 20195 yr by vidcapper

It's absurd to demand the result be ignored on the basis the result '*might* have been different if something in the campaign had been done in a different way'. That's mere speculation. :rolleyes:

 

If we're playing that game, then one could argue that Leave would have had a larger winning margin if Jo Cox had not been tragically murdered...

 

Leave admitted it? They said the lie won it xD They also cheated with data and overspending. If they didn't work, they wouldn't have done it.

 

R.e second point, the referendum should have been cancelled the second that attack happened. Farage bemoaned the effect it could have on the polls rather than um THE HUMAN TRAGEDY OF IT ALL!!!

 

51%. 2 nations. Just not enough :( Want it to be enacted? Ok. Make it binding with safeguards needed for a binding vote. The end.

 

Also let me repeat AGAIN, cloth ears x

 

leave promised a Norway model. They lied. Revoke. The end. They lied about the NHS and said they wouldn't have "won" without it. Revoke. The end.

 

Counter that. No, you can't? You'll sidestep it like the vile Tories do? Riiight.

Leave admitted it? They said the lie won it xD They also cheated with data and overspending. If they didn't work, they wouldn't have done it.

 

R.e second point, the referendum should have been cancelled the second that attack happened. Farage bemoaned the effect it could have on the polls rather than um THE HUMAN TRAGEDY OF IT ALL!!!

 

51%. 2 nations. Just not enough :( Want it to be enacted? Ok. Make it binding with safeguards needed for a binding vote. The end.

 

Also let me repeat AGAIN, cloth ears x

 

leave promised a Norway model. They lied. Revoke. The end. They lied about the NHS and said they wouldn't have "won" without it. Revoke. The end.

 

Counter that. No, you can't? You'll sidestep it like the vile Tories do? Riiight.

 

Yawn.

So you can't. Lol.

 

Is this the Norway model promised? Where are the 350 million PER WEEK for the nhs Brexshit bribe? Oh. Didn't exist. Null and void result then.

I almost feel at this point like I could write code for the sequence of arguments in this thread.

The hardest bit will be coding the random answer from vidcapper that's not related to the question. The text will be easy, but randomness codes are always hard!

I almost feel at this point like I could write code for the sequence of arguments in this thread.

 

:lol:

 

Absolutely true though. Although I admit that I play relatively big part in the back and forth on here.

Edited September 19, 20195 yr by mald487

The hardest bit will be coding the random answer from vidcapper that's not related to the question. The text will be easy, but randomness codes are always hard!

 

It's the one part of your answer that can be potentially challenged no matter its relevance to the original point. If there isn't one, no reply. If there is, completely new dialogue tree.

 

further reading: never play defense.