Laugh? I Nearly Paid My Licence Fee
Film, Media & TV2 mins ago
A Question To The Brexiters
If the UK government doesn't deliver the Brexit deal that you want, are you going to join the EDL, BNP or Britain First?
http://
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
eddie "“So 24% could not be bothered to vote and can be assumed to not care either way.” " - "either way"? so we'll have half each then, oh dear, you still lose. Even if they were all remainers they were not bothered enough to vote, so they can be ignored. Non voters can readily be dismissed as not mattering. It's their choice not to vote and it is mine to not give them an ounce of credibility.
Just to be clear, though, since we're on the topic: referenda arguably should have more stringent terms than a simple 50%+1 majority, but this one didn't. The turnout was pretty high by recent standards; the number of votes for both sides set a record for support for any single position, and the result is unambiguous. Technically it's not legally binding but that's a technicality that should be overcome quickly rather than used to block the democratic outcome.
I don't buy any complaints about the legitimacy of the result. I knew the rules that applied when I voted. I knew that I could be on the losing side. In the event, I was. As far as the referendum result goes, that should be an end to the debate.
I don't buy any complaints about the legitimacy of the result. I knew the rules that applied when I voted. I knew that I could be on the losing side. In the event, I was. As far as the referendum result goes, that should be an end to the debate.
Correction, TTT: we've only had a few referenda (and yes, all 50-50). In many other places where referenda are held, the margin of victory for breaking the status quo is usually set higher than 50%+1, and with some good reason because by definition change is trickier to implement so there needs to be far more certainty about the outcome being unaffected by, eg, protest votes. As it happens that didn't happen this time, and maybe it should have, but that's a philosophical debate about the nature of referenda in general and nothing to do with the result not going my way. Yet again you seem determined to judge me by what you think I say rather than what I've actually said. There aren't many people on AB who have protested louder than I have about how disgusting it was that UKIP got only one seat in the 2015 election on the back of 4 million-odd votes, and that's a party I really wish would disappear into the dust. Doesn't change the fact that it was a shockingly unfair result, and those who supported UKIP got no justice.
sp1814
Question Author
TTT
It wasn't me. I'm just posting on something Farage has said.
It's not my fault that Nigel is saying this.
Sounds like something AOG would do that sp ... You have asked ABers if they would join a far right party not Farage.
You claim courage in asking such a question then distance yourself from it ...
Baldric is right. Even I would be out on the streets protesting and so would Mr J2 (at over 80). I would then probably join UKIP and start being a political activist for the first time in my life. We will save our country, no matter what.
I also feel completely certain that there would be huge civil disobedience, riots etc. and possibly the collapse of Law and Order and the political system. Do not, anyone, underestimate the determination of the people who voted to leave - there is such a calm, positive feeling around here (voted 60/40 to Leave in our county) and they won't take kindly to having that dashed.
I also feel completely certain that there would be huge civil disobedience, riots etc. and possibly the collapse of Law and Order and the political system. Do not, anyone, underestimate the determination of the people who voted to leave - there is such a calm, positive feeling around here (voted 60/40 to Leave in our county) and they won't take kindly to having that dashed.
“You're using outdated stats (and outdated wrong stats, at that: the claimed figure was 36%, not 25%).”
Indeed, jim. My mistake was using the word “calculated”. “Estimated” would be more appropriate as any of the figures are only estimates. Whatever the figure there seems to be little doubt that a far smaller percentage of 18-25 year olds voted than did the rest of the electorate. I would be extremely surprised if it was as high as the Guardian figure suggests. My own very un-scientific poll would suggest a turnout among young people I know of around 20%. The 80% I know who did not vote are probably among the most vociferous in complaining that their futures have been compromised but they fail to see the irony.
However, it matters little. My point (which has already been made by others) is that it makes no more sense to add the percentage of those who didn’t vote to the remain side to get a true percentage than it does to add them to the leave side. Those who did not vote but wanted membership to continue should have got out and done so (as indeed those wanting to leave should have done). To say that “those who did not care one way or the other” should be assumed to want to remain is simply nonsensical. To use it as a reason to dismiss the legitimacy of the referendum is a non-argument.
I know, jim, that you are doing no such thing and as I think I said shortly after the vote I admire your stance. But I cannot agree with the idea that people who voted to leave did so with some sort of acceptable leaving deal in mind. The question was not "Shall we leave if we get an acceptable deal?" The government's responsibility is to ensure the UK is no longer a member of the EU. "Brexit means Brexit" is an appropriate term. It means that everything provided by the EU is no longer provided to the UK and everything the EU enforces is no longer enforced upon the UK. If negotiators can succeed in maintaining some of the advantages, all well and good. But if they cannot that should not jeopardise or delay our exit.
Indeed, jim. My mistake was using the word “calculated”. “Estimated” would be more appropriate as any of the figures are only estimates. Whatever the figure there seems to be little doubt that a far smaller percentage of 18-25 year olds voted than did the rest of the electorate. I would be extremely surprised if it was as high as the Guardian figure suggests. My own very un-scientific poll would suggest a turnout among young people I know of around 20%. The 80% I know who did not vote are probably among the most vociferous in complaining that their futures have been compromised but they fail to see the irony.
However, it matters little. My point (which has already been made by others) is that it makes no more sense to add the percentage of those who didn’t vote to the remain side to get a true percentage than it does to add them to the leave side. Those who did not vote but wanted membership to continue should have got out and done so (as indeed those wanting to leave should have done). To say that “those who did not care one way or the other” should be assumed to want to remain is simply nonsensical. To use it as a reason to dismiss the legitimacy of the referendum is a non-argument.
I know, jim, that you are doing no such thing and as I think I said shortly after the vote I admire your stance. But I cannot agree with the idea that people who voted to leave did so with some sort of acceptable leaving deal in mind. The question was not "Shall we leave if we get an acceptable deal?" The government's responsibility is to ensure the UK is no longer a member of the EU. "Brexit means Brexit" is an appropriate term. It means that everything provided by the EU is no longer provided to the UK and everything the EU enforces is no longer enforced upon the UK. If negotiators can succeed in maintaining some of the advantages, all well and good. But if they cannot that should not jeopardise or delay our exit.
I have had very few face to face conversations with people over the EU referendum. Of those only one voted out and explained the reasons why. He then expressed his utter bewilderment that the UK government has said the UK will leave, just like that - he said he expected some debate, discussion and thought to be spent among qualified people before deciding. Yes, I found this remarkable - but is he the only one with these thoughts among the 51% ?
