Not the Brexit Arms

[bearbehind]

Since BrexitArmsLandlady says she isn't starting anymore threads here's a place to discuss Brexit developments for those that still want to.

It never ceases to amaze me what a shambles this is.

The cabinet still can't even agree what we want, let alone what we're going to get.

Motheroffourdragons And only 24% of the population voted to remain, so I’m not sure what your argument is on this. The vote has gone, it should have never gone to a vote even I agree on that

Motheroffourdragons I said the majority who VOTED

Not keen on Justine Greenings 2nd referendum idea. The way she has phrased it is that there should be 3 options! Hard Brexit, soft Brexit or stay in the EU. How would that work other than splitting the leave vote and giving remain a majority. Could only be a remainer who thought of that one!!!

Not keen on Justine Greenings 2nd referendum idea. The way she has phrased it is that there should be 3 options! Hard Brexit, soft Brexit or stay in the EU. How would that work other than splitting the leave vote and giving remain a majority. Could only be a remainer who thought of that one!!!

I read that as an admission that still no one knows what "Brexit" means. From someone who voted for it ?

you said a majority of those entitled to vote voted leave, it is not true.

It is true.

The electorate (ie registered voters - the only people who are 'entitled to cast a vote'):
46 501 241 (100%)

Leave: 17 410 742 (37.4%)
Remain: 16 141 241 (34.7%)
Did not vote: 12 923 225 (27.8%)
Rejected ballots: 26 033 (0.06%)

No matter how desperately you try to spin it, it is entirely true that a majority of those entitled to vote, voted to Leave.

Sorry - in my book a majority is >50%, as it is in most people's.

But not in the UK electoral system.

As I have explained several times on several threads, in a FPTP electoral system a majority of the popular vote does not automatically mean victory.

Several times since WW2 the party that had the majority of the popular vote lost the elections. See also the US system where Hillary won the popular vote but lost the election.

Within democracy the majority is not always in control as it can lead to what is referred to a 'the tyranny of the majority'.

The one thing the whole Brexit debacle has demonstrated is the ignorance many, many people have in relation to democratic systems and the checks and balances necessary for them to function safely.

Greening is suggesting an alternative vote where you have two preferences it would not be a simple majority.

But not in the UK electoral system.

But the normal UK electoral system is to have GE's no more than 5 years apart and the rules have been clarified over a good many years. If for example two candidates tie, there is a procedure to follow to resolve the issue.

Referendums are one off's each time, so we can't say what the system is. The AV vote would have been binding because the legislation said so, the EU referendum legislation didn't make any such provision.

But the normal UK electoral system is to have GE's no more than 5 years apart and the rules have been clarified over a good many years. If for example two candidates tie, there is a procedure to follow to resolve the issue.

It is possible for an MP to be returned with just one vote, if all other candidates (that's if there were any other candidates) received none.

It's also possible for an MP to be returned with just 2 votes, if all other 1,000 candidates received a single vote each. (I am assuming there is no limit on the number of candidates that may stand).

Either way you dice it, FPTP looks a bit shit right now. It may have served us well in the past. But so did feudalism, restricted suffrage, and no passports.

spouting nonsense does not help your case.

Exactly.
So why are you persisting in your assertion that Leave did not have the largest vote share?

I get it - you don't want Brexit; you'd opt to stop it in any which way you could; you don't want to accept the result etc etc.
But to continue to argue that the result was in any way a defeat for Leave is a nonsense.

"So why are you persisting in your assertion that Leave did not have the largest vote share?"

I think because you stated that the majority of the electorate voted leave at first, and they didn't.

If we are going to play semantics.

I get it - you don't want Brexit; you'd opt to stop it in any which way you could; you don't want to accept the result etc etc.

Why does someone have to accept a result that doesn't mean anything, and yet which has already done untold damage to the UK as a whole ?

Leavers would have much more moral authority if they were able to demonstrate that what we are getting is what they wanted. But they can't, so they haven't.

Some Leavers may have wanted what is happening now. But it's certainly not 100% of that 51%. If for no other reason that claims that were made by the Leave campaign have not been honoured (e.g. leaving the Single Market). There will be a non-trivial proportion of people who voted leave specifically because they did not want to leave the Single Market.

*I think because you stated that the majority of the electorate voted leave at first, and they didn't.

If we are going to play semantics.*

If we're playing the semantics game, then this is incorrect.

@Rosstac , maybe you misspoke. Do you genuinely believe that the people who didn't vote weren't allowed to vote?
Surely they didn't vote for all sorts of reasons that I don't pretend to know.
Of the people who did vote (which is not the same as the people who are allowed to vote), Leave got the majority.
It didn't get the majority of the electorate because a sizeable number didn't vote. Who knows why?
And I'm not interested in bullshit conspiracies about Russia swinging the referendum so stop putting words I neither think nor say in my mouth.

This is a massive decision being made on what was an advisory referendum that was constructed in an ill thought through out way, with insufficient checks and balances.

Surely no one would agree this is the correct basis to make such an important decision?

The point is Rosstac, that Brexit is going to effect everyone in the population adversely , some a lot more than others, does the government only have a duty to that minority who expressed the opinion that the UK should leave the UK or does it have a duty to all the UK citizens ?

does the government only have a duty to that minority who expressed the opinion that the UK should leave the UK or does it have a duty to all the UK citizens ?

The government only has a duty to the people who voted it in. And even then that's moot. If anyone disagrees with me, then they need to answer the question Oh yeah ? And what you gonna do about it ?

Why does someone have to accept a result that doesn't mean anything, and yet which has already done untold damage to the UK as a whole ?

Nobody has to, and I've never suggested otherwise.

48 million people living in the UK in 2016 did not vote for Brexit.

This includes some who chose not to vote, some who were too young.

But this also includes over 3 million EU citizens who were living in the UK, mostly working and paying taxes, some who had lived here for twenty years or more, contributing to this country in so many ways. These people were not allowed to vote, although it obviously affects them just as much as those who were allowed to vote.

"If we're playing the semantics game, then this is incorrect."

No it is correct, you said the majority of the electorate voted to leave, in fact they didn't, the majority of those that voted, voted to leave, there is a difference.

Try harder.

*"If we're playing the semantics game, then this is incorrect."

No it is correct, you said the majority of the electorate voted to leave, in fact they didn't, the majority of those that voted, voted to leave, there is a difference.

Try harder.*

🙄

No, you said

"I think because you stated that the majority of the electorate voted leave at first, and they didn't."

I did not in fact say anything 'first' - I joined in an already ongoing discussion.

So, your statement was incorrect.

Try harder.