Still on what one? Loz posted inaccurate figures regarding the voting wishes of the electorate, and I corrected him. Isn't that what a debate is about?
No, those who didn't vote, didn't care either way, they were happy to go with the majority. so they were happy to leave.
So, using your figures, approximately 25% of the population want to leave the EU. That means less than 25% wanted to remain as it was fewer than those who wanted to leave. Doesn’t that mean that more than half didn’t express an opinion at all: including new-Borns and the recently deceased. What other interpretation are you suggesting for the inconvenience that we don’t know what preference is held by over half of the population, instead of counting the actual votes cast as normal, or are you just obfuscating?
This decision affects 100% of the population, but as you rightly say "we don’t know what preference is held by over half of the population". I don't know what the answer to achieving a 50%+ of the population vote is, or whether that is even possible. Maybe there should have been more rules around the voting of this (and all) constitutional change, such as a minimum voter turnout figure (the 2016 vote was 72% which is the highest ever, iirc!) and/or a Qualified Majority result. There's some interesting discussion here about how turnout affects voting outcomes and the implications: https://www.theguardian.com/comment...um-alan-duncan-supermajority-requirement-vote
You would have thought that after all this time of democracy in the UK we would have got the hang of the rules by now? Maybe not....
Au contraire; In Britain, qualified majorities have been required only in the devolution referendums in Scotland and Wales in 1979. In these referendums, as well as a majority yes vote, a 40% majority of the electorate was needed for parliament to implement the devolution legislation. In Wales, devolution was rejected by a four-to-one majority, and so the threshold was irrelevant. But in Scotland, on a 64% turnout, 33% of the electorate voted for devolution while 31% voted against. The government could not proceed with devolution even though a majority had voted for it. Many Scots argued that the rules had been rigged against them, since there had been no threshold requirement in the 1975 referendum on whether Britain should remain in the European Community. The referendum strengthened the Scottish sense of grievance which continues to poison relations with England.
Are you OK? I mentioned the electorate and you start kicking off about "the population"? Who knows what "the population" wanted? You? In any event, the *majority* of voters voted for Brexit and all eligible voters who *chose* not to vote were content for whichever side had the majority to decide the issue. My original statement is entirely accurate and correct, whilst you have brown stuff oozing out of your ears. Poopyhead. I think what? Please show me where I have expressed any belief in the current government being capable of anything other than non-delivery of Brexit, you foolish wankpuffin. : o ) So, whatcha think? Content to Insult ratio OK? Too low? Too high? Thoughts?
Its the only way. Cancel it. Unless 100% of people agree to Leave, we must Remain. The fact that substantially less than 100% want to Remain is clearly beside the point. If ony there were a way to break the deadlock, through voting or something.
You said: "It was the electorate's idea to leave the EU." This is incorrect. I explained why. I know that facts aren't Leaver's strong points, but please try and keep up. HTH.
The electorate voted to leave. Spin and fantasy and adolescent pedantry notwithstanding. I know that unwelcome facts are not a Remainer's strong point but please try to wake up. ** please note, in your post, the comma you placed before the conjunction "but" is inappropriate, as per your gaffer's recent instruction. Please remember in future.
The system is flawed for such monumental changes in the constitution (IMHO) but that all happened 3 years ago and it's a bit late now The question of another Referendum is a difficult one, because I don't think there is an easy way to have another vote without asking another Yes/No question to ensure that the vote isn't split. The idea of having a "No Deal / Extend Deadline to get a Deal / No Brexit" vote is ridiculous as it doesn't respect the original referendum vote in 2016, and would also split the original Leave vote. Even a "No Deal / Extend Deadline" doesn't really move us on anywhere I don't think. It's all a bit tiresome really.
37.5% of the electorate voted Leave; it's not difficult. The overall outcome was to Leave based upon turnout. HTH.
