EPTIsn't that the closest one can get to respecting the referendum while not driving the lorry through the crowd?
This is not sticking it to the conservatives or owning the Brexiteers. Maybe that's a reason why it's so unpopular.
UK Politics Mega-thread - Page 560
| Forum Index > General Forum |
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
Isn't that the closest one can get to respecting the referendum while not driving the lorry through the crowd? This is not sticking it to the conservatives or owning the Brexiteers. Maybe that's a reason why it's so unpopular. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11912 Posts
If you have three options on the ballot, two of them brexit, one not, then not brexit is going to win because the brexit people will be split. Also, people will claim to be confused, because anything but FPTP is apparently really hard to understand for them. If you just have Brexit and no Brexit, it is not clear what kind of Brexit the people who voted Brexit actually want. Is it a hard Brexit, a realistic deal Brexit, or the fairytale Brexit that was promised at the first referendum. Additionally, there is the problem with constantly having referenda until you get the result you want. The UK system is not actually built for referenda, and it is not clear what authority and democratic legitimisation a referendum has compared to an election. What if the results of an election and the results of a referendum are different, which takes precedence? The first referendum was clearly a mistake, i don't know if a second one will actually solve this. But then, i don't know how to solve this problem anyways. The UK is in gridlock because they cannot get a majority for any of the options that exist, and for inexplicable reasons voted for a Brexit. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22447 Posts
On September 26 2019 16:48 Artisreal wrote: Because people don't want to hear "we'll do something? maybe?" when its, as said, probably the biggest politician question post war. Brexiters want to hear they will leave, Remainers want to hear they will stay. By saying neither your not somewhat placating both, your alienating both.Why is it regarded to not be a position if they managed to finally set their sights on supporting all options and putting it to the people to vote for one of them? Isn't that the closest one can get to respecting the referendum while not driving the lorry through the crowd? This is not sticking it to the conservatives or owning the Brexiteers. Maybe that's a reason why it's so unpopular. On September 26 2019 17:45 Simberto wrote:If you just have Brexit and no Brexit, it is not clear what kind of Brexit the people who voted Brexit actually want. Is it a hard Brexit, a realistic deal Brexit, or the fairytale Brexit that was promised at the first referendum. According to their party conference which finished yesterday the idea is to have a new referendum with the choice between Remain and 'a credible leave deal' which is hogwash as no credible leave deal has been presented anywhere and one may well not exist if no solution can be found for the Irish border. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18348 Posts
On September 26 2019 17:45 Simberto wrote: One problem with that is how to formulate such a referendum. They really like their FPTP systems for inexplicable reasons, so they are not going to go for a simple solution like a system where you can rank in which order you would prefer the options to happen. If you have three options on the ballot, two of them brexit, one not, then not brexit is going to win because the brexit people will be split. Also, people will claim to be confused, because anything but FPTP is apparently really hard to understand for them. If you just have Brexit and no Brexit, it is not clear what kind of Brexit the people who voted Brexit actually want. Is it a hard Brexit, a realistic deal Brexit, or the fairytale Brexit that was promised at the first referendum. Additionally, there is the problem with constantly having referenda until you get the result you want. The UK system is not actually built for referenda, and it is not clear what authority and democratic legitimisation a referendum has compared to an election. What if the results of an election and the results of a referendum are different, which takes precedence? The first referendum was clearly a mistake, i don't know if a second one will actually solve this. But then, i don't know how to solve this problem anyways. The UK is in gridlock because they cannot get a majority for any of the options that exist, and for inexplicable reasons voted for a Brexit. You can't have a referendum with multiple things on the ballot that require a true majority unless you use a runoff or some other more advanced voting mechanism. This is a pretty well studied topic, tho. Runoff is a pretty good system and doesn't necessarily lead to remain winning. Imagine the population is split almost evenly: 36% want remain 34% want hard Brexit 30% want May's deal There is no majority. So we cut the least popular choice and look at these voters' second choice: 70% of these had hard Brexit as a second choice, and 30% remain: 34% 1st + 21% 2nd = 55% hard Brexit 36% 1st + 9% 2nd = 45% remain Hard Brexit wins the election. Now whether these are realistic numbers? Who knows. I was just giving an example to demonstrate that just because the Brexit options are split doesn't mean remain wins by default. If all the Brexit voters prefer all the Brexit options over remain, then one of those options will probably win (unless remainers are now an absolute majority from the get go). | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11912 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18348 Posts
| ||
|
Razyda
1036 Posts
On September 26 2019 17:45 Simberto wrote: One problem with that is how to formulate such a referendum. They really like their FPTP systems for inexplicable reason. [...} If you have three options on the ballot, two of them brexit, one not, then not brexit is going to win because the brexit people will be split. Also, people will claim to be confused, because anything but FPTP is apparently really hard to understand for them. Not really inexplicable - FPTP pretty much guarantee that either of the 2 main parties will remain at power, changing it opens door for others. Therefore it is in neither Labour, or Conservatives interests to change it. I think you severely misjudging situation. I usually go through both camps press and tone and number of comments are pretty telling. Most of leavers comments are "just leave now" It kind of become like religion for many, you wont be able to argue with them. Effectively my guess is that in any multiple choices referendum No Deal Brexit will win by quite large margin as this is core of Leave voters. I wold say 40% no deal, 30-25% remain, whatever else split irrelevantly. All that being said, I am still pretty convinced that 10 years after leaving you wont be able to find single Leave voter with BJ claiming that he always supported remain, but EU kicked UK out. | ||
|
Sbrubbles
Brazil5776 Posts
On September 26 2019 20:48 Razyda wrote: Not really inexplicable - FPTP pretty much guarantee that either of the 2 main parties will remain at power, changing it opens door for others. Therefore it is in neither Labour, or Conservatives interests to change it. I think you severely misjudging situation. I usually go through both camps press and tone and number of comments are pretty telling. Most of leavers comments are "just leave now" It kind of become like religion for many, you wont be able to argue with them. Effectively my guess is that in any multiple choices referendum No Deal Brexit will win by quite large margin as this is core of Leave voters. I wold say 40% no deal, 30-25% remain, whatever else split irrelevantly. All that being said, I am still pretty convinced that 10 years after leaving you wont be able to find single Leave voter with BJ claiming that he always supported remain, but EU kicked UK out. I think by "they" he meant the british people, not the british politicians. Multiple choice referendums can be done without it being a simple plurality vote, though there are different ways of going about it. Multiple rounds sometimes solves the problem, but not always because you'll often see two options with a dedicated voter base but large overall rejection go through and the centrist option (which might have a majority when pitted against both others) stay behind on the first round (brazil's last two elections, case in point). I suppose in the UK's case it might generate a second round that's "hard brexit" vs "remain", once "mystical soft brexit" (whatever it comes out to be) gets eliminated in the first round. Who knows? I'm a fan of condorcet voting methods, but there's always a chance it might lead to the hilarity of "hard brexit" > "remain" > "soft brexit" > "hard brexit" or something like that. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22447 Posts
| ||
|
Sbrubbles
Brazil5776 Posts
On September 26 2019 21:43 Gorsameth wrote: great talk about multiple choice referendums but no one has proposed holding one. True, and? Are you opposed to discussing things on a hypothetical level? If anything, this discussion serves to make clear the folly of the first referendum as a mechanism of social choice, and the folly that it would be to have another one done in the exact same fashion. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22447 Posts
On September 26 2019 21:59 Sbrubbles wrote: I'm not, and even if I was it wouldn't matter. Just pointing out that its not an option that is on the table incase some thought it was.True, and? Are you opposed to discussing things on a hypothetical level? If anything, this discussion serves to make clear the folly of the first referendum as a mechanism of social choice, and the folly that it would be to have another one done in the exact same fashion. | ||
|
Sbrubbles
Brazil5776 Posts
On September 26 2019 22:41 Gorsameth wrote: I'm not, and even if I was it wouldn't matter. Just pointing out that its not an option that is on the table incase some thought it was. Has Corbyn given detais what his referendum would or wouldn't look like? Mind you, I do think a multiple choice referendum is unlikely, and one with fancy things like a second round even less so, but I also haven't seen it ruled out | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22447 Posts
On September 27 2019 03:00 Sbrubbles wrote: At the party conference which ended yesterday morning they talked about a choice between Remain and a 'credible leave deal'.Has Corbyn given detais what his referendum would or wouldn't look like? Mind you, I do think a multiple choice referendum is unlikely, and one with fancy things like a second round even less so, but I also haven't seen it ruled out What constitutes a credible leave deal is unknown as far as I know and I would argue that one doesn't really exist (unless you consider giving N-Ireland to Ireland to avoid a border between the 2 as credible) | ||
|
Sbrubbles
Brazil5776 Posts
On September 27 2019 03:05 Gorsameth wrote: At the party conference which ended yesterday morning they talked about a choice between Remain and a 'credible leave deal'. What constitutes a credible leave deal is unknown as far as I know and I would argue that one doesn't really exist (unless you consider giving N-Ireland to Ireland to avoid a border between the 2 as credible) Thanks, I hadn't seen that pop up. | ||
|
Longshank
1648 Posts
| ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4427 Posts
On September 10 2019 18:46 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Personally i’m guessing the UK will leave with a deal on Oct 31 but anything could happen really. Telegraph reports ministers reaching out to Hungary in hope of vetoing further delay.Still thinking it will be a choice between no deal and whatever deal Boris comes up with, I’ll stick to my prediction of leave w/deal Oct 31. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/10/04/boris-johnson-pins-hopes-hungary-veto-brexit-delay/?WT.mc_id=tmgliveapp_androidshare_AtMhnS56P1lz However, on Friday night, EU sources said senior ministers had reached out to the Hungarian government for assurances it would veto any request for a delay. An Article 50 extension must be agreed by all 27 other EU leaders. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22447 Posts
| ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9223 Posts
On October 05 2019 22:35 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Telegraph reports ministers reaching out to Hungary in hope of vetoing further delay.Still thinking it will be a choice between no deal and whatever deal Boris comes up with, I’ll stick to my prediction of leave w/deal Oct 31. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/10/04/boris-johnson-pins-hopes-hungary-veto-brexit-delay/?WT.mc_id=tmgliveapp_androidshare_AtMhnS56P1lz We've had these discussions already before the previous extensions. I don't know what they're smoking at the Telegraph but they should at least know how the council works by now. If a further extension will be denied at some point it will be unanimous, only voted on once a compromise has been reached. There is no blind vote. But even if it did work that way, why would Hungary or any country give anything at all in exchange for promises made by a government with no majority and an entirely uncertain future? There's too many holes in the veto speculation to be worth entertaining. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
Genuinely so. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22447 Posts
On October 13 2019 02:49 Artisreal wrote: The same as before? Brexit is bad short term but worth it long term. Man would I love bardtown's perspective on the current brexit outlook. Genuinely so. Gj Boris for following the will of the people. | ||
| ||
