Jump to content
kalifire

Brexit at Glasto?

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, ghostdancer1 said:

only ballots which voted Leave to Q1 get counted when counting the result for Q2.

Made sense up until that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The petition has stomped past the 2 million mark now. Remember looking yesterday when it was around 20,000. Amazing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, H.M.V said:

The petition has stomped past the 2 million mark now. Remember looking yesterday when it was around 20,000. Amazing. 

It has, although the number has been stuck for the last hour. Either they're batching the results or it's broken again :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bombfrog said:

It has, although the number has been stuck for the last hour. Either they're batching the results or it's broken again :(

I forgot to click my email confirmation like a numpty so my vote has just been added. Wonder if others are the same. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, H.M.V said:

I forgot to click my email confirmation like a numpty so my vote has just been added. Wonder if others are the same. 

The final count will be hundreds of thousands behind because when the site broke there was a massive delay in sending out the emails and many people won't have received them or click them. I hope that votes are still being counted, despite the total not increasing.

What would be awesome would be if 2 million people turned up to the march on Tuesday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really wish we could do the march but Tuesday and London. We just can't get down. Wonder what number the petition will peak at. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Keithy said:

That wouldn't work. Let's say the result to Q1 is the same as before : 48-52

Then if we hypothesise that 52% split is

25% - May's Deal

27% - No Deal

...then we leave the EU with a deal that 73% of the electorate didn't vote for. That would be madness.

Plus the 48% remainers are ignored on the leave option. I might have voted remain but if leave wins then I'd want the softest possible exit.

Yup it’d be two questions: leave or remain, then deal or no deal. Put more succinctly it’d be a three way vote between Remain, deal, or no deal, with preferential voting. But that would probably be too complicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Keithy said:

But that's what I have a problem with (in the sense of fairness). The leave option is one that's been universally accepted as awful. (Playing devils advocate), if I were a leave voter, I'd immediately be saying that is not a fair vote, plus also arguing why is remain on the ballot? The referendum decided the leave/remain option so surely the peoples vote should be a vote on the deal ie No Deal or May's Deal?

Problem is , all leave options are universally awful. There are no good leave options. So it’s always going to look unfair.

There is no majority for any Leave option because leave voters all wanted different things. It’s like you and nine mates trying to decide what to do on Saturday. 4 of you want to stay at home and watch Back To The Future. The other six all want to go out. But two of them want to go out to a gig, two to a club, and two to a comedy night. They would all rather watch Back To The Future if they can’t go where they want. So sure, there’s a majority for “going out” in general terms but actually Back To The Future is twice as popular as any other option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Yup it’d be two questions: leave or remain, then deal or no deal.

image.jpg

Hello.....  Is that the Juncker?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DeanoL said:

Yup it’d be two questions: leave or remain, then deal or no deal. Put more succinctly it’d be a three way vote between Remain, deal, or no deal, with preferential voting. But that would probably be too complicated.

I don't think the Electoral Commission would approve a 3 way question with 2 answers being leave or preferential voting. It wouldn't be a fair, clear and unbalanced question as the leave vote is split between two options. It took them a while to agree the wording of the initial 'simple' question of the first one - https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/referendums-to-keep/electoral-commission-recommends-change-to-eu-referendum-question

If the first question is leave or remain then thats rerunning the referendum. This isn't a peoples vote on the deal, it's a 2nd referendum and people need to be honest about that and stop this Peoples Vote pseudo bollocks and call it as it is. A 2nd referendum. Which I don't think there's a political majority or public will for as that question has already been answered. If there was, they'd be calling it a 2nd  referendum but they're not.

But if it was rerun and let's say remain won, then what? A best of 3 referendum? It just creates even more questions and delay.

Any question to a public vote has to be clear, unbiased and to the point. The moment you add a second question based around 'if you did vote leave / if we do leave', then what leave deal do you want... you're adding in unconscious bias to the first question to favour leave. 

Unfortunately I don't see how you can have remain as an option unless you explicitly state it's a 2nd referendum. It's either that or a vote on the exit deal - May's deal or no deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DeanoL said:

Problem is , all leave options are universally awful. There are no good leave options. So it’s always going to look unfair.

There is no majority for any Leave option because leave voters all wanted different things. It’s like you and nine mates trying to decide what to do on Saturday. 4 of you want to stay at home and watch Back To The Future. The other six all want to go out. But two of them want to go out to a gig, two to a club, and two to a comedy night. They would all rather watch Back To The Future if they can’t go where they want. So sure, there’s a majority for “going out” in general terms but actually Back To The Future is twice as popular as any other option.

I agree but that's our remainer bias. A leaver could argue the opposite. 

I agree there's no consensus on what 'leave' actually is but that comes back to my point.  What is the question the Peoples Vote wants to answer? A 2nd referendum rerun or clarifying what 'leave' is?

In your example the referendum result would be to go out as 'out' is the majority. You'd then have to have a second separate question to decide what 'out' is.

To extend your thinking, you could argue there needs to be subsequent 'in' options. The 6 outers might argue that if we stay in then they want to watch something else. You gave multiple out options so why not multiple in options? That would be fair and balanced. But if all you've got is Back to the Future on VHS then you only have one option...thus the question is no longer fair and balanced.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mr.Tease said:

Because a second ref doesn’t have a majority in parliament straight up, the only way it has a chance is that compromise motion whereby mps would accept Mays deal IF it’s subject to ratification via a second ref. 

Best shot of winning a second ref is if the options are Mays deal or remain. Having no deal as an option would be fairer and more democratic but tough shit, I’ve had enough of indulging the no deal brexiteers!

i think the above is a safer way of revoking article 50 rather than doing it straight up as you would slightly lessen the backlash.

Stupid question maybe but how many answers can a referendum have? 

Her deal

No deal 

Revoke article 50

???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, stu_kent said:

Stupid question maybe but how many answers can a referendum have? 

Her deal

No deal 

Revoke article 50

???

The guidance is outlined in section 1.6 here - https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/192093/GfK-Report-EU-Referendum-Question-Testing-2015-WEB.pdf

Essentially, unambiguous, to the point, easy to understand and not leading a voter to one answer. 

I think multiple answers would fail the easy to understand and unambiguous test. The intelligent, educated eFesters community might not have an issue but ultimately the question has to be fair to the sort of person who finds putting their pants on the correct way round a complex and challenging task.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Keithy said:

The guidance is outlined in section 1.6 here - https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/192093/GfK-Report-EU-Referendum-Question-Testing-2015-WEB.pdf

Essentially, unambiguous, to the point, easy to understand and not leading a voter to one answer. 

I think multiple answers would fail the easy to understand and unambiguous test. The intelligent, educated eFesters community might not have an issue but ultimately the question has to be fair to the sort of person who finds putting their pants on the correct way round a complex and challenging task.

It’s seriously not possible to choose from 3?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My problem with this online petition is, if remain had won in the original referendum and 2 years later Brexiteers did an online petition demanding we leave, would any remainder honestly insist the online petition over ruled the referendum? Would you honestly buy that? Would the online petition carry any weight with you? I'm a remainder myself, but Im confused now as to whether the strategy is now a second referendum or just revoking article 50 outright? With today's EU decision, the urgency/rationale to revoke is now gone. 

Still think the bes strategy is to negotiate a Norway style deal then put that to a confirmatory vote. 

Edited by Mr.Tease

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, stu_kent said:

It’s seriously not possible to choose from 3?

Not in an unbiased and clear way. If 2 options are leave options, then that's bias towards leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

My problem with this online petition is, if remain had won in the original referendum and 2 years later Brexiteers did an online petition demanding we leave, would any remainder honestly insist the online petition over ruled the referendum? Would you honestly buy that? Would the online petition carry any weight with you? I'm a remainder myself, but Im confused now as to whether the strategy is now a second referendum or just revoking article 50 outright? With today's EU decision, the urgency/rationale to revoke is now gone. 

Still think the bes strategy is to negotiate a Norway style deal then put that to a confirmatory vote. 

Yep. If remain had won and Farage et al were banging on about a new vote, Remainers would be telling them to sling their hook, you lost, etc. We can't have it both ways. 

Plus if I were a leaver, I'd be furious about the leave options. I think even the most ardent remainer would agree that there are better leave options out there if May dropped her red lines.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but after the referendum, there should have been a massive polling exercise or even a consus undertaken on what people wanted from leave. That statistical data would have given weight and authority to any deal struck.

But we are where we are. I can't see May's deal going through so I think it's No Deal or a big delay to allow a cross party team under a new PM to undertake new negotiations with Norway as the starting point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Keithy said:

Yes, that's all very true. But another vote has to be fair and balanced and signed off by the electoral commission. That's just simply the law. We can discuss the calamity of Brexit so far but the reality is all that is irrelevant when it comes to framing the question in a clear, legal, impartial matter. The question has to be balanced fairly for both sides. 

Is the People's Vote a pseudo 2nd referendum with remain as an option or is the People's Vote a vote on the leave deal? 

If it's the former, then call it as it is - a 2nd referendum. Which then gets into the sticky issue of the result if remain wins. Best of 3?

If it's the latter, then remain is not on the ballot and we're a straight shoot out out between a very shit deal and no deal. Which is effectively asking which foot do you want to shoot yourself in, left or right?

 

How do you feel if question 1 is do you accept May's deal? Then if no question 2 is no deal vs revoke and remain?

That isn't rerunning the first referendum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Scott129 said:

I think we may be agreeing. My original point was to say its wrong to say labour have constantly been going between left and centre and only getting elected when centre is in charge.

that part is exceedingly true, unless you can tell me the left of centre Labour leaders who've got to be PM?

While Atlee's programme - a programme born out of war - might (but only might) be called left of centre, Atlee very definitely wasn't. Read up about him.

Remember, there wasn't even a Labour party worth talking about when the biggest social welfare programme was started (state pensions), so the fact of social welfare cannot define left-of-centre.

Nationalisation might define left of centre, but nationalisation as an overriding idea didn't maintain public support.

 

11 hours ago, Scott129 said:

Labours history is between social democracy and democratic socialism (one left and one more left).

and being elected and not.

 

11 hours ago, Scott129 said:

Blair shifted labour (rightly or wrongly) to s place it had never been before. 

not really true.  Society had shifted, and Blair re-aligned Labour to take account of that (but was started by John Smith, don't forget. It can't all be put on Blair having his own evil vision).

For example: millions of Labour voters had just bought their first homes off the govt. A Labour party which stood on the idea of taking it off them again would have got no-where. Labour *HAD* to recognise that society was in a different place,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Keithy said:

Not in an unbiased and clear way. If 2 options are leave options, then that's bias towards leave.

Surely it is a bias against leave, having two leave options would split the leave vote and much more likely enable the remain option to win? Of course the reverse is true if there were two remain options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Keithy said:

Re: Peoples Vote.

What are the options? It can only be 2 options

not true. A single transferable vote could be used to offer up more than two options.

I'm quite comfortable with all options being offered, as it avoids claims of a stitch up.

 

8 hours ago, ghostdancer1 said:

Q1: Remain or Leave

Q2: If Leave:   a - May's Deal

                         b - No Deal

 

only ballots which voted Leave to Q1 get counted when counting the result for Q2.

Doing it that way would be a dreadful idea. It repeats the mistake of the first vote. You might as well have a ballot on "do you want to cut your leg off, yes or no?"

People need to cast their vote in favour of a plan of action, and not be offered the chance to vote against anything without saying what they want instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Atlee very definitely wasn't. Read up about him.

Atlee was a self declared socialist. He believed in incrementalism yes, but he certainly wasn't a centrist. Look at the policies he introduced: widescale nationsalisation, national health service, huge council house building. And the politicians to the right of Attle's cabinet (Morrison, Bevin etc) were still very much to thr left of where labour were under Blair

You are right to suggest labour potentially had to move to the right, as i've said the whole global politics had shifted that way. But Blair did so because that was his ideology also, look at the way he dogmatically pursued  the abolition of clause 4. This isn't a criticism of the merits of Blair, that's a different argument, but he never should have been in the labour party because his politics are not in keeping with its traditions. 

Theres a huge difference between centre left social democracy and neoliberal ideology with more redistribution and "meritocracy"

Even if Corbyn won an election, Blair and peoples with his ideology would oppose Corbyn because they don't agree with his politics. And Corbyn's manifesto wasn't anymore radical than Attlee's

Edited by Scott129

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

Atlee was a self declared socialist.

in the sense that he was in the broad-church Labour Party that championed more-socialist ideals than other parties.

'Real' socialists of the time were commies. Back then communism wasn't tainted as it is now - it's how come it was picking up even plenty of toffs (eg, the spys) as supporters.

 

2 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

He believed in incrementalism yes, but he certainly wasn't a centrist. Look at the policies he introduced: widescale nationsalisation, national health service, huge council house building. 

a lot of elements of the national health service already existed (with the first parts introduced by the tories decades before). That labour govt simply brought it together as a whole.

A massive house-building programme had also happened after ww1, with no labour govt. The necessity after ww2 was greater due to bombing.

Those two ideas above have held pretty strong since - as well as before. Support for nationalisation didn't hold, and programmes of nationalisation had stopped being Labour's dream waaaaay before Blair.

 

2 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

But Blair did so because that was his ideology also, look at the way he dogmatically pursued  the abolition of clause 4. This isn't a criticism of the merits of Blair, that's a different argument, but he never should have been in the labour party because his politics are not in keeping with its traditions. 

he dogmatically pursued the abolution of clause 4 because it had long ceased to be something even Labour members supported.

There hadn't been any ideological nationalisations since the 1940s. There'd been some 'economic rescue' nationalisations (car industry, etc) but they'd been a disaster which no one wanted to repeat. Blair was simply trying to make clear that he wasn't going to repeat them.

Even today in Corbyn's Labour what Blair abolished isn't supported by anyone but a tiny minority. Nationalisation of natural monopolies is something very different to what clause 4 said.

 

2 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

Theres a huge difference between centre left social democracy and neoliberal ideology with more redistribution and "meritocracy"

neoliberal is really just a bollocks propaganda word that's used to avoid a real discussion. Value never goes out of fashion, unless you're going to tell me you don't care about the size of your wage?

I reckon you'll be waiting a long time for people to vote against meritocracy. Care to show me the enthusiastic Labour supporters who don't want their words to have merit?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Keithy said:

Yep. If remain had won and Farage et al were banging on about a new vote, Remainers would be telling them to sling their hook, you lost, etc. We can't have it both ways. 

Plus if I were a leaver, I'd be furious about the leave options. I think even the most ardent remainer would agree that there are better leave options out there if May dropped her red lines.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but after the referendum, there should have been a massive polling exercise or even a consus undertaken on what people wanted from leave. That statistical data would have given weight and authority to any deal struck.

But we are where we are. I can't see May's deal going through so I think it's No Deal or a big delay to allow a cross party team under a new PM to undertake new negotiations with Norway as the starting point.

I used to think there should have been a follow up referendum with the different leave options on, but then I remembered we had a general election and each party set out their type of Brexit- Labours was a soft Norway style one, can't remember what the Tories proposed.

Honestly, I get Remainers being in denial and wanting to pretend that revoking it is fine, or that somehow the first referendum didn't count, or that you could run a second rigged referendum (I think I proposed such a thing yesterday!)-somedays I feel that way too or convince myself of that too. But if I'm being really honest with myself, a Norway style brexit is the only option that feels legitimate, in the sense that its been mandated via the general election, it respects the outcome of the referendum, and it's actually the most realistic of the options in terms of getting a parliamentary majority.

Like I said in that other post, you can check if you're fooling yourself regarding revoking or running a second referendum by checking if you'd buy what you're selling if the situations were reversed. I sure am looking forward to the SNP having another referendum on independence, then  if they win just using the exact same arguments they've used vs Brexit to justify not implementing it and seeing how that goes down with them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   1 member



×
×
  • Create New...