onevalefan.co.uk Present Past Specials About Forum
Jump to content
onevalefan.co.uk forum

Advert


Advert


Do we live in a kakistocracy?


Jacko51

Recommended Posts

I don't disagree with most of that.

There is no dispute that the leave vote won and got more votes. Incidentally, if you want to phrase it like that the remain vote was the third largest mandate in history. Going back to what is termed a "mandate", I don't think you can legitimately claim that a 52:48 result gives you carte blanche to go down an extreme and damaging path. Most of us agree that there was no overwhelming vote for No Deal (because of the different ways mooted of leaving) and I guess most would also point out that the government represents everyone in the country, not just a small minority.

Had around 650,000 people voted differently then the result would have flipped and that's why the irregular and questionable behaviour of Cummings is significant. 

For me, if we are arguing biggest mandate, then we should be looking at the margin between the two. A bigger number (and one you would expect given the growing population) is not as crucial as the gap between the two sides.  For instance, is a 50.3 v 49.7 result in the US a bigger mandate than the 90 v 10 in Slovenia? I'd say the latter. I suspect most people would.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Advert

1 hour ago, Jacko51 said:

The leave vote was 32,000 more than the 1975 remain vote yet the electorate was 6 million larger this time.  So as a percentage of the electorate it was not the largest ever mandate in terms of percentage of the electorate.

As I said it depends on your angle of vision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quantities of oranges and apples can be compared as totals, but not as suitable for marmalade. MPs can claim a mandate from an election, but not from a advisory referendum, The AV referendum was mandatory,  but we have had 3 years of dithering and perhaps 10 years of trade arguments to come, which could have been avoided with a proper vote with a threshold of 50% of the electorate or 60% of the vote. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nofinikea said:

Again we descend into argument and counter argument backed up by stats interpreted to prove or disprove and presented as fact.

In terms of actual crosses in a box it was the largest mandate.  In terms of percentage of electorate it wasn't, that is the actual fact of this stat.  No amount of word play or huffing and puffing will change it and in the end, when people get on the merry go round of repeating there argument it only serves to wind yourselves up.

Just like the country and parliament,  this forum is split with people entrenched in there own viewpoint.  As with everything in life, both arguments have merit and both are also flawed.

The middle ground is where the majority of people from either side will feel most comfortable, neither to extreme one way or the other and as such, despite the "mandate" (whatever that really means as I dont remember there being several Brexit options on the ballot and whilst leave won, there is absolutely zero indication that all those people wanted a hard line brexit nor is there proof that they didnt but history tells us centre ground is generally the right approach to most things) a deal must be struck with our neighbours at the EU.  This allows us to withdraw and thus carry out the will of the people whilst not completely negating the other half (near is as damn it) of the nations wishes also.  Now what exactly is wrong with a compromise which keeps the majority of people from both camps happy?

Now of course if you are a hard line brexiteer, you wont be happy with a compromise because you want what YOU want.  If you are a deep seated remainer the same is true of you also.  I  am afraid the extremes of an argument never have and never will win, and nor can it.

My advice, chill out.  You all know each others stance, you are not going to change each others minds so learn to accept that and stop winding yourselves up.

It was a simple choice between Remain or Leave on the ballot paper.It doesn't come any clearer than that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Fosse69 said:

Quantities of oranges and apples can be compared as totals, but not as suitable for marmalade. MPs can claim a mandate from an election, but not from a advisory referendum, The AV referendum was mandatory,  but we have had 3 years of dithering and perhaps 10 years of trade arguments to come, which could have been avoided with a proper vote with a threshold of 50% of the electorate or 60% of the vote. 

In those circumstances we wouldn't be any better or worse off than now because neither side would have won..... just countless referendum to get no answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, For Us All said:

It was a simple choice between Remain or Leave on the ballot paper.It doesn't come any clearer than that?

The same people saying there is no mandate for no deal are the same people saying that we should have a second referendum. 

There is literally one scenario that has been explicitly ruled out by the people and that is remaining. 

3 years on and they cant accept that. And therefore any attempt by them to make it look like they are conceding ground is absolutely dishonest in my opinion. 

We have comprised. We tried to get a deal but for circumstances outside of our control it is not possible. There really is only one option left now and that is a clean brexit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, geosname said:

In those circumstances we wouldn't be any better or worse off than now because neither side would have won..... just countless referendum to get no answer.

We would be better off without having to spend billions preparing for Brexit, it is likely that the speculators would be worse off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:

Paul, the link you have posted literally says: no electoral option has ever received more votes than the 17.4m leave votes in 2016. 

It is there in black and white on your own link. 

What on earth is going on, on this website? 

Regal, the article also says, "In percentage terms, it’s not the biggest mandate in history. Of those who voted, 52% of people voted to leave the EU in 2016, compared to 67% of people who voted to stay in the European Community in 1975, the 68% who voted against changing the electoral system in 2011, or the 55% who voted for the Conservative party at the 1931 general election", hope we've put that one to bed finally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jacko51 said:

Can I just point out, this thread is about whether or not our politicians are kakistocrats, not about Brexit.  Unless you see the two are interchangeable.

Sorry Jacko, it is difficult to keep on track.. In my mind it is the electoral systems that are at fault, together  with the party system, and media, that has enabled a ruling class to monopolise parliament. To call it a democracy representative of the people is ridiculous, long gone are the days in the forties and fifties when there was a broad representation of the population, with widely different experiences of upbringing, education, and real work. The disdain for experts does not help either. Whether your plea for Brexit to return to its proper thread I only hope it is heeded. Otherwise a Kakistocratic 2 thread?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Paul6754 said:

Regal, the article also says, "In percentage terms, it’s not the biggest mandate in history. Of those who voted, 52% of people voted to leave the EU in 2016, compared to 67% of people who voted to stay in the European Community in 1975, the 68% who voted against changing the electoral system in 2011, or the 55% who voted for the Conservative party at the 1931 general election", hope we've put that one to bed finally.

Fantastic. I didn't say in percentage terms though did I? So exactly who and what are you correcting? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still hoping that there are enough sensible parliamentarians who will stop this unbelievable nonsense. It's so stupidly daft that it's hard to understand that a British government would adopt it as policy.

 

 

Have I got this right?

We are proposing to do something that will severely harm our country, for which we have no sensible plan [apart from trying to minimise the casualties from our forthcoming car crash], at the same time as risking peace in N. Ireland as well as playing into the hands of the SNP, at a cost of hundreds of billions of pounds [at a time of austerity], trashing our relationship with the EU, decreasing our global influence, treating EU citizens like lepers, and then blaming it all on the EU.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Reporting Posts and other information

    Rules - This forum is moderated but the admin team don't read everything. Don't assume we'll spot rule breaking and alert us by reporting content. Logged in users can hover over the post and click the orange button. Guests can contact us here. If you don't get on with another user you can "ignore" them. Click this link, type in their username and click save. Please check with the admin team if you wish to sell/auction any items. We're happy to support good causes but check first.

    Use - This forum may not be suitable for all as it may contain words or phrases not considered appropriate for some. You are personally responsible and potentially liable for the contents of your posting and could face legal action should it contain content of a defamatory or other illegal nature. Every message posted leaves a traceable IP number. Please do not reveal any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example: phone number, address or email address). This forum is not in any way affiliated with Port Vale FC. OVF reserve the right to edit, delete, move or close any thread for any reason. If you spot an offensive post please report it to the admin team (instructions are above).

    Adverts - This site occasionally a) has adverts and sponsored features about gambling b) accepts sponsored posts from third parties. If you require help and advice on gambling read these links: Information on protecting young people | Addiction help from gambleaware.co.uk
  • Friends of OVF

×
×
  • Create New...