Off Topic The Boris Johnson Appreciation Thread
- Thread starter Albert's Chip Shop
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
That does not necessarily work.
To use a analogy, you could ask if a majority of people wanted to live in Newcastle or go somewhere else. Let's say 60% wanted to leave Newcastle for somewhere else. Of those that wanted to leave, half wanted to go to Edinburgh and half wanted to go to London. The London group didn't want to go to Edinburgh and vice versa. In that situation, 70% of the people would rather live in Newcastle than in London and 70% would rather live in Newcastle than Edinburgh. Until a majority want to go to some definable place, the majority want to stay.
It is the same idea. Until the majority prefer some identifiable arrangement (the May deal, some new deal, no deal) to the current situation, then the majority prefer the status quo to any of the alternatives.
That being the case then it will prove impossible to find a viable solution that everyone can agree on. There is not a cat in hells chance that leave voters would agree to dilution of the leave vote. It matters not that you can vote more than one leave option as the end outcome will be impacted in some way as certain leavers will choose only one option.
Unless I'm misunderstanding which wouldn't be unusual.
I think you may be misunderstanding. To use the analogy again, it is the same as asking:
1. Would you prefer to go to Edinburgh or stay in Newcastle ?
2. Would you prefer to go to London or stay in Newcastle ?
There are some people who will want to go anywhere to get out of Newcastle. The would vote for either leave option. There are others who would prefer one destination but not the other. Newcastle is their second favourite of the 3 options.
Let's say of the 30% who would like to go to London, 21% hate Newcastle enough to go to Edinburgh even though they don't really fancy it. In that situation, 51% would support leaving to go to Edinburgh even though some of them would have preferred to go to London. In that situation, we go to Edinburgh.
I'd prefer to use the actual situation as the analogy doesn't really serve any purpose.
Say the three options are:
Leave without a deal (16%)
Leave with a deal (35%)
Remain (49%)
That is the percentage it draws. What happens in that scenario. I take it in that situation under your terms we leave with whatever deal is available? If that is the case that is what I have been saying anyway and it would be the best of an unpalatable idea. If in that situation we remain, then its wrong because all its done is dilute the leave vote.
Th
Each choice adds up to 100%, not the 2 choices combined. If the no deal vote is 16%, the remain options will be 84%. If the deal vote is 35%, the remain vote on that options will be 65%.
Leave voters get to vote for their favourite and their next favourite options. That is how we avoid splitting their vote.
The figures can'the work out like that.
Each choice adds up to 100%, not the 2 choices combined. If the no deal vote is 16%, the remain options will be 84%. If the deal vote is 35%, the remain vote on that options will be 65%.
Leave voters get to vote for their favourite and their next favourite options. That is how we avoid splitting their vote.
So why aren’t we asking the Remain voters to put a second choice? Or am I missing something? As in if not remain then “deal” that can be got or “no deal”?
I don’t agree with a second referendum in any event not until the first result has been actioned but I think this highlights the problem in determining what the Public are to be asked if there were a second referendum.
Everyone gets to vote on each of the two options.
And I understand why you think a second referendum shouldn't be necessary. Perhaps it shouldn't. We are in an endless holding pattern at the moment, though, and it looks like the only way of making progress.
Or a general election.
You state I'm speaking nonsense but you're doing a dreadful job explaining yourself. As my first response stated, neither side would accept such a referendum.
You haven't explained at all how it does not dilute the vote. Unless we as Pouch says add up the leavers, determine they are still a majority and remove remain as an option.
A simpler way is for us to have a general election and see what side has a majority. Of course if leave parties don't obstruct each other a conservative majority is almost guaranteed. Which is why you are all so opposed to it.
And so we are clear, two leave parties were already a majority in the house and had the mandate of the people, the Tories and DUP. Now we must get a third mandate.
In the previous election even Labour ran on a Brexit platform advocating for a deal.
So when we receive a third mandate, Will you pay the slightest bit attention?
In the previous election even Labour ran on a Brexit platform advocating for a deal.
So when we receive a third mandate, Will you pay the slightest bit attention?
It's sad you can't fathom it, but that's what happened so I suppose it doesn't matter.
Well the only way to end it is to revoke Article 50 - and that's exactly what should happen. If almost everyone agrees that the last 4 years have been a debacle, then surely revocation is the only sensible solution. If you stick your finger in a flame do you think: a) I'll keep it there until the flame goes out b) I'll keep it there a few seconds longer since but crikey it hurts c) withdraw it immediately.
This is what the minority would love to see happen.
I was in that minority.
But I believe that the will of the people should be honoured.
I've accepted the result.. others who try to still frustrate things should too.
In terms of your flame question... I don't believe there is a flame as it's just project fear whipping up a **** storm again.. it's a trick of the light.
There seems to be some confusion as to how Single Transferable Vote works. As most of this confusion is on Pouchy’s part I assume he’s just wumming but for the sake of clarity:
STV means that you rank your preferences in order.
If no first choice gets a clear majority, the least popular option is removed, and those who voted for it as their first choice now have their second choice counted to see if that pushes one of the remaining options over 50%.
By analogy:
Alice, Bob, Chris, Dave and Ed are all in the pub. They try and decide whether to;
1) Stay in the pub all night
2) Go to Vodka Revs which is **** but they know they’ll get in
3) Go to a decent club but risk getting stuck in the rain if there’s a queue.
At first Alice and Bob want to stay in the pub, Chris wants to go to Revs, and Dave and Ed want to go clubbing.
First round:
Pub: A,B
Revs: C
Club: D,E
Nobody has a clear majority so they turn to Chris and say: “look mate, everyone hates revs - we’re obviously not going there. Do you want to go out or not.”
Chris would rather go out than stay in the pub.
Second round of voting:
Pub: A,B
Club: C,D,E
Club has a clear majority so they go out. The “going out” group were not disadvantaged by there being multiple places they could go.
STV means that you rank your preferences in order.
If no first choice gets a clear majority, the least popular option is removed, and those who voted for it as their first choice now have their second choice counted to see if that pushes one of the remaining options over 50%.
By analogy:
Alice, Bob, Chris, Dave and Ed are all in the pub. They try and decide whether to;
1) Stay in the pub all night
2) Go to Vodka Revs which is **** but they know they’ll get in
3) Go to a decent club but risk getting stuck in the rain if there’s a queue.
At first Alice and Bob want to stay in the pub, Chris wants to go to Revs, and Dave and Ed want to go clubbing.
First round:
Pub: A,B
Revs: C
Club: D,E
Nobody has a clear majority so they turn to Chris and say: “look mate, everyone hates revs - we’re obviously not going there. Do you want to go out or not.”
Chris would rather go out than stay in the pub.
Second round of voting:
Pub: A,B
Club: C,D,E
Club has a clear majority so they go out. The “going out” group were not disadvantaged by there being multiple places they could go.
Well it's definitely a minority who believe revocation should happen, but it's equally false to claim it's the will of the people to brexit. A small majority of the 72% who voted chose a brexit of completely uncertain terms 3.5 years ago. A tonne of facts, cock-ups, fallouts, divisions, money squandering and exposure of lies and deceits have occured and been exposed since then.
Will I pay attention ?
I am not holding anything up. Boris Johnson and the ERG lot opposed Mrs May's Brexit proposal. Everyone but Boris Johnson and the ERG lot oppose no deal. I would doubt that a general election would change either of those facts though I suppose it is possible.
Also, my understanding is that the opposition parties do intend to call an election as soon as the option for which there is currently no mandate, a no deal exit, has been delayed to allow a someone to obtain a mandate for something.