European Referendum

[JBR]

When an entire 'country' votes for one party and gets another, you have a big problem with the system.

On this issue the Scot's are right to whine, voting against independence shouldn't mean taking it up the a**e instead.

What do you suggest? The SNP running the whole country?

I think the Scots should have another referendum. If they just voted overwhelmingly for SNP, who we all know would like independence, surely they'd vote for Scottish independence too.

I think Scottish independence would suit both the Scots and the English.

 

[AronSearle]

What do you suggest? The SNP running the whole country?

A federalist system.

 

[JBR]

What do you suggest? The SNP running the whole country?

A federalist system.

A semi-independent Scotland?

So they'd have independence in many respects but still receive financial support from England? Even then, I don't think they'd be happy.

 

[EFLImpudence]

When an entire 'country' votes for one party and gets another, you have a big problem with the system.

No, we don't.
The Scots have exactly what they voted for:
Being part of a larger country and 56 Scottish Nationalist MPs.

Plus, of course, the now unfair devolved parliament enabling them to choose some things without taking into account the majority of the population.

On this issue the Scot's are right to whine, voting against independence shouldn't mean taking it up the a**e instead.

No, they are not and it does not.


The trouble with democracy is the result is not always of your choosing.

 

[JBR]

The trouble with democracy is the result is not always of your choosing.

That's right. The people have chosen...

at least, 37% of them got what they wanted!

Edit: That's 37% of the 66% who voted.

 

[Norcon]

The UK pays out approx a net £55m PER DAY to EU and we get back so much red tape and regulation that our industries, fisheries and agriculture have been decimated.

And the jocks want rid of England?

 

[EFLImpudence]

Edit: That's 37% of the 66% who voted.

Ah, but you are looking at it from the UKIP point of view.

I don't think it would have affected Scotland as there were only two runners in the referendum and the SNP had around 50% (of the votes) in the general election.
(So, did they only get 50% of 66%?)

 

[AronSearle]

[So they'd have independence in many respects but still receive financial support from England? Even then, I don't think they'd be happy.

That is not the federalist system numpty.

That they get financial support is a quirk of our current system.

The trouble with democracy is the result is not always of your choosing.

Because there is only 1 form of democracy right?

Ah no, there are several voting systems, and then several versions of governments.

First past the post and a non federalist system is the one that causes the largest *you get what you are given* results.

 

[Davidel]

There will be a simple in out referendum, and the 'outs' will lose.

Never underestimate fear, fear will win out, its so much easier to convince an electorate to maintain the status quo than it is to get them to take a leap of fail into something new.

Expect the rhetoric about job losses, major corporations moving head offices, immediate trade deficit etc. It will start early and be the constant message drowning out even the sensible debate points.

Not convinced? Just look at how the pro union campaign was run to see how fear was the primary weapon in the Scottish referendum.

 

[pred]

I've not read all the post but you may find this interesting

Change.org reform our voting system to be fair and representative

 

[mark vincent]

I disagree that UKIP is a 'dead duck'. Let's not forget that, despite gaining only one seat in parliament, it is now the country's 'third party' (having taken over from the Limp Dems) by support.

I suspect that the present in-fighting may be being exaggerated by the media, some of which have a distinct left-wing bias and all of which love a good story and are not beyond gilding the lily.

Then, of course, we all know there have been 'plants' appearing to support UKIP. I believe that the 'main parties' still fear UKIP and feel that they could benefit from stirring things up a little.

Then there have been the frequent accusations of Nigel Farage doing a U-turn re. his party leadership (not that other politicians ever do U-turns, of course). He was asked to reconsider by the vast majority of his supporters and donors. What was he suppose to do?

They still have my vote when the next opportunity arises.

If it wasn't for the rise of UKIP would Camoron be offering us a referendum at all, it was only a few years ago that he was ruling out a referendum, until we actually have a legitimate referendum there is still a place for UKIP.

 

[mark vincent]

Another point is that i have read that up to 1 million migrants may be allowed under EU law to vote in any referendum on the UK's membership of the EU, if this is the case can any referendum be considered fair.

 

[JBR]

Edit: That's 37% of the 66% who voted.

Ah, but you are looking at it from the UKIP point of view.

I don't think it would have affected Scotland as there were only two runners in the referendum and the SNP had around 50% (of the votes) in the general election.
(So, did they only get 50% of 66%?)

Who's talking about Scotland?
The 37% of 66% referred to the number who voted Conservative.

Please try to keep up.

 

[JBR]

[So they'd have independence in many respects but still receive financial support from England? Even then, I don't think they'd be happy.

That is not the federalist system numpty.

That they get financial support is a quirk of our current system.

OK, numpty (name-calling's fun, isn't it? ), could you please define the 'federalist system'?

I was under the misapprehension that the Scots want independence except for financial support from England. If I was wrong, could you please explain the correct situation, please?

 

[JBR]

There will be a simple in out referendum, and the 'outs' will lose.

I suspect you may well be right.
If that's what the majority of people want, good luck to them.

After all, we live in a democracy (sort of!), don't we?

At my time of life I don't think remaining in the EU will be of too much detriment, and I don't have any children to worry about.
Those who do may have cause to worry, though, but it they're happy with the current situation who am I to quibble?

It would be interesting, though, to come back in, say, a hundred years and see what historians are saying about current events. I suspect they'll refer to us as 'lemmings'.