Second vote?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
It does, unfortunately split the leave voters.

Following your logic we should now have a vote on

1 leave on the terms

2 leave on wto.

Lets be honest, you mean as a remainer you want a three way option to split the leave voters.

Leave without a deal is not an option anyway, .

I guess some leave voters want a 2 way split between the deal or leave without a deal, but see above; no deal is not a real life option.

I havent failed to understand anything.

Who said preferential voting was an option?

Either I am not making myself clear, or some are failing to comprehend the preferential voting system.

Firstly, nobody said that any system is preferred, but there are obvious problems with the simple binary choice.
Secondly, No Deal is an obvious preference for some.
Thirdly I was suggesting that only voters two choices need to be indicated because the unselected option would obviously be their third and least preferable option.

Now to take the example of preferential voting further to illustrate its advantages.

Let us use the previous voting intentions of 4 for Remain, 3 for Deal and 3 for No Deal.
In the usual method the least popular option is eliminated and the second preferences reallocated.
But there is no obvious least popular option therefore two scenarios would be required, Deal eliminated and the second preferences reallocated to see if there was a clear winner AND the same process repeated with No Deal eliminated and those second preference votes reallocated to see again if there was a clear winner.
 
The question asked was quite clear -- should Britain remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union? It is up to our government - who should be acting in the best interests of us and our nation - to get the best deal we can an

Granted it's a huge decision for a voter, but there was at the time and still is a torrent of information available to us as a population to help us make an informed vote. We can't just "have another go" because some feel not enough people knew what they were voting for.

The best type of Brexit I concluded would be one where we left with a deal leaving us as least bound to the EU's rules and restrictions as possible. The EU will do everything they can to make this difficult and to make us an example to other countries with high anti-EU sentiment. Should a favourable deal not be found, then we should leave with no deal. That is the summative result of my own research -- how much do you want to pick it apart and analyse it?

It will not be clean, there will be impacts felt for a long time, but in the long run breaking free from this future superstate is a good move for us.

That's still unclear. You have not said anyjtjjg about tariffs, regulation, trade. Would you still be part of the CU and or Single Market?
 
Sponsored Links
That's still unclear. You have not said anyjtjjg about tariffs, regulation, trade. Would you still be part of the CU and or Single Market?
Sir Gal thinks most people are too thick to decide in/out,never mind more choices.
 
Sir Gal,Your 60% comments highlight,you just don't grasp the basics,you write volumes to cover it up(common tactic) but really have not a clue.

Only 37% of those eligible to vote in the referendum backed Brexit.

So a minority voted out

MOD: Personal insults are not welcome.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
EU says there must be freedom of movement between RoI and NI



So any EU citizen can freely move from, say, Germany to RoI to NI to England if there are no border controls.

.
It is the GF Agreement (and the Common Travel Area) that requires free movement between RoI and NI. The EU and the UK are respecting that.
There are some controls on the rUK/NI ferries.

The Channel Islands are also in the CTA and the EU.
So theoretically an EU citizen can travel to the Channel Islands and on to UK without a passport, but with some other identity document.
 
Last edited:
Either I am not making myself clear, or some are failing to comprehend the preferential voting system.

Firstly, nobody said that any system is preferred, but there are obvious problems with the simple binary choice.
Secondly, No Deal is an obvious preference for some.
Thirdly I was suggesting that only voters two choices need to be indicated because the unselected option would obviously be their third and least preferable option.

Now to take the example of preferential voting further to illustrate its advantages.

Let us use the previous voting intentions of 4 for Remain, 3 for Deal and 3 for No Deal.
In the usual method the least popular option is eliminated and the second preferences reallocated.
But there is no obvious least popular option therefore two scenarios would be required, Deal eliminated and the second preferences reallocated to see if there was a clear winner AND the same process repeated with No Deal eliminated and those second preference votes reallocated to see again if there was a clear winner.

Your logic.

We have had the choice between remain or leave.

The next step should be deal or no deal.

What is your choice of those 2 ?
 
Only 37% of those eligible to vote in the referendum backed Brexit.

So a minority voted out

If you want to use that argument, then only 35% of those eligible to vote backed remain.

So an even smaller minority voted to stay in.
 
If you want to use that argument, then only 35% of those eligible to vote backed remain.

So an even smaller minority voted to stay in.

Which comes back to point of the referendum why you ask for a super majority or its non binding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top