Another vote t'other side of the Border.

[unbeliever]

You have outstanding blinkers.

 

¿ Well that clears things up. ¿

[Harrystottle]

I was happy that Scotland voted to stay in the union, but it's now obvious that the SNP aren't going to let this drop.

 

So yes please, let's have another referendum asap because this needs to be settled. Many English people have had enough of the grim faced Nicola Sturgeon yapping away on TV every day and if Independence for Scotland means seeing the back of her then bring it on.

 

Either stay or go, but let's have it done with one way or the other.

[unbeliever]

I was happy that Scotland voted to stay in the union, but it's now obvious that the SNP aren't going to let this drop.

 

So yes please, let's have another referendum asap because this needs to be settled. Many English people have had enough of the grim faced Nicola Sturgeon yapping away on TV every day and if Independence for Scotland means seeing the back of her then bring it on.

 

Either stay or go, but let's have it done with one way or the other.

 

Could not agree more. In principle.

The question is will this referendum settle the matter when the last one did not.

Also consider that independence is a one-way manoeuvre. The unionists have to win every time, the separatists only have to win once. That imbalance has to be taken into account.

[L00b]

What better means is there of gauging the will of the people.

Non-sequitur. Nice try, though

It's perfectly legitimate to my mind. As I've pointed out before, I said all the same things about the AV referendum which my side lost.

It's absolutely you prerogative not to give a fig about the actual meaning of words and expressions.

 

Just the same as it is mine to give a fig, particularly when they are used misleadingly for populist purposes.

 

Considering how divisive the whole referendum/Brexit matter has proven both pre- and post-vote (the AV referendum of yesteryear does not even register on that scale of divisiveness), I believe bias confirmation in your and apelike's recent posts about the 'will of the people' matter are as clear as a nose on a face. You might get a free pass about it with others. You don't with me, sorry

Edited March 17, 2017 by L00b

[unbeliever]

Non-sequitur. Nice try, though

It's absolutely you prerogative not to give a fig about the actual meaning of words and expressions.

 

Just the same as it is mine to give a fig, particularly when they are used misleadingly for populist purposes.

 

Considering how divisive the whole referendum/Brexit matter has proven both pre- and post-vote (the AV referendum of yesteryear does not even register on that scale of divisiveness), I believe bias confirmation in your and apelike's recent posts about the 'will of the people' matter are as clear as a nose on a face. You might get a free pass about it with others. You don't with me, sorry

 

Given the referendum result, and the following polling, the probability that Brexit is not the will of the people is vanishingly small. That is a matter of maths.

Link established. Job done.

[L00b]

Given the referendum result, and the following polling, the probability that Brexit is not the will of the people is vanishingly small.

And another non-sequitur. You're in good form today

That is a matter of maths.

Link established. Job done.

That "matter of maths" is the very issue I take with badging a 17m electoral majority (out of an electoral corpus of 46m) as 'the people' (having a national corpus of 64.1m).

 

Makes me wonder whether you'd ever accept the notion of a threshold for a mandate. How does 51% of a 51% turnout (12m votes out of 23m) grab you?

 

After all, it's what the Tories had Unions do not so long ago in respect of strike ballots.

[unbeliever]

And another non-sequitur. You're in good form today

That "matter of maths" is the very issue I take with badging a 17m electoral majority (out of an electoral corpus of 46m) as 'the people' (having a national corpus of 64.1m).

 

Makes me wonder whether you'd ever accept the notion of a threshold for a mandate. How does 51% of a 51% turnout (12m votes out of 23m) grab you?

 

After all, it's what the Tories had Unions do not so long ago in respect of strike ballots.

 

I require that all reasonable steps are taken to give all adults the opportunity to vote without having to endure anything onerous to do so. All people who choose not to vote under those circumstances are deemed to have chosen to abstain but in this way still participated. They have walked into both lobbies.

With that standard met, a mandate is derived from a margin of 1 vote or more.

 

My solution to the union issue is a whole different conversation, but the minimum turnout requirement is only there, to my mind, to ensure that all reasonable steps are taken as I describe above. If there's a better means of doing that then show me where to sign.

 

The margin of error on a sample of 17 million by the way is less that 0.01% to 99% confidence.

Edited March 17, 2017 by unbeliever

[apelike]

So, it looks like we're agreed then, that's the will of the referendum-voting majority, not the will of the people.

 

No. The will of the people in this context is the will of those that voted as abstainers are excluded so therefore it still is classed and remains the will of the people. If it was truly to be the will of all the people as you see it then prisoners, some expats and others residing in the UK should also be included. Just to add,as already stated the only way to correct that is to make voting compulsory for everyone of voting age.

Edited March 17, 2017 by apelike

[Jacktari]

Do we English really know the Scots?

I have worked with many a Scotsman in my time, and have found them friendly enough.

But they do seem ready, sometimes, to take offence.

I have often thought it would be a good thing for the North of England to ally with Scotland and form a new country.

But a difference between us may be too much.

 

However the best person in Parliament at present has to be Angus Robertson, he is always calm, collected and has incisive questions.

Nicola Sturgeon is head and shoulders above the dire Theresa May.

The two would make great leaders of a new state, when this shambles of brexit is over.

[ECCOnoob]

Do we English really know the Scots?

I have worked with many a Scotsman in my time, and have found them friendly enough.

But they do seem ready, sometimes, to take offence.

I have often thought it would be a good thing for the North of England to ally with Scotland and form a new country.

But a difference between us may be too much.

 

However the best person in Parliament at present has to be Angus Robertson, he is always calm, collected and has incisive questions.

Nicola Sturgeon is head and shoulders above the dire Theresa May.

The two would make great leaders of a new state, when this shambles of brexit is over.

 

:hihi::hihi::hihi:

 

You have got to be kiddin' me.

 

Nicola Sturgeon is a reactionary, short tempred, lying one trick pony. She would say and do anything to push her agenda and screw over her so called people.

 

May is calm, calculated and decisive. She is not one to be rushed and not one to get rattled. She of course has her own agenda but is also big enough (as has been proven categorically with Brexit) to put that aside to get on with the extremely difficult job she is paid to do.

 

Sturgeon has one thing on her desk and one thing only. By being so narrow minded and stubborn she is failing the very country she is supposed to represent, even going so far as to speak directly against the seemingly wishes of the majority. Jeanette Krankie can blame Westminster and the so called Elites all she wants, but perhaps she needs to take a look around her every now and then and see what her poorly led government has actually done.

 

In democracy you sometimes have to deal with things YOU dont agree with. YOU are not the only one who did not vote for brexit BUT the majority of voters did. We have to accept that now. May has to get on with doing exactly what she is paid to do. Be Prime Minister of the UNITED KINGDOM. That is the UNITED KINGDOM that the majority of voters in Scotland agreed to remain part of.

 

If Sturgoen actually got over her independance tantrum she might realise she has enough to be getting on with trying to fix the SCOTTISH failures with the devolved powers they so heavilly demanded. Perhaps she is too busy with her referendum to fix the failing Scottish NHS or the demands by teachers to fix the scottish education provision or the dwindling oil monies or the make believe figures as to how wealthy scottish industries are......just a thought.

Edited March 25, 2017 by ECCOnoob