Superb result for Nigel Farage and his six week old Brexit party.The so called second referendum has been settled unequivocally...
Apparently Anna (bonkers) Soubry is delighted with her parties result and thinks the have made a statement! (They didn't win a single seat!!!).And the bi polar poster boy Alistair Campbell claims Nigel Farage must be disappointed with the results!! Priceless...
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2004
- Posts
- 15,642
- Media
- 62
- Likes
- 5,041
- Points
- 433
- Location
- London (Greater London, England)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 90% Gay, 10% Straight
- Gender
- Male
Sober reflection by everyone (so excluding what people say to the media) will be that Brexit/Leave have won.
Brexit is the biggest UK party and also the joint biggest single party in the EU Parliament. Brexit+UKIP+Con are 50% of the vote. If we had a second referendum the assertion that Leave would win again now seems very strong, so what's the point? By the way we are now out of time for a referendum before 31st October. It would be a referendum on in effect rejoining.
Brexit is the biggest UK party and also the joint biggest single party in the EU Parliament. Brexit+UKIP+Con are 50% of the vote. If we had a second referendum the assertion that Leave would win again now seems very strong, so what's the point? By the way we are now out of time for a referendum before 31st October. It would be a referendum on in effect rejoining.
I only can repeat what I wrote at the Euro thread...
You can't tell.
The Brexit party got the majority of the votes, but not the total of all votes. Therefore you can't speak of a clear win for Brexit.
Just like MPs from the cons and labour, you have voter of every party who support Brexit or not.
It will be quite difficult to sort out how many voters support what... every poll shows it. Depending on the question you get a majority for Brexit, or against.
If you want to know what people want, let them vote again.
Personally I liked May's idea to pass the Brexit law in the parliament and let the people vote about it in a second referendum.
The parliament definitely isn't able to find a solution and May's deal is the only thing the British government will ever be able to offer... a hard Brexit has no majority.
So, let's the people decide: May's Brexit or no Brexit.
You can't tell.
The Brexit party got the majority of the votes, but not the total of all votes. Therefore you can't speak of a clear win for Brexit.
Just like MPs from the cons and labour, you have voter of every party who support Brexit or not.
It will be quite difficult to sort out how many voters support what... every poll shows it. Depending on the question you get a majority for Brexit, or against.
If you want to know what people want, let them vote again.
Personally I liked May's idea to pass the Brexit law in the parliament and let the people vote about it in a second referendum.
The parliament definitely isn't able to find a solution and May's deal is the only thing the British government will ever be able to offer... a hard Brexit has no majority.
So, let's the people decide: May's Brexit or no Brexit.
Personally, I do think May's deal was the best on offer - and I'd be happy with a referendum on whether to accept it or not.
I doubt Labour would go for that unfortunately, as it doesn't guarantee a pointless election, which would allow Corbyn to 'renegotiate' a deal we already know is non-negotiable.
What I'm not particularly looking forward to, is Farage's party being the joint-largest single party in the EP.
While I think it does give a clear message on the UK public's Brexit feelings, I can't help thinking it may be very unhelpful having Farage causing even more chaos than usual, rather than the UK being constructive after these elections...
Having the largest party doesn't gives you anything in the EU parliament. Even to be the largest fraction doesn't gives you any bonus.
And he will leave soon
But yes, I would have like some other party to be the largest as well.
Total bollox.The vote has been had twice and the result the same.What you are advocating is proportional representation,which neither the public want nor Labour or the Conservatives.More to the point no one asked for it,so you cannot ask for it now when the vote goes the other way.
The referendum was given by Parliament to the people not the other way round and the people have delivered their answer.Don't advocate changing the goal posts again when the vote goes against you .THATS THE EU'S JOB!!
A referendum is just like a proportional vote...
And there was only ONE vote about it. I don't get your point.
And that I like May's idea is absolutely legitimate, if you consider the current political situation in the UK.
A referendum is nothing like proportional representation.In the U.K we have and have always had the first past the post system,its very straight forward.The terms are laid out before the vote takes place.You cannot change from one voting system to another to appease the losers.
Nobody liked May's deal,not even she knew it was viable.
The chaos is not of Farage's making.The EU have done everything to thwart our exit with a complete lack of respect for the public vote and even said they don't want us to benefit in any way from our leaving.Look how they behaved over Ireland and the Lisbon Treaty.The rest is the manipulation by the Westminster establishment to wrestle back the result from the people by hook or by crook.
So at the referendum you count all votes and at the end you show the result in percentage. Sounds very much like proportional.
Not like general British elections, where you fraction the whole island and declare a winner at every area...
The votes are always shown as a percentage but that doesn't determine the result.The result is the party that has the clears the demarcation line by achieving a majority.Jeez it's been the case in the U.K from the year dot!
A Like I said its the first party or result to achieve a majority.There is no second place.In a referendum it is one issue,one question,a simple yes or no.
Right... absolutely different to your general election.
You have various areas where people vote for several parties. Every area declares one winner out of many. The winner takes it all, the losers get nothing.
This isn't even close to proportional. At the end only winners votes count to for the parliament.
The referendum worked different. Every single vote got counts to form the final result.
This is absolutely different to the general elections, even if we have a simple yes-no question with only one winner.
And all of this doesn't speak against a second referendum with a simple question: May's deal, or remain.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2007
- Posts
- 2,811
- Media
- 92
- Likes
- 2,321
- Points
- 433
- Location
- Lincoln (Lincolnshire, England)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- No Response
- Gender
- Male
From my blog:
On Thursday the United Kingdom held its elections for the European Parliament an exercise which, had Brexit taken place on 29th March as originally mandated, would not have been necessary. Since most of our European neighbours are habituated to holding their elections on a Sunday we could not – as a matter of both law and fairness – get our results until all the polls had closed on Sunday night. In terms of outcome it was, at least in Britain’s case, a set piece with the results scarily and, a little in unusually, closely reflecting the pollsters’ predictions.
As predicted Mr Farage’s nascent Brexit party did especially well, taking a third of the vote. Also, the Liberal Democrats did astonishingly well in view of their recent polling experiences in other contests, as did the Greens. Both Labour and the Conservatives were punished heavily, the latter especially so, and we doubt not that it was a punishment beating administered in view of our inability to deliver on Brexit in a timely manner.
What the results did though, was that they laid bare the division in British society which exists and the moment between those who want a clean exit from the EU on the one hand and those on the other who are determined to do anything to stop it happening at all on the other. Although Brexit itself is peculiar to Britain, disaffection with the big Franco-German project certainly isn’t, a fact represented by the results across a number of member states including France, Germany, Spain and Italy. In all of these the populists parties of left and right profited at the expense of the centre parties which have traditionally sought to form consensuses if not coalitions.
In Britain’s case what’s happened makes it harder to resist calls for a confirmatory vote or a complete rerun of the of 2016 referendum. To date the Tories have been broadly opposed to the idea, opinion in the Labour party has been somewhat divided, and the only real cheerleaders for such an exercise have been the Liberal Democrats. There are good reasons for resisting such a move and we have sincere doubts as to its wisdom. It smacks of telling the people ‘you got it wrong last time and you will vote again until you get it right.’ A similar thing happened in the Irish Republic over the Lisbon treaty in 2008-9 and it caused much resentment.
If, however, we are to find ourselves faced with a choice between a second referendum and a general election to resolve the current impasse, the referendum would certainly be the lesser of two evils. Were a general election to be held at the present time it would almost certainly result in Mr Corbyn landing in Downing Street, not on merit but on the back of disaffection with the Tories and Mr Farage’s success in splitting the right-wing vote. The only saving grace of such an outcome would be that it would allow the Tories to heal, regroup, and sort themselves out in a way which isn’t possible for a party when it is in power. A Corbyn led Government would, however, kill off anything which remotely resembled a proper Brexit and leave it in a state of perpetual servitude to our European masters. More seriously it would endanger our prosperity, economic stability and national security. That, in our view, it is just too much of a risk to take. Better to rerun the referendum and live with whatever the result happens to be, than that.
On Thursday the United Kingdom held its elections for the European Parliament an exercise which, had Brexit taken place on 29th March as originally mandated, would not have been necessary. Since most of our European neighbours are habituated to holding their elections on a Sunday we could not – as a matter of both law and fairness – get our results until all the polls had closed on Sunday night. In terms of outcome it was, at least in Britain’s case, a set piece with the results scarily and, a little in unusually, closely reflecting the pollsters’ predictions.
As predicted Mr Farage’s nascent Brexit party did especially well, taking a third of the vote. Also, the Liberal Democrats did astonishingly well in view of their recent polling experiences in other contests, as did the Greens. Both Labour and the Conservatives were punished heavily, the latter especially so, and we doubt not that it was a punishment beating administered in view of our inability to deliver on Brexit in a timely manner.
What the results did though, was that they laid bare the division in British society which exists and the moment between those who want a clean exit from the EU on the one hand and those on the other who are determined to do anything to stop it happening at all on the other. Although Brexit itself is peculiar to Britain, disaffection with the big Franco-German project certainly isn’t, a fact represented by the results across a number of member states including France, Germany, Spain and Italy. In all of these the populists parties of left and right profited at the expense of the centre parties which have traditionally sought to form consensuses if not coalitions.
In Britain’s case what’s happened makes it harder to resist calls for a confirmatory vote or a complete rerun of the of 2016 referendum. To date the Tories have been broadly opposed to the idea, opinion in the Labour party has been somewhat divided, and the only real cheerleaders for such an exercise have been the Liberal Democrats. There are good reasons for resisting such a move and we have sincere doubts as to its wisdom. It smacks of telling the people ‘you got it wrong last time and you will vote again until you get it right.’ A similar thing happened in the Irish Republic over the Lisbon treaty in 2008-9 and it caused much resentment.
If, however, we are to find ourselves faced with a choice between a second referendum and a general election to resolve the current impasse, the referendum would certainly be the lesser of two evils. Were a general election to be held at the present time it would almost certainly result in Mr Corbyn landing in Downing Street, not on merit but on the back of disaffection with the Tories and Mr Farage’s success in splitting the right-wing vote. The only saving grace of such an outcome would be that it would allow the Tories to heal, regroup, and sort themselves out in a way which isn’t possible for a party when it is in power. A Corbyn led Government would, however, kill off anything which remotely resembled a proper Brexit and leave it in a state of perpetual servitude to our European masters. More seriously it would endanger our prosperity, economic stability and national security. That, in our view, it is just too much of a risk to take. Better to rerun the referendum and live with whatever the result happens to be, than that.
Made easy.The Scottish Independence referendum stipulated whoever achieved 51% + won the outcome.The EU referendum was a simple Do you want remain or leave.Majority win.
Similar threads
