3 ms·

Regardless of the epithets used to describe them, it's worth remembering that, accounting for turn-out, it was around 37% of the British electorate that voted t

Regardless of the epithets used to describe them, it's worth remembering that, accounting for turn-out, it was around 37% of the British electorate that voted to leave the EU.

rusk 8y ago
There's no reason to believe that the result as it stands couldn't have been extrapolated across the rest of the population.
- lumisota 8y ago
  My argument is that the number of people who didn't vote doesn't need to be extrapolated: apathy isn't a yes or a no vote, but something else.
  - rusk 8y ago
    Are you sure it's apathy though? There are plenty of other reasons why somebody might not make it to the polling station. (EDIT: For example the elderly who have been shown to be overwhelmingly pro-brexit could have diffculty) All polling and analysis since the result bears out that the vote was indeed representative of the population.
    - lumisota 8y ago
      Sure, it isn't just apathy (as in your example). But if you compare the turn-out for the Scottish independence vote in 2014 (~85%) with the EU referendum (~72%), I think it might be a considerable factor. Another factor is complacency on the part of those that would have voted to remain: polling leading up to the referendum showed a clear remain win. (I should point out that I'm not suggesting that the result of the referendum isn't pro-Brexit, but that the numbers don't support the case for a so-called "hard Brexit")
      - rusk 8y ago
        Yes, as time goes by it seems as though sense is starting to sink in, though it is still quite close. A year ago I wouldn't have been confident at all. [0] https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-there-was-a-referendum-on-britains-membership-of-the-eu-how-would-you-vote-2/ https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-there-was-a-referen... [1] https://yougov.co.uk/news/2018/03/29/where-britain-stands-brexit-one-year-out/ https://yougov.co.uk/news/2018/03/29/where-britain-stands-br...
        lumisota 8y ago
        I'd be for a second referendum on an actual agreement for what Britain's relationship with the EU would be, post-Brexit. Some of the options, particularly those favoured by those that voted to remain, are poor.
        rusk 8y ago
        I think many people right across the continent would probably have similar feelings. Many are "unhappy" with how the EU is presently being run but nobody would want to "leave". The confusion around Brexit emerges from just how poorly the referendum was run. It was a choice between "remain" which can only be a vote for the status quo (unsatisfactory for many) and "leave" which is open to so many interpretations as to be useless. But to call Brexit a "referendum" in any constitutional sense is talking it up a bit. It was a plebiscite. An actual binding referendum against a written constitution would have to provide actual wording; rather than just a single word.
        flukus 8y ago
        I thought this was because Britain didn't have a constitution as such so the don't have actual referendums? > An actual binding referendum against a written constitution would have to provide actual wording; rather than just a single word. I don't disagree for any philosophical reason, but this is very easy to abuse for anyone that favors the status quo. The most notable example I can think of is the republic referendum (to remove the queen as head of state) here in Australia. Deciding the form of the republic was done first and the constitutional changes to do just that was the only question put to the public, splitting the Republican vote. On the other hand the EU has a bit of a reputation for voting until the plebs get it right, so I can definitely see the case for binding referendums.
    - justinclift 8y ago
      > Are you sure it's apathy though? Perhaps because it was very clearly billed as a non-binding referendum, which would only have an advisory impact at best? That the politicians took a basically 50/50 result and have used it to _remove_ the EU citizenship of everyone in the UK is beyond taking the piss.
      - rusk 8y ago
        > it was very clearly billed as a non-binding referendum Was it though? It seems to me that many very clearly consider it to be binding, though ridiculously the actual meaning is ambiguous.
        justinclift 8y ago
        > Was it though? Errr yes? That was the whole point. The general concept I had of it was along the lines of "Lets see what the general opinion is, so if there's a large majority one way or another we'll know if we need to look into it". The non-binding bit was so they didn't have to _commit_ to actually doing anything, just in case.
        rusk 8y ago
        If that was the case it would have been called a plebiscite rather than a referendum. That it was in actual fact a plebiscite to those who actually understand this nuance isn't relevant to the "Brexit means Brexit" hordes who don't. Or to your friends and neighbours looking on aghast ...
isostatic 8y ago
There are a 1.4 million 18 and 19 year olds in the UK that didn't get to vote in 2016. Likewise there are over 1 million who did get to vote who are no longer alive. When accounting for the entire country, about 1 in 4 voted to leave the EU, 1 in 4 voted to remain, 1 in 4 didn't know/care and trusted their MPs to do what was best, and 1 in 4 were not allowed to vote because they were too young and must rely on their MPs to do what is best.

Regardless of the epithets used to describe them, it's worth remembering that, accounting for turn-out, it was around 37% of the British electorate that voted to leave the EU.

rusk 8y ago

There's no reason to believe that the result as it stands couldn't have been extrapolated across the rest of the population.

lumisota 8y ago
My argument is that the number of people who didn't vote doesn't need to be extrapolated: apathy isn't a yes or a no vote, but something else.
- rusk 8y ago
  Are you sure it's apathy though? There are plenty of other reasons why somebody might not make it to the polling station. (EDIT: For example the elderly who have been shown to be overwhelmingly pro-brexit could have diffculty) All polling and analysis since the result bears out that the vote was indeed representative of the population.
  - lumisota 8y ago
    Sure, it isn't just apathy (as in your example). But if you compare the turn-out for the Scottish independence vote in 2014 (~85%) with the EU referendum (~72%), I think it might be a considerable factor. Another factor is complacency on the part of those that would have voted to remain: polling leading up to the referendum showed a clear remain win. (I should point out that I'm not suggesting that the result of the referendum isn't pro-Brexit, but that the numbers don't support the case for a so-called "hard Brexit")
    - rusk 8y ago
      Yes, as time goes by it seems as though sense is starting to sink in, though it is still quite close. A year ago I wouldn't have been confident at all. [0] https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-there-was-a-referendum-on-britains-membership-of-the-eu-how-would-you-vote-2/ https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-there-was-a-referen... [1] https://yougov.co.uk/news/2018/03/29/where-britain-stands-brexit-one-year-out/ https://yougov.co.uk/news/2018/03/29/where-britain-stands-br...
      - lumisota 8y ago
        I'd be for a second referendum on an actual agreement for what Britain's relationship with the EU would be, post-Brexit. Some of the options, particularly those favoured by those that voted to remain, are poor.
        rusk 8y ago
        I think many people right across the continent would probably have similar feelings. Many are "unhappy" with how the EU is presently being run but nobody would want to "leave". The confusion around Brexit emerges from just how poorly the referendum was run. It was a choice between "remain" which can only be a vote for the status quo (unsatisfactory for many) and "leave" which is open to so many interpretations as to be useless. But to call Brexit a "referendum" in any constitutional sense is talking it up a bit. It was a plebiscite. An actual binding referendum against a written constitution would have to provide actual wording; rather than just a single word.
        flukus 8y ago
        I thought this was because Britain didn't have a constitution as such so the don't have actual referendums? > An actual binding referendum against a written constitution would have to provide actual wording; rather than just a single word. I don't disagree for any philosophical reason, but this is very easy to abuse for anyone that favors the status quo. The most notable example I can think of is the republic referendum (to remove the queen as head of state) here in Australia. Deciding the form of the republic was done first and the constitutional changes to do just that was the only question put to the public, splitting the Republican vote. On the other hand the EU has a bit of a reputation for voting until the plebs get it right, so I can definitely see the case for binding referendums.
  - justinclift 8y ago
    > Are you sure it's apathy though? Perhaps because it was very clearly billed as a non-binding referendum, which would only have an advisory impact at best? That the politicians took a basically 50/50 result and have used it to _remove_ the EU citizenship of everyone in the UK is beyond taking the piss.
    - rusk 8y ago
      > it was very clearly billed as a non-binding referendum Was it though? It seems to me that many very clearly consider it to be binding, though ridiculously the actual meaning is ambiguous.
      - justinclift 8y ago
        > Was it though? Errr yes? That was the whole point. The general concept I had of it was along the lines of "Lets see what the general opinion is, so if there's a large majority one way or another we'll know if we need to look into it". The non-binding bit was so they didn't have to _commit_ to actually doing anything, just in case.
        rusk 8y ago
        If that was the case it would have been called a plebiscite rather than a referendum. That it was in actual fact a plebiscite to those who actually understand this nuance isn't relevant to the "Brexit means Brexit" hordes who don't. Or to your friends and neighbours looking on aghast ...

isostatic 8y ago

There are a 1.4 million 18 and 19 year olds in the UK that didn't get to vote in 2016. Likewise there are over 1 million who did get to vote who are no longer alive. When accounting for the entire country, about 1 in 4 voted to leave the EU, 1 in 4 voted to remain, 1 in 4 didn't know/care and trusted their MPs to do what was best, and 1 in 4 were not allowed to vote because they were too young and must rely on their MPs to do what is best.