| seems a bit unfair 22:15 - Nov 19 with 941 views | Trequartista |
johnson and corbyn are pitched into a bear pit fight, and swinson gets some tummy tickling questions to enable a libdem party political broadcast.
why hasn't she been asked how on earth if she won an election with 40% that would give her a mandate to cancel a 52% referendum? |  |
| |  |
| seems a bit unfair on 22:26 - Nov 19 with 911 views | sparks |
Because that would be a shyte question.
1- the referendum is too old to be reliable given demogrpahic changes and vastly greater information.
2- All parties who have formed governments for a very very long time have been accepted as having a mandate despite having a majority, rather than more than 51% of the vote. |  |
| The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it.
(Sir Terry Pratchett) | | Poll: | Is Fred drunk this morning? |
| |
| seems a bit unfair on 22:34 - Nov 19 with 880 views | StokieBlue |
By your logic, no government in history would have a mandate to do anything.
The highest ever winning percentage was 49.7% in 1955.
SB |  |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| seems a bit unfair on 23:40 - Nov 19 with 826 views | Trequartista |
| seems a bit unfair on 22:26 - Nov 19 by sparks |
Because that would be a shyte question.
1- the referendum is too old to be reliable given demogrpahic changes and vastly greater information.
2- All parties who have formed governments for a very very long time have been accepted as having a mandate despite having a majority, rather than more than 51% of the vote. |
So referendums can be ignored if enough time has passed not enacting them? Sounds like filibusting on a national scale.
I accept that in the out-of-date system we use that to get 40% of the vote enables you to form of government, but i can't see how it can give a mandate to cancel a referendum. It's like saying no other issue counts except Brexit and 40% have voted to cancel what 52% wanted.
I am not averse to us having a final referendum and see no reason to omit remain on the ballot paper if we have genuinely changed our minds, but the LibDems cancel Brexit policy is pure opportunism. | |
| |
| seems a bit unfair on 23:41 - Nov 19 with 821 views | Trequartista |
| seems a bit unfair on 22:34 - Nov 19 by StokieBlue |
By your logic, no government in history would have a mandate to do anything.
The highest ever winning percentage was 49.7% in 1955.
SB |
I am not saying they can't govern, i'm saying they don't have a mandate to cancel Brexit. | |
| |
| seems a bit unfair on 06:10 - Nov 20 with 747 views | m14_blue |
I love how people are now using the absurdity of our FPTP system to attack the Lib Dems, despite them being the only major party to campaign for electoral reform for years. |  | | |
| seems a bit unfair on 06:29 - Nov 20 with 736 views | StokieBlue |
| seems a bit unfair on 23:41 - Nov 19 by Trequartista |
I am not saying they can't govern, i'm saying they don't have a mandate to cancel Brexit. |
And that's clearly untrue.
They have a mandate to do whatever is in their ejection manifesto. That's how it works.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| seems a bit unfair on 09:42 - Nov 20 with 653 views | Guthrum |
| seems a bit unfair on 23:40 - Nov 19 by Trequartista |
So referendums can be ignored if enough time has passed not enacting them? Sounds like filibusting on a national scale.
I accept that in the out-of-date system we use that to get 40% of the vote enables you to form of government, but i can't see how it can give a mandate to cancel a referendum. It's like saying no other issue counts except Brexit and 40% have voted to cancel what 52% wanted.
I am not averse to us having a final referendum and see no reason to omit remain on the ballot paper if we have genuinely changed our minds, but the LibDems cancel Brexit policy is pure opportunism. |
The LibDems' plumping for outright revocation cuts them off from moderate potential support much as the Conservatives' flirting with No Deal does on the other side. It now makes them a viable alternative to Labour only if you're a dedicated Remainer who is prepared to scrap the Referendum result out-of-hand (tho, in fairness, that might be getting on for half the electorate). |  |
| |
| seems a bit unfair on 09:48 - Nov 20 with 653 views | ElephantintheRoom |
Let me explain. A fantasy LibDem government would do what it perceives to be best for the country - having been elected on that precise mandate.
The current government has 42% of the vote - ie a clear majority of 58% wants the exact opposite of what they have got.(clearer than that far-off referendum that a 42% government is cynically misrepresenting as 'the will of the people'). | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
