Day Trippers Will Have To Pay €5 To...
News4 mins ago
With The Ongoing Debacle That Is Brexit….
…has your attitude towards politics changed?
I’ve spoken to so many voters, both Labour and Conservative, who say that such is their disgust at the blatant disregard for the electorate and for the democratic process that they see no point in ever voting again.
What about you?
I’ve spoken to so many voters, both Labour and Conservative, who say that such is their disgust at the blatant disregard for the electorate and for the democratic process that they see no point in ever voting again.
What about you?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
That is very true Canary, but this, regardless of how we individually voted takes it to a new real low.
What will I do? As I have stated on here many times at the moment I am a man without a Party. So my vote will either be a spoiled paper or an extreme right wing party (One I guarantee wont get in of course).
Unless A New Party comes along then I will be all ears, particularly if run by a Trump type character who will drain the swamp of these 650 useless graspers.
What will I do? As I have stated on here many times at the moment I am a man without a Party. So my vote will either be a spoiled paper or an extreme right wing party (One I guarantee wont get in of course).
Unless A New Party comes along then I will be all ears, particularly if run by a Trump type character who will drain the swamp of these 650 useless graspers.
I am a little curious what, if anything, is new in all this. I think it's safe to say that this thread can be summarised by saying that, "faith in parliamentary government has suffered an extraordinary decline", and presumably, given events in France, Germany, the USA, Canada, etc, it could be said that "This change is visible in every civilised country." But then again, I grabbed those quotes verbatim from a book written 105 years ago.
I don't think there's any special reason to lose faith in politics or politicians today, as opposed to 10, 50, or even 100 years ago.
I don't think there's any special reason to lose faith in politics or politicians today, as opposed to 10, 50, or even 100 years ago.
> Now if there was an option on the paper entitled "None of the above" and they were counted (meaning that option could hold sway), I might be tempted
One might imagine, at the next election, a social media campaign through which disillusioned voters were encouraged to write "None of the above" on their ballot papers.
A ~100% turnout with ~70% spoiled papers is much more of a message than a ~35% turnout with ~0.5% spoiled papers - especially if "None of the above" is written on around all of those spoiled papers.
One might imagine, at the next election, a social media campaign through which disillusioned voters were encouraged to write "None of the above" on their ballot papers.
A ~100% turnout with ~70% spoiled papers is much more of a message than a ~35% turnout with ~0.5% spoiled papers - especially if "None of the above" is written on around all of those spoiled papers.
We can say definitively *now* that the referendum hasn't been ignored: it has already shaped British politics for three years, pushing most other business to one side and draining resources from other departments in order to prepare for it. And it will continue to go on shaping politics for years, even decades, to come.
Meanwhile, there is clearly no will to overturn the result of the referendum within the House, except as a very last resort and only following another major democratic exercise, be it a second referendum or a general election. In either case, the vote would not have been ignored, but merely superseded. Which is to say, how democracies normally function.
Meanwhile, there is clearly no will to overturn the result of the referendum within the House, except as a very last resort and only following another major democratic exercise, be it a second referendum or a general election. In either case, the vote would not have been ignored, but merely superseded. Which is to say, how democracies normally function.
Seems to me there is clearly plenty of will to overturn the result of the referendum within the House. There's no other excuse for saying no to no-deal and asking for an extension. It's quite clear the EU isn't going to offer an adequate deal so they're hoping for a revoke, or perpetual extensions, or accepting the anti-Brexit, 'out in name only' deal.
Despite assertions on AB, there has yet to be any real demonstration that No Deal *was* the will of the people -- and, more profoundly, any assertion that this is all the justification that is needed to pursue a policy that is so damaging for our future. As a result, rejecting No Deal is not "overturning the result of the referendum". As to the claim that a second vote is not a democracy: any referendum held in the future will be presented to a different electorate, both in the very literal sense that many of the actual voters will be different people, and in the sense that they have had at least three years' more time between the votes, during which a great deal has happened. Whether or not this changes anyone's minds is immaterial; it is enough that such events *could* change their mind (in either direction!).
There is no definition of democracy, in the entire history of that practice of government, that excludes a second vote on any given issue. Indeed, the idea that a vote, once made, can never be unmade, goes against the idea of democracy far more than the other way round, for then the future electorate must forever be slaves to its past, and never able to change its mind in the face of changing events. As David Davis said, a democracy that is not permitted to change its mind is no longer a democracy.
There is no definition of democracy, in the entire history of that practice of government, that excludes a second vote on any given issue. Indeed, the idea that a vote, once made, can never be unmade, goes against the idea of democracy far more than the other way round, for then the future electorate must forever be slaves to its past, and never able to change its mind in the face of changing events. As David Davis said, a democracy that is not permitted to change its mind is no longer a democracy.
Jim, //We can say definitively *now* that the referendum hasn't been ignored//
I didn’t say the referendum has been ignored – it most certainly hasn’t. I said the result has been ignored – and it most certainly has.
//As David Davis said, a democracy that is not permitted to change its mind is no longer a democracy.//
The only way the result can be legitimately overturned is to rerun the referendum in exactly the same format as the first – and that’s never going to happen.
It suits you to quote David Davis but your continuous spin changes nothing.
I didn’t say the referendum has been ignored – it most certainly hasn’t. I said the result has been ignored – and it most certainly has.
//As David Davis said, a democracy that is not permitted to change its mind is no longer a democracy.//
The only way the result can be legitimately overturned is to rerun the referendum in exactly the same format as the first – and that’s never going to happen.
It suits you to quote David Davis but your continuous spin changes nothing.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank15 mins ago
ChatterBank15 mins ago
Who Inherits If Children Are Adopted ?
Law19 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.