Straw polling

UndercoverElephant

PBlakeney wrote:

First Aspect wrote:

Well quite.
Scotland also shot itself in the foot. 67% turn out. Low, dare I say complacent, compared to the rest of the UK. Glasgow, the great hub of democracy in 2014, 56%.

Quite possibly that because their population is so low, what is the point?
As proven by the results.

By my calculations, if we'd had a 95% turnout we may have had a say. That said, I'm not sure about whether all of the registered voters were actually allowed to vote in this one. No 16-17 year olds, no EU immigrants, etc.

Of course, a lot of my optimism above relies on the EU still being in a decent state after all this. That's not a given.

meanredspider

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Of course, a lot of my optimism above relies on the EU still being in a decent state after all this. That's not a given.

That's a fair point - although the UK was only an EU Lite member so it's not such a big deal.

First.Aspect

PBlakeney wrote:

First Aspect wrote:

Well quite.
Scotland also shot itself in the foot. 67% turn out. Low, dare I say complacent, compared to the rest of the UK. Glasgow, the great hub of democracy in 2014, 56%.

Quite possibly that because their population is so low, what is the point?
As proven by the results.

The clue is in the "per" of percent.

UndercoverElephant

meanredspider wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Of course, a lot of my optimism above relies on the EU still being in a decent state after all this. That's not a given.

That's a fair point - although the UK was only an EU Lite member so it's not such a big deal.

Unless it starts a stampede.

pblakeney

First Aspect wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

First Aspect wrote:

Well quite.
Scotland also shot itself in the foot. 67% turn out. Low, dare I say complacent, compared to the rest of the UK. Glasgow, the great hub of democracy in 2014, 56%.

Quite possibly that because their population is so low, what is the point?
As proven by the results.

The clue is in the "per" of percent.

I still don't get your point. As UE says, there would have had to have been a 95% turnout to possibly make a difference.
A difference probably wiped out had there been a 95% turnout in England. Little Englanders caused this.

meanredspider

UndercoverElephant wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Of course, a lot of my optimism above relies on the EU still being in a decent state after all this. That's not a given.

That's a fair point - although the UK was only an EU Lite member so it's not such a big deal.

Unless it starts a stampede.

If we think it's going to be difficult, imagine what it will be like for someone who has the Euro. It's already going to take unbelievable amounts of parliamentary time to enact laws to fill the gaps that EU laws leave (unless we just write across EU laws lock, stock & barrel), not to mention negotiating all the trade agreements (with our non-existent team).

Presumably, Scotland, if it stays in the Uk, will need to decide if it gets power over all those things that the EU handled or whether they will be Westminster laws.

What an unholy mess

First.Aspect

PBlakeney wrote:

First Aspect wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

First Aspect wrote:

Well quite.
Scotland also shot itself in the foot. 67% turn out. Low, dare I say complacent, compared to the rest of the UK. Glasgow, the great hub of democracy in 2014, 56%.

Quite possibly that because their population is so low, what is the point?
As proven by the results.

The clue is in the "per" of percent.

I still don't get your point. As UE says, there would have had to have been a 95% turnout to possibly make a difference.
A difference probably wiped out had there been a 95% turnout in England. Little Englanders caused this.

I know, I'm just venting. Basically, I think if you can't be arsed to get out and vote, then you lose the right to complain about the result. But the Bravehearters will complain about the result, loudly.

Scotland's position (or at least Glasgow's) is, "We were watching Jeremy Kyle and England voted us out of Europe. Those basturds."

You think little old England will have it bad now? Just imagine dealing with the UK breaking apart at the same time as leaving Europe.

surrey_commuter

meanredspider wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Of course, a lot of my optimism above relies on the EU still being in a decent state after all this. That's not a given.

That's a fair point - although the UK was only an EU Lite member so it's not such a big deal.

Unless it starts a stampede.

If we think it's going to be difficult, imagine what it will be like for someone who has the Euro. It's already going to take unbelievable amounts of parliamentary time to enact laws to fill the gaps that EU laws leave (unless we just write across EU laws lock, stock & barrel), not to mention negotiating all the trade agreements (with our non-existent team).

Presumably, Scotland, if it stays in the Uk, will need to decide if it gets power over all those things that the EU handled or whether they will be Westminster laws.

What an unholy mess

England/Wales/n. Ireland could leave the Uk and that would leave Scotland still in the EU.

pblakeney

First Aspect wrote:

You think little old England will have it bad now? Just imagine dealing with the UK breaking apart at the same time as leaving Europe.

I don't imagine, I fear.
I think this is a real possibility.