Thursday, 23 May 2019

Groundhog Day at the polls

This isn’t an overtly political blog beyond the sphere of lifestyle politics. However, for each major national election, out of interest I’ve run a poll on people’s voting intentions. Five years ago I published the results of the one on the 2014 European Parliament Elections. It’s fair to say that the outcome had been somewhat swayed by rather enthusiastic sharing by other people.

Five years on, and against all expectations following the referendum result, we have another round of European Parliament elections. The results of my poll are shown above – make of them what you will. I’m not aware of this one having been touted around to anything like the same degree. As a comparison, here are the results of one of the final proper opinion polls:

As it is not off-topic on this post, feel free to comment on the political issues, but please be polite and don’t throw a metaphorical milkshake (or brick) at anyone.

Note that I removed For Britain from the options shown in the sidebar, as they did not end up nominating any candidates, which I wasn’t aware of when I originally created the poll.

37 comments:

  1. I'm surprised. I thought there were more remoaners among your followers & comments

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's the silent majority, Cookie, not the shrieking brick-chuckers.

      Delete
    2. Never chucked a shrieking brick in my life

      Delete
  2. Professor Pie-Tin23 May 2019 at 16:14

    It's really very simple.
    If you promise the electorate you will abide by the results of a referendum then,when you lose it, spend three years telling the people who won they were thick and didn't understand what they voted for don't be surprised at those people getting very angry.
    And despite three years of being told what will really happen with Brexit the results on Sunday will show that even more people now want Brexit than in the original referendum.
    History has shown there is a point when the British people will only take so much before rebelling.
    We have reached that point now and it is glorious to watch.

    https://unherd.com/2019/05/how-farage-outflanked-everyone/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And it will be even more glorious to watch the so well educated leavers squirming and complaining as they suffer the consequences of leaving the EU.

      For democracy to work the rights of the minorities have to be respected and to do that compromises have to be accepted. Leaving the EU but staying in the customs union is one such possible compromise. It respects the referendum result by leaving the EU but protects the interests of those who want to trade freely with the 27.

      And I am astonished at the number of people who are prepared to vote for a party that has no policies on pressing domestic issues. One trick ponies rarey deliver the mail.

      Delete
    2. Brexit is basically a binary decision - you can't be half in and half out. And, if Remain had won by 52-48%, how much compromise would there have been with Leavers? None whatsoever - it would have been "back in your box!"

      Delete
    3. Seeing that Remain didn't win that is pure speculation. Except that Nigel farage is on record as saying, before the referendum, "There could be unstoppable demand for a re-run of the EU referendum if Remain wins by a narrow margin on 23 June"

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681

      Delete
    4. Of course there are degrees of Brexit. If it was a simple binary decision we would have left without a deal already. There wouldn't be all this fuss about negotiating a deal; Norway++, Canada#-, EFTA option, WTO terms. Nor complaints about being offered "Brexit in name only"

      Delete
    5. "One trick ponies rarey deliver the mail."

      But this isn't a general election, it's effectively halfway between a proxy referendum and a glorified opinion poll.

      Delete
    6. And there is me thinking that is an election for members of a supra-national parliament

      Delete
    7. Matthew Thompson25 May 2019 at 16:33

      Since Remain won in the first referendum on membership of what was then the EEC, by two to one in 1975, there have been a whole series of concessions by British governments and Brussels with the losing Leave camp, from rebates on financial contributions and opt outs on social legislation and political integration to stopping outside the Eurozone and Schengen Area. Even now, the EU are happy to give Britain as many extensions to Article 50 as we like while we try to decide what we want when they could easily have washed their hands of us.

      Delete
    8. The EU would have done us a favour if they'd refused to grant a further extension. But of course it's in their interest to endlessly string us along...

      Delete
  3. What annoys me though is the nearly 36 billion in fees given to the EU during the past almost 3 years during which time a surrender treaty was drafted pretending to be a withdrawal treaty. I hate being taken for a mug by some smug, arrogant politician. I do hope the mainstream big two get the kicking at the polls they so richly deserve.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Doesn't the fact that remainers are throwing milkshake at leavers, whilst leavers are not throwing anything at remainers, tell you all you need to know?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Professor Pie-Tin24 May 2019 at 13:39

      Actually it does.
      Along with being called racist,xenophobic,gammon,coffin-dodgers and people who have to have the piss wiped away after a Brexit rally.
      The worst comment I've seen about Remainers is,er ... Remoaners.
      The sneering,vitriolic,bilious insults from the Remain side has been worth many millions of votes for their opponents.
      Thank you and keep it up for the next election if you would't mind.
      Funnily enough,the BXP social media campaign has been streets ahead of the rest during the election campaign and that has been run by a teenager.
      His name is Steve Edgington.
      Remember it as he'll go far.

      Delete
  5. Any idea who the other two are?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unwavering Tory stalwarts.

      I'll buy both a pint if I find out who they are.

      Delete
  6. I'm somewhat surprised that so many said they'd vote Green, given their history of support for minimum unit pricing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's a strong streak of greenery amongst the "craft beer community" and, even if they make the connection, many of them support minimum pricing as a way of making the swill the knuckle-dragging plebs drink more expensive.

      Delete
    2. The Stafford Mudgie26 May 2019 at 17:08

      But non re-usable, very rarely recycled KeyKegs are the antithesis of "greenery".
      ( And that's probably as far as I'll go in discussing politics on a site about pubs
      - but the Common Room Forum is a good one for politics )

      Delete
    3. Yes, that is often pointed out as an example of hypocrisy. Likewise importing hops from Washington State and New Zealand, although to be fair hops aren't all that heavy.

      Delete
  7. Well well.
    36.8% leave (Brexit 33.3 + UKIP 3.5)
    37.0% Remain (LibDem 20.9 + Green 12.5 + ChUK 3.6)
    23.4 % Constructive Ambiguity.

    A resounding victory for remain :-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah yes, if you add up all the points scored by Arsenal, Chelsea and Spurs, London would have won the Premier League.

      In the words of political scientist Philip Cowley,

      "British politics for the next week is going to consist of people adding a+b to show it's greater than c+d. Supporters of c+d will add e, which then makes it bigger than a+b. Ah ha, say a+b fans, you've forgotten f. And on we go, like a shit Countdown."

      Delete
    2. The Stafford Mudgie27 May 2019 at 12:12

      Not such a bad idea that, merging Arsenal, Chelsea and Spurs into one big London Rovers team.

      Delete
    3. The simple fact is that the country is evenly divided between leave and stay. And virtually every constitution in the world, be it nations, companies, clubs or charities maintains the status quo in those circumstances.

      The fact that the second EU referendum was based on a simple majority flies in the face of reason. Nearly every other institution which uses referenda requires some form of super-majority to make a change. Often a 60% or 66% majority, sometimes a simple majority of the entire electorate.

      And if you don't make the decision by adding up numbers in favour of each option how do you make it? Ask Boris Johnson?

      Delete
    4. The Stafford Mudgie27 May 2019 at 17:16

      DCBW,
      Yes indeed.
      I know that section 283 of the Companies Act 2006 requires that a special resolution of the members of a company can only be passed by a majority of not less than 75% and that rightly prevents the carrying of seriously flawed proposals that superficially might seem like a good idea.

      Delete
    5. But there wasn't a requirement for a super-majority, was there? And I'm sure if there had been one for the Scottish independence referendum it would have gone down like a plate of cold porridge north of the border.

      Delete
    6. I don't recall anyone moaning about the terms of the referendum before the result was announced.

      Delete
    7. Sorry electricpics. It never occurred to me to communicate my doubts to you.

      Delete
    8. And why do you assume that 'anyone' meant you?

      Delete
    9. Because I originally raised the topic

      Delete
  8. Most referenda are decided on a simple majority vote,attempts to impose a super majority have a history of causing ill will and resentment,for example in the Scottish and Welsh referenda in 1979 which led to a successful no confidence motion being passed against the ten government.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Works well enough in Switzerland. (And, before you suggest it, I am not moving there )

      Delete
    2. It works very well in Switzerland although sometimes it takes a great effort to get anything done. I worked there 20 years ago and there was a groundswell for gun reform (think Texas without the restrictions in some parts) and they've only just managed to get reforms passed this year. They have a system that relies on a simple majority on a Canton level but for major federal issues they also have a simple national majority, but a majority of Cantons must also vote in favour. Eminently sensible.

      If this had been done with the EU Referendum here, using the 12 UK regions defined by the Electoral Commission which are broadly similar to Swiss Cantons, we'd still have voted to leave by 9 to 3, with only London, Scotland and NI voting to remain.

      Delete
    3. Yes, the requirement for a super-majority in the Scottish devolution referendum in 1979 certainly did cause a lot of ill-will when the proposal passed, but not by enough votes (it needed to be supported IIRC by 40% of the electorate). The Welsh equivalent was heavily defeated and so it didn't come into play.

      Yes, there is an argument for super-majorities in cases of major constitutional change, but they are problematical if the proposal passes, but not by a sufficient margin. And they haven't been used in any of the referendums held in the UK since 1997. Of course, a super-majority would have canned Welsh devolution, which only passed by a hair's breadth in that year.

      Delete

Comments, especially on older posts, may require prior approval by the blog owner. See here for details of my comment policy.

Please register an account to comment. To combat persistent trolling, unregistered comments are liable to be deleted unless I recognise the author. If you intend to make more than the occasional comment using an unregistered ID, you will need to tell me something about yourself.