Glaring Deficiencies....?

[ToraToraTora]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37238641
"The Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for "democratic reform", said its polling showed Mr Cameron and other political "big beasts" had failed to convince the public." - no *&^% Sherlock!
...in other words the public gave the "wrong" answer! Order another container ship of sour grapes! PMSL

[Old_Geezer]

I decided I couldn't be bothered reading more of their recommendations when I saw they wanted kids to vote. Besides our electoral system is in no need of any major reform, so they seem to be a defunct group.

[ludwig]

The excuses for reneging on the referendum result are slowly being put into place.

You will also have noticed that project fear continues, but the threats are
now prefaced with 'If article 50 is triggered' instead of 'If the UK votes to leave to EU'.

I've said it before, but I will believe Brexit is happening when it actually happens.

[ToraToraTora]

yes ludwig there is a lot of desperate scratching around by project fear to find ways to ignore the will of the public here. I'll be relieved when A50 is invoked.

[jim360]

OG continuing his campaign to preserve a system that was barely suitable in the 1800s, let along today...

Does anyone seriously believe that the campaign from either side was conducted as it should have been? Does anyone seriously believe that democracy in this country is either (a) perfect or (b) as good as it can be? Does anyone believe that the sides various politicians took were entirely out of good will to the country, rather than (as least partly, and probably mostly for some) motivated by an attempt to further their own political careers?

All this, and more, should have been obvious. But the victors in any election tend to stop caring, and sadly the losers can always be accused of sour grapes and so legitimate concerns freely ignored. No, this does not mean that the referendum result on June 23rd was illegitimate and we need a rerun to shore it up (read: overturn it). Absolutely not. I have said that before and I say it again. But, if Brexit is to mean anything, if we are indeed now restoring control of our affairs to Parliament over all else, let us please ask whether the way our democracy works, at all levels is the best it can be. Anyone who seriously considers it should soon realise that the answer is no -- how to correct it may well remain open for debate, but the question shouldn't be ignored just because it's come from the losing side.

[Ellipsis]

> in other words the public gave the "wrong" answer

I think you're reading more into it than is there. By "failed to convince" they mean that these big political beasts on both sides of the debate "were not convincing" i.e. the public took little notice of them, which is a bad thing since we pay them to have an opinion and then we take no notice of it.

This definitely has ramifications for future referendums, especially as technology could result in less representative democracy and more ochlocracy which, if you ask me, would not be a good thing.

[ToraToraTora]

Jim you keep trying to merge your view of our election system with a pure 100% PR referendum binary vote. Please raise your own thread if you want to discuss our system for general elections. The referendum is a simple binary choice you cannot seriously be suggesting that we complicate it? Both sides in the campaign used largely negative methods but that is the nature of these things, I don't see what "deficiencies" the ERS hope to address.

[ToraToraTora]

ellipsis: " the public took little notice of them, which is a bad thing since we pay them to have an opinion and then we take no notice of it." - err no the public saw through project fear from the self serving politicians who love the EU because it's a gravy train they can get on when they have finished their day jobs.

"This definitely has ramifications for future referendums, especially as technology could result in less representative democracy and more ochlocracy which, if you ask me, would not be a good thing." - err how will technology result in less representative democracy? How one actually votes is irrelevant.

[Ellipsis]

> err no the public saw through project fear from the self serving politicians who love the EU because it's a gravy train they can get on when they have finished their day jobs.

During the referendum, did any politician actually cause you to form or change your opinion? Not say things you agreed or disagreed with based on your prior opinion, but actually cause you to form or change your opinion. What the Electoral Reform Society is saying is that, for the most part, that didn't happen, i.e. that the politicians on all sides were "not convincing" and might as well have said nothing during the debate for all the difference it made.

> how will technology result in less representative democracy

Technology could lead to more referendums, especially on smaller issues. Referendums aren't representative democracy, especially when we take no notice of our representatives when voting in a referendum.

[jim360]

I'm sorry TTT if it looks like I'm merging two topics but I just don't see it that way. As far as I'm concerned both referenda and elections are part of our (flawed) democracy, and how we conduct both should be addressed together, not separately. Also you're mistaken in thinking that I am referring specifically to PR -- which, obviously, in a two-option election would produce an essentially equivalent result to first past the post.

[ToraToraTora]

"During the referendum, did any politician actually cause you to form or change your opinion?" - no but to be fair that was never going to happen I have been anti EU from day 1, I have never heard any reason to change that. Clearly both campaigns targeted those who were not sure of their position.

I hope referendums stay as rare as they are, generally we elect the government to govern but occasionally an issue of such magnitude arises that demand the public be consulted, this is one of those rare items. I don't want us to follow the Swiss approach of wholesale referendums.

[ToraToraTora]

Jim you can argue that the FPTP is flawed but how can a simple binary vote be flawed? democracy in it's purest form. I mentioned PR above only to demonstrate that is exactly what we had in the referendum, I know your history on this subject and I was not attempting to label your voting ideas.

[New Judge]

The problem with the referendum (and General Elections, bye-elections, local council elections, parish council elections, et al) is that the campaigns are run by politicians. In the majority they, by their nature are duplicitous, truth-stretching slimy toads. Any campaign they conduct will be laced with lies, half-truths, exaggerations and misleading information. It is the electorate’s job to see through all this mud and make their minds up accordingly. Anybody moaning that they were misled during the referendum campaign is a fool. Politicians mislead the public; that’s what they do for a living. Expecting the referendum campaign to be somehow different from any other campaign comes from an episode of “Cloud Cuckoo Land” (and for the record, I make these accusation against both sides in the referendum).

I have never been swayed by what politicians tell me they will do. I make my mind up based on what I have seen happen – it’s far more reliable. If the Electoral Reform Society believes they can prevent politicians misleading the public then good luck to them with that. They must have visions of some Utopian paradise. They should stick to trying to introduce PR though I imagine they would suggest that the referendum campaigns on that was laced with lies as well.

[ToraToraTora]

as usual judge, bang on, have another BA for your collection.

[New Judge]

Cheers 3Ts :-)