In America the lower house is a simple majority but the upper house requires a super majority. Laws can't be passed without a super majority.
Current Affairs EU In or Out
- Thread starter micknick
- Start date
- Status
In America the lower house is a simple majority but the upper house requires a super majority. Laws can't be passed without a super majority.
Old Blue 2
Player Valuation: £40m
Not interested in the USA. Not germaine to the thread. This is about the UK, and a simple majority carries the day.
And typical of the internet the merits of an argument are ignored in favor of a completely different argument.
Charlie Sweet
Player Valuation: £35m
Joey it is democracy in action. We didn't vote for Leave "at any cost". If the final deal is bad the MPs have to vote against Brexit. Surely you see that's their job?
But in the House of Commons a political party has a detailed manifesto and is held.accountable at the ballot box every four years. So it's nothing like a "once in a generation" Brexit vote....
The ballot paper was a months campaign lies on both signs project fear - the bus bad claim of the amount without the rebates Parliment voted 6-1 to construct how the ballot paper was going to be !
Then in many debates the warning was there vote out and we leave the single market, and the customs union as we wanted to trade worldwide and negotiations with the EU on a seperate trade deal
To say anyone who voted Out was ill informed @Charlie Sweet is ludricous of you are clutching straws!
Charlie Sweet
Player Valuation: £35m
Joey that wasn't my point. we've done that one!
I am.saying if it's a bad deal then the MPs have to use their intelligence and consider how to vote. It can't be "any deal". Surely you agree?
For example if the deal negotiated was we continue to lay the same amount each year to the EU for access to the single market, but get no say in votes and cannot stop immigration you wouldn't want parliament to ratify that would you?
There has to be a deal as we are leaving if Parliment ratify the deal n a small majority then yes it's democracy at its best!
Charlie Sweet
Player Valuation: £35m
I believe in democrocy what ever is decided, and we leave the EU on favourable terms so be it we need to leave then democracy has won!
Old Blue 2
Player Valuation: £40m
Not at all.
On the one hand, one system is a simple majority. On the other it's a 'super' majority, as you called it. Chalk & cheese. Apples & oranges. Not relevant to the discussion concerning the UK vote, which was based 100% on a simple majority.
But carry on arguing the point...
Old Blue 2
Player Valuation: £40m
Come on, Charlie, you cannot compare the one with the other.
One is about an election into power, the other (which was cross-party) was about a collective UK-wide move to stay in or move out of an organisation.
I am not arguing that a second referendum be done. I am arguing what should have been done in the first place. A simple majority on a permanent decision is a divisive way to govern on a closely contested vote.
A simple majority doesn't force either side to sell their ideas to their opponent when it's a split down the middle electorate. A super majority would force both sides to clearly define their stance and have a clear defined plan of execution. Not make it up as you go.
NilSatisOptimum
Player Valuation: £70m
Noone can disregard the result just let democracy decide, can't hold people hostage to a singular vote for ever more or else it looks like Mussolini et al. However, Brexit has only got itself to blame. Factor in the small majority and far from convincing proceedings since June 23 2016, which by the way is well over 600 days now. Brexit has had plenty of time to put something together to convince remainers of the positives about Brexit. Instead all everyone gets is divisions in what Brexit should be. An Utter failure..
Gwladysstreetlad
Player Valuation: £50m
It's funny that you talk about Mussolini ect and yet it is you who show the breathtaking disregard for democracy that monsters such as him took for granted as though it's mearly a tool to be used and not somthing incredibly important to any supposedly civilized nation. Nobody has suggested that there shouldn't ever be another vote on the matter. Many of us (including many remainers who aren't as contemptuous of democracy), just feel we should at least forfill the first referndum before we go about perusing a second one. Holding election or referendums repeatedly till you get the desired result is not democracy at all, it is a twisted mockery of democracy.
Then you make an extremely odd comment suggesting that "Brexit has only got itself to blame". How exactly can Brexit in itself be to blame for anything? It's not a person or an object, it's not a thing. If you mean the government handling of Brexit or the people who voted for it well that is an entirety diffrent thing and you can make your arguments accordingly. As for the idea that the government should of convinced remainers that Brexit would be a good thing, well yes I somewhat agree they should attempted more effectively at least but in reality the vast majority of remainers had no intention of ever changing their mind on the issue regardless of how our leaving went even if it had been smooth saling. As far as creating devisions in the country goes, well how exactly would ignoring the majority's vote actually help fix devisions?!
Last edited:
peteblue
Welcome back Wayne
If we were tied to the EU for two years without a vote, new rules would indeed be bad as they would be deliberately designed to undermine financial services for the benefit of France and Germany. I have no problem with following existing rules but not mischievous ones over which we have no control. That’s why the ‘penalty rules’ they tried to hit us with were floated, so that the U.K. could not use the ECJ as a mechanism to challenge and delay any new rule until our final exit...
- Status