Originally Posted by
roger_ramjet
Sorry, I must have missed this. Are you telling me that only 37% of the voting public voted to leave? I dont think this is true at all
So let us examine the 37% that are supposedly leading us down the garden path to Eden, or Hell, depending on your viewpoint.
Its not really 37%: its 37% of the registered voters. About 5 million voting age people did not even bother to register to vote, so the 37% becomes a bit under 34%.
Further if we examine the total UK population, its around 65 million, so less than 27% of "the people". OK a chunk of those are kids, but it is their future we are talking about; and a few are no doubt in jail such that they lose their ability to vote, but who gives a **** about them.
So our fate - the will of the people, as it were, is barely more than 1/4 of the population.
Are you with me so far, Mangara....
BUT (there always has to be a but doesnt there) less than 1/4 voted to remain.
So which best represents the will of the people - just over a quarter or just under a quarter. I suppose the answer is neither, but to do nothing would be to "take sides" so one has to say which is more representative. Around half expressed no opinion whatsoever either through disenfranchisement, indolence or "couldnt be bothered).
So let us re examine the question that voters were asked. Is there any bias there inferring how the intentions of the non voters should be interpreted? Nope. It was a simple IN or OUT, so the intentions of those that did not vote, cannot be inferred in either direction. Neither IN or OUT. So their opinion has to be ignored.
However you look at it, one option (OUT) got more support than the other (STAY). OUT may not be an overwhelming will of the people, but it is more the will of the people than STAY. So what do we know about those that did not either register to vote or vote? We could assume that their views mirrored those of the voters, in which case the OUT decision is representative.
We could, politically incorrectly perhaps, assume that those who couldnt be bothered or chose not to vote were a collection of people such as the elderly, the JAMs the undereducateds etc (this is the conventional analysis of non voters in an election). How did these demographics vote when they did vote - overwhelmingly OUT. How about the 5 million that did not even bother to register to vote? Probably the same social groupings.
So the best we can say about the non voting eligible voters is that their characteristics are more likely to match the OUT voters, and so if voting were compulsory, the OUT vote majority would probably have been greater.
Sadly for the next generations, who had no vote, consensus is that they would have voted STAY. Plus ca change la meme chose