How should a second referendum present its options? Watch

nonotyoutoo
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
The problem with a 3 way vote of Deal , No Deal , Remain is that it fractures the Leave vote and if nothing is done about it, Remain might be in first place with only 34% of the vote. Similarly any "winner" of that would rob the other 66% of a voice and is illegitimate.

So there is talk of a second preference system. Where you vote for first preference, then a second. This however is an absolute stitch up because what Theresa May has done is deliberate negotiated a deal that is worse than both Remain and Leave. It is actually far worse for No deal voter (and remainers) because they are forced to express an alternative preference when they don't have any, because the deal is as bad or worse than remain. and for the remainers, any second preference means that they think they would be worse off.

I think the best way to run a second referendum would be to ask two questions.

The first question asks to see if at least 50% of voters would accept the deal on offer. If there is majority consensus , then the deal is passed and we have "Brexit".

The second question asks if the deal on offer is rejected, would your preference be Leave (w/o deal) or Remain.

I think that is the fairest way to frame a second referendum. What about your thoughts?
Last edited by nonotyoutoo; 1 year ago
3
reply
DrMikeHuntHertz
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
Same as the last one, no need to hide the fudge.
0
reply
nonotyoutoo
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#3
(Original post by DrMikeHuntHertz)
Same as the last one, no need to hide the fudge.
So you would go for the Tony Blair option of Brexit good hard and proper vs Remain?

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top...rgan-1-5803459

tbh, it's just about the only good idea he's had since 1997.
0
reply
NYU℠
Badges: 20
#4
Report 1 year ago
#4
(Original post by nonotyoutoo)
The problem with a 3 way vote of Deal , No Deal , Remain is that it fractures the Leave vote and if nothing is done about it, Remain might be in first place with only 34% of the vote. Similarly any "winner" of that would rob the other 66% of a voice and is illegitimate.

So there is talk of a second preference system. Where you vote for first preference, then a second. This however is an absolute stitch up because what Theresa May has done is deliberate negotiated a deal that is worse than both Remain and Leave. It is actually far worse for No deal voter (and remainers) because they are forced to express an alternative preference when they don't have any, because the deal is as bad or worse than remain. and for the remainers, any second preference means that they think they would be worse off.

I think the best way to run a second referendum would be to ask two questions.

The first question asks to see if at least 50% of voters would accept the deal on offer. If there is majority consensus , then the deal is passed and we have "Brexit".

The second question asks if the deal on offer is rejected, would your preference be Leave (w/o deal) or Remain.

I think that is the fairest way to frame a second referendum. What about your thoughts?
I’m not sure that asking two separate questions would have a different outcome than preferential voting. I haven’t taken the time to model the game theory outcomes, but I don’t have any initial hunches that the results would be different.

The questions amount to, in simpler form:
(1) Do you want the deal?
(2) Do you want no deal or remain?

I think you could accomplish the same outcome by the just using three options and doing preference voting. If 50% of people vote deal as option one, it has the same outcome as your first question. If less than 50% of people vote for option one, then the preference system determines. I’m not sure that asking the question sequentially actually impacts the results — but I haven’t actually run the game theory on the 6 possible combinations.

My hunch stems from the following: Your first question essentially asks “are you putting ‘deal’ as your option 1 preference?” Your second question essentially asks how they would order their options if deal wasn’t option preference 1.
Last edited by NYU℠; 1 year ago
1
reply
nonotyoutoo
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#5
(Original post by NYU℠)
I’m not sure that asking two separate questions would have a different outcome than preferential voting. I haven’t taken the time to model the game theory outcomes, but I don’t have any initial hunches that the results would be different.

The questions amount to, in simpler form:
(1) Do you want the deal?
(2) Do you want no deal or remain?

I think you could accomplish the same outcome by the just using three options and doing preference voting. If 50% of people vote deal as option one, it has the same outcome as your first question. If less than 50% of people vote for option one, then the preference system determines. I’m not sure that asking the question sequentially actually impacts the results — but I haven’t actually run the game theory on the 6 possible combinations.

My hunch stems from the following: Your first question essentially asks “are you putting ‘deal’ as your option 1 preference?” Your second question essentially asks how they would order their options if deal wasn’t option preference 1.
the difference is. my version forces everyone to express a secondary preference from the point of the view of "May's Deal". Rather than their own first preferences of either Leave or Remain.

That would most respect the first referendum also. we voted to leave, we tried to negotiate a deal. this is the deal. what now?
0
reply
nutz99
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
Pretty pointless exercise really as May has effectively shown her cards. We need a new player with a new attitude that the EU will take seriously and has no hidden agenda. Difficult ask I know but surely there is someone out there who can take on the EU bullies.
1
reply
NYU℠
Badges: 20
#7
Report 1 year ago
#7
(Original post by nonotyoutoo)
the difference is. my version forces everyone to express a secondary preference from the point of the view of "May's Deal". Rather than their own first preferences of either Leave or Remain.
Not sure that this accomplishes anything different than asking the following in preferential system, though:

(1) Leave
(2) Remain
(3) May’s deal

You would, I think, get the same results; but you’re asking one question and giving a preferential system, as opposed to two questions that essentially stand-in as a preferential system.
2
reply
nonotyoutoo
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#8
(Original post by NYU℠)
; but you’re asking one question and giving a preferential system, as opposed to two questions that essentially stand-in as a preferential system.
sorry, could you explain this bit to me?
0
reply
DrMikeHuntHertz
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 year ago
#9
(Original post by nonotyoutoo)
So you would go for the Tony Blair option of Brexit good hard and proper vs Remain?

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top...rgan-1-5803459

tbh, it's just about the only good idea he's had since 1997.
I'd make it exactly the same as the 2016 referendum, with the additional caption at the top "We didn't like your last vote so we're making you vote again".
1
reply
nonotyoutoo
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#10
(Original post by DrMikeHuntHertz)
I'd make it exactly the same as the 2016 referendum, with the additional caption at the top "We didn't like your last vote so we're making you vote again".
the problem with that version is that it doesn't get rid of the remoaning of "people voted to leave, but not how the leave should take place or under what deal".

obviously we have a deal now. and it's a ****ing pile of dog poo.

any second referendum should make it clear there is support for no deal proper brexit so the traitorous politicians have nothing to hide behind.
0
reply
Notoriety
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 year ago
#11
Content and not content works for me.

MPs can work out what to do from there.
0
reply
NYU℠
Badges: 20
#12
Report 1 year ago
#12
(Original post by nonotyoutoo)
sorry, could you explain this bit to me?
Your first question asks the following proposition:

(1) Do you want May’s deal, yes or no.

Your second question asks the following proposition:

(2) If no, do you want hard Brexit or remain?

Compare to the preferential system:

No deal. No deal. Deal. Deal. Remain. Remain.
Deal. Remain. No deal. Remain. No deal. Deal.
Remain. Deal. Remain. No deal. Deal. No deal.

Actually, come to think of it, separating the questions is a problem. Because if the answer to (1) is “no”, then we only know what your first preference is — either remain or no deal. We don’t know if you would prefer may’s deal over the other option.

That is, if you answer your question (1) in the negative, you’re either in the bold or italics categories above, but we don’t know what your second or third preference is. Your way actually limits the options.

Example: I could prefer remain over May’s deal. So on your model I would vote:
(1) No
(2) Remain

Thus, my vote would be counted as “remain.” But, I could prefer May’s deal to no deal. But, that wouldn’t be considered by your separated questions.
0
reply
nonotyoutoo
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#13
(Original post by Notoriety)
Content and not content works for me.

MPs can work out what to do from there.
rubbish. the MPs do not adequately represent the will of das volk. if it ever did, we would not have had a first referedum, and we never would have invoked article 50. most mps are remainers and live in a elite bubble.
Last edited by nonotyoutoo; 1 year ago
0
reply
NYU℠
Badges: 20
#14
Report 1 year ago
#14
(Original post by nonotyoutoo)
the problem with that version is that it doesn't get rid of the remoaning of "people voted to leave, but not how the leave should take place or under what deal".

obviously we have a deal now. and it's a ****ing pile of dog poo.

any second referendum should make it clear there is support for no deal proper brexit so the traitorous politicians have nothing to hide behind.
No deal Brexit is not the most popular option among the public. So, it’s not clear what your aim would be here.
0
reply
nonotyoutoo
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#15
(Original post by NYU℠)
Your first question asks the following proposition:

(1) Do you want May’s deal, yes or no.

Your second question asks the following proposition:

(2) If no, do you want hard Brexit or remain?

Compare to the preferential system:

No deal. No deal. Deal. Deal. Remain. Remain.
Deal. Remain. No deal. Remain. No deal. Deal.
Remain. Deal. Remain. No deal. Deal. No deal.

Actually, come to think of it, separating the questions is a problem. Because if the answer to (1) is “no”, then we only know what your first preference is — either remain or no deal. We don’t know if you would prefer may’s deal over the other option.

That is, if you answer your question (1) in the negative, you’re either in the bold or italics categories above, but we don’t know what your second or third preference is. Your way actually limits the options.

Example: I could prefer remain over May’s deal. So on your model I would vote:
(1) No
(2) Remain

Thus, my vote would be counted as “remain.” But, I could prefer May’s deal to no deal. But, that wouldn’t be considered by your separated questions.
that's a feature, not a bug.

only 1 preference w/regards to deal as the default to be voted on.

everyone gets their say on the deal in the 1st question. if more than 50% tick the yes box, all answers for 2nd one is disregarded.

i'm not a political scientist, or a psephologist, but my version is less a preferential system and more 2 binary referendums in one. it either makes the "condorcet" winner the default, or eliminate it completely. (no compromises)

I also mean that everyone would answer both Q1 and Q2. So everyone's first preference is preserved and some people's second (everyone who thinks deal as their first choice). no thirds.

--

what I want is an unambigous winner between Remain and Leave once and for all. Winner takes all. Losers agitate for the next 25 years. This also settles the best out of three argument.
Last edited by nonotyoutoo; 1 year ago
0
reply
NYU℠
Badges: 20
#16
Report 1 year ago
#16
(Original post by nonotyoutoo)
that's a feature, not a bug.

only 1 preference w/regards to deal as the default to be voted on.

everyone gets their say on the deal in the 1st question. if more than 50% tick the yes box, all answers for 2nd one is disregarded.

i'm not a political scientist, or a psephologist, but my version is less a preferential system and more 2 binary referendums in one. it either makes the condorcet winner the default, or eliminate it completely. (no compromises)
But that’s a problem — it is a bug.

I could prefer “no deal” or “remain” over May’s deal; but prefer May’s deal over the other option. Your way excludes my ability to provide this information.

That is, I could prefer:
(1) Hard Brexit
(2) Deal
(3) Remain

But, on your system, I would vote:
(1) No deal
(2) Hard Brexit

But this leaves out the fact that I would prefer the deal over remain — which leaves out the possibility of obtaining the deal over remain, depending on how the cards fall. Your way limits options to the detriment of the voter.
0
reply
J Papi
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 year ago
#17
(Original post by nonotyoutoo)
The problem with a 3 way vote of Deal , No Deal , Remain is that it fractures the Leave vote and if nothing is done about it, Remain might be in first place with only 34% of the vote. Similarly any "winner" of that would rob the other 66% of a voice and is illegitimate.

So there is talk of a second preference system. Where you vote for first preference, then a second. This however is an absolute stitch up because what Theresa May has done is deliberate negotiated a deal that is worse than both Remain and Leave. It is actually far worse for No deal voter (and remainers) because they are forced to express an alternative preference when they don't have any, because the deal is as bad or worse than remain. and for the remainers, any second preference means that they think they would be worse off.

I think the best way to run a second referendum would be to ask two questions.

The first question asks to see if at least 50% of voters would accept the deal on offer. If there is majority consensus , then the deal is passed and we have "Brexit".

The second question asks if the deal on offer is rejected, would your preference be Leave (w/o deal) or Remain.

I think that is the fairest way to frame a second referendum. What about your thoughts?
Great question

I do like the ranked preferences system, where people can put numbers next to the options in order they like the most (1 = best outcome, 4 = worst outcome)

The options should be:
- Leave - no deal
- Leave - postpone departure and attempt to renegotiate a second deal
- Leave - current deal
- Remain - abandon art.50 process entirely

There won't be a clear winner, but, given the whole 'advisory referendum' thing, I'm hoping that this is going to be treated as the ultimate poll.

An afterthought: the three Leave options aren't necessarily mutually exclusive - the government may choose to pursue more than one of them over time if support is split equally between them
1
reply
nonotyoutoo
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#18
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#18
(Original post by NYU℠)
No deal Brexit is not the most popular option among the public. So, it’s not clear what your aim would be here.
I want my chance to vote for no deal. because the mps will not give the opportunity, look at the dominic grieves annoucement.
0
reply
NYU℠
Badges: 20
#19
Report 1 year ago
#19
(Original post by nonotyoutoo)
I want my chance to vote for no deal. because the mps will not give the opportunity, look at the dominic grieves annoucement.
That’s what the preference system allows. Your system actually hinders your ability to get no deal; it makes it less likely, not more likely.
0
reply
nonotyoutoo
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#20
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#20
(Original post by NYU℠)
That’s what the preference system allows. Your system actually hinders your ability to get no deal; it makes it less likely, not more likely.
my 2 question version or the standard 3 way 3 ranked preferences version?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How many uni open days have you been to/did you go to?

0 (70)
28.23%
1 (40)
16.13%
2 (40)
16.13%
3 (35)
14.11%
4 (17)
6.85%
5 (20)
8.06%
6 (6)
2.42%
7+ (20)
8.06%

Watched Threads

View All