The EU constitutional amendments

retired_ks reddy · 10-20-2007, 11:48 AM

Still got to swing an awful lot of people.

DebSchiff · 10-20-2007, 02:15 PM

Someone in the Guardian the other day pointed out that 25 out of the 27 EU member states were, at some point in the 20th Century, either occupied by a hostile foreign power or run by a dictatorship of some kind.

It's surely no accident that the two who weren't (UK and Sweden) tend to be more euroskeptic than the rest? Neither has the Euro, for example.

retired_drumcook · 10-20-2007, 02:49 PM

A referendum would be completely pointless here, for the reasons people already have said - the vast majority of people voting would not have read the treaty and would have no understanding of what they were voting for or against. Might as well have a text vote ffs.

According to an opinion poll today 75% of the electorate want a referendum. But, if there was one, you can be sure that the turnout would be substantially less than 75%. Conclusion: people are knobs.

Fitness Matt · 10-20-2007, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cobbler:
A referendum would be completely pointless here, for the reasons people already have said - the vast majority of people voting would not have read the treaty and would have no understanding of what they were voting for or against. Might as well have a text vote ffs.

According to an opinion poll today 75% of the electorate want a referendum. But, if there was one, you can be sure that the turnout would be substantially less than 75%. Conclusion: people are knobs.

It's easier for people to kid themselves they're being politically active by being negative than to actually be politically active and take positive action by taking the trouble to go to the polling station.

Fitness Matt · 10-20-2007, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by exchampionsfan:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by Glyn:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by Sir Bert Preast:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by Glyn:
An imaginative PM would call a referendum on the EC, but would make it a vote on membership of the Community as a whole and not about the new Treaty.

Because Cameron would then have to turn round and tell people to vote 'Yes'.

And the 'Yes' vote would win.

The EU, you mean? And I'm not so sure it would win. </BLOCKQUOTE>

The Labour Party would be campaigning 'Yes', the Tory Party would have to campaign 'Yes' to be consistent, the LibDems would campaign 'Yes'. The largest party likely to campaign 'No' is UKIP - and they haven't got any money.

The newspapers, despite all their EU-bashing (which is just lazy journalism for the most part) are still businesses and will probably say vote 'Yes', however much they dress it up as a reluctant one to save their face. The only major paper that I can see saying 'No' is the Telegraph, and that's because I have absolutely no idea which way the Barclay Brothers are likely to tell the editor to go.

With an intensive 'Yes' campaign against what is bound to be a fairly puny 'No' campaign I can only see it going one way. </BLOCKQUOTE>

and that all beautifully illustrates why referenda are often more plutocratic than democratic </BLOCKQUOTE>

And if that truly is the case, they're also a complete waste of time, money and effort.