Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by lumisota 2921 days ago
Regardless of the epithets used to describe them, it's worth remembering that, accounting for turn-out, it was around 37% of the British electorate that voted to leave the EU.
2 comments

There's no reason to believe that the result as it stands couldn't have been extrapolated across the rest of the population.
My argument is that the number of people who didn't vote doesn't need to be extrapolated: apathy isn't a yes or a no vote, but something else.
Are you sure it's apathy though? There are plenty of other reasons why somebody might not make it to the polling station.

(EDIT: For example the elderly who have been shown to be overwhelmingly pro-brexit could have diffculty)

All polling and analysis since the result bears out that the vote was indeed representative of the population.

> Are you sure it's apathy though?

Perhaps because it was very clearly billed as a non-binding referendum, which would only have an advisory impact at best?

That the politicians took a basically 50/50 result and have used it to _remove_ the EU citizenship of everyone in the UK is beyond taking the piss.

> it was very clearly billed as a non-binding referendum

Was it though? It seems to me that many very clearly consider it to be binding, though ridiculously the actual meaning is ambiguous.

> Was it though?

Errr yes? That was the whole point. The general concept I had of it was along the lines of "Lets see what the general opinion is, so if there's a large majority one way or another we'll know if we need to look into it".

The non-binding bit was so they didn't have to _commit_ to actually doing anything, just in case.

Sure, it isn't just apathy (as in your example). But if you compare the turn-out for the Scottish independence vote in 2014 (~85%) with the EU referendum (~72%), I think it might be a considerable factor.

Another factor is complacency on the part of those that would have voted to remain: polling leading up to the referendum showed a clear remain win.

(I should point out that I'm not suggesting that the result of the referendum isn't pro-Brexit, but that the numbers don't support the case for a so-called "hard Brexit")

Yes, as time goes by it seems as though sense is starting to sink in, though it is still quite close. A year ago I wouldn't have been confident at all.

[0] https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-there-was-a-referen...

[1] https://yougov.co.uk/news/2018/03/29/where-britain-stands-br...

I'd be for a second referendum on an actual agreement for what Britain's relationship with the EU would be, post-Brexit. Some of the options, particularly those favoured by those that voted to remain, are poor.
How things might have been different if the UK government had used the result as a warning shot to the EU, and a case for reform.
There are a 1.4 million 18 and 19 year olds in the UK that didn't get to vote in 2016.

Likewise there are over 1 million who did get to vote who are no longer alive.

When accounting for the entire country, about 1 in 4 voted to leave the EU, 1 in 4 voted to remain, 1 in 4 didn't know/care and trusted their MPs to do what was best, and 1 in 4 were not allowed to vote because they were too young and must rely on their MPs to do what is best.