First, it's hard to know that and second, meeting Paris Accord targets will have 'costs'. So if you're voting against costs necessary to meet a specified objective, well it's effectively the same thing as meeting the objective.
The answer is more complicated. The same day there were two more referendums about agriculture, one about pandemic measures and one about giving police more tools for antiterrorism measures. The agriculture referendums were very controversial and were strongly rejected and perhaps there was some spill-over. Imagine someone German speaking from a rural canton writing «Nein», then again «Nein». And the pandemic measures also generated a lot of scorn against government. We will never know whether this was enough of an influence.
The poster you are replying to doesn‘t care about the 49,99% that get the hard end of democracy when they lose a vote if they're the „bad guys“.
So he only cares about the 1-2% that „lamentably“ made his side lose.
Basically he thinks like a dictator, that just needs to get those 51% in his favor and then can absolutely crush the other side.
He completely misses that the goal of a democracy should always be consensus, mutual understanding and a sense of belonging, and that a 51/49 vote is the absolute worst case for a democracy, as it shows a complete divide, no matter which side won.
The goal to fix that should not be to compaign for a few weeks to get the last 1-2% to flip to „his“ side, but rather take a few steps back and think about how his country could achieve a 90+% consensus, perhaps by finding other solutions than increasing taxes for the middle class even more…
Not quite, I do care about consensus , I find it ironic that often these referendums end up with such a pithy divide yet there is little discussion about how to find a consensus from such a half/half vote ..for those not Swiss it might come as a surprise that often a big difference is between the Swiss french and the Swiss german part as well as more conventionally, between the rural and urban...
Btw, what was the proportion of voters voting..? also why not bring in the said measures in the cantons that voted for them..or on a voluntary basis.. I am also curious how much the opposing sides spent on media..
Edit to answer my own question..60% of those who could, voted...so to add to my suggestions why not make it count when say 80-90% have voted...maybe thereby giving people a taste of "every voice matters"
First, it's hard to know that and second, meeting Paris Accord targets will have 'costs'. So if you're voting against costs necessary to meet a specified objective, well it's effectively the same thing as meeting the objective.
After all, it's almost always about money.
The editorial framing is fair.