General Discussion
Again, failing to “get it”. The fact that larger numbers voted in that referendum is utterly statistically irrelevant when it comes to majorities. 77% of those that voted wanted a playpark somewhere on the lawn, 52% of those that voted wanted to leave the EU. You seem to be suggesting that no votes of any kind should be judged binding unless more than a certain percentage of the electorate ...
@Lynne Councillor Foden’s petition to “Save The Lawn”, from which you pasted the above text, attracted a magnificent total of 443 signatures. What percentage is that, based upon the towns population? Exactly...
When analysing the results of a vote, you can only include any percentages in that analysis that are based on the votes actually cast! And of the votes cast, yes the result was overwhelming! I don’t understand why people find this so difficult to comprehend. It was certainly far more overwhelming than another recent referendum, but of course that was different and we need to “get over it”... ...
People complain when there’s a perceived lack of transparency. People complain when there is obvious transparency. Good grief! “They” aren’t trying to “get another one”. It’s not about votes - that has already happened and the result was overwhelmingly in favour of a playpark somewhere on the lawn. These presentations will relay the results of the Lawn Working Groups hard work in fine ...
Shouldn’t those Brexiteers moaning about May’s choice of advisors, erm, “get over it”? And, like I read yesterday, I assume that they’ll be up in arms about official plans to introduce eye tests for drivers who have reached a certain age? As, of course, only the original result ever counts...
The irony is that these Brexiteers want us to go back in time to 50 years ago, but will have to wait another 50 years for that to happen! And the vast majority of them of course will be long long gone by then...
