Talk:2009 Danish Act of Succession referendum

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Motivation ?[edit]

Why was this change made; seeing how it will have no effect for decades? (I don't know anything about danish politics). A motivation/history section would be helpful. 86.121.201.184 (talk) 02:36, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote a short paragraph on the background of the change. /AB-me (chit-chat) 13:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion polls ?[edit]

Have there been any ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.242.236.114 (talk • contribs)

Certainly not a lot. Public interest dropped quite a bit after the gender of Prince Christian of Denmark was announced, and the only poll I could find was from back in May 2005. Hemmingsen 06:46, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Second vote in parliament[edit]

The article was recently updated with a news article from October 2008[1] saying that the law has been passed by the second parliament. That isn't true, though, and it would have made the referendum date in June 2009 a violation of the constitution. (Quoting from paragraph 88: "... If the Bill is passed unamended by the Folketing assembling after the election, the Bill shall, within six months after its final passage, be submitted to the electors for approval or rejection by direct voting...")[2]

Checking with the parliament's website, the law was proposed by the prime minister on 7 October for the second vote, but has not yet made it through the first reading (of three). (See [3] for those who can read Danish.) Hemmingsen 17:20, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The possibility of a no-victory[edit]

Have someone talked about how big the possibility for a no-victory is ? What do people and analysts in Denmark think about that ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.242.236.114 (talk) 00:08, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by a no-victory? If you mean that neither side gets an absolute majority, this is more often the case than not. The government doesn't need to be in majority, they just cannot have a majority against them, so for instance, currently, they have support from the Danish People's Party and, to a large extent but less than the case of DPP, Liberal Alliance. -Lilac Soul (talk • contribs • count) 06:03, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the question is, what are the odds the noes will win? If there's any polling or election reportage, it would be a good thing to know. I assume we will need help from Danish speakers for that. -Rrius (talk) 06:53, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a Danish speaker. I cannot find the poll itself, but this article from a major Danish newspaper cites a poll with 4.3 % voting against. So the chances of a no-victory are near zero (the odds would be about 1 in 22, and this isn't really a stocastic outcome, so that simply isn't going to happen). But if you refer to a no-"victory", as in not enough votes cast in favour according to the somewhat harsh requirement that 40% of all eligible voters must vote in favour, I simply haven't seen a poll about this. Indeed, this is probably difficult to forecast. I have seen some analyses, e.g. this feature story saying that there is some risk that it won't happen. The point of that feature story is that the election for the European Parliament (occuring on the same day as this referendum in Denmark) must not be the major point of focus. Those traditionally garner very low voter turnouts, and as such, the referendum could fail. As the article already states, the fact that almost noone is directly against the new referendum may lead to it being considered a fait accompli, which could lead to voter apathy and the rejection of the referendum due to insufficient numbers of votes cast. However, 88 % of cast votes in favour would require about 44.45 % voter turnout to meet the 40 % of all eligible voters criterion. The last EU parliamentary election had 47.6 %, so that might be alright. With a 47.6 % turnout, about 84.6 % must vote in favour. -Lilac Soul (talk • contribs • count) 09:15, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What are "succedents" supposed to be. And why use "polemically" in this context?124.197.15.138 (talk) 07:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone thought of giving Statistics Denmark a calculator?[edit]

1,858,008 + 317,711 = 2,175,719, not 2,150,500. Kevin McE (talk) 17:13, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody forgot to update the total in [4] I have done it.[5] PrimeHunter (talk) 12:34, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Danish Act of Succession referendum, 2009. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:11, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2009_Danish_Act_of_Succession_referendum&oldid=1196542072"