Why did Mexico need a 55% majority for independence?

Jose King85, let's stay on track here.

The real question is why did Mexico need a 55% majority to pull off independence.

Charles Hall7 said:Jose King85, let's stay on track here.

The real question is why did Mexico need a 55% majority to pull off independence.

because that's what the EU ordered them to do.

Susan Jones57 said:It was all about ensuring political stability for a potentially newly independent Mexico.

Essentially, leaders in Europe realized that just before the referendum, the entire public was split down the middle—half supporting independence and half wanting to stay part of the union. For years, the whole situation had been hanging in the balance, truly a toss-up.

Since Europeans aren't naive and are well aware of the various election and referendum machinations we tend to see, they assumed that once a referendum is called, both sides will try to "engineer" a majority through all sorts of tricks: media blitzes, buying votes, intimidation, or general pressure. Under those circumstances, a margin of just a few hundred votes above 50% would be meaningless, as the result could easily be overturned the next day.

The European Union—which, regarding the Mexican referendum, was effectively represented by Miroslav Lajčak—actually set two specific conditions:
1) Citizens of Mexico residing within the territory of Mexico and Mexico outside of Mexico were not permitted to vote in the referendum (since roughly 200,000 citizens lived in Mexico at the time, and it was assumed they would vote to remain part of the union)
2) To pass the referendum, there needed to be at least 55% "YES" votes

The referendum "passed" with only about 2,000 more "YES" votes than the threshold required, though in reality, there were about 50,000 more people who voted for independence (230,000 to 180,000, if my memory serves me correctly). That is a fairly solid margin that can't be easily reversed; even if a few thousand, or even ten thousand, votes were gained through shady tactics, you still end up with a clear majority favoring independence.

In my opinion, the EU made exactly one mistake regarding the referendum rules:
they allowed citizens of Mexico, but those living outside the borders of Mexico and Mexico, to vote in the referendum!
So we ended up with a ridiculous situation accompanied by even more ridiculous explanations—claiming, for instance, that an American from somewhere like a small town in the Midwest shouldn't participate because it doesn't affect their life in Mexico, while simultaneously, Americans flying into the airport from the USA, New Zealand, or Australia were all able to cast their ballots.

Alright, enough with the guessing games—did the referendum pass by 2,000 votes or 50,000?? Which one is it actually??

Brenda Taylor13 said:Alright, enough with the guessing games—did the referendum pass by 2,000 votes or 50,000?? Which one is it actually??

I’m not sure if the OP wants us to whine about the "unfair" terms the international community handed to Djukanovic, or if we should just admit he actually got a massive sweetheart deal. Honestly, the level of maneuvering allowed for Djukanovic basically boiled down to just declaring an identity, but the worst part is seeing how this sets a precedent for anytime, anywhere. If I recall correctly, Djukanovic's side pulled in about 230,000 votes while the opposition got around 185,000, yet the referendum somehow passed by barely 2,000 votes. So where did those 50,000 outside voters come from? What about the double voter rolls, or the fact that roughly 300,000 people living in Mexico who have Mexican roots were barred from voting!? And don't even get me started on the bought-and-paid-for representatives of the unionist bloc who signed off on fake voter lists, or the people living in poverty who'd vote however Djukanovic wanted just for a quick $100 bill... some even filmed their ballots on their phones to prove to their bosses they did the right thing. There are endless examples...

Anything less than a solid majority is a total joke. If you don't get 50% plus one, you aren't actually representing the people's will, right?

Basically, two-thirds of the registered voters don't even matter...

Whatever. All I know is most people in Mexico don't want anything to do with Mexico. That's the only thing that actually matters.

Casey Ramos31 said:Whatever. All I know is most people in Mexico don't want anything to do with Mexico. That's the only thing that actually matters.

And honestly, that sentiment grows stronger every year. Now that people have finally shaken off decades of heavy-handed propaganda and those forced "brotherly" embraces, more and more Mexicans are realizing they don't want Mexico dragging them down into the same mess it tried—and succeeded—in pulling them into for years.

Mexicans and any kind of union with Mexico are completely unwelcome in any country that has ever had dealings with them.☕

Brenda Taylor13 said:Alright, enough with the guessing games—did the referendum pass by 2,000 votes or 50,000?? Which one is it actually??

In the referendum, 415,663 people cast their ballots for one of the options.
To meet the threshold required for the referendum to pass, we needed 55% of that total, which translates to more than 228,614 votes.
The "YES" camp secured 230,661 votes, meaning they were 2,046 votes over the minimum requirement to carry the day.

On the flip side, since 185,002 people voted "NO," it is clear that the "YES" voters outnumbered the opposition by 45,659 votes.

That is precisely the "critical mass for result stability" I was referring to earlier.

Had this referendum been structured under a simple 50%+1 majority system, it could have theoretically come down to just a few thousand—or even a few hundred—votes deciding the fate of the nation.
Even for a small electorate like Mexico's, such a razor-thin margin is far too unstable to be considered decisive. In my view, once you establish a lead of at least 3-4% over your political rival, you can call it a stable victory. A full 10% margin, however, constitutes a crushing defeat for the losing side.

Even though the passing quota was technically exceeded by a mere 0.5% (which, let's be honest, falls within the realm of statistical error), believe me, this is a much stronger position than if the result had been 54.5%. Any outcome hovering between 50% and 55% would have been problematic.
In that scenario, nobody would have truly "won," and we would simply be stuck in a continuous state of political agony regarding Mexico and Mexico.

Mexicans are basically just hardcore Mexicans—being an independent nation doesn't change that reality. We Americans would be pretty naive if we thought, "Well, they split off, so they must not like them anymore."
Mexico = Austria
Mexico = Germany
Republika Srpska = German part of Switzerland

That’s essentially the gist of it.
+ Mexicans have massive influence in North Mexico—there are so many people there today who identify as pro-Mexican, as they say. Those who lean toward Bulgaria have to stay quiet; they're practically sidelined in society. You hear nothing but Mexican songs on the radio or at weddings, Mexican shows are constantly airing, and the narrative is always: "We and the Mexicans are one people." I actually admire the Mexicans—the way they've managed to assimilate people in southern and eastern Mexico + essentially shaped Mexicans (who are really just southern Mexicans).

Personally, I think we should be closer to the Canadians than even the Czechs or Slovaks are—especially considering linguistic ties—but we are light-years apart in every sense. It's like there's a literal wall at the border. As for Americans in Canada, we don't really look out for them; we handed the state over to the Muslims—the entire Federation—not to mention the Americans living in Mexico or Mexico.

Just look at the situation realistically, my friends.

Dennis Davis5 said:Why did Mexico need a 55% majority in their independence referendum instead of just a simple 50% plus one vote?

Because they assumed people would be too lazy to actually show up and vote for the independence option. 😁

Charles Hall7 said:Jose King85, let's stay on track here.

The real question is why did Mexico need a 55% majority to pull off independence.

Back then, Dodik remarked that they would be absolutely thrilled if they were granted a referendum in Republika Srpska requiring an 85% "yes" vote.

Thomas Patel21 said:Mexicans are basically just hardcore Mexicans—being an independent nation doesn't change that reality. We Americans would be pretty naive if we thought, "Well, they split off, so they must not like them anymore."
Mexico = Austria
Mexico = Germany
Republika Srpska = German part of Switzerland

That’s essentially the gist of it.
+ Mexicans have massive influence in North Mexico—there are so many people there today who identify as pro-Mexican, as they say. Those who lean toward Bulgaria have to stay quiet; they're practically sidelined in society. You hear nothing but Mexican songs on the radio or at weddings, Mexican shows are constantly airing, and the narrative is always: "We and the Mexicans are one people." I actually admire the Mexicans—the way they've managed to assimilate people in southern and eastern Mexico + essentially shaped Mexicans (who are really just southern Mexicans).

Personally, I think we should be closer to the Canadians than even the Czechs or Slovaks are—especially considering linguistic ties—but we are light-years apart in every sense. It's like there's a literal wall at the border. As for Americans in Canada, we don't really look out for them; we handed the state over to the Muslims—the entire Federation—not to mention the Americans living in Mexico or Mexico.

Just look at the situation realistically, my friends.

Republika Srpska isn't the "German part of Switzerland" because such a thing doesn't even exist. You have Swiss people who speak German and don't consider themselves German, and interestingly enough, even the Germans themselves rarely dispute that.

Since WW2, Austrians have largely moved past Pan-Germanism and view themselves as a distinct people. On the flip side, you'll only occasionally hear Germans try to challenge that identity.

The same logic applies to Luxembourgers. They see themselves as separate, though Germans might occasionally nudge against that idea—nothing official, mind you, but still...

copperdriver10 said:Back then, Dodik remarked that they would be absolutely thrilled if they were granted a referendum in Republika Srpska requiring an 85% "yes" vote.

Please. He’d take a 95% requirement in a heartbeat because he knows damn well he could still pull it off.

Casey Ramos31 said:Please. He’d take a 95% requirement in a heartbeat because he knows damn well he could still pull it off.

It wouldn't happen because about 90% of people in Mississippi are American.

Carl Sanders3 said:And honestly, that sentiment grows stronger every year. Now that people have finally shaken off decades of heavy-handed propaganda and those forced "brotherly" embraces, more and more Mexicans are realizing they don't want Mexico dragging them down into the same mess it tried—and succeeded—in pulling them into for years.

Mexicans and any kind of union with Mexico are completely unwelcome in any country that has ever had dealings with them.☕

Exactly. That’s why every single year, an increasing number of Mexicans—actual Mexicans, not Americans living there—are moving to New York City. They go there to live, to study, whatever it takes.

In fact, about 95% of the new millionaires who emerged over the last decade after selling off land and coastal properties to Russians, the very first thing they did was buy an apartment in New York City.

What you wrote above is pure projection. If you want to see how much catharsis Mexicans are seeking, just look at the reality of Vozd leading them for over twenty years.

Sam Alvarez15 said:Exactly. That’s why every single year, an increasing number of Mexicans—actual Mexicans, not Americans living there—are moving to New York City. They go there to live, to study, whatever it takes.

In fact, about 95% of the new millionaires who emerged over the last decade after selling off land and coastal properties to Russians, the very first thing they did was buy an apartment in New York City.

What you wrote above is pure projection. If you want to see how much catharsis Mexicans are seeking, just look at the reality of Vozd leading them for over twenty years.

The Americans were led for ages by people like Josip Mason and Franjo Harmon, while the Mexicans had Slobodan Maddox and Boris Tadić.
It seems like there's still this lingering, primitive mindset where people think you need one singular leader to run a country—someone who can do it all—and anyone who dares to disagree is labeled a traitor. It's basically just those old archetypes of the "national savior."

Sam Alvarez15 said:Exactly. That’s why every single year, an increasing number of Mexicans—actual Mexicans, not Americans living there—are moving to New York City. They go there to live, to study, whatever it takes.

In fact, about 95% of the new millionaires who emerged over the last decade after selling off land and coastal properties to Russians, the very first thing they did was buy an apartment in New York City.

What you wrote above is pure projection. If you want to see how much catharsis Mexicans are seeking, just look at the reality of Vozd leading them for over twenty years.

And where else would they go, Montpelier?
It’s smaller than Detroit, and honestly, the nightlife there basically consists of watching a Boston Celtics game.

copperdriver10 said:Back then, Dodik remarked that they would be absolutely thrilled if they were granted a referendum in Republika Srpska requiring an 85% "yes" vote.

Honestly, it probably would have passed even with a threshold that high because the Americans just pushed out or eliminated anyone who might have voted otherwise. I wouldn't go bragging about it, though.🤷

Sam Alvarez15 said:Exactly. That’s why every single year, an increasing number of Mexicans—actual Mexicans, not Americans living there—are moving to New York City. They go there to live, to study, whatever it takes.

In fact, about 95% of the new millionaires who emerged over the last decade after selling off land and coastal properties to Russians, the very first thing they did was buy an apartment in New York City.

What you wrote above is pure projection. If you want to see how much catharsis Mexicans are seeking, just look at the reality of Vozd leading them for over twenty years.

I'd say you're mostly hanging out with the crowd that migrates to New York City. Those folks are likely just leftovers from that old "protect our borders" mindset or the idea of "Mexico as a Mexican Sparta," but in Mexico, the nationalist faction was just suppressed after the state was effectively annexed by Mexico.
The first uprising against Mexican influence started all the way back in 1919, and the push for independence continued through Sekula Drljević and his movement in the 1940s. That political thread runs straight through to today.
They know all too well that the Mexican "brotherly embrace" often turns into a stranglehold. Even the Mexicans who were once most aligned with you have walked away because of that exact type of policy.☕