RE: Brexit Vote Results

RE: Brexit Vote Results (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Staleek -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/29/2016 11:51:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874 I have to agree here Peon........what was the point of the whole referendum if the result is not going to be accepted ? you may as well not bother and save the UK a whole bunch of money and strife. If you won't accept the majority decision, it really is a bit of a farce, isn't it ? The point of the referendum was this. Mr David Cameron is head of a pretty far-right party. A lot in his party are nationalist to the point they believe they can return to the glory days of the British Empire, the commonwealth, invading India, etc. Also, much of the parties support had started to go to a fascist outfit called UKIP. When he won the 2010 general election he had no majority, and needed the other parties (specifically the Libs) to support him in order to get legislation through. So the 2015 election rolls around, and after almost losing the first election, he was in a panic. In order to appease most of those on the far-right, not only in his party but in the country, he promised a referendum. He fully expected to actually reduce his share of the vote during the election and be in a coalition with the Libs again, and as the most Euro-friendly party they would veto any attempt to hold a referendum. But no, he became the only incumbent prime minister since 1955 to actually increase his share of the vote. So against his own instincts he held the referendum. And he was then forced to fight as hard as he could to try to put down the beast he had unleashed. The leave campaign promised a whole host of bullshit. [image]http://leftfootforward.org/images/2016/05/rsz_cikhd7axaaiklxc.jpg[/image] As well as blatantly making this referendum about things which had nothing to do with the actual EU. [image]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/06/16/12/3559398900000578-0-image-a-1_1466076152222.jpg[/image] And of course, the very day after this those who didn't know before realized it was bullshit as people started to back-track. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cA3XTYfzd1I The referendum was a farce. It was not about giving people a choice but about the ambition of David Cameron and Boris Johnson, and WILL damage the living standards and create upheaval for literally millions of people. As is now apparently, only the nutter crowd wanted it - Johnson is horrified at what he has done - and nobody knows how to go about it. Leaving is a fools errand. It would be stupid to do this now. Merely leaving because of an "advisory" referendum which should not have been held in the first place would be ridiculous.

Dvr22999874 -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/29/2016 11:56:10 PM)
But the referendum WAS held and the voted WERE counted. those that wanted to vote DID vote. If this counts for nothing, then surely any election you hold in the future is suspect ?..............Just invalidate all the votes you don't like and whatever party you vote for should romp home. We are back to Germany 1933 but at least Adolf never accepted any wages smile. I bet Cameron did.

Staleek -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/29/2016 11:57:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874 So only those who voted to leave didn't understand what they voted for ? All the others who voted to stay, knew exactly what it all meant ? Give me a break !!!! They were and are all allowed to vote. They did so. The majority should rule unless you are moving into bully-boy tactics and territory. We are talking about UK 2016, not Germany 1933...........you can't stop certain sections voting just because you are afraid they will vote against you. And tell me, How does your omniscience tell you so plainly that was has been decided is going to be a disaster ? I didn't say "all of those who voted to stay knew exactly what it meant". Stop projecting. And yes, we're talking about UK 2016: http://www.euronews.com/2016/06/28/racist-attacks-on-the-rise-since-brexit/ http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/27/europe/racist-attacks-post-brexit/index.html http://www.vibe.com/2016/06/brexit-racist-attacks/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98pJ5ex5vlM quote: you can't stop certain sections voting just because you are afraid they will vote against you. We can stop certain people driving because they drive drunk. We can stop anyone without a medical license performing operations. We can stop kids handling sharp objects. But we can't stop clearly stupid individuals voting on things that are obviously way way too complex for their feeble, for want of a better word, minds can't comprehend? Give me a break!!!!

Dvr22999874 -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 12:06:16 AM)
so you are to decide who is too feeble minded staleek ? What should their IQ be ? 100 ? Those with 110 will disagree. 110 ? Those with 120 will disagree. you are looking down the barrel of a very elitist society where only those with IQ's of 200 or more are allowed to vote. There is a slight difference between exercising a democratic right and doing something stupid while drunk. you can stop kids using sharp objects but you can't legislate against it. you are fishing for stupidity and catch a whole boatload. They have the vote. Magana Carta gave them that without them having to produce a certificate saying they were Einstein or compos mentis. you though have decided against that. I bow to your superior wisdom. The gods help England if you ever should get that second referendum. I have no idea what is going to happen in the future because of the present one but you patriot, aren't even willing to give it a chance and work for a better future. you just want to spit the dummy and lay on your back and scream until you are blue in the face because not everybody sees the world through your eyes.

Dvr22999874 -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 12:07:30 AM)
Naah, I have had enough of this crap. This is why one of the reasons I left England in the first place. I will sidestep any more arguments and watch you all go to hell in a handbasket of your own making.

PeonForHer -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 1:05:03 AM)
quote: "Brexit campaign's biggest donor has lost £400m since the referendum but says: 'I've got no regrets'" http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-campaigns-biggest-donor-has-lost-400m-since-the-referendum-but-says-ive-got-no-regrets-a3282416.html quote: He got most of it back today. I can't find this. Where did you see that, PS?

PeonForHer -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 1:43:09 AM)
quote: This is the weirdest comment ever! I mean, in most elections, electing a party, even if you are 51% and 49% and 49% are fucking angry and pissed the party they hate are elected to govern. But that's democracy. Majority wins. The unhappy 49% will just have to live with what they don't like. And it doesn't matter what they like or don't like. Majority wins. No, it isn't. Democracy means 'rule by the people'. Majoritarianism, and a majority vote, is just one way of trying to find an approximation of 'rule by the people'. The nearer you can approximate rule by a mixture of all the views of a country, the nearer you get to democracy, proper. It's a means towards democracy - it isn't democracy itself. In a general election run on a first-past-the-post system, such as here in the UK, you'll get a result in which the party running the country wasn't supported by most of the people. The winning party got more votes than any other party - but it needn't have got most people's votes. So, certainly, there'll be plenty of people who are unhappy about the result. However, even in that system of FPTP, it's still recognised that the government is meant to accommodate the views of the whole of the people to some extent. This is one reason we have a Parliament, and why legislation gets discussed and fought over by both members of the winning party and members of the various losing parties. In this way, because everyone's views get some chance of a hearing in Parliament, you reduce conflict in society after the general election. If you were a supporter of a losing party, you at least know that 'your voice will be heard' and that the government of the day is obliged to hear it. This is one of the most crucial points of democracy: the idea is to reduce disharmony in a society - because you can't just 'wish away' that disharmony by an appeal to a majority view. That has been true even on relatively minor issues - but this issue is by far the biggest we've dealt with since WW2. You say 'The unhappy 49% will just have to live with what they don't like' - but, in fact, they don't, and won't. Instead, they will kick up a stink. Here, we can expect a truly seismic stink. You want to be able to minimise that - there's no point in saying 'people should accept the majority view' - they won't, and that is that. There's far too much at stake and far too much disagreement about the impacts of Brexit on our lives. All this is abundantly clear in the UK, right now. The only way this issue gets resolved - and we have even the possibility of a bit of harmony here in the UK - is by trying to hammer out the rights and wrongs of it - just as we're all doing. Parliament will have to do just that, as well - and be seen by the country to be doing it. This is the job of our MPs in our democracy, which is not a direct democracy, but a representative democracy.

PeonForHer -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 1:49:39 AM)
quote: I will sidestep any more arguments and watch you all go to hell in a handbasket of your own making. Eh? Are you implying that now that we've had a majority vote for going to hell, we should all just get on with going to hell? Er, um, no, I don't think so. [:D]

MariaB -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 2:15:44 AM)
quote: However at the moment, 'Who is going to invoke Art 50?' and 'When?' are very open questions and I see no one rushing to do it. Quite the opposite - it appears that most potential invokers (if you will pardon that clumsy construction) would prefer to duck this question at the moment. It seems to have 'political kiss of death' written all over it. So invoking Art. 50 might never happen. According to the ‘Rule of Law’ neither king (in our case Queen) or Prime Minister can invoke Article 50. The only way Article 50 can be invoked is to bring about a new act of Parliament and a new act of Parliament has to be voted in by MP’s; therefore, Article 50 may never happen. quote: Then let's look at the people working in the NHS, about 20% of them foreigners, I mean how dare they come and help our sick? Getting a pretty solid education in another country that doesn't cost Britain a single penny and then helping US, it's outrageous isn't it? Immigrants outside the EU are already restricted from working here. The skills they could bring to this country are held back by a mountain of EU red tape. Whilst the EU may allow any amount of unskilled workers in from the EU, it constantly turns away or makes it difficult for skilled workers outside the EU. Its time that changed because if we want our economy to succeed then we need to be sourcing our skill sets from around the globe and not just Europe. quote: The rise in racism is shocking, never seen anything like that. And to be honest, I read somewhere that apparently the rest of the EU has worse problems with racism. Really? The rise of racism is shocking but the conservative government seeded this racism long before Farage reared his ugly head and long before the Tory divide for ‘leave’ or ‘remain’ happened. For years now we have been bombarded with right wing media bias towards the Romanians and the Polish in a deliberate ruse to take the blame of inequality away from the Establishment. More recently a neo-liberal government agenda to bring about new 'snooping laws' was planted, watered and named 'a reign of fear' regarding the Muslims on our shores. When it comes to ‘racism’ Cameron has fallen on his own sword

MariaB -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 3:18:04 AM)
This is quite funny but then I imagine this is how BoJo responded https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a6HNXtdvVQ

thompsonx -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 3:25:20 AM)
ORIGINAL: Staleek Nothing in life is fair, nor should it be. [8\|]

thompsonx -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 3:31:29 AM)
ORIGINAL: Greta75 Hell, the 30% in my country who hates the ruling party fucking hates the current government like hell! And keeps insulting the 70%. I think that's the problem with democracy, people don't understand that, it's about respecting majority choice. It's a system where you go with what majority wants. Except that in that third world shithole called singapore only about half of the elligible voters vote.

PeonForHer -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 4:03:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MariaB This is quite funny but then I imagine this is how BoJo responded https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a6HNXtdvVQ Gave me a chortle. Thanks! :)

Politesub53 -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 4:13:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Staleek quote: ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874 I have to agree here Peon........what was the point of the whole referendum if the result is not going to be accepted ? you may as well not bother and save the UK a whole bunch of money and strife. If you won't accept the majority decision, it really is a bit of a farce, isn't it ? The point of the referendum was this. Mr David Cameron is head of a pretty far-right party. A lot in his party are nationalist to the point they believe they can return to the glory days of the British Empire, the commonwealth, invading India, etc. Also, much of the parties support had started to go to a fascist outfit called UKIP. When he won the 2010 general election he had no majority, and needed the other parties (specifically the Libs) to support him in order to get legislation through. So the 2015 election rolls around, and after almost losing the first election, he was in a panic. In order to appease most of those on the far-right, not only in his party but in the country, he promised a referendum. He fully expected to actually reduce his share of the vote during the election and be in a coalition with the Libs again, and as the most Euro-friendly party they would veto any attempt to hold a referendum. But no, he became the only incumbent prime minister since 1955 to actually increase his share of the vote. So against his own instincts he held the referendum. And he was then forced to fight as hard as he could to try to put down the beast he had unleashed. The leave campaign promised a whole host of bullshit. As well as blatantly making this referendum about things which had nothing to do with the actual EU. And of course, the very day after this those who didn't know before realized it was bullshit as people started to back-track. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cA3XTYfzd1I The referendum was a farce. It was not about giving people a choice but about the ambition of David Cameron and Boris Johnson, and WILL damage the living standards and create upheaval for literally millions of people. As is now apparently, only the nutter crowd wanted it - Johnson is horrified at what he has done - and nobody knows how to go about it. Leaving is a fools errand. It would be stupid to do this now. Merely leaving because of an "advisory" referendum which should not have been held in the first place would be ridiculous. Total bollocks. Your suggestion Cameron leads a far right party shows you know fuck all about fuck all.

Politesub53 -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 4:18:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: Dear oh dear, still not getting it are we. Democracy, as per its usual conotation is we all vote and the majority, like it or not, support the outcome. Even the majory of the politicians, far left included, are saying that. maybe the simple difference between us is as follows, if we have voted to stay in, I would have supported that as the democratic choice. No, it is not, PS. Democracy is "A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives: a system of parliamentary democracy" http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/democracy One of the main reasons why democracy was conceived was in order to avoid conflict in society. If you represent all of the people in the way you govern, and with your policies, you'll be best placed to avoid conflict. Really, what do you want from the present situation - realistically? Do you seriously think that the 48% are going to just quietly accept what the 52% desire, here? If you can't get someone like me to accept your point of view, what chance do you think you've got against most of the rest of that 48%? Do you think that a lot of smug arguments - no matter how clever - will shut us up? Be realistic .... Get a grip Peon. you cant be arsed to point out all definitions of democracy, even from your own bloody link. You also gave me a laugh speaking of "smug arguments" given your posts. Control of an organization or group by the majority of its members: <<<< IN YOUR LINK. [8\|]

Politesub53 -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 4:20:45 AM)
FR...... Boris has just announced he wont run for leader. Gove said he will, in a speech stabbing Boris in the back. May and leadson both to run, and in my opinion both better options than Gove.

Politesub53 -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 4:23:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 No doubt it all looks doom and gloom to some, but that was quite the view from the Commons Foreign Affairs committee back in April. I read the report in the Sun on pages 3, 4 and 5.... LOL I wont cherry pick the parts which suit, you can do what i did and read it all if you wish. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmfaff/545/54507.htm It doesn't matter about the Sun, and back in April. (Are you kidding me? I can't tell.) What about now? What's your reading? Read the link and learn. It is from an unbiased commons committee. The "sun" dig was me yanking a few left wing chains. [;)]

PeonForHer -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 4:33:03 AM)
quote: Control of an organization or group by the majority of its members: <<<< IN YOUR LINK. Stop being a pinhead, PS. Control does not mean dictatorship.

Politesub53 -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 4:35:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: "Brexit campaign's biggest donor has lost £400m since the referendum but says: 'I've got no regrets'" http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-campaigns-biggest-donor-has-lost-400m-since-the-referendum-but-says-ive-got-no-regrets-a3282416.html quote: He got most of it back today. I can't find this. Where did you see that, PS? Share prices had risen in his company as of last night. Since he lost most of his money via his shareholdings he has now got much of it back. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=hargreaves+lansdown+shares&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&ei=BwN1V6nACKrS8Afe1JU4 The footsie is up even more today and is now higher than it was before the vote.

Politesub53 -> RE: Brexit Vote Results (6/30/2016 4:36:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: Control of an organization or group by the majority of its members: <<<< IN YOUR LINK. Stop being a pinhead, PS. Control does not mean dictatorship. It means democracy, as per your link. If you dont like the link you shouldnt have posted it <grins>

Page: << < prev 26 27 [28] 29 30 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.09375