The Forum Site - Join the conversation
You don't always shop on Amazon, but when you do using this link you're helping to support TFS!
Forums:
Politics

Brexit

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3 ...21 22 23 24 25 26 · >>
shadowen On about 10 hours ago




Bunyip Bend, Australia
#331New Post! Dec 01, 2019 @ 14:00:04
@nooneinparticular Said

...If that has become overbearing, it is only because the nations allowed it in the first place.

And that makes it ok does it?

By the way, over the past ten years there has been a steadily increasing number of situations that no longer require the unanimous approval of the EU parliament and instead only require a simple majority. This of course makes it easier for the EC to get what it wants. In time all proposals, directives and legislation will only require a simple majority.

As an aside, if you want to see how the EU works just look at how von der Leyen was 'appointed'.
shadowen On about 10 hours ago




Bunyip Bend, Australia
#332New Post! Dec 01, 2019 @ 14:03:37
By the way, it's no surprise that Guy Verhofstadt has suggested that the EC should be called the "European Government". For once I actually agree with him.
shadowen On about 10 hours ago




Bunyip Bend, Australia
#333New Post! Dec 01, 2019 @ 14:28:47
@nooneinparticular Said

How about Labour, who you have helpfully pointed out multiple times that they are not exactly against Brexit?

Really, and where have i said that? The Labour Party is unquestionably a remoaner party.

@nooneinparticular Said

How about the rebel Tories, of which ignoring their concerns only resulted in them splitting from the party?

Those rebels like Hammond and Grieve were (and are) hell bent on stopping Brexit from happening. They stood before their electorate on the promise that, if elected, they would respect the result of the 2016 people's vote, and that if a suitable deal couldn't be struck then they would help see that the UK left WITHOUT a deal. Only they lied to the people who elected them.

Their concerns were that the party were intent on doing what they had told the people they would do if elected. If they had a problem with this (which they clearly did) then they should have resigned from the Conservative party and either run as independents or joined the Lib Dems (or another remoaner party) BEFORE the 2017 election. Only they didn't which tells you all you need to know about them.

@nooneinparticular Said

Dealing with both parties would require a certain amount of compromise that stands a good chance of leaving no one particularly pleased, but even that is better than the alternative of this stupid multi-years long deadlock.

Nope, wouldnt have worked. One side wanted (and still does) to honour the people's vote of 2016. The other side doesnt. There is no middle ground.

What was required was that MPs actually honoured the wishes of the people. You know, the ones they are meant to serve.

@nooneinparticular Said

Brexit may have been a lot about principles

Brexit ultimately is about honouring and respecting the result of the 2016 people's vote. The people were asked by Parliament whether or not they wanted the UK to remain a part of the EU. The majority (17.4 million) stated that they wanted the country to leave. It was, and is, hardly unreasonable that the public expected that having been asked by Parliament what it was they wanted that Parliament would then respect their answer. Once the UK had left the EU then there could be another referendum at some future date to ask the people if they still wished to remain outside the EU or if they would like the country to rejoin. But to ask the people what they wanted and then ignore their answer...that is not how a democracy should work. Ignoring the results of a democratic vote is hardly democratic.

@nooneinparticular Said

it's high time that reality set in. The reality is that in order to pass Brexit, it must pass legislation, and in order to do that you must have the votes to do so. Pruning your ranks of 'traitors' is counter productive to this goal.

Nope. Removing traitors from your party is an important part of the process of being able to deliver Brexit. That is why i think returning the whip to around half of the traitors was a mistake.

@nooneinparticular Said

The need for votes necessitates two strategies. One is to hope that, eventually, the people vote in enough of one side or another to finally reach a decision on this matter. A risky gamble and one I don't see working any time soon.

Well hopefully you will soon be proved wrong. We shall wait and see.

@nooneinparticular Said

The other is to compromise enough with the people you can reach some sort of common ground with in order to get the necessary votes to pass. A bitter pill to swallow, but a much more assured path forward than hoping the populace 'votes correctly this time'. So really, the only question that needs to be asked of the public is "Are your feelings on Brexit, whatever they may be, so important that you would rather potentially drag this out for years, if not longer, rather than seeking a compromise resolution now?"

As stated previously there can be no compromise. One side wants to honour the people's wishes for the UK to leave the EU, the other side is determined to make sure this doesnt happen. There is no middle ground. Either you are in the EU or you are out. If you are out then it means you are out of the customs union, out of the single market etc etc etc
shadowen On about 10 hours ago




Bunyip Bend, Australia
#334New Post! Dec 01, 2019 @ 14:43:18
If you ever want a good laugh just watch Andrew Neil's interview with JC
Jennifer1984 On about 8 hours ago
Remoaner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#335New Post! Dec 01, 2019 @ 19:52:02
@shadowen Said

If you ever want a good laugh just watch Andrew Neil's interview with JC



Or if you really want to watch a train wreck of an interview, you could watch this:




Jennifer1984 On about 8 hours ago
Remoaner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#336New Post! Dec 01, 2019 @ 19:56:52
@Jennifer1984 Said

Or if you really want to watch a train wreck of an interview, you could watch this (especially from about 3 minutes in):




nooneinparticular On about 3 hours ago




, Hawaii
#337New Post! Dec 02, 2019 @ 09:58:32
@shadowen Said

And that makes it ok does it?


Not in the slightest. The only thing I was saying is that because the member countries were the ones who allowed and enacted these policies in the first place, then maybe the blame should fall on the ones who voted for the thing in the first place, rather than the entity who is duty bound to enforce it. Consequentially, it is up to the countries involved whether they wish to continue this direction or not.

Quote:

By the way, over the past ten years there has been a steadily increasing number of situations that no longer require the unanimous approval of the EU parliament and instead only require a simple majority. This of course makes it easier for the EC to get what it wants.

In time all proposals, directives and legislation will only require a simple majority.


This is unproveable at this time. Besides, what you've just described is how representative democracy works. By majority opinion, not unanimous opinion.
nooneinparticular On about 3 hours ago




, Hawaii
#338New Post! Dec 02, 2019 @ 14:55:58
@shadowen Said

Really, and where have i said that? The Labour Party is unquestionably a remoaner party.


I could have sworn I read you post that somewhere, but I can't find it now, so I'll just admit to being wrong and leave it at that.

Doesn't change the difference between us on how we view the opposition parties though.

Quote:

Those rebels like Hammond and Grieve were (and are) hell bent on stopping Brexit from happening. They stood before their electorate on the promise that, if elected, they would respect the result of the 2016 people's vote, and that if a suitable deal couldn't be struck then they would help see that the UK left WITHOUT a deal. Only they lied to the people who elected them.

Their concerns were that the party were intent on doing what they had told the people they would do if elected. If they had a problem with this (which they clearly did) then they should have resigned from the Conservative party and either run as independents or joined the Lib Dems (or another remoaner party) BEFORE the 2017 election. Only they didn't which tells you all you need to know about them.

Nope, wouldnt have worked. One side wanted (and still does) to honour the people's vote of 2016. The other side doesnt. There is no middle ground.

What was required was that MPs actually honoured the wishes of the people. You know, the ones they are meant to serve.


Brexit ultimately is about honouring and respecting the result of the 2016 people's vote. The people were asked by Parliament whether or not they wanted the UK to remain a part of the EU. The majority (17.4 million) stated that they wanted the country to leave. It was, and is, hardly unreasonable that the public expected that having been asked by Parliament what it was they wanted that Parliament would then respect their answer. Once the UK had left the EU then there could be another referendum at some future date to ask the people if they still wished to remain outside the EU or if they would like the country to rejoin. But to ask the people what they wanted and then ignore their answer...that is not how a democracy should work. Ignoring the results of a democratic vote is hardly democratic.


Nope. Removing traitors from your party is an important part of the process of being able to deliver Brexit. That is why i think returning the whip to around half of the traitors was a mistake.


As stated previously there can be no compromise. One side wants to honour the people's wishes for the UK to leave the EU, the other side is determined to make sure this doesnt happen. There is no middle ground. Either you are in the EU or you are out. If you are out then it means you are out of the customs union, out of the single market etc etc etc


You blame the rebel conservatives, when truth be told, if they didn't have such a razor thin margin for error to begin with, then their 'betrayal' wouldn't have meant anything. Ultimately, it was the public that returned a hung Parliament and a razor thin coalition that allowed all of this to play out in the first place. If both the voters and those in Parliament acknowledged this situation from the start, then perhaps it wouldn't have gotten this far, or at the very least there would have been a contingency in place to deal with potential 'turncoats'. Instead, both those in favor of Brexit in the public and in Parliament acted as if they had an unassailable position from which to plan 'the perfect Brexit' and it blew up in their faces.

The reality is that, no matter how righteous you think your position, if you don't have the power to make it reality, then it amounts to nothing. You say a lot about how the others are in the wrong, how they have betrayed the public, but you say nothing about how you or Boris or anyone else could hope to fix it. Cooperation is 'impossible'? It is only impossible because you and others insist that your principles are uncompromising.

That position is fine when you have the power to enact that will, but when you don't then you have two options in front of you. The first is to stick to them and hope and wish and pray that something changes to 'give you the chance you deserve to make your beliefs real'. The other is to reexamine your beliefs and figure out what you can give on in order to

Quote:

Well hopefully you will soon be proved wrong. We shall wait and see.


So hoping 'the public votes correctly this time', it is then. Personally, I'm not one for wagering important decisions on faith, but you do you I suppose.
Jennifer1984 On about 8 hours ago
Remoaner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#339New Post! Dec 02, 2019 @ 18:21:39
I come back to wondering the same thing about the Aussie more and more often.

Just exactly WHY is he so desperate to see Brexit happen...? Why...? What does it matter to him...? Why should he give a damn about what's happening to a former colonial power that exists on the other side of the world...??

I can understand Nooneinparticular's participation in the thread. He comes across as having an academic interest and a more objective point of view based on evidence and fact. Fair enough on a discussion forum. After all, that's what it's here for.

But the Aussie is clearly emotionally involved to a very high degree. Having distant relatives living here doesn't account for his level of obsession. Hey, my best mate from school went back to India after graduating from University. We're still in touch and we chat via Facebook, but you don't see me pursuing politics in India to the same obsessive level*.

He (so he says) lives on the other side of a world, ruled by a monarchy he has openly said he wants to see abolished (he said this several years ago in another thread and no, I'm not going to look for the post). He dislikes the English intensely (ditto my former bracketed comment).

It's just so weird. Hey... I'm interested in the political situation across Europe and to an extent, across the globe, but that's only in relation to issues such as women's rights or LGBT rights..... and for obvious reasons..... but even in that regard, I don't have the obsessive determination to change another countries political structure that he has for Brexit.


Another thing I wonder at, is that he never talks about Australia on this forum. Doesn't that strike anybody as odd...? What is going on in Australian politics, Aussie...? What's the news from down under...? Has anything interesting happened there...?

Here is a man (I assume) who seems to have absolutely no interest whatsoever in talking about his homeland.... its politics.... it's news and current affairs.... it's social issues.... Not a peep.

But does he care about what's happening on this little island on the other side of the world..? You betcha. And in spades. He's more than interested. He's obsessed.

It's almost as if he lives here.

It makes one wonder, eh..?



*And in case you were wondering, she thinks we've gone stark staring bonkers by voting to leave the EU, but that's all she ever says about it. Nothing more.
Conflict On about 2 hours ago




Alcalá de Henares, Spain
#340New Post! Dec 03, 2019 @ 14:16:58
A friend of mine says that if the Tories win, Britain leaves the EU at the end of 2020. If Labour wins, they hold a second referendum. If the Liberal Democrats win, they cancel Brexit.

Which of these three events is going to occur?
Jennifer1984 On about 8 hours ago
Remoaner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#341New Post! Dec 03, 2019 @ 18:30:21
@Conflict Said

A friend of mine says that if the Tories win, Britain leaves the EU at the end of 2020. If Labour wins, they hold a second referendum. If the Liberal Democrats win, they cancel Brexit.

Which of these three events is going to occur?



At this time, much to my disappointment, it looks as if the Tories will win a working majority which will result in a Brexit. If Boris Johnson gets his way, it would be a hard Brexit, which means no withdrawal agreement and a verrrrrrrrry long and drawn out period where the Tories will attempt to get a free trade agreement with an EU that is reluctant to give them "cake and eat it."

Ask yourself this: If you were the owner of, say, a gym club and a member told you they want to leave, stop paying membership fees and have no obligations to the club but they still want all the benefits of being a member, would you let them..?

What would those who are still paying a membership think..?

This is what Boris Johnson wants. Benefits of membership without payment or obligation to the Four Freedoms.

It is extremely unlikely that the Liberal Democrats will form a government. They sold their soul during the coalition government of 2010- 15 and have not been forgiven for their part in Austerity and the introduction of Student Tuition Fees. Revocation of Article 50 is not expected.

A Labour win is possible but much less likely than a Conservative win. In any case, Jeremy Corbyn wants Brexit as much as Boris Johnson does, but for different reasons. Corbyn sees the EU as a barrier to a truly Socialist state and he wants no impediments to having (what he sees as) a truly Socialist Britain.

Labour have, however, been boxed into a corner and have now committed to trying to get an early arrangement with the EU that would then be put to the people in a second referendum with Remain on the ballot paper.

At this time, the polls say that there is now a clear majority of the public who would vote to remain. Possibly in excess of 60%. If that is right, it would be a massive swing. I, however, am skeptical of polls.

If a hung Parliament is returned (no overall majority by any party), it is probable that the minor parties, such as the Liberal Democrats, Scottish and Welsh Nationalists, the Northern Ireland parties and the Greens, will hold the balance of power. If that occurs, a second In/Out referendum is a certainty. The Scots will also want a second independence referendum (Indyref 2) which is overwhelmingly likely (cast iron certain, in my opinion) to cause the break up of the United Kingdom.

There are all sorts of opinions being put out and all sorts of commentators and analysts are chipping in with their five bobs worth but nobody can be sure. The early hours of Friday 13th December will tell us.

I'm hoping for a hung Parliament to ensure that second referendum, but I'm not optimistic.
cole On December 10, 2019




Stirling, United Kingdom
#342New Post! Dec 04, 2019 @ 10:41:09
@Jennifer1984 Said


The only way to "Get Brexit done" is to get it done for.



Out of interest say we do go on to have another referendum and it's the same result. What happens then? We've just dragged it out even more and prolonged the misery again. Again the argument that people were lied to is simply not a solid argument for a new referendum, we are always being lied to. I understand remainers believe it was the wrong choice but people don't always get the decision they wanted. It was a decision made by the majority and therefore it should stand. It's how life works, you make a decision and you deal with the consequences.

What is true is that no one (the leave supporters) for minute thought what aftermath would be, no one considered what leaving the EU would actually entail. Perhaps people thought we would just revert back to what it was before we joined the EU. People were certainly naive, perhaps me included.

What it has shown me an as someone who voted YES to IndyRef is that the aftermath of leaving the UK will be 100 time worse than leaving the EU and i'm simply not sure I want to go down that route. I know many of my fellow Scots also feel the same way. Again a vote for SNP in this election isn't an endorsement for their policies as such but because people don't want to vote for the other choices (although SNP won't view it as that and will plow on with IndyRef2) Ever Scot should Watch Andrew Neil's interview with Nicola Sturgeon and think long and hard about independence and whether it will be worth it, perhaps in the long term but in the 10-20 years after it will be hell.
Jennifer1984 On about 8 hours ago
Remoaner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#343New Post! Dec 05, 2019 @ 19:38:25
I disagree with your comment that being lied to is no reason for another referendum. I think it's a very solid reason.

They lied in very material terms. They lied about how much money we send to the EU. They lied about how easy it would be to make arrangements with the EU for future relationship.

They lied when they said there would be no disruption to supplies, especially important medical supplies.

They lied about so many things there isn't enough room on the server to list them all.

And all of these things had an effect on the outcome of the referendum. Many people believed the lies and voted on the basis of what they were told. Had they been told the truth in all probability Remain would have won and we wouldn't be where we are now.

To dismiss that factor with such a trite comment as "We get lied to all the time" is more than defeatest, it is an acceptance that dishonesty should profit and prosper and I just don't believe in that.


Voters didn't really know what they were voting for in 2016. They accepted the lies because they were pumped at them relentlessly through social media, The Tory press, a biased BBC and criminal activity such as the theft of millions of people's data by Cambridge Analytica in order to target the "undecided" vote and bombard them with propaganda online.

Should any political campaign profit from crime...? Do you support crime, Cole...?

What exactly is your moral compass, Cole...? Lies and crime are alright as long as they get the result you want..?

We should also remember that the 2016 referendum was advisory only. It was NOT legally binding. The government was under no obligation to act upon it. Indeed, the judge in the case of the overspending offence by Leave.UK said in his summing up that if the referendum had been legally binding, the crimes of Leave.Uk were so significant in affecting the outcome that the result would have been declared null and void.

And so we are being pushed out of the EU by a bent vote after a criminal campaign where the outcome didn't have the force of law to put into effect.

There is no legal obligation to leave the EU and the referendum result has no moral basis either on account of the lies, criminality, etc, etc.




Another factor for a second referendum now is that the original one is well past its demographic sell by date.

Analysis of the 2016 vote has firmly established that the "Baby Boomer" generation, those born between 1949 - 1960 overwhelmingly voted to leave. The department for national statistics, in 2018, reported on the number within that generation who have since died.

Another factor is that the age group 18 - 25 voted overwhelmingly to remain and current evidence is that the young....... those most likely to be affected by Brexit..... who have attained majority age since 2016 are highly pro-remain.

If you take those two factors alone into account ..... the decline of the Boomer generation who voted leave, and the rise of the young generation who are likely to vote remain, it's not too difficult to see that the demographic has dramatically shifted.

Should we leave the EU on the basis of votes made by people who are now dead, while disenfranchising those who are now of majority age...?


As for accepting the result of a second referendum, I have spelled my position on that out many, many times. I think the second ref should be made legally binding.

A legally binding referendum would mean the campaigns (of both sides) would be closely monitored by the Electoral Commission. Any criminality would be punished under law and the side that benefited would, if the won, find the result being overturned.

That should be enough to ensure a fair and honest campaign.

Also, the public are now more aware of the real consequences of Brexit. The last (nearly) four years have not only shown up the sham of Tory promises, but what we could really look forward to.

An honest campaign and an enlightened and informed public would produce a legally and morally sound result and if that result was for leave I would accept that that was the genuine will of the British people. I'd be disappointed, but I would accept it.

OK... I think that answers your questions.

Honesty and legality, Cole. That should not be too much to ask.
Jennifer1984 On about 8 hours ago
Remoaner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#345New Post! Dec 06, 2019 @ 04:49:42
Burger King............. You're telling it like it is.


Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3 ...21 22 23 24 25 26 · >>

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Politics Forum - Some Rudeness Allowed

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   Video Games
Mon Jun 06, 2011 @ 02:48
8 872
New posts   US Election 2012
Sun Oct 28, 2012 @ 01:34
17 721
New posts   TFS+ politics
Mon Sep 14, 2009 @ 16:42
34 2290
New posts   Politics
Wed Dec 24, 2008 @ 03:02
13 837
New posts   Abortion
Thu Mar 24, 2011 @ 17:35
0 2874