The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums: Politics:
UK Elections & Politics

Voting

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3 ...5 6 7 8 · >>
bob_the_fisherman On about 15 hours ago
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#91New Post! Mar 05, 2019 @ 20:17:52
@nooneinparticular Said

So in actuality, this conversation means nothing to the wider discussion and you just brought it up to rant about the SJWs for a while?


Rant? No. I'd have happily left it at 'SJWs have a tendency to sprout the same crap Nazis did that gave rise to a holocaust.' They mask their hate in the left's typical Orwellian manipulation of language. Many people preaching global tolerance, many of whom support Remoan, are actually extremely self righteous and unpleasant individuals when you get right down to it. They seem to think their opponents are fuelled by hate and spite etc. To some degree it's a product of youth, but there is also that element that just hates and wants to justify it.

@nooneinparticular Said
That's a rather broad definition of 'mainstream' isn't it?


Is it? The racist SJW BS gets a lot of airtime these days around the world. It is not the dominant theory on the left so far as I know, but nor is it some extreme fringe thing. It gets airplay on CNN, MSNBC, BBC, HuffPo etc. The "you can't be racist against white people" line is used often there. It comes straight from Nazi rhetoric about Jews in the early 1930s.

Try as I might I just can't find the path to good there. But maybe you can. In fact, I am done with this part of the conversation.

Show us at least one potential path to good that this race hate potentially has in store for us so we can discuss it. At the moment all you is attack my idea and say nothing. Give an alternative idea to discuss.

Give us one possible path to joy this race hate provides.

@nooneinparticular Said
Does that make Furries Rights mainstream since Portland decided to make a law, aka talk about in politics, where furries were allowed to use parks like actual dogs and other animals?


This is what I mean about absurdities for the sake of it.

Your _reductio ad absurdum_ approach is useful. I use it at times, but it shouldn't be the only weapon in your arsenal. It just ends up being a series of pointless strawmen.

@nooneinparticular Said
I simply find the idea that the UK can't have a second vote because you think Brexit was handled incompetently utterly baffling.


Then allow me to make it clear.

The EU are demanding the UK be punished for voting to leave. This is fascist BS and is not acceptable. May is a remoaner and incompetent. I am sure deep down she would love to stay in the EU.

The people voted to leave. A representative government is required to represent the will of the people. At this time they are doing all they can not to, or, to punish the people. That is not how democracy works. Leaders do not get to punish wrongvote.
nooneinparticular On August 14, 2019




, Hawaii
#92New Post! Mar 06, 2019 @ 01:47:10
@bob_the_fisherman Said

Rant? No. I'd have happily left it at 'SJWs have a tendency to sprout the same crap Nazis did that gave rise to a holocaust.' They mask their hate in the left's typical Orwellian manipulation of language. Many people preaching global tolerance, many of whom support Remoan, are actually extremely self righteous and unpleasant individuals when you get right down to it. They seem to think their opponents are fuelled by hate and spite etc. To some degree it's a product of youth, but there is also that element that just hates and wants to justify it.


Not a rant? So phrases like 'extremely self righteous and unpleasant individuals' are meant to be taken as dispassionate and clinical?

Quote:

Is it? The racist SJW BS gets a lot of airtime these days around the world. It is not the dominant theory on the left so far as I know, but nor is it some extreme fringe thing. It gets airplay on CNN, MSNBC, BBC, HuffPo etc. The "you can't be racist against white people" line is used often there. It comes straight from Nazi rhetoric about Jews in the early 1930s.

Try as I might I just can't find the path to good there. But maybe you can. In fact, I am done with this part of the conversation.

Show us at least one potential path to good that this race hate potentially has in store for us so we can discuss it. At the moment all you is attack my idea and say nothing. Give an alternative idea to discuss.

Give us one possible path to joy this race hate provides.


I think you and I fundamentally differ on what constitutes 'a lot of airtime'. From what I've seen on the news most of those types who seem to genuinely believe that are not given much air time from the big names here. Can't comment on the BBC and equivalent organizations across the Atlantic, though. As a mini experiment, I attempted to actively search for the phrase "you can't be racist against white people", and the only things I managed to dig up where those arguments were attempting to be made were things that looked like blogs, publications I'd never heard of, and Vice. And if you're biggest offender is Vice, I don't think you can call it mainstream.

Quote:

This is what I mean about absurdities for the sake of it.

Your _reductio ad absurdum_ approach is useful. I use it at times, but it shouldn't be the only weapon in your arsenal. It just ends up being a series of pointless strawmen.


It fits my purposes, which was simply to show that your definition is vague and broad. It took me less then 30 seconds to come up with an absurd thing that fulfilled the definition you provided. That means it is too broad to be useful.

Quote:

Then allow me to make it clear.

The EU are demanding the UK be punished for voting to leave. This is fascist BS and is not acceptable. May is a remoaner and incompetent. I am sure deep down she would love to stay in the EU.

The people voted to leave. A representative government is required to represent the will of the people. At this time they are doing all they can not to, or, to punish the people. That is not how democracy works. Leaders do not get to punish wrongvote.


No, I can comprehend the words, but that doesn't make the point any less baffling.

A) The EU has absolutely no reason to make this process easy for the UK. They didn't vote to kick the UK out, the UK decided to leave. The UK decided to leave, ostensibly, because the UK didn't like the EU and it's rules. Then they come back and ask for s***. Think about this for a second. The people who voted to leave have been bad mouthing the EU all throughout this process and long beforehand, and then they have the gall to expect help from the EU in making this process painless?

B) The idea that this is undemocratic is ludicrous. The people of the EU didn't get a say, nor did they vote for the UK leaving. I'd imagine that if it were up to the EU, the UK would stay. Remember when you said that in a hypothetical situation where London voted to remain, they shouldn't be expected to support Brexit? Well that's pretty similar to the actual reality we have before us. The EU didn't vote for the UK to leave, and it's quite likely they would prefer everyone to stay together. Why should they be at all obliged to support Brexit when that directly counters the majority of their constituents wishes?
bob_the_fisherman On about 15 hours ago
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#93New Post! Mar 06, 2019 @ 07:52:38
@nooneinparticular Said

Not a rant? So phrases like 'extremely self righteous and unpleasant individuals' are meant to be taken as dispassionate and clinical?


As I say, I'm happy now for you to provide me with one theoretically possible path to global harmony that race hate provides.

I won't hold my breath waiting.

@nooneinparticular Said
As a mini experiment, I attempted to actively search for the phrase "you can't be racist against white people", and the only things I managed to dig up where those arguments were attempting to be made were things that looked like blogs, publications I'd never heard of, and Vice. And if you're biggest offender is Vice, I don't think you can call it mainstream.


Refine your search methods.

CNN et al., probably don't have articles called that, but they have clowns that say it (mark/Mike? Dyson for example. Can't remember the first name but he's the wannabe intellectual who uses multisyllabic words he clearly does not understand - he tried to debate Jordan Peterson not so long ago, but couldn't seem to get further than using racist ad hominems.

@nooneinparticular Said
No, I can comprehend the words, but that doesn't make the point any less baffling.


Are you baffled by this: 1 + 1 = 2
The reason I ask is because the concept is very simple.

The people are asked to vote yes or no. The people vote no. The politicians do what the people vote for.

You can't get much simpler.

There's even a word for it. "Democracy," I believe.

@nooneinparticular Said
A) The EU has absolutely no reason to make this process easy for the UK.


Wrong. They have the obligation to do what is right by people in Europe. Right now that includes making trade deals with the UK. Or, the UK walks without a deal.

Yes, there will be problems. Yes, it will make things hard, but that is not the fault of the UK.

The EU leaders can punish everyone (except themselves, they won't be effected). That's true. They can do that. It makes them s*** stains. But they can be that.

What they do not get to do is force the UK to accept a deal that makes Brexit a catastrophe because they're little girls having a tanty. Nor do they get to bully the British out of leaving a system they voted to leave.

@nooneinparticular Said
B) The idea that this is undemocratic is ludicrous. The people of the EU didn't get a say, nor did they vote for the UK leaving.


Of course they didn't. Nor should they. But if you ask the average European, "Do you want to risk losing your job, face higher national debt, increased costs and increasing unemployment so we can punish the people of the UK for opting out of the EU," what do you think the average worker would say? (And yes, this question is rhetorical you don't need to answer because we all know what the majority would say).
nooneinparticular On August 14, 2019




, Hawaii
#94New Post! Mar 06, 2019 @ 14:55:57
@bob_the_fisherman Said

As I say, I'm happy now for you to provide me with one theoretically possible path to global harmony that race hate provides.

I won't hold my breath waiting.


Not the point I was making, and I never argued otherwise.

Quote:

Refine your search methods.

CNN et al., probably don't have articles called that, but they have clowns that say it (mark/Mike? Dyson for example. Can't remember the first name but he's the wannabe intellectual who uses multisyllabic words he clearly does not understand - he tried to debate Jordan Peterson not so long ago, but couldn't seem to get further than using racist ad hominems.


There's a difference between discussing a stance on air and endorsing that stance as an organization. Or does their mere mention of it make it mainstream? Because CNN has mentioned a lot of inconsequential crap over the decades. Doesn't make any of it common or worth notice.

Quote:

Are you baffled by this: 1 + 1 = 2
The reason I ask is because the concept is very simple.

The people are asked to vote yes or no. The people vote no. The politicians do what the people vote for.

You can't get much simpler.

There's even a word for it. "Democracy," I believe.


And a second vote can't be held because? The form of Democracy you describe has never existed in this world. What democracy requires that a plan voted on or motion passed cannot be overturned until it's done and the dust has settled? None of them. That's a very dangerous and easily abuse-able argument to make. Get the people on your side to support a 30 year plan, and even if it's the most horrible plan ever, no one can touch or overturn or stop it until 30 years has gone by and it's over and done with? How does that make any amount of sense? You say it's undemocratic to overturn a vote? I say it's undemocratic to lock people into a policy with no hope for escape until it expires.

Quote:

Wrong. They have the obligation to do what is right by people in Europe. Right now that includes making trade deals with the UK. Or, the UK walks without a deal.

Yes, there will be problems. Yes, it will make things hard, but that is not the fault of the UK.

The EU leaders can punish everyone (except themselves, they won't be effected). That's true. They can do that. It makes them s*** stains. But they can be that.

What they do not get to do is force the UK to accept a deal that makes Brexit a catastrophe because they're little girls having a tanty. Nor do they get to bully the British out of leaving a system they voted to leave.


Hmm. Obligation. Funny word that. What about the obligation that the UK has to the ROI and NI? Don't they have an obligation to find a solution that's not a no deal Brexit?

Quote:

Of course they didn't. Nor should they. But if you ask the average European, "Do you want to risk losing your job, face higher national debt, increased costs and increasing unemployment so we can punish the people of the UK for opting out of the EU," what do you think the average worker would say? (And yes, this question is rhetorical you don't need to answer because we all know what the majority would say).


Are you attempting to argue that the EU would destabalize if the UK leaves with no deal? Perhaps some industries in certain countries would suffer, but the 'average European'? Even some of the most hard-line Brexiters I've ever seen would not make THAT outlandish of a claim. Such an extraordinary claim requires evidence, no? Or is it more self evident assertions that require no proof but are automatically true?
Jennifer1984 On about 22 hours ago
Remoaner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#95New Post! Mar 06, 2019 @ 19:20:15
@bob_the_fisherman Said


The EU are demanding the UK be punished for voting to leave. This is fascist BS and is not acceptable. May is a remoaner and incompetent. I am sure deep down she would love to stay in the EU.

The people voted to leave. A representative government is required to represent the will of the people. At this time they are doing all they can not to, or, to punish the people. That is not how democracy works. Leaders do not get to punish wrongvote.



The EU is protecting itself from the rise in fascism across Europe that is being encouraged by Brexit. Any organisation anywhere in the world would protect itself.

It cannot allow the one member that is leaving the union to have better arrangements than the 27 that remain..... which is what I am sure you would like because if that were to happen it would spark the hard right all over Europe to tell its people "Britain left and got a better deal. We should do the same."

I'm sure you won't see that because frankly, you're just a hard line extremist yourself. You have some pathological hatred of the EU.... an organisation that affects you not one iota.

As for May being a Remainer, that would be laughed out of the room if you were to say it here. Frankly, it's a joke and so are you.

But get this from today's newspaper:

Theresa May Could Force Ministers To Vote For No Deal.

Snippets:

The leading Brexiteer (Liam Fox*) said he expected the prime minister to impose a “collective decision” on Tory MPs – after suggestions of a free vote, to avoid mass resignations.

She isn't acting in the interests of the country. She's acting in the interest of the Conservative Party.

Does she give a damn about the people...? Does she hell. Her loyalty is to her party and more accurately, the extreme right wing of her party.

The comment came moments after the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development warned a crash-out Brexit could tip the UK into a recession spilling out across the global economy.

The government’s own forecast is a near-10 per cent hit to GDP over 15 years, with the poorest areas – the North East and Northern Ireland – suffering the most.


This is just the latest of a series of stark warnings as to what is going to happen. And the figures given above are the British government's figures... which are bound to be the "best case scenario".... the reality will undoubtedly be worse.

Dr Fox was also quizzed about the revelation that plans to scrap most import tariffs after a no-deal Brexit – threatening huge job losses in UK firms – will be kept secret unless it becomes a reality.

Unfortunately for Fox, the cat is already out of the bag on that. They would LIKE to keep thing secret.... for God's sake, don't tell people the truth, whatever you do...... but there is no containing this now.

But of course, from 12'000 miles away and your own personal hate-Britain, anti-Europe agenda, you know it all. You know it all.

We're on the brink of the cliff now and I think that pleases you. That's where your real agenda is.

I'll await your responses.




*Please don't tell me Liam Fox is a remainer. I already think you're a deluded idiot as it is. I'm going to cut and paste your response to this on a UK site and I'll send you some of the replies back.
Jennifer1984 On about 22 hours ago
Remoaner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#96New Post! Mar 06, 2019 @ 19:43:12
A taste of what is to come:

Huge Queues at Gare du Nord as French Stage a Brexit Drill for After March 29

The French are not going to go easy on British visitors disembarking Eurostar in France.

The attitude of Europe towards the British is steeling by the day.



Meanwhile back in London......

Theresa May Runs Out of the Chamber As She Is Exposed - Again - of Lying To Parliament

To fury from the SNP benches, Theresa May was exposed as telling porkies to Parliament.... yet again.

As she realised a Point of Order was about to be made after she told the House that Scotland had no mandate for an independence referendum (they have), she scarpered dead quick before the Speaker could call the SNP MP to his feet.

Coward.
bob_the_fisherman On about 15 hours ago
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#97New Post! Mar 06, 2019 @ 23:00:34
@Jennifer1984 Said

The EU is protecting itself from the rise in fascism across Europe that is being encouraged by Brexit. Any organisation anywhere in the world would protect itself.

It cannot allow the one member that is leaving the union to have better arrangements than the 27 that remain..... which is what I am sure you would like because if that were to happen it would spark the hard right all over Europe to tell its people "Britain left and got a better deal. We should do the same."

I'm sure you won't see that because frankly, you're just a hard line extremist yourself. You have some pathological hatred of the EU.... an organisation that affects you not one iota.

As for May being a Remainer, that would be laughed out of the room if you were to say it here. Frankly, it's a joke and so are you.

But get this from today's newspaper:

Theresa May Could Force Ministers To Vote For No Deal.

Snippets:

The leading Brexiteer (Liam Fox*) said he expected the prime minister to impose a “collective decision” on Tory MPs – after suggestions of a free vote, to avoid mass resignations.

She isn't acting in the interests of the country. She's acting in the interest of the Conservative Party.

Does she give a damn about the people...? Does she hell. Her loyalty is to her party and more accurately, the extreme right wing of her party.

The comment came moments after the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development warned a crash-out Brexit could tip the UK into a recession spilling out across the global economy.

The government’s own forecast is a near-10 per cent hit to GDP over 15 years, with the poorest areas – the North East and Northern Ireland – suffering the most.


This is just the latest of a series of stark warnings as to what is going to happen. And the figures given above are the British government's figures... which are bound to be the "best case scenario".... the reality will undoubtedly be worse.

Dr Fox was also quizzed about the revelation that plans to scrap most import tariffs after a no-deal Brexit – threatening huge job losses in UK firms – will be kept secret unless it becomes a reality.

Unfortunately for Fox, the cat is already out of the bag on that. They would LIKE to keep thing secret.... for God's sake, don't tell people the truth, whatever you do...... but there is no containing this now.

But of course, from 12'000 miles away and your own personal hate-Britain, anti-Europe agenda, you know it all. You know it all.

We're on the brink of the cliff now and I think that pleases you. That's where your real agenda is.

I'll await your responses.

*Please don't tell me Liam Fox is a remainer. I already think you're a deluded idiot as it is. I'm going to cut and paste your response to this on a UK site and I'll send you some of the replies back.









You are going to cut and paste this response on a UK forum? Really?

Ok then...

Here is my response.

In your previous post you spoke of the shooting and stabbing of Jo Cox and seemed to suggest that I thought it was a good thing by asking what amounted to a rhetorical question - "deserved it did she, Bob?"

I asked you to tell me what you think my response would be, and placed that in the context of a question in return - are you capable of ascribing a good moral trait to a political opponent?

I then went on to say that if a Brexiteer attacked you I would defend and protect you, even if you were screaming in our faces that we are all racists, xenophobes and Islamophobes etc. (And I said that I would think you're a muppet, and once I knew you were ok I'd tell you you're a muppet, then I'd move on).

There is no excuse for initiating violence against political opponents. Even when they scream hate at us. Even when they accuse us of all kinds of things (saying we enjoy innocent people being shot, we're filled with hate and spite and bigotry and want to burn a nation to the ground out of purely nefarious intent etc.,), there is zero justification in me or anyone else attacking or threatening you. It is unacceptable.

I also asked how you would react if one of your political allies shot and stabbed me. I said I thought you would be appalled by it. Now though, I am not so sure.

You have replied to that post here. You've called me an idiot, said I'm filled with pathological hatred, I'm a hard line extremist, and, that I hate Britain and want it to fall off a cliff.

In your mind I must be truly evil.

You know I am not uneducated. In fact I'm at least as educated as you. Therefore, it can only be a moral deficiency that makes me this inexcusably vile. What do you want to do with people like me, Jen? Educating me won't work, so what is your preferred method of dealing with the evil you know me to be? Surely I shouldn't be free to walk the streets?

If the UK has to suffer awhile to get back it's sovereignty that's sad. It's not what I would want. I would want the UK to get the best deal they can, but no deal if they can't. As I said in the last post, I have children I care about, my own and others, living there. I want them to live and succeed in life. They can't do that in a collapsing UK. I have friends living there. I want them to succeed. Many of my friends here in Aus are British - many of them have parents and brothers and cousins etc., living there. I want them to succeed. You live there. I want you and your family to succeed. I also want Brexit.

The UK is Australia's cultural roots. Despite mocking Brits constantly about almost everything, many Australians have willingly risked life and limb in her defence - including relatives of mine, and "Aussies" would do it again if required (although we would much prefer that it was never required).

The UK is the one country alongside Australia about which I care, but I care about all people and nations. Race, religion, creed, nationality, even political ideology etc., are irrelevant. People are people and we should care about everyone.

However, I do not believe staying in the EU is right. Most people who voted in the Brexit referendum agreed. Either you support democracy or you don't. And as I also said to you, you don't need to support democracy. It has its problems. But be honest about it. You want to ignore or overthrow democracy. That's ok. Just be honest.

I look forward to the responses.
DiscordTiger 0 minutes ago
The Queen of Random

Administrator




Emerald City, United States (g
#98New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 00:32:06
MOD hat on.

So its a warning because some rudeness is allowed in the politics.

and in general the topic is polarizing and there is some very rude remarks tossed out in all directions.

But can we watch the direct name calling? ie calling bob an idiot. (wher i would let it go that calling him a joke, and I am letting go a lot of what he is saying that is rude and his use of muppet.) Value judgement on my part idiot is worse than muppet, because the muppets are awesome.

I don't want to stifle actual discussion, with rule enforcing. So just a plea to take second look before we post and stick to just rudeness and not actual namecalling?

I hope this makes sense, but im willing to clarify in private to not, derail further if desired.
chaski On about 2 hours ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#99New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 01:14:38
@DiscordTiger Said

MOD hat on.


MOD's wearing muppet hats are the best!
bob_the_fisherman On about 15 hours ago
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#100New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 01:57:31
@DiscordTiger Said

MOD hat on.

So its a warning because some rudeness is allowed in the politics.

and in general the topic is polarizing and there is some very rude remarks tossed out in all directions.

But can we watch the direct name calling? ie calling bob an idiot. (wher i would let it go that calling him a joke, and I am letting go a lot of what he is saying that is rude and his use of muppet.) Value judgement on my part idiot is worse than muppet, because the muppets are awesome.

I don't want to stifle actual discussion, with rule enforcing. So just a plea to take second look before we post and stick to just rudeness and not actual namecalling?

I hope this makes sense, but im willing to clarify in private to not, derail further if desired.



My muppet was purely hypothetical, not a real muppet. But, yes I will refrain from it in future.

I am 100% not worried about being called anything. I know the rules apply no matter what, but I'm happy for you to err on the side of not modding people I debate with.
Jennifer1984 On about 22 hours ago
Remoaner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#101New Post! Mar 07, 2019 @ 11:40:34





Petition For A Second Referendum Reaches 4 Million Signatures


The petition was given a brief skim over by Civil Service minions and rejected without further discussion.

Under Parliamentary rules, any petition that gathers over 100'000 signatures should be raised in the house. This one wasn't.
bob_the_fisherman On about 15 hours ago
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#102New Post! Mar 08, 2019 @ 05:15:21
@Jennifer1984 Said






Petition For A Second Referendum Reaches 4 Million Signatures


The petition was given a brief skim over by Civil Service minions and rejected without further discussion.

Under Parliamentary rules, any petition that gathers over 100'000 signatures should be raised in the house. This one wasn't.


This is a serious question. If your side had won would you say there should be a second referendum now if the other side got a lot of signatures calling for one?
Jennifer1984 On about 22 hours ago
Remoaner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#103New Post! Mar 08, 2019 @ 12:08:51
@bob_the_fisherman Said

This is a serious question. If your side had won would you say there should be a second referendum now if the other side got a lot of signatures calling for one?



I would be making the same point that I made in my previous comment. That the matter should at the very least be debated on in Parliament under the 100'000 signature rule.

You have to understand that the Conservative government has behaved absolutely reprehensibly over Brexit which is why the depth of feeling is as strong as it is.

Also in order to answer your underlying question.... if the poles were reversed and Remain had won, but the situation had significantly altered since then, I WOULD support a second referendum.

Why..? Not because of this dumbass load of pigs***e about "democracy" (the one thing that is NOT happening here is democracy of any stripe), it would be because the conditions under which we voted to leave in 2016 have radically altered.

It's about doing WHAT IS BEST FOR THE COUNTRY and Brexit is demonstrably not in Britain's interests.

Now.... there have been a multitude of polls and all sorts of stuff over the last year or so, some manipulated, some fair, some commissioned by self interest groups and some honest. Nobody knows what the real figures are. It's all being lost in the welter of claim and counter claim.

But the best estimate available for the real average of hard-core, die-hard Brexiters in the entire country is around 10 million. Yes, 17.4 million voted for Brexit in 2016, but (again, I will say "best estimate" ) around 7 million (give or take) who were not genuine hard core Leave voters only did so because of the promises made... promises that those making them knew were undeliverable and even if they were, they had no intention of delivering them.

Consider, for example, the lie that has become known as "The Big Red Bus Lie", you know, the one about £350 million a week for the NHS


This is probably the most famous lie, and most leave voters will admit to this.

The EU does not cost the UK £350m a week in any sense. The UK *would* pay £350m a week if its contributions were calculated in the same way as every other member state, but they're not.

If you manage to get a special deal on a new car with an RRP of £15,000, so that you only pay £10,000, you can't go around telling everyone that you spent £15k on your car just because that's the price everybody else pays.

The UK does not pay the "RRP" for the EU. One of the reasons why the UK's current deal with the EU is the best deal of any member states is that it gets a huge reduction on the membership fees that no other members get.

The UK actually pays a gross value of £252M per week because we get a rebate that no other country gets. Out of this, £87M comes straight back to the UK to pay for EU projects in the UK.

This leaves a net value of £165M.

It would have been perfectly acceptable to use either the gross or net values, but instead, the Vote Leave campaign used a lie. Vote Leave were instructed by the electoral commission to retract this lie and to stop repeating it. But they didn't.

Unfortunately, the electoral commission has no power to pause, postpone or cancel referenda when one of the official campaigns lies and refuses to stop making a lie that they've been specifically told to stop.

Cost of £252M per week still *sounds* like a lot of money to the average observer, but on the political scale, it's quite small. Less than 1% of government spending.

And unfortunately, you can't make the argument that by leaving the EU, we'd be able to spend that money on the NHS, or anything else for that matter. Even ignoring the massive economic hit that will dwarf the EU contributions, the rest of that money (and more) would be needed to duplicate the services currently pooled with the EU.

This raises an obvious question though. If the actual gross and net figures still "sound" high to the average observer, why didn't they just make the exact same (ludicrous) argument with the genuine figures?

The Vote Leave strategy was to discredit the facts from the Stronger In campaign by flooding the debate with lies. If one side is telling lots of lies (and they're allegedly respectable politicians), this doesn't just discredit them, it also makes people assume that the other side are also openly lying. It serves to discredit the opposition, even when they don't tell any lies at all.

By presenting so many lies in quick succession it also kept the media busy trying to fact-check everything. But unfortunately, the way that the media works, the press releases are announced in the morning, when everyone is watching, listening to, or reading the news, and the fact checking takes all morning, so the rebuttals are announced at lunchtime, when very few people are watching or reading the news. By the evening, when people are watching the news on TV, the news channels have stopped reporting it because it has already been debunked.

So people hear the lies, don't hear the rebuttal, and end up believing the lie.

If Vote Leave had used the correct figures, the media would have been focused on pointing out the underlying flaws in the argument, and that wouldn't have helped the Leave campaign at all.


OK... I think my point has been made on that one. Moving on.


The lies have now been well and truly exposed and are now fixed in the public consciousness. Unsurprisingly, many people don't like being lied to in this way.... taken for fools.... and as these lies now mean that they are going to be seriously financially disadvantaged... many will lose their livelihoods.... this makes it even worse.

Have attitudes towards Brexit changed...? You betcha.

All that happens though, is that the hard core, noisy Brexiter lobby (the best estimate 10 million) are getting all the publicity in the Tory press which makes it seem that support for Brexit is as solid now as it was in 2016. It's a massive exercise in manipulation.



But I believe the people are entitled to that option because then there could be no doubt that, whatever the outcome, it would be a much truer representation of what people actually want. And at least it could be the start of the healing process that we all want for our terribly.... bitterly.... divided and wounded country.

I would respect a second vote if it were for leave because it would have been made in the full knowledge of what the consequences of leaving are. With what we know now, there could be no doubt that such a vote would truly be the will of the people.

If it went the way of remain, then that too would be what people really wanted.... the safety, security and known quantity of being a part of a great European project that we would be able to help reform from the inside, rather than be at the mercy of without any say in what happens to us in the future.

A few days ago I posted Macron's letter to Europe. It indicates that a major figure in the EU hierarchy believes that the EU must reform. And his proposals sound like exactly what Britain has been arguing for for years.

Wouldn't it be the worst irony if, in a few years time, the EU is (or at least is heading towards) what we have always wanted it to be.......... only we have shot ourselves in the foot and gain no benefit from it..?

It couldn't get any dumber than that.
Jennifer1984 On about 22 hours ago
Remoaner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#104New Post! Mar 08, 2019 @ 17:08:48
68 Year Old Remain Campaigner Attacked By Brexiter In Swindon


This is what we're coming to. A 68 year old woman handing out leaflets in the street, quite lawfully, was attacked and left bruised and terrified when a man attacked her in the street.

Attacks by Brexiters are becoming more and more commonplace.

Nice people these Brexiters. It's really brave of them to beat up an old woman.
Jennifer1984 On about 22 hours ago
Remoaner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#105New Post! Mar 08, 2019 @ 22:08:15
And if beating up elderly women isn't bad enough, leaks are starting to emerge that Aaron Banks told his Brexit campaign to "Press It Harder" on the very morning after the murder of Jo Cox by a Brexit supporter:

Aaron Banks Ordered "Press It Harder" after Jo Cox Murder

In the aftermath of the horrific murder of Jo Cox, there was an agreement by all parties that campaigning would be suspended for a period of reflection and mourning.

Banks ignored this and told his campaign to press all the harder during this time.


snip from article:

The emails show that on June 17 2016, the morning after Jo Cox’s death, Aaron Banks issued an order to Liz Bilney, the CEO of Leave.EU and other staff:

“Keep pumping the McKenna video”, he says “and up the Spend A”.

Ms Bilney replies: “Yes that’s starting to get traction now and with paid advertising and no active campaigning could get a lot of take up today.”

Arron Banks replies: “Exactly – press it harder.”




These are sickening reports of moral failure by Leave.EU and criminal collusion with Labour Leave and other groups to possibly hide spending of £5 million when the cap was £700,000..

Jess Philips calls for Mueller style Inquiry. Alison McGovern "calls for the Electoral Commission to throw the book at him"

"The Prime Minister's got to make sure that this is fully investigated and the most significant of penalties be levied"

AMcG:"This [abuse] won't just stop here. This could affect every Democratic event in the future, and we have got to get control of what's going on here"


I doubt very much that Theresa May will do anything about this. She knew this sort of thing was going on at the time and was complicit, as Home Secretary, in "sitting on" a Serious Crime Agency investigation into Banks until after the Referendum was concluded.

A sick, ruthless bastard exploiting a brutal murder as a good time to get his criminal operations greater traction. This is the sort of thing that Bob calls "democracy".

A corrupt Home Secretary abusing her position of power to delay the judicial process in order to help ensure that criminality reaped a reward.

Not condemning such things are you, Bob..? That can only mean you agree that everything done was acceptable under your version of "democracy".

Not had much to say lately Bob..... Cat got your tongue..?
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3 ...5 6 7 8 · >>

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   Friendships
Thu May 14, 2009 @ 00:58
56 3023
New posts   Random
Tue Oct 21, 2008 @ 12:51
19 866
New posts   Random
Sun Apr 12, 2009 @ 17:21
35 2767
New posts   Random
Wed Jul 25, 2012 @ 02:29
5 596
New posts   Homosexuality
Wed May 06, 2015 @ 10:58
51 12740