Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Brexit

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • antimony
    replied
    Brexit Remain Campaign - A Great Marketing Failure

    Within my company there is already a marketing newsletter out that aims to portray the marketing failure of the Remain campaign, of how the real competition to Remain was the disenfranchisement of the working class.

    Leave a comment:


  • antimony
    replied
    Originally posted by tankie View Post
    Love him or loathe him , he said he would and he did , Ladies n Gents ,I give you , herr Adolf nazi Farage (very unkind words )at his meeting today in confrontation with mep's in brussels ,,,,,,,Farage , Nigel for world leader , and i know all the youngsters will vote for him ,,,,lol And if the arroant juncker /tusk/merkel/schultz / etc had listened to cameron and his concerns for the UK and got a better deal , brexit would never have happened , the dictatorship unelected got it all wrong ,,well now suck it up .

    https://youtu.be/MlN9o3g-yuA
    The lying sons of bitches who promised you the world have already started backtracking.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...ises/86458944/
    http://money.cnn.com/2016/06/27/news...oken-promises/
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...gest-promises/

    Leave a comment:


  • tankie
    replied
    Its spreading .

    'Britain got the first shot in': French far-right leader Marine Le Pen says 'politicians are afraid' amid calls for THIRTY FOUR separate EU referendums across Europe.
    Last edited by tankie; 29 Jun 16,, 16:51.

    Leave a comment:


  • tankie
    replied
    Originally posted by cataphract View Post
    That's good. EU can keep the convenience of speaking English while not having to put up with English people.
    As a whole , or just political people ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Goatboy
    replied
    Originally posted by Doktor View Post
    I am still confused as to why a super majority would rule crucial issues. 50%+1 is not good enough?

    Minority will rule the majority? But why?

    To help mitigate the huge swings of voter intention, from week to week, by simple media pressure for one. To get a "clear majority", (which means a clear mandate) is important for plenty of people. A 50.0001% of the vote is not good for national stability, not when it involves radically changing the direction of an entire nation -- much more substantial than mere electing a premier I think. The Montenegrin 2006 independence referendum (set by the European Union) required 55% of the vote (it passed barely). There were reasons for that, I'm not saying they were better reasons, just that there were reasons.

    By the way, I prefer simple majority generally, certainly in electing a president. But to radically change the course of the country? Maybe. But I'm open to the possibility that simple majority isn't the end all, be all, always.

    My last thought is that there is no perfect solution. Frankly, I can understand both sides of the issue. I don't agree with some of the higher threshold super majorities either, or super majorities at all in many political contests.
    Last edited by Goatboy; 29 Jun 16,, 07:58.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doktor
    replied
    I am still confused as to why a super majority would rule crucial issues. 50%+1 is not good enough?

    Minority will rule the majority? But why?

    Leave a comment:


  • Goatboy
    replied
    Originally posted by citanon View Post
    So let me get this straight. You spent three pages defending the idea of looking at London as the "most important piece" of Britain, and yet you don't want to "separate" London from Britain.
    The whole London thing was an afterthought. Frankly, I was responding to OOE's comments, more than rehashing them. I also stated that it's not an important issue. Separating London from the UK is crazy. Separating Scotland and Northern Ireland? Well, I'm not in favor of that. I prefer the UK whole and unified, along with an intact EU for a variety of reasons (we all know what the reasons are, no need to rehash them here)

    You spent text walls saying how the majority vote is a dumb idea, and raising examples of referendums in LA, and yet you are not insinuating that British voters are dumb to allow a simple majority.
    You're trying to force me into some "I'm better than you" position. Why not stop the accusations. My point is that sometimes, mere majority isn't appropriate. I'm sure you've googled the reasons why, in various national elections why, and I'm suggesting that in this case, referendums to decide massively crucial issues should probably need a higher threshold than say.... 50.0001% of the vote.




    Sorry, but idiocy is idiocy, no matter the semantics. Glad you are not a millenial. They have no need for anyone to make them look even worse.
    Everyone's an individual....

    Oh, and I'm perfectly fine with any bit of political analysis. It's the repeated insistence on stupid ideas that I find annoying.
    How about "ideas you don't agree with" instead of "stupid ideas that you find annoying



    Edit: You know what, I wrote the above reply to you but on reflection i think I'm I'm getting a bit too grumpy and impatient.

    So first, let me apologize to you for personally insulting you on these pages. Sometimes pointed posts need to be made in the interests of quality control and debate flow, but some of my comments were poorly judged and went too far.

    Secondly, myself and others members have made direct points on why supermajority referenda are unworkable in these cases, and why London is so inextricably a part of the country that it makes no sense to even consider its importance as a separate piece. You should answer these directly and cogently, instead of dancing around the issue with self referential semantics.

    Thirdly, if we still cannot reach resolution, we should agree to disagree and move on to another aspect of the topic instead of getting the thread stuck on a never ending loop of repetitive pronouncements.
    First - Apology accepted, political debates get heated, especially here. Water under the bridge.

    Second - I never considered London a separate piece, like some independent country. I said it's the most important piece. Southern California is probably the most important piece of the Pacific region of the US. Does it control every other piece? No. I answered why I thought London is the most important individual piece, financial, GDP, population, international influence. Did I state that London rules the UK? No. Did I state anything except point out how important Greater London is to the UK? No. I'm getting frustrated of this "London" discussion, and I've stated so several times, speaking of never ending loops....

    Third: We can't reach resolution I think, and I agree to move onto other aspects of the topic. I would have shortened my response to you but I felt the need to respond to your points. I'm done if you are.....

    Leave a comment:


  • cataphract
    replied
    Originally posted by kato View Post
    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news...-34840768.html

    As an aside, English is an official language of Malta and Ireland (besides Maltese and Irish). That'll keep it in the EU for a while.
    That's good. EU can keep the convenience of speaking English while not having to put up with English people.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doktor
    replied
    Nope. They haven't filed it as official

    Leave a comment:


  • kato
    replied
    Originally posted by Doktor View Post
    So, within EU bodies there will be English no more when UK leaves. Oh dear.
    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news...-34840768.html

    As an aside, English is an official language of Malta and Ireland (besides Maltese and Irish). That'll keep it in the EU for a while.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doktor
    replied
    Piratese? :)))))))))))))

    Leave a comment:


  • tankie
    replied
    Originally posted by Doktor View Post
    British language?

    It's like English, but spoken by a drunk Scot?
    Aye jimmy , och aye .

    Leave a comment:


  • Doktor
    replied
    British language?

    It's like English, but spoken by a drunk Scot?

    Leave a comment:


  • tankie
    replied
    Originally posted by Doktor View Post
    So, within EU bodies there will be English no more when UK leaves. Oh dear.
    English no , but if sturgeon gets her way , British yes , ha .

    Leave a comment:


  • Doktor
    replied
    So, within EU bodies there will be English no more when UK leaves. Oh dear.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X