BS: From my eyes Elections

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Oct 16 - 09:45 AM

Bugger, missed claiming '100'!

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Oct 16 - 09:52 AM

Very few, a tiny percentage, of "EU laws" have ever met with UK disapproval. In a club of 28 (by now) there will always be something or other you don't like. The rational thing to do is to negotiate from within. When we leave we will still have to abide by EU laws if we wish to trade, but we'll have no say in those laws. Using EU laws as an argument for leaving is like resigning from the golf club because you don't like the colour of the back of the beer mats.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Oct 16 - 10:28 AM

resigning from the golf club because you don't like the colour of the back of the beer mats.

T-Bird's already done that.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Oct 16 - 10:56 AM

Correct, Steve. Those rational ones amongst us, the ones who aren't seduced by the Liars' slogans and sound bites, who don't wrap themselves in the Union Flag and St. George's Cross tee-shirts, who don't fall for every piece of nationalistic, xenophobic, racist horse-shit the Daily Heil, Sun, and Express print, we understand those things.

Sadly, that kind of intelligent thought is way beyond the 'Take Back Control' crowd.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Oct 16 - 10:56 AM

"what is it about the concept of our elected representatives in parliament debating, and voting on, the terms and conditions of exit which the government negotiate with the EU, that you're so afraid of?"

Not all that afraid about anything. I am however somewhat sceptical, those doing all this debating Backwoodsman, would they be the same brand of self-serving trough guzzlers who lied through their teeth to us in 1973 and again in 1975? Would these be the same "professional politicians" who would have a conflict of interest in voting for the continuation of their access to the greatest "Gravy Train" in the world versus what is in our country's best interest? In political thought the latter has taken a back seat as far as British politicians go for decades.

I also see no advantage in our side of the negotiating team having to give their hand away and offer the EU Commission detailed insights into our negotiating position before we even sit down with them. Ultimately the terms and conditions for us leaving the EU will be a compromise reached through negotiation with the EU Commission, not the EU Council of Europe and most certainly not with the EU Parliament.

Also one from your earlier post:

"Democracy demands that issues of significant national and international importance should be debated and voted upon by our elected representatives in parliament, who are certain to be far better informed on the minutiae of the issue than the general public, and whose responsibility it is to make decisions on behalf of all of us."

That bit highlighted in bold - Don't you believe it Backwoodsman - they are as clueless as the rest of us, as the pre-referendum campaigns showed us.

By the way Backwoodsman when Great Britain declared War on Germany in 1939 when did the debate on whether or not we go to war take place? Fact is there was no debate on Great Britain going to war with Germany the decision was taken by the Prime Minister in the name of the Crown.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Oct 16 - 11:08 AM

Well said Mr T....Stirring stuff!

Good to see there are still some who believe in OUR country and OUR people.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Oct 16 - 11:13 AM

"In a club of 28 (by now) there will always be something or other you don't like. The rational thing to do is to negotiate from within."

Perhaps either Steve Shaw or Backwoodsman could tell us the ways in which the UK has managed to influence or reform the EU from within during the 43 years we've been members. Anthony Charles Lynton Blair had a crack at it when he negotiated away much of our rebate in exchange for the supposed scrapping of the EU Common Agricultural Policy Scheme - This resulted in the UK receiving less rebate yet the CAP sails merrily on. In any negotiation "within" Europe we will always be out-voted.

The EU is a cosy little club specifically run for the benefit of the Germans and the French always was and it always will be.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Oct 16 - 11:15 AM

Not suggesting that May should 'reveal her hand' before the negotiations take place - read again, properly this time - I'm saying that, when negotiations are completed and a set of T&Cs are arrived at, democracy dictates that parliament should debate and vote on the acceptability of the deal(s) on offer.

THAT is called Democracy.

And, as the disaster unfolds before us, the daft buggers are still prattling on about 'making our own laws' (which we've always been able to do) and 'taking back control', and crowing, "We won, get over it".

Ever hear the story about Nero and his fiddle?

'Bye now.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Oct 16 - 12:00 PM

For the most part you blokes all sound unhappy, dissatisfies and unrepresented.


You would all be much happier with life in today's Germany or Slovenia, if any of you could overcome your programming and false sense of national ego.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Oct 16 - 12:25 PM

still some who believe in OUR country and OUR people.

Ja, ja, Ake, & to hell with those foreign untermenschen

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Oct 16 - 01:35 PM

Well we certainly won't be taking back control of our borders much. We can't do it for non-EU citizens because we need all those doctors and nurses that somebody else has trained. Likewise, we need some more from the EU too, as well as the skilled and unskilled workers that can do jobs that Brits can't or won't do.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Oct 16 - 03:48 PM

We need to put our own people to work in proper jobs with proper rates of pay.......that will never happen while there is "freedom of movement" on a steeply sloping playing field.

It also involves a huge change in society, and how we value "work"

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Oct 16 - 03:57 PM

Don, we are not nearly as "unrepresented" as you are.
Your political system is an obscene joke.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Oct 16 - 04:42 PM

Joke personalities agree. As for your borders, you are a fuckin island
based on historic classism.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Oct 16 - 01:30 AM

Backwoodsman - 26 Oct 16 - 11:15 AM

"Not suggesting that May should 'reveal her hand' before the negotiations take place - read again, properly this time - I'm saying that, when negotiations are completed and a set of T&Cs are arrived at, democracy dictates that parliament should debate and vote on the acceptability of the deal(s) on offer."

We would debate and vote to what purpose Backwoodsman? Once Article 50 has been triggered there is no going back, the terms and conditions arrived at through negotiation with the EU Commission will be final and the UK will find itself unshackled from the governance of Brussels.

Now on the subject of unanswered questions:

If in the US Presidential election a voter turn out of 72.2% came up with a similar result in favour of Hilary Clinton would you then advocate that her majority was insufficient and that Trump should really be given another chance. Or would 51.9% Clinton 48.1% Trump be good enough to make Hilary Clinton the next President of the United States of America?

A turn out of 72% would be extremely high for the USA judging by recent elections where voter turn out has been as follows - 2000, 54.2%; in 2004 60.4%; 2008 62.3%; and 2012 57.5%

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Stu
Date: 27 Oct 16 - 04:56 AM

Will somebody please put this thread out of it's misery.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Oct 16 - 05:46 AM

Try a dose of foul trolling, Stu. Or just bring God into it. Or mention Israel. That should do it!

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Oct 16 - 08:20 AM

Hell, try all three!

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 27 Oct 16 - 10:32 AM

My final contribution - for those who don't understand 'Democracy'

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Oct 16 - 12:18 PM

From your link Backwoodsman:

"Over the years, Parliament has passed laws that limit the application of parliamentary sovereignty. These laws reflect political developments both within and outside the UK.

They include:

The devolution of power to bodies like the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly.

The Human Rights Act 1998.

The UK's entry to the European Union in 1973.

The decision to establish a UK Supreme Court in 2009, which ends the House of Lords function as the UK's final court of appeal.

These developments do not fundamentally undermine the principle of parliamentary sovereignty, since, in theory at least, Parliament could repeal any of the laws implementing these changes."

Thanks for that.

Still see that along with the "usual suspects" you are good at asking questions, which I have had the courtesy to answer, while you ignore questions asked of you. Here's a reminder for you:

1: What are you going to debate after the terms and conditions have been agreed?

2: If in the US Presidential election a voter turn out of 72.2% came up with a similar result in favour of Hilary Clinton would you then advocate that her majority was insufficient and that Trump should really be given another chance. Or would 51.9% Clinton 48.1% Trump be good enough to make Hilary Clinton the next President of the United States of America?

But just in case you remained moved to silence:

Answer 1 - nothing to debate it would be a useless talking exercise.

Answer 2 - With an average US voter turn-out of 58.6% if Hillary Clinton wins by a margin of 52% to 48% in November there will a huge sigh of relief and there will not be a single murmur about minority votes by those who question the Brexit result.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Oct 16 - 02:56 PM

Well I answered your numero two by telling you that general elections and an EU in-out referendum are not equivalent and I gave you the reasons. So that makes me no longer a usual suspect.

Talking about keeping cards close to chests, etc., a thousand pairs of industrialists' ears are currently pricked up, as it's clear that Theresa May has promised Nissan something to keep them here, probably some guarantee that she'll soften the tariff blow for them when we leave. She hasn't read your strictures, has she, Teribus?

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Oct 16 - 01:52 AM

Now what strictures would they be Shaw?

"With an average US voter turn-out of 58.6% if Hillary Clinton wins by a margin of 52% to 48%" Will that be good enough?

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Oct 16 - 09:40 AM

"Voters must be given the chance to change their minds on Brexit, Labour former prime minister Tony Blair has insisted.

Mr Blair said people need to be allowed to give their view on any Brexit divorce deal with the EU, either through a referendum, or general election.

"There is absolutely no reason why we should close off any options. You can't change this decision, unless it becomes clear in one way or another, that the British people have had a change of mind because they have seen the reality of the alternative.

 "We are entitled to carry on scrutinising, and, yes, if necessary, to change our minds, because it seems sensible to us to do so. This is not about an elite over-ruling the people.

Just because this shyster is saying that is the perfect reason why his advice should not be followed. Not surprisingly this would appear to be exactly what Steve Shaw, Backwoodsman and others want.

The 17,410,742 people who voted to leave the EU in no way can be viewed as being "an elite over-ruling the people" This from a "socialist" who has used his position to become a multi-millionaire, who was only prepared to stand down as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom in order to become President of Europe - i.e. Head of the "greatest gravy train" on Earth.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Oct 16 - 11:10 AM

Refresh:

""With an average US voter turn-out of 58.6% if Hillary Clinton wins by a margin of 52% to 48%" Will that be good enough?

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Oct 16 - 11:45 AM

No. in four years' time the yanks can change their minds. Once we're out, that's it, whatever you want to pretend. General elections and once-and-for-all referendums are not comparable. I've told you that had the result been a marginal win for Remain, we'd already be seeing campaigns for a rerun, and we'd probably have got one in a few years' time. The same game as the SNP are playing. It can't work the other way round. The referendum was skewed and the thresholds were way too low for leaving. You can keep quoting your seventeen million until you're blue in the face, but forty-six million were registered to vote and twenty-nine million did NOT vote to leave.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Oct 16 - 11:46 AM

I meant no, you're wrong about all of this.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 29 Oct 16 - 01:31 PM

No. in four years' time the yanks can change their minds. Once we're out, that's it, whatever you want to pretend. General elections and once-and-for-all referendums are not comparable. I've told you that had the result been a marginal win for Remain, we'd already be seeing campaigns for a rerun, and we'd probably have got one in a few years' time. The same game as the SNP are playing. It can't work the other way round. The referendum was skewed and the thresholds were way too low for leaving. You can keep quoting your seventeen million until you're blue in the face, but forty-six million were registered to vote and twenty-nine million did NOT vote to leave."

A perfect and totally accurate summation, Steve.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Oct 16 - 02:50 PM

No Backwoodsman and Steve Shaw - 46.5 million people were given the opportunity to vote roughly 28% couldn't be bothered one way or the other. Of those who could be bothered to vote more wanted to leave than wanted to remain - both sides can claim the percentage that couldn't be bothered to vote. Those are the facts live with it.

Now answer the question:

"With an average US voter turn-out of 58.6% if Hillary Clinton wins by a margin of 52% to 48%" Will that be good enough to make Hillary Clinton the next President of the United States of America? - Simple YES or NO will suffice.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Oct 16 - 05:36 PM

Evasive in the extreme. Just over one-third of the electorate have made an irreversible decision on behalf of the one hundred percent of us. They did this on the back of a campaign full of lies and which pandered to their basest xenophobic instincts. There you go.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Oct 16 - 01:59 AM

Answer the question:

With an average US voter turn-out of 58.6% if Hillary Clinton wins by a margin of 52% to 48%" Will that be good enough to make Hillary Clinton the next President of the United States of America? - Simple YES or NO will suffice.

"Just over one-third of the electorate have made an irreversible decision on behalf of the one hundred percent of us."

All you have done is describe the norm

Population of the United Kingdom (i.e. "the one hundred percent of us") = 65 265 435

UK electorate = 46 500 001 or 71.25% of the population

So in any referendum IF 100% of the electorate votes (Never likely to happen) and the result is close then 36.34% of the electorate, i.e. Just over one-third of the electorate would have made an irreversible decision on behalf of the one hundred percent of us.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Oct 16 - 05:36 AM

"Once we're out, that's it, whatever you want to pretend."

Idiotic and inaccurate statement.

We most certainly will be out of the EU once Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty has been put in motion. That does not necessarily mean that we will be out of Europe.

Having triggered Article 50 and having left the EU there is nothing that stops us reapplying for membership at some point in the future although I cannot for the life of me think why we would ever want to do that.

The "doom'n'gloom" predictions have all proved false, our economy continues to grow and outperform that of the EU, who over the past five years have not managed to solve any of their underlying problems. I wouldn't pay too much attention to the pronouncements of Merkel or Hollande as neither might be in power come the time we actually leave. The EU is in dire need of reform and has been in that state for decades yet it has not budged one inch (or 2.54cm) down that route to reform itself. The greatest fear of the EU Commission at the moment is who else is going to follow the UK's lead and leave next.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Oct 16 - 05:55 AM

Your last point is the very reason we are not going to get a good deal. As for the rest of your post, well, none so blind... And will you give over with your Clinton guff. General elections are not the same thing as referendums and no amount of your silly repetitions will change that fact.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Oct 16 - 07:22 AM

Amen Steve. Let's bugger off to the pub and leave 'im to his delusions. First one there gets 'em in.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Oct 16 - 07:25 AM

Well I have a bad leg, you see... 🍻

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Oct 16 - 10:09 AM

Oh OK, I'll get 'em in! 😄

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Oct 16 - 01:13 AM

"And will you give over with your Clinton guff. General elections are not the same thing as referendums and no amount of your silly repetitions will change that fact." - Steve Shaw

What "General Election" is Clinton involved in Shaw?

National Referendum = One question with a straightforward choice is put before the electorate of the country and as a result of that a decision is reached.

US Presidential Election = One question involving a straightforward choice of which candidate you want to vote for is put before the electorates of each State and as a result of that a decision is reached as to who will become the next President of the United States of America.

So I will ask you again:

"With an average US voter turn-out of 58.6% if Hillary Clinton wins by a margin of 52% to 48%" - Will that be good enough to make Hillary Clinton the next President of the United States of America? - Simple YES or NO will suffice.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 16 - 05:22 AM

Well...yes and no....

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 16 - 05:29 AM

General election - incorrect term for the US presidential election, agreed. It doesn't change my argument.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Nov 16 - 01:57 AM

You're wriggling Shaw.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 16 - 05:19 AM

I've just admitted a mistake. How is that wriggling? I've answered the statistics stuff you are obsessively throwing at us until I'm blue in the face. Can't you think of something different now and move on?

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Nov 16 - 06:55 AM

"With an average US voter turn-out of 58.6% if Hillary Clinton wins by a margin of 52% to 48%" - Will that be good enough to make Hillary Clinton the next President of the United States of America? - Simple YES or NO will suffice.

Your "Well...yes and no.... " is a wriggling cop out and you know it. On the Brexit Referendum had the vote gone the other by exactly the same margin there would never have been a peep out of you, Carroll, Stu, et al.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 16 - 09:29 AM

It was not a wriggling cop-out. All this has been fully addressed in the thread. Go and look. What it actually was was me taking the piss. Now stop parroting out the same senseless question and think of something else, why don't you.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Nov 16 - 02:58 AM

"With an average US voter turn-out of 58.6% if Hillary Clinton wins by a margin of 52% to 48%" - Will that be good enough to make Hillary Clinton the next President of the United States of America? - Simple YES or NO will suffice.

That "senseless question" that you and your fellow travellers seem to be incapable of answering because you know damn well that in any democratic country that holds free and fair elections, or, plebiscites the answer is an unequivocal YES

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Nov 16 - 10:13 AM

I have patiently explained to you why "plebiscites" and general/presidential elections are not equivalent. I have patiently explained to you why our referendum was so skewed that an unqualified simple majority was inappropriate, why the bar for turnout and voting outcome was set way too low. You are ignoring that and trying to barge through all the arguments with your simplistic, one-size-fits-all bluster. Now you don't like people putting words in your mouth, but I'm just wondering how you'd react if teachers voted, though with a low turnout, to go on strike...

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Nov 16 - 11:02 AM

"peep out of you, Carroll, Stu, et al."
Again, you lie about this - your metier nowadays.
I made my position clear on Europe at the very beginning - I voted against it when it was put to the vote, I have always mistruded it as an organisation of Capitalist States and I posted heavily when the Greek situation raised its ugly head - made a few enemies among toy fascists when I did.
My attitude is as it was from the beginning - it is a gathering of capitalist states co-operating among themselves to do the best in their own national interests.
Until the world becomes a better place, it is the best option we have at the present time.
Brexit was fought on a racist, 'Little England'ticket - no thought was given for the consequences as long as we could stop forigners entering Britain.
Britain has swung sharply to the right in the short time since the referendum - an increase in racist hate crimes being one of the results of this.
Without introducing too fractious a subject, an acceleration in antisemitism is part of this increase - antisemitism has always been the domain of the right - (though, to be fair, the situation hasn't been helped by the Israeli regime using the Jewish People as human shields to protect itself from having to face war crimes charges)
You accuse Steve of wiggling, yet you refuse to respond to any fact put up in front of you on the outcome of Britain leaving Europe - it doesn't matter to you if British workers can no longer go to Europe for work - more fuel for your hatred and contempt of the less well off.
Brexit has raised problem after problem for the ordinary people of Britain and it has been given as expert opinion that it will be at least a decade before the economy becomes steady again - as little good as that will do for working people .
I doubt if you will even bother "wiggling" on this - you usually ignore what doesn't suit your extremist right-wing agenda.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Stu
Date: 02 Nov 16 - 11:18 AM

"...there would never have been a peep out of you, Carroll, Stu, et al."

I'm willing to admit this is true. However I'm guessing we might have heard more than a peep out of yourself, Ake, Farage et al.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Nov 16 - 11:36 AM

If the referendum had gone the other way the losers woulld undoubtely have been crying foul, and demanding another referenendum.

The difference would be that the suggestion that somehow another referendum would be in any way an affront to democracy would be recognised as absurd. No more so than another election. Democracy means if you lose one time you work to try to win next time.

Even when a couple get divorced that's conditional. There's a "decree nisi", but the divorce doesn't happen unless they confirm they still wish to go ahead, and a "decree absolute" is made. I strongly suspect that if we had a chance to vote whether to go ahead with Brexit we'd vote to stay.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Nov 16 - 02:32 PM

I'm sure we would. As you say, there would be clamour for a rerun. That's very easy to do at any time with a remain win, but to all intents and purposes impossible once Article 50 is enforced with the leave vote. That's why the referendum was skewed and that's why it can't be compared to a general/presidential election. The winning line for leaving was set way too far back. We're called remoaners and undemocratic by the crowing brexiteers. The truth is that the democratic deficit lies squarely in their court. Still, they won't be crowing for much longer.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 08:03 AM

The High Court have just ruled that there must be a parliamentary vote before May can trigger Art. 50.

Thank god for judges with common sense.

Subject: RE: BS: From my eyes Elections
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 03 Nov 16 - 08:50 AM

.....And an understanding of the democratic principle of Parliamentary Sovreignty.