|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 4, 2022 16:27:46 GMT
Some even had a referendum on a Constitution for the EU, which was rejected , but they got it anyway by means of something they could not have a referendum on. On such things are pictures drawn of what one is dealing with I don't quite know what you're talking about. Do you have a link? The Constitutional Treaty we were supposed to have a say in failed because in 2005 a French referendum was won by no, they clearly rejected a Constitution. The polls had suggested a large Yes win. What happened next was the same principles were drawn up in an amending treaty whereby no referenda were required in many countries to accept it except perhaps Ireland and the Czech Republic if I recall correctly. Ireland rejected Lisbon but in time honoured EU fashion were asked to vote again after a few tweaks in the treaty and a major effort to get the Yes campaign effectively organised with all its ducks in a row. Needless to say Yes won as it did in Czechoslovakia. The point as always is that democracy is manipulated within the EU. A No vote sees repeat referenda a yes vote in the case of the UK in 75 sees over 40 years of trying to get another one and that request being fought all the way until teh time seems ripe; but they got that wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Nov 4, 2022 16:27:56 GMT
Not all Labour voters or MPs opposed Brexit The problem for me is the lying bitch Jessica Morden who got back in as the Labour MP for Newport East said categorically in the 2017 election manifesto that it was time for her and the party to recognise the referendum result and work to deliver the best possible outcome from it, and as soon as her arse was safely on the green leather again the bitch went into all out conspiracy mode to do her utmost short of actually bombing people to derail the process. The key fact you must realise in connection with her treachery is that AT THE TIME we were a somewhat marginal seat and there were a whole range of voices asking to be elected ranging from ‘burn the 1972 Act and come straight out now’ to ‘burn the referendum result and as many leave voters as we can round up and stick in a gas oven’ and pretty much every shade of political opinion in between and HAD THIS BITCH TOLD THE TRUTH about her intent she would NOT have got back in. Why should I believe a bloody word these scum day when they pull stunts like that ?? Assuming your comment is made without bias, the words "these scum" goes a hell of lot further than some female MP in Wales. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 4, 2022 16:32:54 GMT
I don't quite know what you're talking about. Do you have a link? The Constitutional Treaty we were supposed to have a say in failed because in 2005 a French referendum was won by no, they clearly rejected a Constitution. The polls had suggested a large Yes win. What happened next was the same principles were drawn up in an amending treaty whereby no referenda were required in many countries to accept it except perhaps Ireland and the Czech Republic if I recall correctly. Ireland rejected Lisbon but in time honoured EU fashion were asked to vote again after a few tweaks in the treaty and a major effort to get the Yes campaign effectively organised with all its ducks in a row. Needless to say Yes won as it did in Czechoslovakia. The point as always is that democracy is manipulated within the EU. A No vote sees repeat referenda a yes vote in the case of the UK in 75 sees over 40 years of trying to get another one and that request being fought all the way until teh time seems ripe; but they got that wrong. That's a complete misrepresentation. I don't know the details, but it's discussed regularly on forums such as this. As far as I can recall, the Irish electorate rejected because of a clause in the proposed treaty. That clause was removed and they voted again. This time it succeeded. You can't say fairer than that. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Nov 4, 2022 16:38:38 GMT
The problem for me is the lying bitch Jessica Morden who got back in as the Labour MP for Newport East said categorically in the 2017 election manifesto that it was time for her and the party to recognise the referendum result and work to deliver the best possible outcome from it, and as soon as her arse was safely on the green leather again the bitch went into all out conspiracy mode to do her utmost short of actually bombing people to derail the process. The key fact you must realise in connection with her treachery is that AT THE TIME we were a somewhat marginal seat and there were a whole range of voices asking to be elected ranging from ‘burn the 1972 Act and come straight out now’ to ‘burn the referendum result and as many leave voters as we can round up and stick in a gas oven’ and pretty much every shade of political opinion in between and HAD THIS BITCH TOLD THE TRUTH about her intent she would NOT have got back in. Why should I believe a bloody word these scum day when they pull stunts like that ?? Assuming your comment is made without bias, the words "these scum" goes a hell of lot further than some female MP in Wales. I have her 2017 manifesto and her voting record and activities are a matter of public record. The finest thing that is supposed to happen in the near future is the extermination of the Newport East constituency and the distribution of its huge labour majority to rather less Marxist areas nearby where they will get to understand what it means to be a voter with a constituency so overwhelmingly against your view voting is pointless. I hope in the cat fight between her and Newport West’s safe seater she will lose. It wasn’t always this extremist round here. In Newport West where I used to live our MP was Paul Flynn. He got the seat in 1987 or thereabouts after a Tory who got in on Maggie’s falklands victory was ousted. The first thing Flynn did was to ask his constituents what they thought of an upcoming vote and I was one of a number who pointed out in scientific terms how boneheaded the bill was. Crucially I and a few dozen others pointed him at scientists whose work weighed up the measure and even more importantly he went off his own back to talk to them and came back and admitted publicly he had changed his mind. I can work with someone who is open to debate. Morden isn’t. At any level. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Nov 4, 2022 16:38:44 GMT
I don't quite know what you're talking about. Do you have a link? The Constitutional Treaty we were supposed to have a say in failed because in 2005 a French referendum was won by no, they clearly rejected a Constitution. The polls had suggested a large Yes win. What happened next was the same principles were drawn up in an amending treaty whereby no referenda were required in many countries to accept it except perhaps Ireland and the Czech Republic if I recall correctly. Ireland rejected Lisbon but in time honoured EU fashion were asked to vote again after a few tweaks in the treaty and a major effort to get the Yes campaign effectively organised with all its ducks in a row. Needless to say Yes won as it did in Czechoslovakia. The point as always is that democracy is manipulated within the EU. A No vote sees repeat referenda a yes vote in the case of the UK in 75 sees over 40 years of trying to get another one and that request being fought all the way until teh time seems ripe; but they got that wrong. The problem with that so called Constitutional Treaty was that it was swallowed up, literally engulfed by, modifications needed to address the new member countries that had either joined or were joining the EU. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 4, 2022 16:57:46 GMT
The Constitutional Treaty we were supposed to have a say in failed because in 2005 a French referendum was won by no, they clearly rejected a Constitution. The polls had suggested a large Yes win. What happened next was the same principles were drawn up in an amending treaty whereby no referenda were required in many countries to accept it except perhaps Ireland and the Czech Republic if I recall correctly. Ireland rejected Lisbon but in time honoured EU fashion were asked to vote again after a few tweaks in the treaty and a major effort to get the Yes campaign effectively organised with all its ducks in a row. Needless to say Yes won as it did in Czechoslovakia. The point as always is that democracy is manipulated within the EU. A No vote sees repeat referenda a yes vote in the case of the UK in 75 sees over 40 years of trying to get another one and that request being fought all the way until teh time seems ripe; but they got that wrong. That's a complete misrepresentation. I don't know the details, but it's discussed regularly on forums such as this. As far as I can recall, the Irish electorate rejected because of a clause in the proposed treaty. That clause was removed and they voted again. This time it succeeded. You can't say fairer than that. So they tweaked the treaty as I said. If you think that the Yes campaign did not review its campaign and redirect its efforts with a redirection to specific demographic groups and explain the rewording in comforting detail I think you are wrong. There is also to my recall the unashamed threats of financial disaster if the then severely distressed Celtic Tiger should have to leave the EU. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Nov 4, 2022 16:58:26 GMT
Not all Labour voters or MPs opposed Brexit The problem for me is the lying bitch Jessica Morden who got back in as the Labour MP for Newport East said categorically in the 2017 election manifesto that it was time for her and the party to recognise the referendum result and work to deliver the best possible outcome from it, and as soon as her arse was safely on the green leather again the bitch went into all out conspiracy mode to do her utmost short of actually bombing people to derail the process. The key fact you must realise in connection with her treachery is that AT THE TIME we were a somewhat marginal seat and there were a whole range of voices asking to be elected ranging from ‘burn the 1972 Act and come straight out now’ to ‘burn the referendum result and as many leave voters as we can round up and stick in a gas oven’ and pretty much every shade of political opinion in between and HAD THIS BITCH TOLD THE TRUTH about her intent she would NOT have got back in. Why should I believe a bloody word these scum day when they pull stunts like that ?? Again you twist the truth All of Labour incl her voted in January 2018 against fixing the exit date as March 29th 2019 whether there was a deal or not and other points in the bill that broke Tory manifesto commitments. As they pointed out, the relevant bill had several flaws. They also voted in April 2019 against leaving without an exit agreement and 113 Conservative MPs agreed with her Perhaps you may remember that Boris also opposed May's daft exit plans. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Nov 4, 2022 17:00:40 GMT
I don't quite know what you're talking about. Do you have a link? The Constitutional Treaty we were supposed to have a say in failed because in 2005 a French referendum was won by no, they clearly rejected a Constitution. The polls had suggested a large Yes win. What happened next was the same principles were drawn up in an amending treaty whereby no referenda were required in many countries to accept it except perhaps Ireland and the Czech Republic if I recall correctly. Ireland rejected Lisbon but in time honoured EU fashion were asked to vote again after a few tweaks in the treaty and a major effort to get the Yes campaign effectively organised with all its ducks in a row. Needless to say Yes won as it did in Czechoslovakia. The point as always is that democracy is manipulated within the EU. A No vote sees repeat referenda a yes vote in the case of the UK in 75 sees over 40 years of trying to get another one and that request being fought all the way until teh time seems ripe; but they got that wrong. Nope The Lisbon Treaty had significant amendments from that constitution for Ireland, Poland and the UK. Most importantly they took out the supremacy of the ECJ in all matters and so made it for us a treaty not a constitution establishing a one EU nation. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 4, 2022 17:12:11 GMT
The Constitutional Treaty we were supposed to have a say in failed because in 2005 a French referendum was won by no, they clearly rejected a Constitution. The polls had suggested a large Yes win. What happened next was the same principles were drawn up in an amending treaty whereby no referenda were required in many countries to accept it except perhaps Ireland and the Czech Republic if I recall correctly. Ireland rejected Lisbon but in time honoured EU fashion were asked to vote again after a few tweaks in the treaty and a major effort to get the Yes campaign effectively organised with all its ducks in a row. Needless to say Yes won as it did in Czechoslovakia. The point as always is that democracy is manipulated within the EU. A No vote sees repeat referenda a yes vote in the case of the UK in 75 sees over 40 years of trying to get another one and that request being fought all the way until teh time seems ripe; but they got that wrong. Nope The Lisbon Treaty had significant amendments from that constitution for Ireland, Poland and the UK. Most importantly they took out the supremacy of the ECJ in all matters and so made it for us a treaty not a constitution establishing a one EU nation. Do not take my word for it leave to the Constitutional expert. The Treaty of Lisbon is the same as the rejected constitution. Only the format has been changed to avoid referendums.” Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, former French President and President of the Constitutional Convention in several European newspapers, 27 October 2007 Should we believe him or is he lying? |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Nov 4, 2022 17:30:17 GMT
The Constitutional Treaty we were supposed to have a say in failed because in 2005 a French referendum was won by no, they clearly rejected a Constitution. The polls had suggested a large Yes win. What happened next was the same principles were drawn up in an amending treaty whereby no referenda were required in many countries to accept it except perhaps Ireland and the Czech Republic if I recall correctly. Ireland rejected Lisbon but in time honoured EU fashion were asked to vote again after a few tweaks in the treaty and a major effort to get the Yes campaign effectively organised with all its ducks in a row. Needless to say Yes won as it did in Czechoslovakia. The point as always is that democracy is manipulated within the EU. A No vote sees repeat referenda a yes vote in the case of the UK in 75 sees over 40 years of trying to get another one and that request being fought all the way until teh time seems ripe; but they got that wrong. The problem with that so called Constitutional Treaty was that it was swallowed up, literally engulfed by, modifications needed to address the new member countries that had either joined or were joining the EU. So the masters at the EU drew up a constitution that wasn't fit for purpose, is that what you think? Did you ever think it drew it up in the belief it would pass without objection and that it would be waved through without a murmur? Do you think the Irish leader took it upon himself to call another referendum or do you think he was pressured by the EU? Why would he call another referendum when, after the first vote, he said he would not ask the Irish people to vote again? This is just a part of the reason Farage once compared the EU top brass to the Mafia and when told to retract it, calledf them gangsters. What goes on in the EU parliament is little different to what goes on in other parliaments and even in local councils right down to parish level, it is the major reason why the mainstream parties shy away from anything other than the status quo in terms of the electoral system. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 4, 2022 17:59:55 GMT
The problem with that so called Constitutional Treaty was that it was swallowed up, literally engulfed by, modifications needed to address the new member countries that had either joined or were joining the EU. So the masters at the EU drew up a constitution that wasn't fit for purpose, is that what you think? Did you ever think it drew it up in the belief it would pass without objection and that it would be waved through without a murmur? Do you think the Irish leader took it upon himself to call another referendum or do you think he was pressured by the EU? Why would he call another referendum when, after the first vote, he said he would not ask the Irish people to vote again? This is just a part of the reason Farage once compared the EU top brass to the Mafia and when told to retract it, calledf them gangsters. What goes on in the EU parliament is little different to what goes on in other parliaments and even in local councils right down to parish level, it is the major reason why the mainstream parties shy away from anything other than the status quo in terms of the electoral system. Did someone hold a gun to the head of the Irish electorate? If they didn't agree with the changes, why did they vote to pass it the second time? Were they threatened with expulsion? By the way, do you happen to know if it passed overwhelmingly the second time? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 4, 2022 19:35:28 GMT
So the masters at the EU drew up a constitution that wasn't fit for purpose, is that what you think? Did you ever think it drew it up in the belief it would pass without objection and that it would be waved through without a murmur? Do you think the Irish leader took it upon himself to call another referendum or do you think he was pressured by the EU? Why would he call another referendum when, after the first vote, he said he would not ask the Irish people to vote again? This is just a part of the reason Farage once compared the EU top brass to the Mafia and when told to retract it, calledf them gangsters. What goes on in the EU parliament is little different to what goes on in other parliaments and even in local councils right down to parish level, it is the major reason why the mainstream parties shy away from anything other than the status quo in terms of the electoral system. Did someone hold a gun to the head of the Irish electorate? If they didn't agree with the changes, why did they vote to pass it the second time? Were they threatened with expulsion? By the way, do you happen to know if it passed overwhelmingly the second time? Well in effect a metaphorical gun was held to teh heads of the Irish electorate. After being the Celtic Tiger and overheating the economy of Ireland was in a major decline at the time. House prices were plunging and forecast to go down significantly, many people were struggling to keep afloat and the Yes campaign played on fears as regards the recession and jobs by accentuating the problems of a NO vote whereby funding would be lost for some projects as it would entail leaving the EU. Of course it passed the second time. The original point was teh French referendum rejected a Constitution, the Lisbon Treaty being an amending treaty was ratified without a referendum by France yet it effectively was the same thing as the French electorate had rejected. T |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 4, 2022 21:09:44 GMT
Did someone hold a gun to the head of the Irish electorate? If they didn't agree with the changes, why did they vote to pass it the second time? Were they threatened with expulsion? By the way, do you happen to know if it passed overwhelmingly the second time? Well in effect a metaphorical gun was held to teh heads of the Irish electorate. After being the Celtic Tiger and overheating the economy of Ireland was in a major decline at the time. House prices were plunging and forecast to go down significantly, many people were struggling to keep afloat and the Yes campaign played on fears as regards the recession and jobs by accentuating the problems of a NO vote whereby funding would be lost for some projects as it would entail leaving the EU. Of course it passed the second time. The original point was teh French referendum rejected a Constitution, the Lisbon Treaty being an amending treaty was ratified without a referendum by France yet it effectively was the same thing as the French electorate had rejected. T It passed the second time for one reason and one reason only: the EU removed the clause the Irish objected to. The Irish had a problem with it. The EU listened. They're just lovely. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 4, 2022 21:25:57 GMT
Well in effect a metaphorical gun was held to teh heads of the Irish electorate. After being the Celtic Tiger and overheating the economy of Ireland was in a major decline at the time. House prices were plunging and forecast to go down significantly, many people were struggling to keep afloat and the Yes campaign played on fears as regards the recession and jobs by accentuating the problems of a NO vote whereby funding would be lost for some projects as it would entail leaving the EU. Of course it passed the second time. The original point was teh French referendum rejected a Constitution, the Lisbon Treaty being an amending treaty was ratified without a referendum by France yet it effectively was the same thing as the French electorate had rejected. T It passed the second time for one reason and one reason only: the EU removed the clause the Irish objected to. The Irish had a problem with it. The EU listened. They're just lovely. Well now you are in the land of pure assumption. We do not know why it passed the second time. What we do is the differences in what was being voted for, the campaigns of both sides and the general change in economic circumstances from the first referendum. All may have had some effect but what a second referendum did was allowed the losing side to reassess their campaign, correct errors of prominence and downplay negative aspects of a yes vote and highlight negative aspects of a No vote. I am not saying any was definitive but they were all part of the event. I see you could not comment on the French having a referendum and rejecting a Constitution and then having an amending treaty that did exactly the same thing ratified by their government with no referendum |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 4, 2022 21:29:47 GMT
It passed the second time for one reason and one reason only: the EU removed the clause the Irish objected to. The Irish had a problem with it. The EU listened. They're just lovely. Well now you are in the land of pure assumption. We do not know why it passed the second time. What we do is the differences in what was being voted for, the campaigns of both sides and the general change in economic circumstances from the first referendum. All may have had some effect but what a second referendum did was allowed the losing side to reassess their campaign, correct errors of prominence and downplay negative aspects of a yes vote and highlight negative aspects of a No vote. I am not saying any was definitive but they were all part of the event. I see you could not comment on the French having a referendum and rejecting a Constitution and then having an amending treaty that did exactly the same thing ratified by their government with no referendum What do you mean when you say we can't know why they voted for it the second time? What do you think the Irish are? Poodles? If the EU told them to vote one way, you can be pretty sure they'd vote the exact opposite way. Just as Obama telling the UK how to vote backfired. It's very simple: the Irish didn't like the entire proposal put to them in the first referendum, so they rejected it. The EU removed the part they didn't like, and then they wholeheartedly accepted it. The Irish spoke. The EU listened. |
|
