|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 7, 2023 7:36:21 GMT
Doesnt matter. Cameron had no legal right to speak against the law. He didnt speak against the Law - he made a promise to the electorate about what he would do after they voted. Politicians do that every day. Hence as we know politicians are so despised ,parliament distrusted , and democracy on the verge of collapse when we cant trust them to implement their word ,and anti democratic sore losers like oracle cheering on anti demcoratic measures while hiding behind warped interpretations of democracy. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2023 7:44:25 GMT
Thomas. The results of a referendum are NON BINDING. Those who foresaw all the current problemschave the DEMOCRATIC RIGHT to express opposition to the illegally manipulated result. dearie me. The anti democratic excuses shine through yet again. why are referendums you dont like like brexit non binding and illegally manipulated , but others like the scot indy ref not? The Brexit referendum was non-binding and illegally manipulated. That's no excuse. It's the truth. That referendum didn't have legal standing. That's why the courts, despite the fact that it was proven that the results were corrupted, couldn't legally void the results. It was advisory. The then government could have (and should have!) set side the results. Teresa May sneakily -- and successfully! -- pushed the idea that although it was not legally binding and was advisory, her government was morally bound to bow to the will of the people -- as though the will of the people was etched in stone. Now we see that the will of the people in 2016 is not the same as the will of the people in 2023. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 7, 2023 7:50:24 GMT
dearie me. The anti democratic excuses shine through yet again. why are referendums you dont like like brexit non binding and illegally manipulated , but others like the scot indy ref not? The Brexit referendum was non-binding and illegally manipulated. That's no excuse. It's the truth. That referendum didn't have legal standing. you could as i said argue the same thing about every vote ever held in the yookay.
for example , the infamous scottish devolution referendum of 1979 , and its infamous anti demcocratic 40 % rule , the brainchild of robin cook of labour. The result stood for two decades, and was only overturned by the council of europe and their misgivings over uk democracy.
In the 1993 Memorandum to the Council of Europe we offered to arrange for a delegation of representatives from all of the relevant institutions to meet with the Council to discuss the situation in Scotland. In the end, however, the Council of Europe took the matter further on the strength of the Memorandum alone, and started a series of investigations that exposed the serious shortcomings of the UK’s democratic system. electricscotland.com/independence/uncommittee.htm
You sound like bad losers though in the brexit case.
Its time to move on , get your man keir starmer elected , and ask him to be honest with his pro european intentions , and hold another brexit ref , or at least , stand on a clear rejoin mandate.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 7, 2023 7:53:51 GMT
dearie me. The anti democratic excuses shine through yet again. why are referendums you dont like like brexit non binding and illegally manipulated , but others like the scot indy ref not? Teresa May sneakily -- and successfully! -- pushed the idea that although it was not legally binding and was advisory, her government was morally bound to bow to the will of the people -- as though the will of the people was etched in stone. Now we see that the will of the people in 2016 is not the same as the will of the people in 2023. what a contradiction in terms in this post.
Theresa may was elected in 2017 on a get brexit done ticket , both main parties stood on that stance from memory. The legality is nothing more than a red herring. Democracy demanded the brexit ref be implemented.
we saw the will of the people being the same in 2019 as it was in 2016. We cant comment further , until the next election. If starmers fails to get elected , will you be demanding demcoracy is overthrown and its the best of two ?
|
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Jul 7, 2023 8:22:00 GMT
Thomas please stop 5he infantile "sore loser" thing. I stopped being ten years old many years ago.
In a democracy i have the right to express an opinion. I di not call you names even when you clearly do not know the law about refs.
I have a right to point out lies, corruption and mistakes which resulted in what the UK is suffering now. Those who cheated and lies became Boris' government and we now see the kind of people they are and were.
Do you not find it hugely ironic that the leavers told you it was due to regaining sovereignty and then used sovereignty to form the kind of injurious brexit , without the will of the people, which is now becoming clear? Were you ever asked about the shape of brexit you wanted? Norweguan? Swiss? Stay in the SM? Were you ever told that you would lose the right to return migrants to France? That thousands of doctors and nurses would leave or that people are not objects who must replace thousands of migrants who do the uncomfortable jobs and who won't no matter who won the ref? That instead of little or no paperwork, business would move to the EU to avoid it , that small businesses relying on EU trade would close and that the ROW woyld find somewhere else to invest, including SIR James Dyson.
Some tried to discuss it, warn you but you called it project fear.
I am not about to rerun 7 year old battles because you are where you are.
I only ask that you be honest. And treat me as an adult, stop using outworn cheap memes annd deal constructively with what you voted for.
Now i have an appointment and a busy day.
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jul 7, 2023 8:33:12 GMT
The public was never given a chance. Once again they were lied to. More importantly, if they were given a chznce today, the UK would be reapplying for membership. Except the chances of that being approved by the EU are very slim. what do you mean the public were never given a chance? Are you implying people werent allowed to vote ?
i dont disagree. ...but if lying was a reason to overturn democratic results , then every election and referendum through political history would have to be revisited. We were lied to in 2014 , that didnt seem to matter either.
well according to the polls , you will get your chance when keir starmer and labour win the next election. Im not sure you will be allowed to vote on it , thats not keir starmers way , but im ure he will take the uk back in behind the brussells bike sheds.
The question on everyones lips though oracle , are you once again going to refuse to recognise the vote if keir and labour dont win ? You have damaged uk democracy oracle , and we cant be sure now of your participation within the rules.
What's the basis of your claim that Scotland is entitled to another vote, Toejam? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2023 10:07:47 GMT
Teresa May sneakily -- and successfully! -- pushed the idea that although it was not legally binding and was advisory, her government was morally bound to bow to the will of the people -- as though the will of the people was etched in stone. Now we see that the will of the people in 2016 is not the same as the will of the people in 2023. what a contradiction in terms in this post.
Theresa may was elected in 2017 on a get brexit done ticket , both main parties stood on that stance from memory. The legality is nothing more than a red herring. Democracy demanded the brexit ref be implemented.
we saw t he will of the people being the same in 2019 as it was in 2016. We cant comment further , until the next election. If starmers fails to get elected , will you be demanding demcoracy is overthrown and its the best of two ?
I was not speaking to how May won in 2017 but to how she successfully managed to implement a corrupted referendum with no legal standing by projecting her own virtue-signalling views about its moral imperative. A referendum is either legally binding or advisory. But she went full-scale Tony Blair with a Third Way: "It's not legally binding yet it's not really advisory either. But we are morally bound by the will of the people." Impressive gaslight manoeuvre, I must admit. Actually, No. Democracy never demanded the referendum be implemented. Democracy demanded that the referendum be rerun. Only that democracy-loving Brexiteers mangled the term and its true meaning. Like what you're doing now. Any neutral political scientist will tell you that 2016 should have been rerun because it was corrupted. They will also tell you that rerunning a corrupted referendum is demoratic. Once again: do not conflate and then confuse a democratic process with democracy itself. Elections are a democratic process. Democracy is a concept. A process must fall within the concept for it to be democratic. Re 2019: You're not gonna sit there and expect me to accept your personal conclusion, are you? You have to argue for it. My own argument is that 2019 was more about the un-electability of Jeremy Corbyn than anything else. Johnson was a leaver and so was Corbyn. If it was the new Brexit-convert Keith Starmer up against Johnson, I bet you the results would have been seriously different. No. If Starmers fails to get elected I won't be demanding that the results of the democratic process of election (note: not Democracy) be overturned. That's on the assumption that that election is not corrupted by any illegalities and other electoral fraud. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2023 10:14:31 GMT
The Brexit referendum was non-binding and illegally manipulated. That's no excuse. It's the truth. That referendum didn't have legal standing. you could as i said argue the same thing about every vote ever held in the yookay.
for example , the infamous scottish devolution referendum of 1979 , and its infamous anti demcocratic 40 % rule , the brainchild of robin cook of labour. The result stood for two decades, and was only overturned by the council of europe and their misgivings over uk democracy.
In the 1993 Memorandum to the Council of Europe we offered to arrange for a delegation of representatives from all of the relevant institutions to meet with the Council to discuss the situation in Scotland. In the end, however, the Council of Europe took the matter further on the strength of the Memorandum alone, and started a series of investigations that exposed the serious shortcomings of the UK’s democratic system. electricscotland.com/independence/uncommittee.htm
You sound like bad losers though in the brexit case.
Its time to move on , get your man keir starmer elected , and ask him to be honest with his pro european intentions , and hold another brexit ref , or at least , stand on a clear rejoin mandate.
It sounds like you are not disputing that the fact that the Brexit referendum was non-binding and illegally manipulated. That's great! Well, yes. Time to move on. But let's get this thing straight: you're the one who opened the door to a discussion about 2016. And now 1979! |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 7, 2023 10:50:06 GMT
what a contradiction in terms in this post.
Theresa may was elected in 2017 on a get brexit done ticket , both main parties stood on that stance from memory. The legality is nothing more than a red herring. Democracy demanded the brexit ref be implemented.
we saw t he will of the people being the same in 2019 as it was in 2016. We cant comment further , until the next election. If starmers fails to get elected , will you be demanding demcoracy is overthrown and its the best of two ?
I was not speaking to how May won in 2017 but to how she successfully managed to implement a corrupted referendum with no legal standing by projecting her own virtue-signalling views about its moral imperative. A referendum is either legally binding or advisory. But she went full-scale Tony Blair with a Third Way: "It's not legally binding yet it's not really advisory either. But we are morally bound by the will of the people." Impressive gaslight manoeuvre, I must admit. Actually, No. Democracy never demanded the referendum be implemented. Democracy demanded that the referendum be rerun. Only that democracy-loving Brexiteers mangled the term and its true meaning. Like what you're doing now. Any neutral political scientist will tell you that 2016 should have been rerun because it was corrupted. They will also tell you that rerunning a corrupted referendum is demoratic. Once again: do not conflate and then confuse a democratic process with democracy itself. Elections are a democratic process. Democracy is a concept. A process must fall within the concept for it to be democratic. Re 2019: You're not gonna sit there and expect me to accept your personal conclusion, are you? You have to argue for it. My own argument is that 2019 was more about the un-electability of Jeremy Corbyn than anything else. Johnson was a leaver and so was Corbyn. If it was the new Brexit-convert Keith Starmer up against Johnson, I bet you the results would have been seriously different. No. If Starmers fails to get elected I won't be demanding that the results of the democratic process of election (note: not Democracy) be overturned. That's on the assumption that that election is not corrupted by any illegalities and other electoral fraud. Well its a good job that since the referendum we have had 2 elections with a plurality of voters supporting parties who promised to enact the result of the referendum. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 7, 2023 11:04:10 GMT
what do you mean the public were never given a chance? Are you implying people werent allowed to vote ?
i dont disagree. ...but if lying was a reason to overturn democratic results , then every election and referendum through political history would have to be revisited. We were lied to in 2014 , that didnt seem to matter either.
well according to the polls , you will get your chance when keir starmer and labour win the next election. Im not sure you will be allowed to vote on it , thats not keir starmers way , but im ure he will take the uk back in behind the brussells bike sheds.
The question on everyones lips though oracle , are you once again going to refuse to recognise the vote if keir and labour dont win ? You have damaged uk democracy oracle , and we cant be sure now of your participation within the rules.
What's the basis of your claim that Scotland is entitled to another vote, Toejam? what do you mean entitled to another vote? Weve been told we cant have another referendum? |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 7, 2023 11:06:26 GMT
what a contradiction in terms in this post.
Theresa may was elected in 2017 on a get brexit done ticket , both main parties stood on that stance from memory. The legality is nothing more than a red herring. Democracy demanded the brexit ref be implemented.
we saw t he will of the people being the same in 2019 as it was in 2016. We cant comment further , until the next election. If starmers fails to get elected , will you be demanding demcoracy is overthrown and its the best of two ? Actually, No. Democracy never demanded the referendum be implemented. I , and millions of others , clearly disagreed. We are now in the realms of outight fantasy , and you anglo remainers are coming across as entitled children who are not used to mummy saying no . |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 7, 2023 11:08:02 GMT
you could as i said argue the same thing about every vote ever held in the yookay.
for example , the infamous scottish devolution referendum of 1979 , and its infamous anti demcocratic 40 % rule , the brainchild of robin cook of labour. The result stood for two decades, and was only overturned by the council of europe and their misgivings over uk democracy.
In the 1993 Memorandum to the Council of Europe we offered to arrange for a delegation of representatives from all of the relevant institutions to meet with the Council to discuss the situation in Scotland. In the end, however, the Council of Europe took the matter further on the strength of the Memorandum alone, and started a series of investigations that exposed the serious shortcomings of the UK’s democratic system. electricscotland.com/independence/uncommittee.htm
You sound like bad losers though in the brexit case.
Its time to move on , get your man keir starmer elected , and ask him to be honest with his pro european intentions , and hold another brexit ref , or at least , stand on a clear rejoin mandate.
It sounds like you are not disputing that the fact that the Brexit referendum was non-binding and illegally manipulated. That's great! no .Im reiterating what i have said many a time , that why is your brexit referendum not binding either legally or democratically , totally unfair becuase you lost , yet no one elses referndums or elections are?
|
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Jul 7, 2023 11:08:40 GMT
Another hilarious post.
The Brexit government refuses to allow Scotland a referendum.
😆😆😆
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 7, 2023 11:11:15 GMT
Another hilarious post. The Brexit government refuses to allow Scotland a referendum. 😆😆😆 so does labours potential next government. Not only that , labour didnt even want the original brexit referendum much to the ridicule of even the liberal democrats.
As i said , demcoracy seems to be something that is difficult for you and many in your country to understand.
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jul 7, 2023 11:14:48 GMT
What's the basis of your claim that Scotland is entitled to another vote, Toejam? what do you mean entitled to another vote? Weve been told we cant have another referendum? Join the club, Toejam. |
|
