|
|
Post by wapentake on Jul 2, 2024 5:33:44 GMT
That makes absolutely no sense at all. You said MP's are better at taking decisions than the public because they are better informed - well MP's rejected membership of the Single Market because they were better informed. So do you think they made the correct decision? My point is and has been that MPs are better informed and have advisers and help to gain information, which is their job as a MP, making them better informed than the average voter who will spend most of their time just getting on with their own lives. Hmmm you sure about that,if they’re better informed why didn’t they know what was happening to the postmasters et al? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jul 2, 2024 6:31:33 GMT
The UK is perfectly capable, it is the Europhiles that seem unable to engage in debate by only issuing dire warnings and name calling those who wished to seek a different path. 2016 shows otherwise. I disagree, the main substance of the Remain campaign centered around how bad things would be if Brexit came to pass. Little was heard of the positive aspects of EU membership. By contrast the main substance of the Leave side centered around taking back control of the country from foreign/global/financial interests. There is little doubt that a large section of the Remain side certainly 'bigged up' the potential problems, including potential return to violence in NI, (does that constitute a threat?) and the ostracising of the UK from global power. Now within that debate there was much flowery language and hyperbole from many people but the sober discussions, and there were many, highlighted those as the salient points. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jul 2, 2024 8:37:49 GMT
LOL......... the lies of true Red Labour lefty supporter ............LIAR. In the opinion of your shit filled stunted logic mind LOL ^^This is from someone who never has his finger off the report button ..LOL |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jul 2, 2024 9:09:43 GMT
My point is and has been that MPs are better informed and have advisers and help to gain information, which is their job as a MP, making them better informed than the average voter who will spend most of their time just getting on with their own lives. Hmmm you sure about that,if they’re better informed why didn’t they know what was happening to the postmasters et al? Nothing to do with with the point I make. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jul 2, 2024 9:20:50 GMT
I disagree, the main substance of the Remain campaign centered around how bad things would be if Brexit came to pass. Little was heard of the positive aspects of EU membership. By contrast the main substance of the Leave side centered around taking back control of the country from foreign/global/financial interests. There is little doubt that a large section of the Remain side certainly 'bigged up' the potential problems, including potential return to violence in NI, (does that constitute a threat?) and the ostracising of the UK from global power. Now within that debate there was much flowery language and hyperbole from many people but the sober discussions, and there were many, highlighted those as the salient points. The referendum was a mess full of lies, insinuated lies and misinformation, with the finger of guilt pointed at both sides. That's the reality. The salient points is what it should have all been about, it wasn't, so cherry picking does not change the reality. For instance I was still pulling posters up 7 years after the referendum for claiming the EU was run by unelected people. An obvious lie apparently swallowed by many who voted Brexit. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jul 2, 2024 9:27:53 GMT
In the opinion of your shit filled stunted logic mind LOL ^^This is from someone who never has his finger off the report button .LOL Liar, you have my permission to ask the Mods just how many times I have reported anyone. I know I have reported two people for using part of my username as an insult, doing such is against the forum rules. That's it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2024 9:30:07 GMT
In the opinion of your shit filled stunted logic mind LOL ^^This is from someone who never has his finger off the report button ..LOL He spams Labour party propaganda around the clock so is bound to want everyone banned. He's part of the most intolerant and depraved partyin the country. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 2, 2024 9:33:11 GMT
What, EXACTLY, made it the wrong time to extend the use of Democracy? There is NEVER a wrong time to extend Democracy IMO, because I believe in the principle of Democracy; even when it delivers results I didn't vote for. All The Best 1) I explained why IMO it was the wrong time, in the post you replied to. 2) A referendum that was filled with lies and misinformation, huh, and you refer to that as democracy. 1) Yes, on a different Forum we have been asked not to link to, so I am asking you here: What, EXACTLY, made it wrong to extend the use of Democracy? 2) Do you think the referendum was the only political campaign that contained lies and misinformation? If your criteria for holding a popular vote is the absence of misinformation we'd have to abandon Democracy completely - which is, I suspect EXACTLY what you want. Surely it is better to accept that in any political campaign there will be some level of misinformation, but with so many voters the chances are enough will see through it to counter it. Furthermore, as all side of any political debate will use misinformation they are likely to cancel one another out. For example, Alan Johnson (Labour Remainer) lied about two-thirds of UK manufacturing jobs being wholly dependent on the EU. Remain claimed that Brexit would lead to more calls for Scottish Independence, but the y2017 General Election, after the referendum, saw support for the SNP fall significantly, with the SNP losing seats. How about we credit the British Public with having the ability to, in most cases, discern truth from lies. The ONLY real argument you have against the Brexit Referendum is either a) you don't like the outcome, or b) you reject the principles of Democracy. Everything else is bullshit. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Jul 2, 2024 9:47:38 GMT
That makes absolutely no sense at all. You said MP's are better at taking decisions than the public because they are better informed - well MP's rejected membership of the Single Market because they were better informed. So do you think they made the correct decision? My point is and has been that MPs are better informed and have advisers and help to gain information, which is their job as a MP, making them better informed than the average voter who will spend most of their time just getting on with their own lives. Being an M.P is a job , that job is to represent their constituents to the best of their ability in competition with some 650 other MPs who are also representing their constituents to the best of their abilities. Everyone who works has a job description with a defined job role that may make them well informed within their own sector , if you need financial advice you consult a financial advisor , you don't consult your local MP . If your arm hurts you consult a doctor , not an MP You appear to think that their job description is widespread non specific information gathering and fulfilling a paternalistic all knowing ''nanny knows best'' job role. It isn't , at best a well rounded MP will be have generalist knowledge ,an MP who has no qualification and has dot worked outside poltics/government will have basic life general knowledge only , an MP who was formerly a house painter and decorator will probably have specialist knowhow in painting and decorating and have general knowledge on other subjects if they are of interest. M.P.'s also have their own lives to conduct , often in the spotlight . Conducting your own life is not restricted to the average voter (whatever that means) |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jul 2, 2024 10:11:41 GMT
^^This is from someone who never has his finger off the report button ..LOL He spams Labour party propaganda around the clock so is bound to want everyone banned. He's part of the most intolerant and depraved partyin the country. Anyone might think you are entirely politically biased  |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jul 2, 2024 10:21:26 GMT
My point is and has been that MPs are better informed and have advisers and help to gain information, which is their job as a MP, making them better informed than the average voter who will spend most of their time just getting on with their own lives. Being an M.P is a job , that job is to represent their constituents to the best of their ability in competition with some 650 other MPs who are also representing their constituents to the best of their abilities. Everyone who works has a job description with a defined job role that may make them well informed within their own sector , if you need financial advice you consult a financial advisor , you don't consult your local MP . If your arm hurts you consult a doctor , not an MP You appear to think that their job description is widespread non specific information gathering and fulfilling a paternalistic all knowing ''nanny knows best'' job role. It isn't , at best a well rounded MP will be have generalist knowledge ,an MP who has no qualification and has dot worked outside poltics/government will have basic life general knowledge only , an MP who was formerly a house painter and decorator will probably have specialist knowhow in painting and decorating and have general knowledge on other subjects if they are of interest. M.P.'s also have their own lives to conduct , often in the spotlight . Conducting your own life is not restricted to the average voter (whatever that means) Until something like a referendum comes along, and then MPs minds are focused to a greater degree on that referendum. Where they just happen to have people to help with their research, all part of the job. I see you waste much of your post pointing out the obvious, that has nothing to do with debating an issue. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Jul 2, 2024 10:40:45 GMT
Hmmm you sure about that,if they’re better informed why didn’t they know what was happening to the postmasters et al? Nothing to do with with the point I make. Very relevant |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jul 2, 2024 10:41:09 GMT
1) I explained why IMO it was the wrong time, in the post you replied to. 2) A referendum that was filled with lies and misinformation, huh, and you refer to that as democracy. 1) Yes, on a different Forum we have been asked not to link to, so I am asking you here: What, EXACTLY, made it wrong to extend the use of Democracy? 2) Do you think the referendum was the only political campaign that contained lies and misinformation? If your criteria for holding a popular vote is the absence of misinformation we'd have to abandon Democracy completely - which is, I suspect EXACTLY what you want. Surely it is better to accept that in any political campaign there will be some level of misinformation, but with so many voters the chances are enough will see through it to counter it. Furthermore, as all side of any political debate will use misinformation they are likely to cancel one another out. For example, Alan Johnson (Labour Remainer) lied about two-thirds of UK manufacturing jobs being wholly dependent on the EU. Remain claimed that Brexit would lead to more calls for Scottish Independence, but the y2017 General Election, after the referendum, saw support for the SNP fall significantly, with the SNP losing seats. How about we credit the British Public with having the ability to, in most cases, discern truth from lies. The ONLY real argument you have against the Brexit Referendum is either a) you don't like the outcome, or b) you reject the principles of Democracy. Everything else is bullshit. All The Best 1. It is also included along with other comments in the post at the top of page 65, this thread. 2. My concern was about the referendum. 2 'A' ditto ^ You miss the elephant in the room i.e. MPs have the responsibility to be honest and informed, If they fail to do that in parliament they can be exposed, if all the average voter does is to put their 'X' on the way they vote, even if they do it because of the nonsense over 'bent bananas' so what? that's it. Your final comment is pure bullshit. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jul 2, 2024 10:41:40 GMT
Nothing to do with with the point I make. Very relevant How so? |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 2, 2024 10:44:14 GMT
1) Yes, on a different Forum we have been asked not to link to, so I am asking you here: What, EXACTLY, made it wrong to extend the use of Democracy? 2) Do you think the referendum was the only political campaign that contained lies and misinformation? If your criteria for holding a popular vote is the absence of misinformation we'd have to abandon Democracy completely - which is, I suspect EXACTLY what you want. Surely it is better to accept that in any political campaign there will be some level of misinformation, but with so many voters the chances are enough will see through it to counter it. Furthermore, as all side of any political debate will use misinformation they are likely to cancel one another out. For example, Alan Johnson (Labour Remainer) lied about two-thirds of UK manufacturing jobs being wholly dependent on the EU. Remain claimed that Brexit would lead to more calls for Scottish Independence, but the y2017 General Election, after the referendum, saw support for the SNP fall significantly, with the SNP losing seats. How about we credit the British Public with having the ability to, in most cases, discern truth from lies. The ONLY real argument you have against the Brexit Referendum is either a) you don't like the outcome, or b) you reject the principles of Democracy. Everything else is bullshit. All The Best 1. It is also included along with other comments in the post at the top of page 65, this thread. 2. My concern was about the referendum. 2 'A' ditto ^ You miss the elephant in the room i.e. MPs have the responsibility to be honest and informed, If they fail to do that in parliament they can be exposed, if all the average voter does is to put their 'X' on the way they vote, even if they do it because of the nonsense over 'bent bananas' so what? that's it. Your final comment is pure bullshit. And no MP in the entire history of the UK Parliament has ever a) lied, or b) been shown to be ignorant of facts? I personally know of no one who simply puts an X in a box without thinking about it; everyone I know well enough to discuss politics with actually discusses politics BEFORE making their voting decision. But you still have NOT answered my first question: " What, EXACTLY, made it wrong to extend the use of Democracy?" Referring me to a vague prior answer that did not actually say EXACTLY what reasons you have for denying the Democratic Process does not cut it. You answer was: " I don't believe in the UK's ability to run an anything like an honest or genuinely debated referendum." Why EXACTLY do you think it impossible for the UK to run "an honest and genuinely debated referendum"? Which EXACT part of that whole process is so flawed as to warrant denying the popular vote to the people? All The Best |
|
