|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 14, 2022 19:53:41 GMT
Although cheating refers to fairness and unfair is defined as "not based on or behaving according to the principles of equality and justice:" Now I suppose we could push that argument around for hours and pages but fairness is not restricted to the rules as laid out as we all know that breaking the principles of equality and justice mean you are being unfair but not necessarily illegal. Yep, and Steve could have argued in support of Slavery prior to abolition with his argument. Technically I could have but I wouldn't have and you full well know that. The point Vinny (and others) are trying to obscure is one side and one side only cheated by breaking the rules. And they did it in record breaking levels It's a fact and a fact Leavers will continue to find awkward as the years go on and we see the UK continue to be hampered economically by the Brexit outcome. They have their victory and technically their victory is legal but it is and will always be a pyrrhic one. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Dec 14, 2022 19:55:32 GMT
One side cheated by manipulating the rules in their favour.
If you have rules that are rotten from the start they're no rules at all.
And you're letting David Cameron off the hook over his misuse of taxpayers money and his lying.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 14, 2022 19:58:48 GMT
One side cheated by manipulating the rules in their favour. If you have rules that are rotten from the start they're no rules at all. And you're letting David Cameron off the hook over his misuse of taxpayers money and his lying. The rules were set by our sovereign parliament in fair debate. No cheatingBut hey ho if you want the referendum Act repealed because you feel it's wrong then you best be consistent and demand that everything that resulted reversed too |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2022 20:04:44 GMT
Yep, and Steve could have argued in support of Slavery prior to abolition with his argument. Technically I could have but I wouldn't have and you full well know that. The point Vinny (and others) are trying to obscure is one side and one side only cheated by breaking the rules. And they did it in record breaking levels It's a fact and a fact Leavers will continue to find awkward as the years go on and we see the UK continue to be hampered economically by the Brexit outcome. They have their victory and technically their victory is legal but it is and will always be a pyrrhic one. I wouldn't want to argue for your soul. Remain was the most immoral and unethical force I have witnessed first hand. It was so odious that those on the fence supported Leave. The country is currently hampered by Remain (group PTSD?), Labour's past desire for huge lockdowns, which forced Tory hand, and their organised economically destructive strike force managed by Labour's beloved Unions. There's also part of Europe being invaded which has led to a full blown energy war, but that's probably completely irrelevant, because it's a wonderful paradise in the Eurozone, right?
Brexit is fine, and would be a hell of a lot better if Remain accepted reality and stop behaving like spoilt children.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Dec 14, 2022 20:08:07 GMT
The voters are sovereign, not Parliament, Parliament is our servant.
We are its master.
They set rules that were not fair, rules we did not want.
They used their power to cheat. To try and set the stakes in their favour.
They advocated things we didn't want and we sacked a whole load of Europhiles in subsequent elections as they continually tried to frustrate our departure.
They have consistently tried to favour themselves to get our tax money.
What we need to do next, is to change the rules further, so that we voters have more power over our Parliamentarians.
We need to replace FPTP, the current set of rules, with PR.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 14, 2022 20:08:13 GMT
One side cheated by manipulating the rules in their favour. If you have rules that are rotten from the start they're no rules at all. And you're letting David Cameron off the hook over his misuse of taxpayers money and his lying. The rules were set by our sovereign parliament in fair debate. No cheatingBut hey ho if you want the referendum Act repealed because you feel it's wrong then you best be consistent and demand that everything that resulted reversed too However we know that sovereign parliament, despite being representatives of the people, was very much skewed to the Remain side. So a fair debate was always heavily weighted to the Remain views and what best suited Remain. So fairness is not just the act of playing within the rules it is creating an environment where both sides of any debate have an equality of opportunity to promote their views and in fact since Leave was often represented as a minority and extreme position there should have been positive action to overcome the years of discrimination against them. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2022 20:32:07 GMT
What is unfair about outspending an opponent? Well if spending a bit more than you declare (but still spending an awful lot less than the other side) is a case for voiding the result then why is not spending more than the other side a reason to void the result? - after all the only thing in discussion is how much was spent. An associated point is was it right to spend £9 million of taxpayers money promoting one side of the argument when the majority of taxpayers were in favour of the other side? Because within the context of electoral rules and laws, outspending your opponent per se does not carry any unlawful connotation as spending over your legally allowed campaigned budget. And No -- the thing in discussion is not how much was spent but the fact that leave campaign broke electoral laws by overspending and sending unlawful email blasts. Yes. "Call Me Dave" Cameron was clear that he and his government were not taking the neutral position. What he did what was legal, necessary and right. Probably to you it was all wrong because he didn't back your team. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 14, 2022 20:45:53 GMT
The voters are sovereign, not Parliament, Parliament is our servant. We are its master. They set rules that were not fair, rules we did not want. They used their power to cheat. To try and set the stakes in their favour. They advocated things we didn't want and we sacked a whole load of Europhiles in subsequent elections as they continually tried to frustrate our departure. They have consistently tried to favour themselves to get our tax money. What we need to do next, is to change the rules further, so that we voters have more power over our Parliamentarians. We need to replace FPTP, the current set of rules, with PR.  doth protest too much |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 14, 2022 20:52:12 GMT
The rules were set by our sovereign parliament in fair debate. No cheatingBut hey ho if you want the referendum Act repealed because you feel it's wrong then you best be consistent and demand that everything that resulted reversed too However we know that sovereign parliament, despite being representatives of the people, was very much skewed to the Remain side. So a fair debate was always heavily weighted to the Remain views and what best suited Remain. So fairness is not just the act of playing within the rules it is creating an environment where both sides of any debate have an equality of opportunity to promote their views and in fact since Leave was often represented as a minority and extreme position there should have been positive action to overcome the years of discrimination against them. The electorate elected that government according to the system they freely voted for in that 2011 referendum. You want to deem that unfair that you also have to deem unfair the 2019 General election that delivered Brexit. You can't have it both ways. FWIW there is some 'unfairness' in the government being allowed to promote its view to every household without the official opposition being allowed to also so do. But we know the official opposition would have advocated Remain so Leave certainly did not lose out on that. The Electoral Commission consistently unfairly sided with Vote Leave starting with not selecting Farage's Leave.Eu and until there is that inquiry it will always look like they did so for dishonest reasons. But no one forced Vote Leave to cheat so massively |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 14, 2022 20:57:18 GMT
The voters are sovereign, not Parliament, Parliament is our servant. The UK constitution makes Parliament sovereign, not the people. In fact, the majority of the ' the people' only have a vote by virtue of an act of Parliament passed in 1918. If 'the people' were sovereign, a representative could have taken Parliament to court to enforce the 'peoples' decision' in the referendum. It didn't happen, because Parliament is sovereign. That's not to say that 'the people' couldn't cause a change in the constitution, but it's a different thing to say that the people will be sovereign in the UK's legal system at some point in the future. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2022 21:07:34 GMT
Technically I could have but I wouldn't have and you full well know that. The point Vinny (and others) are trying to obscure is one side and one side only cheated by breaking the rules. And they did it in record breaking levels It's a fact and a fact Leavers will continue to find awkward as the years go on and we see the UK continue to be hampered economically by the Brexit outcome. They have their victory and technically their victory is legal but it is and will always be a pyrrhic one. I wouldn't want to argue for your soul. Remain was the most immoral and unethical force I have witnessed first hand. It was so odious that those on the fence supported Leave. The country is currently hampered by Remain (group PTSD?), Labour's past desire for huge lockdowns, which forced Tory hand, and their organised economically destructive strike force managed by Labour's beloved Unions. There's also part of Europe being invaded which has led to a full blown energy war, but that's probably completely irrelevant, because it's a wonderful paradise in the Eurozone, right?
Brexit is fine, and would be a hell of a lot better if Remain accepted reality and stop behaving like spoilt children.
Maybe you should list what the issues are currently hampering the country. A grand but unfounded statements like "the country is currently hampered by Remain..." is just silly. It is a fact that problems we face now were created by the past three Brexit governments and their supporters and the Brexit project itself. One example: problems with the implementation of the Protocol? They were created by the DUP. The Hard Brexit-loving, No Deal-promoting, GFA-rejecting politicians from Northern Ireland. Remain supporters have nothing to do with it. So how does "Remain" hamper the country? |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Dec 14, 2022 21:26:25 GMT
The rules were set by our sovereign parliament in fair debate. No cheatingBut hey ho if you want the referendum Act repealed because you feel it's wrong then you best be consistent and demand that everything that resulted reversed too However we know that sovereign parliament, despite being representatives of the people, was very much skewed to the Remain side. So a fair debate was always heavily weighted to the Remain views and what best suited Remain. So fairness is not just the act of playing within the rules it is creating an environment where both sides of any debate have an equality of opportunity to promote their views and in fact since Leave was often represented as a minority and extreme position there should have been positive action to overcome the years of discrimination against them. Correct. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Dec 14, 2022 22:44:56 GMT
Because within the context of electoral rules and laws, outspending your opponent per se does not carry any unlawful connotation as spending over your legally allowed campaigned budget. but if one person has a smaller budget anyway is that fair - how can any campaign group outspend the government? So extra emails were more unfair than the governments leaflet? How was it necessary for a fair referendum?. Is a referendum only fair when one side vastly outspends the other? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 14, 2022 22:54:06 GMT
However we know that sovereign parliament, despite being representatives of the people, was very much skewed to the Remain side. So a fair debate was always heavily weighted to the Remain views and what best suited Remain. So fairness is not just the act of playing within the rules it is creating an environment where both sides of any debate have an equality of opportunity to promote their views and in fact since Leave was often represented as a minority and extreme position there should have been positive action to overcome the years of discrimination against them. The electorate elected that government according to the system they freely voted for in that 2011 referendum. You want to deem that unfair that you also have to deem unfair the 2019 General election that delivered Brexit. You can't have it both ways. FWIW there is some 'unfairness' in the government being allowed to promote its view to every household without the official opposition being allowed to also so do. But we know the official opposition would have advocated Remain so Leave certainly did not lose out on that. The Electoral Commission consistently unfairly sided with Vote Leave starting with not selecting Farage's Leave.Eu and until there is that inquiry it will always look like they did so for dishonest reasons. But no one forced Vote Leave to cheat so massively I think you missed the point. Referenda were presented to the people as a measure of exactly what they wanted on a specific issue. General elections are for governments to deliver a range of policies. The referendum showed that on the issue of the EU Parliament was not in alignment with the electorate on that issue and Leave was always starting from a position of disadvantage as those representing that view as MPs were much fewer. So the question is how do you balance equality and justice which are supposed to be the watchwords of both parties. The National broadcaster was obvious in its weighting to the Remain side both in numbers and tenor of the conversation and comment with its impartiality brief cast to the four winds. So there never was fairness. I would agree that the overspend was at best stupid and ultimately criminal but in the end it was an overspend, not sackfuls of false votes or collections of tippex corrected voting papers (and I seem to recall none of those men went to prison). Everything has to be in perspective and because Remain lost that overspend is magnified as the reason for the loss of the referendum. I doubt that very much as i am sure most people do. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 14, 2022 23:12:32 GMT
No Sandy you're still relying on an illegally skewed referendum. You diss the General Elections and you diss your only legitimate electoral backing for Brexit. Unwise
|
|
