Need someone with a weighty handbag, and not afraid to use it... (May of course be male, female or indeterminate)

Eloise posted:

OscillateWildly posted:

For GBP 350 million, there is GBP 4,300.

Except one was a barefaced misrepresentation of the, the other a costed exercise while offered an understandable, relatable headline figure.

For cries of Leave lies, there are the Cameron deal and a reformed EU. 

Cameron got a deal.  Leave campaign have no idea what to do next.

For Farage, see Guy Verhofstadt and Juncker.

Not really sure what you're suggesting here?

UKIP poster, Operation Black Vote poster. Intolerance on both sides.

The two posters also not comparable.  UKIP were saying "not welcome"; Operation Black Vote saying everyone counts.

There's no high ground for Remain, they are in the same gutter.

Except one told the truth, the other told lies. And knew they were lying!

 

 

The headline figures are exaggerations to gain exposure - in the news, talked about - counting on the fact checked figures being enough to make people think - Ooh, that's still a lot. Welcome to campaigning. The various checks have the GBP 350 million at around GBP 250 million; around GBP 170 million not returned plus around GBP 80 million not controlled.

This link has the total at GBP 248 million:

https://fullfact.org/europe/vo...flet-membership-fee/

On the GBP 4,300:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-p...-referendum-36073201

Remain campaigned claiming certainty when uncertainty covered both options. You cannot claim certainty re EU reform. On the Cameron deal:

https://fullfact.org/europe/ex...-it-legally-binding/

Farage, Verhofstadt, Juncker; all certifiable on their day.

Both posters are divisive.

Again, both sides were lying/exaggerating.

Cheers,

OW

naim_nymph posted:

dave marshall posted:

naim_nymph posted:

thebigfredc posted:

 Thank God  the margin of victory was 1.3 million and not a couple of thousand or worse hundreds (imagine the recounts).

Ray

Ray,

You really ought to be careful which god to believe in.

Your margin of victory only looks correct in the interest of inappropriate electoral procedures, but if you want to dial in true democracy then your 1.3 million figures is completely misleading.

17, 401,742 voted to Leave

29,090,499 did not vote to Leave

Therefore the margin is 11,688,757  of the electorate not voting to leave the EU

Plus the Remain margin would have been even larger if 16 and 17 year olds were allowed to vote, it was very unjust to exclude them.

Debs

Conversely, 

16,141,241 voted to remain.

30,351,000 did not vote to remain.

Therefore the margin is 14209759 of the electorate not voting to remain within the EU. 

 

There is no conversely other way around in this instance due the obvious reason that the only people who actually want an EU Brexit election are the minority of people who want the UK to leave the EU, the majority of UK people did not want or feel the need for this election so the onus is on the Brexit supporters to prove that over 50% of the electorate want to leave, and Brexit have not only clearly failed to demonstrate that but the results prove that far more eligible voters do not want the UK to Leave the EU. The EU election results are a miss-representation due to the electoral procedure being highly inappropriate in the circumstance.

Debs

 

"the majority of UK people did not want or feel the need for this election"

The proposed referendum was part of the Conservative manifesto, prior to the last General Election, so, since they won that particular contest, (albeit with a minority, but that's the major flaw in the present system of first past the post), one can only assume that all voters understood then that such a referendum would take place. 

"the onus is on the Brexit supporters to prove that over 50% of the electorate want to leave"

The onus to prove that the majority of the electorate wish to leave is something of a non starter, since 28% of said electorate didn't, for whatever reasons, cast their vote. Of the 72% who actually made their way down to their polling station on the day, well we already know the outcome.

"the results prove that far more eligible voters do not want the UK to Leave the EU"

I can only repeat  that the maths can be used to support either point of view.

 "Therefore the margin is 14209759 of the electorate not voting to remain within the EU"

We really shouldn't be assuming an interest or opinion either way, on the part of that 28%, I was merely showing that much is being made of their supposed support for Remain.

Anyway, let's just agree to disagree on this one, and turn the music up? 

Bruce Woodhouse posted:

So with with 66% majority if you had a referendum (and you never would) then the country would explicitly have to accept as little as 1/3rd of the population being the 'winner'.

Would not look much like democracy.

It is democratic, and the low proportion does not win, because the question should be one way: e.g do you want to leave europe, Y/N? and define that for the CHANGE to happen you need at least a specific majority: i.e, 'the noes have it'. It is a powerful way of deciding if change should go ahead: if a suitably sizeable  majority say yes then it is probably the right thing to do, and few then have scope to argue.

Bored.

Hmack posted:

OscillateWildly posted:

For GBP 350 million, there is GBP 4,300. For cries of Leave lies, there are the Cameron deal and a reformed EU.  For Farage, see Guy Verhofstadt and Juncker. UKIP poster, Operation Black Vote poster. Intolerance on both sides. There's no high ground for Remain, they are in the same gutter.

Cheers,

OW

Eloise has eloquently dismissed your ridiculous statement.

How anyone has the bare-faced audacity to give any credence to Farage, and claim that there is any comparison between the campaign sides and their arguments is completely beyond me.

Well, now there are calls for the Tory party to be taken over by a small group of BREXIT Tory MPs who backed the 'Leave' campaign, because they are the only ones who can represent the UK in the forthcoming trade negotiations. Are you happy that a small group of inexperienced (with a few exceptions) and unrepresentative members of parliament should be given control of the Conservative party and our Government for the next four years, just because they happened to vote in a referendum for the BREXIT side?

 

Beyond you; so it seems - including civility.

I'm happy not to believe every story flying around.

JamieWednesday posted:

Bored.

Likewise. 

fatcat posted:

Boris Johnson may be in a difficult position if he does not want to be Prime Minister  and the majority do want him to be Prime Minister...?

Innocent Bystander posted:

Bruce Woodhouse posted:

So with with 66% majority if you had a referendum (and you never would) then the country would explicitly have to accept as little as 1/3rd of the population being the 'winner'.

Would not look much like democracy.

It is democratic, and the low proportion does not win, because the question should be one way: e.g do you want to leave europe, Y/N? and define that for the CHANGE to happen you need at least a specific majority: i.e, 'the noes have it'. It is a powerful way of deciding if change should go ahead: if a suitably sizeable  majority say yes then it is probably the right thing to do, and few then have scope to argue.

Whether you agree with it or not thats how referendums work in Australia (if i understand correctly).  First off all Australians have a legal responsibility to vote.  But for a constitutional change to happen, first both houses have to agree to put the issue to a vote (its possible for something to be pushed through without the "senate" but most are agreed by both houses).  Then there has to be both a majority across the country, as well as a majority in each of the 6 states.

Any referendum is run on the basis of "Do you want a change? Yes or No".  So in the case of the UK leaving the EU; the question would be "Do you want to leave the EU?  Yes or No".  

As slightly different subjects ... If it was right to have a referendum to decide the EU question; should there be a referendum on other laws we've had recently?  For example; if the government follow though on their plan to repeal the Human Rights Legislation and replace it with a British Bill of Rights ... should that be put to a referendum?  Should the UK have a written constitution which binds parliament to certain things and can only be changed with the agreement of the people?  Should UK introduce legislation to ensure everyone votes (even if they vote by spoiling their ballot paper)?

JUNE 28, 2016

""Well, that didn’t take long. Some of the most prominent politicians behind the “Leave” campaign are backing away from the false claims and dubious promises that they made in the run-up to the referendum to take Britain out of the European Union.

“Leave” supporters like Boris Johnson, the former mayor of London, claimed that getting out of the E.U. would save money, allowing Britain to invest in public services while limiting immigration from other European countries. Now it’s clear they didn’t intend to fulfill any of their promises. They peddled exaggerations and lies to frustrated and angry Britons, some of whom have legitimate grievances about economic insecurity.""

I guess that's what politicians do!

No matter what region of the world!

Allante93!

Some gear can't carry a tune, likewise an awful lot of people have a short attention span. One of the reasons why the vote went the way it did.

Michael Heseltine has ripped into Boris accusing him of creating the "greatest constitutional crisis in modern times"...............  "has ripped the (conservative) party apart."   .................  "like a general, that led his army to the sound of guns, and at the sight of the battlefield abandoned the field."

+1 on that.   Boris has no balls,  but to be fair he was knifed in the back by the slimeball Gove .

My money is on May 

Romi posted:

fatcat posted:

Boris Johnson may be in a difficult position if he does not want to be Prime Minister  and the majority do want him to be Prime Minister...?

Hilarious.

Johnson probably did not mean to win the Leave campaign, now he knows that he has created a big mess, and he does not want to go down in history as the guy who ran UK into the ground so he decides not to seek the PM job this time.

He is a smart guy, he will make  the next move whenever it suits him.

It is a f***ing joke last year David Cameron convinces 36% of those that voted to vote him back into office claiming he had a five year plan to take the United Kingdom forward make it better, stronger, safer there is the small matter of an EU referendum to take care of first. Fast forward and the referendum goes the way of the leave campaign led by Boris Johnson who has convinced 36% of those that voted to leave he promised to take the United Kingdom forward making it better, stronger, safer one week later both bail out and we are left with Micheal Gove, Theresa May, Andrea Leadsom, Liam Fox and Stephen Crab forgive me BUT for f***s sake COME ON! 

Bob the Builder posted:

It is a f***ing joke last year David Cameron convinces 36% of those that voted to vote him back into office claiming he had a five year plan to take the United Kingdom forward make it better, stronger, safer there is the small matter of an EU referendum to take care of first. Fast forward and the referendum goes the way of the leave campaign led by Boris Johnson who has convinced 36% of those that voted to leave he promised to take the United Kingdom forward making it better, stronger, safer one week later both bail out and we are left with Micheal Gove, Theresa May, Andrea Leadsom, Liam Fox and Stephen Crab forgive me BUT for f***s sake COME ON! 

Well asterisked expleteves forgiven and fully understood in the circumstances! If it weren't affecting the livelihoods of 65 million people it would be a joke. In some parts of the world people, politicians or not, behaving like that would be taken to one side and summarily dealt with in a way that ensures no possible future problems. They are fortunate we live in a civilised part of the world where people are allowed to make mistakes and punishments are far less severe. But in my view what they've done is so grossly incompetent that they should be disbarred from holding any public office, and indeed any position carrying responsibility for others, for the rest of their lives.

Innocent Bystander posted:

Bob the Builder posted:

It is a f***ing joke last year David Cameron convinces 36% of those that voted to vote him back into office claiming he had a five year plan to take the United Kingdom forward make it better, stronger, safer there is the small matter of an EU referendum to take care of first. Fast forward and the referendum goes the way of the leave campaign led by Boris Johnson who has convinced 36% of those that voted to leave he promised to take the United Kingdom forward making it better, stronger, safer one week later both bail out and we are left with Micheal Gove, Theresa May, Andrea Leadsom, Liam Fox and Stephen Crab forgive me BUT for f***s sake COME ON! 

Well asterisked expleteves forgiven and fully understood in the circumstances! If it weren't affecting the livelihoods of 65 million people it would be a joke. In some parts of the world people, politicians or not, behaving like that would be taken to one side and summarily dealt with in a way that ensures no possible future problems. They are fortunate we live in a civilised part of the world where people are allowed to make mistakes and punishments are far less severe. But in my view what they've done is so grossly incompetent that they should be disbarred from holding any public office, and indeed any position carrying responsibility for others, for the rest of their lives.

Here here! I would suggest a sound thrashing but both look as they might enjoy it!!

Bob the Builder posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

Bob the Builder posted:

It is a f***ing joke last year David Cameron convinces 36% of those that voted to vote him back into office claiming he had a five year plan to take the United Kingdom forward make it better, stronger, safer there is the small matter of an EU referendum to take care of first. Fast forward and the referendum goes the way of the leave campaign led by Boris Johnson who has convinced 36% of those that voted to leave he promised to take the United Kingdom forward making it better, stronger, safer one week later both bail out and we are left with Micheal Gove, Theresa May, Andrea Leadsom, Liam Fox and Stephen Crab forgive me BUT for f***s sake COME ON! 

Well asterisked expleteves forgiven and fully understood in the circumstances! If it weren't affecting the livelihoods of 65 million people it would be a joke. In some parts of the world people, politicians or not, behaving like that would be taken to one side and summarily dealt with in a way that ensures no possible future problems. They are fortunate we live in a civilised part of the world where people are allowed to make mistakes and punishments are far less severe. But in my view what they've done is so grossly incompetent that they should be disbarred from holding any public office, and indeed any position carrying responsibility for others, for the rest of their lives.

Here here! I would suggest a sound thrashing but both look as they might enjoy it!!

Cameron miscalculated, Boris took advantage of the human crisis, Health Care, Economics, migration, In short he catered to the populist view! 

But in both cases, Both gentleman  were fighting to lengthen their political careers. Remember Margret's famous Speech!

Magaret Thatcher was infinitely worse than Boris Johnson and David Cameron they are just amateurs compared to that monster.  'Battle of Oargreave',  'IRA Hungrer Strike' 'Care in the Community' need I go on Margaret Thatchers legacy is one of misery not national pride!

Everyone still moaning then. 

Bob the Builder posted:

Magaret Thatcher was infinitely worse than Boris Johnson and David Cameron they are just amateurs compared to that monster.  'Battle of Oargreave',  'IRA Hungrer Strike' 'Care in the Community' need I go on Margaret Thatchers legacy is one of misery not national pride!

Its nice to be able to agree with someone on this thread and I couldn't agree more with that post.  

Moaning on the way to depression would be my guess. Funny how those of us on the outside seem to have greater faith that our British friends will work it out than they do. Thought they should stay but am certainly aware of the valid arguements against. Now they just have to get on with it. They'll work it out. Demonizing each other will not help.

dayjay posted:

Bob the Builder posted:

Magaret Thatcher was infinitely worse than Boris Johnson and David Cameron they are just amateurs compared to that monster.  'Battle of Oargreave',  'IRA Hungrer Strike' 'Care in the Community' need I go on Margaret Thatchers legacy is one of misery not national pride!

Its nice to be able to agree with someone on this thread and I couldn't agree more with that post.  

Fascinating. Again from the outside, Britain was the poor man of Europe before Thatcher. Strikes everywhere, aging non-competitive businesses, lazy and surly workforce, lousy product quality, a country still exhausted by WWII. Whatever you may think about her, the difference between before and after Thatcher Britain is night and day. Greater wealth, greater productivity, more home ownership, thriving industries, and a world class financial center.

Comments like this remind of comments made by Russian citizens when asked to reflect on the Soviet era. Unexpectedly, they have some fondness for that time. They concede they had no say in governance, nothing worked, and and they were as poor as church mice but they liked the fact that they had nothing together. They were all treated poorly. Human nature is interesting.

 Apologies for going off thread. Won't do it again.

I don't know much about Margret Thatcher, but was merely pointing out, that she sprouted the Tories, part of the Leave campaign.

But check out the following, a nice read, I don't know how to figure out the link, but google it! 

Blaming Elites For The Rise Of Populism

 

 

 

Adam Ozimek, Contributor

Whether it’s Donald Trump or the Brexit movement, the rise of populism has helped crystalize the fact that there are two kinds of elites: those who like to bash populists for being foolish, and those who like to bash other elites for failing to give populists enough of what they want.

While anti-elites love to sneer at elites for being blinded by class-bias and detachment, I’d gently suggest they ask themselves if their own love of bashing their fellow elites represents it’s own kind of blinding bias. This is made pretty clear in the amount of fun they are having in their anti-elitism. And while I enjoy bashing populism, I also can’t deny having used the anti-elitism complaint against a certain breed of Republicanism that has held tax cuts as the be-all-end-all solution for 30 years now.

What’s interesting is that the anti-elite elites don’t seem to have policy preferences that differ that greatly from other elites, and everybody basically thinks status quo needs changing in one way or another. And I don’t think points based skilled immigration systems and relocation vouchers aren’t what most anti-immigration protesters have in mind.

That's my Point Greed, Policies really aren't that different.  Focus on the Human Condition. Economy, Unemployment, Health Care, and at the end of the Day your leaders will say find. But the key word Austerity,  will be first on the Agenda, where is the money coming from! 

Allante93! 

Clay Bingham posted:

dayjay posted:

Bob the Builder posted:

Magaret Thatcher was infinitely worse than Boris Johnson and David Cameron they are just amateurs compared to that monster.  'Battle of Oargreave',  'IRA Hungrer Strike' 'Care in the Community' need I go on Margaret Thatchers legacy is one of misery not national pride!

Its nice to be able to agree with someone on this thread and I couldn't agree more with that post.  

Fascinating. Again from the outside, Britain was the poor man of Europe before Thatcher. Strikes everywhere, aging non-competitive businesses, lazy and surly workforce, lousy product quality, a country still exhausted by WWII. Whatever you may think about her, the difference between before and after Thatcher Britain is night and day. Greater wealth, greater productivity, more home ownership, thriving industries, and a world class financial center.

Comments like this remind of comments made by Russian citizens when asked to reflect on the Soviet era. Unexpectedly, they have some fondness for that time. They concede they had no say in governance, nothing worked, and and they were as poor as church mice but they liked the fact that they had nothing together. They were all treated poorly. Human nature is interesting.

 Apologies for going off thread. Won't do it again.

I have no nostalgia for pre Thatcher years, mainly because I am just too young to remember them and I am sure that the country needed to respond to some of the issues you refer to, which I do just remember, but I was a teenager growing up in the North West when Thatcher came to power and I well remember not just her policies but her total lack of anything approaching concern or compassion for my generation on my side of the country and the total devastation her policies caused.  I remember disgusting greed and affluence in the City of London whilst unemployment was close to 100% on the estates I grew up on and the downward spiral of those areas and rampant drug abuse and crime that resulted.  I remember a government who seriously discussed writing off the city of Liverpool and allowing it to die and I remember the response of her government to Hillsborough, the miners strike (in all its idiocy) and countless other miscarriages of justice.  I try not to let hatred and anger and other negative emotions cloud my judgement because it only hurts those who hate and who feel that anger (one of the reasons I am trying not to respond to some posts on this thread) but that woman gets me as close as anyone to feeling them.

Quite so. First milk, then jobs and communities.