The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
nickgusset  Shizzlehurst 04 Jul 16 9.11pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Do you know, I used to wonder why we got so few new posters and so few from our younger supporters. Of course, the reason must be they are lazy, feckless and have no interest in Palace, local affairs or current affairs. Or, just maybe, they don't feel especially welcomed or valued. At least matt himself has skulked off to the bbs so a few more will feel able to post without a torrent of abuse. As for the referendum, we voted leave. I don't know if that's good or bad or a bit of both, we can only surmise. I just wish they'd get a move on with it now. we've made our bed, time to lie in it.
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 NickinOX  Sailing country. 04 Jul 16 9.16pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Sadly you don't understand the definition of the word. You don't have to have been enfranchised to become disenfranchised, merely to feel it. I tried to explain but am now disillusioned and disinterested. Regarding voting patterns, you can't treat each source equally. Only one is based on proper analysis. You imply each source should be treated as valid and equal, not true. You still don't get it. As for the sources, I made it quite clear that I would treat all of the sources with scepticism. Again, another straw man argument from you.
If you come to a fork in the road, take it. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
I even agreed with your definition. When you added the word "being" into the sentence it changed the sentence's meaning. As you're clearly struggling with simple English, I will leave it there. 
| NickinOX Sailing country. 04 Jul 16 9.17pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
At least matt himself has skulked off to the bbs so a few more will feel able to post without a torrent of abuse. As for the referendum, we voted leave. I don't know if that's good or bad or a bit of both, we can only surmise. I just wish they'd get a move on with it now. we've made our bed, time to lie in it. Spot on.
If you come to a fork in the road, take it. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| elgrande bedford 04 Jul 16 9.24pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Absobloominglutely. Put my daughter in a room with my mother and see who wins the debates. And my mother is a denizen of a certain national political party, attending conferences n everything. I respect what you are saying about your daughter,and good on her.
always a Norwood boy, where ever I live. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 04 Jul 16 9.35pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by elgrande
I respect what you are saying about your daughter,and good on her. On this I speak as I find. I have three children, two that recently left school and one at school. All three are engaged and the two that could voted. More importantly their friends are also engaged, especially in the 18 to 23 age group. And they work hard, try ordering a pizza in Croydon during University breaks. I just don't recognise the way young people are being portrayed - relentlessly - on this thread.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 04 Jul 16 9.38pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by NickinOX
You still don't get it. As for the sources, I made it quite clear that I would treat all of the sources with scepticism. Again, another straw man argument from you. I used being in the sense of existing, not in the sense of changing to. It could also have worked in terms of 'becoming' as it is about how they feel not losing an actual right to vote. I did 'get' your intended point, just didn't agree.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 04 Jul 16 9.40pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by elgrande
I respect what you are saying about your daughter,and good on her. My mother not her mother mate. I could never have married a woman that shares the views of my mother
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 04 Jul 16 9.43pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
At least matt himself has skulked off to the bbs so a few more will feel able to post without a torrent of abuse. As for the referendum, we voted leave. I don't know if that's good or bad or a bit of both, we can only surmise. I just wish they'd get a move on with it now. we've made our bed, time to lie in it. He's gone into the Grauniad canteen to have a go?
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| elgrande bedford 04 Jul 16 9.58pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
He's gone into the Grauniad canteen to have a go? Otherwise known as the BBS.....lol
always a Norwood boy, where ever I live. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
SloveniaDave  Tirana, Albania 04 Jul 16 9.58pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Have you been observing the legal challenge Dave? It's Mischcon de Reya, so to be taken very seriously. I have been up against them in the past and they really know what they are doing. Likely outcome is that Parliament would have to vote on leaving, no doubt taking into account the way the referendum went. I wonder if MPs will have the balls to vote according to how their constituencies voted. If so it could be a close run thing and I might suggest it would shift slightly in favour of remain. I asked a very well-respected Professor of EU and British law a week ago about the issue of whether Article 50 could be triggered by royal prerogative or whether it would need a parliamentary vote or Act. He could not give a definite answer but he said that any attempt to bypass parliament could be challenged and this is coming to pass (or being pre-empted). His view, on balance, was that a simple vote in Parliament would probably suffice but we were in uncharted territory and precedent does not provide a direct parallel. Whether people like it or not, and whether they think it is 'sour grapes' or not (certainly I would not be worrying about this if the vote had gone the other way), it would be very irresponsible of our Parliament to simply allow the result of a plebiscite to determine a fundamental issue such as this - not least because it would then create a dangerous precedent and because it would reduce the likelihood of anyone ever calling another referendum, even if it was only advisory.
Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand! My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right. (Member of the School of Optimism 1969-2016 inclusive) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 04 Jul 16 10.11pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by SloveniaDave
I asked a very well-respected Professor of EU and British law a week ago about the issue of whether Article 50 could be triggered by royal prerogative or whether it would need a parliamentary vote or Act. He could not give a definite answer but he said that any attempt to bypass parliament could be challenged and this is coming to pass (or being pre-empted). His view, on balance, was that a simple vote in Parliament would probably suffice but we were in uncharted territory and precedent does not provide a direct parallel. Whether people like it or not, and whether they think it is 'sour grapes' or not (certainly I would not be worrying about this if the vote had gone the other way), it would be very irresponsible of our Parliament to simply allow the result of a plebiscite to determine a fundamental issue such as this - not least because it would then create a dangerous precedent and because it would reduce the likelihood of anyone ever calling another referendum, even if it was only advisory. I agree with you that the referendum was flawed in oh so many ways and that people didn't take it seriously enough. You only have to look on this site and all the talk of winners and losers rather than risk and opportunity. But I currently fail to understand how the referendum could be ignored or somehow overturned, albeit I am sure Parliament overall would like to do that. The vote was populist and as such has mobilised quite a high proportion of the masses. To now be seen to over-rule the majority of those that voted seems - at best - ill advised. I guess there is always a way, I am just not seeing it.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 04 Jul 16 10.13pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
I agree with you that the referendum was flawed in oh so many ways and that people didn't take it seriously enough. You only have to look on this site and all the talk of winners and losers rather than risk and opportunity. But I currently fail to understand how the referendum could be ignored or somehow overturned, albeit I am sure Parliament overall would like to do that. The vote was populist and as such has mobilised quite a high proportion of the masses. To now be seen to over-rule the majority of those that voted seems - at best - ill advised. I guess there is always a way, I am just not seeing it. There will be all sorts of shenanigans to prevent the invocation of article 50 I reckon.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.