The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Wisbech Eagle  Truro Cornwall 06 Sep 19 11.32am |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
So let's leave and if it goes south reapply. Would you jump over a cliff knowing that most people think there are rocks at the bottom and that people cannot fly? Or would you hope to prove them all wrong?
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| Hrolf The Ganger 06 Sep 19 11.34am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
I have already given the opinion that most of the over 65s missed out on getting involved in a good war and they now want the under 25s to fight one for them. Stop being snowflakes. Either a financial/trade war or maybe even a real one It is interesting that was not the opinion of those who actually fought in WW2. Largely they voted Remain Also note that this is the group that mostly was involved in the first referendum. So clearly they don't think they were lied to. Hrolf and Midlands, stop denying facts. It is really boring. MPs represent all of their constituents, not only the majority that voted for them. They do this to the best of their ability, they don't take direct orders from their constituents. Under normal circumstances. One thing is clear. A vote for Labour or Lib Dim is vote for another referendum. Look how long it has taken to get nowhere since the original one. A second referendum has no logic or legitimacy and could cost the country billions. It has to be stopped. People must vote against this crazy path regardless of their politics. The so called Remain parties are political opportunists putting their interests above that of Britain.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Sep 19 11.40am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
You are hiding behind technicalities which the public quite reasonably expected would not be evoked. Ultimately, the government could do whatever it pleases on any issue if it has the support of the military. How far do you go with your technicalities? You condemn Boris Johnson for using questionable but technically legitimate tactics, but when it favours your side, it is suddenly OK. Typical. Parliamentary democracy is not "technicalities". It's the way it has evolved over the centuries and is relied upon because it works. Johnson is not using "technically legitimate tactics" at all. He is seeking to thwart the will of Parliament and that is an illegitimate act. It is almost impossible to conceive of any occasion when the military would side with a government against Parliament. Never forget that their Commander in Chief is not the President as in the USA but the Queen, and that this situation has deliberately been constructed to ensure that no government can use military force against the people in the UK.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Sep 19 11.48am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
MPs are representatives that is a fact. How much leeway that allows them is an opinion. Over the last few months I have heard many MPs and constitutional experts disagree on where you draw the line on that point. Your opinion is on the extreme range that MPs should be free to decide what they think is best for the country regardless of what they electorate thought they were voting for. The more moderate views I have heard from MPs is that they are free to vote on issues that are not in the party manifesto or where that party has no particular view e.g. matters of personal conscience. The other exception to the party manifesto is if an MP makes a clear public statement that they will not follow the party line on a key issue during the election. People like Ken Clarke have never hidden their pro EU views and presumably the local voters are happy with this, it certainly should not be a surprise how he votes. Where I and many on this board disagree with you is when an MP hides their intention until after they are elected. By the 2017 GE I do not think any MP was in any doubt as to the issues regarding Brexit so their personal view should have been clear to the voters. However for some MPs this has not been the case. Then of course we have the MPs who have switched parties. My own personal view is that this should trigger a by election within 6 months or at the very least give the voters the opportunity for a recall election by petition. If MPs are allowed to do as they think fit why do we bother with elections. We might as well have a ballot because we can never know how they will vote. The key point, which you seem to now be acknowledging, is that is each MPs decision on what they do. Some decide to interpret their role as abiding by the manifesto, whatever their own opinions are. Some don't. What matters is that is their own choice and it is not mandated upon them by law. We have elections to choose who we believe is best suited to represent the interests of the constituency and the country. That's our role. We don't select delegates. We choose representatives.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
cryrst  The garden of England 06 Sep 19 12.10pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Would you jump over a cliff knowing that most people think there are rocks at the bottom and that people cannot fly? Or would you hope to prove them all wrong? What are you on about ,again!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 06 Sep 19 12.15pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Parliamentary democracy is not "technicalities". It's the way it has evolved over the centuries and is relied upon because it works. Johnson is not using "technically legitimate tactics" at all. He is seeking to thwart the will of Parliament and that is an illegitimate act. It is almost impossible to conceive of any occasion when the military would side with a government against Parliament. Never forget that their Commander in Chief is not the President as in the USA but the Queen, and that this situation has deliberately been constructed to ensure that no government can use military force against the people in the UK. But it is OK to thwart the will of the people as determined by a referendum which was granted because such a decision was deemed to be too big for Parliament and should be put directly to the plebiscite. Do you know how ridiculous you sound when you say that Parliament should now overrule the result because it was the 'wrong' choice? Laughable.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| cryrst The garden of England 06 Sep 19 12.16pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
The key point, which you seem to now be acknowledging, is that is each MPs decision on what they do. Some decide to interpret their role as abiding by the manifesto, whatever their own opinions are. Some don't. What matters is that is their own choice and it is not mandated upon them by law. We have elections to choose who we believe is best suited to represent the interests of the constituency and the country. That's our role. We don't select delegates. We choose representatives. And what a swerving bunch of
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Jimenez  SELHURSTPARKCHESTER,DA BRONX 06 Sep 19 12.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Referendums have no legal standpoint in the British system of Parliamentary democracy. Nevertheless, it is Parliament which is sovereign and as they can change their mind in the light of experience and circumstances they can revoke Article 50 if they no longer believe it is in the country's best interests to proceed. No political decision is set in stone for ever. They are all capable of being revised and overturned.
Pro USA & Israel |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 06 Sep 19 12.31pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Did you read the link? To help you, here is a quote All else being equal, the war generation have more positive attitudes towards the EU than the immediately following generations. Indeed, only the most recent generation, the millennial generation, display more positive attitudes towards the EU than the war generation. Which rather snookers the logic that people feel that they were lied to when we first entered the EEC and at the first referendum dunnit. Edited by Mapletree (06 Sep 2019 1.05pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 06 Sep 19 12.38pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
Your position goes beyond dogmatic. The people expected the referendum result to be honored as promised. Any other interpretation is purely an attempt by the losing side to get their own way regardless. It is people like you who have created this farce and continue to disrupt the process. You can keep repeating your old guff as often as you like but we can all see the excuses for avoiding democracy becoming more transparent by the day. You and your ilk are continually speaking like remaining is a done deal. It's bizarre. If we leave with some form of deal, we've left. End of. You lot can then fight over what you meant by leaving but that is for the birds. We will still have left. Don't throw your toys out of the pram simply because you won't be getting your version of 'leave'. That was never specified, and anyone who claims it meant this or that is simply making it up to suit their own position.
Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Sep 19 12.46pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
But it is OK to thwart the will of the people as determined by a referendum which was granted because such a decision was deemed to be too big for Parliament and should be put directly to the plebiscite. Do you know how ridiculous you sound when you say that Parliament should now overrule the result because it was the 'wrong' choice? Laughable. What's really laughable is that people on your side of the fence cannot accept that the reason the referendum was called in the first place was not because the decision was "too big for Parliament" but because it was too big for the Tory Party. If Parliament as a whole had been asked then we would not be in this mess. It was held to shut up the Eurosceptics once and for all but went badly wrong. Any referendum can be hijacked by the winds of fortune, political shenanigans, outside influences and money. That's no way to decide important issues which affect future generations much more than ourselves. Parliament is where the will of the people is represented. No one made a "wrong choice"! It's now just an out of date choice made on issues that have subsequently expanded in complexity with greater clarity over the implications.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Sep 19 12.50pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Jimenez
What on earth are you talking about? Referendums have never had any legal standpoint in the UK system.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| 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.