|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
On June 25 2016 23:13 tenacity wrote: why does Cameron not resign immediately or within the next 2-3 weeks but wants to wait until October?? Because smooth transitions take time and no one wants to make dumb rash decisions in a time of crisis (aka now).
|
On June 25 2016 23:39 Topdoller wrote:Show nested quote +[B]On June 25 2016 23:24 LegalLord wrote:[/B It's laughable that people are calling for a revote. That sounds like the "vote until democracy gets our desired result" that the EU is known and hated for. The referendum yielded this result, now it's time to live with that new set of conditions and focus on how to make the best of the situation for their benefit. Certainly there are limits to what can be done because the UK has only so much negotiating power, but there is more than one path it can take with regards to how it leaves.
As for the conditions of the referendum, the cutoff, the people who were allowed to vote? Maybe that argument should have been made before the referendum was scheduled, not after. Maybe it was - and that argument failed, despite the fact that this was obviously a pro-Remain government that put that referendum forward. Under the mutually agreed upon conditions, Leave won and Remain did not. You can't just change that because just under half of those who casted a vote didn't get the result they wanted. The fact the leader's of the out campaign are backtracking on theire promises the day after their victory is the most concerning. Their whole campaign was based on fear and now its looking like deceit. This is what becomes of any country where its populatio make decision based on no manifesto, We have just spent almost ten years in recession and now the economy is heading into a black hole. I am expecting another ten years before we will recover. Welcome to populist politics. Facts are not important here
|
On June 25 2016 23:39 Topdoller wrote:Show nested quote +[B]On June 25 2016 23:24 LegalLord wrote:[/B It's laughable that people are calling for a revote. That sounds like the "vote until democracy gets our desired result" that the EU is known and hated for. The referendum yielded this result, now it's time to live with that new set of conditions and focus on how to make the best of the situation for their benefit. Certainly there are limits to what can be done because the UK has only so much negotiating power, but there is more than one path it can take with regards to how it leaves.
As for the conditions of the referendum, the cutoff, the people who were allowed to vote? Maybe that argument should have been made before the referendum was scheduled, not after. Maybe it was - and that argument failed, despite the fact that this was obviously a pro-Remain government that put that referendum forward. Under the mutually agreed upon conditions, Leave won and Remain did not. You can't just change that because just under half of those who casted a vote didn't get the result they wanted. The fact the leader's of the out campaign are backtracking on theire promises the day after their victory is the most concerning. Their whole campaign was based on fear and now its looking like deceit. This is what becomes of any country where its populatio make decision based on no manifesto, We have just spent almost ten years in recession and now the economy is heading into a black hole. I am expecting another ten years before we will recover. Unfortunately, campaign promises and the tendency of them not to be achieved is an age-old story of politics. Maybe it's better to focus on electing a leadership that will actually make it happen, than to find an escape from the referendum results?
|
On June 25 2016 23:59 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2016 23:39 Topdoller wrote:[B]On June 25 2016 23:24 LegalLord wrote:[/B It's laughable that people are calling for a revote. That sounds like the "vote until democracy gets our desired result" that the EU is known and hated for. The referendum yielded this result, now it's time to live with that new set of conditions and focus on how to make the best of the situation for their benefit. Certainly there are limits to what can be done because the UK has only so much negotiating power, but there is more than one path it can take with regards to how it leaves.
As for the conditions of the referendum, the cutoff, the people who were allowed to vote? Maybe that argument should have been made before the referendum was scheduled, not after. Maybe it was - and that argument failed, despite the fact that this was obviously a pro-Remain government that put that referendum forward. Under the mutually agreed upon conditions, Leave won and Remain did not. You can't just change that because just under half of those who casted a vote didn't get the result they wanted. The fact the leader's of the out campaign are backtracking on theire promises the day after their victory is the most concerning. Their whole campaign was based on fear and now its looking like deceit. This is what becomes of any country where its populatio make decision based on no manifesto, We have just spent almost ten years in recession and now the economy is heading into a black hole. I am expecting another ten years before we will recover. Unfortunately, campaign promises and the tendency of them not to be achieved is an age-old story of politics. Maybe it's better to focus on electing a leadership that will actually make it happen, than to find an escape from the referendum results?
Yeah usually it takes a few years to realize that not all objectives are achievable.. but the next day come on are you serious !!!
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-result-nigel-farage-nhs-pledge-disowns-350-million-pounds-a7099906.html
|
On June 26 2016 00:04 Topdoller wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2016 23:59 LegalLord wrote:On June 25 2016 23:39 Topdoller wrote:[B]On June 25 2016 23:24 LegalLord wrote:[/B It's laughable that people are calling for a revote. That sounds like the "vote until democracy gets our desired result" that the EU is known and hated for. The referendum yielded this result, now it's time to live with that new set of conditions and focus on how to make the best of the situation for their benefit. Certainly there are limits to what can be done because the UK has only so much negotiating power, but there is more than one path it can take with regards to how it leaves.
As for the conditions of the referendum, the cutoff, the people who were allowed to vote? Maybe that argument should have been made before the referendum was scheduled, not after. Maybe it was - and that argument failed, despite the fact that this was obviously a pro-Remain government that put that referendum forward. Under the mutually agreed upon conditions, Leave won and Remain did not. You can't just change that because just under half of those who casted a vote didn't get the result they wanted. The fact the leader's of the out campaign are backtracking on theire promises the day after their victory is the most concerning. Their whole campaign was based on fear and now its looking like deceit. This is what becomes of any country where its populatio make decision based on no manifesto, We have just spent almost ten years in recession and now the economy is heading into a black hole. I am expecting another ten years before we will recover. Unfortunately, campaign promises and the tendency of them not to be achieved is an age-old story of politics. Maybe it's better to focus on electing a leadership that will actually make it happen, than to find an escape from the referendum results? Yeah usually it takes a few years to realize that not all objectives are achievable.. but the next day come on are you serious !!! http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-result-nigel-farage-nhs-pledge-disowns-350-million-pounds-a7099906.html Welcome to the 21st century, where you can repeat a lie often enough despite evidence to the contrary and people are so stuck in their own little world they don't care about the truth.
Also see the US where a significant part of the country still believes Obama is a Muslim.
|
United States43565 Posts
On June 25 2016 21:11 Tula wrote: Could someone from the UK please enlighten me whether there is a provision for a binding poll in any way in the UK or is a referendum like this (where all the parties agree that it should be binding) the most you can do?
Personally the only way back I would see in the Austrian system (different constitution, heck we actually have a written constitution) would be to negotiate fully now and then hold a second binding poll if that is truly what the people want.
On the topic in general my british friends (all between 30 and 40 years old) are pretty depressed and angry about this but they don't see a way out now that the result is in. The UK has no constitution at all. It is a monarchy in which the powers of the monarch are wielded by an elected parliament. There is only one rule. Every parliament has absolute power and may do anything it wishes except limit the powers of a future parliament. So that means that while a parliament may declare on Monday that they will consider themselves bound by the outcome of a referendum to be held on Wednesday the Monday parliament has no power to limit the power of the parliament considering what to do when it gets the results on Friday. That make sense?
|
My country was communist not a long time ago, but I was born after democracy was reintroduced, so I'm a big supporter of democracy. However, a friend of mine says you can't give referendum to ordinary people when they're not nuclear physicists (there was a referendum in Bulgaria if we need another nuclear plant), economists (UK's case when most people can't predict what is going to happen after Brexit), etc. So, I tend to agree with that friend of mine. You really can't let plebs make important decisions. Cynical but true. Just remember what one of your own said:
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Winston Churchill
I'm not against referendums. Not even one bit, but they're for very informed people. I don't think half of brexiters were even well informed about consequences of their choice.
|
On June 25 2016 23:24 LegalLord wrote: It's laughable that people are calling for a revote. That sounds like the "vote until democracy gets our desired result" that the EU is known and hated for. The referendum yielded this result, now it's time to live with that new set of conditions and focus on how to make the best of the situation for their benefit. Certainly there are limits to what can be done because the UK has only so much negotiating power, but there is more than one path it can take with regards to how it leaves.
As for the conditions of the referendum, the cutoff, the people who were allowed to vote? Maybe that argument should have been made before the referendum was scheduled, not after. Maybe it was - and that argument failed, despite the fact that this was obviously a pro-Remain government that put that referendum forward. Under the mutually agreed upon conditions, Leave won and Remain did not. You can't just change that because just under half of those who casted a vote didn't get the result they wanted. People complained about the lies and deceit by the Leave party (who admit to that WITHIN 24 FUCKING HOURS) and the fact that a vote for the future generations is decided largely by old babyboomers and 16+ people didn't get to vote.
This is a referendum with tiny margings with a party that won through lieing and populist politics. There are so many things wrong with it (referenda in general) that a 'brexit' based on this disgusting phenomenon is FUBAR.
|
On June 26 2016 00:04 Topdoller wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2016 23:59 LegalLord wrote:On June 25 2016 23:39 Topdoller wrote:[B]On June 25 2016 23:24 LegalLord wrote:[/B It's laughable that people are calling for a revote. That sounds like the "vote until democracy gets our desired result" that the EU is known and hated for. The referendum yielded this result, now it's time to live with that new set of conditions and focus on how to make the best of the situation for their benefit. Certainly there are limits to what can be done because the UK has only so much negotiating power, but there is more than one path it can take with regards to how it leaves.
As for the conditions of the referendum, the cutoff, the people who were allowed to vote? Maybe that argument should have been made before the referendum was scheduled, not after. Maybe it was - and that argument failed, despite the fact that this was obviously a pro-Remain government that put that referendum forward. Under the mutually agreed upon conditions, Leave won and Remain did not. You can't just change that because just under half of those who casted a vote didn't get the result they wanted. The fact the leader's of the out campaign are backtracking on theire promises the day after their victory is the most concerning. Their whole campaign was based on fear and now its looking like deceit. This is what becomes of any country where its populatio make decision based on no manifesto, We have just spent almost ten years in recession and now the economy is heading into a black hole. I am expecting another ten years before we will recover. Unfortunately, campaign promises and the tendency of them not to be achieved is an age-old story of politics. Maybe it's better to focus on electing a leadership that will actually make it happen, than to find an escape from the referendum results? Yeah usually it takes a few years to realize that not all objectives are achievable.. but the next day come on are you serious !!! http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-result-nigel-farage-nhs-pledge-disowns-350-million-pounds-a7099906.html The fact that they're already backtracking on migration while that was one of the core issues of the campaign is pretty telling.
|
On June 26 2016 00:17 Shield wrote:My country was communist not a long time ago, but I was born after democracy was reintroduced, so I'm a big supporter of democracy. However, a friend of mine says you can't give referendum to ordinary people when they're not nuclear physicists (there was a referendum in Bulgaria if we need another nuclear plant), economists (UK's case when most people can't predict what is going to happen after Brexit), etc. So, I tend to agree with that friend of mine. You really can't let plebs make important decisions. Cynical but true. Just remember what one of your own said: Show nested quote + The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Winston Churchill
I'm not against referendums. Not even one bit, but they're for very informed people. I don't think half of brexiters were even well informed about consequences of their choice. "I DONT WANT MORE MUSLIMS IN THE COUNTRY THEY MAKE BOMBS"
"We fought for this country and we want it back" (note: you didn't. You grew up in the generation that DRAINED every little benefit they could get and appear to do their very best to shaft the new generations as hard as possible)
"European Politicians only lie and cost us money"
- Baby Boomers
|
On June 26 2016 00:17 Shield wrote:My country was communist not a long time ago, but I was born after democracy was reintroduced, so I'm a big supporter of democracy. However, a friend of mine says you can't give referendum to ordinary people when they're not nuclear physicists (there was a referendum in Bulgaria if we need another nuclear plant), economists (UK's case when most people can't predict what is going to happen after Brexit), etc. So, I tend to agree with that friend of mine. You really can't let plebs make important decisions. Cynical but true. Just remember what one of your own said: Show nested quote + The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Winston Churchill
I'm not against referendums. Not even one bit, but they're for very informed people. I don't think half of brexiters were even well informed about consequences of their choice. For democracy to work it requires a level of knowledgeable voters, people who look critically at the options before them and make a choice based on that. Sadly not everyone does this.
However limiting who can and cannot vote leads to a whole new set of problems where certain groups get excluded because their opinion on what is right does not match with those deciding who gets to vote.
All in all Democracy is a system riddled with deep flaws. It is however also better then all the other systems humanity has tried over the millennia.
|
On June 26 2016 00:25 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2016 00:17 Shield wrote:My country was communist not a long time ago, but I was born after democracy was reintroduced, so I'm a big supporter of democracy. However, a friend of mine says you can't give referendum to ordinary people when they're not nuclear physicists (there was a referendum in Bulgaria if we need another nuclear plant), economists (UK's case when most people can't predict what is going to happen after Brexit), etc. So, I tend to agree with that friend of mine. You really can't let plebs make important decisions. Cynical but true. Just remember what one of your own said: The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Winston Churchill
I'm not against referendums. Not even one bit, but they're for very informed people. I don't think half of brexiters were even well informed about consequences of their choice. For democracy to work it requires a level of knowledgeable voters, people who look critically at the options before them and make a choice based on that. Sadly not everyone does this. However limiting who can and cannot vote leads to a whole new set of problems where certain groups get excluded because their opinion on what is right does not match with those deciding who gets to vote. All in all Democracy is a system riddled with deep flaws. It is however also better then all the other systems humanity has tried over the millennia.
That's the true, democracy is the worst and best system we've had. It has no alternative at the moment. On the other hand, I'm willing to try a democratic model which lets long-term laws and referendum be decided only by people with a university degree. You'll still have idiots but not as many as now. Democracy only works when the society is well informed, well educated and intelligent. Unfortunately, Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson are none of these!
Edit: Before someone shouts "it's not democratic", it is democratic. You just have minimum requirements to participate and anyone can fulfill them if they educate themselves.
|
Direct Democracy and bait-and-switch tactics make for excellent partners, particularly when we're talking pure majority rule.
|
On June 26 2016 00:29 Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2016 00:25 Gorsameth wrote:On June 26 2016 00:17 Shield wrote:My country was communist not a long time ago, but I was born after democracy was reintroduced, so I'm a big supporter of democracy. However, a friend of mine says you can't give referendum to ordinary people when they're not nuclear physicists (there was a referendum in Bulgaria if we need another nuclear plant), economists (UK's case when most people can't predict what is going to happen after Brexit), etc. So, I tend to agree with that friend of mine. You really can't let plebs make important decisions. Cynical but true. Just remember what one of your own said: The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Winston Churchill
I'm not against referendums. Not even one bit, but they're for very informed people. I don't think half of brexiters were even well informed about consequences of their choice. For democracy to work it requires a level of knowledgeable voters, people who look critically at the options before them and make a choice based on that. Sadly not everyone does this. However limiting who can and cannot vote leads to a whole new set of problems where certain groups get excluded because their opinion on what is right does not match with those deciding who gets to vote. All in all Democracy is a system riddled with deep flaws. It is however also better then all the other systems humanity has tried over the millennia. That's the true, democracy is the worst and best system we've had. It has no alternative at the moment. On the other hand, I'm willing to try a democratic model which lets long-term laws and referendum be decided only by people with a university degree. You'll still have idiots but not as many as now. Democracy only works when the society is well informed, well educated and intelligent. Unfortunately, Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson are none of these! The problem with that is that you do no longer give the voice of the people, but the voice of the 'elite'.
There's so many issues with democracy... Or rather, the theory is great, there is so many issues with people shamelessly spouting their uninformed opinion and not being open to any form of discussion.
|
On June 26 2016 00:29 Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2016 00:25 Gorsameth wrote:On June 26 2016 00:17 Shield wrote:My country was communist not a long time ago, but I was born after democracy was reintroduced, so I'm a big supporter of democracy. However, a friend of mine says you can't give referendum to ordinary people when they're not nuclear physicists (there was a referendum in Bulgaria if we need another nuclear plant), economists (UK's case when most people can't predict what is going to happen after Brexit), etc. So, I tend to agree with that friend of mine. You really can't let plebs make important decisions. Cynical but true. Just remember what one of your own said: The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Winston Churchill
I'm not against referendums. Not even one bit, but they're for very informed people. I don't think half of brexiters were even well informed about consequences of their choice. For democracy to work it requires a level of knowledgeable voters, people who look critically at the options before them and make a choice based on that. Sadly not everyone does this. However limiting who can and cannot vote leads to a whole new set of problems where certain groups get excluded because their opinion on what is right does not match with those deciding who gets to vote. All in all Democracy is a system riddled with deep flaws. It is however also better then all the other systems humanity has tried over the millennia. That's the true, democracy is the worst and best system we've had. It has no alternative at the moment. On the other hand, I'm willing to try a democratic model which lets long-term laws and referendum be decided only by people with a university degree. You'll still have idiots but not as many as now. Democracy only works when the society is well informed, well educated and intelligent. Unfortunately, Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson are none of these! Edit: Before someone shouts "it's not democratic", it is democratic. You just have minimum requirements to participate and anyone can fulfill them if they educate themselves. The counter argument is Ben Carson. A neurosurgeon (you would think that makes him a very smart man, he certainly has a university education) who believes that the Pyramids were grain silo's.
|
On June 26 2016 00:33 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2016 00:29 Shield wrote:On June 26 2016 00:25 Gorsameth wrote:On June 26 2016 00:17 Shield wrote:My country was communist not a long time ago, but I was born after democracy was reintroduced, so I'm a big supporter of democracy. However, a friend of mine says you can't give referendum to ordinary people when they're not nuclear physicists (there was a referendum in Bulgaria if we need another nuclear plant), economists (UK's case when most people can't predict what is going to happen after Brexit), etc. So, I tend to agree with that friend of mine. You really can't let plebs make important decisions. Cynical but true. Just remember what one of your own said: The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Winston Churchill
I'm not against referendums. Not even one bit, but they're for very informed people. I don't think half of brexiters were even well informed about consequences of their choice. For democracy to work it requires a level of knowledgeable voters, people who look critically at the options before them and make a choice based on that. Sadly not everyone does this. However limiting who can and cannot vote leads to a whole new set of problems where certain groups get excluded because their opinion on what is right does not match with those deciding who gets to vote. All in all Democracy is a system riddled with deep flaws. It is however also better then all the other systems humanity has tried over the millennia. That's the true, democracy is the worst and best system we've had. It has no alternative at the moment. On the other hand, I'm willing to try a democratic model which lets long-term laws and referendum be decided only by people with a university degree. You'll still have idiots but not as many as now. Democracy only works when the society is well informed, well educated and intelligent. Unfortunately, Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson are none of these! Edit: Before someone shouts "it's not democratic", it is democratic. You just have minimum requirements to participate and anyone can fulfill them if they educate themselves. The counter argument is Ben Carson. A neurosurgeon (you would think that makes him a very smart man, he certainly has a university education) who believes that the Pyramids were grain silo's. Thats what happens when you play too much civilization
|
On June 26 2016 00:33 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2016 00:29 Shield wrote:On June 26 2016 00:25 Gorsameth wrote:On June 26 2016 00:17 Shield wrote:My country was communist not a long time ago, but I was born after democracy was reintroduced, so I'm a big supporter of democracy. However, a friend of mine says you can't give referendum to ordinary people when they're not nuclear physicists (there was a referendum in Bulgaria if we need another nuclear plant), economists (UK's case when most people can't predict what is going to happen after Brexit), etc. So, I tend to agree with that friend of mine. You really can't let plebs make important decisions. Cynical but true. Just remember what one of your own said: The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Winston Churchill
I'm not against referendums. Not even one bit, but they're for very informed people. I don't think half of brexiters were even well informed about consequences of their choice. For democracy to work it requires a level of knowledgeable voters, people who look critically at the options before them and make a choice based on that. Sadly not everyone does this. However limiting who can and cannot vote leads to a whole new set of problems where certain groups get excluded because their opinion on what is right does not match with those deciding who gets to vote. All in all Democracy is a system riddled with deep flaws. It is however also better then all the other systems humanity has tried over the millennia. That's the true, democracy is the worst and best system we've had. It has no alternative at the moment. On the other hand, I'm willing to try a democratic model which lets long-term laws and referendum be decided only by people with a university degree. You'll still have idiots but not as many as now. Democracy only works when the society is well informed, well educated and intelligent. Unfortunately, Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson are none of these! Edit: Before someone shouts "it's not democratic", it is democratic. You just have minimum requirements to participate and anyone can fulfill them if they educate themselves. The counter argument is Ben Carson. A neurosurgeon (you would think that makes him a very smart man, he certainly has a university education) who believes that the Pyramids were grain silo's. Meh. A surgeon is skillful with his hands, not with his brain ;D
|
How important was the refugee crisis and anti-muslim immigration sentiment for the leave voters? Main factor or just one of many?
|
On June 26 2016 00:54 REDBLUEGREEN wrote: How important was the refugee crisis and anti-muslim immigration sentiment for the leave voters? Main factor or just one of many? The answer to this question depends on whom you ask, but I think its definitely fair to say that refugee/immigration concerns operated at the forefront of the leave platform.
|
On June 26 2016 00:55 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2016 00:54 REDBLUEGREEN wrote: How important was the refugee crisis and anti-muslim immigration sentiment for the leave voters? Main factor or just one of many? The answer to this question depends on whom you ask, but I think its definitely fair to say that refugee/immigration concerns operated at the forefront of the leave platform. In the north of England it was certainly central to most Leave voters' reasons - even if they would also include long factually questionable diatribes about the cost of the EU and it's lack of democracy every argument I've seen would include in it's summary 'taking back control of our borders', which tells you everything you need to know really.
|
|
|
|
|
|