How About Another EU Referendum?

[Mrr T]

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Mrr T said:

.

The EU Parliment is democratically elected but has limited power. The UK Parliament is not democratically elected but has all powers.

PR using the list system isn't that democratic. EU parliament uses a flawed process and has no power. Great for pretending to the great unwashed though. A complete sham.

Not sure the great unwashed, who ever they are, care much.

You are missing my point. Many brexiters say one reason for voting leave was the demographic failing of the EU. I have some sympathy with that argument.

What I do not understand is the desire to leave the EU for that reason but have no desire to address the problems with UK democracy. The UK has a government which represent about 43% of the electorate. It has a revision chamber which is unelected and made up of political appointments. No written constitution. A legal system where there is no scrutiny of those appointed to the highest levels of the judiciary. I think addressing these issue are far more important that the EU.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

Mrr T said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Mrr T said:

.

The EU Parliment is democratically elected but has limited power. The UK Parliament is not democratically elected but has all powers.

PR using the list system isn't that democratic. EU parliament uses a flawed process and has no power. Great for pretending to the great unwashed though. A complete sham.

Not sure the great unwashed, who ever they are, care much.

You are missing my point. Many brexiters say one reason for voting leave was the demographic failing of the EU. I have some sympathy with that argument.

What I do not understand is the desire to leave the EU for that reason but have no desire to address the problems with UK democracy. The UK has a government which represent about 43% of the electorate. It has a revision chamber which is unelected and made up of political appointments. No written constitution. A legal system where there is no scrutiny of those appointed to the highest levels of the judiciary. I think addressing these issue are far more important that the EU.

FPTP isn't perfect but neither is PR. Flaws of PR are typically weak and ineffective coalition governments, political instability and no real say on who gets elected as the parties write the lists.

I agree on the Lords to a degree, but an unelected chamber does have its benefits. It needs serious culling in terms of numbers, cronies (Andrew Adonis ffs) and god botherers have no place in a 21 century modern legislature.

ETA
However, if we had remained in the EU these issues wouldnt be important as both Houses were becoming more and more redundant.

[Pan Pan Pan]

Zumbruk said:

Murph7355 said:

Zumbruk said:

Murph7355 said:

You're just repeating the same old ... arguments.

That's because they're still true. And always will be.

As will the counterpoints.

Yes, but they were deranged lies during the referendum and still are. There are no benefits to Brexit. Not one.

Murph7355 said:

And most pertinently, that this will never end

At least not until the Quitlings have all died of old age.

Better to be a quitling than a quisling.

[sugerbear]

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Mrr T said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Mrr T said:

.

The EU Parliment is democratically elected but has limited power. The UK Parliament is not democratically elected but has all powers.

PR using the list system isn't that democratic. EU parliament uses a flawed process and has no power. Great for pretending to the great unwashed though. A complete sham.

Not sure the great unwashed, who ever they are, care much.

You are missing my point. Many brexiters say one reason for voting leave was the demographic failing of the EU. I have some sympathy with that argument.

What I do not understand is the desire to leave the EU for that reason but have no desire to address the problems with UK democracy. The UK has a government which represent about 43% of the electorate. It has a revision chamber which is unelected and made up of political appointments. No written constitution. A legal system where there is no scrutiny of those appointed to the highest levels of the judiciary. I think addressing these issue are far more important that the EU.

FPTP isn't perfect but neither is PR. Flaws of PR are typically weak and ineffective coalition governments, political instability and no real say on who gets elected as the parties write the lists.

I agree on the Lords to a degree, but an unelected chamber does have its benefits. It needs serious culling in terms of numbers, cronies (Andrew Adonis ffs) and god botherers have no place in a 21 century modern legislature.

ETA
However, if we had remained in the EU these issues wouldnt be important as both Houses were becoming more and more redundant.

There are only a couple of countries within the EU that still rely on FPTP, Belarus and the UK.

PR has been used in Germany and they have a fantastic economy and political outlook. It's much more grown up and they look for compromise and try to work together. To give you an example, how many companies create two team of execs and then let them fight it out? It isn't even about the "best" argument anymore because politicians now vote on party lines rather than the interests of the country. They pander to their small base. They can be elected on a tiny proportion of the voter base and FPTP goes hand in hand with gerrymandering to ensure their party at stays in power.

The House of Lords are political appointments, Paul Dacre is to become a Lord along with a list of tory donors. They are large donors or party apologists / media cronies.

Everything you have written is a load of tosh.

[Pan Pan Pan]

Mrr T said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Nope the EU parliament is a smoke screen to pretend to the masses that democracy is retained, when in reality it's a sham.

Great that you think NATO seems to be doing doing a reasonable job...who the hell do you think has countered the Russian threat since ww2....it wasnt Germany and France.

ETA
The elected members have the final say in the UK btw.

Where as the UK parliament where a 43% share of votes gives you a massive majority is clearly the pinnacle of democracy.

As for keeping Russia in check. The UK also only played a bit part compared to the US.

You dont do logic very well do you?
If the UK had not been the SINGLE European country, which did not fall, or capitulate to Nazi Germany in 1940, the US could not have entered the war against the Nazis (Indeed they did not even want to). How were American bombers, going to launch raids on Nazi held Europe, from the far side of the Atlantic?
How was D Day, going to be launched from the far side of the Atlantic? It was difficult enough just getting it across the English Channel.
How were the raids which disrupted, and delayed the Nazis nuclear weapons program, going to be launched, let alone even known about, from the far side of the Atlantic?
With the Western approaches to Europe controlled by Nazi U-boats and surface fleets, how were the billions of tons of war materiel, needed to keep Russia in the war against the Nazis, going to be supplied from the far side of the Atlantic
All the above, and much more was only made possible because the UK was the one country, that did not fall, or capitulate in 1940. and was the one country on this side of the Atlantic, `not' in control of the Hitler's Nazi Germany.
As for the voting system in this country it is not perfect by any means, but at its worst, it is still better than the systems used in many other countries.

[Dr Jekyll]

If a party has a manifesto that appeals to over 50% of the electorate they will have no difficulty getting elected under the current system. If nobody has such a manifesto, then whoever gets in power will appeal to less than 50%. Of course the argument would be that if a party with 40% support agrees a coalition with a party with 11% support then 51% must agree with the result of all that horsetrading. But the reality is nobody had the chance to vote on it.

[Murph7355]

Zumbruk said:

Murph7355 said:

Awww bless you.

You would know "deranged" it seems...

Immediate resort to 'ad hominem' duly noted.

Awwww bless you again if that's how you took it.

You hurl a silly word (edited add "words") around, don't be surprised when it gets sent right back at you.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

sugerbear said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Mrr T said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Mrr T said:

.

The EU Parliment is democratically elected but has limited power. The UK Parliament is not democratically elected but has all powers.

PR using the list system isn't that democratic. EU parliament uses a flawed process and has no power. Great for pretending to the great unwashed though. A complete sham.

Not sure the great unwashed, who ever they are, care much.

You are missing my point. Many brexiters say one reason for voting leave was the demographic failing of the EU. I have some sympathy with that argument.

What I do not understand is the desire to leave the EU for that reason but have no desire to address the problems with UK democracy. The UK has a government which represent about 43% of the electorate. It has a revision chamber which is unelected and made up of political appointments. No written constitution. A legal system where there is no scrutiny of those appointed to the highest levels of the judiciary. I think addressing these issue are far more important that the EU.

FPTP isn't perfect but neither is PR. Flaws of PR are typically weak and ineffective coalition governments, political instability and no real say on who gets elected as the parties write the lists.

I agree on the Lords to a degree, but an unelected chamber does have its benefits. It needs serious culling in terms of numbers, cronies (Andrew Adonis ffs) and god botherers have no place in a 21 century modern legislature.

ETA
However, if we had remained in the EU these issues wouldnt be important as both Houses were becoming more and more redundant.

There are only a couple of countries within the EU that still rely on FPTP, Belarus and the UK.

PR has been used in Germany and they have a fantastic economy and political outlook. It's much more grown up and they look for compromise and try to work together. To give you an example, how many companies create two team of execs and then let them fight it out? It isn't even about the "best" argument anymore because politicians now vote on party lines rather than the interests of the country. They pander to their small base. They can be elected on a tiny proportion of the voter base and FPTP goes hand in hand with gerrymandering to ensure their party at stays in power.

The House of Lords are political appointments, Paul Dacre is to become a Lord along with a list of tory donors. They are large donors or party apologists / media cronies.

Everything you have written is a load of tosh.

Belarus and the UK aren't in the EU.

I stopped reading your crap after that.

[Mortarboard]

Pan Pan Pan said:

You dont do logic very well do you?
If the UK had not been the SINGLE European country, which did not fall, or capitulate to Nazi Germany in 1940, the US could not have entered the war against the Nazis (Indeed they did not even want to). How were American bombers, going to launch raids on Nazi held Europe, from the far side of the Atlantic?
How was D Day, going to be launched from the far side of the Atlantic? It was difficult enough just getting it across the English Channel.
How were the raids which disrupted, and delayed the Nazis nuclear weapons program, going to be launched, let alone even known about, from the far side of the Atlantic?
With the Western approaches to Europe controlled by Nazi U-boats and surface fleets, how were the billions of tons of war materiel, needed to keep Russia in the war against the Nazis, going to be supplied from the far side of the Atlantic
All the above, and much more was only made possible because the UK was the one country, that did not fall, or capitulate in 1940. and was the one country on this side of the Atlantic, `not' in control of the Hitler's Nazi Germany.
As for the voting system in this country it is not perfect by any means, but at its worst, it is still better than the systems used in many other countries.

Ireland says Hi! We were/are in Europe too.

M.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

Pan Pan Pan said:

You dont do logic very well do you?
If the UK had not been the SINGLE European country, which did not fall, or capitulate to Nazi Germany in 1940, the US could not have entered the war against the Nazis (Indeed they did not even want to). How were American bombers, going to launch raids on Nazi held Europe, from the far side of the Atlantic?
How was D Day, going to be launched from the far side of the Atlantic? It was difficult enough just getting it across the English Channel.
How were the raids which disrupted, and delayed the Nazis nuclear weapons program, going to be launched, let alone even known about, from the far side of the Atlantic?
With the Western approaches to Europe controlled by Nazi U-boats and surface fleets, how were the billions of tons of war materiel, needed to keep Russia in the war against the Nazis, going to be supplied from the far side of the Atlantic
All the above, and much more was only made possible because the UK was the one country, that did not fall, or capitulate in 1940. and was the one country on this side of the Atlantic, `not' in control of the Hitler's Nazi Germany.
As for the voting system in this country it is not perfect by any means, but at its worst, it is still better than the systems used in many other countries.

Agreed, but point of note, Germany declared war on the US not the other way round.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

Mortarboard said:

Ireland says Hi! We were/are in Europe too.

M.

Not many US troops in Ireland during ww2.

[Mortarboard]

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Mortarboard said:

Ireland says Hi! We were/are in Europe too.

M.

Not many US troops in Ireland during ww2.

Why would there be?

Ireland's contributions to the effort in WWII were varied.

M.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

Mortarboard said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Mortarboard said:

Ireland says Hi! We were/are in Europe too.

M.

Not many US troops in Ireland during ww2.

Why would there be?

Ireland's contributions to the effort in WWII were varied.

M.

But would have not enabled the opening of a second front which was the original point.

[Mortarboard]

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

But would have not enabled the opening of a second front which was the original point.

That's a matter of debate. If the UK fell, there's plenty of room to take off from Ireland. In fact, the RAF did so many times during WWII.

So perhaps less going on about the UK being the only european country not to fall/capitulate might be prudent.

M.

[Sheets Tabuer]

OK the only one fighting the germans then.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

Mortarboard said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

But would have not enabled the opening of a second front which was the original point.

That's a matter of debate. If the UK fell, there's plenty of room to take off from Ireland. In fact, the RAF did so many times during WWII.

So perhaps less going on about the UK being the only european country not to fall/capitulate might be prudent.

M.

It would be a short debate.


RAF offensive missions from the Republic?

Btw I wasnt the one who said the UK was the only one as I would have added Malta...admittedly not independent at the time.

[Mrr T]

Pan Pan Pan said:

Mrr T said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Nope the EU parliament is a smoke screen to pretend to the masses that democracy is retained, when in reality it's a sham.

Great that you think NATO seems to be doing doing a reasonable job...who the hell do you think has countered the Russian threat since ww2....it wasnt Germany and France.

ETA
The elected members have the final say in the UK btw.

Where as the UK parliament where a 43% share of votes gives you a massive majority is clearly the pinnacle of democracy.

As for keeping Russia in check. The UK also only played a bit part compared to the US.

You dont do logic very well do you?
If the UK had not been the SINGLE European country, which did not fall, or capitulate to Nazi Germany in 1940, the US could not have entered the war against the Nazis (Indeed they did not even want to). How were American bombers, going to launch raids on Nazi held Europe, from the far side of the Atlantic?
How was D Day, going to be launched from the far side of the Atlantic? It was difficult enough just getting it across the English Channel.
How were the raids which disrupted, and delayed the Nazis nuclear weapons program, going to be launched, let alone even known about, from the far side of the Atlantic?
With the Western approaches to Europe controlled by Nazi U-boats and surface fleets, how were the billions of tons of war materiel, needed to keep Russia in the war against the Nazis, going to be supplied from the far side of the Atlantic
All the above, and much more was only made possible because the UK was the one country, that did not fall, or capitulate in 1940. and was the one country on this side of the Atlantic, `not' in control of the Hitler's Nazi Germany.
As for the voting system in this country it is not perfect by any means, but at its worst, it is still better than the systems used in many other countries.

FFS I post about Russia and FPP and you create one of your standard posts about WW2.

You also seem to have only very limited knowledge of what happened. You do realise the US had already invaded Europe before overlord?

As it is WW2 has nothing, zero, even less than zero to do with the UK or the EU today.

Edited by Mrr T on Tuesday 28th June 17:42

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

Mrr T said:

FFS I post about Russia and FPP and you create one of your standard posts about WW2.

You also seem to have only very limited knowledge of what happened. You do realise the US had already invaded Europe before overlord?

As it is WW2 has nothing, zero, even less than zero to do with the UK or the EU today.

Edited by Mrr T on Tuesday 28th June 17:42

...via Torch that used the UK as a staging post

[CharlesdeGaulle]

Mrr T said:

You also seem to have only very limited knowledge of what happened. You do realise the US had already invaded Europe before overlord?

I've edited your post, but this line is disingenuous at best.

[Mrr T]

CharlesdeGaulle said:

Mrr T said:

You also seem to have only very limited knowledge of what happened. You do realise the US had already invaded Europe before overlord?

I've edited your post, but this line is disingenuous at best.

I am aware the UK was part of both tourch and huskey but I just replied to a specific post. Anyway what the hell has this got to do with either the UK or the EU today.