Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Mr Badger, May 8, 2019.
You sound like you are getting commission
Perhaps that's where part of Nige's funding is going.
Lol. You've literally spent the last few weeks unquestioningly regurgitating what the Brexit Party has told you to think, without applying any sort of critical thinking or analysis - and it's there, as evidence, for everyone to see!
I didn't vote leave. Also IIRC he said on the televised debate that "no deal is better than a bad deal". So seems he's been pretty consistent to me.
Edit: I checked myself.
He said no deal is better than the current deal (being a member of the EU). So seems he thinks that no deal was better than being in the EU.
This is a thread about The Brexit Party, who have published their pledges from their inception as a party and as you are most likely already aware they've been campaigning to leave the EU on WTO to respect the democratic vote in the 2016 referendum and 2017 GE.
Sorry but it seems you're answering a question that wasn't asked, the question asked was "Since the BP's one major policy is 'leave with no deal', which isn't the policy of any of the other parties (UKIP possibly excepted, though I'm not sure), would they consider voters to have rejected that policy if the BP doesn't get at least 51% of the vote? Bearing in mind that we've been constantly told by Brexiteers that any majority, even a slim one, means that what the majority voted for/against must be acted on."
It's asking the same question that's been asked multiple times in the past, that if the only two parties who are advocating leaving without a WA don't get more than %51 of the vote does that mean the majority do not support leaving the EU without a deal?
I suppose a person of any political leaning can suffer from mental health issues and I wouldn't want to mock that. However, I would be interested in the evidence that there are many (or even any) "neo-nazi, white supremacist" types that support remaining in the EU.
Apologies then. Not you - the people on whose behalf you're taking umbrage.
As I've explained before if a voter wants to leave the EU then there is really only one party that is campaigning on that basis and that's The Brexit Party.
Exactly. It's literally using the thread to advertise Brexit party messages, events etc. and then refusing to enter into meaningful debate about them.
I suggest you reread the thread then because it is clearly a reasoned response to the question posed so I hope your not just being deliberately obtuse.
I generally take issue with people on this forum indirectly insulting people. It's against the rules to claim that <member X> is an idiot. So instead when you're talking to someone who has <opinion Y> instead of saying "I think you're an idiot because you believe in <opinion Y>" you go on to say that "anyone who holds <opinion Y> is an idiot". You know exactly what you're doing and frankly I don't know why the mods allow it. It is incredibly obvious what you are implying.
To answer that question I would look at the economic growth of Eastern Europe over the last 5+ years as a good example.
In a nutshell, they've boomed.
Are you a fan of the Witcher series by any chance? The skills and money required to feed the game development industry in Poland, has come from labour moving back and forth between more developed economies.
The example might seem trite, but it's one of thousands. Economies flex, they're not static. Labour goes where there is work, and skills transfer with them.
The things you're identifying as problems, are inherent challenges of capitalism full stop, and are issues to be addressed and offset as best as possible via policy.
Whether we are talking about a large free market across a continent, or a small protectionist economy of an island nation, the economic factors and issues remain the same, just on different scales.
The only difference being that we've now reached a technological point where it's become a case of superpowers competing, not small/medium nation states.
Not being a part of one of them leaves us incredibly vulnerable and ripe for economic exploitation in the future. When we consider the rise of the East, and the fact that many of those economies are going to push us out of the top ten over the next 20-30 years, trying to play with the superpowers as an isolated small economy should be a genuinely terrifying prospect for anyone.
And besides, you cannot avoid those issues simply by withdrawing and isolating your economy, because those issues are present on the town level, the council level, the city level, the county and region level etc.
The world is going to continue to globalise, technology makes it inevitable. Trying to push against that tide, rather than embracing it's warts in order to harness it's benefits, would only put such a country at an ever increasing disadvantage as time goes on.
Anyway, sorry I don't have the time to flesh out a full response with all i'd like to contribute, but I have a busy evening ahead.
The questions have been answered in so much as an answer can be given on a future status that hasn't yet occurred and citation has also in many cases been given where possible.
This is an odd, almost bot-like non-response.
That's entirely untrue.
All day yesterday I repeatedly asked you to address a post of mine, and all day today I have repeatedly asked you to answer a single question.
Instead you continuously embedded numerous Brexit Party memes and tweets.
Trying to extract honest debate out of you over the last 48 hours has been like pulling teeth, so much so that I've entirely given up.
Which in fairness is good timing as i'm off out. Ciao gentlemen.
I think you and others like you are confusing someone's democratic vote to put a cross in the box of their choosing with your own set of rules about someone must prove that it will be xyz future outcome to justify having voted in a particular way. That is not how democracy works so again if someone wants to leave the EU then it is perfectly valid for them to cast their vote to a party campaigning that way such as The Brexit Party.
I suspect you have in actual fact repeated a question that I've already answered.
Reason has nothing to do with it, you answered a question that was not being asked, you presented a strawman.
It's a really simple question: If the only two parties who are advocating leaving without a WA don't get more than %51 of the vote does that mean the majority do not support leaving the EU without a deal?
To wit you said something about the proportion of votes being reflected in seats, standing on the grounds they were elected, and those that oppose leaving the EU already being represented, none of which addressed the question being asked, and then you tried to dispute the 65% figure by saying eurosceptic have a larger share of the vote despite the question being specifically about parties who support leaving the EU without a WA and not eurosceptic parties (AKA: A strawman within a strawman).
I think you've confused what is currently being voted on, it's an EU election and whatever the proportions of the vote are will be represented by a corresponding number of seats in parliament so that will be the basis on which future debate and political influence commences.
What I said previously which I also think answered the question was:
Again with the strawman, the question was if the only two parties who are advocating leaving without a WA don't get more than %51 of the vote does that mean the majority do not support leaving the EU without a deal?
Why are you going on about the proportion of the votes vs seats, it's a simple yes or no answer.
Allow me to answer it for you as it seems even when the obvious is staring you in the face you continue to deny reality, the answer is yes, if the only two parties who advocate leaving without a WA get less than %51 of the vote it means the majority of the electorate do not want to leave the EU with a deal.
Separate names with a comma.