The Positive Brexit Thread

[Bill 1,788]

"Mr Corbyn has a long record of embracing antisemites as comrades "

[Rock The Boat 1,322]

Evidence that Labour is now a party of the middle-class

[Surfer 1,547]

What will your next propaganda push be - that Labor is the party of the fat cats and the Tories are the protectors of the working classes? Fantastical fascist messaging there - Benito Mussolini would be proud of you. 

"We become strong, I feel, when we have no friends upon whom to lean, or to look to for moral guidance."

Edited November 15, 2019 by Surfer

[Rock The Boat 1,322]

2 minutes ago, Surfer said:

What will your next propaganda push be - that Labor is the party of the fat cats and the Tories are the protectors of the working classes? Fantastical fascist messaging there - Benito Mussolini would be proud of you. 

It's a poll taken by YouGov, a respected polling company. If you think that their polling is untruthful, or propaganda to support just one political viewpoint, then perhaps you ought to present the evidence you have for your opinion. Benito Mussolini would think you a t!t.

[Surfer 1,547]

A single data point is a single data point, I won't bother to argue that with you, it is what is its. 

It's what you do with that data point that shows your understanding or intent to misdirect. 

I stand by my comments. 

[Herman 9,691]

Uh oh. Johnson is launching the tory campaign bus today. Remember to fact check whatever horse**** is written on the side. 

[Herman 9,691]

Did anyone mention the appalling NHS figures yesterday? It's not safe in the Conservatives hands and I think they are deliberately running it down. Watch we don't lose it. 

[canarydan23 4,060]

6 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

It's a poll taken by YouGov, a respected polling company. If you think that their polling is untruthful, or propaganda to support just one political viewpoint, then perhaps you ought to present the evidence you have for your opinion. Benito Mussolini would think you a t!t.

You use the fact that Mussolini would think someone a t!t as an insult. 

We know what you are. 

[BigFish 1,986]

14 hours ago, canarydan23 said:

Of course I don't like the results from FPTP. A system of election that gives a party almost two thirds of seats with vary more than a third of votes is inherently unlikeable for anyone who really supports democracy. 

You only need to look at the EU elections to see that a list system generally delivers seats to votes within a single digit percentile margin of error. And in doing so it maintains and in some ways enhances the link between. 

What it would achieve would be legion.

1) A much, much closer correlation between votes and seats/influence 

2) A freer electorate, whereby voters feel less need to vote tactically and can select a party that aligns with their views, rather than feeling compelled to pick from one of two or three whom they don't actually like

3) Less influence from lobbyists. Big business in the Tories and trade union s in Labour will see their influence diminished as their puppets can no longer bank on getting majority governments

4) An end to safe seats which sees only a minority of seats affect the national result, thereby rendering millions of votes worthless

5) Less tribalism in politics as parties would be forced to learn to collaborate and compromise

6) Westminster would be less able to ignore factors that give rise to extremist elements as extreme parties would get a voice in Parliament if they reached the sorts of levels the BNP have in the past

7) As 35% of voters can no longer grant a majority, parties that only appeal to one or two demographics won't have great prospects, they'll be forced into more universally beneficial manifestos rather than ones that sweep to power on the back of people aged 60+

What's FPTP got going for it? It used to have the delivers strong governments argument, but try saying that with a straight face. 

Coalitions don't work? Politically I despised the Cameron/Clegg government but it functioned perfectly well. 

Constituency link? See above. 

What else has it got going for it? 

So no, there's just a smidge more to it than not liking the results, which is a perfectly legitimate opinion for any fan of democracy, as opposed to the facade we currently have. 

None of this will enable our political class to make better decisions and none of this makes your vote count more. It naturally creates career politicians who are close to totally immune to the wishes of the electorate. It increases the sway of minority parties with extreme views. In fact changing the voting system alone changes very little on its own. As the old maxim goes it doesn't matter who you vote for, the government still gets in.

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

8 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

It's a poll taken by YouGov, a respected polling company. If you think that their polling is untruthful, or propaganda to support just one political viewpoint, then perhaps you ought to present the evidence you have for your opinion. Benito Mussolini would think you a t!t.

Reported. Unnecessary insults and abuse. I’m sure a snowflake like you will understand ❄️⛄️ 😆👍🏻

[Herman 9,691]

I am not too sure of the current Conservative policy of shutting the stable door once the horse has bolted. Is it a goer? 

[Jools 584]

Labour promise to nationalise BT 🙃

Looks like they've realised they aren't going to win so have gone for broke by doing their usual 'free everything' just to see if people are really that stupid 🤪

[canarydan23 4,060]

51 minutes ago, BigFish said:

None of this will enable our political class to make better decisions and none of this makes your vote count more. It naturally creates career politicians who are close to totally immune to the wishes of the electorate. It increases the sway of minority parties with extreme views. In fact changing the voting system alone changes very little on its own. As the old maxim goes it doesn't matter who you vote for, the government still gets in.

It absolutely does make your vote count more. People who live in what is currently a mega safe seat may as well not vote under FPTP, and there is undoubtedly some that choose that option. Under a PR system, their vote will count for something.

And it will also change the decision-making process, as coalitions, often more than two-party strong, will be forced to compromise and collaborate, as I stated. And I think policy that is rigorously scrutinised from multiple perspectives may end up more suitable than one that has merely been formed in the echo chambers of a single party and then given an easy-to-ignore examination from the opposition in Parliament. 

Again, I've listed the pros, I'm struggling to see what continued FPTP offers, other than the fact that it suits the two parties who occasionally swap the keys to Number 10. And let's be honest, they're not doing a good job, are they?

[Herman 9,691]

12 minutes ago, Jools said:

Labour promise to nationalise BT 🙃

Looks like they've realised they aren't going to win so have gone for broke by doing their usual 'free everything' just to see if people are really that stupid 🤪

No they haven't. Please read or listen to what they say properly. 

[Jools 584]

21 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

It absolutely does make your vote count more. People who live in what is currently a mega safe seat may as well not vote under FPTP, and there is undoubtedly some that choose that option. Under a PR system, their vote will count for something.

And it will also change the decision-making process, as coalitions, often more than two-party strong, will be forced to compromise and collaborate, as I stated. And I think policy that is rigorously scrutinised from multiple perspectives may end up more suitable than one that has merely been formed in the echo chambers of a single party and then given an easy-to-ignore examination from the opposition in Parliament. 

Again, I've listed the pros, I'm struggling to see what continued FPTP offers, other than the fact that it suits the two parties who occasionally swap the keys to Number 10. And let's be honest, they're not doing a good job, are they?

Well, here's something we agree on, Danielle..

When 3,881,129 votes garners a Party one MP, commonsense demands electoral reform 👍

[Jools 584]

22 minutes ago, Herman said:

No they haven't. Please read or listen to what they say properly. 

I'm reading it in your beloved Guardian.

[TCCANARY 263]

4 minutes ago, Jools said:

I'm reading it in your beloved Guardian.

So you are failing to read and comprehend at the same time, there's a pattern with the RWNJ's. 😀

 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Jools, in your haste reading the Guardian (no of course you don't).

Let's start again. You have seen an article from the Guardian and not read all of it. Read it again and see the real story.

BT have just been making statements regarding Labour's plan.

Now it is all about the employees! We have over 100k employees and we need to generate enough income to support their pensions. Funny how when you ring them you go straight through to the sub continent.

Because it is a Labour policy, they don't mention shareholders because they know what retort they would get.

[Mr Apples 1,315]

Some interesting information for the easily offended Brexit bunch, from the Daily Mash. 😂

How to be an offended baby boomer

DO you feel you’re being unfairly attacked for being a baby boomer, despite believing anyone with a grievance is a ‘snowflake’? Here’s what to do.

Suggest ‘boomer’ is a deeply offensive slur

Claim it’s on a par with racism and should be banned. Completely fail to see the irony that you’ve been moaning about political correctness for years and possibly even believe it was much better when you could call people ‘shirt-lifters’, ‘gypos’ and worse. 

Accuse anyone younger than you of lacking respect

Don’t concern yourself with whether simply being older means you deserve respect – after all, quite a few serial killers probably live to be 100. Also ignore the fact that younger people generally are quite respectful and are not all lazy scumbags just because they grew up with double glazing.

Double down on saying ‘In my day…’ 

Make growing up in the 1960s sound like some sort of Dickensian nightmare. Eventually you’ll be totally convinced you did have to walk uphill to school nine miles each way in three feet of snow, even if it never actually happened. Ideally all younger acquaintances should genuinely believe you lived in the Monty Python ‘Northerners’ sketch.

Insist you’re always right because of the Second World War

You weren’t actually in it, but your dad nearly was so that makes you hardened to the harsh realities of life, or something. This doesn’t really make sense, but nor does being a Daily Express reader who believes everyone and everything is terrible these days.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Its like you had a say in what era you were born in

[Rock The Boat 1,322]

10 hours ago, Surfer said:

A single data point is a single data point, I won't bother to argue that with you, it is what is its. 

It's what you do with that data point that shows your understanding or intent to misdirect. 

I stand by my comments. 

What it is, is a fact. That on a certain day, a given poll of voters indicated an intention of how they would vote. What we did with the fact is discover that middle-class voters were more inclined to vote Labour than working-class voters. I'm not sure what your opinion of that fact is, but mine is one of mild surprise. What we do know about you is that you seem to have been offended by the facts - calling them fascist messages, and calling up Benito Mussolini, thus confirming the stereotype of lefties as a bunch of snowflakes who get offended by facts they don't like and consider anyone that has a different opinion is, by definition, a fascist.

[canarydan23 4,060]

16 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

What it is, is a fact. That on a certain day, a given poll of voters indicated an intention of how they would vote. What we did with the fact is discover that middle-class voters were more inclined to vote Labour than working-class voters. I'm not sure what your opinion of that fact is, but mine is one of mild surprise. What we do know about you is that you seem to have been offended by the facts - calling them fascist messages, and calling up Benito Mussolini, thus confirming the stereotype of lefties as a bunch of snowflakes who get offended by facts they don't like and consider anyone that has a different opinion is, by definition, a fascist.

Ok boomer.

[Jools 584]

1 hour ago, keelansgrandad said:

Jools, in your haste reading the Guardian (no of course you don't).

Let's start again. You have seen an article from the Guardian and not read all of it. Read it again and see the real story.

BT have just been making statements regarding Labour's plan.

Now it is all about the employees! We have over 100k employees and we need to generate enough income to support their pensions. Funny how when you ring them you go straight through to the sub continent.

Because it is a Labour policy, they don't mention shareholders because they know what retort they would get.

In your haste, you seem to have forgotten that in order to re-nationalise anything in the UK we need to be out of the EU.

Labour now advocate leaving the EU do they?

I haven't heard or read that anywhere 🤪

Edited November 15, 2019 by Jools

[Bill 1,788]

1 hour ago, Jools said:

In your haste, you seem to have forgotten that in order to nationalise anything in the UK we need to be out of the EU.

Labour now advocate leaving the EU do they?

I haven't heard or read that anywhere 🤪

As usual Jools/hand crank etc is lying, as

" EU law explicitly protects the right of member states to nationalise industries. Art. 345 TFEU states “The Treaties shall in no way prejudice the rules in Member States (MS) governing the system of property ownership. "

""The ECJ has often been tolerant of member states accused of violating the treaties if their actions are “proportionate“, i.e. for a legitimate aim (which would include one endorsed by the electorate) and effective, but not excessive, in achieving that aim. Assuming that nationalisation was prominent in Mr Corbyn’s manifesto, conducted on a transparent timetable and proper compensation was paid, Mr Corbyn would have a strong case based on Art. 345. "

 

ps  isn't it reassuring to have Bill to set things straight.........................however it does highlight how easy it has been for the brexiteers to spread lies and so cause this mess.

Edited November 15, 2019 by Bill

[Bill 1,788]

6 hours ago, Herman said:

Did anyone mention the appalling NHS figures yesterday? It's not safe in the Conservatives hands and I think they are deliberately running it down. Watch we don't lose it. 

yes, dear old Bill did, and to save you checking which is often the surest method 😉

 

" One in six patients waited longer than four hours in A&E in England during October – the worst-ever performance since a target was introduced in 2004, according to data.

The shadow health secretary, Jonathan Ashworth, said: “The Conservatives have ushered in the worst NHS crisis on record. Under Boris Johnson the NHS is in crisis and we’re heading for a winter of abject misery for patients.

“Our A&Es are overwhelmed, more so than ever. In every community there’s an ever-growing queue of people waiting for treatment. The Tories spent a decade cutting over 15,000 beds. Now they should apologise to every patient languishing on a trolley and waiting longer for treatment."

I suppose it is one way for the Tories to be rid of 'useless mouths (pensioners) - kill them off through reducing health care "

"

[Bill 1,788]

As a brexiteer Johnson is back lying yet again, as this morning we have

• The PM said the proportion of EU and non-EU net immigration is 50-50. But actually, ONS figures show that EU citizens have only made up around 20 per cent of the total proportion.
• He claimed that as London mayor he took 11,000 knives “off the street” through the stop and search policy. But as Labour party have pointed out, only 4,500 knives were recovered through stop and search.
• He also said the murder rate fell below 100 for “several years” while he was at City Hall – a claim he’s made before that’s already proved to be incorrect.
• The PM says Jeremy Corbyn would have a Scottish referendum “next year”, but Corbyn says he would “not countenance an independence referendum in the early years of a Labour government”.

The fat fraud also tried to avoid responsibility for the failed “Garden Bridge” project – launched under his watch at City Hall.

 

As someone sacked from his job for lying, being divorced for lying and now not even trusted by his own immediate family you can see why he is beloved by brexiteers......... a liar who lies as well as they do........ask the DUP

 

Brexit - a lie, by liars for liars

[Bill 1,788]

31 minutes ago, Bill said:

repeated post

 

Edited November 15, 2019 by Bill

[Jools 584]

 

 

 

 

 

3

29 minutes ago, Bill said:

As usual Jools/hand crank etc is lying, as

" EU law explicitly protects the right of member states to nationalise industries. Art. 345 TFEU states “The Treaties shall in no way prejudice the rules in Member States (MS) governing the system of property ownership. "

""The ECJ has often been tolerant of member states accused of violating the treaties if their actions are “proportionate“, i.e. for a legitimate aim (which would include one endorsed by the electorate) and effective, but not excessive, in achieving that aim. Assuming that nationalisation was prominent in Mr Corbyn’s manifesto, conducted on a transparent timetable and proper compensation was paid, Mr Corbyn would have a strong case based on Art. 345. "

 

ps  isn't it reassuring to have Bill to set things straight.........................however it does highlight how easy it has been for the brexiteers to spread lies and so cause this mess.

You'd best go tell/show that to your nutter, FBPE friends over at Twitter 🙃

Go and study the ECHR, you insufferable nincompoop.

[BigFish 1,986]

1 hour ago, Jools said:

In your haste, you seem to have forgotten that in order to re-nationalise anything in the UK we need to be out of the EU.

Labour now advocate leaving the EU do they?

I haven't heard or read that anywhere 🤪

This would be an obsticle if it was true, but again it isn't - you just made it up @Jools.

[Rock The Boat 1,322]

Of course, if Labour did roll out broadband everywhere, it would put every other ISP out of business. So there would be no competition and as everyone who lived through the years of socialist nationalised industries such as British Leyland will know, both product quality and customer service goes right out of the window.

But there are more sinister aspects to why you don't want the government to be your broadband provider. Firstly, the government will have free licence to snoop on everything that you do online, from your chat, your shopping to your bank accounts and your location. Secondly, with a monopoly power the government can restrict your access to the internet if they don't like who you are. This is already happening in China where social credit is earned, and those who the regime doesn't like are unable to buy travel tickets or hold credit cards. If you let the government run your broadband connect then you will hand over all your rights as a private citizen to them.