Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
La Colombe

Brexit Is Reversible...

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, pongo said:

A small majority voted in favour of leaving. But there is no sensible or rational reason to believe that a majority see the EU as "loathsome". There is very little difference between a moderate Euro-sceptic who voted Leave and a moderate Euro-sceptic who voted Remain. Those who see the EU as "loathsome" are a crackpot minority.

Populism is about simplistic easy answers. It appeals to simple people looking for easy answers. Common sensers.

There is no reason to believe this. The most likely outcome is gradual evolution. These doomsday scenarios never come to pass. Clearly the EU is transitional. Ultimately the majority of the world will play by the same rules and compete on level ground. As we already increasingly do in so many important areas.

Small or large majority, it was a majority and the EU is loathsome. It is corrupt, corrupting, and profoundly undemocratic. What's not to find loathsome about that alone?

Population is about what is popular amongst the hoi polloi, and governments are supposed to adopt strategies based on the will of them. We are supposed to have politicians who represent the will of the electorate, not a management team or bosses and that is a sentiment far more prevalent and demanded in the Eastern nation states of the EU but is spreading amongst the PIGS nation states.

As for the future of the EU, it's worth keeping in mind the fate of the USSR and if in spite of the huge power of The Kremlin the USSR imploded because of the will of the people the EU has no chance.

Best to establish and maintain both literal and figurative clear blue water between the UK and the EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Rog said:

We are supposed to have politicians who represent the will of the electorate

Not really no.

You elect politicians who can best represent you locally. That's how the system works. And a politician should not adopt policy which they believe is popular - they stand on what they believe and you choose whether or not to support them. That's why you should shut the door on any politician who asks you what you think the issues are. It's for them to tell you what they believe in.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And more than that you should vote for the best candidate. Even if you don't agree with them on everything.

The bloke who agrees with the majority of the electorate may very well be a total moron. That's not a case for electing him.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, your five minutes of a cheap laugh are up, not really fair to leave it up any longer. 

Edited by La Colombe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pongo said:

After 2019 the relationship with the EU will no longer be a ballot box issue. Because it will be about the small print and legal meaning of thousands of agreements and technical standards. The same as the UK's relationship with UN bodies or the OECD is not an election issue ( - nobody asks their MP about shipping regulation or international tax). Democracy will have been removed from these processes. Well done. Own goal.

delusional.........

1 hour ago, pongo said:

You're pretending. You know full well that it makes no difference whether the UK is officially in or out.

delusional.........

1 hour ago, mojomonkey said:

So the reasoning here is that anyone who voted leave can do nothing wrong and anyone who voted leave is responsible for anything that doesn't go to plan. What a total cop out. 

correct......

1 hour ago, pongo said:

He's on the back foot because he knows they are losing. And even if they win, they lose. Because they are fighting the tide. It's not even about winning the arguments anymore. There is only one lot of outcomes. Deal or no deal makes no difference.

If a deal is rejected Britain will get it anyhow later. After the shouting is over.

delusional.........

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pongo said:

Not really no.

You elect politicians who can best represent you locally. That's how the system works. And a politician should not adopt policy which they believe is popular - they stand on what they believe and you choose whether or not to support them. That's why you should shut the door on any politician who asks you what you think the issues are. It's for them to tell you what they believe in.

Over here we benefit from having political parties who publish manifesto but who also have local constitutional meetings so that while manifesto promises are like an mot, the moment the car leaves the test centre the not simply shows that at a point in time the vehicle passed the requirements it's no guarantee that it will be fit the next day but it does at least allow us to vote for national issues. Likewise the constitutional meetings give us some degree of control and feedback to our MP.

The last thing that a prospective candidate should be decided upon is their views on local matters. That is what our local councilors are for and for the most part they do a good job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, pongo said:

And more than that you should vote for the best candidate. Even if you don't agree with them on everything.

The bloke who agrees with the majority of the electorate may very well be a total moron. That's not a case for electing him.

No. We vote for the party, or increasingly we vote strategically if by so doing we might queer the pitch of a party that we dislike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rog said:

No. We vote for the party, or increasingly we vote strategically if by so doing we might queer the pitch of a party that we dislike.

So you'd vote for the moron - if the moron was in the right party - or to prevent a party you disliked from being elected. And yet you talk about democracy. Never sure what you like but you know what you hate.

I'm certainly beginning to understand why you people don't like experts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, pongo said:

So you'd vote for the moron - if the moron was in the right party - or to prevent a party you disliked from being elected. And yet you talk about democracy. Never sure what you like but you know what you hate.

I'm certainly beginning to understand why you people don't like experts.

Yes I would and in the past have voted strategically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, pongo said:

So you'd vote for the moron - if the moron was in the right party - or to prevent a party you disliked from being elected. And yet you talk about democracy. Never sure what you like but you know what you hate.

I'm certainly beginning to understand why you people don't like experts.

That' the very definition of democracy though isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lxxx said:

That' the very definition of democracy though isn't it?

Idiocracy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Rog said:

Yes I would and in the past have voted strategically.

Tactical voting shows that UK democracy is broken.  To vote for the candidate you least hate is a shitty choice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

Tactical voting shows that UK democracy is broken.  To vote for the candidate you least hate is a shitty choice. 

Not broken, but needs to be used in a way that delivers the closest to the government that a person wants while if necessary minimises the possibility of a government or candidate that a person doesn't want.

There is of course a huge problem in the case of marginal seats whereby a small number of them can end up controlling the outcome of an election so parties concentrate on winning them and to hell with their safe seats.

I favour proportional representation.

Edited by Rog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

Tactical voting shows that UK democracy is broken.  To vote for the candidate you least hate is a shitty choice. 

That's not what strategic voting is about nor how it works.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×