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

Anna Soubry...

Recommended Posts

She is an anti-democratic harridan who does not accept the result of the referendum, but it should stop at political condemnation rather than physical confrontation and bullying in the street. That is never acceptable in a civilised society. Although perhaps we stopped being that long ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, woolley said:

...not accept the result of the referendum

Because no-one has ever lost confidence in something they originally voted for, apparently knowing the facts of the situation in hand?

*cough* Tories *cough* No confidence *cough*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, woolley said:

She is an anti-democratic harridan who does not accept the result of the referendum, but it should stop at political condemnation rather than physical confrontation and bullying in the street. That is never acceptable in a civilised society. Although perhaps we stopped being that long ago.

I partly agree.

The Brexit debate has become too toxic. We have to respect each others rights to disagree - some want to leave the EU and some don't - those are both reasonable positions. Any debate should be about the issues rather than the tribal name-calling a very serious debate has descended into.

BUT...why is she anti-democratic. I can't see what is anti-democratic about campaigning for a different direction. If we could not change our minds we would still have Robert Walpole as Prime Minister along with slavery and sending children up chimneys. At the moment we have a Government following the referendum result and we are set to Leave, this makes me sad but I accept it is the result of a (far from perfect) democratic process. I want this direction to change but I accept this can only happen as a result of a new vote - either a referendum or an election. Why is it undemocratic to promote such a notion?

"Harridan" is a tribal insult and has no place in a mature debate.

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Phillip Dearden said:

I partly agree.

The Brexit debate has become too toxic. We have to respect each others rights to disagree - some want to leave the EU and some don't - those are both reasonable positions. Any debate should be about the issues rather than the tribal name-calling a very serious debate has descended into.

BUT...why is she anti-democratic. I can't see what is anti-democratic about campaigning for a different direction. If we could not change our minds we would still have Robert Walpole as Prime Minister along with slavery and sending children up chimneys. At the moment we have a Government following the referendum result and we are set to Leave, this makes me sad but I accept it is the result of a (far from perfect) democratic process. I want this direction to change but I accept this can only happen as a result of a new vote - either a referendum or an election. Why is it undemocratic to promote such a notion?

"Harridan" is a tribal insult and has no place in a mature debate.

 

 

so you want a vote on everything everytime you lose?

some lost in the first referendum and had to wait 40+ years for another vote.......

it would only be fair and democratic to wait another 40+ years.......

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voting is democracy. How can it not be?  Simply put, a further vote is therefore increasing democracy.

Why are you so worried about another vote? There can only be one reason.

Share this post


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

Voting is democracy. How can it not be?  Simply put, a further vote is therefore increasing democracy.

Why are you so worried about another vote? There can only be one reason.

already had 3 in the last 3 years......

how many more do you want?

 

Share this post


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

Because no-one has ever lost confidence in something they originally voted for, apparently knowing the facts of the situation in hand?

*cough* Tories *cough* No confidence *cough*

"Facts"? That would be as presented by Project Fear since June 2016 now in overdrive, and a supine negotiation conducted by europhiles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

already had 3 in the last 3 years....

3? anyway did having any of those reduce democracy then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Phillip Dearden said:

I partly agree.

The Brexit debate has become too toxic. We have to respect each others rights to disagree - some want to leave the EU and some don't - those are both reasonable positions. Any debate should be about the issues rather than the tribal name-calling a very serious debate has descended into.

BUT...why is she anti-democratic. I can't see what is anti-democratic about campaigning for a different direction. If we could not change our minds we would still have Robert Walpole as Prime Minister along with slavery and sending children up chimneys. At the moment we have a Government following the referendum result and we are set to Leave, this makes me sad but I accept it is the result of a (far from perfect) democratic process. I want this direction to change but I accept this can only happen as a result of a new vote - either a referendum or an election. Why is it undemocratic to promote such a notion?

"Harridan" is a tribal insult and has no place in a mature debate.

 

 

The Brexit debate has become too toxic. - Agree.

We have to respect each others rights to disagree - some want to leave the EU and some don't - those are both reasonable positions. Any debate should be about the issues rather than the tribal name-calling a very serious debate has descended into. - Agree. But seeing as it's just over half for and just under half against on such a divisive issue, I don't know how it's going to happen.

BUT...why is she anti-democratic. etc, why not new vote? etc. - Because Parliament voted overwhelmingly to give the decision to the electorate saying the the result would be enacted. If you don't honour that, trust in Parliament will be totally destroyed.

"Harridan" is a tribal insult and has no place in a mature debate.- Disagree. Harridan is a perfectly valid English noun of long standing which describes Ms Soubry to a tee. The term "tribal insult" is less precise and of dubious worth in this context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

BUT...why is she anti-democratic. etc, why not new vote? etc. - Because Parliament voted overwhelmingly to give the decision to the electorate saying the the result would be enacted. If you don't honour that, trust in Parliament will be totally destroyed.

Utterly simplistic. So no matter what, we have to deliver brexit?    Trust in parliament will be gone if they proceed no matter what now we know what we know now that we didn't when voting.  

 

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×