Ann Widdecombe's EU slavery remarks branded as disgusting
Scroll to see replies
Original post by JamesManc
"It's a lot more democratic than the uk"
When the EU president isn't even elected, ok.
When the EU president isn't even elected, ok.
The last PM and the one about to be anointed werent either...
Original post by JamesManc
"It's a lot more democratic than the uk"
When the EU president isn't even elected, ok.
When the EU president isn't even elected, ok.
It is very arguable that the EU is more democratic than the UK, and this is clear to anyone that knows the actual constitutions of both the EU and the UK. It's also weird to be flippant in relation to an unelected President, when Brown and May were unelected. Anyhow, I will demonstrate an argument for the superior democratic nature of the EU by comparing the constitutional compositions, legal processes and political representation. Enjoy.
The legislative constitutional bodies of the EU are: the EU Parliament, Council of the EU, EU Commission and the Council of Ministers. The EU Parliament is directly elected by the citizens across the EU (we elect our MEPs). The Council of the EU’s composition is not fixed - it is composed of government ministers representing their respective departments in accordance with what area of law is at hand. For example, we'd send Amber Rudd to any matter that concerns environmental policy. Thus, our representative is usually the top elected official in their field. The Council of Ministers is composed of the elected head of state from each country (because our head of state is an unelected queen, David Cameron goes instead). The EU Commission is not elected by us. Rather, the Council elects the President of the Commission, with the Council of Ministers appointing the remaining members in conjunction with the Commission’s president.
The Council of Ministers meets every 4 years (should be more frequent) to set out the general principles and direction of the EU. They can make proposals to the EU Commission to examine certain areas and recommend initiating the legislative procedure where necessary.
The one undemocratic aspect of the EU concerns the EU Commission. The Commission has the sole power to propose law, whether recommended by the Council of Ministers or not. However, they cannot (save for very exceptional circumstances, comparable to British Executive Orders) pass law.
The vast majority of law is passed through the “ordinary legislative procedure”. Depending on the area of law, the Commission will consult (Europe wide) with experts and practitioners in the relevant field, local authorities, NGOs and societal representatives. Individual citizens, businesses and other organisations can get involved in this process by visiting http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/consultations/index_en.htm
Subsequently, the Commission then sends their proposed law to the EU Parliament and Council of the EU, who amend, approve or reject the law. If they cannot agree on amendments, it goes to a Second Reading. If they cannot agree amendments at this stage, the directly elected EU Parliament can block the legislation. Alternatively, a “conciliation committee” may be called to try and facilitate an agreement. However, if none can be found, both the EU Parliament or the elected Council of the EU can block the legislation. Simply put, only an agreement between directly elected officials can lead to the passing of law. The Commission cannot block the will of the elected officials. This is clearly a democratic process, although it has its deficit (the EU Commission).
Compare this to the UK system, which is formed of lower and upper houses. Its head of state is a monarchy! A monarchy that is vocal in its will at Privy Council meetings, and privately lobbies the government to impose its own will, and then tries to hide it from the public (the black spider memos is a recent example). A monarchy which has huge international political influence, be it as a trade envoy (Prince Andrew) or as some old bigoted tosser we send to seemingly ruin international relations (Prince Phillip).
I won't go into great detail here, as you probably already know. The House of Commons is directly elected. The House of Lords is completely unelected. It is the only unelected upper house that is larger than the elected lower house (in the world)! By the same token, it is also the largest unelected chamber in the Western world. It is formed by the PM recommending peerages to the queen and is, thus, a house of cronyism. It is a system which allows people like Andrew Lloyd Webber to decide on the future of this country.
Both houses can propose primary and secondary legislation (as can private entities, on rare occasions). After three readings (if de facto necessary) and, if consensus is lacking between the two house, primary and secondary legislation can go back and forth between the two houses until an agreement is reached. For certain primary legislation, the House of Commons has the power to neglect the consent of the Lords, subject to the Lords’ delaying power of one year. However, or secondary legislation, the unelected chamber of the House of Lords can veto legislation, and block the Commons from utilising their mandate (tax credits is a recent example).
Thus, the unelected House of Lords has the power to propose, amend, delay and, if secondary legislation, block law. This unaccountable, unelected power is far greater than the EU Commission's. Its saving grace is that it does not possess the sole power to propose law (most proposed laws come from the government).
Law aside, there is a lot to say when one compares democratic representation in the EU and UK. The EU has a proportional electoral system, the UK has a first-past-the-post system. The difference in democratic fairness is large:
- 2015 UK general election, Tories won 36.9% of the vote share and got 331 seats. Greens and UKIP won 16.4% and got 2 seats. Massively unrepresentative.
- 2014 European Parliament election, UKIP won 26.6% of the vote share and got 24 seats. Labour won 24.4% of the vote share and got 20 seats. Tories won 23.1% of the vote share and got 19 seats. Proportional and representative.
The UK has 73 seats in the EU Parliament, which constitutes 9.7% of the total. Thus, we have 1/10 power in an institution with 28 countries. Our seemingly extra power is due to degressive proportionality, which stipulates representation should be based on population size. Our population is roughly 12.6% of the EU. This 3 percent deficit between population size and representation is prevalent in all 4 major EU states (Germany, UK, France and Italy). With fluid population size in mind, that's impressively representative.
Original post by JamesManc
"It's a lot more democratic than the uk"
When the EU president isn't even elected, ok.
When the EU president isn't even elected, ok.
Are we electing our prime minister? Do we elect our queen? Also what he said^.
(edited 4 years ago)
Original post by Napp
The last PM and the one about to be anointed werent either...
Wrong again, yes they was!
Original post by James2312
Ann widdecombe is a far right horrorbag.As for why she's wrong.................We're not slaves; we've never been castrated or beaten up or murdered or raped as a result of belonging to the EU.We're one of the largest and most powerful nations in the EU who have chosen to work collaboratively in a common market with our allies.We gain a lot out of it and it's ridiculous to make comparisons to slavery.People like her are stuck in the past still fighting WW2.Except they don't seem to realise that most of the EU were actually on our side in that war.
Apart from the far right horrorbag insult, your post is good.
You highlight how Ann widdecombes statement was misleading or used out of context comparisons to our EU membership, I agree with you if you had just left it at that, that factual part of your arugement was brilliant, sharp and factual.
Unfortunately you ruin it by adding in you're opinion as fact that Ann is far right, living in the past and a horrorbag!
Original post by Napp
You’re trying to argue with a person whose sole means of communicating is stamping their feet in a fit of moral outrage, calling everyone kids and accusing everyone else of slander. You’d have better luck debating a tree 😂
As my lad would say - LOL just LOL!
Original post by JamesManc
If you put her quote into context of what she actually said in her speech it fits in perfectly:
'oppressed people turn against their oppresors, slaves against their owners, peasantry against the feudal barons, colonies against their empires.'
'oppressed people turn against their oppresors, slaves against their owners, peasantry against the feudal barons, colonies against their empires.'
They either don't understand the context in which Ann was speaking or they deliberately misinterpreting them for political gain.
Original post by Bashtopher
It is very arguable that the EU is more democratic than the UK, and this is clear to anyone that knows the actual constitutions of both the EU and the UK. It's also weird to be flippant in relation to an unelected President, when Brown and May were unelected. Anyhow, I will demonstrate an argument for the superior democratic nature of the EU by comparing the constitutional compositions, legal processes and political representation. Enjoy.
The legislative constitutional bodies of the EU are: the EU Parliament, Council of the EU, EU Commission and the Council of Ministers. The EU Parliament is directly elected by the citizens across the EU (we elect our MEPs). The Council of the EU’s composition is not fixed - it is composed of government ministers representing their respective departments in accordance with what area of law is at hand. For example, we'd send Amber Rudd to any matter that concerns environmental policy. Thus, our representative is usually the top elected official in their field. The Council of Ministers is composed of the elected head of state from each country (because our head of state is an unelected queen, David Cameron goes instead). The EU Commission is not elected by us. Rather, the Council elects the President of the Commission, with the Council of Ministers appointing the remaining members in conjunction with the Commission’s president.
The Council of Ministers meets every 4 years (should be more frequent) to set out the general principles and direction of the EU. They can make proposals to the EU Commission to examine certain areas and recommend initiating the legislative procedure where necessary.
The one undemocratic aspect of the EU concerns the EU Commission. The Commission has the sole power to propose law, whether recommended by the Council of Ministers or not. However, they cannot (save for very exceptional circumstances, comparable to British Executive Orders) pass law.
The vast majority of law is passed through the “ordinary legislative procedure”. Depending on the area of law, the Commission will consult (Europe wide) with experts and practitioners in the relevant field, local authorities, NGOs and societal representatives. Individual citizens, businesses and other organisations can get involved in this process by visiting http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/consultations/index_en.htm
Subsequently, the Commission then sends their proposed law to the EU Parliament and Council of the EU, who amend, approve or reject the law. If they cannot agree on amendments, it goes to a Second Reading. If they cannot agree amendments at this stage, the directly elected EU Parliament can block the legislation. Alternatively, a “conciliation committee” may be called to try and facilitate an agreement. However, if none can be found, both the EU Parliament or the elected Council of the EU can block the legislation. Simply put, only an agreement between directly elected officials can lead to the passing of law. The Commission cannot block the will of the elected officials. This is clearly a democratic process, although it has its deficit (the EU Commission).
Compare this to the UK system, which is formed of lower and upper houses. Its head of state is a monarchy! A monarchy that is vocal in its will at Privy Council meetings, and privately lobbies the government to impose its own will, and then tries to hide it from the public (the black spider memos is a recent example). A monarchy which has huge international political influence, be it as a trade envoy (Prince Andrew) or as some old bigoted tosser we send to seemingly ruin international relations (Prince Phillip).
I won't go into great detail here, as you probably already know. The House of Commons is directly elected. The House of Lords is completely unelected. It is the only unelected upper house that is larger than the elected lower house (in the world)! By the same token, it is also the largest unelected chamber in the Western world. It is formed by the PM recommending peerages to the queen and is, thus, a house of cronyism. It is a system which allows people like Andrew Lloyd Webber to decide on the future of this country.
Both houses can propose primary and secondary legislation (as can private entities, on rare occasions). After three readings (if de facto necessary) and, if consensus is lacking between the two house, primary and secondary legislation can go back and forth between the two houses until an agreement is reached. For certain primary legislation, the House of Commons has the power to neglect the consent of the Lords, subject to the Lords’ delaying power of one year. However, or secondary legislation, the unelected chamber of the House of Lords can veto legislation, and block the Commons from utilising their mandate (tax credits is a recent example).
Thus, the unelected House of Lords has the power to propose, amend, delay and, if secondary legislation, block law. This unaccountable, unelected power is far greater than the EU Commission's. Its saving grace is that it does not possess the sole power to propose law (most proposed laws come from the government).
Law aside, there is a lot to say when one compares democratic representation in the EU and UK. The EU has a proportional electoral system, the UK has a first-past-the-post system. The difference in democratic fairness is large:
- 2015 UK general election, Tories won 36.9% of the vote share and got 331 seats. Greens and UKIP won 16.4% and got 2 seats. Massively unrepresentative.
- 2014 European Parliament election, UKIP won 26.6% of the vote share and got 24 seats. Labour won 24.4% of the vote share and got 20 seats. Tories won 23.1% of the vote share and got 19 seats. Proportional and representative.
The UK has 73 seats in the EU Parliament, which constitutes 9.7% of the total. Thus, we have 1/10 power in an institution with 28 countries. Our seemingly extra power is due to degressive proportionality, which stipulates representation should be based on population size. Our population is roughly 12.6% of the EU. This 3 percent deficit between population size and representation is prevalent in all 4 major EU states (Germany, UK, France and Italy). With fluid population size in mind, that's impressively representative.
The legislative constitutional bodies of the EU are: the EU Parliament, Council of the EU, EU Commission and the Council of Ministers. The EU Parliament is directly elected by the citizens across the EU (we elect our MEPs). The Council of the EU’s composition is not fixed - it is composed of government ministers representing their respective departments in accordance with what area of law is at hand. For example, we'd send Amber Rudd to any matter that concerns environmental policy. Thus, our representative is usually the top elected official in their field. The Council of Ministers is composed of the elected head of state from each country (because our head of state is an unelected queen, David Cameron goes instead). The EU Commission is not elected by us. Rather, the Council elects the President of the Commission, with the Council of Ministers appointing the remaining members in conjunction with the Commission’s president.
The Council of Ministers meets every 4 years (should be more frequent) to set out the general principles and direction of the EU. They can make proposals to the EU Commission to examine certain areas and recommend initiating the legislative procedure where necessary.
The one undemocratic aspect of the EU concerns the EU Commission. The Commission has the sole power to propose law, whether recommended by the Council of Ministers or not. However, they cannot (save for very exceptional circumstances, comparable to British Executive Orders) pass law.
The vast majority of law is passed through the “ordinary legislative procedure”. Depending on the area of law, the Commission will consult (Europe wide) with experts and practitioners in the relevant field, local authorities, NGOs and societal representatives. Individual citizens, businesses and other organisations can get involved in this process by visiting http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/consultations/index_en.htm
Subsequently, the Commission then sends their proposed law to the EU Parliament and Council of the EU, who amend, approve or reject the law. If they cannot agree on amendments, it goes to a Second Reading. If they cannot agree amendments at this stage, the directly elected EU Parliament can block the legislation. Alternatively, a “conciliation committee” may be called to try and facilitate an agreement. However, if none can be found, both the EU Parliament or the elected Council of the EU can block the legislation. Simply put, only an agreement between directly elected officials can lead to the passing of law. The Commission cannot block the will of the elected officials. This is clearly a democratic process, although it has its deficit (the EU Commission).
Compare this to the UK system, which is formed of lower and upper houses. Its head of state is a monarchy! A monarchy that is vocal in its will at Privy Council meetings, and privately lobbies the government to impose its own will, and then tries to hide it from the public (the black spider memos is a recent example). A monarchy which has huge international political influence, be it as a trade envoy (Prince Andrew) or as some old bigoted tosser we send to seemingly ruin international relations (Prince Phillip).
I won't go into great detail here, as you probably already know. The House of Commons is directly elected. The House of Lords is completely unelected. It is the only unelected upper house that is larger than the elected lower house (in the world)! By the same token, it is also the largest unelected chamber in the Western world. It is formed by the PM recommending peerages to the queen and is, thus, a house of cronyism. It is a system which allows people like Andrew Lloyd Webber to decide on the future of this country.
Both houses can propose primary and secondary legislation (as can private entities, on rare occasions). After three readings (if de facto necessary) and, if consensus is lacking between the two house, primary and secondary legislation can go back and forth between the two houses until an agreement is reached. For certain primary legislation, the House of Commons has the power to neglect the consent of the Lords, subject to the Lords’ delaying power of one year. However, or secondary legislation, the unelected chamber of the House of Lords can veto legislation, and block the Commons from utilising their mandate (tax credits is a recent example).
Thus, the unelected House of Lords has the power to propose, amend, delay and, if secondary legislation, block law. This unaccountable, unelected power is far greater than the EU Commission's. Its saving grace is that it does not possess the sole power to propose law (most proposed laws come from the government).
Law aside, there is a lot to say when one compares democratic representation in the EU and UK. The EU has a proportional electoral system, the UK has a first-past-the-post system. The difference in democratic fairness is large:
- 2015 UK general election, Tories won 36.9% of the vote share and got 331 seats. Greens and UKIP won 16.4% and got 2 seats. Massively unrepresentative.
- 2014 European Parliament election, UKIP won 26.6% of the vote share and got 24 seats. Labour won 24.4% of the vote share and got 20 seats. Tories won 23.1% of the vote share and got 19 seats. Proportional and representative.
The UK has 73 seats in the EU Parliament, which constitutes 9.7% of the total. Thus, we have 1/10 power in an institution with 28 countries. Our seemingly extra power is due to degressive proportionality, which stipulates representation should be based on population size. Our population is roughly 12.6% of the EU. This 3 percent deficit between population size and representation is prevalent in all 4 major EU states (Germany, UK, France and Italy). With fluid population size in mind, that's impressively representative.
Interesting, you clearly know how UK and EU poltics works. However you contradict yourself, you're own text proves your first paragraph incorrect. Brown and May was elected, which leaves me wondering have you copy/paste from somewhere?
Original post by Burton Bridge
They either don't understand the context in which Ann was speaking or they deliberately misinterpreting them for political gain.
Interesting, you clearly know how UK and EU poltics works. However you contradict yourself, you're own text proves your first paragraph incorrect. Brown and May was elected, which leaves me wondering have you copy/paste from somewhere?
Interesting, you clearly know how UK and EU poltics works. However you contradict yourself, you're own text proves your first paragraph incorrect. Brown and May was elected, which leaves me wondering have you copy/paste from somewhere?
Those are all my own words. I taught public law at university, so I know a little.
Brown never won a general election, hence "unelected". May was an unelected PM before she held are snap election and lost her majority (but, simultaneously, became elected as PM).
Boris will also become an unelected PM (That is, becoming PM without winning a general election). Which is funny, considering his views on when Gordon Brown took over from Blair. See:
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/06/without-mandate-british-people-how-boris-johnson-described-gordon-brown-2007?amp
Original post by Bashtopher
Those are all my own words. I taught public law at university, so I know a little.
Brown never won a general election, hence "unelected". May was an unelected PM before she held are snap election and lost her majority (but, simultaneously, became elected as PM).
Boris will also become an unelected PM (That is, becoming PM without winning a general election). Which is funny, considering his views on when Gordon Brown took over from Blair. See:
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/06/without-mandate-british-people-how-boris-johnson-described-gordon-brown-2007?amp
Brown never won a general election, hence "unelected". May was an unelected PM before she held are snap election and lost her majority (but, simultaneously, became elected as PM).
Boris will also become an unelected PM (That is, becoming PM without winning a general election). Which is funny, considering his views on when Gordon Brown took over from Blair. See:
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/06/without-mandate-british-people-how-boris-johnson-described-gordon-brown-2007?amp
We have never elected a PM in the history of our country! Unless you live in Maidenhead you have not got the chance to vote for or against Theresa May.
Original post by Burton Bridge
They either don't understand the context in which Ann was speaking or they deliberately misinterpreting them for political gain.
Interesting, you clearly know how UK and EU poltics works. However you contradict yourself, you're own text proves your first paragraph incorrect. Brown and May was elected, which leaves me wondering have you copy/paste from somewhere?
Interesting, you clearly know how UK and EU poltics works. However you contradict yourself, you're own text proves your first paragraph incorrect. Brown and May was elected, which leaves me wondering have you copy/paste from somewhere?
No May was elected by Tory party members after Leadsom pulled out,so she ran uncontested.Boris Johnson will probably also be elected by Tory party members in a few weeks.Thats different to a proper election which asks the entire public.
Furthermore 17 million voted to leave the EU but they didn't say how to leave it.They didn't say Brexit in ALL circumstances.But now Johnson is saying he will take us out on 31st October with or without a deal.But 17 million people didn't vote for No-Deal.They voted for Brexit.But that doesn't mean they all agree that we should leave without a deal.
Original post by James2312
No May was elected by Tory party members after Leadsom pulled out,so she ran uncontested.Boris Johnson will probably also be elected by Tory party members in a few weeks.Thats different to a proper election which asks the entire public.
Furthermore 17 million voted to leave the EU but they didn't say how to leave it.They didn't say Brexit in ALL circumstances.But now Johnson is saying he will take us out on 31st October with or without a deal.But 17 million people didn't vote for No-Deal.They voted for Brexit.But that doesn't mean they all agree that we should leave without a deal.
Furthermore 17 million voted to leave the EU but they didn't say how to leave it.They didn't say Brexit in ALL circumstances.But now Johnson is saying he will take us out on 31st October with or without a deal.But 17 million people didn't vote for No-Deal.They voted for Brexit.But that doesn't mean they all agree that we should leave without a deal.
You've entered the rabbit hole here buddy.
Original post by Burton Bridge
We have never elected a PM in the history of our country! Unless you live in Maidenhead you have not got the chance to vote for or against Theresa May.
It is common political parlance to describe an MP that has been elevated to the position of PM as "unelected". That is a fact. Just like the facts I described above about EU and UK democracy, which you are seemingly trying to obfuscate by 1) ignoring the common description of an unelected PM, and 2) by somewhat accusing me of copying and pasting from elsewhere. I've noticed through talking to brexiteers and remainers alike, that people like to ignore or not engage with facts. Oh well, it's why we're here in the first place.
Regardless, even if you don't accept the notion of an "unelected" PM, then you can't see the problem of an unelected EU President (which was one of the reasons for my response). So no harm done either way, eh?
Original post by Burton Bridge
Wrong again, yes they was!
Again? No.
Brown was not elected. May was neither elected (she got it by default) not did she have a majority. Same goes for Johnson. Not only was he elected by nobody to be PM he also will be PM of a minority government and thus have no popular mandate.
Original post by Burton Bridge
As my lad would say - LOL just LOL!
I rest my case, m'lud.
Original post by James2312
No May was elected by Tory party members after Leadsom pulled out,so she ran uncontested.Boris Johnson will probably also be elected by Tory party members in a few weeks.Thats different to a proper election which asks the entire public.
Incorrect - I refer you to my post #29
Original post by James2312
Furthermore 17 million voted to leave the EU but they didn't say how to leave it.They didn't say Brexit in ALL circumstances.But now Johnson is saying he will take us out on 31st October with or without a deal.But 17 million people didn't vote for No-Deal.They voted for Brexit.But that doesn't mean they all agree that we should leave without a deal.
Furthermore 17 million voted to leave the EU but they didn't say how to leave it.They didn't say Brexit in ALL circumstances.But now Johnson is saying he will take us out on 31st October with or without a deal.But 17 million people didn't vote for No-Deal.They voted for Brexit.But that doesn't mean they all agree that we should leave without a deal.
This is true however Johnson has also made it clear that a deal is what he would like as a first choice. As I have said before over several topics, the EU, they have offered us what we asked for, several times. Brexiteers they have been frozen out of the negotiation process and deals favoured by the brexiteers was rejected by the remainer Parliamentarians, deals asked for by remainers have been rejected by remainer parliamentarians.
This whole mess is down to a tiny group of hard core remainers, making up a tiny tiny fraction of the electorate and a small fraction of the remain vote being over represented in Parliament despite majority of Parliament standing on brexit manifestos.
Borris is simply say he won't put up with it any longer, Brexit needs to be done for the majority of the country not the tiny fraction currently holding us back.
Original post by Napp
Again? No.
Brown was not elected. May was neither elected (she got it by default) not did she have a majority. Same goes for Johnson. Not only was he elected by nobody to be PM he also will be PM of a minority government and thus have no popular mandate.
I rest my case, m'lud.
Brown was not elected. May was neither elected (she got it by default) not did she have a majority. Same goes for Johnson. Not only was he elected by nobody to be PM he also will be PM of a minority government and thus have no popular mandate.
I rest my case, m'lud.
No they wasn't, that's not how our democracy works as I have pointed out above. Telling a untruth several times does not make it any more true. Neither does insulting me
Original post by Burton Bridge
Incorrect - I refer you to my post #29
This is true however Johnson has also made it clear that a deal is what he would like as a first choice. As I have said before over several topics, the EU, they have offered us what we asked for, several times. Brexiteers they have been frozen out of the negotiation process and deals favoured by the brexiteers was rejected by the remainer Parliamentarians, deals asked for by remainers have been rejected by remainer parliamentarians.
This whole mess is down to a tiny group of hard core remainers, making up a tiny tiny fraction of the electorate and a small fraction of the remain vote being over represented in Parliament despite majority of Parliament standing on brexit manifestos.
This is true however Johnson has also made it clear that a deal is what he would like as a first choice. As I have said before over several topics, the EU, they have offered us what we asked for, several times. Brexiteers they have been frozen out of the negotiation process and deals favoured by the brexiteers was rejected by the remainer Parliamentarians, deals asked for by remainers have been rejected by remainer parliamentarians.
This whole mess is down to a tiny group of hard core remainers, making up a tiny tiny fraction of the electorate and a small fraction of the remain vote being over represented in Parliament despite majority of Parliament standing on brexit manifestos.
Are you completely incapable of ;laying the blame anywhere bare you conspiracy theory of treacherous remainers?
Not to mention the rest of your assertions are opinions bereft of fact, or ironic, ..or simply both.
Original post by Burton Bridge
No they wasn't, that's not how our democracy works as I have pointed out above. Telling a untruth several times does not make it any more true. Neither does insulting me
Wasnt?
Are you honestly trying to contend that those 2 (nevermind Johnson) were elected by the public to lead? You're obviously lying here then.
Then why do you keep doing it?
I didn't insult you in any conceivable way.
Original post by Bashtopher
It is common political parlance to describe an MP that has been elevated to the position of PM as "unelected". That is a fact. Just like the facts I described above about EU and UK democracy, which you are seemingly trying to obfuscate by 1) ignoring the common description of an unelected PM, and 2) by somewhat accusing me of copying and pasting from elsewhere. I've noticed through talking to brexiteers and remainers alike, that people like to ignore or not engage with facts. Oh well, it's why we're here in the first place.
Regardless, even if you don't accept the notion of an "unelected" PM, then you can't see the problem of an unelected EU President (which was one of the reasons for my response). So no harm done either way, eh?
Regardless, even if you don't accept the notion of an "unelected" PM, then you can't see the problem of an unelected EU President (which was one of the reasons for my response). So no harm done either way, eh?
I think we need a little virtual tea break, firstly I apologise for if I caused offence asking you If you copied and paste your post. I only asked the question because of the quality of your text (was high) verses that the contradiction that you made within it was clumsy and unlikely (in my mind) to have been written by the person that held such vast knowledge.
Your point I agree with, is that cherry-picking facts certainly happens from both brexiteers and remainers alike to suit their political point. However you seem to be thinking that because I am pointing out of fact that I agree with it, what I am pointing out to you as being incorrect which it is, is not necessarily same as what I agree with. I disagree with the House of Lords and delete the House of Lords should be abolished I also disagree with the unelected bureaucrats of the EU.
I simply have a problem with both of them, You see I am not trying to make svore political point, I'm merely pointing out the flaws in your argument
Original post by Napp
Are you completely incapable of ;laying the blame anywhere bare you conspiracy theory of treacherous remainers?
Not to mention the rest of your assertions are opinions bereft of fact, or ironic, ..or simply both.
Not to mention the rest of your assertions are opinions bereft of fact, or ironic, ..or simply both.
I said insults would follow, please debate and use your superior intellect you believe to hold over me, to prove me wrong.
You can start by explaining for example, ho somebody who lives in say north summerset can they vote for Theresa May, God speed!
(edited 4 years ago)
Original post by Burton Bridge
I said insults would follow, please debate and use your superior impact you can leave to have over me, to prove me wrong.
You can start by telling somebody who lives in say north summerset for example how can they vote for Theresa May, God speed
You can start by telling somebody who lives in say north summerset for example how can they vote for Theresa May, God speed
I strongly suggest you look up the definition of an insult because there are none here.
Err are you serious? by voting Tory ?
That is how our electoral system now functions. You rarely vote based on your local representitive (who is not democratically placed, that is another story though) people generally vote based on the head of the party ergo May. As it happens though I was referring to her becoming PM without an election. This is more salient for Johnson as he doesnt have a majority and thus has no electoral mandate to lead to carpool in whitehall let alone the country.Quick Reply
Related discussions
- University of Bath, near missed offer for BSc in Economics
- Why is Queen Anne known as 'Anne Gloria'?
- University of Bristol - MS Datascience
- OMG is this for real? TV in the 70s was sooo racist
- Oxford College hurt/heal
- How to create a copyright free logo
- Can immigration actually been controlled?
- Accommodation for Post-grads...
- Uni of York accomodation
- Ann Summers interview (HELP ASAP)
- Higher English Prelim
- Oxford colleges for maths
- How to get a job abroad in a gap year?
- Which Oxford colleges have the best kitchen and en-suite access?
- Name a girl's name which starts with the last letter of the above name
- How is Jekyll presented in the middle and end of his confession
- Transaction writing. Please mark!
- becoming an Ann Summers rep
- appealing gcse grades
- Offer holders hyms 2023
Latest
Last reply 1 minute ago
Cambridge interview for MPhil in population health sciencesLast reply 1 minute ago
HSBC Degree Apprenticeship 2024Last reply 1 minute ago
TSR Study Together - STEM vs Humanities - Ninth SessionLast reply 2 minutes ago
LSE International Social and Public Policy and Economics (LLK1) 2024 ThreadLast reply 3 minutes ago
Goldmansachs Degree Apprenticeship 2024Last reply 5 minutes ago
Official: University of Birmingham A100 2024 Entry ApplicantsMedical Schools
1035
Posted 5 minutes ago
Is it possible to change what course I applied for after getting an offer?Last reply 7 minutes ago
AQA A Level Music Written Paper: Appraising (7272/W) - Mon 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]Last reply 7 minutes ago
Official University College London Applicant Thread for 2024Last reply 8 minutes ago
Application to Royal Conservatoire Scotland (RCS) 2024Last reply 10 minutes ago
Official Cambridge Postgraduate Applicants 2024 ThreadLast reply 11 minutes ago
Do NOT attend if you're planning to do accountancy/financeLast reply 11 minutes ago
Home Office: Immigration Enforcement Casework Support AO 2024Last reply 11 minutes ago
Official: King's College London A101 EMDP 2024 Entry ApplicantsMedical Schools
1013
Last reply 12 minutes ago
SIP civil service 2024 threadTrending
Last reply 5 days ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 6 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 5 days ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 6 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
