Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Is anyone else utterly disguscted by the people who run the UK? watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SerLorasTyrell)
    Absolutely everything the original poster said, I feel like I could have almost wrote it myself.
    Did you not feel upset the snp deceived you with some rather blatant lies.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Did you not feel upset the snp deceived you with some rather blatant lies.
    No. I was not voting for the SNP.

    If anything their lies were not nearly as severe as the daily dose we get from Westminster.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SerLorasTyrell)
    No. I was not voting for the SNP.

    If anything their lies were not nearly as severe as the daily dose we get from Westminster.
    Really. I was slightly concerned that they lied about their legal advice on The EU. $113 a barrel for oil. Hidden oil fields and non existent currency unions
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Really. I was slightly concerned that they lied about their legal advice on The EU. $113 a barrel for oil. Hidden oil fields and non existent currency unions
    Why are you dragging this discussion somewhere else? I agree with the OP, deal with it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SerLorasTyrell)
    Why are you dragging this discussion somewhere else? I agree with the OP, deal with it.
    Merely highlighting that because a nationalist party spreads a load of untruths and looses a referendum then things aren't that bad.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Merely highlighting that because a nationalist party spreads a load of untruths and looses a referendum then things aren't that bad.
    Did I even mention the SNP? No. Take your grievances somewhere they will be appreciated.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Raymat)
    At one time university education was completely free and students at the the time were even given massive grants. Why can't it remain like that or atleast remove grants, bursaries, scholarships, sponsorships etc, as these will have no good purpose if university education is free. I believe universities should come back to being funded by the government as these huge tuition fees are repelling some intelligent students from working class backgrounds from going university.
    So cut university places back tot he levels of the 1950s?

    You realise they still are funded by the Government right? Even ignoring that the 'loans' are funded by the taxpayer, the LEA is still contributing £2-4k/year to fees.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    Even 45% of one of constituent nations wanting to leave
    The Yes vote wasn't even that high...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    The Yes vote wasn't even that high...
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...k-9746674.html

    Ok, it was 44.7%, come on. Believe David Cameron was right to declare it an emphatic verdict?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...k-9746674.html

    Ok, it was 44.7%, come on. Believe David Cameron was right to declare it an emphatic verdict?
    No, but it was decisive.

    That link exemplifies why I said it, people with 45% badges are way more annoying than people with Yes badges. making a point of saying they are minority and yet somehow feeling that shows they're right
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...k-9746674.html

    Ok, it was 44.7%, come on. Believe David Cameron was right to declare it an emphatic verdict?
    As an outsider these pictures and sentiments look insane, verging on tin foil hat territory.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    No, but it was decisive.

    That link exemplifies why I said it, people with 45% badges are way more annoying than people with Yes badges. making a point of saying they are minority and yet somehow feeling that shows they're right
    What are you talking about? You're willing to say any old crap as though it's authoritative to anyone who's some apparently anti-establishment crank.
    When confronted with a fact, that the Yes vote was that high, save for 0.3 percent, you make a completely tangential non-point, and act as if it's irrelevant what you just did. That encapsulates so many authoritarian or pro-establishment people I have debated with.

    I prefer to call it totally unquestioning of establishment, than 'pro-establishment' though. I'd be pro-establishment if it was allowed objective scrutiny, to be questioned at all, and to work better for the people.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    As an outsider these pictures and sentiments look insane, verging on tin foil hat territory.
    Don't be stupid. They are just reminding everyone that the future fate of another referendum is far from sealed when changes can occur and when they were less than 6% away this time. It's perfectly legitimate campaigning.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    What are you talking about? You're willing to say any old crap as though it's authoritative to anyone who's some apparently anti-establishment crank.
    When confronted with a fact, that the Yes vote was that high, save for 0.3 percent, you make a completely tangential non-point, and act as if it's irrelevant what you just did. That encapsulates so many authoritarian or pro-establishment people I have debated with.

    I prefer to call it totally unquestioning of establishment, than 'pro-establishment' though. I'd be pro-establishment if it was allowed objective scrutiny, to be questioned at all, and to work better for the people.
    Really?

    I voted twice for Yes, once under my own address, and another under the name of someone who I knew wouldn't be voting.

    It isn't irrelavent. But equally, its not a majority. Montrose lost to Albion 3-4 at the weekend. In terms of the outcome its irrelavent that Montrose scored 3, Albion scored more...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Really?

    I voted twice for Yes, once under my own address, and another under the name of someone who I knew wouldn't be voting.

    It isn't irrelavent. But equally, its not a majority. Montrose lost to Albion 3-4 at the weekend. In terms of the outcome its irrelavent that Montrose scored 3, Albion scored more...
    So? I know that two plus two equal four, and how the referendum was decided. I was talking in terms of complacency, and how close they were to losing a constituent nation. There is denial, complacency, or lack of concern, as evidenced by this thread, and it may well punish them, and contribute to the dissolution of our country, although that is being wrecked in many regards.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    Don't be stupid. They are just reminding everyone that the future fate of another referendum is far from sealed when changes can occur and when they were less than 6% away this time. It's perfectly legitimate campaigning.
    Of course it's legitimate. David Icke is legitimate. That doesn't mean it isn't stupid as hell.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    Of course it's legitimate. David Icke is legitimate. That doesn't mean it isn't stupid as hell.
    It isn't a belief, it's a campaign, you might not like it, you may think it's pointless, but they are simply re-stating that 45% voted Yes. To compare it to conspiracy theorists just shows how ludicrously incapable of objectivity or fairness the pro-establishment often are, and the type of smears they will make towards anyone who has a different sentiment.

    And that's bs about David Icke-he's a crackpot. Why are you equating these things? Because the anti-establishment arouse such discomfort in you that you must fire unfounded nonsense at them.

    I simply cannot belief the infantile and rubbish arguments presented here. I am perfectly prepared to respect people who oppose my point of view if they address points and argue on a thoughtful basis, and have a capacity for objectivity- and accept where they've beaten me even - that would appear to be the difference between me and them, they have no capacity to debate, listen to the other side, and just want unconditional reverence for their point of view. It's an authoritarian mindset.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    It isn't a belief, it's a campaign, you might not like it, you may think it's pointless, but they are simply re-stating that 45% voted Yes. To compare it to conspiracy theorists just shows how ludicrously incapable of objectivity or fairness the pro-establishment often are, and the type of smears they will make towards anyone who has a different sentiment.

    And that's bs about David Icke-he's a crackpot. Why are you equating these things? Because the anti-establishment arouse such discomfort in you that you must fire unfounded nonsense at them.

    I simply cannot belief the infantile and rubbish arguments presented here. I am perfectly prepared to respect people who oppose my point of view if they address points and argue on a thoughtful basis, and have a capacity for objectivity- and accept where they've beaten me even - that would appear to be the difference between me and them, they have no capacity to debate, listen to the other side, and just want unconditional reverence for their point of view. It's an authoritarian mindset.
    They didn't just say that the Yes campaign came second and lost by a somewhat, but not much, smaller margin than originally expected, they said:

    1. the election might have been rigged and that investigations were deliberately sabotaged

    2. the fact that a losing minority, albeit large, wanted something delegitimises the majority who wanted something else

    3. they've constructed this theory by drawing the worst possible picture of their opponents' motivations and the best possible picture of their own; standard practice for sure, but one hopes that people don't actually believe their spin themselves

    The politics.co.uk article in particular could, with a few small changes, have been written by UKIP, yet the SNP claims that UKIP sit on the opposite of the political spectrum to them. This sort of thing belongs in the continental Europe of the 1930s:

    “How about every No voter adopts the nationality of northern English because they certainly aren’t Scottish.”
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    They didn't just say that the Yes campaign came second and lost by a somewhat, but not much, smaller margin than originally expected, they said:

    1. the election might have been rigged and that investigations were deliberately sabotaged

    2. the fact that a losing minority, albeit large, wanted something delegitimises the majority who wanted something else

    3. they've constructed this theory by drawing the worst possible picture of their opponents' motivations and the best possible picture of their own; standard practice for sure, but one hopes that people don't actually believe their spin themselves

    The politics.co.uk article in particular could, with a few small changes, have been written by UKIP, yet the SNP claims that UKIP sit on the opposite of the political spectrum to them. This sort of thing belongs in the continental Europe of the 1930s:

    “How about every No voter adopts the nationality of northern English because they certainly aren’t Scottish.”
    1)There was footage of yes votes going on a no pile.
    2)No, not at all, everyone accepts the way the vote verdict works, they may think something bent went on but everyone accepts the logic of who wins.

    It's nothing to do with de-legitimizing the fact that a majority means that side gets what they want, it is legitimate to point out that you got a lrage share of the vote, and use it to continue the campaign. It's just the same as losing the first leg of a cup tie but rallying to try and win the whole tie. Nothing to do with not accepting the validity of the verdict, that's a separate issue.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    Stupid bureaucracy.
    Innocent people have been up fro extradition and some have gone to the USA whilst being spinelessly abandoned by our politicians
    And some people who claim to be innocent to fight extradition

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ed-States.html

    are actually guilty

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-1m-fraud.html
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 9, 2015
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.