Ann Widdecombe's EU slavery remarks branded as disgusting Watch

Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#41
Report 1 week ago
#41
(Original post by Napp)
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.
I don't think you understand what I'm saying or the UK political system. I cannot keep repeating myself over and over we don't appoint cabinet ministers including the PM via current the British electoral system.

This is fact
1
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#42
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#42
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
I don't think you understand what I'm saying or the UK political system. I cannot keep repeating myself over and over we don't appoint cabinet ministers including the PM via current the British electoral system.

This is fact
No this just means you dont understand the system.
During an election you do not just vote for your local MP, to be, you de facto pass a vote for the leader of the party and thus the PM.
I never said anything about CM's, that is the prerogative of the chief piggy.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#43
Report 1 week ago
#43
(Original post by Napp)
No this just means you dont understand the system.
During an election you do not just vote for your local MP, to be, you de facto pass a vote for the leader of the party and thus the PM.
I never said anything about CM's, that is the prerogative of the chief piggy.
That is true and chief piggy as you called it is the head of the cabinet!

You are confusing issues, such as voting trends between general and local elections and the actual electoral political system. We are not a republic we don't vote for the p.m like, it's totally different system to how president's are elected.


You are simply wrong
0
reply
Trotsky's Iceaxe
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#44
Report 1 week ago
#44
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
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.
Another day and we see you continue to mindlessly the parrot the it is someone else's fault for the Brexit train wreck narrative. This whole fiasco could have been avoided if Brexiters had drawn up detailed withdrawal plans before the 2016 referendum. Instead no one bothered and now you are trying to find someone else to blame.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#45
Report 1 week ago
#45
(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.
Wrong again on the contrary they are very factual;

Who rejected the Canada deal the EU president offered on requested of uk brexiteers? Answer Theresa May a remainer parliament parliamentarian

Who rejected the cheques deal? Answer Theresa May a remainer parliament parliamentarian.

It goes on and on and on

Who rejected an exit agreement they had previously said they agree with -answer remainer Parliamentarians

Hey #shocker



(Original post by Trotsky's Iceaxe)
Another day and we see you continue to mindlessly the parrot the it is someone else's fault for the Brexit train wreck narrative. This whole fiasco could have been avoided if Brexiters had drawn up detailed withdrawal plans before the 2016 referendum. Instead no one bothered and now you are trying to find someone else to blame.
Oh hi, you have a two posts to answer in other topics which I predicted you would ignore because you are wrong!

Thank you for the insult but your written text is proving who is actually is, as you described me - mindlessly parroting!
Last edited by Burton Bridge; 1 week ago
0
reply
Trotsky's Iceaxe
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#46
Report 1 week ago
#46
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Oh hi, you have a two posts to answer in other topics which I predicted you would ignore because you are wrong!
I haven't bothered to read your response as I'm already aware that your grasp of politics is extremely myopic.

Thank you for the insult but your written text is proving who is actually, as you described me - mindlessly parroting!
Pointing out the failure of Brexit supporters of adequately plan is not an insult. It is a fact. That it offends you and you feel insulted by it does not change that fact, so stop playing the victim.
1
reply
z-hog
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#47
Report 1 week ago
#47
(Original post by Trotsky's Iceaxe)
Another day and we see you continue to mindlessly the parrot the it is someone else's fault for the Brexit train wreck narrative. This whole fiasco could have been avoided if Brexiters had drawn up detailed withdrawal plans before the 2016 referendum. Instead no one bothered and now you are trying to find someone else to blame.
Typical bogus and fictitious argument, another construct of the Remain camp. The withdrawal plan was to become independent from the EU, the details were to be negotiated at the table at a later stage but that was all that could responsibly be said. These issues don't really exist, they're just smoke-bombs from Remainers.
0
reply
Trotsky's Iceaxe
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#48
Report 1 week ago
#48
(Original post by z-hog)
Typical bogus and fictitious argument, another construct of the Remain camp. The withdrawal plan was to become independent from the EU, the details were to be negotiated at the table at a later stage but that was all that could responsibly be said. These issues don't really exist, they're just smoke-bombs from Remainers.
You go into negotiations with some kind of plan of what you are trying to negotiate. Instead the UK was woefully underprepared and the negotiations resulted in an agreement that too many people, including hardcore Breixteers, simply did not find palatable.

So thank you for reinforcing my point.
2
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#49
Report 1 week ago
#49
(Original post by z-hog)
Typical bogus and fictitious argument, another construct of the Remain camp. The withdrawal plan was to become independent from the EU, the details were to be negotiated at the table at a later stage but that was all that could responsibly be said. These issues don't really exist, they're just smoke-bombs from Remainers.
Correct and this was rejected by remainer parliamentarians, dispite then publicly several times saying they support the withdrawal agreement.

There is no way this can be the fault of anyone else other than parliament and the tiny fraction of hard remainers who are desperate to sabotage the process so they create and present a fallacious argument to get their own way.

Trotsky's Iceaxe is avoiding posts I make because he knows I'm correct.
Last edited by Burton Bridge; 1 week ago
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#50
Report 1 week ago
#50
(Original post by Trotsky's Iceaxe)
You go into negotiations with some kind of plan of what you are trying to negotiate. Instead the UK was woefully underprepared and the negotiations resulted in an agreement that too many people, including hardcore Breixteers, simply did not find palatable.

So thank you for reinforcing my point.
Only that it not entirely true, it is partially true but it only tells a fraction of the story around May's deal, which was created by a remainer parliamentarian! #shocker
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#51
Report 1 week ago
#51
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Correct and this was rejected by remainer parliamentarians, dispite then publicly several times saying they support the withdrawal agreement.

There is no way this can be the fault of anyone else other than parliament and the tiny fraction of hard remainers who are desperate to sabotage the process so they can make out
Of course it is, Brexit hasn't happened only because of the sabotaging of the whole thing by the Remain body of interests. They may fool their own but they don't fool us, eh?
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#52
Report 1 week ago
#52
(Original post by z-hog)
Of course it is, Brexit hasn't happened only because of the sabotaging of the whole thing by the Remain body of interests. They may fool their own but they don't fool us, eh?
It's easy to win debate when you're correct and your opponent is incorrect. For example, We don't vote for a pm - fact.

All they have left is insults, but they are only making themselves look stupid
Last edited by Burton Bridge; 1 week ago
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#53
Report 1 week ago
#53
(Original post by Trotsky's Iceaxe)
You go into negotiations with some kind of plan of what you are trying to negotiate. Instead the UK was woefully underprepared and the negotiations resulted in an agreement that too many people, including hardcore Breixteers, simply did not find palatable.

So thank you for reinforcing my point.
Not enough meat to comment on, maybe May was determined all along that Brexit would mean anything but. Her deal was never hers, it was co-authored by the EU themselves. What you mean is that we should have gone in prepared to stay attached instead of independent, probably.
0
reply
James2312
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#54
Report 1 week ago
#54
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
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!
Surely this just destroys your original argument that the UK is more democratic? You can't vote for Theresa May because of the first past the Post system.The EU doesn't have that.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#55
Report 1 week ago
#55
(Original post by James2312)
Surely this just destroys your original argument that the UK is more democratic? You can't vote for Theresa May because of the first past the Post system.The EU doesn't have that.
I'm sorry you are mistaking me for someone else, I have never said the UK is more democratic than the EU in this topic.

I may elsewhere have said that the EU is undemocratic with large amounts of unelected bureaucrats, however elsewhere I have certainly been very anti House of Lords and anti royal family, regarding the UK political system.

Therefore my arguments are consistent and logical, Im afraid others have simply been creating strawman arugements aimed my because they are incorrect and defeated in debate.
Last edited by Burton Bridge; 1 week ago
0
reply
Bashtopher
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#56
Report 1 week ago
#56
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
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
You didn't point out any flaws in my argument concerning the democratic nature of the EU. All you said was that I made a contradiction (which I didn't, since it is wholly appropriate and common across bipartisan politics to call Brown and May unelected), and then used this erroneous claim to think aloud on whether I plagiarised my researched, factually-based argument.

I appreciate the apology however, in spite of the (misplaced) patronising tone.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#57
Report 1 week ago
#57
(Original post by Bashtopher)
You didn't point out any flaws in my argument concerning the democratic nature of the EU. All you said was that I made a contradiction (which I didn't, since it is wholly appropriate and common across bipartisan politics to call Brown and May unelected), and then used this erroneous claim to think aloud on whether I plagiarised my researched, factually-based argument.

I appreciate the apology however, in spite of the (misplaced) patronising tone.
If you felt it was patronising I apologise also, it was not intended I was merely explaining why I asked you the question that seems to have brought you such upset for some reason.

You need to take my virtual cup of tea and reread what I wrote and come back with a clearer head.

You simply did make a contradiction, you explained the EU and UK political system and which explains the government is formed, in which we are not a Republic and thus to do vote for a state head directly.

You can use all the big posh words that you like, you can take offence to any questions or make believe tones you wish to take offence too, in order to smoke screen the fact that you are wrong! We in the UK do not elect a Prime Minister in the same way that you electe a president of a country - you simply don't and you can make all the side shifty comments you like to try to wiggle out of it, the fact is we don't and never have and you are wrong!
Last edited by Burton Bridge; 1 week ago
0
reply
Bashtopher
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#58
Report 1 week ago
#58
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
If you felt it was patronising I apologise also, it was not intended I was merely explaining why I asked you the question that seems to have brought you such upset for some reason.

You need to take my virtual cup of tea and reread what I wrote and come back with a clearer head.

You simply did make a contradiction, you explained the EU and UK political system and which explains the government is formed, in which we are not a Republic and thus to do vote for a state head directly.

You can use all the big posh words that you like and take offence to anything you wish it to take offence too. In order to smoke screen the fact that you are wrong! We in the UK do not elect a Prime Minister in the same way that you collect a president of a country - you simply don't and you can make all the side shifty comments you like, the fact is we don't and never have. You are wrong!
Not upset, just highlighting your actions. You're being very patronising ("virtual tea break", "come back with a clearer head") for little reason. It's funny as you call out others for using insults, when you're clearly just as bad. Also funny when I was actually engaging without being insulting. I guess actual facts get you a little defensive.

It's also funny that you're actually being patronising to me, since you don't understand what "contradiction" means, and you don't accept the fact that Brown, May at all are considered unelected leaders because their leadership was not formed via a general election. If you don't understand simple words, and don't accept actual facts, then their is little point in me trying to debate with you. You are blinded by your bias, and wilfully ignorant. Shame, really.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#59
Report 1 week ago
#59
(Original post by Bashtopher)
Not upset, just highlighting your actions. You're being very patronising ("virtual tea break", "come back with a clearer head") for little reason. It's funny as you call out others for using insults, when you're clearly just as bad. Also funny when I was actually engaging without being insulting. I guess actual facts get you a little defensive.

It's also funny that you're actually being patronising to me, since you don't understand what "contradiction" means, and you don't accept the fact that Brown, May at all are considered unelected leaders because their leadership was not formed via a general election. If you don't understand simple words, and don't accept actual facts, then their is little point in me trying to debate with you. You are blinded by your bias, and wilfully ignorant. Shame, really.
No I have not insulted anyone least of all you, in fact i have actually praised the content of your first post. I have now twice apologised for you're misinterpretation of my words. I have tried to be polite and suggest a little breather away from the debate but you misinterpret that as me being insulting also.

I can only do so much, you know? You are now resulting to the remainer stereotypical card of insult when you are defeated. Where as I'm sticking to facts - You don't vote for a PM, you know that, I know that! We vote for local candidates with associations to a party the party and its manifesto is elected - not the PM. However if you actually wrote all that then you already know that

Good day
Last edited by Burton Bridge; 1 week ago
0
reply
Bashtopher
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#60
Report 1 week ago
#60
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
No I have not insulted anyone least of all you, in fact i have actually praised the content of your first post. I have now twice apologised for you're misinterpretation of my words. I have tried to be polite and suggest a little breather away from the debate but you misinterpret that as me being insulting also.

I can only do so much, you know? You are now resulting to the remainer stereotypical card of insult when you are defeated. Where as I'm sticking to facts - You don't vote for a PM, you know that, I know that! We vote for local candidates with associations to a party the party and its manifesto is elected - not the PM. However if you actually wrote all that then you already know that

Good day
Patronising is a form of insulting. And when you patronise whilst apologising, it means it probably isn't sincere. I'm sure a parent/guardian would have taught you that long ago.

I referred to May and Brown as unelected, and I defended this by noting that it is common parlance across politics (left and right) to call PMs "unelected" if they have not got to their office via a general election. That is a fact. Somehow, you've taken that to mean that I'm claiming that we all vote for the PM directly, like the US presidential election. I have not said that. I know you don't directly elect the MP who is also PM unless you're in their constituency, and nothing I've said makes this claim. You have merely made an assumption. Ergo, I have made no contradictions, and you have pointed out no flaws.

(FYI, PMs that haven't faced a general election are referred to as "unelected" since a substantial number of people vote on the basis of who the PM might be (a lot of people won't vote Labour because they don't want Corbyn to be PM), or on the leader of the party (UKIP and the Brexit Party would not be half as successful if it wasn't for Farage). This is where the democratic deficit occurs, since the result of a general election would be different if a different leader is in place. The leader of a party influences people's votes, and can be decisive in an election (this why media tries so hard to discredit the image of leaders of parties more than anything else, and why most people remember Miliband for a bacon sandwich). Hope that helps you understand.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you tempted to change your firm university choice now or on A-level results day?

Yes, I'll try and go to a uni higher up the league tables (122)
19.55%
Yes, there is a uni that I prefer and I'll fit in better (58)
9.29%
No I am happy with my course choice (352)
56.41%
I'm using Clearing when I have my exam results (92)
14.74%

Watched Threads

View All