Why do people vote for Borris when he was not born in the UK Watch

BugglyBo1
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#21
Report 2 weeks ago
#21
I agree with you that the PM of the UK should be from the UK But Borris Johnson is Kinda British. I mean his parents are both British Nationals and they were both living in the UK (I assume) at the time of his birth
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#22
Report 1 week ago
#22
(Original post by BugglyBo1)
I agree with you that the PM of the UK should be from the UK But Borris Johnson is Kinda British. I mean his parents are both British Nationals and they were both living in the UK (I assume) at the time of his birth
They were living in New York as his father was working for the World Bank (the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development) which when Boris was born was a much more important part of the world financial system than it is today.
1
reply
angelinahx
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#23
Report 1 week ago
#23
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Naive of you think nobody has!
***** who has
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 week ago
#24
(Original post by angelinahx)
***** who has
His constituents, his peers (MPs) and the conservative membership of which you and I could of been if we wished.

We don't directly elect a PM in a parliamentary democracy, didn't you know?
0
reply
angelinahx
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#25
Report 1 week ago
#25
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
His constituents, his peers (MPs) and the conservative membership of which you and I could of been if we wished.

We don't directly elect a PM in a parliamentary democracy, didn't you know?
no, but we assume the leader of the party we vote for will be pm.
he was 'voted' in by less than 1% of the public. there's no widespread public support for him and PMs, including his own family, have resigned in protest. you're not a democratic country.
Last edited by angelinahx; 1 week ago
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#26
Report 1 week ago
#26
(Original post by angelinahx)
no, but we assume the leader of the party we vote for will be pm.
he was 'voted' in by less than 1% of the public. there's no widespread public support for him and PMs, including his own family, have resigned in protest. you're not a democratic country.
We certainly aren't, we are having democracy opposed by the opposition. Leave voters have had their referendum votes hijacked and the zombie government in being kept in office by an opposition who refuses to take charge themselves.

The FPTP is not perfect However it's the system we have choosen and it allows for a change of PM or other cabinet positions without the consent of the British electorate, that's just that simple. I don't know if you are old enough to remember but when Brown took over from Blair, the last time this happened their was no elections which took place. I was a member of the labour party at the time and I did not get a vote, something that jarred me a little at the time.
0
reply
angelinahx
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#27
Report 1 week ago
#27
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
We certainly aren't, we are having democracy opposed by the opposition. Leave voters have had their referendum votes hijacked and the zombie government in being kept in office by an opposition who refuses to take charge themselves.

The FPTP is not perfect However it's the system we have choosen and it allows for a change of PM or other cabinet positions without the consent of the British electorate, that's just that simple. I don't know if you are old enough to remember but when Brown took over from Blair, the last time this happened their was no elections which took place. I was a member of the labour party at the time and I did not get a vote, something that jarred me a little at the time.
umm no sweetie, the 'opposition' does not oppose democracy.......... the r*t who's currently trying to prorogue parliament which has led to pm's resigning in protest does, however
0
reply
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#28
Report 1 week ago
#28
(Original post by angelinahx)
no, but we assume the leader of the party we vote for will be pm.
he was 'voted' in by less than 1% of the public. there's no widespread public support for him and PMs, including his own family, have resigned in protest. you're not a democratic country.
And which country is?
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#29
Report 1 week ago
#29
(Original post by angelinahx)
umm no sweetie, the 'opposition' does not oppose democracy.......... the r*t who's currently trying to prorogue parliament which has led to pm's resigning in protest does, however
Blocking the ability for the electorate to have a say is not opposing democracy?

Also are you OK with parliamentarians being elected on manifestos and promises only to cross and actively join other parties who have polarised opposite views and manifesto promises without seeking the opinion of the people?


It would seem you are more interested in protecting parliamentary democracy for the elite few rather than direct democracy for the masses, why is this?
0
reply
Justvisited
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#30
Report 1 week ago
#30
(Original post by L i b)
Because where he was born is completely and utterly irrelevant. He is a British and Commonwealth citizen, resident in the UK. Hence, he can be Prime Minister - and I'd question anyone who suggested there was anything remotely wrong with that.
Several years ago I read that apparently you're not allowed to be Defence Secretary unless you were born here - seemed odd if you can be PM etc. - any legal eagles confirm if this stipulation ever was the case, or still is?
(Original post by mpaprika)
depends on immigration laws. I was born in Belgium but I get the nationality of my parents
Only if they were born in Britain. So not all citizenship is the same.

It's laughable to hear certain remainers grumbling about supposedly being about to lose something called "EU citizenship". Don't they realise that you could be born in the EU of parents who are both nationals of EU countries and both born in the EU, and still not be a national of any EU state?
(Original post by Alt Tankie)
So in your view someone who can trace their family tree up to three hundred years and is a white Briton but was born elsewhere has less right be PM than a Iraqi refugee who just happened to be born here?

I don’t know which view is dumber, the idea that Purely being born in Britain makes you British (magic dirt theory) or the idea that laws makes you British (magic paper theory) ...
"Magic dirt theory", a.k.a. lex soli, is pretty widespread, and was the iron rule in the UK until 1983, and still applies to the vast majority of people born here. In particular it continues to apply in the US (though not surprising Trump has asked whether it should be abolished), hence all those return-flight babies (not that BJ was one of them).

As for "magic paper theory", well, that applies to a whole lot of stuff beloved by our late statists, notably in 2013 {snigger}
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
We certainly aren't, we are having democracy opposed by the opposition. Leave voters have had their referendum votes hijacked and the zombie government in being kept in office by an opposition who refuses to take charge themselves.

The FPTP is not perfect However it's the system we have choosen and it allows for a change of PM or other cabinet positions without the consent of the British electorate, that's just that simple. I don't know if you are old enough to remember but when Brown took over from Blair, the last time this happened their was no elections which took place. I was a member of the labour party at the time and I did not get a vote, something that jarred me a little at the time.
Your second sentence hits the nail on the head. What is this dysfunctional not-fit-for-this-purpose parliament that keeps blocking the referendum for Brexit? An election would clear the air, but the FTPA has got the govt. by the YKW. First thing we do once this has been sorted, we dump the FTPA. Who predicted back in 2011 that it would lead to the present constitutional constipation? A.k.a. "electile dysfunction".

Yes, Brown should have faced a genuine contest, the Labour Party leadership rules are defective for not requiring this. But then so are the Tories' - once Leadsom pulled out in 2016, Gove should of come back in as the lucky loser for a runoff vs. May with the membership.
1
reply
angelinahx
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#31
Report 1 week ago
#31
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Blocking the ability for the electorate to have a say is not opposing democracy?
ummmmm............. yes it is. because we're a parliamentary democracy we rely on POLITICIANS to deliver brexit (not a xenophobic r*t who no one voted for or wanted) and there is no support for no deal (which boris is pushing) amongst the "masses" so...... blocking their ability to have a say is undemocratic and political scientists agree.
0
reply
angelinahx
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#32
Report 1 week ago
#32
(Original post by Andrew97)
And which country is?
not sure if the tu quoque is srs but? norway canada australia belgium switzerland all have flourishing democracies.
0
reply
Alt Tankie
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#33
Report 1 week ago
#33
(Original post by angelinahx)
ummmmm............. yes it is. because we're a parliamentary democracy we rely on POLITICIANS to deliver brexit (not a xenophobic r*t who no one voted for or wanted) and there is no support for no deal (which boris is pushing) amongst the "masses" so...... blocking their ability to have a say is undemocratic and political scientists agree.
Casebook cognitive dissonance right here β˜οΈπŸ˜‚
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#34
Report 1 week ago
#34
(Original post by angelinahx)
ummmmm............. yes it is. because we're a parliamentary democracy we rely on POLITICIANS to deliver brexit (not a xenophobic r*t who no one voted for or wanted) and there is no support for no deal (which boris is pushing) amongst the "masses" so...... blocking their ability to have a say is undemocratic and political scientists agree.
Woah!

So you admit blocking the ability of the electorate to have a say is opposing democracy, but refuse to accept those doing it are blocking democracy which was my original point?

Can we also stop with the name calling of people we politically disagree with, it not big clever and does not help the situation. Plus reiteration mistruths that we have already proved to be incorrect is not exactly strength in your debating strategy. As we have already unequivocally proved Borris Johnson was elected, denying that simply makes you look silly. Like calling someone who is clearly suffering xenophobic abuse on this very thread, a xenophobic β˜†β˜†β˜†β˜†. You cant write this lol
Last edited by Burton Bridge; 1 week ago
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#35
Report 1 week ago
#35
(Original post by Alt Tankie)
Casebook cognitive dissonance right here β˜οΈπŸ˜‚
Unbelievable isn't it?
0
reply
angelinahx
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#36
Report 1 week ago
#36
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Woah!

So you admit blocking the ability of the electorate to have a say is opposing democracy, but refuse to accept those doing it are blocking democracy which was my original point?

Can we also stop with the name calling of people we politically disagree with, it not big clever and does not help the situation. Plus reiteration mistruths that we have already proved to be incorrect is not exactly strength in your debating strategy. As we have already unequivocally proved Borris Johnson was elected, denying that simply makes you look silly. Like calling someone who is clearly suffering xenophobic abuse on this very thread, a xenophobic β˜†β˜†β˜†β˜†. You cant write this lol
1) I can write and say whatever I want, thank you very much. We still, thankfully, have freedom of speech in this country in spite of the blatant neglect of political democracy shown by your disgusting government.
2) When we vote for a party, we expect the leader of that party to become the leader of the country (given that they do in fact win). B*ris has no widespread public support. He was voted in afterwards and people did not vote Tory with him in mind. MPs have resigned in protest, suggesting that he critically does not have support. He was the lesser of two evils. That is all. That is it. Furthermore, the UK is, at its core, and has always been, an undemocratic country. Your Queen and your House of Lords are not elected by the people yet have power over which proposals of legislation become actual laws. That is fundamentally undemocratic. So is your current PM.
3) Brexit was voted for by the people and won by a marginal of 4% thanks to endless propaganda (muh independence day/muh let's give anti-EU xenophobes around the EU hope by leaving (in fact, you deterred everybody and more people support the EU than ever/muh NHS (in fact, the NHS is under threat more than ever thanks to Brexit) and significantly, lies. But that's still fair enough - Brexit means Brexit. Brexit does not, however, mean a no deal Brexit, which is what B*ris is pushing for in spite of the lie that he is attempting to gain a deal. Proroguing parliament obviously indicates that he is not interested in seriously pursuing a deal for the UK with the EU or at the very least that he does not care what MPs think about his shi*ty deal. There is no support for a no deal Brexit even amongst the people who voted for Brexit (possibly amongst the staunch Brexiteers, but the European parliamentary election in the UK obviously suggests that that's a minority - the Brexit Party got fewer votes than the LibDems and Labour put together).

In conclusion/tl;dr: Your unelected PM is proroguing and suspending parliament with the help of your unelected monarch in order to attempt to pursue policy which lacks public support. That is what we call not democratic, sweetie.
Last edited by angelinahx; 1 week ago
0
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#37
Report 1 week ago
#37
Because his place of birth isn't relevant. People shouldn't vote for him because he's grossly incompetent and if meritocracy was really a thing would have bombed out long before now, having been a failure as London mayor and as foreign secretary. People shouldn't vote for him because he's the defacto leader of a disaster capitalist coup of the UK which will destroy it for the majority of its citizens. There are many reasons not to vote for him or his party, all to do with them being a threat to the nation, not his place of birth.
0
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#38
Report 1 week ago
#38
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Blocking the ability for the electorate to have a say is not opposing democracy?
Not necessarily no. Democracy isn't just rule by plebiscite, indeed in this country it generally isn't, but rather a parliamentary democracy. Saying no to another general election, which is clearly being proposed to avoid any parliamentary scrutiny and force through a no deal with its timing, is not anti-democratic, if anything it's precisely the opposite, ensuring our democracy works as intended rather than preventing parliament from playing its role in our democracy
0
reply
MagnumKoishi
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#39
Report 1 week ago
#39
(Original post by Benarro)
I doubt anyone else will
Conservative support is now on the rise in polls. They're ahead of labour, the lib dems, and the brexit party.

Although as a student it definitely seems that everyone's remain and anti-BoJo, outside of these young person and middle class echo chambers Leave and the Conservative Party have a huge amount of support. Middle aged and older, and the working class (quite unexpectedly) generally have the most support for it.

And to be honest if you forget about brexit, Boris is being a really strong and proactive leader who seems to be at least trying to follow through on his promises as best he can with his current situation. You may disagree with his politics, but you've gotta at least respect him as a politician unlike the soggy tissue that was Theresa May
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#40
Report 1 week ago
#40
(Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
Not necessarily no. Democracy isn't just rule by plebiscite, indeed in this country it generally isn't, but rather a parliamentary democracy. Saying no to another general election, which is clearly being proposed to avoid any parliamentary scrutiny and force through a no deal with its timing, is not anti-democratic, if anything it's precisely the opposite, ensuring our democracy works as intended rather than preventing parliament from playing its role in our democracy
Firstly I agree completely with you if we are talking about mixing direct democracy with parliamentary democracy? I am passionate about referenda never being used in a parliamentary democracy, I dislike referendums and think they should never be authorised to be used. So let me be clear, I completely reject the referendum culture in our current political culture.


However (and its a important and large however) the governments aim is not a no deal Brexit, further more Claiming there is no disire for no deal Brexit is not factually inaccurate, let's not forget the results of all major election fir the last 5 years has been won on hard Brexit manifestos and promises. You are simply deluding yourself if you think otherwise, the results of national elections in 2015,2016,2017 and 2019 all prove this, beyond reasonable doubt.

Also parliament as a parliamentary democracy voted made a sovereign decision to desolve parliamentary democracy, temporarily and elect direct democracy to deside the EU issue. Now it is the parliamentary democracy that is frustrating the will of the direct democracy that they voted for, And now they want to stop me and you and silence our voice so they can continue to ignore and sabotage our will.

Democracy? I don't think so, do you?
Last edited by Burton Bridge; 1 week ago
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
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 attending a Global Climate Strike?

Yes, I'm striking (39)
7.59%
No, but I wanted to/I support the cause (299)
58.17%
No (176)
34.24%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed