Will Britain piss off and get on with Brexit II (mod warning in OP)

blinding

fash wrote: »

Please show anything he said which "disrespects" the referendum - in particular let's consider the context that you were not outraged at Farage saying that a 52-48 referendum would "not mean things were over" - or the fact that the wishes of the vast majority of voters to remain in the single market were disrespected - or indeed the vast numbers of young people who would have voted to remain but are stuck with the decisions made by dead Brexiters - aside from illegalities and shady circumstances of the vote - the vote was hardly a good example of what a democratic vote should be - but what more should one expect from the UK - given it's corruption, fake democracy and disrespect for the rule of law.

Tis very funny when people talk about Dead Brexiteer ! !

Ye don’t seem to realise that the rest of the Electorate has got older and wiser and that their is always replacement with more older and wiser Voters ! !:D:D

This is a mistake that Lefties never work out either. As people get older and wiser they always see the nonsense of that ideology as well.

Bar that your post was virtually un-readable ! !

Leroy42

blinding wrote: »

Tis very funny when people talk about Dead Brexiteer ! !

Ye don’t seem to realise that the rest of the Electorate has got older and wiser and that their is always replacement with more older and wiser Voters ! !:D:D

This is a mistake that Lefties never work out either. As people get older and wiser they always see the nonsense of that ideology as well.

Bar that your post was virtually un-readable ! !

Let's gloss over that you couldn't provide any evidence of Tusk.

Let's say he was rabidly against the UK being allowed leave and argued against any notion that they could leave. So what, in a democracy, which you claim to value so highly, people are allowed their opinion. Are you suggesting that since the UK voted a certain way that peoples freedom and right to hold their own views are removed, that they all must simply get into line with it?

And if he was, that proves the points about democracy in the EU. Despite a major player in the EU being totally against democracy, he was powerless to stop it.

That is the very nature of democracy.

You are actually making the EU look very democratic. I would either stop digging or move to the next item on your list because you clearly haven't thought this one through.

blinding

Leroy42 wrote: »

Let's gloss over that you couldn't provide any evidence of Tusk.

Let's say he was rabidly against the UK being allowed leave and argued against any notion that they could leave. So what, in a democracy, which you claim to value so highly, people are allowed their opinion. Are you suggesting that since the UK voted a certain way that peoples freedom and right to hold their own views are removed, that they all must simply get into line with it?

And if he was, that proves the points about democracy in the EU. Despite a major player in the EU being totally against democracy, he was powerless to stop it.

That is the very nature of democracy.

Nobody has got back to me as to when Tusk was actually last Elected by an Eu Electorate ! !

Democracy can only work / exist when People realise that they can lose in a Democracy and when they Lose that the Losers accept that they have lost.

Anyway to an Eu-Sceptic like myself , I knew that the more the British people saw of the Eu the less they would like it. They never voted to join what the Eu turned out to be and the very first opportunity they Democratically got, They Booted the Eu out of their Country = Bye Bye Eu from Britain.

Democracy is a beautiful thing but as I said all sides must realise that they can lose and if they lose they must respect the Decision of the Electorate. You do not have Democracy without That.

theological

blinding wrote: »

Nobody has got back to me as to when Tusk was actually last Elected by an Eu Electorate ! !

Democracy can only work / exist when People realise that they can lose in a Democracy and when they Lose that the Losers accept that they have lost.

Anyway to an Eu-Sceptic like myself , I knew that the more the British people saw of the Eu the less they would like it. They never voted to join what the Eu turned out to be and the very first opportunity they Democratically got, They Booted the Eu out of their Country = Bye Bye Eu from Britain.

Democracy is a beautiful thing but as I said all sides must realise that they can lose and if they lose they must respect the Decision of the Electorate. You do not have Democracy without That.

I think we know the answer is that he wasn't elected by the public.


However, I don't regard this bit as actually being important. What is important is making sure that people like him don't have an overriding say on what happens domestically in Britain after December. All major policy decisions should be made in Westminster and any arrangement the EU propose that doesn't allow for this should be rejected.


I'm much much more interested in the future and what that will look like after the transition period.

fash

theological wrote: »

I think we know the answer is that he wasn't elected by the public.

Neither Donald Trump nor (except in the most perfunctory manner) was Boris Johnson. That blinding focuses on Tusk without mentioning the others suggest that honesty or accuracy is not his aim.

As regards democratic legitimacy, it is also interesting that very many of those claiming the EU lacks democratic legitimacy also defend the clear law-breaking by an unelected ruler in the UK. It again suggests the Brexiters in general don't actually care for democracy - (as blinding's failure to engage in the troubling issues surrounding the Brexit vote suggests).

However, I don't regard this bit as actually being important. What is important is making sure that people like him don't have an overriding say on what happens domestically in Britain after December. All major policy decisions should be made in Westminster and any arrangement the EU propose that doesn't allow for this should be rejected.


I'm much much more interested in the future and what that will look like after the transition period.

And I note you failed to answer any of my questions on the logistics of this.

blinding

fash wrote: »

Neither Donald Trump nor (except in the most perfunctory manner) was Boris Johnson. That blinding focuses on Tusk without mentioning the others suggest that honesty or accuracy is not his aim.

As regards democratic legitimacy, it is also interesting that very many of those claiming the EU lacks democratic legitimacy also defend the clear law-breaking by an unelected ruler in the UK. It again suggests the Brexiters in general don't actually care for democracy - (as blinding's failure to engage in the troubling issues surrounding the Brexit vote suggests).


And I note you failed to answer any of my questions on the logistics of this.

Donald Trump won the Election under the Rules of the Election.

Boris Johnson won a Landslide Victory in December.

When was Donald Tusk last Elected by an Eu Electorate ? ?

fash

blinding wrote: »

Donald Trump won the Election under the Rules of the Election.

Boris Johnson won a Landslide Victory in December.

When was Donald Tusk last Elected by an Eu Electorate ? ?

Neither Trump nor Johnson were voted for by the electorates of their respective countries.

Furthermore, Trump received a minority of votes and Johnson was parachuted into a safe seat by a tiny clique of Tories in circumstances where 56% of the population voted against the Tories.
Given that both are corrupt law breaking liars who exercise vast powers on an autocratic manner for self enrichment, this lack of democratic legitimacy is rather troubling.
Comparing that to the chairman of a council (as Tusk was) - and requiring that he should be held to far, far higher requirements of electoral enfranchisement - is to say the least hypocritical and clearly disingenuous.
Why might that be the case?

Padre_Pio

blinding wrote: »

Donald Trump won the Election under the Rules of the Election.

Boris Johnson won a Landslide Victory in December.

When was Donald Tusk last Elected by an Eu Electorate ? ?

Nov 2019.

He was elected by the European Parliament, who's member are voted in my the public.

Our 13 members were voted in May 2019.

blinding

fash wrote: »

Neither Trump nor Johnson were voted for by the electorates of their respective countries.

Furthermore, Trump received a minority of votes and Johnson was parachuted into a safe seat by a tiny clique of Tories in circumstances where 56% of the population voted against the Tories.
Given that both are corrupt law breaking liars who exercise vast powers on an autocratic manner for self enrichment, this lack of democratic legitimacy is rather troubling.
Comparing that to the chairman of a council (as Tusk was) - and requiring that he should be held to far, far higher requirements of electoral enfranchisement - is to say the least hypocritical and clearly disingenuous.
Why might that be the case?

An Eu-Phile not understanding how Democracy works in Nation States ! ! ! Sadly this is no Surprise to me. Donald Trump is the legitimate President of the Unites States. He won by the rules of that Country.

Boris Johnson has just won a Landslide in Britain by the Rules of Britain.

As I say its no surprise that Eu-Philes have no Respect or Acceptance of the Democracy of Nation States. This should surprise No One ! ! !

Eu-philes do not Respect and Accept that you can lose in a Democracy ! !

There is No Respect or Acceptance of Democracy in That ! ! !

The British Electorate kicked the Eu out on its a$$ to Protect their Democracy ! !

Anyone that thinks that Democracy is Safe are with the Eu or Eu-Philes is kidding themselves ! !

I see Nobody has got back to me on when the Last time Donald Tusk was Elected by an Eu Electorate ! !

blinding

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Nov 2019.

He was elected by the European Parliament, who's member are voted in my the public.

Our 13 members were voted in May 2019.

That is not the Electorate of an Eu Country ! !

theological

fash wrote: »

And I note you failed to answer any of my questions on the logistics of this.

As far as I can tell it is pretty simple.

It means that major policy decisions are made in parliament. For example we've been discussing immigration law. I have a particular opinion on what that law should look like once the UK regains control of it, but it is a matter for subsequent parliaments to shape and direct that policy. Subsequent governments will stand before the electorate with a manifesto platform on immigration. The people will be able to directly decide this for themselves. It won't be determined in Brussels. MPs that are elected in Westminster will decide this on a national level.

The same is true for other areas. I don't know what legitimate questions there are on the "logistics" of this.

I don't promise to respond to every post that has a question for me. I respond to what I can and I usually respond to posts that bring us in a new direction, or don't require repetition.

Padre_Pio

blinding wrote: »

That is not the Electorate of an Eu Country ! !

He's indirectly elected.

Irish people didn't vote for Leo Varadker to be Taoiseach. A small subset of people in his constituency voted him in as a TD, but no more than that.
UK people didn't vote for Boris to be Prime Minister. Again, he was voted MP by a subset of people in Uxbridge and South Ruislip (according to Google) and a PM by conservative party vote of 99,000. Hardly a majority of the UK public.

They both got their office from their party members, who were themselves voted in by the public.

No different really.

You can argue that one is maybe MORE democratic than the other, but either way, the majority of voters had zero say in how these men took office.

Actually, Google says that Leo won the Taoiseach gig with a 57–50 vote with 47 abstentions.

Donald Trump

fash wrote: »

Furthermore, Trump received a minority of votes

I think that the tens of millions present at the largest inauguration in history might beg to differ!

theological

Padre_Pio wrote: »

He's indirectly elected.

Irish people didn't vote for Leo Varadker to be Taoiseach. A small subset of people in his constituency voted him in as a TD, but no more than that.
UK people didn't vote for Boris to be Prime Minister. Again, he was voted MP by a subset of people in Uxbridge and South Ruislip (according to Google) and a PM by conservative party vote of 99,000. Hardly a majority of the UK public.

They both got their office from their party members, who were themselves voted in by the public.

No different really.

You can argue that one is maybe MORE democratic than the other, but either way, the majority of voters had zero say in how these men took office.

Actually, Google says that Leo won the Taoiseach gig with a 57–50 vote with 47 abstentions.

I'm presuming you know this argument doesn't hold for a very simple reason. People vote for a political party in the knowledge that the leader will be the leader of the country in the event that they secure enough support.

It isn't comparable.

Donald Trump

blinding wrote: »

That is not the Electorate of an Eu Country ! !

You elect your reps and those reps get together with the other reps and decide on how to organise themselves. If you don't like their decision then elect different ones next time.




Or explain to us why the UK electorate voted for Teresa May and then moaned about her?

Leroy42

theological wrote: »

I'm presuming you know this argument doesn't hold for a very simple reason. People vote for a political party in the knowledge that the leader will be the leader of the country in the event that they secure enough support.

It isn't comparable.

Who voted for TM to be PM after Cameron resigned? Was she no 2 so it was obvious? No, the party decided.

How is that any different?

ancapailldorcha

Leroy42 wrote: »

Who voted for TM to be PM after Cameron resigned? Was she no 2 so it was obvious? No, the party decided.

How is that any different?

I don't remember getting to vote for her replacement either. Odd since said replacement censured Gordon Brown for the same thing a decade ago.

blinding

Padre_Pio wrote: »

He's indirectly elected.

Irish people didn't vote for Leo Varadker to be Taoiseach. A small subset of people in his constituency voted him in as a TD, but no more than that.
UK people didn't vote for Boris to be Prime Minister. Again, he was voted MP by a subset of people in Uxbridge and South Ruislip (according to Google) and a PM by conservative party vote of 99,000. Hardly a majority of the UK public.

They both got their office from their party members, who were themselves voted in by the public.

No different really.

You can argue that one is maybe MORE democratic than the other, but either way, the majority of voters had zero say in how these men took office.

Actually, Google says that Leo won the Taoiseach gig with a 57–50 vote with 47 abstentions.

Varadkar did scrape in on the fifth count ( very embarrassing for a sitting Taoiseach ) but at least he has a mandate from a Constituency of the Irish electorate.

Boris Johnson had a good win in a seat that either the Liberals or Labour had as a Target Marginal ( Bless,:D:D:D )

Some of ye lot probably think Jo Swinson ( actually managed to lose her own seat ) should be Prime Minister

Or Maybe ye think Jeremy Corbyn should be Prime Minister despite bringing Labour to their worst defeat since 1935. A defeat that could have been a lot worse had Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party withdrawn from 20 or 30 Labour Marginals.

Its not long ago since the British actually Democratically Voted not to change their Voting System.

As I have had to say many times, Eu-Philes or the Eu are No Respecters of the Democracy of Nation States. Why would they be, when the ultimate aim of the Eu is to destroy the Nation State !

theological

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't remember getting to vote for her replacement either. Odd since said replacement censured Gordon Brown for the same thing a decade ago.

Both had elections pretty soon after they were in office, which was only right.

blinding

Has anybody actually found out when the last time was, that Donald Tusk did face the Electorate of an Eu Country ?

fash

blinding wrote: »

An Eu-Phile not understanding how Democracy works in Nation States ! ! ! Sadly this is no Surprise to me. Donald Trump is the legitimate President of the Unites States. He won by the rules of that Country.

Boris Johnson has just won a Landslide in Britain by the Rules of Britain.

As I say its no surprise that Eu-Philes have no Respect or Acceptance of the Democracy of Nation States. This should surprise No One ! ! !

Wait a minute- you were questioning the legitimacy of Tusk despite the fact that he was overwhelmingly elected by the relevant processes to a minor role with limited powers - yet now feign outrage when one questions the democratic legitimacy of 2 corrupt criminal autocrats exercising autocratic powers?
And also repeatedly fail to respond to the anti democratic nature of Brexit?
Hypocrite (to say the least).

Eu-philes do not Respect and Accept that you can lose in a Democracy ! !

By that logic, you must be a "EU-phile" - since clearly you do not accept or respect democracy .

There is No Respect or Acceptance of Democracy in That ! ! !

I'll be damned if I have to listen to complaints from you EU-philes.

I see Nobody has got back to me on when the Last time Donald Tusk was Elected by an Eu Electorate ! !

I'll answer that after you tell me when Trump or Johnson were elected by a US or UK electorate.

Padre_Pio

blinding wrote: »

As I have had to say many times, Eu-Philes or the Eu are No Respecters of the Democracy of Nation States. Why would they be, when the ultimate aim of the Eu is to destroy the Nation State !

I see that you quoted me and didn't answer any of my points, just resorted to the same formulaic trash answers as usual.

At least your true to form.

One thing I will say is the EU Commission actually has very little power.
They propose bills to the EU Parliament who vote on them. The Parliament are elected by member states and Ireland actually has a lot of swing for a country population smaller than some EU cities.
The Parliament have no ties or political connection to the Commission.

Unlike say BoJo, who as we've discussed was not DEMOCRATIC ALLY elected (seeing as the vast majority of UK voters have never seen his name on a ballot paper and only conservative party members get to vote on the party leader)

He can literally say whatever he wants and get it passed by his conservative majority, while dissenters are immediately sacked, vilified by the press and called Traitors by our good mate Blinding here.


Of course, people should vote for the party, not the person

Donald Trump

blinding wrote: »

Varadkar did scrape in on the fifth count ( very embarrassing for a sitting Taoiseach ) but at least he has a mandate from a Constituency of the Irish electorate.

Boris Johnson had a good win in a seat that either the Liberals or Labour had as a Target Marginal ( Bless,:D:D:D )

Some of ye lot probably think Jo Swinson ( actually managed to lose her own seat ) should be Prime Minister

Or Maybe ye think Jeremy Corbyn should be Prime Minister despite bringing Labour to their worst defeat since 1935. A defeat that could have been a lot worse had Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party withdrawn from 20 or 30 Labour Marginals.

Its not long ago since the British actually Democratically Voted not to change their Voting System.

As I have had to say many times, Eu-Philes or the Eu are No Respecters of the Democracy of Nation States. Why would they be, when the ultimate aim of the Eu is to destroy the Nation State !

blinding,


How each country decides to run its own system is of no concern to the EU.


In Ireland we have STV, in UK they have first-past-the-post, in many continental countries they have list systems where you vote for the party and seats are allocated to each party according to the order on their list



I don't think you really understand "democracy" in fairness.


Which system - Irish or UK - would you consider to be more "democratic"? Would you consider a list system to be democratic?

fash

theological wrote: »

As far as I can tell it is pretty simple.
...
I don't promise to respond to every post that has a question for me. I respond to what I can and I usually respond to posts that bring us in a new direction, or don't require repetition.

Here was my post - and I would very much like to hear your response.

fash wrote: »

I could ask the same question. Do you think the US offer compares in any way to that of the EU? Do you honestly think the UK will have the (likely massively underestimated) 50,000 customs people in place considering they don't even have the course up and running yet and it's already asking for more money? Have you seen the list of asks the UK has made of the EU in their "very limited FTA" -and do you understand why? Do you think the UK will actually turn French fishermen away from their waters- and what will happen if they do? Hint: think of the French ports. What will the UK do then?
If the US ramps up its antagonism towards China (or otherwise) - how is the UK going to act towards China- and how will that impact on its relationship with the EU?
If you've actually looked at this in any depth, I'll be very interested to hearing your answers to the above questions.

No it doesn't. Nor in any case was that asked if the UK by the EU.

theological

Donald Trump wrote: »

Which system - Irish or UK - would you consider to be more "democratic"? Would you consider a list system to be democratic?

This question is irrelevant when we're talking about the democratic deficit in the European Union on an institutional level.

I don't consider either one of the two systems to be more democratic, just different forms of democracy with different pros and cons.

blinding

fash wrote: »

Wait a minute- you were questioning the legitimacy of Tusk despite the fact that he was overwhelmingly elected by the relevant processes to a minor role with limited powers - yet now feign outrage when one questions the democratic legitimacy of 2 corrupt criminal autocrats exercising autocratic powers?
And also repeatedly fail to respond to the anti democratic nature of Brexit?
Hypocrite (to say the least).


By that logic, you must be a "EU-phile" - since clearly you do not accept or respect democracy .
I'll be damned if I have to listen to complaints from you EU-philes.


I'll answer that after you tell me when Trump or Johnson were elected by a US or UK electorate.

2016 Donald Trump won the US presidential Election by the American Rules. Well done Donald. Nobody expected him to win. The Democrats had a big party with celebrities ( the peoples party ) a week before the Election:D:D:D:D:D

The Conservative won a Huge, Gigantic, Landslide, in the December Election and under the British system the party with the Huge-est, Big-est, Massive Majority gets to nominate their Leader as Prime Minister. ( actually they only need a majority ):D

Are you saying that No Irish Taoiseach has ever had any Legitimacy to be Taoiseach:eek::eek:

It’s like I am teaching Politics to Kindergarten ! !

fash

theological wrote: »

This question is irrelevant when we're talking about the democratic deficit in the European Union on an institutional level.

I don't consider either one of the two systems to be more democratic, just different forms of democracy with different pros and cons.

Would you agree that the democratic deficit in the UK is far, far greater than any alleged democratic deficit in the EU?

Donald Trump

theological wrote: »

This question is irrelevant when we're talking about the democratic deficit in the European Union on an institutional level.

I don't consider either one of the two systems to be more democratic, just different forms of democracy with different pros and cons.

I was asking the poster who keeps rabbiting on about "democracy".




Personally, I prefer the Irish system because it gives you more choice and the option that your vote will always be counted if needed.

Donald Trump

blinding wrote: »

2016 Donald Trump won the US presidential Election by the American Rules. Well done Donald. Nobody expected him to win. The Democrats had a big party with celebrities ( the peoples party ) a week before the Election:D:D:D:D:D

Sure Tusk won his election under EU rules!!!


How d'ya like them apples?

blinding

Donald Trump wrote: »

blinding,


How each country decides to run its own system is of no concern to the EU.


In Ireland we have STV, in UK they have first-past-the-post, in many continental countries they have list systems where you vote for the party and seats are allocated to each party according to the order on their list



I don't think you really understand "democracy" in fairness.


Which system - Irish or UK - would you consider to be more "democratic"? Would you consider a list system to be democratic?

If the Eu does not Respect and Accept the Democratic Decision of an Independent Nation State ? What does that make the Eu ? ?