The "we haven't left yet" EU election thread.

EU election straw poll

  • UKIP

    Votes: 119 62.6%
  • Labour

    Votes: 6 3.2%
  • Conservative

    Votes: 9 4.7%
  • Green

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • SNP

    Votes: 5 2.6%
  • Lib Dems

    Votes: 10 5.3%
  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • DUP

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • Spoil Ballot paper

    Votes: 17 8.9%
  • Can't be ARRSED to vote

    Votes: 15 7.9%

  • Total voters
    190

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
it could convince silly people to join isis...

Ta? Surely all reservists deploy when called/volunteer. They'd have to be pretty poor reservists not to. May as well join the uotc.
I hope you are not referring to a certain Arrser!? ;)
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
who would that be?

my unit is sending another 4 bods to augment regular units. Not bad from 20 off blokes. We've just had two back. Another 2 to come.
No name; no pack drill!
 
The simple proposal could not have been clearer, as you say leave or remain, nothing in there was ambiguous, it was to leave lock, stock and barrel. The cries of the doomsayers proved it. The politicians would normally have set the question so vague as to allow any interpretation, but Dave thought he was clever and that there was no problem with a definitive vote because he and his team were going to show everyone that actually leaving would be such a disaster that no one would countenance it.
He was going to put all his eurosceptic party members back in their box and finally shut up the likes of farage and co.
Then the impossible happened, people weren't as gullible as Dave and co thought and showed that they could think for themselves and that they could understand the ramifications and they still voted to leave.
So the question was straightforward and yes, people thought, even though history should have shown us better, that they would honour their word. Cameron said that leave meant leave in the entirety, the country thought that he and parliament would follow through on that promise, they didn't, they are duplicitous.
Also those duplicitous dicks who were voted in by those who thought they would deliver lock, stock and barrel will have to answer their constituents at the next election, they will really need to practice their twisting and turning for that!
The problem is that when you're voting you're voting for what's on the ballot paper. You're not voting for what Joe Bloggs said or something you saw on the side of a bus. The question on the Brexit ballot paper was straightforward but the answer was open to interpretation. You can rail against the Tories for not giving you the Brexit you want but you still keep voting them into power.
 
A few Remainers on Arrse do not a population make!

I may be wrong*, and others may wish to point out where, but I think I have followed this, and other threads on Brexit, quite closely!



* I know, this will come as a shock to many of you o_O
Following is one thing, but...

Now I have the greatest respect for all of your posts on all the other threads, but I'd humbly suggest that, on this one subject, you do have a tendency to tune out anything you don't agree with.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Following is one thing, but...

Now I have the greatest respect for all of your posts on all the other threads, but I'd humbly suggest that, on this one subject, you do have a tendency to tune out anything you don't agree with.
But if you come on with a one sided viewpoint, don't expect everyone else to sign up to it. I certainly do have a bias and it is that towards the democratic vote of the EU referendum, not the deliberate undermining of it by the MPs who disagree with their constituents. Mind you, in Labour they are more afraid of the Comintern than the voter.
 
Well worth a listen, even for the first 5 minutes. Interesting take on the Cons, the impact of brexit on politics generally PC intolerance of dissenting views and the marxist background of New Labour leadership.

 
Last edited:
But if you come on with a one sided viewpoint, don't expect everyone else to sign up to it. I certainly do have a bias and it is that towards the democratic vote of the EU referendum, not the deliberate undermining of it by the MPs who disagree with their constituents. Mind you, in Labour they are more afraid of the Comintern than the voter.
I'm not commenting on our different viewpoints. This conversation started when you interjected the following comment into the discussion I was having with rifleair:

Your evidence for that comes from where?
My point to you was (as I said to Rifleair) that the evidence for the various claims about how easy Brexit was going to be had already been presented by a number of posters here and on the other Brexit threads.

Now, given that (a) the evidence exists and (b) you are following the Brexit threads, it seems reasonable to conclude that you are tending to discount all the evidence that you don't agree with.

You have also again gone off on a couple of tangents from your own original tangent. We have talked before about the use of the 'D-bomb' and the problems caused by the use of words like 'democratic' as polemic adjectives, because in such rhetoric they imply that there is only one form of 'democracy' at play.

The referendum is an example of direct democracy that we have very little experience with and which requires the presentation of complex issues in a simplistic binary format. On the other hand, Parliament is an example of representative democracy which has evolved over centuries and with which, for better or worse, it is possible to debate complex issue in full.

We have already discussed that MPs are not delegates, and that they have to weigh up the interests of all their constituents (and their parties, and their country), not just the ones who voted for them. Frankly, emotive terms like 'deliberate undermining' don't help as they don't reflect the complexity of the situation.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
I'm not commenting on our different viewpoints. This conversation started when you interjected the following comment into the discussion I was having with rifleair:



My point to you was (as I said to Rifleair) that the evidence for the various claims about how easy Brexit was going to be had already been presented by a number of posters here and on the other Brexit threads.

Now, given that (a) the evidence exists and (b) you are following the Brexit threads, it seems reasonable to conclude that you are tending to discount all the evidence that you don't agree with.

You have also again gone off on a couple of tangents from your own original tangent. We have talked before about the use of the 'D-bomb' and the problems caused by the use of words like 'democratic' as polemic adjectives, because in such rhetoric they imply that there is only one form of 'democracy' at play.

The referendum is an example of direct democracy that we have very little experience with and which requires the presentation of complex issues in a simplistic binary format. On the other hand, Parliament is an example of representative democracy which has evolved over centuries and with which, for better or worse, it is possible to debate complex issue in full.

We have already discussed that MPs are not delegates, and that they have to weigh up the interests of all their constituents (and their parties, and their country), not just the ones who voted for them. Frankly, emotive terms like 'deliberate undermining' don't help as they don't reflect the complexity of the situation.
OK, if as you claim all you were doing is re-stating a POV which had been discussed endlessly on here without mentioning that there are two sides to the coin then fine. However the flip side of the coin should be perfectly entitled to challenge and point out the deficiencies of the original, one sided, post.

In the same vein, I don't recall Remainers telling us that the EU would not enter into negotiations, be totally intransigent and refuse to compromise in any area. Maybe had Remain campaigners done that we would have had a much larger number of leave votes.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
I'm not commenting on our different viewpoints. This conversation started when you interjected the following comment into the discussion I was having with rifleair:



My point to you was (as I said to Rifleair) that the evidence for the various claims about how easy Brexit was going to be had already been presented by a number of posters here and on the other Brexit threads.

Now, given that (a) the evidence exists and (b) you are following the Brexit threads, it seems reasonable to conclude that you are tending to discount all the evidence that you don't agree with.

You have also again gone off on a couple of tangents from your own original tangent. We have talked before about the use of the 'D-bomb' and the problems caused by the use of words like 'democratic' as polemic adjectives, because in such rhetoric they imply that there is only one form of 'democracy' at play.

The referendum is an example of direct democracy that we have very little experience with and which requires the presentation of complex issues in a simplistic binary format. On the other hand, Parliament is an example of representative democracy which has evolved over centuries and with which, for better or worse, it is possible to debate complex issue in full.

We have already discussed that MPs are not delegates, and that they have to weigh up the interests of all their constituents (and their parties, and their country), not just the ones who voted for them. Frankly, emotive terms like 'deliberate undermining' don't help as they don't reflect the complexity of the situation.
One other thing, I will challenge anyone who thinks what is happening in Parliament is anything close to democracy at work!
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
The problem is simply that these two different forms of democracy have come up with different results.
So you do think parliament is acting democratically?

Maybe you can explain how a vote by an MP is worth more than a vote by the person who put them there?
 
So you do think parliament is acting democratically?

Maybe you can explain how a vote by an MP is worth more than a vote by the person who put them there?
Parliament was elected democratically and is acting in line with customary rules and procedures. There are people (like Bill Cash) ready to pounce on the merest hint of an irregularity. You know this. You may not like it, but I can't help you there.

If you divide the electorate (approximately 30,000,000) by the number of MP (650) it gives you the relative 'value' of the different votes (46,000:1) but that's a meaningless calculation.

As you very well know, the electorate participates by voting for the MP. Votes in the House are the responsibility of, er, the MP. For the nth time they're not just 'delegates'. So trying to compare the relative 'value' of the votes is meaningless.

If you don't like what they're doing, don't vote for them next time.

That's how our representative, parliamentary, democracy works.
 
You really are a whiny little neo-liberal loon.
Clearly he/she is incapable of understanding metaphore
The problem is that when you're voting you're voting for what's on the ballot paper. You're not voting for what Joe Bloggs said or something you saw on the side of a bus. The question on the Brexit ballot paper was straightforward but the answer was open to interpretation. You can rail against the Tories for not giving you the Brexit you want but you still keep voting them into power.
if the people you are voting for are specific in what they are saying i.e. you must be very scared because we will be leaving all the institutions of the eu and then the sky will fall in, and then they reinforce that with their general election manifesto then of course you can rail against them for not giving the brexit that they promised.
 
The great ARRSE poll of 2019 would agree with you.

What is heartening to see though, even in these bleak socio-political times, nobody has ticked the green option.

Is it dusty in here?...
Ah the Melons, green on the outside but bright red under the skin.
 
Clearly he/she is incapable of understanding metaphore


if the people you are voting for are specific in what they are saying i.e. you must be very scared because we will be leaving all the institutions of the eu and then the sky will fall in, and then they reinforce that with their general election manifesto then of course you can rail against them for not giving the brexit that they promised.
Well have fun.
I'll have the popcorn and beers ready fro the UK's election count. I have a feeling there may be much wailing and gnashing of teeth.
 

Latest Threads

Top