politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The front pages on this historic day
Comments
-
I don't think any country is immune from doing great damage to themselves via some kind of "green" imperative.contrarian said:Consider the latest economic data from Europe.
Almost no growth at all, France and Italy shrinking. The ECB with the easing taps full on and insisting things are getting better. Negative bond yields across a slew of markets.
What's the recipe for recovery? Ursula Von Der Leyen's unscrutinised and unvoted for green deal. A green deal that promises to further penalise the great manufacturing bases of Europe in Germany, France and Italy.
Even the most devoted euro enthusiast would surely concede its not an attractive picture.0 -
That's such a bullshit statement. The EU is much more than a trade agreement. If it was just trade then Brexit would never have happened.rottenborough said:1 -
Very true it is a broadly political project which seeks ever closer union amongst its member states. If only we could somehow have obtained an opt out from that ever closer union.MaxPB said:
That's such a bullshit statement. The EU is much more than a trade agreement. If it was just trade then Brexit would never have happened.rottenborough said:0 -
Still effectively members during the transition, then on to a FTA?rottenborough said:0 -
Maybe but democratic countries are able to undo the worst excesses of these policies when they occur much more quickly and flexibly than an institution like the EU. Boris has already said he will not go down the hair shirt route, and his backbenchers would be all over him if he did.TOPPING said:
I don't think any country is immune from doing great damage to themselves via some kind of "green" imperative.contrarian said:Consider the latest economic data from Europe.
Almost no growth at all, France and Italy shrinking. The ECB with the easing taps full on and insisting things are getting better. Negative bond yields across a slew of markets.
What's the recipe for recovery? Ursula Von Der Leyen's unscrutinised and unvoted for green deal. A green deal that promises to further penalise the great manufacturing bases of Europe in Germany, France and Italy.
Even the most devoted euro enthusiast would surely concede its not an attractive picture.
Who or what is to check Von Der Leyen?
0 -
Yes, the same value as when we secured reductions in CAP spending.TOPPING said:
Very true it is a broadly political project which seeks ever closer union amongst its member states. If only we could somehow have obtained an opt out from that ever closer union.MaxPB said:
That's such a bullshit statement. The EU is much more than a trade agreement. If it was just trade then Brexit would never have happened.rottenborough said:0 -
As is Dawn Butler.Jonathan said:
Burgon is appalling.NickPalmer said:
Nothing against Rayner, but I see her as a loyalist rather than a left-winger. I accpet that we need Starmer or Nandy at the top of the ticket, but a signal to the Corbynites (like me) that we're not throwing everything overboard would be good for unity. And race is mildly relevant too at about the same level as gender - it's odd that we've never had a senior black MP in either leader or deputy slots.Stocky said:
That`s interesting. Why Butler rather than Raynor?NickPalmer said:
Butler is reliably Corbynite without going OTT about it, and I think also there's a feeling that some racial and gender balance with Starmer would be a good idea. I'm considering voting for her.MarqueeMark said:
Burgon is buggered.....Stocky said:Anyone else surprised how well Dawn Butler is doing in CLP nominations? She`s in strong second place. Anything to read into this?
I might vote for Rayner in the end, but certainly I think there should be a contest, and Butler would be an interesting contrast. I don't share the dislike of Burgon that seems common here, but he's a bit One True Faith for me.0 -
The members. That's how it works in a club. Either you sign up and accept all the rules albeit one or two you don't want, or you leave the club. We chose the latter option. But the EU is a democratic institution whose members retain sovereignty, as we demonstrated.contrarian said:
Maybe but democratic countries are able to undo the worst excesses of these policies when they occur much more quickly and flexibly than an institution like the EU. Boris has already said he will not go down the hair shirt route, and his backbenchers would be all over him if he did.TOPPING said:
I don't think any country is immune from doing great damage to themselves via some kind of "green" imperative.contrarian said:Consider the latest economic data from Europe.
Almost no growth at all, France and Italy shrinking. The ECB with the easing taps full on and insisting things are getting better. Negative bond yields across a slew of markets.
What's the recipe for recovery? Ursula Von Der Leyen's unscrutinised and unvoted for green deal. A green deal that promises to further penalise the great manufacturing bases of Europe in Germany, France and Italy.
Even the most devoted euro enthusiast would surely concede its not an attractive picture.
Who or what is to check Von Der Leyen?0 -
We'll never know. It was in one of those pesky EU agreements which we know they love to ignore.MaxPB said:
Yes, the same value as when we secured reductions in CAP spending.TOPPING said:
Very true it is a broadly political project which seeks ever closer union amongst its member states. If only we could somehow have obtained an opt out from that ever closer union.MaxPB said:
That's such a bullshit statement. The EU is much more than a trade agreement. If it was just trade then Brexit would never have happened.rottenborough said:0 -
Congratulations! If you ever fancy dipping back into academia I found the Open University very rewarding - did the degrees I should have done decades earlier!AlastairMeeks said:Meeksit means Meeksit. I suppose today is as good a day as any to announce that I’m retiring on 30 April.
0 -
Except for the reasons I stated 11pm suits us all.TOPPING said:
The point is, we will need a deal with the EU. Not to have one will be very bad for the UK, and less bad, but still bad for the EU, although far less on a per-country basis.Philip_Thompson said:
We are leaving on their terms somewhat because we want to leave with an agreement. You know full well that I was prepared to leave without a deal but always wanted one and remained stubbornly confident that we would get an amended deal even when all concerned said that was impossible.TOPPING said:
We do engage regularly, which I enjoy. As such I know when you are dissembling and dissembling you were when you tried to deflect on the substance of my post, small point as it was, that even leaving the EU we are doing it on their terms.Philip_Thompson said:
You don't think highly enough of yourself!TOPPING said:
You are evidently very worried otherwise you would have ignored my post.Philip_Thompson said:That's fine I'm not remotely worried!
If you are, if you're coming around to the idea of the UK being members as a humiliation, then I presume you are going to welcome our leaving. Welcome aboard!
I am just pointing out who is likely to have the greater influence in our future negotiations and the fact that we are leaving at midnight *their time* is a very small indication of this. Same with Boris' deal and the border in the Irish Sea, which he said no PM could ever agree to, just before he agreed to it.
I responded to your post because it was you and we engage frequently, not because of any worries. Had you not posted it I wouldn't have engaged in the topic by bringing it up unilaterally.
"It suits us"..."an hour early, great"..."less chance of disruption" are all, as you are well aware, dissembling.
The key to getting a deal is of course to compromise where you are able to and fight over issues that matter. This timing is not an issue that matters - it is a date and time that suits both parties so why fight over this issue?
I'm not interested in disagreeing for disagreements sake.
We can't just pretend that the bloc into which we send nearly half our exports doesn't exist and hence we can just have a "no deal" with them. We will have a deal and, sadly, it will be almost wholly on their terms. My small point about the fanfare of leaving at, er, 11pm our time, is that such is going to be the tenor of these negotiations. We will largely be takers not makers.
If you're claiming that we will get a trade deal that suits us all, then such a tenor is one I'm quite happy to embrace.1 -
Them: You can have any colour you want as long as it's blackPhilip_Thompson said:
Except for the reasons I stated 11pm suits us all.TOPPING said:
The point is, we will need a deal with the EU. Not to have one will be very bad for the UK, and less bad, but still bad for the EU, although far less on a per-country basis.Philip_Thompson said:
We are leaving on their terms somewhat because we want to leave with an agreement. You know full well that I was prepared to leave without a deal but always wanted one and remained stubbornly confident that we would get an amended deal even when all concerned said that was impossible.TOPPING said:
We do engage regularly, which I enjoy. As such I know when you are dissembling and dissembling you were when you tried to deflect on the substance of my post, small point as it was, that even leaving the EU we are doing it on their terms.Philip_Thompson said:
You don't think highly enough of yourself!TOPPING said:
You are evidently very worried otherwise you would have ignored my post.Philip_Thompson said:That's fine I'm not remotely worried!
If you are, if you're coming around to the idea of the UK being members as a humiliation, then I presume you are going to welcome our leaving. Welcome aboard!
I am just pointing out who is likely to have the greater influence in our futureeed to it.
I responded to your post because it was you and we engage frequently, not because of any worries. Had you not posted it I wouldn't have engaged in the topic by bringing it up unilaterally.
"It suits us"..."an hour early, great"..."less chance of disruption" are all, as you are well aware, dissembling.
The key to getting a deal is of course to compromise where you are able to and fight over issues that matter. This timing is not an issue that matters - it is a date and time that suits both parties so why fight over this issue?
I'm not interested in disagreeing for disagreements sake.
We can't just pretend that the bloc into which we send nearly half our exports doesn't exist and hence we can just have a "no deal" with them. We will have a deal and, sadly, it will be almost wholly on their terms. My small point about the fanfare of leaving at, er, 11pm our time, is that such is going to be the tenor of these negotiations. We will largely be takers not makers.
If you're claiming that we will get a trade deal that suits us all, then such a tenor is one I'm quite happy to embrace.
Us: That's great we like black.0 -
I suppose if you genuinely like black then it’s a convenient coincidence.TOPPING said:
Them: You can have any colour you want as long as it's blackPhilip_Thompson said:
Except for the reasons I stated 11pm suits us all.TOPPING said:
The point is, we will need a deal with the EU. Not to have one will be very bad for the UK, and less bad, but still bad for the EU, although far less on a per-country basis.Philip_Thompson said:
We are leaving on their terms somewhat because we want to leave with an agreement. You know full well that I was prepared to leave without a deal but always wanted one and remained stubbornly confident that we would get an amended deal even when all concerned said that was impossible.TOPPING said:
We do engage regularly, which I enjoy. As such I know when you are dissembling and dissembling you were when you tried to deflect on the substance of my post, small point as it was, that even leaving the EU we are doing it on their terms.Philip_Thompson said:
You don't think highly enough of yourself!TOPPING said:
You are evidently very worried otherwise you would have ignored my post.Philip_Thompson said:That's fine I'm not remotely worried!
If you are, if you're coming around to the idea of the UK being members as a humiliation, then I presume you are going to welcome our leaving. Welcome aboard!
I am just pointing out who is likely to have the greater influence in our futureeed to it.
I responded to your post because it was you and we engage frequently, not because of any worries. Had you not posted it I wouldn't have engaged in the topic by bringing it up unilaterally.
"It suits us"..."an hour early, great"..."less chance of disruption" are all, as you are well aware, dissembling.
The key to getting a deal is of course to compromise where you are able to and fight over issues that matter. This timing is not an issue that matters - it is a date and time that suits both parties so why fight over this issue?
I'm not interested in disagreeing for disagreements sake.
We can't just pretend that the bloc into which we send nearly half our exports doesn't exist and hence we can just have a "no deal" with them. We will have a deal and, sadly, it will be almost wholly on their terms. My small point about the fanfare of leaving at, er, 11pm our time, is that such is going to be the tenor of these negotiations. We will largely be takers not makers.
If you're claiming that we will get a trade deal that suits us all, then such a tenor is one I'm quite happy to embrace.
Us: That's great we like black.1 -
You're getting it.TOPPING said:
Them: You can have any colour you want as long as it's blackPhilip_Thompson said:
Except for the reasons I stated 11pm suits us all.TOPPING said:
The point is, we will need a deal with the EU. Not to have one will be very bad for the UK, and less bad, but still bad for the EU, although far less on a per-country basis.Philip_Thompson said:
We are leaving on their terms somewhat because we want to leave with an agreement. You know full well that I was prepared to leave without a deal but always wanted one and remained stubbornly confident that we would get an amended deal even when all concerned said that was impossible.TOPPING said:
We do engage regularly, which I enjoy. As such I know when you are dissembling and dissembling you were when you tried to deflect on the substance of my post, small point as it was, that even leaving the EU we are doing it on their terms.Philip_Thompson said:
You don't think highly enough of yourself!TOPPING said:
You are evidently very worried otherwise you would have ignored my post.Philip_Thompson said:That's fine I'm not remotely worried!
If you are, if you're coming around to the idea of the UK being members as a humiliation, then I presume you are going to welcome our leaving. Welcome aboard!
I am just pointing out who is likely to have the greater influence in our futureeed to it.
I responded to your post because it was you and we engage frequently, not because of any worries. Had you not posted it I wouldn't have engaged in the topic by bringing it up unilaterally.
"It suits us"..."an hour early, great"..."less chance of disruption" are all, as you are well aware, dissembling.
The key to getting a deal is of course to compromise where you are able to and fight over issues that matter. This timing is not an issue that matters - it is a date and time that suits both parties so why fight over this issue?
I'm not interested in disagreeing for disagreements sake.
We can't just pretend that the bloc into which we send nearly half our exports doesn't exist and hence we can just have a "no deal" with them. We will have a deal and, sadly, it will be almost wholly on their terms. My small point about the fanfare of leaving at, er, 11pm our time, is that such is going to be the tenor of these negotiations. We will largely be takers not makers.
If you're claiming that we will get a trade deal that suits us all, then such a tenor is one I'm quite happy to embrace.
Us: That's great we like black.
0 -
She's alright.justin124 said:
As is Dawn Butler.Jonathan said:
Burgon is appalling.NickPalmer said:
Nothing against Rayner, but I see her as a loyalist rather than a left-winger. I accpet that we need Starmer or Nandy at the top of the ticket, but a signal to the Corbynites (like me) that we're not throwing everything overboard would be good for unity. And race is mildly relevant too at about the same level as gender - it's odd that we've never had a senior black MP in either leader or deputy slots.Stocky said:
That`s interesting. Why Butler rather than Raynor?NickPalmer said:
Butler is reliably Corbynite without going OTT about it, and I think also there's a feeling that some racial and gender balance with Starmer would be a good idea. I'm considering voting for her.MarqueeMark said:
Burgon is buggered.....Stocky said:Anyone else surprised how well Dawn Butler is doing in CLP nominations? She`s in strong second place. Anything to read into this?
I might vote for Rayner in the end, but certainly I think there should be a contest, and Butler would be an interesting contrast. I don't share the dislike of Burgon that seems common here, but he's a bit One True Faith for me.0 -
She comes across as thick and incoherent.TheGreenMachine said:
She's alright.justin124 said:
As is Dawn Butler.Jonathan said:
Burgon is appalling.NickPalmer said:
Nothing against Rayner, but I see her as a loyalist rather than a left-winger. I accpet that we need Starmer or Nandy at the top of the ticket, but a signal to the Corbynites (like me) that we're not throwing everything overboard would be good for unity. And race is mildly relevant too at about the same level as gender - it's odd that we've never had a senior black MP in either leader or deputy slots.Stocky said:
That`s interesting. Why Butler rather than Raynor?NickPalmer said:
Butler is reliably Corbynite without going OTT about it, and I think also there's a feeling that some racial and gender balance with Starmer would be a good idea. I'm considering voting for her.MarqueeMark said:
Burgon is buggered.....Stocky said:Anyone else surprised how well Dawn Butler is doing in CLP nominations? She`s in strong second place. Anything to read into this?
I might vote for Rayner in the end, but certainly I think there should be a contest, and Butler would be an interesting contrast. I don't share the dislike of Burgon that seems common here, but he's a bit One True Faith for me.0 -
I think we're getting closer to an explanation of Brexit.Gallowgate said:I suppose if you genuinely like black then it’s a convenient coincidence.
0 -
👀👀👀👀
QAnon Followers Are Drinking Bleach to Avoid Coronavirus
https://www.menshealth.com/health/a30702086/qanon-drinking-bleach-coronavirus/0 -
TBF, if the dosage is sufficient, that's 100% effective.TheScreamingEagles said:👀👀👀👀
QAnon Followers Are Drinking Bleach to Avoid Coronavirus
https://www.menshealth.com/health/a30702086/qanon-drinking-bleach-coronavirus/
The side effects are a little extreme, though....1 -
The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
0 -
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.0 -
Worthy of a Darwin Award for anyone who gets the dosage high enough.Nigelb said:
TBF, if the dosage is sufficient, that's 100% effective.TheScreamingEagles said:👀👀👀👀
QAnon Followers Are Drinking Bleach to Avoid Coronavirus
https://www.menshealth.com/health/a30702086/qanon-drinking-bleach-coronavirus/
The side effects are a little extreme, though....0 -
Wings over Scotland - Sturgeon 'The Betrayer' following her speech this morning
https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-betrayer/comment-page-1/#comment-25133100 -
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.0 -
Clearly it was. We democratically voted to leave the thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.0 -
Yes, by leaving it the UK is no longer within the confines of the EU.Gallowgate said:
Clearly it was. We democratically voted to leave the thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.
0 -
Indeed once we've left we're no long within the confines. QED.Gallowgate said:
Clearly it was. We democratically voted to leave the thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.0 -
He is right that we could not vote to remove Ursula von der Leyen though. That is a big mistake by the EU. They should have a directly elected President. A few cycles of that and we may want to be part of those big elections.Gallowgate said:
Clearly it was. We democratically voted to leave the thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.0 -
I worry that this is a test by the Russians to see the level of brainwashing. If they can get some to kill themselves they could get them to kill others.Philip_Thompson said:
Worthy of a Darwin Award for anyone who gets the dosage high enough.Nigelb said:
TBF, if the dosage is sufficient, that's 100% effective.TheScreamingEagles said:👀👀👀👀
QAnon Followers Are Drinking Bleach to Avoid Coronavirus
https://www.menshealth.com/health/a30702086/qanon-drinking-bleach-coronavirus/
The side effects are a little extreme, though....0 -
Most astonishingly, some senior policymakers think green policy has the capacity to drive growth. Where is the evidence for this? its just insane.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.0 -
Japan and Iceland might be stretches there.RobD said:
Still effectively members during the transition, then on to a FTA?rottenborough said:0 -
I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.0 -
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.0 -
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?0 -
Because the members of the club agree on a set of rules and members must abide by those rules. You're arguing that competitors who turn up to Wimbledon are forced to play tennis. It is an identity. It doesn't mean we weren't sovereign as we always were.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.0 -
Quite. She has far more power than a head of state. A head of state would have had to campaign on her green deal everywhere from Belfast to Belgrade, and watch bits get knocked off it by every populist in town until it did not exist any more.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
In her position she can just impose it. Almost incredibly I believe I heard her use the word 'mandate'.0 -
Is Liz Windsor imposing a far reaching green deal?TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?0 -
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?0 -
Fucking hell it was a club. We decided to join and then we decided to leave. All perfectly democratic.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.0 -
This is just a fundamental misunderstanding of how the EU works. Typical really.contrarian said:
Quite. She has far more power than a head of state. A head of state would have had to campaign on her green deal everywhere from Belfast to Belgrade, and watch bits get knocked off it by every populist in town until it did not exist any more.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
In her position can just impose it. Almost incredibly I believe I heard her use the word 'mandate'.0 -
Yeah, and while we were members we were bound by the rules. I don't think that's in question.TOPPING said:
Fucking hell it was a club. We decided to join and then we decided to leave. All perfectly democratic.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.0 -
There’s a turn-up ☺Philip_Thompson said:I'm not interested in disagreeing for disagreements sake.
This 11 pm point, though, Topping probably making too much of it - think he is - but it is interesting that we didn't hold out for a proper midnight slot. Perhaps we got something in return. Let's hope so.1 -
0
-
Her successor plans to do so.contrarian said:
Is Liz Windsor imposing a far reaching green deal?TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
He's been banging about it this week.0 -
So what's with the democratic/sovereignty bollocks?RobD said:
Yeah, and while we were members we were bound by the rules. I don't think that's in question.TOPPING said:
Fucking hell it was a club. We decided to join and then we decided to leave. All perfectly democratic.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.0 -
Bound by the rules our democratically elected government pretty much wrote themselves.RobD said:
Yeah, and while we were members we were bound by the rules. I don't think that's in question.TOPPING said:
Fucking hell it was a club. We decided to join and then we decided to leave. All perfectly democratic.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.0 -
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?0 -
Remind me what happened to a previous monarch with the name Charles.TheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we? 0 -
But a directly elected President would then be criticized as suggesting the EU is a nation.Gabs3 said:
He is right that we could not vote to remove Ursula von der Leyen though. That is a big mistake by the EU. They should have a directly elected President. A few cycles of that and we may want to be part of those big elections.Gallowgate said:
Clearly it was. We democratically voted to leave the thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.
Which would still wind up those who voted Leave . Unless of course it was a UK politician who got the job !
0 -
That is exactly the plotline of the play King Charles III, the result is the Duchess of Cambridge manoeuvres to force his abdication and she and William take the throne insteadTheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?0 -
Well Charles II sired like a dozen illegitimate children with his mistresses.RobD said:
Remind me what happened to a previous monarch with the name Charles.TheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?
King Charles are randy gits who put their own desires ahead of the country.0 -
Doesn’t sound very democratic.HYUFD said:
That is exactly the plotline of the play King Charles III, the result is the Duchess of Cambridge manoeuvres to force his abdication and she and William take the throne insteadTheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?0 -
Could you give us a 'heads up' please?RobD said:
Remind me what happened to a previous monarch with the name Charles.TheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we? 2 -
Since your e-mail is stereotyping and unnecessarily perjorative, I think it's best to leave you in your present bewildered state.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.0 -
Say what?Wulfrun_Phil said:
Since your e-mail is stereotyping and unnecessarily perjorative, I think it's best to leave you in your present bewildered state.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.0 -
The issue with the EU is that its not a club where the members agree on a set of rules and then abide with them. If that was the case there would be less of an issue.TOPPING said:
Because the members of the club agree on a set of rules and members must abide by those rules. You're arguing that competitors who turn up to Wimbledon are forced to play tennis. It is an identity. It doesn't mean we weren't sovereign as we always were.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.
The EU has powers to create new rules without any consent from the UK. It does that within the rules the UK agreed to in the past via the Lisbon Treaty etc but the British public never endorsed the Lisbon Treaty.0 -
Polling shows the vast majority of voters want to keep the monarchy but a narrow majority prefer William and Kate to Charles and Camilla as next monarchsGallowgate said:
Doesn’t sound very democratic.HYUFD said:
That is exactly the plotline of the play King Charles III, the result is the Duchess of Cambridge manoeuvres to force his abdication and she and William take the throne insteadTheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/make-william-next-king-say-87088000 -
I think the national newspapers can take "credit" for Brexit, if credit is the right word, for years of drip drip fake news on the EU. They have been sources of mass disinformation, generated in a filthy desire to appeal to people's basest of instincts in their attitudes to anything foreign. A genuine critique of the EU is that it did not work hard enough at rebuttal, and was far too complacent.0
-
Polling also shows Remain ahead of Leave. And what?HYUFD said:
Polling shows the vast majority of voters want to keep the monarchy but a narrow majority prefer William and Kate to Charles and Camilla as next monarchsGallowgate said:
Doesn’t sound very democratic.HYUFD said:
That is exactly the plotline of the play King Charles III, the result is the Duchess of Cambridge manoeuvres to force his abdication and she and William take the throne insteadTheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?0 -
If the EU doesn't want to be a nation it shouldn't have a Parliament and a President and Commission setting laws.nico67 said:
But a directly elected President would then be criticized as suggesting the EU is a nation.Gabs3 said:
He is right that we could not vote to remove Ursula von der Leyen though. That is a big mistake by the EU. They should have a directly elected President. A few cycles of that and we may want to be part of those big elections.Gallowgate said:
Clearly it was. We democratically voted to leave the thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.
Which would still wind up those who voted Leave . Unless of course it was a UK politician who got the job !
If it does want to be a nation it should be democratic.
Don't take the powers but refuse the democracy.1 -
Gallowgate is simply relaying facts which I of course understand isn’t what many Leavers can always grasp !Wulfrun_Phil said:
Since your e-mail is stereotyping and unnecessarily perjorative, I think it's best to leave you in your present bewildered state.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
UVDL is not a head of state! As the EU isn’t a state ! Those are the facts !0 -
You do realize that the EU parliament is directly elected and has a veto over the appointment of the “President”...Philip_Thompson said:
If the EU doesn't want to be a nation it shouldn't have a Parliament and a President and Commission setting laws.nico67 said:
But a directly elected President would then be criticized as suggesting the EU is a nation.Gabs3 said:
He is right that we could not vote to remove Ursula von der Leyen though. That is a big mistake by the EU. They should have a directly elected President. A few cycles of that and we may want to be part of those big elections.Gallowgate said:
Clearly it was. We democratically voted to leave the thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.
Which would still wind up those who voted Leave . Unless of course it was a UK politician who got the job !
If it does want to be a nation it should be democratic.
Don't take the powers but refuse the democracy.
Sounds familiar...0 -
Leave won the referendum, a pro Leave PM was re elected and not one poll putting Remain ahead has it much more than 50% ie margin of errorGallowgate said:
Polling also shows Remain ahead of Leave. And what?HYUFD said:
Polling shows the vast majority of voters want to keep the monarchy but a narrow majority prefer William and Kate to Charles and Camilla as next monarchsGallowgate said:
Doesn’t sound very democratic.HYUFD said:
That is exactly the plotline of the play King Charles III, the result is the Duchess of Cambridge manoeuvres to force his abdication and she and William take the throne insteadTheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?0 -
At certain concentrations bleach is harmless. That Milton stuff you sterilise baby bottles with is basically bleachGabs3 said:
I worry that this is a test by the Russians to see the level of brainwashing. If they can get some to kill themselves they could get them to kill others.Philip_Thompson said:
Worthy of a Darwin Award for anyone who gets the dosage high enough.Nigelb said:
TBF, if the dosage is sufficient, that's 100% effective.TheScreamingEagles said:👀👀👀👀
QAnon Followers Are Drinking Bleach to Avoid Coronavirus
https://www.menshealth.com/health/a30702086/qanon-drinking-bleach-coronavirus/
The side effects are a little extreme, though....0 -
"Ahead of the UK leaving the European Union on Friday, Remain campaigners are buying and streaming Beethoven’s seminal work – while Leavers champion Dominic Frisby’s ‘17 Million F***-Offs’."
Says it all really.
https://www.classicfm.com/composers/beethoven/andre-rieu-ode-to-joy-charts/0 -
Exactly. Polling is irrelevant.HYUFD said:
Leave won the referendum, a pro Leave PM was re elected and not one poll putting Remain ahead has it much more than 50% ie margin of errorGallowgate said:
Polling also shows Remain ahead of Leave. And what?HYUFD said:
Polling shows the vast majority of voters want to keep the monarchy but a narrow majority prefer William and Kate to Charles and Camilla as next monarchsGallowgate said:
Doesn’t sound very democratic.HYUFD said:
That is exactly the plotline of the play King Charles III, the result is the Duchess of Cambridge manoeuvres to force his abdication and she and William take the throne insteadTheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?0 -
Charles is pro action on climate change, pro heritage conservation, pro helping young people find work through the Princes Trust, pro helping Palestinians, he is actually quite altruisticTheScreamingEagles said:
Well Charles II sired like a dozen illegitimate children with his mistresses.RobD said:
Remind me what happened to a previous monarch with the name Charles.TheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?
King Charles are randy gits who put their own desires ahead of the country.0 -
Several polls had Leave ahead before the referendumGallowgate said:
Exactly. Polling is irrelevant.HYUFD said:
Leave won the referendum, a pro Leave PM was re elected and not one poll putting Remain ahead has it much more than 50% ie margin of errorGallowgate said:
Polling also shows Remain ahead of Leave. And what?HYUFD said:
Polling shows the vast majority of voters want to keep the monarchy but a narrow majority prefer William and Kate to Charles and Camilla as next monarchsGallowgate said:
Doesn’t sound very democratic.HYUFD said:
That is exactly the plotline of the play King Charles III, the result is the Duchess of Cambridge manoeuvres to force his abdication and she and William take the throne insteadTheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?0 -
'Course he might not be King Charles, could be George.TheScreamingEagles said:
Well Charles II sired like a dozen illegitimate children with his mistresses.RobD said:
Remind me what happened to a previous monarch with the name Charles.TheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?
King Charles are randy gits who put their own desires ahead of the country.0 -
It's all part of it. We can throw out some stuff and endorse other stuff. We are or were part of the team that created new rules. The Lisbon Treaty was more a fuck up of British politics.Philip_Thompson said:
The issue with the EU is that its not a club where the members agree on a set of rules and then abide with them. If that was the case there would be less of an issue.TOPPING said:
Because the members of the club agree on a set of rules and members must abide by those rules. You're arguing that competitors who turn up to Wimbledon are forced to play tennis. It is an identity. It doesn't mean we weren't sovereign as we always were.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.
The EU has powers to create new rules without any consent from the UK. It does that within the rules the UK agreed to in the past via the Lisbon Treaty etc but the British public never endorsed the Lisbon Treaty.
And now we have left. All perfectly democratic and the actions of a sovereign nation. As David Davis so clearly recognised.0 -
Not very familiar no. What's it familiar to in your eyes? Surely not our Parliament which requires the PM to be an elected MP and typically the leader of the party who won the election.Gallowgate said:
You do realize that the EU parliament is directly elected and has a veto over the appointment of the “President”...Philip_Thompson said:
If the EU doesn't want to be a nation it shouldn't have a Parliament and a President and Commission setting laws.nico67 said:
But a directly elected President would then be criticized as suggesting the EU is a nation.Gabs3 said:
He is right that we could not vote to remove Ursula von der Leyen though. That is a big mistake by the EU. They should have a directly elected President. A few cycles of that and we may want to be part of those big elections.Gallowgate said:
Clearly it was. We democratically voted to leave the thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.
Which would still wind up those who voted Leave . Unless of course it was a UK politician who got the job !
If it does want to be a nation it should be democratic.
Don't take the powers but refuse the democracy.
Sounds familiar...0 -
But unelected.HYUFD said:
Charles is pro action on climate change, pro heritage conservation, pro helping young people find work through the Princes Trust, pro helping Palestinians, he is actually quite altruisticTheScreamingEagles said:
Well Charles II sired like a dozen illegitimate children with his mistresses.RobD said:
Remind me what happened to a previous monarch with the name Charles.TheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?
King Charles are randy gits who put their own desires ahead of the country.0 -
Hilarious isn't it. We have left the club and the headbangers are still ranting about the same simplistic mantras. Do we hear them complain we do not elect the secretary general of the EU? And when di the population of the world vote for Britain to have permanent seat on the security council? Who recalls having a vote for the Secretary general of NATO, or the Supreme Allied Commander (an American FFS)? Don't get me started on the Royal family or the House of Lords!TOPPING said:
Fucking hell it was a club. We decided to join and then we decided to leave. All perfectly democratic.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.0 -
I recommend people pay it a visit if they’re ever in the North East.
https://twitter.com/newcastlecc/status/1223226834168492033?s=210 -
It must be very disappointing for you that we should be leaving the EU.HYUFD said:
Leave won the referendum, a pro Leave PM was re elected and not one poll putting Remain ahead has it much more than 50% ie margin of errorGallowgate said:
Polling also shows Remain ahead of Leave. And what?HYUFD said:
Polling shows the vast majority of voters want to keep the monarchy but a narrow majority prefer William and Kate to Charles and Camilla as next monarchsGallowgate said:
Doesn’t sound very democratic.HYUFD said:
That is exactly the plotline of the play King Charles III, the result is the Duchess of Cambridge manoeuvres to force his abdication and she and William take the throne insteadTheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?0 -
Typo! I meant the Secretary General of the UN !Nigel_Foremain said:
Hilarious isn't it. We have left the club and the headbangers are still ranting about the same simplistic mantras. Do we hear them complain we do not elect the secretary general of the EU? And when di the population of the world vote for Britain to have permanent seat on the security council? Who recalls having a vote for the Secretary general of NATO, or the Supreme Allied Commander (an American FFS)? Don't get me started on the Royal family or the House of Lords!TOPPING said:
Fucking hell it was a club. We decided to join and then we decided to leave. All perfectly democratic.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.0 -
The PM having to be an MP is not actually a requirement.Philip_Thompson said:
Not very familiar no. What's it familiar to in your eyes? Surely not our Parliament which requires the PM to be an elected MP and typically the leader of the party who won the election.Gallowgate said:
You do realize that the EU parliament is directly elected and has a veto over the appointment of the “President”...Philip_Thompson said:
If the EU doesn't want to be a nation it shouldn't have a Parliament and a President and Commission setting laws.nico67 said:
But a directly elected President would then be criticized as suggesting the EU is a nation.Gabs3 said:
He is right that we could not vote to remove Ursula von der Leyen though. That is a big mistake by the EU. They should have a directly elected President. A few cycles of that and we may want to be part of those big elections.Gallowgate said:
Clearly it was. We democratically voted to leave the thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.
Which would still wind up those who voted Leave . Unless of course it was a UK politician who got the job !
If it does want to be a nation it should be democratic.
Don't take the powers but refuse the democracy.
Sounds familiar...0 -
Indeed we should abolish the monarchy.TheScreamingEagles said:
But unelected.HYUFD said:
Charles is pro action on climate change, pro heritage conservation, pro helping young people find work through the Princes Trust, pro helping Palestinians, he is actually quite altruisticTheScreamingEagles said:
Well Charles II sired like a dozen illegitimate children with his mistresses.RobD said:
Remind me what happened to a previous monarch with the name Charles.TheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?
King Charles are randy gits who put their own desires ahead of the country.
But in the meantime the monarch doesn't actually act via politics. If that ever changes I hope we will abolish the monarchy PDQ.0 -
It de facto is. Our PM's position stems from him leading the party at the last election and winning it. Other PMs who take over midterm do so typically because they take over the leadership of the party that won the last election.Gallowgate said:
The PM having to be an MP is not actually a requirement.Philip_Thompson said:
Not very familiar no. What's it familiar to in your eyes? Surely not our Parliament which requires the PM to be an elected MP and typically the leader of the party who won the election.Gallowgate said:
You do realize that the EU parliament is directly elected and has a veto over the appointment of the “President”...Philip_Thompson said:
If the EU doesn't want to be a nation it shouldn't have a Parliament and a President and Commission setting laws.nico67 said:
But a directly elected President would then be criticized as suggesting the EU is a nation.Gabs3 said:
He is right that we could not vote to remove Ursula von der Leyen though. That is a big mistake by the EU. They should have a directly elected President. A few cycles of that and we may want to be part of those big elections.Gallowgate said:
Clearly it was. We democratically voted to leave the thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.
Which would still wind up those who voted Leave . Unless of course it was a UK politician who got the job !
If it does want to be a nation it should be democratic.
Don't take the powers but refuse the democracy.
Sounds familiar...
Where does von der Leyen's mandate come from. Which constituency did she stand in last time? What election did she stand in? What election did she win? How did the voters endorse her?0 -
Our system essentially functions like the EU does. The Queen appoints a Prime Minister and if Parliament doesn’t like it they can get rid.Gallowgate said:
The PM having to be an MP is not actually a requirement.Philip_Thompson said:
Not very familiar no. What's it familiar to in your eyes? Surely not our Parliament which requires the PM to be an elected MP and typically the leader of the party who won the election.Gallowgate said:
You do realize that the EU parliament is directly elected and has a veto over the appointment of the “President”...Philip_Thompson said:
If the EU doesn't want to be a nation it shouldn't have a Parliament and a President and Commission setting laws.nico67 said:
But a directly elected President would then be criticized as suggesting the EU is a nation.Gabs3 said:
He is right that we could not vote to remove Ursula von der Leyen though. That is a big mistake by the EU. They should have a directly elected President. A few cycles of that and we may want to be part of those big elections.Gallowgate said:
Clearly it was. We democratically voted to leave the thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.
Which would still wind up those who voted Leave . Unless of course it was a UK politician who got the job !
If it does want to be a nation it should be democratic.
Don't take the powers but refuse the democracy.
Sounds familiar...
I know you’re going to disagree for the sake of it because it goes against your “tHe EU is UnDeMOCratic” worldview but whatever.0 -
The fanaticism of the convert is always a rather repulsive thing to witness. "The side I have defected to won, so the other roughly 50% can go and fuck themselves while I party with my new friends" Pathetic and shallow.TOPPING said:
It must be very disappointing for you that we should be leaving the EU.HYUFD said:
Leave won the referendum, a pro Leave PM was re elected and not one poll putting Remain ahead has it much more than 50% ie margin of errorGallowgate said:
Polling also shows Remain ahead of Leave. And what?HYUFD said:
Polling shows the vast majority of voters want to keep the monarchy but a narrow majority prefer William and Kate to Charles and Camilla as next monarchsGallowgate said:
Doesn’t sound very democratic.HYUFD said:
That is exactly the plotline of the play King Charles III, the result is the Duchess of Cambridge manoeuvres to force his abdication and she and William take the throne insteadTheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?0 -
Our system essentially functions like the EU?Gallowgate said:
Our system essentially functions like the EU does. The Queen appoints a Prime Minister and if Parliament doesn’t like it they can get rid.Gallowgate said:
The PM having to be an MP is not actually a requirement.Philip_Thompson said:
Not very familiar no. What's it familiar to in your eyes? Surely not our Parliament which requires the PM to be an elected MP and typically the leader of the party who won the election.Gallowgate said:
You do realize that the EU parliament is directly elected and has a veto over the appointment of the “President”...Philip_Thompson said:
If the EU doesn't want to be a nation it shouldn't have a Parliament and a President and Commission setting laws.nico67 said:
But a directly elected President would then be criticized as suggesting the EU is a nation.Gabs3 said:
He is right that we could not vote to remove Ursula von der Leyen though. That is a big mistake by the EU. They should have a directly elected President. A few cycles of that and we may want to be part of those big elections.Gallowgate said:
Clearly it was. We democratically voted to leave the thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.
Which would still wind up those who voted Leave . Unless of course it was a UK politician who got the job !
If it does want to be a nation it should be democratic.
Don't take the powers but refuse the democracy.
Sounds familiar...
I know you’re going to disagree for the sake of it because it goes against your “tHe EU is UnDeMOCratic” worldview but whatever.
For starters the EU parliament is subservient to the commission in terms of proposing legislation.0 -
Pretty much like our parliament then in normal times. The government controls 99% of the legislative agenda.RobD said:Our system essentially functions like the EU?
For starters the EU parliament is subservient to the commission in terms of proposing legislation.0 -
You own this now, Brexiteers. Lock, stock and barrel.
https://twitter.com/patel4witham/status/12232212788590223360 -
I hope be enjoyed Diane Abbott's Labour Party constituency victory celebrations.Nigel_Foremain said:
The fanaticism of the convert is always a rather repulsive thing to witness. "The side I have defected to won, so the other roughly 50% can go and fuck themselves while I party with my new friends" Pathetic and shallow.TOPPING said:
It must be very disappointing for you that we should be leaving the EU.HYUFD said:
Leave won the referendum, a pro Leave PM was re elected and not one poll putting Remain ahead has it much more than 50% ie margin of errorGallowgate said:
Polling also shows Remain ahead of Leave. And what?HYUFD said:
Polling shows the vast majority of voters want to keep the monarchy but a narrow majority prefer William and Kate to Charles and Camilla as next monarchsGallowgate said:
Doesn’t sound very democratic.HYUFD said:
That is exactly the plotline of the play King Charles III, the result is the Duchess of Cambridge manoeuvres to force his abdication and she and William take the throne insteadTheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?
But on a serious note, as a Diehard Remainer he probably is quite sad at our leaving.0 -
You don't understand our system so your misjudgement is forgiven.Gallowgate said:
Our system essentially functions like the EU does. The Queen appoints a Prime Minister and if Parliament doesn’t like it they can get rid.Gallowgate said:
The PM having to be an MP is not actually a requirement.Philip_Thompson said:
Not very familiar no. What's it familiar to in your eyes? Surely not our Parliament which requires the PM to be an elected MP and typically the leader of the party who won the election.Gallowgate said:
You do realize that the EU parliament is directly elected and has a veto over the appointment of the “President”...Philip_Thompson said:
If the EU doesn't want to be a nation it shouldn't have a Parliament and a President and Commission setting laws.nico67 said:
But a directly elected President would then be criticized as suggesting the EU is a nation.Gabs3 said:
He is right that we could not vote to remove Ursula von der Leyen though. That is a big mistake by the EU. They should have a directly elected President. A few cycles of that and we may want to be part of those big elections.Gallowgate said:
Clearly it was. We democratically voted to leave the thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but the principle of democracy is that we can at elections reverse any bad decisions, even if it takes time or tough choices to do so.TOPPING said:
Maybe so but the principle is a sound one. There may well be plenty of bad decisions made by our government that will take time to reverse.contrarian said:The members.
Well maybe but the response time between a green deal going collossally belly up and the members actually getting together and reversing some of the worse excesses of it could be extremely slow.
So slow, indeed that by the time they did it 1. huge damage may have been done to the economy and 2. The rest of the world will have learned a salutary lesson and adjusted their policy appropriately.
That's not possible within the confines of the EU.
Which would still wind up those who voted Leave . Unless of course it was a UK politician who got the job !
If it does want to be a nation it should be democratic.
Don't take the powers but refuse the democracy.
Sounds familiar...
I know you’re going to disagree for the sake of it because it goes against your “tHe EU is UnDeMOCratic” worldview but whatever.
Our Parliament via channels to the Queen chooses the PM from amongst its own number, based on the Commons makeup. The EU does not work that way.0 -
The same except when it is not?Gallowgate said:
Pretty much like our parliament then in normal times. The government controls 99% of the legislative agenda.RobD said:Our system essentially functions like the EU?
For starters the EU parliament is subservient to the commission in terms of proposing legislation.
Another difference is that the leader of the largest party becomes PM. Why didn't the EPP's candidate become commission president?1 -
@Philip_Thompson : Through the council of ministers you numpty, who are either directly and indirectly elected by their countries population. Most of those countries are far more directly democratic then the UK (not difficult). The appointment of her position has no less legitimacy than our system of appointing the PM.0
-
Why did the leader of the party who only got 43% of the vote become Prime Minister?RobD said:
The same except when it is not?Gallowgate said:
Pretty much like our parliament then in normal times. The government controls 99% of the legislative agenda.RobD said:Our system essentially functions like the EU?
For starters the EU parliament is subservient to the commission in terms of proposing legislation.
Another difference is that the leader of the largest party becomes PM. Why didn't the EPP's candidate become commission president?0 -
Juncker at least could claim a mandate.RobD said:
The same except when it is not?Gallowgate said:
Pretty much like our parliament then in normal times. The government controls 99% of the legislative agenda.RobD said:Our system essentially functions like the EU?
For starters the EU parliament is subservient to the commission in terms of proposing legislation.
Another difference is that the leader of the largest party becomes PM. Why didn't the EPP's candidate become commission president?0 -
Because it is seats that matter and not votes. In any case, we were discussing the similarities and differences between the UK and EU system.Gallowgate said:
Why did the leader of the party who only got 43% of the vote become Prime Minister?RobD said:
The same except when it is not?Gallowgate said:
Pretty much like our parliament then in normal times. The government controls 99% of the legislative agenda.RobD said:Our system essentially functions like the EU?
For starters the EU parliament is subservient to the commission in terms of proposing legislation.
Another difference is that the leader of the largest party becomes PM. Why didn't the EPP's candidate become commission president?0 -
I doubt it . They’ll just keep blaming others if it doesn’t turn out the way they expected . Remainers will get blamed for not believing enough . Then the EU will get blamed for not giving the UK the perfect deal.rottenborough said:You own this now, Brexiteers. Lock, stock and barrel.
https://twitter.com/patel4witham/status/1223221278859022336
It will never be anything to do with Leavers .1 -
Because he overwhelmingly won a majority at the election.Gallowgate said:
Why did the leader of the party who only got 43% of the vote become Prime Minister?RobD said:
The same except when it is not?Gallowgate said:
Pretty much like our parliament then in normal times. The government controls 99% of the legislative agenda.RobD said:Our system essentially functions like the EU?
For starters the EU parliament is subservient to the commission in terms of proposing legislation.
Another difference is that the leader of the largest party becomes PM. Why didn't the EPP's candidate become commission president?0 -
So what, 69% want to keep the monarchy to only 21% who want a republic so it is a non issue, support for the monarchy is one of the few issues most of us agree onTheScreamingEagles said:
But unelected.HYUFD said:
Charles is pro action on climate change, pro heritage conservation, pro helping young people find work through the Princes Trust, pro helping Palestinians, he is actually quite altruisticTheScreamingEagles said:
Well Charles II sired like a dozen illegitimate children with his mistresses.RobD said:
Remind me what happened to a previous monarch with the name Charles.TheScreamingEagles said:
I have a bet with a friend, I reckon within 10 years of Charles becoming our Head of State he refuses to give Royal Assent to a bill he doesn't like.RobD said:
I'd have more of an issue with that if she was responsible for the direction of the country, and the leader of the body that has sole responsibility for proposing legislation.TheScreamingEagles said:
But she has more democratic legitimacy than the UK's Head of State.RobD said:
Because of the principles of democracy. Who voted for the president of the EU? No one, she wasn't even one of the candidates from the two main groupings. Instead, she was parachuted in at the last minute.Gallowgate said:I don’t get why Leavers whinge about the EU being like a nation state and then whinge that it isn’t like a nation state ENOUGH with things like a directly elected head of state.
Ursula von der Leyen is not a head of state.
How many times has Liz Winsdor been elected?
Then what happens. We cannot vote him out can we?
King Charles are randy gits who put their own desires ahead of the country.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/05/18/who-are-monarchists0 -
No point even comparing democratic legitimacy when our democracy is ridiculously undemocratic.Philip_Thompson said:
Juncker at least could claim a mandate.RobD said:
The same except when it is not?Gallowgate said:
Pretty much like our parliament then in normal times. The government controls 99% of the legislative agenda.RobD said:Our system essentially functions like the EU?
For starters the EU parliament is subservient to the commission in terms of proposing legislation.
Another difference is that the leader of the largest party becomes PM. Why didn't the EPP's candidate become commission president?
I know you disagree but you’re looking at the EU through the eyes of our system.
Those like me who thinks that British democracy is a complete sham are going to think otherwise.0 -
Well the answer is the same. “Because that’s how the system works”.RobD said:
Because it is seats that matter and not votes. In any case, we were discussing the similarities and differences between the UK and EU system.Gallowgate said:
Why did the leader of the party who only got 43% of the vote become Prime Minister?RobD said:
The same except when it is not?Gallowgate said:
Pretty much like our parliament then in normal times. The government controls 99% of the legislative agenda.RobD said:Our system essentially functions like the EU?
For starters the EU parliament is subservient to the commission in terms of proposing legislation.
Another difference is that the leader of the largest party becomes PM. Why didn't the EPP's candidate become commission president?
Just because it’s different doesn’t mean its less democratic.
Our democracy is a sham after all.0 -
-
Ah, so they aren't essentially the same then.Gallowgate said:
Well the answer is the same. “Because that’s how the system works”.RobD said:
Because it is seats that matter and not votes. In any case, we were discussing the similarities and differences between the UK and EU system.Gallowgate said:
Why did the leader of the party who only got 43% of the vote become Prime Minister?RobD said:
The same except when it is not?Gallowgate said:
Pretty much like our parliament then in normal times. The government controls 99% of the legislative agenda.RobD said:Our system essentially functions like the EU?
For starters the EU parliament is subservient to the commission in terms of proposing legislation.
Another difference is that the leader of the largest party becomes PM. Why didn't the EPP's candidate become commission president?
Just because it’s different doesn’t mean its less democratic.
Our democracy is a sham after all. 0 -
A majority of seats not votes.Philip_Thompson said:
Because he overwhelmingly won a majority at the election.Gallowgate said:
Why did the leader of the party who only got 43% of the vote become Prime Minister?RobD said:
The same except when it is not?Gallowgate said:
Pretty much like our parliament then in normal times. The government controls 99% of the legislative agenda.RobD said:Our system essentially functions like the EU?
For starters the EU parliament is subservient to the commission in terms of proposing legislation.
Another difference is that the leader of the largest party becomes PM. Why didn't the EPP's candidate become commission president?
Many would argue that is not democracy.
I know you disagree but you must recognize many people do agree.0
