Question Time

BoroMart said:
I've compromised my stance, if you want more, that's capitulation.

If you want me to ignore the illegal funding and lies that secured victory, and theft of moderate votes for "not leaving the single market", then that's subjugation. I'm not down with that, sorry.

If you don't like my answer, it doesn't automatically make it prejudiced.


Absolutely not, you totally misunderstand, that's a major assumption of my views and incorrect. My issue is they DIDN'T all vote for the same thing. Some voted for escape from laws but part of single market, some for complete disassociation. The sensible, stay in the single market view..their votes were stolen through a dishonest vote. So I'm glad you see that people expected different things, how can you justify someone voting to leave the EU but remain in the single market as they were repeatedly told having their vote used for an entirely different objective and outcome? Is that what democracy is?
Click to expand...
I can not accept any of that when a majority disagrees. Right or wrong, it is democracy in action.
 
coluka said:
Oh ok fine you think i am wrong, i think you are hey ho, we are were we are though. Reality of life trumps blindness
Click to expand...
Mate, you are here preaching about compromise and not being prejudiced to each other and stopping the divide and coming together. Show it then, do your bit
 
coluka said:
I can not accept any of that when a majority disagrees. Right or wrong, it is democracy in action.
Click to expand...
Of course you can't, you won't compromise, you won't show honesty that there were serious procedural flaws in the process, not exactly bringing that divide down are we?

Like I said it isn't compromise you want, you've just proven it's capitulation.

While you refuse to accept the procedural flaws, then you are part of the problem because you are perpetuating the lack of integrity.
 
The biggest problem
coluka said:
I can not accept any of that when a majority disagrees. Right or wrong, it is democracy in action.
Click to expand...
how do you claim a majority, that is bizarre in itself. I accept the majority 52/48 was unacceptable in my eyes it was within the law. I am not against rejoining, i am not against the EU, i am however supporting democracy unlike you
 
coluka said:
The biggest problem

how do you claim a majority, that is bizarre in itself. I accept the majority 52/48 was unacceptable in my eyes it was within the law. I am not against rejoining, i am not against the EU, i am however supporting democracy unlike you
Click to expand...
You've quoted yourself, so not sure who that is aimed at.

Democracy isn't just the existence of a vote, they have them in Russia and China, hardly a paradigm of good democratic process. A democratic process has checks and balances to avoid foul play, there was proven foul play. If you can't accept that and accept that it was tainted then that's just a further evidence of your continuation of the division
 
BoroMart said:
You've quoted yourself, so not sure who that is aimed at.

Democracy isn't just the existence of a vote, they have them in Russia and China, hardly a paradigm of good democratic process. A democratic process has checks and balances to avoid fowl play, there was proven fowl play. If you can't accept that and accept that it was tainted then that's just a further evidence of your continuation of the division
Click to expand...
I give in you are frankly being silly. You really believe that post about Russia and China as being a fair Vote? 😂😂😂😂😂 Deary me ……. I think you mean foul play tbf too, no chickens were harmed in the vote 😉
 
coluka said:
I give in you are frankly being silly. You really believe that post about Russia and China as being a fair Vote?
Click to expand...
Mate, your comprehension is that of a 4 year old tonight, Russia and China DON'T have a fair vote, that's my point, the existence of a vote is not evidence of democracy in action. It's pretty simple.
 
HundredRoom said:
There was that bloke in Gateshead who was prosecuted for selling bananas by the pound
Click to expand...
The issue wasn't that he sold them by the pound, it's that he refused out of an ideological stance to state the kg price. That made it difficult for consumers to easily understand his price compared to other shops.

You can sell by the pound, but you need to put a standardised kg price on display too. What is the problem with protecting consumers with standardised measurement systems? and even better decimalised systems instead of antiquated nonsensical ones?

He was playing the martyr, and for zero benefit to the consumer.

By the way, the metric system has been in use since 1965 in the UK, 8 years before we joined the EEC, it was OUR decision to abandon the imperial system as it was utterly impractical. The vast majority of Brits only really know metric. You need to be in your 70s to have not been schooled in the metric system. It's like arguing for the right to write your terms and conditions only in latin which most of your consumers won't understand.

This is an example of how media headlines at a glance sound like an issue, but in reality once you analyse it, are not only a non-issue, but in fact total common sense and of benefit. It's this kind of headline that fueled brexit.
 
Last edited:
BoroMart said:
Mate, your comprehension is that of a 4 year old tonight, Russia and China DON'T have a fair vote, that's my point, the existence of a vote is not evidence of democracy in action. It's pretty simple.
Click to expand...
You are most certainly not my mate. You may think you are sound and clever, but really you are being foolish. I am trying to be be polite, leave it before you do yourself more damage
 
coluka said:
You are most certainly not my mate. You may think you are sound and clever, but really you are being foolish. I am trying to be be polite, leave it before you do yourself more damage
Click to expand...
No I'm not your mate, and very comfortable in that fact. If you think you are being polite, you probably need to work on your manners and self awareness a bit.

It's pretty simple, read and comprehend before responding to anything
 
coluka said:
I think we should park it there as it is you that does not like the outcome, not those that favoured the outcome or the process, ie the majority.

I wanted a labour government, hey tough ****, i support the outcome, thats democracy in action
Click to expand...
You appear to be missing the point. I think deliberately. This thread alone was showing the most persistent and longest running of the many lies we were fed to get to brexit. The fact this one is so old and people are still believing it is just crazy. You talk of democracy and respecting the outcome. It’s an outcome based on lies and hatred. I’m happy to reconcile but only with people who can acknowledge the truth. Only with people who don’t use blatant and easily verifiable lies as a basis for their actions. You’ll see remainders constantly, constantly asking for the benefits of Brexit. And constantly this will always end up in an argument because there are very few. If that simple question could be answered unquestionably then I could reconcile. Until then no, to meet someone halfway they have to come halfway as well
 
SmallTown said:
You appear to be missing the point. I think deliberately. This thread alone was showing the most persistent and longest running of the many lies we were fed to get to brexit. The fact this one is so old and people are still believing it is just crazy. You talk of democracy and respecting the outcome. It’s an outcome based on lies and hatred. I’m happy to reconcile but only with people who can acknowledge the truth. Only with people who don’t use blatant and easily verifiable lies as a basis for their actions. You’ll see remainders constantly, constantly asking for the benefits of Brexit. And constantly this will always end up in an argument because there are very few. If that simple question could be answered unquestionably then I could reconcile. Until then no, to meet someone halfway they have to come halfway as well
Click to expand...
Bananas only allowed to be half bent?
 
Does anybody seriously care what shape a banana is? Or any fruit and veg for that matter as long as it's fresh and tastes good.
 
Randy said:
Does anybody seriously care what shape a banana is? Or any fruit and veg for that matter as long as it's fresh and tastes good.
Click to expand...
Rational people don't, the bendy banana type stories - lots written by Johnson - are aimed at a swivel eyed, foaming at the mouth kind of person; the type who gets all red in the face at the thought of them over there telling us what do do over 'ere.

It seems to be a vote winner.
 
tripleheader said:
Strangely I was getting turned off by QT because of Fiona's style of always interrupting shortly after asking a question. It drives me nuts. Not helped by the earpiece I'm sure. But tonight it was the first time for a while now where I actually enjoyed the debates(in spite of Fiona's interruptions). It was pointed out by the American on the panel that it was because there shouldn't be attempts to make political capital out of the arguments and that is the way it should be done( said when discussing Covid ). Express your point of view, let the other speak, ask the questioner what they thought debate and move on. For too long QT became a shouting match between politicos. It is much better when people speak their minds and not what they are told to say.
Was it because the panel were mainly women, two of which were friends and the two blokes had nothing to lose politically. Don't know, but tonight I found it rather refreshing.
The debate on the sausages was a cracker, and I find the EU's approach not helpful. Trying to deprive the NI community their bangers a shocking state of affairs.
Click to expand...
The Greek bloke was also top class, I wish we had some politicians with his clarity of thought rather than the wishy washy, half informed, soundbite driven bunch currently messing around in our Parliament.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top