|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Bloody Brexiteers
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
If the outcome post June 23rd was such a freaking disaster there would be rioting on the streets and the government which wrought such catastrophe would be outed.
That is because, as I have already said on this thread, nothing has actually changed yet on the face of things.
However, investment decisions are indeed being suspended and uncertainty, which is always bad for economic activity, is persisting.
Recent professional assignments have brought home to me the multiple and complex ways Brexit is going to be a nightmare, even if one imagines the least unfavourable outcome possible. The fact that the issues are complex and detailed does not make for eye-catching headlines, however.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
There is a grave danger that this is going to be like the financial crisis in 2008. Lots of problems to do with the debt required to dig the country out of that crisis became dissociated from the crisis itself because people were too damned lazy to listen to anyone making the connections. There will be considerable effort required to force Brexiteers to listen to the sound of their own destruction and to prevent them from being able to profit from their own and other people's intellectual laziness.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
There is a grave danger that this is going to be like the financial crisis in 2008. Lots of problems to do with the debt required to dig the country out of that crisis became dissociated from the crisis itself because people were too damned lazy to listen to anyone making the connections. There will be considerable effort required to force Brexiteers to listen to the sound of their own destruction and to prevent them from being able to profit from their own and other people's intellectual laziness.
The real victims weren't able to vote, or not even born when the vote was taken. Oh, and the rest of Europe too, because it won't do them any good either. Then again, the rest of Europe, if not the World, doesn't matter, and that is key to the Leave argument.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
There is a grave danger that this is going to be like the financial crisis in 2008. Lots of problems to do with the debt required to dig the country out of that crisis became dissociated from the crisis itself because people were too damned lazy to listen to anyone making the connections. There will be considerable effort required to force Brexiteers to listen to the sound of their own destruction and to prevent them from being able to profit from their own and other people's intellectual laziness.
The real victims weren't able to vote, or not even born when the vote was taken. Oh, and the rest of Europe too, because it won't do them any good either. Then again, the rest of Europe, if not the World, doesn't matter, and that is key to the Leave argument.
All of which is perfectly true. Sadly, I think it makes the dissociation of cause and effect even more likely to happen, and gives Brexiteers an even greater chance of getting away scott free from their wilful and wanton destruction. This makes me indescribably furious.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
The real victims weren't able to vote, or not even born when the vote was taken.
Oh look. The melodrama is back.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
It means that she hasn't won an election as leader.
Which makes not the slightest difference in a Westminster system, as you bloody well know.
David Cameron was not on your ballot paper last election unless you lived in his constituency, so the fact that Theresa May was not on your ballot paper either means zero.
Vote on the POLICIES of each party by all means, but thinking of it in terms of voting for a person as Prime Minister is just idiotic.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
It means that she hasn't won an election as leader.
Which makes not the slightest difference in a Westminster system, as you bloody well know.
David Cameron was not on your ballot paper last election unless you lived in his constituency, so the fact that Theresa May was not on your ballot paper either means zero.
Vote on the POLICIES of each party by all means, but thinking of it in terms of voting for a person as Prime Minister is just idiotic.
This may have been true in the 18th Century but certainly hasn't been since the rise of the party system.
Constitutionally and legally it is undoubtedly the case that Theresa May is every bit as much the rightwise Prime Minister of the UK as David Cameron was. But if you vote for a party which purports, however implausibly, to have a claim to form the next government you do so in the knowledge that your vote will contribute to the electoral mandate of the Party Leader as Prime Minister, and if the Party Leader is popular his or her stardust will contribute to your MP's success, particularly if you are voting in a marginal constituency. And a decision whether or not to go for an early election upon inheriting the leadership of the Parliamentary Party may impact upon the Prime Minister's standing. Sir Anthony Eden enhanced his by calling, and winning, a snap general election in order to claim his own mandate and Gordon Brown weakened his by failing to do so. (Mrs May, ironically, was one of those who remarked on the weakness of his position.) The issue was sufficiently important that, in 1987, Neil Kinnock was forced to deny that he would be forced out of office by the hard left should he be become Prime Minister.
Granted, Prime Ministers are not directly elected but it's not strictly correct to say that the only people to have voted for David Cameron were the electors of Witney, either.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
IOW, the British electoral system is more screwy and complex than how it's described in the (unwritten) constitution and law books. Very few people would have blinked if instead of the party name on the ballot paper they had the party leaders name, certainly not for the big two UK parties. A ballot paper that said
"Mr X (David Cameron for PM)
"Ms Y (Ed Milliband for PM)
"Mr Z (Nick Clegg for coalition partner) "
would have been an accurate representation of how many people voted.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
There is a grave danger that this is going to be like the financial crisis in 2008. Lots of problems to do with the debt required to dig the country out of that crisis became dissociated from the crisis itself because people were too damned lazy to listen to anyone making the connections. There will be considerable effort required to force Brexiteers to listen to the sound of their own destruction and to prevent them from being able to profit from their own and other people's intellectual laziness.
The assumption that if voters had been given “the right information”, they would have voted “the right way” or "they didn't understand the consequences" etc is really patronising.
I voted Remain but had quite a few long conversations with friends who voted Leave. They were just as thoughtful about their vote as I was about mine.
Admittedly, we're now in the phoney Brexit and have no idea how things are going to pan out. I'm not entirely hopeful. I think both sides will cut off their noses to spite the other's face.
Tubbs
[ 19. September 2016, 11:47: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
The real victims weren't able to vote, or not even born when the vote was taken.
Oh look. The melodrama is back.
Your jibe doesn't affect the accuracy of my post. Try doing that instead.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I would say that everyone had access to the information necessary to make their decision in June. Of course, not everyone chose to access that information - and, there were those who voted Remain who did so without thinking through the issues as well as those who voted Leave.
What we really lacked access to was the question, indeed we still haven't seen the question. We were all told at school that the first thing you do in an exam is read the question and make sure you understand what is being asked. I'm sure we'd all cry foul if a history exam said "Write an essay on Henry VIII" and then people failed because they wrote about his relationships with his wives when the examiners wanted an essay on his defence of Roman Catholic dogma prior to the break with Rome. Clear questions are important in exams, they're equally important in elections and referenda.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I would say that everyone had access to the information necessary to make their decision in June. Of course, not everyone chose to access that information - and, there were those who voted Remain who did so without thinking through the issues as well as those who voted Leave.
What was missing was an honest and clear statement of what Britain would lose with leaving the EU. It's true that negotiations could retrieve or replace some of this, but the Remain campaign wasn't remotely effective, in fact I think the Conservative element of the Remain team, more so than Jeremy Corbyn, stayed far too quiet about the real consequences of leaving for fear of upsetting the Eurosceptics in the Tory Party and splitting the party before June 23rd.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I would say that everyone had access to the information necessary to make their decision in June. Of course, not everyone chose to access that information - and, there were those who voted Remain who did so without thinking through the issues as well as those who voted Leave.
What was missing was an honest and clear statement of what Britain would lose with leaving the EU. It's true that negotiations could retrieve or replace some of this, but the Remain campaign wasn't remotely effective, in fact I think the Conservative element of the Remain team, more so than Jeremy Corbyn, stayed far too quiet about the real consequences of leaving for fear of upsetting the Eurosceptics in the Tory Party and splitting the party before June 23rd.
True. What Remain never managed to do was demonstrate, in a way that people can relate too, the benefits of being in the EU. They talked about the consequences - "a bomb under the economy", Osbourne's punishment budget etc. I'm not sure this was because they didn't want to upset the Eurosceptics. More likely is most of them don't have a clue about life outside the M25 or for those who didn't go to Eton.
And, for some weird reason, people really like Boris. ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Tubbs
[ 19. September 2016, 12:22: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
In fact I think the Conservative element of the Remain team, more so than Jeremy Corbyn, stayed far too quiet about the real consequences of leaving for fear of upsetting the Eurosceptics in the Tory Party and splitting the party before June 23rd.
and not just Eurosceptics in the Parliamentary party. Their electorate was skeptic by a majority:
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/LR-by-party.jpg
(As you mention Corbyn there, worth pointing out once more that Labour voters were split along the same lines as the SNP).
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
In fact I think the Conservative element of the Remain team, more so than Jeremy Corbyn, stayed far too quiet about the real consequences of leaving for fear of upsetting the Eurosceptics in the Tory Party and splitting the party before June 23rd.
and not just Eurosceptics in the Parliamentary party. Their electorate was skeptic by a majority:
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/LR-by-party.jpg
(As you mention Corbyn there, worth pointing out once more that Labour voters were split along the same lines as the SNP).
I love the fact that 4% of UKIP supporters voted Remain. Did they miss the memo or what?!
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
It's entirely possible that some people voted UKIP in 2015 for reasons unrealted to the EU (though I find it difficult to work out what they would be). Possibly more plausible is they voted UKIP in 2015 and during the course of the referendum campaign came to realise that the UK is better off in the EU than outside.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
I love the fact that 4% of UKIP supporters voted Remain. Did they miss the memo or what?!
Tubbs
They could have been persuaded to Remain but that campaign was so lacklustre that I doubt it. I think it more likely that they took a look at the leading Leavers and didn't like what they saw.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
It means that she hasn't won an election as leader.
Which makes not the slightest difference in a Westminster system, as you bloody well know.
David Cameron was not on your ballot paper last election unless you lived in his constituency, so the fact that Theresa May was not on your ballot paper either means zero.
Vote on the POLICIES of each party by all means, but thinking of it in terms of voting for a person as Prime Minister is just idiotic.
This may have been true in the 18th Century but certainly hasn't been since the rise of the party system.
Constitutionally and legally it is undoubtedly the case that Theresa May is every bit as much the rightwise Prime Minister of the UK as David Cameron was. But if you vote for a party which purports, however implausibly, to have a claim to form the next government you do so in the knowledge that your vote will contribute to the electoral mandate of the Party Leader as Prime Minister, and if the Party Leader is popular his or her stardust will contribute to your MP's success, particularly if you are voting in a marginal constituency. And a decision whether or not to go for an early election upon inheriting the leadership of the Parliamentary Party may impact upon the Prime Minister's standing. Sir Anthony Eden enhanced his by calling, and winning, a snap general election in order to claim his own mandate and Gordon Brown weakened his by failing to do so. (Mrs May, ironically, was one of those who remarked on the weakness of his position.) The issue was sufficiently important that, in 1987, Neil Kinnock was forced to deny that he would be forced out of office by the hard left should he be become Prime Minister.
Granted, Prime Ministers are not directly elected but it's not strictly correct to say that the only people to have voted for David Cameron were the electors of Witney, either.
And yet, when a Prime Minister is kicked out or resigns or dies or is presumed dead (they never DID find Harold Holt's body), none of this inherently triggers a new election.
You'd do well to think about the death case. What exactly do you think should happen if the PM dies?
[ 20. September 2016, 07:14: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
The real victims weren't able to vote, or not even born when the vote was taken.
Oh look. The melodrama is back.
Your jibe doesn't affect the accuracy of my post. Try doing that instead.
How could I possibly negate your prediction of the future in several decades time?
Well, apart from scoffing at your apparent belief that future Britons will be entirely powerless to have any say in or control over their own destiny.
Just think of the political mileage available, though. Imagine the British Prime Minister in 2065 saying "sorry folks, there's nothing I can do about the destiny of this nation, they buggered it up in 2016 and we're all just along for the ride".
At the same time, I'm wondering how on earth all the Britons born since the decision to JOIN the EU in the early 1970s managed to cope with the sheer powerlessness of their position. You'd have thought that if leaving the EU rendered entire generations unable to affect the course of their nation, joining the EU must have been oh so much worse in that respect.
[ 20. September 2016, 07:15: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
The real victims weren't able to vote, or not even born when the vote was taken.
Oh look. The melodrama is back.
Your jibe doesn't affect the accuracy of my post. Try doing that instead.
How could I possibly negate your prediction of the future in several decades time?
You couldn't. How about adding that to the growing list of things you can't do?
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Originally posted by Callan:
quote:
Granted, Prime Ministers are not directly elected but it's not strictly correct to say that the only people to have voted for David Cameron were the electors of Witney, either.
It is strictly correct to say that the only people to have voted for David Cameron were the electors of Witney. Strictly, it is not correct to say that anyone else voted for him.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
The real victims weren't able to vote, or not even born when the vote was taken.
Oh look. The melodrama is back.
Your jibe doesn't affect the accuracy of my post. Try doing that instead.
How could I possibly negate your prediction of the future in several decades time?
You couldn't. How about adding that to the growing list of things you can't do?
If you know your predictions are accurate, any tips on tonight's Euromillions numbers?
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Yeah, don't play, you won't win.
How can I predict that? Same way we are saying Brexit will not be net positive; reason and logic. Not as much of a long shot, but still a safe bet.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
It means that she hasn't won an election as leader.
Which makes not the slightest difference in a Westminster system, as you bloody well know.
David Cameron was not on your ballot paper last election unless you lived in his constituency, so the fact that Theresa May was not on your ballot paper either means zero.
Vote on the POLICIES of each party by all means, but thinking of it in terms of voting for a person as Prime Minister is just idiotic.
This may have been true in the 18th Century but certainly hasn't been since the rise of the party system.
Constitutionally and legally it is undoubtedly the case that Theresa May is every bit as much the rightwise Prime Minister of the UK as David Cameron was. But if you vote for a party which purports, however implausibly, to have a claim to form the next government you do so in the knowledge that your vote will contribute to the electoral mandate of the Party Leader as Prime Minister, and if the Party Leader is popular his or her stardust will contribute to your MP's success, particularly if you are voting in a marginal constituency. And a decision whether or not to go for an early election upon inheriting the leadership of the Parliamentary Party may impact upon the Prime Minister's standing. Sir Anthony Eden enhanced his by calling, and winning, a snap general election in order to claim his own mandate and Gordon Brown weakened his by failing to do so. (Mrs May, ironically, was one of those who remarked on the weakness of his position.) The issue was sufficiently important that, in 1987, Neil Kinnock was forced to deny that he would be forced out of office by the hard left should he be become Prime Minister.
Granted, Prime Ministers are not directly elected but it's not strictly correct to say that the only people to have voted for David Cameron were the electors of Witney, either.
And yet, when a Prime Minister is kicked out or resigns or dies or is presumed dead (they never DID find Harold Holt's body), none of this inherently triggers a new election.
You'd do well to think about the death case. What exactly do you think should happen if the PM dies?
Exactly what happens when a party leader leaves his position for less terminal reasons? How the hell does that invalidate my point?
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Originally posted by Callan:
quote:
Granted, Prime Ministers are not directly elected but it's not strictly correct to say that the only people to have voted for David Cameron were the electors of Witney, either.
It is strictly correct to say that the only people to have voted for David Cameron were the electors of Witney. Strictly, it is not correct to say that anyone else voted for him.
You can be as strict as you want, but I think the fact that a political party has never won a General Election when the Party Leader has been behind his opposite number on leadership, indicates that the desirability of Mr Cameron, or not, as PM had some salience to the choices made in other constituencies.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
That is an entirely different argument to the one which you were putting. You now sound pretty close to admitting that your use of the cliché "strictly correct"was as inaccurate as it usually is.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
His word usage was not accurate, but his point was. Who one votes for directly is often influenced by the presumed result of that vote. In other words, if I vote for x party candidate, who is the likely PM should x party gain control, is a common voting rationale.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Strictly? Come Dancing around a single word.
We all know that the strict, formal way people are supposed to vote is how virtually no one actually votes. We know we're supposed to vote for an individual candidate, on the merits of that candidate. But, most people wouldn't be able to recognise any of the candidates if they were walking down the street (unless festooned with coloured ribbons), maybe the sitting MP would be known. There's no way any candidate can be personally known to 70,000+ people - and, how are we to judge the merits of someone we don't know? are they trustworthy? will they be diligent and hardworking? All we have to go on are what their supporters say, and any existing record of their political career (local authority seats, and for the sitting MP their record in Parliament). So, the vast majority of people cast their vote on the basis of what party they represent, and the face of the party isn't the local candidate but the party leader.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
That is an entirely different argument to the one which you were putting. You now sound pretty close to admitting that your use of the cliché "strictly correct"was as inaccurate as it usually is.
Since when did a frequently used phrase count as a cliche? That makes "good morning" a cliche.
And I think the point I made reiterates and reinforces the point I made in this paragraph:
quote:
But if you vote for a party which purports, however implausibly, to have a claim to form the next government you do so in the knowledge that your vote will contribute to the electoral mandate of the Party Leader as Prime Minister, and if the Party Leader is popular his or her stardust will contribute to your MP's success, particularly if you are voting in a marginal constituency.
There may have been a few wacky eccentrics who wanted Ed Miliband to be the next Prime Minister but nonetheless voted for Sir Bufton Tufton, or whoever, because he is a good constituency MP but, if you vote in a General Election, a vote for an MP belonging to the same party as the Prime Minister will contribute to the electoral mandate of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister is, if you like, indirectly elected. In some meaningful sense, therefore, a vote for Sir Bufton was also a vote for David Cameron.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Your last paragraph is getting very close to the truth.
Can anyone recall the last time a leader lost her/his seat but the party succeeded overall?
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Strictly? Come Dancing around a single word.
We all know that the strict, formal way people are supposed to vote is how virtually no one actually votes. We know we're supposed to vote for an individual candidate, on the merits of that candidate. But, most people wouldn't be able to recognise any of the candidates if they were walking down the street (unless festooned with coloured ribbons), maybe the sitting MP would be known. There's no way any candidate can be personally known to 70,000+ people - and, how are we to judge the merits of someone we don't know? are they trustworthy? will they be diligent and hardworking? All we have to go on are what their supporters say, and any existing record of their political career (local authority seats, and for the sitting MP their record in Parliament). So, the vast majority of people cast their vote on the basis of what party they represent, and the face of the party isn't the local candidate but the party leader.
As I said, I've got no problem with voting for party policies.
But voting for a party on the basis that person X is their leader... well I suppose that's what we get these days when voters don't know much about the actual policies. Ho hum.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
If you know your predictions are accurate, any tips on tonight's Euromillions numbers?
They are completely different animals. One is, as you would know if you looked at the name a lottery, while the other isn't little more than me agreeing with economists and other sages working with hard evidence that things will get worse.
The odds are very, very different too.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
.....agreeing with economists and other sages working with hard evidence that things will get worse.
Which is why May may next May.
Presumably in the hopes of squeakin in as a properly elected Prime Minister before the public mood turns against her party for conjuring up this fiasco.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
If you know your predictions are accurate, any tips on tonight's Euromillions numbers?
They are completely different animals. One is, as you would know if you looked at the name a lottery, while the other isn't little more than me agreeing with economists and other sages working with hard evidence that things will get worse.
The odds are very, very different too.
The economists and other sages already predicted a significant downturn straight after the referendum. It didn't happen, hence a rash of articles a few weeks ago discussing "why didn't the downturn we predicted happen?"
There is no doubt some skill involved in some of this work, but it takes some gumption to treat such predictions as gospel right after the first set of predictions failed.
[ 21. September 2016, 23:08: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
If you know your predictions are accurate, any tips on tonight's Euromillions numbers?
They are completely different animals. One is, as you would know if you looked at the name a lottery, while the other isn't little more than me agreeing with economists and other sages working with hard evidence that things will get worse.
The odds are very, very different too.
The economists and other sages already predicted a significant downturn straight after the referendum. It didn't happen, hence a rash of articles a few weeks ago discussing "why didn't the downturn we predicted happen?"
There is no doubt some skill involved in some of this work, but it takes some gumption to treat such predictions as gospel right after the first set of predictions failed.
Thing is, no one knows how things are going to go because random shit that will affect the outcomes hasn't happened yet. All people can do is take an educated guess. If you're reading The Guardian that educated guess will be very different to the one you'll get from The Telegraph.
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
The Titanic was still afloat two and a half hours after hitting the iceberg, too.
There hasn't been much fallout from the referendum result because nothing much has happened yet. The PM is making reassuring noises ("Brexit means Brexit" for the Brexiteers, "Britain will not turn its back on the world" for the Remainers and the rest of the world) but the UK is still a member of the European Union, the City of London still has passporting privileges and all legislation that depends on EU legislation is still in force.
Meanwhile, the pound is weaker, some investment funds have suspended trading and other EU countries are eyeing up the UK-based institutions that will have to move elsewhere post-Brexit.
But we have taken back control, so it's all going to be worthwhile.
[ 22. September 2016, 08:31: Message edited by: Jane R ]
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
The Titanic was still afloat two and a half hours after hitting the iceberg, too.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Then get in the fucking lifeboat and row away.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I was looking at possible jobs in Ireland just the other day.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
The Titanic was still afloat two and a half hours after hitting the iceberg, too.
Then get in the fucking lifeboat and row away.
The problem is (and was) that there aren't enough lifeboats. Yes, if there's a job in Ireland that gives me a personal lifeboat. But, it doesn't help the millions of people who are going to be left on board Brittania as she sinks beneath the waves she once ruled.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
The Titanic was still afloat two and a half hours after hitting the iceberg, too.
Then get in the fucking lifeboat and row away.
The problem is (and was) that there aren't enough lifeboats. Yes, if there's a job in Ireland that gives me a personal lifeboat. But, it doesn't help the millions of people who are going to be left on board Brittania as she sinks beneath the waves she once ruled.
And?
The solution around here appears to be "If we start now there's still time to build a new hull".
EDIT: This is not an analogy I actually subscribe to, you understand. Just following through with the latest melodramatic We're All DOOMED! pronouncement on this thread.
[ 22. September 2016, 12:10: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
The Titanic was still afloat two and a half hours after hitting the iceberg, too.
Then get in the fucking lifeboat and row away.
I've no idea what happened to you between 10 July and 2 September, but it hasn't done your temper, patience or intellect any good whatsoever.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
The Titanic was still afloat two and a half hours after hitting the iceberg, too.
Then get in the fucking lifeboat and row away.
I've no idea what happened to you between 10 July and 2 September, but it hasn't done your temper, patience or intellect any good whatsoever.
I've no idea what happened to your memory or your ability to research what I've been like for the last 8 years or so, but I can't say I'm enjoying the results.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
The solution around here appears to be "If we start now there's still time to build a new hull".
It wasn't my analogy either. But, for simplicity we have two groups of people:
1. Those who consider that Brexit has punched a massive hole in the hull, that will eventually sink us
2. Those who consider Brexit is a wee bump that has caused no damage, and we're now free to sail away from Europe to once more rule the waves. With, obviously, no danger of sinking
For those of us in category 1 the options certainly include:
a) bailing furiously in the hope we can stay afloat long enough to find dry land
b) a patch to stop us taking in more water so we can continue sailing, but recognise it'll probably fail come the first storm
c) find a dry dock where we can rebuild the hull as a permanent fix, there will be a lot of expense but it should stop us sinking
d) abandon ship
Of those, c) is by far the prefered option. a) and b) are just stop gap measures at best.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
The solution around here appears to be "If we start now there's still time to build a new hull".
It wasn't my analogy either. But, for simplicity we have two groups of people:
1. Those who consider that Brexit has punched a massive hole in the hull, that will eventually sink us
2. Those who consider Brexit is a wee bump that has caused no damage, and we're now free to sail away from Europe to once more rule the waves. With, obviously, no danger of sinking
For those of us in category 1 the options certainly include:
a) bailing furiously in the hope we can stay afloat long enough to find dry land
b) a patch to stop us taking in more water so we can continue sailing, but recognise it'll probably fail come the first storm
c) find a dry dock where we can rebuild the hull as a permanent fix, there will be a lot of expense but it should stop us sinking
d) abandon ship
Of those, c) is by far the prefered option. a) and b) are just stop gap measures at best.
A fair enough description. But there's a significant element to be added...
Which group is steering the boat?
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
At the moment it seems like we're going round in circles with no one steering the boat.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
The solution around here appears to be "If we start now there's still time to build a new hull".
It wasn't my analogy either. But, for simplicity we have two groups of people:
1. Those who consider that Brexit has punched a massive hole in the hull, that will eventually sink us
2. Those who consider Brexit is a wee bump that has caused no damage, and we're now free to sail away from Europe to once more rule the waves. With, obviously, no danger of sinking
For those of us in category 1 the options certainly include:
a) bailing furiously in the hope we can stay afloat long enough to find dry land
b) a patch to stop us taking in more water so we can continue sailing, but recognise it'll probably fail come the first storm
c) find a dry dock where we can rebuild the hull as a permanent fix, there will be a lot of expense but it should stop us sinking
d) abandon ship
Of those, c) is by far the prefered option. a) and b) are just stop gap measures at best.
You missed
3) Those who are hoping for the best, planning for the worst and waiting to see exactly what will happen. Because we don't know! But, as the other side won, then we have to get on with it and make it work. Constantly demanding a re-do because we didn't get the result we hoped for seems disrespectful. (And we still might not even if we got the re-do!)
Tubbs
[ 22. September 2016, 12:59: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
At the moment it seems like we're going round in circles with no one steering the boat.
Bit of an issue if you're trying to find a dry dock, is my point.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
The Titanic was still afloat two and a half hours after hitting the iceberg, too.
Then get in the fucking lifeboat and row away.
I've no idea what happened to you between 10 July and 2 September, but it hasn't done your temper, patience or intellect any good whatsoever.
I've no idea what happened to your memory or your ability to research what I've been like for the last 8 years or so, but I can't say I'm enjoying the results.
That's what concerns me. Before July 10th you were sharp but intelligent and rational. Since your two-month hiatus you've been like a bear with a sore head.
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Ah. I see. Because I don't agree with you my mental faculties are in question. Got it.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Ah. I see. Because I don't agree with you my mental faculties are in question. Got it.
No, in some ways I do agree, but your attitude, to the whole of mankind, appears to have changed and not for the better. It can't be the heat because it's been what passes for winter downunder. Not for the first time, I'm puzzled.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
