Brexit Thread Redux

[ChrisJones 7,973]

Just now, kanny said:

What channel is that on ? The English channel! lol  .....we have been sold a illusion of democracy but the veneer is peeling people are seeing what's underneath the illusion and it stinks ....I really don't know how to fix it but I do know putting more faith in the existing establishment isn't going to work

I agree that supporting the status quo isn't going to change anything. Curing apathy is the first step...

[Born Hunter 17,622]

13 minutes ago, ChrisJones said:

I agree that supporting the status quo isn't going to change anything. Curing apathy is the first step...

Being honest I don't mind apathy, I mind when apathy turns up at the ballot. Folks that don't have an interest in politics are right to stay out of it. Folks that barely have any interest but still vote are dangerous, they're easily manipulated and bias democracy towards ignorance.

[ChrisJones 7,973]

3 minutes ago, Born Hunter said:

Being honest I don't mind apathy, I mind when apathy turns up at the ballot. Folks that don't have an interest in politics are right to stay out of it. Folks that barely have any interest but still vote are dangerous, they're easily manipulated and bias democracy towards ignorance.

They are all good for the status quo. The machine has been built around it. You're absolutely right though, you only have to look at some of the shite doing the rounds to see how a polished narrative is more important than factual content. I don't think there is a cure for apathy though!

[kanny 19,322]

6 minutes ago, Born Hunter said:

Being honest I don't mind apathy, I mind when apathy turns up at the ballot. Folks that don't have an interest in politics are right to stay out of it. Folks that barely have any interest but still vote are dangerous, they're easily manipulated and bias democracy towards ignorance.

 I think a number of votes in total would be a much better system than the seats won system we have now ...it would give smaller parties a fighting chance to gain seats  that would be one of the first things I'd change .

[Born Hunter 17,622]

14 minutes ago, kanny said:

 I think a number of votes in total would be a much better system than the seats won system we have now ...it would give smaller parties a fighting chance to gain seats  that would be one of the first things I'd change .

I think one BIG reason for the apathy and frankly disillusion we see from the electorate currently is down the the perpetual two party system. It's unbreakable by its nature. Within such a system, other than in quite unique instances, the only way to get change is from within one of the two parties. Competing with them is useless other than as a pressure group.

I've played with the thought of binning the Lords and replacing it with some sort of house of representatives, which would be designed not to represent constituencies but each party proportionally, determined by a separate election. Not sure on the technicalities but I like the idea.

Edited December 7, 2017 by Born Hunter

[kanny 19,322]

From the 2015 election in%  I just don't see why the seats can't be shared out according to the % of votes each party gets it would be more representative of what the people actually want ...like you say how many don't even vote because its a pointless two horse race  it's totally flawed 

CON	36.9
LAB	30.4
UKIP	12.6
LD	7.9
SNP	4.7
GRN	3.8

[ChrisJones 7,973]

11 minutes ago, Born Hunter said:

I think one BIG reason for the apathy and frankly disillusion we see from the electorate currently is down the the perpetual two party system. It's unbreakable by its nature. Within such a system, other than in quite unique instances, the only way to get change is from within one of the two parties. Competing with them is useless other than as a pressure group.

I've played with the thought of binning the Lords and replacing it with some sort of house of representatives, which would be designed not to represent constituencies but each party proportionally, determined by a separate election. Not sure on the technicalities but I like the idea.

Isn't that product of the lack of f*cks given by the electorate, though? It's kind of a chicken and egg situation whereby one has created the other? The only way I could see a two-party system working is if there was enough local pressure from the electorate making their MP's actually work for a living. That level of activity could see the system reform in favour of the voters.

Over here there has been a political awakening that is refreshing to see despite some of the offerings it's brought us.

1 minute ago, kanny said:

From the 2015 election in%  I just don't see why the seats can't be shared out according to the % of votes each party gets it would be more representative of what the people actually want ...like you say how many don't even vote because its a pointless two horse race  it's totally flawed 

CON	36.9
LAB	30.4
UKIP	12.6
LD	7.9
SNP	4.7
GRN	3.8

Would that be enough to get people out to vote though?

[kanny 19,322]

5 minutes ago, ChrisJones said:

Isn't that product of the lack of f*cks given by the electorate, though? It's kind of a chicken and egg situation whereby one has created the other? The only way I could see a two-party system working is if there was enough local pressure from the electorate making their MP's actually work for a living. That level of activity could see the system reform in favour of the voters.

Over here there has been a political awakening that is refreshing to see despite some of the offerings it's brought us.

Would that be enough to get people out to vote though?

I think it would be a start also it would reduce the pointless vote fear...... people voting for one of the two because they know there preferable vote wouldent stand a chanc in the current system 

[Lenmcharristar 9,172]

in all truth, if a war broke out id not fight until all the mps against us in Westminster was publically executed, why would I put my life on the line to defend those who wish us harm in our own homes, GB is being ruined from within by the likes of the labour party etc.  how much longer can it go on before the queen sacks the lot

[WILF 44,188]

So May has surrendered and called it a victory !!

Brilliant........that folks, is how they f****d You out of Brexit! 

[Neobliviscaris1776 1,998]

48 minutes ago, WILF said:

So May has surrendered and called it a victory !!

Brilliant........that folks, is how they f****d You out of Brexit! 

That's it. 

Stay and we hit you with regular bills.

Leave and we hit you harder.

Scum

[jukel123 6,570]

Well I've heard staments from everybody this morning except the british government. It's demonstrative of the contempt they have for the electorate. I'm told by the Irish government  there will be no hard border and we can now proceed to trade talks with the EU. Thanks for keeping us in the loop messrs Davis and May. What breathtaking contempt and arrogance they display. 

Edited December 8, 2017 by jukel123

[WILF 44,188]

A prime example of why I have less than zero faith in any politician ! 

Folk ask “what do we do if the system is destroyed?”.......I ask “what do we do if it isn’t ?”

Edited December 8, 2017 by WILF

[walshie 2,804]

1 hour ago, WILF said:

So May has surrendered and called it a victory !!

Brilliant........that folks, is how they f****d You out of Brexit! 

She's just as spineless as Cameron. He used to go to the EU "to get a better deal", they used to tel him to f**k off and he came back saying what a good deal he had got.

I really don't understand why we have to concede anything at all. 

[WILF 44,188]

Just now, walshie said:

She's just as spineless as Cameron. He used to go to the EU "to get a better deal", they used to tel him to f**k off and he came back saying what a good deal he had got.

I really don't understand why we have to concede anything at all. 

Mate, I hear ya