Jump to content
Gracii Guns

British Politics

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

But you can sit happy in your delusion Soul - by all means. 

What delusion would that be? Ah, of course, you think that my argument is that the majority of people still wants to remain in the EU (despite me having explicitly stated I will delay any opinion on that until I see a poll on the subject and that I have pointed out that a more fresh poll would be valuable since people's opinion may have swung towards remain), and not that it is wrong to interpret the general results as evidence for anything in regards to Brexit. I should never underestimate your ability to fail to understand. Thank you for teaching me that valuable lesson….again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said:

...the best gauge of public opinion being the yes/no referendum of 2016.

That was the best gauge of what people wanted at that snapshot in time. Since then numerous polls have been conducted that are statistical meaningful and that indicate that since 2016 people's opinion have swung towards remain resulting in a majority wanting to still be in the EU. Why do I even have to repeat this to you? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

What delusion would that be? Ah, of course, you think that my argument is that the majority of people still wants to remain in the EU (despite me having explicitly stated I will delay any opinion on that until I see a poll on the subject and that I have pointed out that a more fresh poll would be valuable since people's opinion may have swung towards remain), and not that it is wrong to interpret the general results as evidence for anything in regards to Brexit. I should never underestimate your ability to fail to understand. Thank you for teaching me that valuable lesson….again.

 

1 minute ago, SoulMonster said:

That was the best gauge of what people wanted at that snapshot in time. Since then numerous polls have been conducted that are statistical meaningful and that indicate that since 2016 people's opinion have swung towards remain resulting in a majority wanting to still be in the EU. Why do I even have to repeat this to you? :lol:

Give it up Soul. You've been beaten democratically, or at least the side you opt to align yourself with, Britain's remainism, has been beaten. Boris has his majority and will now proceed with implementing the results of the 2016 referendum. Such is democracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Give it up Soul. You've been beaten democratically, or at least the side you opt to align yourself with, Britain's remainism, has been beaten. Boris has his majority and will now proceed with implementing the results of the 2016 referendum. Such is democracy.

You are mistakenly trying to align the argument I am making against conflating the general election result with perfect assessment of the public's opinion on Brexit, with some kind of opposition against the general election result. Fascinating. It is of course sad that a Brexit is now more likely -- because I think the Brits will do much better within the union than outside and I want all the best for you -- and from a more fundamental viewpoint, even more sad if the Brexit happens in disagreement with the public' opinion at the time it happens but based on what people wanted 3-4 years ago, but this doesn't at all affect me personally. I am happy for everybody who is happy for the result, and feel with those who don't. I am sure life will go on and that the Brits will do the best out of the situation. In many ways, there is a new potential crisis emerging with Scotland wanting independence. I wonder how that will pan out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My new MP looks like Clarence Boddicker from RoboCop,

Screen-Shot-2019-12-12-at-23.56.25-300x2

10 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Brexit is now more likely

Impossible to see it not happening given the size of Boris's majority. 

I don't even think the keys to Number 10 being handed to Mr Farage himself would convince you of the groundswell support for leave here! 

Edited by DieselDaisy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 years to address the climate crisis. But you lot prioritized Brexit instead. So what you've done is mandated your government to focus on establishing new trade deals instead of addressing the greatest existential emergency of an age. And whereas new trade deals could be green (with enough other greening of your economy). But to do this you have chosen to toss out a bunch of ecologically informed MPs and have a Conservative seek out new trade deals. All but assuring that said deals wont meet the green needs of this climate emergency.

Way to monumentally miss the point. :( 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I don't even think the keys to Number 10 being handed to Mr Farage himself would convince you of the groundswell support for leave here! 

If the majority had voted for a party that was based around one and only one issue, Brexit, then of course that would be more indicative of what the people wanted on that issue. But that is not the case here, the Conservatives, who got the most votes now and more than in 2015, is not a pure Brexit party, so off-handedly dismissing that more people could have voted Tories because they simply want conservative politics, or because Labour failed to arouse voters, or because of other election dynamics, or that some of these voters did so for tribal reasons, is simply a logical fallacy. Not everybody who went to the urns did so to affect Brexit. Thinking otherwise is at best splendidly naive.

You cannot equate the general election results with some kind of perfect assessment of the public's opinion on Brexit. It isn't that simple. We just don't know the exact reasons why people rallied around the Conservatives. Some (maybe many) did it because they want to leave the EU. Some did it because they found Labour horridly detestable and thought that 4 years of Corbyn was worse than Brexit. Some did it because they always vote conservative. Some did it because they like Boris Johnson. Some did it because they want a fiscally conservative direction. And although it is not unlikely that some votes shifted to Conservatives because of Brexit, you have no way of figuring out how many they were. Just assuming they are all leave votes is simply unintellectual. It is letting your own wishes affect your conclusions.

It could be that the result is indicative of a majority now being for Brexit (despite the poll from late October suggesting otherwise), but you have no way of knowing this (which should be such an accustomed feeling for you that I am sure is why you fail to question your rationale). 

As I have said before, my argument here is on the methodological flaw of assuming that this result means that the majority has shifted sufficiently. I am not taking a stance on what the public now wants re: Brexit. We don't know that until it is actually proven that the percentage of the new votes for the Conservatives that are caused by a desire to leave the EU is large enough to shift the majority from Remain to Leave. It goes against my every fibre to confuse such assumptions with reality. But of course, you have never seemed to be encumbered by an urge to be correct. I, on the other hand, will make sure to not make a fool of myself by waiting until a proper poll has been conducted. I am much more comfortable appearing to be stubbornly hard to move with arguments of emotion than risking being wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, soon said:

11 years to address the climate crisis. But you lot prioritized Brexit instead. So what you've done is mandated your government to focus on establishing new trade deals instead of addressing the greatest existential emergency of an age. And whereas new trade deals could be green (with enough other greening of your economy). But to do this you have chosen to toss out a bunch of ecologically informed MPs and have a Conservative seek out new trade deals. All but assuring that said deals wont meet the green needs of this climate emergency.

Way to monumentally miss the point. :( 

Climate Change is never going to be political issue number one for a large percentage of the population. If that isn't obvious by now I don't know what to tell you. What you lot could learn is that you need to pair it with other populist issues and make sure the financial burden of climate change policies doesn't hit the middle class in the pocketbook too hard.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Climate Change is never going to be political issue number one for a large percentage of the population. If that isn't obvious by now I don't know what to tell you. What you lot could learn is that you need to pair it with other populist issues and make sure the financial burden of climate change policies doesn't hit the middle class in the pocketbook too hard.

Thats exactly what the Green New Deal is about. Klein too. Labours platform wasnt outside of that philosophy either. If you dont know thats how we're organized than I dont know what to tell you. ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Climate Change is never going to be political issue number one for a large percentage of the population. If that isn't obvious by now I don't know what to tell you. What you lot could learn is that you need to pair it with other populist issues and make sure the financial burden of climate change policies doesn't hit the middle class in the pocketbook too hard.

Probably will be when things start to get really bad and it's absolutely too late to do anything about it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Graeme said:

Probably will be when things start to get really bad and it's absolutely too late to do anything about it.

Probably. But what he's saying is correct unfortunately Gra, as depressing as that is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Republican, Texas Mayor and his townsfolk see it clearly. This isn't a partisan issue - its an everyone issue. And its a middle class, worker-driven transition.

This right-leaning Texas town are 100% renewable energy!

The workers who used to work the oil patches now work the wind farm. And its better pay, not to mention cleaner work. The boom and bust cycle of oil, with its rapidly expanding an contracting workforce is whats not fair to workers. These well paying green jobs will be there forever.

Following the science makes good economic sense. Energy costs to the consumer are down too!! Listen to these concrete facts that this Republican can demonstrate conclusively,

Here in more detail,

This hit the news cycle a year ago. Weird its not gotten enough coverage to be a mainstay in these conversations, isnt it??? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, spunko12345 said:

Where's the shrooms and carbs?

Whys he posted a picture of some tart eating fried tomatos, bacon and sausages?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Graeme said:

Probably will be when things start to get really bad and it's absolutely too late to do anything about it.

In 2020 food cost for the average Canadian household is projected to increase $500. And the authors of the report point to the Climate Crisis as a main factor. I hope this will be the kick in the ass that people need. Blows apart the 'costs to much to act' propaganda too. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/climate-change-food-price-increase-report-1.5383507

Edited by soon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, soon said:

11 years to address the climate crisis. But you lot prioritized Brexit instead. So what you've done is mandated your government to focus on establishing new trade deals instead of addressing the greatest existential emergency of an age. And whereas new trade deals could be green (with enough other greening of your economy). But to do this you have chosen to toss out a bunch of ecologically informed MPs and have a Conservative seek out new trade deals. All but assuring that said deals wont meet the green needs of this climate emergency.

Way to monumentally miss the point. :( 

Cheer up, soon. On the upside, Lisa Nandy retained her seat.

New Labour leader, perhaps?

2 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

My new MP looks like Clarence Boddicker from RoboCop,

Screen-Shot-2019-12-12-at-23.56.25-300x2

Can you fly, Bobby?

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bucketfoot said:

Cheer up, soon. On the upside, Lisa Nandy retained her seat.

New Labour leader, perhaps?

Thats my girl! Good point, best to be 'glass had full' about it. 

Nandy would make an incredible Labour Leader! :headbang:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, soon said:

Thats exactly what the Green New Deal is about. Klein too. Labours platform wasnt outside of that philosophy either. If you dont know thats how we're organized than I dont know what to tell you. ;)

 

I'm sorry, but this is a video full of nothing but platitudes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Graeme said:

Probably will be when things start to get really bad and it's absolutely too late to do anything about it.

Well you don't own people's votes. You've got to go out and get them and sell them on a popular message. I'm seeing a lot of insults at "those idiots and rubes who voted for Johnson." Well what does it say about you when you lose to a guy like that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

I'm sorry, but this is a video full of nothing but platitudes.

Sanders cosponsored the Green New Deal. Are you suggesting that this life long, successful politician, and sitting Senator doesnt know how to get things done in US Federal Govt? (The lie his opponents tell...)

Furthermore, The Squads election isnt a platitude, its a reality. 

Edited by soon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boris' victory speech after winning his seat this morning. The guy behind him is called Lord Buckethead! :lol: 

 

Edited by Dazey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, soon said:

Sanders cosponsored the Green New Deal. Are you suggesting that this life long, successful politician, and sitting Senator doesnt know how to get things done in US Federal Govt? (The lie his opponents tell...)

Furthermore, The Squads election isnt a platitude, its a reality. 

The problem with the green new deal is it's lack of specificity. The plan itself doesn't propose any specific technologies or sources of energy. It doesn't say anything about immigration or population growth. We need to get specific if we're being serious.

Now, I'm even more disappointed in the Republicans for not coming up with their own plan. This is a great opportunity that is being wasted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Well you don't own people's votes. You've got to go out and get them and sell them on a popular message. I'm seeing a lot of insults at "those idiots and rubes who voted for Johnson." Well what does it say about you when you lose to a guy like that?

We? We didn't lose to a guy like that, it was Corbyn who lost to Johnson. We can still refer to those who voted for Johnson as idiots and rubes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

We? We didn't lose to a guy like that, it was Corbyn who lost to Johnson. We can still refer to those who voted for Johnson as idiots and rubes.

And right on cue. Those people are just going to double down on voting for people like Johnson.

I'm actually not happy over the moon about this. Working class whites are going to be on the conservative plantation in the UK, just like they are in the United States.

Edited by Basic_GnR_Fan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

If the majority had voted for a party that was based around one and only one issue, Brexit, then of course that would be more indicative of what the people wanted on that issue. But that is not the case here, the Conservatives, who got the most votes now and more than in 2015, is not a pure Brexit party, so off-handedly dismissing that more people could have voted Tories because they simply want conservative politics, or because Labour failed to arouse voters, or because of other election dynamics, or that some of these voters did so for tribal reasons, is simply a logical fallacy. Not everybody who went to the urns did so to affect Brexit. Thinking otherwise is at best splendidly naive.

You cannot equate the general election results with some kind of perfect assessment of the public's opinion on Brexit. It isn't that simple. We just don't know the exact reasons why people rallied around the Conservatives. Some (maybe many) did it because they want to leave the EU. Some did it because they found Labour horridly detestable and thought that 4 years of Corbyn was worse than Brexit. Some did it because they always vote conservative. Some did it because they like Boris Johnson. Some did it because they want a fiscally conservative direction. And although it is not unlikely that some votes shifted to Conservatives because of Brexit, you have no way of figuring out how many they were. Just assuming they are all leave votes is simply unintellectual. It is letting your own wishes affect your conclusions.

It could be that the result is indicative of a majority now being for Brexit (despite the poll from late October suggesting otherwise), but you have no way of knowing this (which should be such an accustomed feeling for you that I am sure is why you fail to question your rationale). 

As I have said before, my argument here is on the methodological flaw of assuming that this result means that the majority has shifted sufficiently. I am not taking a stance on what the public now wants re: Brexit. We don't know that until it is actually proven that the percentage of the new votes for the Conservatives that are caused by a desire to leave the EU is large enough to shift the majority from Remain to Leave. It goes against my every fibre to confuse such assumptions with reality. But of course, you have never seemed to be encumbered by an urge to be correct. I, on the other hand, will make sure to not make a fool of myself by waiting until a proper poll has been conducted. I am much more comfortable appearing to be stubbornly hard to move with arguments of emotion than risking being wrong. 

I'm not disputing much of this, but there is little doubt that the level of Boris's victory combined with the nature of the Tory manifesto, centered around one campaign slogan to ''get Brexit done'', has given support to arguments against this swing from leave to remain which you seem to feel exists, not to mention the fact that the Liberal Democrats utterly bombed. There is a method of measuring the ''Brexit factor'' actually, by correlating the polling with the results of the 2016 referendum. 

_110132032_optimised-sharechange.euref.c

There will be multiple analyses of this date no doubt over the next few days. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×