The EU Referendum - Thursday 23 June (with voting poll)

First topic message reminder :

Hopefully it will stop the arguments about Gib and we can tell Spain to pee off

TJ wrote:In

there are 3 reasons for voting out
1) xenophobia
2) a nostalgia for a 1950s that never really existed
3) You believe the lies of the right wing press

All decision makers in the EU are elected - "unelected bureaucrats" is one lie too many folk believe

So the UK, when they vote Remain, will dispense with all their opt-out clauses and special treatment within the EU? They'll adopt the Euro, they'll join the Schengen area, they'll say all their pre-Referendum conditions are null and void, they'll accept that the EU wishes to become a United States and travel obediently along that line with the rest of us, they'll accept an EU army, navy and perhaps unified police force........

Grand. Looking forward to the UK becoming a fully fledged EU members at last...given that the EU is a fully democratic outfit and majority decisions should always rule over local suspicions.

Well yorkshire has to put up with decisions from westminster they do not like and made by a government they have not voted for and that is a government with a minority of the vote - unlike the EU which is fully representative of all the countries in it.

SecretFly wrote:

TJ wrote:In

there are 3 reasons for voting out
1) xenophobia
2) a nostalgia for a 1950s that never really existed
3) You believe the lies of the right wing press

All decision makers in the EU are elected - "unelected bureaucrats" is one lie too many folk believe

So the UK, when they vote Remain, will dispense with all their opt-out clauses and special treatment within the EU?  They'll adopt the Euro, they'll join the Schengen area, they'll say all their pre-Referendum conditions are null and void, they'll accept that the EU wishes to become a United States and travel obediently along that line with the rest of us, they'll accept an EU army, navy and perhaps unified police force........

Grand.  Looking forward to the UK becoming a fully fledged EU members at last...given that the EU is a fully democratic outfit and majority decisions should always rule over local suspicions.

Madder than a box of frogs.....

The "unelected bureaucrat" is a complete joke. Why? We have 400,000 bloody civil servants here who aren't elected and put up more red tape than Brussels does.

And it's a factually incorrect statement (as usual):

It is led by a 28-person ‘College’, which includes one Commissioner from each member country. This is headed by the Commission President, currently the former prime minister of Luxembourg, Jean-Claude Juncker.

The Commission President is nominated by the prime ministers and presidents of the EU member states. The President then allocates jobs to other Commissioners, who are nominated by their government.

The whole College must be approved by a majority vote in the European Parliament and among prime ministers and presidents.

Crucially, the Commission has only a limited role in EU law-making. It can decide some less important rules, and in general it is the only institution that can propose new laws, but it doesn’t have the power to pass them on its own.

Professor Kassim says that many of the proposals that it brings forward have been requested by national political leaders. And there is no guarantee that a Commission proposal will become a law.

The authority to make law belongs to the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union.

The Parliament is directly elected by EU citizens every five years. The Council of the European Union, sometimes called the Council of Ministers, is where representatives of all 28 member countries negotiate.

These two institutions debate, amend and pass EU law. Each one has a veto.

I really wish xenophobia and racism wernt the only two things that this whole debate has turned into, and I mean everywhere not here

They're dominating proceedings
It is conceivable to want to control imnigration without being s racist you know...

And regarding the above, Farage the idiot starts swanning down the river campaiging for fisherman rights. The same rights he could only be bothered to attend 1 out of 42 meetings for the Fisheries Committee. For three major votes to fix the laws he was in attendance to vote ZERO times.

Joke of a man.

TJ wrote:Well yorkshire has to put up with decisions from westminster they do not like and made by a government they have not voted for and that is a government with a minority of the vote - unlike the EU which is fully representative of all the countries in it.

Not proportionately though, is it?

The UK's level of representation is pretty miniscule relative to it's size (demographically, geographically, economically and politically [not sure how many of those words I've spelt right!]).

temporary21 wrote:I really wish xenophobia and racism wernt the only two things that this whole debate has turned into, and I mean everywhere not here

They're dominating proceedings
It is conceivable to want to control imnigration without being s racist you know...

Tell Farage that with his 1930's style poster.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

TJ wrote:In

there are 3 reasons for voting out
1) xenophobia
2) a nostalgia for a 1950s that never really existed
3) You believe the lies of the right wing press

All decision makers in the EU are elected - "unelected bureaucrats" is one lie too many folk believe

So the UK, when they vote Remain, will dispense with all their opt-out clauses and special treatment within the EU?  They'll adopt the Euro, they'll join the Schengen area, they'll say all their pre-Referendum conditions are null and void, they'll accept that the EU wishes to become a United States and travel obediently along that line with the rest of us, they'll accept an EU army, navy and perhaps unified police force........

Grand.  Looking forward to the UK becoming a fully fledged EU members at last...given that the EU is a fully democratic outfit and majority decisions should always rule over local suspicions.

Madder than a box of frogs.....

No, I'll look forward to the UK abiding fully by the democratic voice of the Great EU. You'll be on that bandwagon, won't you Top? First step, joining the Euro

TJ wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Actually I don't think the reason you give is the one that drove people in Scotland to vote Tory. For years the SNP have been more popular in Scotland than the independence movement. People have previously voted SNP because they felt they were competent, and would stick up for Scotland when seeking to barter a better deal (i.e. more fiscal autonomy). Labour had disintegrated, the Tories deeply unpopular and this, combined with those SNP factors, lead to a majority SNP govt. Then came the referendum, which deeply divided Scotland (as much as the EU referendum is damaging the fabric of the UK). Independence because a realistic prospect and those voters who voted SNP on the basis of competence and sticking up for Scotland (rather than for independence) deserted them. The SNP effectively lost a tranche of supporters who weren't actually pro-independence, and those voters (now voting principally against independence) shifted to the Tories, a wee bit to Labour and a bit to Lib Dem. The SNP are still the most popular party, but their approach to the neverendum has certainly damaged their prospects in Scottish govt elections.

The other factor is Ruth Davidson, who has done a fantastic job of detoxifying the Tory party image in Scotland. She has made them a credible force again, almost single-handedly. Labour desperately need an equivalent figurehead. Dugdale is competent, but is not inspiring.

The SNP vote did not go down.  It actually went up in the constituency vote but by a quirk of the system this lead to less seats overall as they go very few list seats.  Davidson is certainly an effective politician and second only to Sturgeon in Holyrood

It isn't really a quirk of the system. You get two votes in Scotland, one for your local MP and a "regional" vote from which parties find out how many MPs they may elect from their party lists - designed to broadly ensure a degree of proportional representation.

So the SNP, as you say, gained 6 seats in the constituency votes. These are classic first past the post constituency votes. Their overall votes on this vote went up by +1.1%, for 6 extra seats. The Tories constituency vote went up by +8.1% but they only gained 4 constituency seats. Lib Dems lost a share of these votes (-0.1%) but actually gained two seats.

The SNP lost on the PR "regional vote" - down -2.3% and -12 seats. This is where the Tories made big gains, up 10.6% and 12 seats. These are the votes I was talking about previously, which to me signified swing against independence. The Tories made hay by being the most credible voice against independence.

So, in short, the SNP did well out of the skewed first past the post results, but were pegged back via the "regional" votes.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TJ wrote:Well yorkshire has to put up with decisions from westminster they do not like and made by a government they have not voted for and that is a government with a minority of the vote - unlike the EU which is fully representative of all the countries in it.

Not proportionately though, is it?

The UK's level of representation is pretty miniscule relative to it's size (demographically, geographically, economically and politically [not sure how many of those words I've spelt right!]).

All of them are correct expect for "it's".

But not everybody is Nigel farage are they...

Taking one extreme example and applying it blanket to the whole campaign isn't right

temporary21 wrote:But not everybody is Nigel farage are they...

Taking one extreme example and applying it blanket to the whole campaign isn't right

Leave... them at it, temp. The sharks have smelled blood. "Ain't no stopping us now, OoooooH, Clap your hands, clap your hands" That's the new Theme.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TJ wrote:Well yorkshire has to put up with decisions from westminster they do not like and made by a government they have not voted for and that is a government with a minority of the vote - unlike the EU which is fully representative of all the countries in it.

Not proportionately though, is it?

The UK's level of representation is pretty miniscule relative to it's size (demographically, geographically, economically and politically [not sure how many of those words I've spelt right!]).

All of them are correct expect for "it's".

goddammit!! undone by a simple grammatical error.......

SecretFly wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

TJ wrote:In

there are 3 reasons for voting out
1) xenophobia
2) a nostalgia for a 1950s that never really existed
3) You believe the lies of the right wing press

All decision makers in the EU are elected - "unelected bureaucrats" is one lie too many folk believe

So the UK, when they vote Remain, will dispense with all their opt-out clauses and special treatment within the EU?  They'll adopt the Euro, they'll join the Schengen area, they'll say all their pre-Referendum conditions are null and void, they'll accept that the EU wishes to become a United States and travel obediently along that line with the rest of us, they'll accept an EU army, navy and perhaps unified police force........

Grand.  Looking forward to the UK becoming a fully fledged EU members at last...given that the EU is a fully democratic outfit and majority decisions should always rule over local suspicions.

Madder than a box of frogs.....

No, I'll look forward to the UK abiding fully by the democratic voice of the Great EU.  You'll be on that bandwagon, won't you Top?  First step, joining the Euro

Yeh, let's just make up a load of tosh that's never going to happen.........classic Leaver.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

TJ wrote:In

there are 3 reasons for voting out
1) xenophobia
2) a nostalgia for a 1950s that never really existed
3) You believe the lies of the right wing press

All decision makers in the EU are elected - "unelected bureaucrats" is one lie too many folk believe

So the UK, when they vote Remain, will dispense with all their opt-out clauses and special treatment within the EU?  They'll adopt the Euro, they'll join the Schengen area, they'll say all their pre-Referendum conditions are null and void, they'll accept that the EU wishes to become a United States and travel obediently along that line with the rest of us, they'll accept an EU army, navy and perhaps unified police force........

Grand.  Looking forward to the UK becoming a fully fledged EU members at last...given that the EU is a fully democratic outfit and majority decisions should always rule over local suspicions.

Madder than a box of frogs.....

No, I'll look forward to the UK abiding fully by the democratic voice of the Great EU.  You'll be on that bandwagon, won't you Top?  First step, joining the Euro

Yeh, let's just make up a load of tosh that's never going to happen.........classic Leaver.

They just spout rubbish that no one has actually stated. So bizarre.

Sure it's not going to happen - that was my point. The laissez-faire EU.

If we were to ever join the Euro then I'd be frothing at the mouth in opposition.

That is unless we (say "we", but bigoted racists! ) vote to leave.. everything goes pete tong.. 5 years later we're begging to get back in at which point zee Germans go "nein, you vant to come back in eh? vell, you vill join ze rest of arse and get rid of your pound and join ze euro.. haha". At which point those of you that are left in the country will be sat in the corner of dark rooms muttering "we all make mistakes".

temporary21 wrote:But not everybody is Nigel farage are they...

Taking one extreme example and applying it blanket to the whole campaign isn't right

I see your point, but Farage is a rather prominent focal point and cheerleader for the Leave campaign, being the head of the only major party to support Leave. I don't think it's a stretch to criticise his behaviour and the Leave campaign in the same breath! There would be no referendum and no potential Leave vote without Farage and UKIP, and he does represent a fair chunk of the Leave supporters.

We have a few liabilities on our side of the debate as well, namely the leader of the Labour Party! The most politically inept party leader I can remember, which takes some doing considering Gordon Brown's superb effort for the title.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

TJ wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Actually I don't think the reason you give is the one that drove people in Scotland to vote Tory. For years the SNP have been more popular in Scotland than the independence movement. People have previously voted SNP because they felt they were competent, and would stick up for Scotland when seeking to barter a better deal (i.e. more fiscal autonomy). Labour had disintegrated, the Tories deeply unpopular and this, combined with those SNP factors, lead to a majority SNP govt. Then came the referendum, which deeply divided Scotland (as much as the EU referendum is damaging the fabric of the UK). Independence because a realistic prospect and those voters who voted SNP on the basis of competence and sticking up for Scotland (rather than for independence) deserted them. The SNP effectively lost a tranche of supporters who weren't actually pro-independence, and those voters (now voting principally against independence) shifted to the Tories, a wee bit to Labour and a bit to Lib Dem. The SNP are still the most popular party, but their approach to the neverendum has certainly damaged their prospects in Scottish govt elections.

The other factor is Ruth Davidson, who has done a fantastic job of detoxifying the Tory party image in Scotland. She has made them a credible force again, almost single-handedly. Labour desperately need an equivalent figurehead. Dugdale is competent, but is not inspiring.

The SNP vote did not go down.  It actually went up in the constituency vote but by a quirk of the system this lead to less seats overall as they go very few list seats.  Davidson is certainly an effective politician and second only to Sturgeon in Holyrood

It isn't really a quirk of the system. You get two votes in Scotland, one for your local MP and a "regional" vote from which parties find out how many MPs they may elect from their party lists - designed to broadly ensure a degree of proportional representation.

So the SNP, as you say, gained 6 seats in the constituency votes. These are classic first past the post constituency votes. Their overall votes on this vote went up by +1.1%, for 6 extra seats. The Tories constituency vote went up by +8.1% but they only gained 4 constituency seats. Lib Dems lost a share of these votes (-0.1%) but actually gained two seats.

The SNP lost on the PR "regional vote" - down -2.3% and -12 seats. This is where the Tories made big gains, up 10.6% and 12 seats. These are the votes I was talking about previously, which to me signified swing against independence. The Tories made hay by being the most credible voice against independence.

So, in short, the SNP did well out of the skewed first past the post results, but were pegged back via the "regional" votes.

Not how I see it at all. I think most tory votes came from the lib dems who collapsed. SNP lost votes went green who did well. I really do not see it as a swing against independence as independence was not a great issue in this election. List seats are allocated NOT on share of vote but by a complex system which takes into account the number of MSPs you get in the constituency vote. So as the SNP gained so many seats on the constituency vote they were always going to not be allocated many on the list. a couple of % here or there is hardly significant and many folk realise second vote SNP was a waste of time as those votes were essentially wasted as it was clear the snp were going to get a big constituency vote. tories benefited from the collapse of the lib dems and Labour. SNP vote held up well considering they are at unprecedented high levels of around 50% in a five party system

SecretFly wrote:

temporary21 wrote:But not everybody is Nigel farage are they...

Taking one extreme example and applying it blanket to the whole campaign isn't right

Leave... them at it, temp.  The sharks have smelled blood.  "Ain't no stopping us now, OoooooH, Clap your hands, clap your hands"  That's the new Theme.

In not saying stop man. Just unfortunate it's come to that

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TJ wrote:Well yorkshire has to put up with decisions from westminster they do not like and made by a government they have not voted for and that is a government with a minority of the vote - unlike the EU which is fully representative of all the countries in it.

Not proportionately though, is it?

The UK's level of representation is pretty miniscule relative to it's size (demographically, geographically, economically and politically [not sure how many of those words I've spelt right!]).

Actually its pretty proportionate with a weighting to the smaller nations. We have very similar number of MSPs per head of population as France or Germany. the smaller ones get more per head of population - but this apportionment was a democratically made decision!

Again you simply believe the lies put about by the xenophobes on the right.

Of the Leave voters, over half of them have stated that their main reason for voting Leave is immigration. The focal point of Leave wheels out propaganda that has his own Leave colleagues 'shuddering'.
It's a talking point whether it leaves a bad taste in your mouth or not.

temporary21 wrote:I really wish xenophobia and racism wernt the only two things that this whole debate has turned into, and I mean everywhere not here

They're dominating proceedings
It is conceivable to want to control imnigration without being s racist you know...

You do realise there aremore UK nationals in the rest of the EU than there are EU nationals in the UK? also that he EU nationals in the UK contribute more taxes and take less benefits than the average UK national does?

No - I thought you wouldn't know or understand this as again its not one of the leave side lies folk swallow.

TJ wrote:

temporary21 wrote:I really wish xenophobia and racism wernt the only two things that this whole debate has turned into, and I mean everywhere not here

They're dominating proceedings
It is conceivable to want to control imnigration without being s racist you know...

You do realise there aremore UK nationals in the rest of the EU than there are EU nationals in the UK?  also that he EU nationals in the UK contribute more taxes and take less benefits than the average UK national does?  

No - I thought you wouldn't know or understand this as again its not one of the leave side lies folk swallow.

https://youtu.be/sIzivCJ9pzU

TJ wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TJ wrote:Well yorkshire has to put up with decisions from westminster they do not like and made by a government they have not voted for and that is a government with a minority of the vote - unlike the EU which is fully representative of all the countries in it.

Not proportionately though, is it?

The UK's level of representation is pretty miniscule relative to it's size (demographically, geographically, economically and politically [not sure how many of those words I've spelt right!]).

Actually its pretty proportionate with a weighting to the smaller nations.  We have very similar number of MSPs per head of population as France or Germany.  the smaller ones get more per head of population - but this apportionment was a democratically made decision!

Again you simply believe the lies put about by the xenophobes on the right.

No, I'm not (am also in the Remain camp, before you get too excited).

The UK has the third worst ratio of MEPs to population, only France & Spain (very marginally) do worse. Germany and Italy are in pretty much the same boat.

Lux, for example, has 10 times more. Why??

And what about ratio to economic importance/influence? The UK economy makes up almost 20% of the EU, yet we get less than 10% of MEPs.

Hence, I think it is not an unreasonable argument that UK interests are not fully and fairly represented within the EU policy bloc.

Erm...

I didn't say anything about what you just talked about. I've never said what side i am voting for even if I can be bothered. I also perfectly understand your point. However there's two reasonable sides to most arguments if we don't jump
On one another and put words into peoples mouths

That's a fair point top and perhaps this is another point to reform in the future.

I suppose the counter is that the uk has 9.7% of meps despite being only 1/28 members.

Just for amusements sake Luxembourg is so small it would have more meps per head of population than the uk even if it only had one mep lol

TJ wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

TJ wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Actually I don't think the reason you give is the one that drove people in Scotland to vote Tory. For years the SNP have been more popular in Scotland than the independence movement. People have previously voted SNP because they felt they were competent, and would stick up for Scotland when seeking to barter a better deal (i.e. more fiscal autonomy). Labour had disintegrated, the Tories deeply unpopular and this, combined with those SNP factors, lead to a majority SNP govt. Then came the referendum, which deeply divided Scotland (as much as the EU referendum is damaging the fabric of the UK). Independence because a realistic prospect and those voters who voted SNP on the basis of competence and sticking up for Scotland (rather than for independence) deserted them. The SNP effectively lost a tranche of supporters who weren't actually pro-independence, and those voters (now voting principally against independence) shifted to the Tories, a wee bit to Labour and a bit to Lib Dem. The SNP are still the most popular party, but their approach to the neverendum has certainly damaged their prospects in Scottish govt elections.

The other factor is Ruth Davidson, who has done a fantastic job of detoxifying the Tory party image in Scotland. She has made them a credible force again, almost single-handedly. Labour desperately need an equivalent figurehead. Dugdale is competent, but is not inspiring.

The SNP vote did not go down.  It actually went up in the constituency vote but by a quirk of the system this lead to less seats overall as they go very few list seats.  Davidson is certainly an effective politician and second only to Sturgeon in Holyrood

It isn't really a quirk of the system. You get two votes in Scotland, one for your local MP and a "regional" vote from which parties find out how many MPs they may elect from their party lists - designed to broadly ensure a degree of proportional representation.

So the SNP, as you say, gained 6 seats in the constituency votes. These are classic first past the post constituency votes. Their overall votes on this vote went up by +1.1%, for 6 extra seats. The Tories constituency vote went up by +8.1% but they only gained 4 constituency seats. Lib Dems lost a share of these votes (-0.1%) but actually gained two seats.

The SNP lost on the PR "regional vote" - down -2.3% and -12 seats. This is where the Tories made big gains, up 10.6% and 12 seats. These are the votes I was talking about previously, which to me signified swing against independence. The Tories made hay by being the most credible voice against independence.

So, in short, the SNP did well out of the skewed first past the post results, but were pegged back via the "regional" votes.

Not how I see it at all.  I think most tory votes came from the lib dems who collapsed.  SNP lost votes went green who did well.  I really do not see it as a swing against independence as independence was not a great issue in this election.  List seats are allocated NOT on share of vote but by a complex system which takes into account the number of MSPs you get in the constituency vote.  So as the SNP gained so many seats on the constituency vote they were always going to not be allocated many on the list.  a couple of % here or there is hardly significant and many folk realise second vote SNP was a waste of time as those votes were essentially wasted as it was clear the snp were going to get a big constituency vote.  tories benefited from the collapse of the lib dems and Labour.  SNP vote held up well considering they are at unprecedented high levels of around 50% in a five party system

1. I cannot possibly see how you can reach that conclusion. It was THE issue at the election, and remains the biggest issue in Scottish politics. It shouldn't be, because the vote should have settled the issue, the SNP and its supporters won't let it go. It is, after all, the raison d'etre for the SNP. It's why they included text around a second referendum being a possibility in their manifesto, and it's why all opposition parties spent considerable time and resources addressing the issue. In fact Ruth Davidson made opposing independence her flagship policy!

2. The system isn't that complex, and list seats ARE allocated based on vote share (although across both types of votes). The "regional list" vote is designed to iron out as best it can the flaw in first past the post, whereby the party with the most votes doesn't necessary win across the country. The reason the SNP lost out on the "regional list" allocation is that their constituency vote outcomes gave them a higher number of seats than their share of the constituency vote would have suggested. In sum, the SNP constituency votes were efficiently spread, meaning that where they lost constituencies they lost by comparatively large margins, but they one a number of tight battles (so votes weren't wasted). They had 46.5% of the constituency vote share, but 80% of the constituency seats. The "regional list" votes (where they dropped to 41.7% vote share) therefore sought to address the mismatch in the constituency vote, taking into account the overall voting share. If it didn't, the SNP would have had a clear majority in the Parliament despite its vote shares being 46.5% and 41.7% respectively.

It's actually a really good system, and far better than the one at Westminster (although on the upside it screwed UKIP last time around - they had 12.6% of the overall UK vote share vs the SNP who had 4.7%, but that translated into 1 UKIP seat and 56 SNP seats!!).

Oh its a good system alright.

this election was not about independence. It simply was not a huge issue. SNP made almost no mention of it - it was the opposition parties especially the tories who kept banging on about independence not the SNP and the tories kept on pushing the issue despite the SNP having put it right on the back burner. Yes Davidson made a big point on it and yes it got them the antiindependence vote but those vote came from the lib dems in the main - not the SNP.

Its just my view based on what I saw. People were talking far or about energy policy, healthcare, schools and competence than independence - apart from the tories who brought it up every chance they got. davidson made her party the main uniuonist party so took uniuonist votes of the other unionist parties and the tories profited from the collapse in the Lib Dem vote mainly.

anyway - thats going a long way off track.

Ent wrote:Just for amusements sake Luxembourg is so small it would have more meps per head of population than the uk even if it only had one mep lol

LOL that's a fair point! haha


Though I do get thinking sometimes, I wonder how many people who claim the 'undemocratic EU' argument actually voted for their MEP at the last opportunity, or could even name him/her??

I voted for mine, but checking the list for Greater London even I cannot remember who it was!!

TJ wrote:Oh its a good system alright.

this election was not about independence.  It simply was not a huge issue.  SNP made almost no mention of it - it was the opposition parties especially the tories who kept banging on about independence not the SNP and the tories kept on pushing the issue despite the SNP having put it right on the back burner.  Yes Davidson made a big point on it and yes it got them the antiindependence vote but those vote came from the lib dems in the main - not the SNP.

Its just my view based on what I saw.  People were talking far or about energy policy, healthcare, schools and competence than independence - apart from the tories who brought it up every chance they got.  davidson made her party the main uniuonist party so took uniuonist votes of the other unionist parties and the tories profited from the collapse in the Lib Dem vote mainly.

anyway - thats going a long way off track.

You mean Labour?? Lib Dem vote stayed almost exactly the same.

I think it's a tad disingenuous to say "the SNP made almost no mention of it". The senior SNP politicians tried to avoid it as best they could, knowing that it was a vote loser (or rather not a vote winner) for them. They wanted to stick to the line of being the most competent party to govern in Scotland, and best able to stand up to Westminster. They know they'll win the vote of die-hard nationalists, but to get to that magic majority they won previously they need independence to be shelved, and effectively win the progressive/left votes (of both nationalists and unionists). That's why Sturgeon wanted desperately to avoid the subject, but her party faithful dragged it back onto the agenda once more, thus the inclusion of a 2nd ref being a possibility in this Parliament being included.

Until we have independence, or the SNP rule it out for a generation (as initially promised), it'll be a major issue at every election going forward (in fact it's been talked about a huge amount in the context of the EU ref as well).

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Ent wrote:Just for amusements sake Luxembourg is so small it would have more meps per head of population than the uk even if it only had one mep lol

LOL that's a fair point! haha


Though I do get thinking sometimes, I wonder how many people who claim the 'undemocratic EU' argument actually voted for their MEP at the last opportunity, or could even name him/her??

I voted for mine, but checking the list for Greater London even I cannot remember who it was!!

Hmmm...so the point is?

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Ent wrote:Just for amusements sake Luxembourg is so small it would have more meps per head of population than the uk even if it only had one mep lol

LOL that's a fair point! haha


Though I do get thinking sometimes, I wonder how many people who claim the 'undemocratic EU' argument actually voted for their MEP at the last opportunity, or could even name him/her??

I voted for mine, but checking the list for Greater London even I cannot remember who it was!!

I also voted but I've no idea who for.

I guess people don't really pay attention to European politics.

SecretFly wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Ent wrote:Just for amusements sake Luxembourg is so small it would have more meps per head of population than the uk even if it only had one mep lol

LOL that's a fair point! haha


Though I do get thinking sometimes, I wonder how many people who claim the 'undemocratic EU' argument actually voted for their MEP at the last opportunity, or could even name him/her??

I voted for mine, but checking the list for Greater London even I cannot remember who it was!!

Hmmm...so the point is?

Point is people say the EU is undemcratic.......whilst never taking part in its democratic process.

Like fat people blaming lack of help/support for their wasteline whilst noshing down on Fray Bentos and walking past the fresh veg aisle at the supermarket and not speaking the their GP.

I'd say the people who say the EU is undemocratic would be voting for one Nigel Farrage....no?

But of course voting for him is anti-democracy as the man is against that which he belongs to.

Ribbit....ribbit........

It's a Mad Old World is the European Union. Kings, Queens, Presidents and Paupers all air kissing each other pretending that the do valiantly commit themselves to undying love and respect for and fealty to each other........

Hasn't it all happened many many many times in the past, folks. The EU will be just another chapter - it'll end in tears. Cinderella will lose her slipper again.

SecretFly wrote:It's a Mad Old World is the European Union.  Kings, Queens, Presidents and Paupers all air kissing each other pretending that the do valiantly commit themselves to undying love and respect for and fealty to each other........

Hasn't it all happened many many many times in the past, folks.  The EU will be just another chapter - it'll end in tears.  Cinderella will lose her slipper again.

Every time you write I think you should start with;

'Riddle me this...'

Ah no...it's not that obtuse or absurdist or weird really, Hero. Really, it's quite easy to read what I write.

Russell Brand strikes again.........


Depressing to see Leave poll leads given what utter nincompoops it's supporters make themselves look whenever they open their mouths....

I ain't no nincompoop, sir! Are you racist against them, by the way?

TopHat24/7 wrote:Russell Brand strikes again.........


Depressing to see Leave poll leads given what utter nincompoops it's supporters make themselves look whenever they open their mouths....

Because the Remain supporters have all engaged in intelligent, reasonable, discussion?

Polls looking better for Remain, as a result the Pound makes strong gains against the Dollar.

Hero wrote:Polls looking better for Remain, as a result the Pound makes strong gains against the Dollar.

That's odd. Duty told us that they weren't linked.....

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Hero wrote:Polls looking better for Remain, as a result the Pound makes strong gains against the Dollar.

That's odd. Duty told us that they weren't linked.....

Duty should start his sentences with 'Once upon a time' as what follows is usually a fairy tale.

Once upon a time, there was a fair Land situated in a Great Ocean called The United Kingdom. All was well in this Merry Kingdom until a Dragon appeared to the East called MerKill, who shared the same nest as a smaller Dragon with specs called Puppet.

Over to Duty for the rest of the story.

Sir Farage the white Knight appeared to rid the land of the funny speaking orcs and banish them back to Mordor from whence they came.

Munchkin wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Russell Brand strikes again.........


Depressing to see Leave poll leads given what utter nincompoops it's supporters make themselves look whenever they open their mouths....

Because the Remain supporters have all engaged in intelligent, reasonable, discussion?

Not neccessarily, but they're also not the mad kooks like Secretfly and that other muppet on here who kept on making up imaginery things that weren't even being discussed.