Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. " No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We had an interesting discusion about it, are we seeing signs it is slowly becoming that way as brexit is turning the wrong way, whats your view?" Another interesting debate.. ?? What did you conclude that led you to your position, what areas of our lives here or policies are steering towards this totalitarianism? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. " Well yeah this is one of the concerns of Brexit. Once the shackles are off the Tories they will be free to exploit the people and environment unchecked. In that regard we are certainly moving in this direction. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority)." Most of the prime ministers over the last century have "inherited" the position as May did. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. Well yeah this is one of the concerns of Brexit. Once the shackles are off the Tories they will be free to exploit the people and environment unchecked. In that regard we are certainly moving in this direction. " Those wondering above what we discussed about and what conclusions we came too, this is what we said too, that the government would have more power when they are leaving the eu, they are free to do whatever they like, control and exploit people. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"one area is the de jure recording and monitoring of all forms of electronic communications and personal digital footprints another area is the resulting de facto harvesting of personal data including financial data, social media activity, geographical movements etc etc. which results as a by-product of the governments de jure harvesting highlighted in the first point." Indeed, and Theresa May was continually trying to step up her suverillance of people and all forms of communication in the ‘Snoopers Charter’ she kept trying to push through as home sec. It was so bad that David Davis took her to the European courts to get it overturned. -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority). Most of the prime ministers over the last century have "inherited" the position as May did." She only became leader of the Conservative party which happened to have control of the House of Commons. The only people that voted for David Cameron were those of his constituency. Last time round, the only people who allowed Theresa May to continue to be Prime Minister were those who voted for her in her constituency of Maidenhead. No one else actually votes for the PM. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority)." Come on you know what we meant! We're just keeping it simple without getting into full blown political structures on a swingers site. 
At the end of the day when her party was elected she was not the leader of the party. People voted for her party based on a previous leadership, no one was offered the choice to vote again on the basis that she would lead the party. Then when she did call an election the outcome wasn't as clean cut as she hoped, so she then used public money to buy support.
Our government has and always will be a self serving establishment, corrupt, and immoral, that said there's probably few governments out there that are any different. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority). Come on you know what we meant! We're just keeping it simple without getting into full blown political structures on a swingers site.
At the end of the day when her party was elected she was not the leader of the party. People voted for her party based on a previous leadership, no one was offered the choice to vote again on the basis that she would lead the party. Then when she did call an election the outcome wasn't as clean cut as she hoped, so she then used public money to buy support.
Our government has and always will be a self serving establishment, corrupt, and immoral, that said there's probably few governments out there that are any different. "No one voted for Gordon Brown when he took over from Tony Blair or John Major when he took over from Margaret Thatcher, there never is an election when the role is "inherited". There didn't have to be one when May took over. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority). Come on you know what we meant! We're just keeping it simple without getting into full blown political structures on a swingers site.
At the end of the day when her party was elected she was not the leader of the party. People voted for her party based on a previous leadership, no one was offered the choice to vote again on the basis that she would lead the party. Then when she did call an election the outcome wasn't as clean cut as she hoped, so she then used public money to buy support.
Our government has and always will be a self serving establishment, corrupt, and immoral, that said there's probably few governments out there that are any different. "This person speaks the truth | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority). Come on you know what we meant! We're just keeping it simple without getting into full blown political structures on a swingers site.
At the end of the day when her party was elected she was not the leader of the party. People voted for her party based on a previous leadership, no one was offered the choice to vote again on the basis that she would lead the party. Then when she did call an election the outcome wasn't as clean cut as she hoped, so she then used public money to buy support.
Our government has and always will be a self serving establishment, corrupt, and immoral, that said there's probably few governments out there that are any different.
No one voted for Gordon Brown when he took over from Tony Blair or John Major when he took over from Margaret Thatcher, there never is an election when the role is "inherited". There didn't have to be one when May took over."And there's the issue and part of our point... why should someone inherit this position. Surely the country should be given the choice to decide.. People didn't vote for the party with these hand me downs in charge. A fresh vote should be called to allow people to decided if the new candidate is the right person to represent the country. As we all know just because they are part of the same party it doesn't mean they have the same values or ideals. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority). Come on you know what we meant! We're just keeping it simple without getting into full blown political structures on a swingers site.
At the end of the day when her party was elected she was not the leader of the party. People voted for her party based on a previous leadership, no one was offered the choice to vote again on the basis that she would lead the party. Then when she did call an election the outcome wasn't as clean cut as she hoped, so she then used public money to buy support.
Our government has and always will be a self serving establishment, corrupt, and immoral, that said there's probably few governments out there that are any different.
No one voted for Gordon Brown when he took over from Tony Blair or John Major when he took over from Margaret Thatcher, there never is an election when the role is "inherited". There didn't have to be one when May took over.
And there's the issue and part of our point... why should someone inherit this position. Surely the country should be given the choice to decide.. People didn't vote for the party with these hand me downs in charge. A fresh vote should be called to allow people to decided if the new candidate is the right person to represent the country. As we all know just because they are part of the same party it doesn't mean they have the same values or ideals.
"Agreed. Prime Minister should be elected by the country not just the party who they represent. Also I think an age limit should be 70 - the maximum age. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority). Come on you know what we meant! We're just keeping it simple without getting into full blown political structures on a swingers site.
At the end of the day when her party was elected she was not the leader of the party. People voted for her party based on a previous leadership, no one was offered the choice to vote again on the basis that she would lead the party. Then when she did call an election the outcome wasn't as clean cut as she hoped, so she then used public money to buy support.
Our government has and always will be a self serving establishment, corrupt, and immoral, that said there's probably few governments out there that are any different.
No one voted for Gordon Brown when he took over from Tony Blair or John Major when he took over from Margaret Thatcher, there never is an election when the role is "inherited". There didn't have to be one when May took over.
And there's the issue and part of our point... why should someone inherit this position. Surely the country should be given the choice to decide.. People didn't vote for the party with these hand me downs in charge. A fresh vote should be called to allow people to decided if the new candidate is the right person to represent the country. As we all know just because they are part of the same party it doesn't mean they have the same values or ideals.
"There isn't an election because we do not vote for a prime minister. It really is as simple as that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority). Come on you know what we meant! We're just keeping it simple without getting into full blown political structures on a swingers site.
At the end of the day when her party was elected she was not the leader of the party. People voted for her party based on a previous leadership, no one was offered the choice to vote again on the basis that she would lead the party. Then when she did call an election the outcome wasn't as clean cut as she hoped, so she then used public money to buy support.
Our government has and always will be a self serving establishment, corrupt, and immoral, that said there's probably few governments out there that are any different.
No one voted for Gordon Brown when he took over from Tony Blair or John Major when he took over from Margaret Thatcher, there never is an election when the role is "inherited". There didn't have to be one when May took over.
And there's the issue and part of our point... why should someone inherit this position. Surely the country should be given the choice to decide.. People didn't vote for the party with these hand me downs in charge. A fresh vote should be called to allow people to decided if the new candidate is the right person to represent the country. As we all know just because they are part of the same party it doesn't mean they have the same values or ideals.
"Did you or any citizen anywhere in the EU vote for any of the eu elite, juncker, tusk et al ? Sounds like you should have voted leave if youre worried about british PMs taking over without an election | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority). Come on you know what we meant! We're just keeping it simple without getting into full blown political structures on a swingers site.
At the end of the day when her party was elected she was not the leader of the party. People voted for her party based on a previous leadership, no one was offered the choice to vote again on the basis that she would lead the party. Then when she did call an election the outcome wasn't as clean cut as she hoped, so she then used public money to buy support.
Our government has and always will be a self serving establishment, corrupt, and immoral, that said there's probably few governments out there that are any different.
No one voted for Gordon Brown when he took over from Tony Blair or John Major when he took over from Margaret Thatcher, there never is an election when the role is "inherited". There didn't have to be one when May took over.
And there's the issue and part of our point... why should someone inherit this position. Surely the country should be given the choice to decide.. People didn't vote for the party with these hand me downs in charge. A fresh vote should be called to allow people to decided if the new candidate is the right person to represent the country. As we all know just because they are part of the same party it doesn't mean they have the same values or ideals.
Did you or any citizen anywhere in the EU vote for any of the eu elite, juncker, tusk et al ? Sounds like you should have voted leave if youre worried about british PMs taking over without an election"Don't recall indicating which way we voted, however for your information we did vote leave. We see it as a small step to the country being able to make decisions that are beneficial for the country.. we just hope those in power recognise that fact and don't serve their own needs instead. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority). Come on you know what we meant! We're just keeping it simple without getting into full blown political structures on a swingers site.
At the end of the day when her party was elected she was not the leader of the party. People voted for her party based on a previous leadership, no one was offered the choice to vote again on the basis that she would lead the party. Then when she did call an election the outcome wasn't as clean cut as she hoped, so she then used public money to buy support.
Our government has and always will be a self serving establishment, corrupt, and immoral, that said there's probably few governments out there that are any different.
No one voted for Gordon Brown when he took over from Tony Blair or John Major when he took over from Margaret Thatcher, there never is an election when the role is "inherited". There didn't have to be one when May took over.
And there's the issue and part of our point... why should someone inherit this position. Surely the country should be given the choice to decide.. People didn't vote for the party with these hand me downs in charge. A fresh vote should be called to allow people to decided if the new candidate is the right person to represent the country. As we all know just because they are part of the same party it doesn't mean they have the same values or ideals.
There isn't an election because we do not vote for a prime minister. It really is as simple as that."Yes... we get that... that's the system we currently have. In our opinion the system is flawed, new leader new rules new vote. That's the system we should have in our opinion. It's like north korea... oh well my dad's dead so I get to play supreme leader. Don't recall the north Koreans voting either... We supposedly have a democratic society however we have no say when our elected party wants to change it's leadership and potentially change the way it governs. All the campaign promises made by a former leader don't necessarily carry over to the successor. But yes... we know... we don't vote on that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"While it's true that we do not vote for the Prime minister but vote for the party it's self, the leader of the party can have a major bearing on which way voters may go. If the Prime minister changes then that should trigger a general election in my view."  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority). Come on you know what we meant! We're just keeping it simple without getting into full blown political structures on a swingers site.
At the end of the day when her party was elected she was not the leader of the party. People voted for her party based on a previous leadership, no one was offered the choice to vote again on the basis that she would lead the party. Then when she did call an election the outcome wasn't as clean cut as she hoped, so she then used public money to buy support.
Our government has and always will be a self serving establishment, corrupt, and immoral, that said there's probably few governments out there that are any different.
No one voted for Gordon Brown when he took over from Tony Blair or John Major when he took over from Margaret Thatcher, there never is an election when the role is "inherited". There didn't have to be one when May took over.
And there's the issue and part of our point... why should someone inherit this position. Surely the country should be given the choice to decide.. People didn't vote for the party with these hand me downs in charge. A fresh vote should be called to allow people to decided if the new candidate is the right person to represent the country. As we all know just because they are part of the same party it doesn't mean they have the same values or ideals.
Did you or any citizen anywhere in the EU vote for any of the eu elite, juncker, tusk et al ? Sounds like you should have voted leave if youre worried about british PMs taking over without an election
Don't recall indicating which way we voted, however for your information we did vote leave. We see it as a small step to the country being able to make decisions that are beneficial for the country.. we just hope those in power recognise that fact and don't serve their own needs instead.
"We all hope that the government will take this opportunity to improve workers rights, improve environmental legislation and try to increase living standards. However we all know that the chances of this happening are zero. I firmly believe we needed the EU to protect us from the Tories. Now that will be gone they have free reign to squeeze every last drop of life from the people of this country. The reason they’re so keen on Brexit is specifically so they can push the country towards a more totalitarian nation. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority). Come on you know what we meant! We're just keeping it simple without getting into full blown political structures on a swingers site.
At the end of the day when her party was elected she was not the leader of the party. People voted for her party based on a previous leadership, no one was offered the choice to vote again on the basis that she would lead the party. Then when she did call an election the outcome wasn't as clean cut as she hoped, so she then used public money to buy support.
Our government has and always will be a self serving establishment, corrupt, and immoral, that said there's probably few governments out there that are any different.
No one voted for Gordon Brown when he took over from Tony Blair or John Major when he took over from Margaret Thatcher, there never is an election when the role is "inherited". There didn't have to be one when May took over."Same applies to Winston Churchill. Look at the prime ministers and see how many came into that position part way through a parliament. Over half of them. Suddenly people notice ??? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority). Come on you know what we meant! We're just keeping it simple without getting into full blown political structures on a swingers site.
At the end of the day when her party was elected she was not the leader of the party. People voted for her party based on a previous leadership, no one was offered the choice to vote again on the basis that she would lead the party. Then when she did call an election the outcome wasn't as clean cut as she hoped, so she then used public money to buy support.
Our government has and always will be a self serving establishment, corrupt, and immoral, that said there's probably few governments out there that are any different.
No one voted for Gordon Brown when he took over from Tony Blair or John Major when he took over from Margaret Thatcher, there never is an election when the role is "inherited". There didn't have to be one when May took over.
Same applies to Winston Churchill. Look at the prime ministers and see how many came into that position part way through a parliament. Over half of them. Suddenly people notice ???"I do remember people saying that there should be a new election when Brown took over. It's mainly people who support the opposition who say that there should be an election for a new PM (hoping that their guy can get in on the back of confusion). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We had an interesting discusion about it, are we seeing signs it is slowly becoming that way as brexit is turning the wrong way, whats your view?" I haven't seen any differences since the brexit referendum. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some would argue we're already there, some would say the government doesn't enforce things enough... I for one don't recall Theresa May ever being voted in as prime minister.. the government handed her the title after the elected prime minister stood down.. then she failed to secure a majority vote but bought allegiance from another party to secure of office. None of this was done on the will of the people. Our concern with brexit is that the government will have more power to act as it pleases without the legislation of Europe to worry about.. given it's previous disdain for the public opinion this could be a negative. On the other hand you could say that our involvement with Brussels was a totalitarian relationship. They set the rules on everything from fishing to how long we can work for. No matter what we all dance to someone else's song it's just sometimes the rhythm is a little more pleasant than others. No one votes for a prime minister, we only vote for the local member of parliament who fits our requirements. To be a prime minister, you have to be the leader of the party that has the majority of MP's in the House of Commons (in rare occasions it is a minority). Come on you know what we meant! We're just keeping it simple without getting into full blown political structures on a swingers site.
At the end of the day when her party was elected she was not the leader of the party. People voted for her party based on a previous leadership, no one was offered the choice to vote again on the basis that she would lead the party. Then when she did call an election the outcome wasn't as clean cut as she hoped, so she then used public money to buy support.
Our government has and always will be a self serving establishment, corrupt, and immoral, that said there's probably few governments out there that are any different.
No one voted for Gordon Brown when he took over from Tony Blair or John Major when he took over from Margaret Thatcher, there never is an election when the role is "inherited". There didn't have to be one when May took over.
And there's the issue and part of our point... why should someone inherit this position. Surely the country should be given the choice to decide.. People didn't vote for the party with these hand me downs in charge. A fresh vote should be called to allow people to decided if the new candidate is the right person to represent the country. As we all know just because they are part of the same party it doesn't mean they have the same values or ideals.
Did you or any citizen anywhere in the EU vote for any of the eu elite, juncker, tusk et al ? Sounds like you should have voted leave if youre worried about british PMs taking over without an election
Don't recall indicating which way we voted, however for your information we did vote leave. We see it as a small step to the country being able to make decisions that are beneficial for the country.. we just hope those in power recognise that fact and don't serve their own needs instead.
We all hope that the government will take this opportunity to improve workers rights, improve environmental legislation and try to increase living standards. However we all know that the chances of this happening are zero.
I firmly believe we needed the EU to protect us from the Tories. Now that will be gone they have free reign to squeeze every last drop of life from the people of this country. The reason they’re so keen on Brexit is specifically so they can push the country towards a more totalitarian nation."Funny thing is I always believed we needed the EU to protect us from the extremes of socialism and the likes of Foot & Ben. It's funny how the extremes on both the left and right share the same feelings about the EU. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We had an interesting discusion about it, are we seeing signs it is slowly becoming that way as brexit is turning the wrong way, whats your view?" If Corbyn wins the next election it could happen as that is what the communist want and the Labour party is turning communist under Corbyn Mcdonald they are dangerous,they are opposed tp the democratic system we have now but is using to try and seize power like Hitler did,methods very similar to the Hitler early years. I expect an outcry over this but I stand by this statement even though everybody laughs at me for it.All you lot do is worry about Brexit a good diversion for these evil bastards | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We had an interesting discusion about it, are we seeing signs it is slowly becoming that way as brexit is turning the wrong way, whats your view?If Corbyn wins the next election it could happen as that is what the communist want and the Labour party is turning communist under Corbyn Mcdonald they are dangerous,they are opposed tp the democratic system we have now but is using to try and seize power like Hitler did,methods very similar to the Hitler early years. I expect an outcry over this but I stand by this statement even though everybody laughs at me for it.All you lot do is worry about Brexit a good diversion for these evil bastards" You're not far wrong considering the demonisation of Jew's by some elements in the Labour party and the likes of the kkk and former BNP leader Nick Griffin publicly support the Labour leadership. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We had an interesting discusion about it, are we seeing signs it is slowly becoming that way as brexit is turning the wrong way, whats your view?If Corbyn wins the next election it could happen as that is what the communist want and the Labour party is turning communist under Corbyn Mcdonald they are dangerous,they are opposed tp the democratic system we have now but is using to try and seize power like Hitler did,methods very similar to the Hitler early years. I expect an outcry over this but I stand by this statement even though everybody laughs at me for it.All you lot do is worry about Brexit a good diversion for these evil bastards You're not far wrong considering the demonisation of Jew's by some elements in the Labour party and the likes of the kkk and former BNP leader Nick Griffin publicly support the Labour leadership. " I'm not sure I've heard anybody from Labour saying that Jews shouldn't exist (which is what happened during the Second World War). There is no mention that the Israelis should no longer be in Israel. There is mention of the treatment of Palestinians though. Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism are two different things. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We had an interesting discusion about it, are we seeing signs it is slowly becoming that way as brexit is turning the wrong way, whats your view?If Corbyn wins the next election it could happen as that is what the communist want and the Labour party is turning communist under Corbyn Mcdonald they are dangerous,they are opposed tp the democratic system we have now but is using to try and seize power like Hitler did,methods very similar to the Hitler early years. I expect an outcry over this but I stand by this statement even though everybody laughs at me for it.All you lot do is worry about Brexit a good diversion for these evil bastards You're not far wrong considering the demonisation of Jew's by some elements in the Labour party and the likes of the kkk and former BNP leader Nick Griffin publicly support the Labour leadership. " I think you're confused. You appear to be suggesting that because the KKK praise the uk labour party (I can't find anything about this on line BTW), that Labour are bad. On the other hand, Trump is is sympathetic towards the KKK and who praises white supremacists is great. Besides aren't the likes of Nick Griffin on your EDL/UKIP team? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We had an interesting discusion about it, are we seeing signs it is slowly becoming that way as brexit is turning the wrong way, whats your view?If Corbyn wins the next election it could happen as that is what the communist want and the Labour party is turning communist under Corbyn Mcdonald they are dangerous,they are opposed tp the democratic system we have now but is using to try and seize power like Hitler did,methods very similar to the Hitler early years. I expect an outcry over this but I stand by this statement even though everybody laughs at me for it.All you lot do is worry about Brexit a good diversion for these evil bastards You're not far wrong considering the demonisation of Jew's by some elements in the Labour party and the likes of the kkk and former BNP leader Nick Griffin publicly support the Labour leadership. I'm not sure I've heard anybody from Labour saying that Jews shouldn't exist (which is what happened during the Second World War). There is no mention that the Israelis should no longer be in Israel. There is mention of the treatment of Palestinians though. Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism are two different things." The poster I quoted said there were similarities between the Labour movement now and how Hitler attempted to seize power in the "early years". I take it from that they were referring to how Hitler operated in the 1930's before WW2 started. Hitler didn't start by saying Jew's should be exterminated, it started with antisemitism and the demonisation of the Jewish community. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We had an interesting discusion about it, are we seeing signs it is slowly becoming that way as brexit is turning the wrong way, whats your view?If Corbyn wins the next election it could happen as that is what the communist want and the Labour party is turning communist under Corbyn Mcdonald they are dangerous,they are opposed tp the democratic system we have now but is using to try and seize power like Hitler did,methods very similar to the Hitler early years. I expect an outcry over this but I stand by this statement even though everybody laughs at me for it.All you lot do is worry about Brexit a good diversion for these evil bastards You're not far wrong considering the demonisation of Jew's by some elements in the Labour party and the likes of the kkk and former BNP leader Nick Griffin publicly support the Labour leadership. I'm not sure I've heard anybody from Labour saying that Jews shouldn't exist (which is what happened during the Second World War). There is no mention that the Israelis should no longer be in Israel. There is mention of the treatment of Palestinians though. Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism are two different things. The poster I quoted said there were similarities between the Labour movement now and how Hitler attempted to seize power in the "early years". I take it from that they were referring to how Hitler operated in the 1930's before WW2 started. Hitler didn't start by saying Jew's should be exterminated, it started with antisemitism and the demonisation of the Jewish community. " But that isn't what the Labour party are doing now. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We had an interesting discusion about it, are we seeing signs it is slowly becoming that way as brexit is turning the wrong way, whats your view?If Corbyn wins the next election it could happen as that is what the communist want and the Labour party is turning communist under Corbyn Mcdonald they are dangerous,they are opposed tp the democratic system we have now but is using to try and seize power like Hitler did,methods very similar to the Hitler early years. I expect an outcry over this but I stand by this statement even though everybody laughs at me for it.All you lot do is worry about Brexit a good diversion for these evil bastards You're not far wrong considering the demonisation of Jew's by some elements in the Labour party and the likes of the kkk and former BNP leader Nick Griffin publicly support the Labour leadership. I'm not sure I've heard anybody from Labour saying that Jews shouldn't exist (which is what happened during the Second World War). There is no mention that the Israelis should no longer be in Israel. There is mention of the treatment of Palestinians though. Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism are two different things. The poster I quoted said there were similarities between the Labour movement now and how Hitler attempted to seize power in the "early years". I take it from that they were referring to how Hitler operated in the 1930's before WW2 started. Hitler didn't start by saying Jew's should be exterminated, it started with antisemitism and the demonisation of the Jewish community. But that isn't what the Labour party are doing now." Really? It looks like it from where I'm standing. Corbyn can't even bring himself to agree with the internationally recognised definition of antisemitism. You have far left Momentum activists like Peter Willsman just elected to The Labour NEC ruling body calling anyone who criticises Corbyn "Jewish Trump fanatics". Ken Livingston, Naz Shah among others have made blatantly anti semitic comments on record. I'd say it's pretty clear. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We had an interesting discusion about it, are we seeing signs it is slowly becoming that way as brexit is turning the wrong way, whats your view?If Corbyn wins the next election it could happen as that is what the communist want and the Labour party is turning communist under Corbyn Mcdonald they are dangerous,they are opposed tp the democratic system we have now but is using to try and seize power like Hitler did,methods very similar to the Hitler early years. I expect an outcry over this but I stand by this statement even though everybody laughs at me for it.All you lot do is worry about Brexit a good diversion for these evil bastards You're not far wrong considering the demonisation of Jew's by some elements in the Labour party and the likes of the kkk and former BNP leader Nick Griffin publicly support the Labour leadership. I'm not sure I've heard anybody from Labour saying that Jews shouldn't exist (which is what happened during the Second World War). There is no mention that the Israelis should no longer be in Israel. There is mention of the treatment of Palestinians though. Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism are two different things. The poster I quoted said there were similarities between the Labour movement now and how Hitler attempted to seize power in the "early years". I take it from that they were referring to how Hitler operated in the 1930's before WW2 started. Hitler didn't start by saying Jew's should be exterminated, it started with antisemitism and the demonisation of the Jewish community. But that isn't what the Labour party are doing now. Really? It looks like it from where I'm standing. Corbyn can't even bring himself to agree with the internationally recognised definition of antisemitism. You have far left Momentum activists like Peter Willsman just elected to The Labour NEC ruling body calling anyone who criticises Corbyn "Jewish Trump fanatics". Ken Livingston, Naz Shah among others have made blatantly anti semitic comments on record. I'd say it's pretty clear. " Corbyn is the worst thing that could have happened to the Labour party in modern times. Just when the country needed a good strong opposition they got JC (and it's not Jesus Christ)! However, those right wingers, who think they have the green light for almost anything, got an almighty shock at the last general elections! The British public voted against the right, otherwise, there would have been a massive majority for the Tories! It's called checks and balances - there is a long way to go yet! We need a new centrist party to lead us forward, not the tribal warfare which we currently have! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We had an interesting discusion about it, are we seeing signs it is slowly becoming that way as brexit is turning the wrong way, whats your view?If Corbyn wins the next election it could happen as that is what the communist want and the Labour party is turning communist under Corbyn Mcdonald they are dangerous,they are opposed tp the democratic system we have now but is using to try and seize power like Hitler did,methods very similar to the Hitler early years. I expect an outcry over this but I stand by this statement even though everybody laughs at me for it.All you lot do is worry about Brexit a good diversion for these evil bastards You're not far wrong considering the demonisation of Jew's by some elements in the Labour party and the likes of the kkk and former BNP leader Nick Griffin publicly support the Labour leadership. I'm not sure I've heard anybody from Labour saying that Jews shouldn't exist (which is what happened during the Second World War). There is no mention that the Israelis should no longer be in Israel. There is mention of the treatment of Palestinians though. Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism are two different things. The poster I quoted said there were similarities between the Labour movement now and how Hitler attempted to seize power in the "early years". I take it from that they were referring to how Hitler operated in the 1930's before WW2 started. Hitler didn't start by saying Jew's should be exterminated, it started with antisemitism and the demonisation of the Jewish community. But that isn't what the Labour party are doing now. Really? It looks like it from where I'm standing. Corbyn can't even bring himself to agree with the internationally recognised definition of antisemitism. You have far left Momentum activists like Peter Willsman just elected to The Labour NEC ruling body calling anyone who criticises Corbyn "Jewish Trump fanatics". Ken Livingston, Naz Shah among others have made blatantly anti semitic comments on record. I'd say it's pretty clear. " What did they say that's anti-Semitic? The interview that Ken did which got him barred from the Labour Party stated that originally the stance of the Nazi party was to set up Israel as a state for all Jews to go to. On this thread, someone has already agreed that this is what the Nazi party wanted to do (I'm not sure if it was you, so apologies if it wasn't). How is that anti-Semitic? I'd like to point out though, I'm not a Labour supporter so I am looking at this from a neutral stance, not a Labour stance. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We had an interesting discusion about it, are we seeing signs it is slowly becoming that way as brexit is turning the wrong way, whats your view?" It has nothing to do with BREXIT. But I do see a lot of evidence that our politicians are looking more and more power hungry. The banning of the national action was imo an own goal politically. But it did send out the message that if they want to they can simply close down the debate. (Not saying that I believe NA were right, or that they were adding to any particular debate). Politicians in Germany have been jailing people for “denying the holocaust” for many years, most end up doing a five stretch in Mannheim. It looks very much to me like the UK govt would love the power to oppress those who express such opposing views. Is that really the sort of thing we need? If it happens here it won’t just stop at historical revisionists, MI5 will have a ball! Last week an extraordinary general meeting of my local council, decided to allow the local farmer more grazing rights on the local downs. It also ruled in favour of more restrictions to local dog walkers who use the Downs to exercise their animals. The reason this is relevant is because the same local farmer who gained from this EGM, sits on the local council, and indeed it was he who called it. It was held at such short notice, that none of us who oppose his land grabbing plans had the time to be their on the night. So yes, the UK does appear to be becoming a totalitarian state. But no, nothing to do with BREXIT. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If the Labour Party turns communist... and then people turn to the Labour Party ... shouldn’t we accept this is what the people want ? And if this is all a bad thing, should we point fingers at the tories for driving the masses there ..." Well they still cannot win an election dispite the boundaries being fixed to give labour a built n advantage as they where last changed under Blair. It is the swing to the left that keeps the conservatives in power it is a the better of two evils for many | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
