NATION

PASSWORD

UK Referendum Thread [Moderator Sanctioned]

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:24 pm

San Lumen wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Corbyn is respecting his fellow Labour party members by not resigning. His fellow MPs are disrespecting those Labour members.

So then why shouldn't Labour MPs respect the vote of the Labour party? Why are you do adamant that not only the government but private individuals and businesses respect the Brexit referendum vote, but also adamant that Jeremy Corbyn disregard the Labour leadership election?


So if he faces a leadership challenge as he probably will he should refuse to respect the result?

If he faces a leadership challenge, it will be the same procedure as when he was elected in the first place. It will be put to the Labour party members who will vote for their candidate. I suspect that no-one has any doubts that Jeremy will win a second election. If not a first-round wipeout like in September, he'll probably win in the second or third round, because he's not as popular as he originally was, and no denying that.

Of course, he might lose. In which case - as his argument has always been, "the majority of Labour members voted for me", he will step down. Because he will clearly no longer have the mandate he claims to.

The only way in which he is likely to lose is being left off the ballot.
And I would argue he has every right to claim that being maliciously removed from the ballot (for it would be malicious) would render the result illegitimate.

And as I said earlier, I do hope that if he is removed from the ballot, Labour burns.
It'll deserve it.
Last edited by Imperializt Russia on Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 87246
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby San Lumen » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:24 pm

Ifreann wrote:
San Lumen wrote:Yeah who cares about how the people voted! Lets cut jobs and wipe out wealth and move our corporate hq because we don't like the result. Thats not how adults act that's how a child throwing a tantrum acts.

Who cares about how the members of the Labour party votes? Let's oust Corbyn and have literally anyone else as leader because we don't like the result.

That's not how adults act. That's how children throwing tantrums act.

No its not. When you are a party leader you have to have the confidence of your fellow MP's if you don't you face a vote of no confidence. So if a party leader is unpopular with the caucus they should just suck it up and work with someone whose plans and ideas they don't like?

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:26 pm

San Lumen wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Who cares about how the members of the Labour party votes? Let's oust Corbyn and have literally anyone else as leader because we don't like the result.

That's not how adults act. That's how children throwing tantrums act.

No its not. When you are a party leader you have to have the confidence of your fellow MP's if you don't you face a vote of no confidence. So if a party leader is unpopular with the caucus they should just suck it up and work with someone whose plans and ideas they don't like?

Because that's their job.

Why should my family members have continued to suck it up and work in DWP when Ian Duncan Smith was shitting down on them from on high with plans and ideas they didn't like, or my friends in teaching when Gove and now Morgan do so, and no-one else did?
Oh yeah, because it was their fucking job.
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
Souseiseki
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 19625
Founded: Apr 12, 2012
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Souseiseki » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:26 pm

San Lumen wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Who cares about how the members of the Labour party votes? Let's oust Corbyn and have literally anyone else as leader because we don't like the result.

That's not how adults act. That's how children throwing tantrums act.

No its not. When you are a party leader you have to have the confidence of your fellow MP's if you don't you face a vote of no confidence. So if a party leader is unpopular with the caucus they should just suck it up and work with someone whose plans and ideas they don't like?


yes

the conservatives just fucking tanked the goddamn country and "opposition having stupid spat fight" is in the headlines
ask moderation about reading serious moderation candidates TGs without telling them about it until afterwards and/or apparently refusing to confirm/deny the exact timeline of TG reading ~~~ i hope you never sent any of the recent mods or the ones that got really close anything personal!

signature edit: confirmation has been received. they will explicitly do it before and without asking. they can look at TGs basically whenever they want so please keep this in mind when nominating people for moderator or TGing good posters/anyone!
T <---- THE INFAMOUS T

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 87246
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby San Lumen » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:27 pm

Imperializt Russia wrote:
San Lumen wrote:
So if he faces a leadership challenge as he probably will he should refuse to respect the result?

If he faces a leadership challenge, it will be the same procedure as when he was elected in the first place. It will be put to the Labour party members who will vote for their candidate. I suspect that no-one has any doubts that Jeremy will win a second election. If not a first-round wipeout like in September, he'll probably win in the second or third round, because he's not as popular as he originally was, and no denying that.

Of course, he might lose. In which case - as his argument has always been, "the majority of Labour members voted for me", he will step down. Because he will clearly no longer have the mandate he claims to.

The only way in which he is likely to lose is being left on the ballot.
And I would argue he has every right to claim that being maliciously removed from the ballot (for it would be malicious) would render the result illegitimate.

And as I said earlier, I do hope that if he is removed from the ballot, Labour burns.
It'll deserve it.


If I was party leader and lost a no confidence vote I would resign and If the people vote him in again they deserve to lose the election.

User avatar
Norstal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41465
Founded: Mar 07, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Norstal » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:29 pm

San Lumen wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Who cares about how the members of the Labour party votes? Let's oust Corbyn and have literally anyone else as leader because we don't like the result.

That's not how adults act. That's how children throwing tantrums act.

No its not. When you are a party leader you have to have the confidence of your fellow MP's if you don't you face a vote of no confidence. So if a party leader is unpopular with the caucus they should just suck it up and work with someone whose plans and ideas they don't like?

And compromise with them. No two people will agree 100% politically, everyone has to compromise. This isn't hard.
Toronto Sun wrote:Best poster ever. ★★★★★


New York Times wrote:No one can beat him in debates. 5/5.


IGN wrote:Literally the best game I've ever played. 10/10


NSG Public wrote:What a fucking douchebag.



Supreme Chairman for Life of the Itty Bitty Kitty Committee

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:29 pm

San Lumen wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:If he faces a leadership challenge, it will be the same procedure as when he was elected in the first place. It will be put to the Labour party members who will vote for their candidate. I suspect that no-one has any doubts that Jeremy will win a second election. If not a first-round wipeout like in September, he'll probably win in the second or third round, because he's not as popular as he originally was, and no denying that.

Of course, he might lose. In which case - as his argument has always been, "the majority of Labour members voted for me", he will step down. Because he will clearly no longer have the mandate he claims to.

The only way in which he is likely to lose is being left on the ballot.
And I would argue he has every right to claim that being maliciously removed from the ballot (for it would be malicious) would render the result illegitimate.

And as I said earlier, I do hope that if he is removed from the ballot, Labour burns.
It'll deserve it.


If I was party leader and lost a no confidence vote I would resign and If the people vote him in again they deserve to lose the election.

Yes, but you'd also intentionally break the markets and lose millions of not billions of other people's money if you were a financier or a stockbroker, so why does your opinion matter?
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 163844
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Iron Fist Socialists

Postby Ifreann » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:29 pm

San Lumen wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Corbyn is respecting his fellow Labour party members by not resigning. His fellow MPs are disrespecting those Labour members.

So then why shouldn't Labour MPs respect the vote of the Labour party? Why are you do adamant that not only the government but private individuals and businesses respect the Brexit referendum vote, but also adamant that Jeremy Corbyn disregard the Labour leadership election?


So if he faces a leadership challenge as he probably will he should refuse to respect the result?

He shouldn't face a leadership challenge because his fellow MPs should respect the result of the election that made him leader. You can't just ignore the results of a vote because you don't like them. You can't hold a second vote because you didn't win.
He/Him

beating the devil
we never run from the devil
we never summon the devil
we never hide from from the devil
we never

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 87246
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby San Lumen » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:31 pm

Ifreann wrote:
San Lumen wrote:
So if he faces a leadership challenge as he probably will he should refuse to respect the result?

He shouldn't face a leadership challenge because his fellow MPs should respect the result of the election that made him leader. You can't just ignore the results of a vote because you don't like them. You can't hold a second vote because you didn't win.

So if your fellow MP's don't have confidence in you who cares? a no confidence vote and a referendum are not the same thing.

User avatar
Great Feng
Senator
 
Posts: 4319
Founded: Dec 08, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Great Feng » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:31 pm

You know if Trump, coupled with Brexit, wins people everywhere may suddenly think that Democracy isn't such a good idea since democracy led to those decisions and start making Fascist or at the least non-elective regimes ....
Wait...
I, A MONARCHIST, MIGHT HAVE A CHANCE AGAIN IF THAT HAPPENS! :D

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:32 pm

San Lumen wrote:
Ifreann wrote:He shouldn't face a leadership challenge because his fellow MPs should respect the result of the election that made him leader. You can't just ignore the results of a vote because you don't like them. You can't hold a second vote because you didn't win.

So if your fellow MP's don't have confidence in you who cares? a no confidence vote and a referendum are not the same thing.

They're both non-binding policy-suggestion tools that have no direct consequences.
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
Norstal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41465
Founded: Mar 07, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Norstal » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:35 pm

Great Feng wrote:You know if Trump, coupled with Brexit, wins people everywhere may suddenly think that Democracy isn't such a good idea since democracy led to those decisions and start making Fascist or at the least non-elective regimes ....
Wait...
I, A MONARCHIST, MIGHT HAVE A CHANCE AGAIN IF THAT HAPPENS! :D

Constitutions are supposed to limit what the people can vote on. Besides, if Trump wins it doesn't mean you're totally powerless. That's why we have separation of powers after all.
Toronto Sun wrote:Best poster ever. ★★★★★


New York Times wrote:No one can beat him in debates. 5/5.


IGN wrote:Literally the best game I've ever played. 10/10


NSG Public wrote:What a fucking douchebag.



Supreme Chairman for Life of the Itty Bitty Kitty Committee

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 87246
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby San Lumen » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:36 pm

Imperializt Russia wrote:
San Lumen wrote:So if your fellow MP's don't have confidence in you who cares? a no confidence vote and a referendum are not the same thing.

They're both non-binding policy-suggestion tools that have no direct consequences.

Well they both should both are votes. one is a vote of the people the other is a vote of MP's. One shouldnt matter more than the other.

User avatar
Great Feng
Senator
 
Posts: 4319
Founded: Dec 08, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Great Feng » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:37 pm

Norstal wrote:
Great Feng wrote:You know if Trump, coupled with Brexit, wins people everywhere may suddenly think that Democracy isn't such a good idea since democracy led to those decisions and start making Fascist or at the least non-elective regimes ....
Wait...
I, A MONARCHIST, MIGHT HAVE A CHANCE AGAIN IF THAT HAPPENS! :D

Constitutions are supposed to limit what the people can vote on. Besides, if Trump wins it doesn't mean you're totally powerless. That's why we have separation of powers after all.

Well if someone removes Trump non-democratically the Trumpies would get angry and maybe rebel, so we'd have a civil war, and they would claim that he won democratically, which would be technically true, so thus, we'd have a crisis concerning Democracy in the USA and a potential civil war.
That's what I think may lead many people to abandon the concept of democracy, because they don't want another Trump in power or they may admit that sometimes the majority is wrong, whether that is true or not, and then democracy won't seem like a feasible form of government anymore.

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 163844
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Iron Fist Socialists

Postby Ifreann » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:41 pm

San Lumen wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Who cares about how the members of the Labour party votes? Let's oust Corbyn and have literally anyone else as leader because we don't like the result.

That's not how adults act. That's how children throwing tantrums act.

No its not. When you are a party leader you have to have the confidence of your fellow MP's if you don't you face a vote of no confidence.

When you're running a business you have to act in the best interests of that business, not in the interests of the British economy, not according to the results of a British referendum. If you don't you get fired or the whole business goes under.
So if a party leader is unpopular with the caucus they should just suck it up and work with someone whose plans and ideas they don't like?

So if a business would lose money by staying in Britain or by keeping its sterling, they should just suck it up and lose money?


San Lumen wrote:
Ifreann wrote:He shouldn't face a leadership challenge because his fellow MPs should respect the result of the election that made him leader. You can't just ignore the results of a vote because you don't like them. You can't hold a second vote because you didn't win.

So if your fellow MP's don't have confidence in you who cares?

Yes. They should work with their leader because he is the leader the members chose.
a no confidence vote and a referendum are not the same thing.

There shouldn't be a no confidence vote, because Labour MPs should respect the leadership election. You can't have a second election if you don't like the winner just like you can't have a second referendum if you don't like the result. That's not how democracy works. You've said so yourself.
He/Him

beating the devil
we never run from the devil
we never summon the devil
we never hide from from the devil
we never

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 163844
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Iron Fist Socialists

Postby Ifreann » Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:42 pm

San Lumen wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:They're both non-binding policy-suggestion tools that have no direct consequences.

Well they both should both are votes. one is a vote of the people the other is a vote of MP's. One shouldnt matter more than the other.

Oh, but a vote of the Labour party members, that doesn't mean anything, eh? That election wasn't binding, hmm?
He/Him

beating the devil
we never run from the devil
we never summon the devil
we never hide from from the devil
we never

User avatar
Geilinor
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41328
Founded: Feb 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Geilinor » Sun Jul 10, 2016 5:03 pm

Ifreann wrote:
San Lumen wrote:Yeah who cares about how the people voted! Lets cut jobs and wipe out wealth and move our corporate hq because we don't like the result. Thats not how adults act that's how a child throwing a tantrum acts.

Who cares about how the members of the Labour party votes? Let's oust Corbyn and have literally anyone else as leader because we don't like the result.

That's not how adults act. That's how children throwing tantrums act.

That's politics. They don't believe that Corbyn represents their views and wanted Corbyn to be more enthusiastic for remaining in the EU.
Member of the Free Democratic Party. Not left. Not right. Forward.
Economic Left/Right: -1.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.41

User avatar
Geilinor
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41328
Founded: Feb 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Geilinor » Sun Jul 10, 2016 5:04 pm

Ifreann wrote:
San Lumen wrote:Well they both should both are votes. one is a vote of the people the other is a vote of MP's. One shouldnt matter more than the other.

Oh, but a vote of the Labour party members, that doesn't mean anything, eh? That election wasn't binding, hmm?

That doesn't prevent future leadership elections, which can be held with the support of enough MP's.
Member of the Free Democratic Party. Not left. Not right. Forward.
Economic Left/Right: -1.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.41

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 163844
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Iron Fist Socialists

Postby Ifreann » Sun Jul 10, 2016 5:39 pm

Geilinor wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Oh, but a vote of the Labour party members, that doesn't mean anything, eh? That election wasn't binding, hmm?

That doesn't prevent future leadership elections, which can be held with the support of enough MP's.

Same as this referendum result doesn't prevent future referenda, and certainly doesn't prevent businesses from acting to remain profitable. Despite San Lumen's insistence that this referendum be final and binding not only on the British government but on the entire global economy. Almost as though I'm deliberately making the comparison to highlight their quite different feelings about democracy when the results are not to their liking.
He/Him

beating the devil
we never run from the devil
we never summon the devil
we never hide from from the devil
we never

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 87246
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby San Lumen » Sun Jul 10, 2016 7:48 pm

Ifreann wrote:
Geilinor wrote:That doesn't prevent future leadership elections, which can be held with the support of enough MP's.

Same as this referendum result doesn't prevent future referenda, and certainly doesn't prevent businesses from acting to remain profitable. Despite San Lumen's insistence that this referendum be final and binding not only on the British government but on the entire global economy. Almost as though I'm deliberately making the comparison to highlight their quite different feelings about democracy when the results are not to their liking.

You don't get do overs if you don't the outcome of referendums and elections. That's not the same as a leadership election for a party leader. They have to maintain the confidence of their rank and file members.

And bankers and wealthy executives and investors should respect the results of a referendum and not wipe out wealth or cut jobs or threaten to move their HQ's bequest they are displeased with the outcome. I never said results should be different when I don't like the outcome. I was in favor of leave but if the people had voted remain I would have disappointed but respectful of democracy. Apparently many in the business world are unable to do that.

User avatar
Olerand
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13169
Founded: Sep 18, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Olerand » Sun Jul 10, 2016 7:51 pm

San Lumen wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Same as this referendum result doesn't prevent future referenda, and certainly doesn't prevent businesses from acting to remain profitable. Despite San Lumen's insistence that this referendum be final and binding not only on the British government but on the entire global economy. Almost as though I'm deliberately making the comparison to highlight their quite different feelings about democracy when the results are not to their liking.

You don't get do overs if you don't the outcome of referendums and elections. That's not the same as a leadership election for a party leader. They have to maintain the confidence of their rank and file members.

And bankers and wealthy executives and investors should respect the results of a referendum and not wipe out wealth or cut jobs or threaten to move their HQ's bequest they are displeased with the outcome. I never said results should be different when I don't like the outcome. I was in favor of leave but if the people had voted remain I would have disappointed but respectful of democracy. Apparently many in the business world are unable to do that.

There won't be a do-over. This is, barring any unforeseen future perfidy, final. May says so, Juncker/Hollande/Merkel etc. say so. People are being very salty about this.

That's not how that works. In general, markets have no votes, and no need to respect them. Nowadays, with globalization, markets don't even have nationalities or loyalties, and will do as they please wherever they please.
French citizen. Still a Socialist Party member. Ségolène Royal 2019, I guess Actually I might vote la France Insoumise.

Qui suis-je?:
Free Rhenish States wrote:You're French, without faith, probably godless, liberal without any traditional values or respect for any faith whatsoever

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 87246
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby San Lumen » Sun Jul 10, 2016 7:54 pm

Olerand wrote:
San Lumen wrote:You don't get do overs if you don't the outcome of referendums and elections. That's not the same as a leadership election for a party leader. They have to maintain the confidence of their rank and file members.

And bankers and wealthy executives and investors should respect the results of a referendum and not wipe out wealth or cut jobs or threaten to move their HQ's bequest they are displeased with the outcome. I never said results should be different when I don't like the outcome. I was in favor of leave but if the people had voted remain I would have disappointed but respectful of democracy. Apparently many in the business world are unable to do that.

There won't be a do-over. This is, barring any unforeseen future perfidy, final. May says so, Juncker/Hollande/Merkel etc. say so. People are being very salty about this.

That's not how that works. In general, markets have no votes, and no need to respect them. Nowadays, with globalization, markets don't even have nationalities or loyalties, and will do as they please wherever they please.

I;m glad there won't be a do over as it would be an affront to democracy to have another referendum.

On your second point perhaps they shouldn't be able to do whatever they please whenever they please.

User avatar
Olerand
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13169
Founded: Sep 18, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Olerand » Sun Jul 10, 2016 7:58 pm

San Lumen wrote:
Olerand wrote:There won't be a do-over. This is, barring any unforeseen future perfidy, final. May says so, Juncker/Hollande/Merkel etc. say so. People are being very salty about this.

That's not how that works. In general, markets have no votes, and no need to respect them. Nowadays, with globalization, markets don't even have nationalities or loyalties, and will do as they please wherever they please.

I;m glad there won't be a do over as it would be an affront to democracy to have another referendum.

On your second point perhaps they shouldn't be able to do whatever they please whenever they please.

Well, you start that global revolution and we will follow. Meanwhile, in the present time, they do.
French citizen. Still a Socialist Party member. Ségolène Royal 2019, I guess Actually I might vote la France Insoumise.

Qui suis-je?:
Free Rhenish States wrote:You're French, without faith, probably godless, liberal without any traditional values or respect for any faith whatsoever

User avatar
San Lumen
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 87246
Founded: Jul 02, 2009
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby San Lumen » Sun Jul 10, 2016 8:00 pm

Olerand wrote:
San Lumen wrote:I;m glad there won't be a do over as it would be an affront to democracy to have another referendum.

On your second point perhaps they shouldn't be able to do whatever they please whenever they please.

Well, you start that global revolution and we will follow. Meanwhile, in the present time, they do.

Debt default would be a way to start it but no one has the guts to do it. However that's outside the realm of this discussion and i don't want to thread jack.

User avatar
Stable Cities
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 4
Founded: Apr 19, 2016
Ex-Nation

Re: Not To Blame?

Postby Stable Cities » Sun Jul 10, 2016 8:09 pm

Good Day To All Governmental Chief Executives(President) I've Been Busy Traveling And Just Red This Post Its Very Interesting But I Think The U.S. Has A Role In This Somewhere ?

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 0rganization, Arevala, Brazen II, Cerespasia, Diarcesia, Eragon Island, GMS Greater Miami Shores 1, Ineva, Infected Mushroom, Kostane, New Temecula, New Westmore, Stellar Colonies, Takiv, Tillania, Unclear

Advertisement

Remove ads