Dutch Tourist Hurls Objects at Udon Thani Café Staff Over Change Dispute

[Jim1000]

He would have got more bang for his baht in Thailand !!!

[George Aylesham]

If I was a London ratepayer I'd be pretty <deleted> at having to finance Boris Johnson's rutting.

[billd766]

37 minutes ago, sawadee1947 said:

That's not quite right. 

Uk is divided for sure. The majority of voters opted for leave. 

However only few were voting. 

To go the way of peace UK is to find a compromise. 

Either a general election, a new referendum or a deal with EU. 

It can't be that a bunch of non-elected selfish elites will decide the future and fate of a whole nation just for fun, egocentrics or ego - trips. 

They will walk away no matter what will happen to the people. They will enjoy life without responsibility for a nation's future. Money talks. ????

quote from your post.

 

"However only few were voting."

 

You think that 17.4 million who voted to leave is only a few?

 

Following that train of thought, how would you describe the 16 odd million who voted to Remain? Just a handful?

 

How about the 12 odd million who didn't vote? Less than a handful?

 

The turnout of voters was higher than that of any general election for decades.

Edited September 29, 2019 by billd766
added extra text

[sawadee1947]

24 minutes ago, billd766 said:

quote from your post.

 

"However only few were voting."

 

You think that 17.4 million who voted to leave is only a few?

 

Following that train of thought, how would you describe the 16 odd million who voted to Remain? Just a handful?

 

How about the 12 odd million who didn't vote? Less than a handful?

 

The turnout of voters was higher than that of any general election for decades.

Sure 12 millions didn't have a say because they didn't know or couldn't imagine how important their vote would have been. 

I can't see that you consider that UK is terribly divided and be in political turmoil created by incapable poltiticians. 

[stevenl]

30 minutes ago, billd766 said:

quote from your post.

 

"However only few were voting."

 

You think that 17.4 million who voted to leave is only a few?

 

Following that train of thought, how would you describe the 16 odd million who voted to Remain? Just a handful?

 

How about the 12 odd million who didn't vote? Less than a handful?

 

The turnout of voters was higher than that of any general election for decades.

But did the referendum result represent the opinion of the majority? And does it represent the opinion of the majority now?

[billd766]

22 minutes ago, sawadee1947 said:

Sure 12 millions didn't have a say because they didn't know or couldn't imagine how important their vote would have been. 

I can't see that you consider that UK is terribly divided and be in political turmoil created by incapable poltiticians. 

But those 12 odd million had exactly the same chance to vote as the Leavers and Remainers did. AFAIR the TV news, newspapers social media etc were plugging Brexit every day and yes, their votes were just as important as everybody elses vote, but they just couldn't be bothered to go to the nearest polling station and put a cross in the box marked Leave or Remain.

 

I do see that the UK is divided and yes there are a lot of incapable politicians in the HoC but ask yourself how the got there?

 

The public in the constituencies voted them there, so the public have nobody else to complain to. It was self inflicted.

 

In my constituency I made a tactical vote for the Tory candidate at the last election simply to keep the Lib/Dems out and it worked. In the previous election I voted UKIP while Nigel Farage was running it (they came from nowhere into 3rd place) but I wouldn't vote UKIP again.

 

At the next election I will be looking at the candidates, their policies and see how I get on from there.

 

BTW the 350,000,000 on the side of a bus I took with the same reasoning as all politicians promises, ie with a bucket of salt, never mind a pinch.

[billd766]

37 minutes ago, stevenl said:

But did the referendum result represent the opinion of the majority? And does it represent the opinion of the majority now?

At that time it did and there are no reruns because one side lost.

 

Now? Nobody has a clue no matter which poll you chose as there are always other polls to choose from.

[vogie]

Just now, stevenl said:

But did the referendum result represent the opinion of the majority? And does it represent the opinion of the majority now?

A once in a lifetime referendum only happens once in a lifetime, believe it or not.

[sawadee1947]

12 minutes ago, billd766 said:

But those 12 odd million had exactly the same chance to vote as the Leavers and Remainers did. AFAIR the TV news, newspapers social media etc were plugging Brexit every day and yes, their votes were just as important as everybody elses vote, but they just couldn't be bothered to go to the nearest polling station and put a cross in the box marked Leave or Remain.

 

I do see that the UK is divided and yes there are a lot of incapable politicians in the HoC but ask yourself how the got there?

 

The public in the constituencies voted them there, so the public have nobody else to complain to. It was self inflicted.

 

In my constituency I made a tactical vote for the Tory candidate at the last election simply to keep the Lib/Dems out and it worked. In the previous election I voted UKIP while Nigel Farage was running it (they came from nowhere into 3rd place) but I wouldn't vote UKIP again.

 

At the next election I will be looking at the candidates, their policies and see how I get on from there.

 

BTW the 350,000,000 on the side of a bus I took with the same reasoning as all politicians promises, ie with a bucket of salt, never mind a pinch.

It makes no sense to go ahead on the road to divide the country. As half of UK is either pro or con a compromise is necessary. A deal at least might really a solution ????

[Bluespunk]

7 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Meanwhile long term Labor MP Keith Vaz, a career MP since his mid 20's continues without a care. 

 

He is very visibly unusually wealthy - several million pound homes; children all privately educated at expensive schools. He was also caught supplying class A drugs to Romanian rent boys whilst enjoying their entertainment.

 

The "investigations" launched by the Met Police went..................... nowhere fast. The stopped the one on unusual wealth because Vaz said he didn't feel well and was "off work"; although the was pictured out and about at festivals shortly after. 

 

British politics is corrupt. The whole lot want investigating - but no one's got the bottle.

Not entirely sure what that has to do with my post, but has to be said I'm no fan of Vaz.

 

However this thread isn't about him is it?

[stevenl]

20 minutes ago, billd766 said:

At that time it did and there are no reruns because one side lost.

 

Now? Nobody has a clue no matter which poll you chose as there are always other polls to choose from.

I very much doubt it represented the majority opinion 3 years ago, and even less so now.

[stevenl]

9 minutes ago, vogie said:

A once in a lifetime referendum only happens once in a lifetime, believe it or not.

And?

So just did it that it didn't work if it didn't represent the opinion of the majority?

[vogie]

Just now, stevenl said:

And?

So just did it that it didn't work if it didn't represent the opinion of the majority?

52% is more than 48%, so I'd say it did represent the majority that cared to and was able to vote.

 

I don't really understand what you are trying to say, but I think I've got the gist of it.

[beautifulthailand99]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

If anybody was start talking to me about  ‘Deep state elitists’ while sitting on a bus or at a bar, I’d move seats.

 

It's the joos aka George Soros but they have not the guts to air publically their odious conspiracy foiled spud-loonery. 

[stevenl]

13 minutes ago, vogie said:

52% is more than 48%, so I'd say it did represent the majority that cared to and was able to vote.

 

I don't really understand what you are trying to say, but I think I've got the gist of it.

Ok, let me help you.

What is the purpose of a referendum? It should result in knowing the opinion of the electorate. I doubt it did that at the time, so that means that imo it failed miserably. On top of that much more information and discussion has come out since, so imo the referendum represents even less the opinion of the majority now.

[sanemax]

12 hours ago, vogie said:

52% is more than 48%, so I'd say it did represent the majority that cared to and was able to vote.

 

I don't really understand what you are trying to say, but I think I've got the gist of it.

If you add the people who didnt vote in the referendum to the Remain partys vote, Remain won the referendum and therefore the UK should remain in the EU .

[beautifulthailand99]

Talk of Corbyn stepping down as leader  - could be a huge game changer and every reason to defer the election for the time being. 

[JAG]

13 minutes ago, sanemax said:

If you add the people who didnt vote in the referendum to the Remain partys vote, Remain won the referendum and therefore the UK should remain in the EU .

They didn't vote.

 

They couldn't be arsed to vote.

 

Their number should not be added to either the leave or remain totals.

 

As Ursula Von Der Leyen (new President of the EU commission) so pertinently pointed out, when ratification of her appointment scraped through the European Parliament with a handful of votes: "A majority is a majority!"

Edited September 29, 2019 by JAG

[sanemax]

12 hours ago, JAG said:

They didn't vote.

 

They couldn't be arsed to vote.

 

Their number should not be added to either the leave or remain totals.

 

As Ursula Von Der Leyen (new President of the EU commission) so pertinently pointed out, when ratification of her appointment scraped through the European Parliament with a handful of votes: "A majority is a majority!"

The voters who didnt go out and vote remained in their houses , so that was a vote to remain in itself 

[vogie]

7 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Ok, let me help you.

What is the purpose of a referendum? It should result in knowing the opinion of the electorate. I doubt it did that at the time, so that means that imo it failed miserably. On top of that much more information and discussion has come out since, so imo the referendum represents even less the opinion of the majority now.

I think I can be more of a help to you in all honesty. The government asked the opinion of the electorate whether to remain or leave, ok so far? The electorate voted by a majority to leave and the government agreed to do so, still with us? Nobody is bothered about your "imo," democracy is about referendums and not your opinion. It "failed miserably" because it didn't go your way, I am sure that 52% of the electorate are still very happy with the result, we would be even happier if Brexit had been delivered instead of all this tom foolery that is happening, nearly finished.

But there again if we relied on your "imo" instead of referendums that would not be very democratic now would it.

Thinking that in your opinion that the referendum represents even less the opinion of the majority is pure conjecture and would not stand up in a court of law. The only referendum we have to go on is the once in a lifetime referendum, and remember only the losers want another referendum, does that tell you something, if not it should.

[stevenl]

9 minutes ago, vogie said:

I think I can be more of a help to you in all honesty. The government asked the opinion of the electorate whether to remain or leave, ok so far? The electorate voted by a majority to leave and the government agreed to do so, still with us? Nobody is bothered about your "imo," democracy is about referendums and not your opinion. It "failed miserably" because it didn't go your way, I am sure that 52% of the electorate are still very happy with the result, we would be even happier if Brexit had been delivered instead of all this tom foolery that is happening, nearly finished.

But there again if we relied on your "imo" instead of referendums that would not be very democratic now would it.

Thinking that in your opinion that the referendum represents even less the opinion of the majority is pure conjecture and would not stand up in a court of law. The only referendum we have to go on is the once in a lifetime referendum, and remember only the losers want another referendum, does that tell you something, if not it should.

You're missing the purpose of a referendum. So yes, I agree that my imo is irrelevant. And please stop the personal baiting.

 

It has failed miserably in its purpose.

[JAG]

10 minutes ago, sanemax said:

The voters who didnt go out and vote remained in their houses , so that was a vote to remain in itself 

Whilst I suspect (hope) you may be extracting the urine with that comment, I am also aware that there are those in this debate who would regard it as the clinching argument!

[vogie]

8 minutes ago, stevenl said:

You're missing the purpose of a referendum. So yes, I agree that my imo is irrelevant. And please stop the personal baiting.

 

It has failed miserably in its purpose.

When you start your post off patronizing me with "Ok, let me help you." Don't be surprised if posts are returned in kind.

How am I missing the purpose of a referendum.

The referendum has worked as well as it could, our duplicitious MPs have let us down and the remainers who refuse to accept the result.

[stevenl]

44 minutes ago, vogie said:

When you start your post off patronizing me with "Ok, let me help you." Don't be surprised if posts are returned in kind.

How am I missing the purpose of a referendum.

The referendum has worked as well as it could, our duplicitious MPs have let us down and the remainers who refuse to accept the result.

That's what happens when you post 'i don't understand what you're trying to say', I think 'let me help you' is a natural and decent reply.

 

But that was not what I was referring to. But I won't get into that, you probably wouldn't understand as well.

 

And yes, you're still missing the purpose of a referendum.

[vogie]

32 minutes ago, stevenl said:

That's what happens when you post 'i don't understand what you're trying to say', I think 'let me help you' is a natural and decent reply.

 

But that was not what I was referring to. But I won't get into that, you probably wouldn't understand as well.

 

And yes, you're still missing the purpose of a referendum

"You wouldn't understand as well" more patronising and unable to answer my post.

 

It would seem to me that remainers struggle to understand the purpose of a referendum.

 

If you read what you have written, do you think I could be forgiven for not fully understanding what you are trying to say? To me it is totally gobblygook.

 

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

And?

So just did it that it didn't work if it didn't represent the opinion of the majority?

 

Edited September 29, 2019 by vogie

[White Christmas13]

On 9/28/2019 at 10:02 PM, billd766 said:

How strange that it has just come up now and not earlier.

 

 

because he was not PM earlier

[stevenl]

16 minutes ago, vogie said:

"You wouldn't understand as well" more patronising

 

If you read what you have written, do you think I could be forgiven for not fully understanding what you are trying to say? To me it is totally gobblygook.

 

 

Yes, was a patronising answer to a patronising post.

 

And again yes, spelling correction made a mess of that post, sorry. Explanation later in the thread should be clear though.

 

But I'm out of here, this tit for that is irritating and tiresome.

[billd766]

3 hours ago, sawadee1947 said:

It makes no sense to go ahead on the road to divide the country. As half of UK is either pro or con a compromise is necessary. A deal at least might really a solution ????

But who should compromise with who?

 

Leavers with Remainers or Remainers with Leavers?

 

 

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

 

Sorry wrong post,

 

[billd766]

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

I very much doubt it represented the majority opinion 3 years ago, and even less so now.

Well if 17.4 million people voted to leave and 16.14 voted to Remain back in 2016 I would think that is fairly conclusive wouldn't you?

 

As for now nobody knows.

 

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

And?

So just did it that it didn't work if it didn't represent the opinion of the majority?

 

But it did represent the majority who bothered to vote.

[stevenl]

3 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Well if 17.4 million people voted to leave and 16.14 voted to Remain back in 2016 I would think that is fairly conclusive wouldn't you?

 

As for now nobody knows.

 

 

But it did represent the majority who bothered to vote.

Yes, but very likely the result did not reflect the opinion of the electorate, even less so now.

Edited September 29, 2019 by stevenl