Daily Express Crusade Victory

[Surman4no7shirt]

Are you all mental? If we left the EU all those foreign birds would have to leave...

[View From The Top]

The fella I travel to matches with works in The City and we used to argue about joining the Euro. I was opposed and he was pro. My grounds were based on sovereignty and his based on business and even now he has a pro-European view based on business and my pro-European rule contains caveats based solely on sovereignty.

Because business and The City are so pro-EU there is no way that the Tories would risk a vote that would lose them the support of their sponsors. After all, you take their coin you dance to their tune.

[Lord Duckhunter]

The fella I travel to matches with works in The City and we used to argue about joining the Euro. I was opposed and he was pro. My grounds were based on sovereignty and his based on business and even now he has a pro-European view based on business and my pro-European rule contains caveats based solely on sovereignty.

Because business and The City are so pro-EU there is no way that the Tories would risk a vote that would lose them the support of their sponsors. After all, you take their coin you dance to their tune.

 

There are vast swathes of the Tory party that are oppossed to the EU out of principle. Somehow a myth has devoloped that people like Clarke, Hestletine and Patten are the moderate's and people like Redwood are loons. Just because he looks strange, on Europe and the Euro, Redwood and his ilk were right, and Ken "Man of the people" Clarke was wrong.

 

Had the "moderates" got their way, we'd be in the Euro by now. Even after the ERM fiasco idiots like Clarke and Hestletine still looked at Europe and the Euro through rose tinted glasses.

 

They damaged the party by portraying anyone oppossed to "The Project" as right wing nutters and the pro European BBC lapped it up. James Goldsmith was right, and what good did it do the Torys pandering to the likes of Clarke and Hestletine, nothing, they are still unable to win an election outright for the 20 years since Hestletine, Clarke, Major and all the other political pigmies moved the party to the "centre".

[Saintandy666]

This is why we'll never get a vote on Europe. Plain and simple, nothing to do with principles, just politics. The establishment have deemed we're best off in Europe and are scared the peasant's will upset the apple cart.Just like public opinion on hanging changed over the years, they're hoping that they can ride out this storm and that future generations will come to see the European project as a wonderful thing.Personally, I think opinion is travelling the other way, and if they wanted to maintan or place in the EU, should have held a vote 10 years ago and killed it for another 20 years(as the Torys have done with PR)

 

I personally think in an 'In/Out' referendum, once the arguments are laid out and argued, the UK would vote to stay in. Just remember how far ahead AV was in the polls before the arguments were properly laid out in a massive public debate.

[pap]

I personally think in an 'In/Out' referendum, once the arguments are laid out and argued, the UK would vote to stay in. Just remember how far ahead AV was in the polls before the arguments were properly laid out in a massive public debate.

 

Or as is more likely, a massive scare campaign in which the yes campaign tricks the public into staying in. If business wants to stay in the EU, I daresay we will.

[pedg]

Or as is more likely, a massive scare campaign in which the yes campaign tricks the public into staying in.

 

So you mean one based on the FPTP campaign in the recent referendum..

[aintforever]

I personally think in an 'In/Out' referendum, once the arguments are laid out and argued, the UK would vote to stay in. Just remember how far ahead AV was in the polls before the arguments were properly laid out in a massive public debate.

 

Or as in the AV vote, if Clegg says yes, the British public says no.

[hypochondriac]

I personally think in an 'In/Out' referendum, once the arguments are laid out and argued, the UK would vote to stay in. Just remember how far ahead AV was in the polls before the arguments were properly laid out in a massive public debate.

 

Lol. There was never any chance of AV getting through. None at all.

[Saintandy666]

Lol. There was never any chance of AV getting through. None at all.

 

But it was very far ahead in opinion polls recently. It was only when the debate heated up that people changed their mind... so my point stands. It would have gotten through if the yes campaign had had any money. I worked on the campaign locally and I can tell you we had next to nothing to work with. In comparison the no vote had millions upon millions.

 

Another problem with Referenda... more often than not they go the way of where the money is in the end. If the city is overwhelmingly pro-EU as people keep saying, I'd be surprised if an out vote is achieved.

[dune]

But it was very far ahead in opinion polls recently. It was only when the debate heated up that people changed their mind... so my point stands. It would have gotten through if the yes campaign had had any money. I worked on the campaign locally and I can tell you we had next to nothing to work with. In comparison the no vote had millions upon millions.

 

Another problem with Referenda... more often than not they go the way of where the money is in the end. If the city is overwhelmingly pro-EU as people keep saying, I'd be surprised if an out vote is achieved.

 

Please keep your Americanisms off the forum.

 

As for your sour grapes.

 

:lol:

[Thedelldays]

But it was very far ahead in opinion polls recently. It was only when the debate heated up that people changed their mind... so my point stands. It would have gotten through if the yes campaign had had any money. I worked on the campaign locally and I can tell you we had next to nothing to work with. In comparison the no vote had millions upon millions.

 

Another problem with Referenda... more often than not they go the way of where the money is in the end. If the city is overwhelmingly pro-EU as people keep saying, I'd be surprised if an out vote is achieved.

 

it got quashed......just accept that this country simply does not want it

[aintforever]

I'm usually up for getting out of the EU but I think if we opted out now it would send the whole thing into a tailspin which wouldn't be good for us.

[hypochondriac]

But it was very far ahead in opinion polls recently. It was only when the debate heated up that people changed their mind... so my point stands. It would have gotten through if the yes campaign had had any money. I worked on the campaign locally and I can tell you we had next to nothing to work with. In comparison the no vote had millions upon millions.

 

Another problem with Referenda... more often than not they go the way of where the money is in the end. If the city is overwhelmingly pro-EU as people keep saying, I'd be surprised if an out vote is achieved.

 

No it wouldn't.

[hypochondriac]

I'm usually up for getting out of the EU but I think if we opted out now it would send the whole thing into a tailspin which wouldn't be good for us.

 

So your reason for staying in is because it's disruptive if we leave? Is that really the best reason to stay?

[aintforever]

No it wouldn't.

 

I think it would. The British public are generally quite stupid, the AV was clearly a fairer option, a couple of flash ads with race horses in - bingo, game over.

 

Apart from the Clegg factor the reason AV lost was because of the self serving @rseholes of the Tory and Labour party desperately in fear of their safe seats, the public just went along with what their favourite @rsehole said.

[Saintandy666]

Considering the opinion polls prior to the campaign period... there is a real possibility it could have won if the money had been there. I'm not the greatest fan of AV anyways in comparison to STV and AMS. I saw it more as a stepping stone.

 

But I think you lot all missed the point on the financial funding aspect. If the financial disparity is too large, then the side with the big spanky campaigns will win.

[dune]

Considering the opinion polls prior to the campaign period... there is a real possibility it could have won if the money had been there. I'm not the greatest fan of AV anyways in comparison to STV and AMS. I saw it more as a stepping stone.

 

But I think you lot all missed the point on the financial funding aspect. If the financial disparity is too large, then the side with the big spanky campaigns will win.

 

You lost. Get over it.

[Saintandy666]

You lost. Get over it.

 

Thanks for your valuable contribution in the debate on whether financial muscle could influence referenda.

[dune]

Thanks for your valuable contribution in the debate on whether financial muscle could influence referenda.

 

The debate is about the EU, not the fact the british public told you Liberals to f/k off with your voting reforms.

[pap]

I think it would. The British public are generally quite stupid, the AV was clearly a fairer option, a couple of flash ads with race horses in - bingo, game over.

 

Apart from the Clegg factor the reason AV lost was because of the self serving @rseholes of the Tory and Labour party desperately in fear of their safe seats, the public just went along with what their favourite @rsehole said.

 

Good post.

 

If anything, the AV referendum confirmed my suspicion I might have placed too much faith in the British public's ability to see the merits of an argument. Genuinely gutted about it. It wasn't perfect, but it was a better deal for the people than what we have, and it was scuppered out of pure self-interest. The self-interest I expected, but I was truly surprised to see the British public vote in such numbers for something that wasn't in their best interests.

[Saintandy666]

The debate is about the EU, not the fact the british public told you Liberals to f/k off with your voting reforms.

 

No, it's related. Because when the city gets behind the pro-EU vote and chucks money at it, you euro-sceptics will lose.

[Thedelldays]

I think it would. The British public are generally quite stupid, the AV was clearly a fairer option, a couple of flash ads with race horses in - bingo, game over.

 

Apart from the Clegg factor the reason AV lost was because of the self serving @rseholes of the Tory and Labour party desperately in fear of their safe seats, the public just went along with what their favourite @rsehole said.

 

Would the British public be stupid if they voted in favour of it???

[dune]

No, it's related. Because when the city gets behind the pro-EU vote and chucks money at it, you euro-sceptics will lose.

 

Unlike the whingey Liberals I will accept the vote because unlike the Liberal Elite I believe that people can make their own minds up.

[Saintandy666]

Unlike the whingey Liberals I will accept the vote because unlike the Liberal Elite I believe that people can make their own minds up.

 

I accept the vote of the AV referendum. I'm just saying it wasn't a fair fight on many levels(lies, financial etc, but that is a fault in referenda. Remember, all anyone objected to was AV, not electoral reform.

[Lord Duckhunter]

You can see even on this thread how the Pro Europeans seem unable to accept the will of the people, and keep trying to tell us what is best for us. They would make really good members of the EU council as added to this, is their inability to accept the first result of a referendum. Unfortunatly for them the AV vote was not the Lisbon or Nice treaty and we were not told to keep voting until we got the result they wanted.Bloody hell, they've come up with more excuses than Wurzel does when the Skate's lose. It wasn't even close, it's like complaining about the ref after a 7-0 drubbing.

[pedg]

You can see even on this thread how the Pro Europeans seem unable to accept the will of the people, and keep trying to tell us what is best for us. They would make really good members of the EU council as added to this, is their inability to accept the first result of a referendum. Unfortunatly for them the AV vote was not the Lisbon or Nice treaty and we were not told to keep voting until we got the result they wanted.Bloody hell, they've come up with more excuses than Wurzel does when the Skate's lose. It wasn't even close, it's like complaining about the ref after a 7-0 drubbing.

 

I assume you are happy though with the numbers of UKIP members of the European parliament despite the fact that they never would have got as many as they do if it was not for the proportional representation system that is used in the European elections?

Edited 6 October, 2011 by pedg

[Lord Duckhunter]

I assume you are happy though with the numbers of UKIP members of the European parliament despite the fact that they never would have got as many as they do if it was not for the proportional representation system that is used in the European elections?

 

I'm not happy with any sort of election system for the European Parliament, because I dont want us in the EU.

 

However, if we had a vote to determine which system to use, I would accept the will of the British people. I would not try and tell them they were, conned,stupid, lied to, or compalin about the amount of money spent on the campaign.Especially if my side of the arguement was defeated in a manner bordering on humilation.I would sit back and think about why I was so out of touch with what the people want..............

[um pahars]

However, if we had a vote to determine which system to use, I would accept the will of the British people. I would not try and tell them they were, conned,stupid, lied to, or compalin about the amount of money spent on the campaign.Especially if my side of the arguement was defeated in a manner bordering on humilation.I would sit back and think about why I was so out of touch with what the people want..............

 

But surely as the recent News International scandal showed, the media in the UK are a very powerful and influential institution. The main reason Blair got in was that Murdoch came out in support of him.

 

And therefore you must recognise that the media will play a very important part in influencing both politicians and the general public and that their self interests may well come before that of the UK or its population.

[pap]

I'm not happy with any sort of election system for the European Parliament, because I dont want us in the EU.

 

However, if we had a vote to determine which system to use, I would accept the will of the British people. I would not try and tell them they were, conned,stupid, lied to, or compalin about the amount of money spent on the campaign.Especially if my side of the arguement was defeated in a manner bordering on humilation.I would sit back and think about why I was so out of touch with what the people want..............

 

Really? Somehow, I doubt it. We'll probably never know, because, as we've pointed out, we're unlikely to get a referendum on the EU.

 

Anyways, are you saying that something is automatically better because more people choose it?

[Lord Duckhunter]

But surely as the recent News International scandal showed, the media in the UK are a very powerful and influential institution. The main reason Blair got in was that Murdoch came out in support of him.

 

And therefore you must recognise that the media will play a very important part in influencing both politicians and the general public and that their self interests may well come before that of the UK or its population.

 

There's nothing you can do about it, save ban media or ban elections.

 

My view as a freemarket supporter is that the media (except the BBC) is governed by the free market. How many people were really disgusted with the phone tapping, yet how many cancelled their Sky subscription? People buy the Mail, Sun and Telegraph, they have a choice. If they didn't like/agree with most they write, they would have the circulation figs of the Guardian...........

[um pahars]

There's nothing you can do about it, save ban media or ban elections.

 

My view as a freemarket supporter is that the media (except the BBC) is governed by the free market. How many people were really disgusted with the phone tapping, yet how many cancelled their Sky subscription? People buy the Mail, Sun and Telegraph, they have a choice. If they didn't like/agree with most they write, they would have the circulation figs of the Guardian...........

 

And IMHO the "freemarket" has shown itself to be as abusive, divisive and unworkable as Communism/Marxism at the other extreme. There is of course a middle way that involves regulation (what that regualtion looks like and how far it goes is up for debate), but just saying the freemarket will work its way out is a tad naive.

 

It wasn't the phone tapping that was the real issue for me, instead it was the undue and undemocratic influence that a handful of media proprietors had on the Government of the day (or the prospective Governments in waiting).

 

And in a way this undemocratic and unaccountable influence is just as bad (if not worse) as the undemocratic influence of those in Brussels that we both seem to dislike.

[Lord Duckhunter]

And IMHO the "freemarket" has shown itself to be as abusive, divisive and unworkable as Communism/Marxism at the other extreme. There is of course a middle way that involves regulation (what that regualtion looks like and how far it goes is up for debate), but just saying the freemarket will work its way out is a tad naive.

 

 

The freemarket has to work in the media. Apart from the BBC (which I object paying for, but that's for another thread) the media is governed by the rules of demand. Anyone can set up a paper or buy an existing title. Why are there no left wing right on papers that sell as many copies as the Mail, telegraph and Sun. Perhaps it's because nobody would buy it. You could put a pair of tits on page 3,4 & 5 of the Guardian, but as long as Polly Toynbee is spouting her nonsense, nobodys going to buy it, except a few sandal wearers and tree huggers.

[ecuk268]

Why are there no left wing right on papers that sell as many copies as the Mail, telegraph and Sun. Perhaps it's because nobody would buy it. You could put a pair of tits on page 3,4 & 5 of the Guardian, but as long as Polly Toynbee is spouting her nonsense, nobodys going to buy it, except a few sandal wearers and tree huggers.

 

The Mirror sells twice as many as the Telegraph and nearly three times as many as the Times. The average Sun reader doesn't give a toss about it's politics as shown by Murdoch supporting whoever he thinks likely to win.

 

What I find worrying is that the Star (is it really a newspaper) outsells the Telegraph, Times and Express. What does that say about the newspaper buying public?