trigger_andy

I for one say he’s called it spot on. I think you’re bang out of order here. But I like that! The forum would be a boring place if there was not a few cranks posting off the wall mid-90’s references.

There is no counter-argument to a national referendum where the majority wish to leave the Union. It’s really as simple as that. End of

Not? Have we been teleported back to the mid 90’s? Hark! Do I hear frogs croaking Bud-Wis-Er? Is a yellow puppet named Edi selling me Levi Jeans? Are the ladies swooning from windowsills drinking Diet Cola? Great retort? Maybe not. But sure beats the hell outta yours.

Well that’s not surprising really. You seem permanently drunk. cut back a little, drink some water and stop playing Braveheart on repeat.

Spot on! I think you’ve really summed up what’s happening in Scotland today.

That’s not how I read it at all. It’s clear you always intended overlaying your own agenda on whatever answer he was going to give. There was no ‘plan’ for the Brexit I Referendum. It was in,or out. Simple as. A huge majority of us still want the simple ‘out’ that we we offered in the referendum and then won. You it seems have been blinded by the remoaner types they where in politics. But I’m sure you’ve noticed that they are few and far between now. They went against their constituents and paid the price. You’re an optimist with tunnel vision, good for you bud!

Yes.

So am I right in thinking that the older someone gets the more right of center they become? There is a few here that will be spitting into their beer tonight if that’s the case!

I know you are J. But you seem to expect the system to bend to your will and not vice versa. It seems to me that as your unique set of parameters are not catered for you believe there must be a flaw that needs addressing. There is no party in Scotland that represents my unique political recipe. I don’t believe changing the system to appease me is the correct course of action. I can pull my big boy pants up and see that maybe indi#2 is what the people here want even if it’s not what I think is best for Scotland right now. Voting Tory in my county would have been a waste of time. I’m not gonna get my huff on and greet that my views are not being represented!

Impacted could be a more accurate adjective?

Better to have lots of parties fuck things up right? Then we'd have no idea who was to blame and to whom to vote in the next election. What an utterly pointless system. We give (or should) give the party with the most votes the right to govern unhindered for a set number of years and if we see they are not doing the job we vote them out and replace them with another. You're ideals seems like the perfect circle of hell. Neither system is perfect, and as long as we dont wish to hold the MP's personally accountable for their actions and manifestos it will continue to be quite imperfect. But Id much rather FPTP than PR. Thankfully FPTP will remain in place. Maybe we should have a FPTP or PR Poll?

In my opinion J's politics are chaotic. Juts because they are written in an eloquent way does not change that. They range from left wing, centralist to extreme right wing. That to me is impossible to follow, the fact that he repeatedly stated no party represents him and his ideals somewhat backs that up. What point am I missing? If you have 100 votes and one person has 45% of those votes and one person has 25% and another 20% and a person with 5% and so on what individual has the majority of votes? I'm going to assume you will argue no one. Where as in a democracy the person with the majority is clearly the person with 45%. I simply do not agree with your assessment of FPTP and as much as your welcome to it no one really cares. Its not gonna change anything.

Yes I realise that, but Mull gave his drunken assumption I picked it up from working with Yanks. I just find it winds people up more than 'knickers in a twist'.

My my, you’re just full of assumptions tonight. “working with yanks so long you can’t think for yourself no more?” Aside from the double negative that’s quite the American colloquialism you’ve got going on there.

Damn, caught another one! This is too easy! ?. It’s so funny to see folk jumping to the wildest of conclusions. I literally said the population needs reducing but in a way the bleeding hearts won’t get their panties in a bunch. Yet you imagine the worst then get your panties all bunched up. It’s hilarious.

Are your panties in a bunch? It sounds like they're in a bunch.

Being forced to do things just means more tax, so Im obviously against that. The companies that are causing the problems need punished. They are the ones polluting the earth, they are the ones wrapping peeled Oranges in plastic. They are the ones releasing toxic waste into our rivers. Stop them and we're making progress. But allowing them to carry on and taxing us for using their products wont work. Never ever gonna happen. Surely you see that? Of course Trump pulled out. China, India etc where just laughing into everyones faces. They are polluting just as badly as before but paying lip service to the world. There was no promising progress and even if someone was delusional to believe there was surely the other countries can just carry on pretending to save the planet? Its just common sense. Untill the likes of China, India and all the other countries that are causing insane amounts of pollution are forced to curb it then nothing will change. America is forced to play on 1st world terms whilst China gets to play dumb on 3rd world terms. All the while decimating the US economy. If you wanna be pissed off get pissed at the right countries.

I quite agree. The number of humans on earth is simply not sustainable. We do need to reduce numbers and it can be done without the bleeding hearts getting their panties in a bunch.

I really like Peterson but he came accross as slightly drunk. Repeating the same phrase time and time again and just generally ranting. But I completely agree with what he's saying. None of us are willing to change a damn thing. Especially not the kids who seem to be up in arms about it anyway.

Could it be ash?

Exactly! Only really enticing to someone who’s views are permanently in the minority but don’t think they are wrong, everyone else is. ?

Its simply a recipe for disaster and not democratic at all. So if you have a democratic majority it can be wiped out my parties that lost the democratic vote and club together to twart the will of the majority. Its idiotic. Not sure what that means? In general agreement? Thats the opposite that would happen. No, thats what happens when the winning party does not have a majority. Which in my mind they should not need. Let PR happen, where it to the Tories would have still won. But winner takes all. Your idea of the winner wins nothing and the parties with the lest votes club together to appear like they have a majority is a slap in the face for democracy and thankfully its not on the cards. You really do seem bitter that your rather chaotic and impossible to follow views of politics are not represented so you think the current system is not working because regardless what party you vote for your own tick list is not covered. Your own PR System would still see the Tories win, and by a good margin. That would still mean the majority are being represented.

But even with PR the Tories would still have the most seats? Tory = 288 Labour = 216 Lib Dems = 70 SNP = 28 Green = 12 Brexit Party =10 In my mind that party with the most seats wins. Is that not Democracy? The party with the most votes wins? But for a PR system to be fair no coalitions would be allowed to form. This in my mind is thwarting Democracy. And Anything put to the House would also be on a Democratic basis. Whatever gets the most votes wins, not by any margin, just purely on votes alone. Otherwise we'd see voters even more ignored than we seen during Brexit.

No, was more directed at Big J as he has a Hard-on for PR. I agree with what you're saying regarding Sturgeon and the SNP. They like to think they speak for Scotland but they dont. I think BoJo should just give them their Indi#2 and see where the cards fall. Where they to lose again they would have no mandate at all for Indi#3 and hopefully they'd shut it for a while.

Found an article where the Lib Dems would have 60 seats or something. And the Tories would have a minority government. So we’d just have bitching, and fighting, and years and years of stagnation caused by the opposition blocking everything. Like Labour has done to destroy Brexit purely for their own political gains. Seems like a waste of time to me. This is what the general election results would have looked like if … WWW.GOOGLE.CO.UK Boris Johnson would have been denied a majority in parliament if the UK had used the voting system adopted for European parliament polls at the general election, new research shows. Analysis of