So that is Paul Nuttall's real address? at least the Police will know where to go to arrest him!
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
This is what a major German magazine thinks of the American president:
Given that the Germans know a thing or two about dictators, the guy in the USA who had this to say about his new leader is right on the money!
Tom
Given that the Germans know a thing or two about dictators, the guy in the USA who had this to say about his new leader is right on the money!
Tom
Has this been on the front page of the national dailies?
https://www.thecanary.co/2017/02/03/british-nhs-doctor-turned-away-flight-us-told-rules-changed/
Tom
https://www.thecanary.co/2017/02/03/british-nhs-doctor-turned-away-flight-us-told-rules-changed/
Tom
I'm still baffled how he could lose the election by over 3,000,000 votes and still get elected.
Perhaps it was a Consolation Prize and Mr's Clinton's got a REAL Cowboy outfit to play with as First Prize?
Perhaps this little gem made it to the major UK press organs?
http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/02/04/new-law-in-us-state-lets-rapists-sue-if-victims-want-to-have-an-abortion/
Tom
http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/02/04/new-law-in-us-state-lets-rapists-sue-if-victims-want-to-have-an-abortion/
Tom
Yes, it's a very strange situation and a bit like the old holiday camp entertainer's crack about the prizes in one of the competitions for the guests:
Third will receive a bottle of something resembling champagne.....
Second will win a two week holiday at our Skegness resort but the winner will receive...........
.......A WEEK'S HOLIDAY AT SKEGNESS!
Tom
I thought you knew. Forgive me if I am wrong, but didn't you once explain how the SNP won more 50 time more seats than a party who secured 3 times more votes than them? I think it comes down to the voting system in the country.
If you don't like it, I shall look forward to you campaigning to have the number of UKIP MPs in the House of Commons increased.
But they didn't win them in a straight fight, did they?
Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
people voting for one party, that party not delivering, people then vote for a different party, that party not delivering, and so on. it might not seem logical how people can change their vote from one extreme to another. gone are the days of the SRSY.
I think you'll find it just made a comeback[emoji1]
Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
But a very similar, and judging by your original comment regarding Trump, unfair voting mechanism, delivered a result which did not reflect the number of votes cast.
Trump received less votes than Clinton but one more states, SNP received less votes than UKIP but won more seats. It's an identical situation, so why no protesting about the SNP?
I'll answer that if I may. You don't like UKIP, which is fine, so you are willing to overlook the situation in their case, but simultaneously protest when the situation is to the detriment of a party or candidate who you support. That's not so good.
you tell me, as i can only assume that political party's are not offering or delivering what people want.
For the simple reason that you are determined to forget the the SNP resulted in a win in each of the areas where they were elected, the contests were SEPARATE affairs ,whereas in the USA it was a single contest between just the TWO participants , where it might reasonably be expected that the winner had the most votes, not that one had one more district to his name
The same situation exists here and it should in America
The fundamental rule of Democracy is quite simple
In a contest between TWO PARTICIPANTS in a geographical area being contested, the one with the most votes wins
The Presidential election was for the Entire USA
Otherwise it might be argued that Trump should only be President of those States that he won in.
Absolute nonsense, but that is what your argument amounts to.
The Voting here was for individual areas and was therefore "one against others in that area alone" as the Contest in America was for one area, the entire continent.
No if, no buts, "get over" it as one might say
And why have you leaped to the conclusion that I supported EITHER candidate in the US presidential elections?
Once again you are trying to twist the argument and imagine that will give you an advantage.
Your argument is spurious and is intended, but has failed. to mislead.
Try harder with a better argument next time.
By all means make that assumption, but the evidence it clear that in these pro Brxit areas the Brexit voters in both have thrown out the parties that they supported before the referendum
That is a fact and hardly no matter how you care to view it, why would they not have stuck with their previous candidate if they were still as enthusiastic for Brexit as before, when Brexit had been achieved?
In one case the party actually trying to get Brexit stopped has been elected, and in the other they can have no confidence in the UKIP or the Tory party to deliver the Brexit that they thought they voted for to have made the change they have back to the labour party.
From Reuters today
Pretty much confirming things about the fate of London I pointed out a day or so ago.
The wordind has a "Sting in the Tail"
"
The City of London offers financial services that benefit Europe as a whole and the European Union should recognise that in a "reasonable" Brexit deal with Britain, German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble said in a newspaper interview.
"We don't want to punish the British for their decision," Schaeuble said in a pre-released interview with the Sunday edition of Tagesspiegel. "We want to keep Britain close to us."
"London's financial centre serves the whole European economy," he added. "London offers a quality of financial services that are not to be found on the continent. That would change a bit after a separation, but we have to find reasonable rules here with Britain."
Oh yes, "Gypsies Warning" there for all with even half a brain to see!
Pretty much confirming things about the fate of London I pointed out a day or so ago.
The wordind has a "Sting in the Tail"
"
The City of London offers financial services that benefit Europe as a whole and the European Union should recognise that in a "reasonable" Brexit deal with Britain, German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble said in a newspaper interview.
"We don't want to punish the British for their decision," Schaeuble said in a pre-released interview with the Sunday edition of Tagesspiegel. "We want to keep Britain close to us."
"London's financial centre serves the whole European economy," he added. "London offers a quality of financial services that are not to be found on the continent. That would change a bit after a separation, but we have to find reasonable rules here with Britain."
Oh yes, "Gypsies Warning" there for all with even half a brain to see!
I'm afraid not OG. The person who wins the most states takes the presidency which is similar in nature to the party which takes the majority of constituencies in the UK wins the election. Both systems rely on winning areas of the country and both systems can deliver a winner with fewer votes than their rival(s).
Your argument is busted my friend.
I can understand why you want to cherry pick aspects of one particular system when it shows a person that you disagree with in an unfavourable light, for example Trump, but conveniently ignore it when the system disadvantages a party you disagree with, as with UKIP. But that's OK, it's human nature and it shows that you are human!
The USA does not have a direct election system for the presidency. Their electoral college system is an indirect system, the electorate's votes are for "electors" who in turn vote for the president. There are 538 electors divided among the 50 states.
The winner of the presidency is the one receiving the most "elector" votes from all the states. Since the number of "electors" in each state cannot be precisely aligned with the number of the electorate, there can be disparity in the final outcome.
I understand there have been four US presidencies in less than 200 years where the winner did not receive the largest number of individual votes from the electorate.
.
The winner of the presidency is the one receiving the most "elector" votes from all the states. Since the number of "electors" in each state cannot be precisely aligned with the number of the electorate, there can be disparity in the final outcome.
I understand there have been four US presidencies in less than 200 years where the winner did not receive the largest number of individual votes from the electorate.
.
Sorry tillson you are wrong again as the party that has the most number of Mps may not even have an overall majority. It can assume power and can form alliances to make up it's numbers to fake a majority with people it's supporters would never vote for in a million years and were not entitled to be in Government anyway. or just go ahead without one
The now-common practice of the party with the most seats forming the government has led to a widespread misconception among voters that a convention exists whereby the party with the most seats always gets to form the government. In fact, the most compelling reason for this practice is that the party with the most seats can survive confidence votes so long as the smaller party (or parties) simply abstain from confidence votes.
The way governments are formed is not democratic as the voters have no part in it, it is simply a political accommodation between politicians
Sorry, as I said you need a better argument.
Understood; Which makes it about as undemocratic as the way that party politics rule this country.
how do you know that its a 'fact' that brexit voters threw out who they voted for pre brexit. perhaps the people who voted remain and those who didn't bother to vote at all, actually got up and participated this time. you assume that brexit voters have now changed their minds, as i said before, i believe the eu referendum was not based on what party you support.
i've voted labour all my life but voted leave, my choice. i vote in elections for the party i want to run the country. i would just like whichever party the country votes for to run it without being in the eu.