tim... wrote:

"tim..." wrote in message
news

apparently, a large number of the 50s generation of immigrates voted to

Hm, what on earth is an immigrate?

Oops


People I know have posted on Facebook about 'immigants' and 'imagrints'...


Anna Noyd-Dryver

wrote:
On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 14:55:16 +0000
(Mark Bestley) wrote:
wrote:

On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 12:32:45 +0000
(Mark Bestley) wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:


And many people who were born here did not have a vote e.g. those using
EU freedom of movement to work in Europe.

There's a reason there's an "ex" in ex-pat.

So you don't want immigrants to UK to vote because they wern't born here
and you don't want people who were born here to be able to vote either.
That does not make any sense.

Born here and living here. If you've ****ed off to live in another country
you absolve any right to have an influence on whether your country of birth
remains in the EU since it is no longer your concern. And if all those chavs
and criminals living on the costas are worried about their status when we
exit then they should apply for Spanish citizenship. Ditto anywhere else.



What about those working abroad on fixed term contracts of a few years
duration?


Anna Noyd-Dryver

Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
Mark Bestley wrote:


And many people who were born here did not have a vote e.g. those using
EU freedom of movement to work in Europe.


Only if they'd been resident out of the country for more than 15 years.

At least some UK expats retain a UK address for various reasons.

On Thu, 17 Nov 2016 17:44:50 +0000
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 17/11/2016 09:37, d wrote:

Parliment exists to enact the will of the people,

So how come we haven't got hanging, flogging and free beer?

Because sadly it doesn't always happen. They know perfectly well what the
result of a referendum on capital punishment would be, which is why one's never
been called and its never in a policy manifesto so they can't be accused of
renaging on it.

--
Spud

On Fri, 18 Nov 2016 01:46:08 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 14:55:16 +0000
(Mark Bestley) wrote:
wrote:

On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 12:32:45 +0000
(Mark Bestley) wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:


And many people who were born here did not have a vote e.g. those using
EU freedom of movement to work in Europe.

There's a reason there's an "ex" in ex-pat.

So you don't want immigrants to UK to vote because they wern't born here
and you don't want people who were born here to be able to vote either.
That does not make any sense.

Born here and living here. If you've ****ed off to live in another country
you absolve any right to have an influence on whether your country of birth
remains in the EU since it is no longer your concern. And if all those chavs
and criminals living on the costas are worried about their status when we
exit then they should apply for Spanish citizenship. Ditto anywhere else.



What about those working abroad on fixed term contracts of a few years
duration?

Thats different. I'm talking about people who've gone to live abroad with
no intention of returning.

--
Spud

On Thu, 17 Nov 2016 21:19:18 -0000
"Michael R N Dolbear" wrote:
wrote in message

"Clive D.W. Feather" wrote:

Actually, the correct analogy is
Georgians/Carolinans/Virginians/Alabamans complaining about being told
what to do by a load of leftie liberals in Washington DC.

They were not sovereign nations to start with. The analogy is false.

Don't know your history do you ?

The states that originally ratified the US constitution plus Texas,
California and Hawaii were all sovereign when they joined so that's all but
Alabama in the list above.

Yeah, right. A bunch of armed settlers forming an irregular army with a
constantly shifting border with Mexico does not make a sovereign state.

--
Spud

On Thu, 17 Nov 2016 18:36:55 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 17/11/2016 16:22, d wrote:
On Thu, 17 Nov 2016 23:25:29 +0800
"Clive D.W. Feather" wrote:
On 09/11/2016 00:58, Peter wrote:
The whole point of Brexit is that a lot of us DO care about being
British, to the extent that we would really like to govern ourselves
again, rather than be ruled by a foreign power.

Can you imagine the United States being told what to do by an American
Union based in Guatemala?

Actually, the correct analogy is
Georgians/Carolinans/Virginians/Alabamans complaining about being told
what to do by a load of leftie liberals in Washington DC.

They were not sovereign nations to start with. The analogy is false.


Surely the whole point of the Untied States is that each state is a
sovereign entity.

Are they? Oh. So who's the current New York ambassador to the UK then? How
many ships does the Rhode Island navy have? Whats Californias foreign policy
with respect to Syria?

--
Spud

On 18/11/2016 09:32, d wrote:
On Thu, 17 Nov 2016 21:19:18 -0000
"Michael R N Dolbear" wrote:
d wrote in message

"Clive D.W. Feather" wrote:

Actually, the correct analogy is
Georgians/Carolinans/Virginians/Alabamans complaining about being told
what to do by a load of leftie liberals in Washington DC.

They were not sovereign nations to start with. The analogy is false.

Don't know your history do you ?

The states that originally ratified the US constitution plus Texas,
California and Hawaii were all sovereign when they joined so that's all but
Alabama in the list above.

Yeah, right. A bunch of armed settlers forming an irregular army with a
constantly shifting border with Mexico does not make a sovereign state.


I'd like to see you explain that in Dallas…

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 18/11/2016 09:34, d wrote:
On Thu, 17 Nov 2016 18:36:55 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 17/11/2016 16:22, d wrote:
On Thu, 17 Nov 2016 23:25:29 +0800
"Clive D.W. Feather" wrote:
On 09/11/2016 00:58, Peter wrote:
The whole point of Brexit is that a lot of us DO care about being
British, to the extent that we would really like to govern ourselves
again, rather than be ruled by a foreign power.

Can you imagine the United States being told what to do by an American
Union based in Guatemala?

Actually, the correct analogy is
Georgians/Carolinans/Virginians/Alabamans complaining about being told
what to do by a load of leftie liberals in Washington DC.

They were not sovereign nations to start with. The analogy is false.


Surely the whole point of the Untied States is that each state is a
sovereign entity.

Are they? Oh. So who's the current New York ambassador to the UK then? How
many ships does the Rhode Island navy have? Whats Californias foreign policy
with respect to Syria?


You mean you don't know?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Fri, 18 Nov 2016 10:27:48 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 18/11/2016 09:34, d wrote:
Are they? Oh. So who's the current New York ambassador to the UK then? How
many ships does the Rhode Island navy have? Whats Californias foreign policy
with respect to Syria?


You mean you don't know?

No. Perhaps you should fill us in.

--
Spud