J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,774 
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jul 24, 2024 18:59:02 GMT
The franchise should be people who are both citizens and residents - simples. Nonsense. That's ignoring what citizenship is. My sister lives in Buenos Aires and doesn't get a vote in Argentinian elections and I've never heard a good reason why she should. Presumably she's not a citizen - which is what NOA is saying - she would need to be a citizen of Argentina, and to live in Argentina to vote. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,774
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jul 24, 2024 19:05:01 GMT
The franchise should be people who are both citizens and residents - simples. I personally like a (e.g a 5 year) residency qualification. If you pay tax, you should have a say in how the money is spent. That's how the municipal franchise used to be, and we saw how well that worked out in Northern Ireland. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,777
|
Clacton
Jul 26, 2024 5:45:58 GMT
via mobile
Post by right on Jul 26, 2024 5:45:58 GMT
|
|
cathyc
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,132
|
Post by cathyc on Jul 26, 2024 8:59:45 GMT
"Mack also said Farage had promised him a salaried job at the top of the politician’s team in Clacton." Would that be legal? |
|
stb12
Top Poster
Posts: 8,380
|
Clacton
Jul 26, 2024 10:49:47 GMT
via mobile
Post by stb12 on Jul 26, 2024 10:49:47 GMT
"Mack also said Farage had promised him a salaried job at the top of the politician’s team in Clacton." Would that be legal? I’m not an expert on electoral law but I’m thinking not, since it was to do with Reform as a private entity, and as many love to point out it’s a Ltd company that Farage solely owns. It sounds like he may have been offered some compensation to not make a fuss over being removed It’s not as if there was attempted bribery to make a candidate of another party or an independent drop out |
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Jul 26, 2024 16:25:58 GMT
Quite obviously any promises that Farage made would have been conditional, even if the conditions were not explicitly stated. Such conditions would have likely included not running as an Independent candidate. |
|
cathyc
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,132
|
Post by cathyc on Jul 26, 2024 16:29:51 GMT
Quite obviously any promises that Farage made would have been conditional, even if the conditions were not explicitly stated. Such conditions would have likely included not running as an Independent candidate. Please let them have been conditional. |
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Jul 26, 2024 16:40:06 GMT
Quite obviously any promises that Farage made would have been conditional, even if the conditions were not explicitly stated. Such conditions would have likely included not running as an Independent candidate. Please let them have been conditional. You are wasting your time with this line of attack. Farage/Reform are under no obligation to pay Mack for the money he spent on the campaign and have every right to expect certain things from Mack if he wanted them to do so voluntarily. |
|
cathyc
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,132
|
Post by cathyc on Jul 26, 2024 17:03:04 GMT
Please let them have been conditional. You are wasting your time with this line of attack. Farage/Reform are under no obligation to pay Mack for the money he spent on the campaign and have every right to expect certain things from Mack if he wanted them to do so voluntarily. A verbal contract is still a contact, even though it's harder to prove. If conditions had been placed and a promise broken (and I really do mean 'if') then that compounds it. Any conditions imposed may also make it an election offence, but that would depend on what stage Mack's candidature had reached. Being a limited company does mean they can by-pass normal democratic procedures but does not exempt them from the law. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 26, 2024 22:37:08 GMT
You are wasting your time with this line of attack. Farage/Reform are under no obligation to pay Mack for the money he spent on the campaign and have every right to expect certain things from Mack if he wanted them to do so voluntarily. A verbal contract is still a contact, even though it's harder to prove. If conditions had been placed and a promise broken (and I really do mean 'if') then that compounds it. Any conditions imposed may also make it an election offence, but that would depend on what stage Mack's candidature had reached. Being a limited company does mean they can by-pass normal democratic procedures but does not exempt them from the law. All contracts in normal life are verbal. Ignorant policemen make the same mistake. A contract is difficult to express without using any words. |
|
cathyc
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,132
|
Post by cathyc on Jul 26, 2024 22:41:51 GMT
A verbal contract is still a contact, even though it's harder to prove. If conditions had been placed and a promise broken (and I really do mean 'if') then that compounds it. Any conditions imposed may also make it an election offence, but that would depend on what stage Mack's candidature had reached. Being a limited company does mean they can by-pass normal democratic procedures but does not exempt them from the law. All contracts in normal life are verbal. Ignorant policemen make the same mistake. A contract is difficult to express without using any words. Are you saying that contracts can't be made without the use of words? Wow. Thanks. Every day's a schoolday. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 26, 2024 22:49:09 GMT
All contracts in normal life are verbal. Ignorant policemen make the same mistake. A contract is difficult to express without using any words. Are you saying that contracts can't be made without the use of words? Wow. Thanks. Every day's a schoolday. Not at all. I am pointing out that you are an ignorant chav plonker who is unable to see the difference between oral and verbal. |
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Jul 26, 2024 23:10:47 GMT
You are wasting your time with this line of attack. Farage/Reform are under no obligation to pay Mack for the money he spent on the campaign and have every right to expect certain things from Mack if he wanted them to do so voluntarily. A verbal contract is still a contact, even though it's harder to prove. If conditions had been placed and a promise broken (and I really do mean 'if') then that compounds it. Any conditions imposed may also make it an election offence, but that would depend on what stage Mack's candidature had reached. Being a limited company does mean they can by-pass normal democratic procedures but does not exempt them from the law. You really are a very, very silly individual that is trying desperately to manufacture something from nothing. A promise to do something for someone is not the same as entering into a contract and even Mack has not come close to suggesting the things that you are. It seems pretty likely that what happened here is as follows. Shortly after announcing he was standing in Clacton there was phone call between Farage and Mack. The latter no doubt spoke of the money he had spent on the campaign and Farage will have almost certainly suggested the possibility of paying him for that and/or floated the idea of a job. The conditions would have been entirely unspoken and non-specific, i.e take one for the team like a good soldier and we will look after you. Farage has been playing this game for 30 years and he is bloody good at it. He hasn't survived this long by clumsily committing criminal acts. You may well agree with Mack's assessment that Farage has been dishonest but trying to find a crime in this is quite pathetic desperation. |
|
cathyc
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,132
|
Post by cathyc on Jul 26, 2024 23:19:52 GMT
Are you saying that contracts can't be made without the use of words? Wow. Thanks. Every day's a schoolday. Not at all. I am pointing out that you are an ignorant chav plonker who is unable to see the difference between oral and verbal. I was pointing out the difference (or not) between verbal and written. How very unlike you (or not) to miss a point by a country mile. I also know what chav means . I neither live in a council house nor have ever been violent, if you really want to be a pedantic bore. You also missed out a comma between ignorant and chav. Don't mention it. |
|
cathyc
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,132
|
Post by cathyc on Jul 26, 2024 23:25:55 GMT
A verbal contract is still a contact, even though it's harder to prove. If conditions had been placed and a promise broken (and I really do mean 'if') then that compounds it. Any conditions imposed may also make it an election offence, but that would depend on what stage Mack's candidature had reached. Being a limited company does mean they can by-pass normal democratic procedures but does not exempt them from the law. You really are a very, very silly individual that is trying desperately to manufacture something from nothing. A promise to do something for someone is not the same as entering into a contract and even Mack has not come close to suggesting the things that you are. It seems pretty likely that what happened here is as follows. Shortly after announcing he was standing in Clacton there was phone call between Farage and Mack. The latter no doubt spoke of the money he had spent on the campaign and Farage will have almost certainly suggested the possibility of paying him for that and/or floated the idea of a job. The conditions would have been entirely unspoken and non-specific, i.e take one for the team like a good soldier and we will look after you. Farage has been playing this game for 30 years and he is bloody good at it. He hasn't survived this long by clumsily committing criminal acts. You may well agree with Mack's assessment that Farage has been dishonest but trying to find a crime in this is quite pathetic desperation. Then I suggest you read the sections of election law that cover inducements for candidates to stand down. Like I said right from the start, it may well be that Mack wasn't a candidate in the legal sense so there is no offence. It still shows what a grifter's charter is Reform UK. Still, probably to be expected in an outfit where 20% of its House of Commons representation has been in jail. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 26, 2024 23:31:53 GMT
Not at all. I am pointing out that you are an ignorant chav plonker who is unable to see the difference between oral and verbal. I was pointing out the difference (or not) between verbal and written. How very unlike you (or not) to miss a point by a country mile. I also know what chav means . I neither live in a council house nor have ever been violent, if you really want to be a pedantic bore. You also missed out a comma between ignorant and chav. Don't mention it. You cannot fight your way out of this wet paper bag. You have committed a gormless solecism and refuse to admit it because you are that sort if person. You really thought that verbal meant 'spoken', but it means in words. If something is expressed by speech only, it is oral. |
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 24,561
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on Jul 27, 2024 0:12:07 GMT
Not at all. I am pointing out that you are an ignorant chav plonker who is unable to see the difference between oral and verbal. I was pointing out the difference (or not) between verbal and written. How very unlike you (or not) to miss a point by a country mile. I also know what chav means . I neither live in a council house nor have ever been violent, if you really want to be a pedantic bore. You also missed out a comma between ignorant and chav. Don't mention it. Anybody with more than zero brain cells would be able to tell you that the etymology and derivation of the word “chav” has never had anything whatsoever to do with the words “council”, “house”, or “violent”, and that any attempt to make any such connection has only ever been in the form of a contrived backronym. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,774
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jul 27, 2024 0:26:04 GMT
I was pointing out the difference (or not) between verbal and written. How very unlike you (or not) to miss a point by a country mile. I also know what chav means . I neither live in a council house nor have ever been violent, if you really want to be a pedantic bore. You also missed out a comma between ignorant and chav. Don't mention it. That's not what chav means, that's a back formation. I've known chavs who weren't violent, and chavs who didn't live in council houses. |
|
cathyc
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,132
|
Post by cathyc on Jul 27, 2024 7:22:53 GMT
I was pointing out the difference (or not) between verbal and written. How very unlike you (or not) to miss a point by a country mile. I also know what chav means . I neither live in a council house nor have ever been violent, if you really want to be a pedantic bore. You also missed out a comma between ignorant and chav. Don't mention it. You cannot fight your way out of this wet paper bag. You have committed a gormless solecism and refuse to admit it because you are that sort if person. You really thought that verbal meant 'spoken', but it means in words. If something is expressed by speech only, it is oral. Wrong. "A verbal contract, also known as an oral or parol contract, is a legally binding agreement made between two or more parties through spoken communication, such as over the phone." |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 27, 2024 9:50:38 GMT
You cannot fight your way out of this wet paper bag. You have committed a gormless solecism and refuse to admit it because you are that sort if person. You really thought that verbal meant 'spoken', but it means in words. If something is expressed by speech only, it is oral. Wrong. "A verbal contract, also known as an oral or parol contract, is a legally binding agreement made between two or more parties through spoken communication, such as over the phone." Don't make it worse. When you have been shewn up as wrong, stop digging the hole. Some of us here are well versed in commercial law and usage and even fewer of us have a good grasp on structural English. That was my last word on it. |
|
