Speak for yourself. I’ve become deeply concerned with the role of NATO, especially the opportunities that the EU has provided to US forces.
We tried containment and encirclement as a policy ourselves. Germany, I think it was. Didn’t turn out too well. Nations don’t like being contained, escalation is already a danger and arguably has already happened in Crimea.
Perhaps not now, but eventually, that region will be a tinderbox.
One of the most frequent comments that I’ve seen on the result is that Brexiters were duped, specifically on that claim of £350 million going into the NHS.
Fair enough, some were. I’ve seen some of the complaints. Personally, I think it amazing that someone would settle on that figure with all the other information available, but some did. I’m not really contesting that. There are stupid people on both sides of any argument, who’ll switch off the moment they’ve heard what they want to hear.
I’ve even read suggestions that the poll should be re-run because so many Brexiters were duped. Give them time to get the right information, to make a better decision, etc. I won’t personally have any kittens if that happens, but this entire school of thought is on shaky ground.
First, it assumes that the voter was going to plump for Remain, changing their mind at the last minute, to do great things for the NHS. That may never have been the case.
Next, it assumes that no-one changed their vote from Leave to Remain, and that doesn’t hold either. They call 'em “reluctant remainers”
Not seeking to inflame things any further, but it does strike me that the thinking is rather one way. I wonder what the result would have been had people not been scared by Remain’s arguments.
Originally posted by @pap
One of the most frequent comments that I’ve seen on the result is that Brexiters were duped, specifically on that claim of £350 million going into the NHS.
Fair enough, some were. I’ve seen some of the complaints. Personally, I think it amazing that someone would settle on that figure with all the other information available, but some did. I’m not really contesting that. There are stupid people on both sides of any argument, who’ll switch off the moment they’ve heard what they want to hear.
You think it amazing, really? They drove a fucking massive bus round the country with their lie emblazoned on the side and you’re surprised that may have convinced some people to vote for them…we’ll never know how many people it swayed obviously.
It does ‘appear’ though that a significant number of voters (on both sides) have only engaged with the implications post-referendum.
On the point of a re-vote this should never have been a simple IN/OUT referendum (regardless of who won) - some kind of cooling off period after the first vote followed by a second vote with redined terms would have made much more sense.
I’d be lying if I said I wouldn’t be fucking delighted with a 2nd referendum (not that I expect it to happen) - I’d also be a lot more accepting of the democratic decision
We’re not governed by a democracy…it’s a Parliamentary democracy. You nominate representatives to govern the democracy for you. The Government elected carries out the democratic process and by that token there should never have been a referendum…it’s not in our constitution.
| |
Click this link to sign the petition “EU Referendum Rules triggering a 2nd EU Referendum”
https://petition.parliament.uk/signatures/20100796/verify/nl1QXJPh4oKbwB12KeUJ
|
Agreed. People just didn’t realise what they were voting for. The highest ranked google search term in the UK … the day after the vote was, “What is the EU?”
Originally posted by @TheCholulaKid
Originally posted by @pap
One of the most frequent comments that I’ve seen on the result is that Brexiters were duped, specifically on that claim of £350 million going into the NHS.
Fair enough, some were. I’ve seen some of the complaints. Personally, I think it amazing that someone would settle on that figure with all the other information available, but some did. I’m not really contesting that. There are stupid people on both sides of any argument, who’ll switch off the moment they’ve heard what they want to hear.
You think it amazing, really? They drove a fucking massive bus round the country with their lie emblazoned on the side and you’re surprised that may have convinced some people to vote for them…we’ll never know how many people it swayed obviously.
There are fucking massive buses going up and down the country at all times. I grant you, not all of the buses get this level of publicity.
If it is your contention that this piece of information alone was decisive, I’d have to disagree. Anyone following the debate would have known that this was the absolute maximum we could say we paid the EU each week. It’s full of the sin of omission, of course, and that was pointed out. Much of that money comes back and does good things. I accepted that, Remain people were screaming it from the rooftops.
It is not as if there wasn’t a counter-argument.
It does ‘appear’ though that a significant number of voters (on both sides) have only engaged with the implications post-referendum.
To be fair, it has only been possible post-referendum.
The expectation was that Article 50 would be invoked on June 24th, starting the two year countdown. That didn’t happen. Brexit is not binding. I’ve said throughout that it was a consultative referendum.
On the point of a re-vote this should never have been a simple IN/OUT referendum (regardless of who won) - some kind of cooling off period after the first vote followed by a second vote with redined terms would have made much more sense.
That may yet happen anyway, but it really won’t benefit us if we blink first. I’ve said before that the EU needs us more than we need it. The US needs us in the EU to push its agenda. The last thing we want is to cry stupid and beg re-entry. The terms will forever be set on that baseline.
I’d be lying if I said I wouldn’t be fucking delighted with a 2nd referendum (not that I expect it to happen) - I’d also be a lot more accepting of the democratic decision
As my resurrectin’ post stated in a more roundabout fashion, there is no way of quantifying which lies won which votes.
And I’d accept another vote. It’s what I predicted would happen all along.
Originally posted by @pap
If it is your contention that this piece of information alone was decisive, I’d have to disagree. Anyone following the debate would have known that this was the absolute maximum we could say we paid the EU each week.
Eh? The £350 million battlebus wasn’t designed for people ‘following the debate’. It was a soundbite with no substance designed to sway those people who either weren’t interested in or didn’t have access to the nuances. But, I suspect you knew that.
The rest of your post I can agree with.
The £350m a week is a figure plucked out of the air, with no reference to any rebate or costs involved in being in a single market. The worst aspect was the lie that this money would be paid back into “Our NHS”. The people have made their choice
It was based on the amount of money we’re perceived to give the EU (without considering rebate or EU money flowing back in) and predicated on the assumption that we’d spend all that money on the NHS.
It wasn’t plucked out of the air, but neither was it remotely realistic.
I get your frustration. I felt the same way after the general election, but it has been ever thus.
The first thing they teach you in A Level politics is that mostly, people vote selfishly and without a great deal of knowledge of what they’re voting for. I was taught this in the early 90s. If people are doing alright, they will generally stick with the status quo.
For argument’s sake, let’s say that claim was decisive, and tipped the balance. The only way it could have worked is if people felt the NHS needs saving, which it surely does. We know that it’s really underfunding that’s the issue, something I suspect would have been the case with or without EU immigrants.
The thing is, people aren’t doing alright. Many aren’t too politically aware, and while one option is assuredly sneering at those you don’t agree with, it gets you nowhere in terms of changing hearts and minds.
The funding thing really isn’t that difficult an argument to sell. In my experience, 80% of those concerned about immigration tail off the minute you say “there could always be enough funding”. I did it myself, in a local pub, half-cut, talking to someone half-cut, with a known reputation for knocking people’s fucking lights out if he doesn’t agree with them.
Difficult chat, but I sold the underfunding argument.
He probably fell asleep.
It was plainly a deliberate LIE…wasn’t a mis-representation it was a lie. The figure was challenged immediately in all the independent fact-checking websites yet nothing was done about it. It was for this reason and all the other lies like EU army, Turkey immediately joining the EU, UK rebate being revoked and on and on I voted in a referendum I passionately believed was unconstitutional. These big fat fucking lies forced me to vote and I resent it and always will.
CUNTS!!
Sadly, I suspect that the Murdoch media supporting Brexit had something to do with the fact that theLIE was not ripped to pieces Murdoch whose only desire to Brexit was based on avoid those nasty EU privacy laws… cunt.
Originally posted by @pap
Originally posted by @TedMaul
The £350m a week is a figure plucked out of the air, with no reference to any rebate or costs involved in being in a single market. The worst aspect was the lie that this money would be paid back into “Our NHS”. The people have made their choice
It was based on the amount of money we’re perceived to give the EU (without considering rebate or EU money flowing back in) and predicated on the assumption that we’d spend all that money on the NHS.
It wasn’t plucked out of the air, but neither was it remotely realistic.
Farage on the morning of the Leave win stated to GMB that no extra money would go to the NHS.
You can be taken to the cleaners by the Advertisting Standards Authority, as far as their powers allow, for publishing lies during a general election campaign. They have no such power over referendums. I am just as pissed off with the dead soldiers and dead babies lies of the NO2AV campaign, but there was no legal recourse to do anything about it.
I genuinely thought the turkeys voted for Christmas during that referendum. We had the indyref in Scotland awhile ago and now the EU referendum countrywide. Three referendums, the ASA with no power to intervene in any of the lies, which were plentiful in all three.
It does makes me rather cynical about the real nature of referendums. Why is this one area free from prosecution if you print lies, yet other democratic processes are subject to more rigorous scrutiny? And by more rigorous scrutiny, I mean any.
In my view, referendums are not designed to be plebiscites. They’re there to validate an existing and pre-agreed course of action, and ensure the question isn’t posed again for decades. We were always joining the EEC, Scotland was never leaving (either time), we were never going to get AV and we were always going to Remain. At least, that was the plan.
Fuck, tinfoil hat on, I think deploying Gove might have been _part _of the plan 
The Lib Dems played it nice during the AV debate, and look where that got them. Some of the Leave campaigners weren’t that squeamish. I don’t agree with it, but there was nothing stopping them from saying _anything they wanted _in their advertising that they could be nicked on. The ASA has no authority.
As it went, they told one of the best sort of lies. One with a hint of truth. If you honestly think that this was decisive, and I could work with that for argument’s sake, we need to be more worried about the critical thinking of our compatriots than the case itself.
You’ve hit the nail on the head - thanks for putting it more clearly than I could - & only one expletive!!