Discussion:
How much for the NHS...?
Add Reply
James Harris
2017-11-08 20:20:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".

It did not say ALL of it.

Those who lost the referendum - and, sadly, the media - keep saying that
all of the money was promised for the NHS. But that was NOT said on the
side of the bus. And it is not my recollection as to what Vote Leave
said. Checking back in the run-up to the referendum:

23 April 2016: 'We would also regain control over the £350m subscription
we pay Brussels every week. We could spend it on schools, the NHS, the
environment, cutting the deficit-- the choice will become ours again.'
(Gisela Stuart)

I.e. not all of it.

4 June 2016: "The government should use some of the billions saved from
leaving the EU to give at least a £100m per week cash transfusion to the
NHS." (Gove and Johnson)

I.e. not all of it.


Were _you_ annoyed by Vote Leave at the time? If so, and you now claim
that all of it was for the NHS ... then you are just as dishonest. If
not more so.


Refs.:

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/gisela_stuart_exposes_the_risks_of_staying_in_the_eu.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36450749
--
James Harris
Nightjar
2017-11-09 09:36:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS. However, that is
what seemed to be implied and what most of the Leave voters who were
swayed by the slogan probably assumed they meant.

Immediately after the referendum, all mention of the claim and pictures
of the bus disappeared from the Leave campaign web site, which seems to
suggest that they didn't want to be held to it.
--
--

Colin Bignell
Christie
2017-11-09 10:34:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
The big red bus said "We send the EU A?350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of A?350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS. However, that is
what seemed to be implied and what most of the Leave voters who were
swayed by the slogan probably assumed they meant.
Immediately after the referendum, all mention of the claim and pictures
of the bus disappeared from the Leave campaign web site, which seems to
suggest that they didn't want to be held to it.
But the Leave campaign never could be held to it. They are not the
government, the government never made any such promise, on the
contrary, their position was that the UK should remain in the EU.
JNugent
2017-11-09 11:59:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS.
The Leave Campaign wasn't in a position to make any promises, not being
either a government or a party hoping to win an election.

All it could do was make comparisons and offer suggestions.
Ophelia
2017-11-09 12:07:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund our
NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was false,
so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS.
The Leave Campaign wasn't in a position to make any promises, not being
either a government or a party hoping to win an election.

All it could do was make comparisons and offer suggestions.

===

It staggers me just how dim some of the remoaners are! As I said elsewhere,
they are either illiterate, stupid or liars.
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
Nightjar
2017-11-09 12:30:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS.
The Leave Campaign wasn't in a position to make any promises...
That didn't stop them from making what appeared to the electorate to be
promises, such as the £350 million a week to the NHS.
--
--

Colin Bignell
Tim Woodall
2017-11-09 12:46:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nightjar
That didn't stop them from making what appeared to the electorate to be
promises, such as the ??350 million a week to the NHS.
That's why I think we'll end up with a last minute Norwegian model.
Maybe the 350MM couldn't be a promise but nor could 'take back
sovereignty' (whatever that means), 'control imigration' (although TPTB
will activate what we could have done anyway and claim it's brexit)

About the only thing we can rely on for brexit is the result of a
non-binding referendum to leave the EU.
James Harris
2017-11-09 14:24:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Woodall
Post by Nightjar
That didn't stop them from making what appeared to the electorate to be
promises, such as the ??350 million a week to the NHS.
That's why I think we'll end up with a last minute Norwegian model.
Maybe the 350MM couldn't be a promise but nor could 'take back
sovereignty' (whatever that means),
Sovereignty rests with us, the British people. Our politicians have to
ask for our permission to rule. That stops them going off like Henry VIII!

But while we are in the EU our politicians also have another master: the
EU. In fact, the EU is more powerful than we, the people, are. That is
profoundly wrong, anti-democratic, and dangerous. By taking back
sovereignty our politicians will have just one master: us. And that's
how it should be. This is simple but profound, and democracy is the key
to a nation being prosperous.
Post by Tim Woodall
'control imigration' (although TPTB
will activate what we could have done anyway and claim it's brexit)
About the only thing we can rely on for brexit is the result of a
non-binding referendum to leave the EU.
--
James Harris
Yellow
2017-11-09 14:23:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nightjar
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS.
The Leave Campaign wasn't in a position to make any promises...
That didn't stop them from making what appeared to the electorate to be
promises, such as the £350 million a week to the NHS.
The irony is, it seems to be the remoaners who were actually the ones to
'believe' this as they are the only ones demand the cash.

Thick or what? :-)
James Harris
2017-11-09 14:33:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Post by Nightjar
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS.
The Leave Campaign wasn't in a position to make any promises...
That didn't stop them from making what appeared to the electorate to be
promises, such as the £350 million a week to the NHS.
The irony is, it seems to be the remoaners who were actually the ones to
'believe' this as they are the only ones demand the cash.
Thick or what? :-)
:-) They didn't really believe it! The Remain side spent half the
campaign telling us all that it wasn't true. So they are being
disingenuous to now claim it had any credibility. They are just irked!

BTW, I can understand them being annoyed! But that doesn't give them the
right to now claim something which they spent the campaign saying was
false.
--
James Harris
Yellow
2017-11-09 16:26:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 9 Nov 2017 14:33:46 +0000, James Harris <james.harris.1
Post by James Harris
Post by Yellow
Post by Nightjar
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS.
The Leave Campaign wasn't in a position to make any promises...
That didn't stop them from making what appeared to the electorate to be
promises, such as the £350 million a week to the NHS.
The irony is, it seems to be the remoaners who were actually the ones to
'believe' this as they are the only ones demand the cash.
Thick or what? :-)
:-) They didn't really believe it! The Remain side spent half the
campaign telling us all that it wasn't true. So they are being
disingenuous to now claim it had any credibility. They are just irked!
I originally thought this was a bad idea and could not see why anyone
would write this on a bus, but of course we now know why - it was to
keep the idea that we send a lot of cash to the EU front and centre.

And it has worked better than they could have dreamed.
Post by James Harris
BTW, I can understand them being annoyed! But that doesn't give them the
right to now claim something which they spent the campaign saying was
false.
Yes - that is my point of view too.
JNugent
2017-11-10 01:21:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Post by Nightjar
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS.
The Leave Campaign wasn't in a position to make any promises...
That didn't stop them from making what appeared to the electorate to be
promises, such as the £350 million a week to the NHS.
The irony is, it seems to be the remoaners who were actually the ones to
'believe' this as they are the only ones demand the cash.
Thick or what? :-)
:-)
JNugent
2017-11-10 01:20:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nightjar
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's
fund our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS.
The Leave Campaign wasn't in a position to make any promises...
That didn't stop them from making what appeared to the electorate to be
promises, such as the £350 million a week to the NHS.
I am a member of the electorate.

It did not "appear" to be a promise to me. It was 100% obvious that it
could not be, and therefore was not, a promise or commitment.

I am sure that you will not insist that *you* thought it to be a promise.
James Harris
2017-11-09 13:28:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS. However, that is
what seemed to be implied
Agreed.
Post by Nightjar
and what most of the Leave voters who were
swayed by the slogan probably assumed they meant.
Can you back that up? I suspect not. ISTM it is sore losers who keep
claiming that Brexiteers believed it. But apart from those who promised
it I don't think many do or did. Did you believe it? No. Nor did other
sensible people. So there's no point you keep pretending they did!
Post by Nightjar
Immediately after the referendum, all mention of the claim and pictures
of the bus disappeared from the Leave campaign web site, which seems to
suggest that they didn't want to be held to it.
Looks to me as though their site is as dormant as a ghost town. But it
still carries the same message about the 350 million:

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/why_vote_leave.html
--
James Harris
Dan S. MacAbre
2017-11-09 13:38:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS. However, that is
what seemed to be implied
Agreed.
Post by Nightjar
and what most of the Leave voters who were
swayed by the slogan probably assumed they meant.
Can you back that up? I suspect not. ISTM it is sore losers who keep
claiming that Brexiteers believed it. But apart from those who promised
it I don't think many do or did. Did you believe it? No. Nor did other
sensible people. So there's no point you keep pretending they did!
Were Vote Leave really in a position to make this sort of promise? And
have people all of a sudden become hopelessly credulous when it comes to
the claims of political campaigners? It's not like the government were
hoping for a leave vote anyway, so why would anyone expect them to
honour this?
Post by James Harris
Post by Nightjar
Immediately after the referendum, all mention of the claim and pictures
of the bus disappeared from the Leave campaign web site, which seems to
suggest that they didn't want to be held to it.
Looks to me as though their site is as dormant as a ghost town. But it
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/why_vote_leave.html
James Harris
2017-11-09 15:14:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Post by James Harris
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS. However, that is
what seemed to be implied
Agreed.
Post by Nightjar
and what most of the Leave voters who were
swayed by the slogan probably assumed they meant.
Can you back that up? I suspect not. ISTM it is sore losers who keep
claiming that Brexiteers believed it. But apart from those who promised
it I don't think many do or did. Did you believe it? No. Nor did other
sensible people. So there's no point you keep pretending they did!
Were Vote Leave really in a position to make this sort of promise? And
have people all of a sudden become hopelessly credulous when it comes to
the claims of political campaigners? It's not like the government were
hoping for a leave vote anyway, so why would anyone expect them to
honour this?
To a point I understand Remoaner exasperation but I don't think they
really believe the public were taken in. And I think they are now
milking this for all its worth.
--
James Harris
Ophelia
2017-11-09 17:00:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Post by James Harris
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS. However, that is
what seemed to be implied
Agreed.
Post by Nightjar
and what most of the Leave voters who were
swayed by the slogan probably assumed they meant.
Can you back that up? I suspect not. ISTM it is sore losers who keep
claiming that Brexiteers believed it. But apart from those who promised
it I don't think many do or did. Did you believe it? No. Nor did other
sensible people. So there's no point you keep pretending they did!
Were Vote Leave really in a position to make this sort of promise? And
have people all of a sudden become hopelessly credulous when it comes to
the claims of political campaigners? It's not like the government were
hoping for a leave vote anyway, so why would anyone expect them to
honour this?
To a point I understand Remoaner exasperation but I don't think they
really believe the public were taken in. And I think they are now
milking this for all its worth.

James Harris

==

They don't have anything else to pick on so that is why they are milking it
to death.

I don't believe they are all so stupid as to believe what they are saying
but they are certainly intent on looking it.
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
Nightjar
2017-11-13 09:25:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS. However, that is
what seemed to be implied
...
Were Vote Leave really in a position to make this sort of promise? ...
No, which meant that they could promise anything they liked, safe in the
knowledge that they would not be the ones who had to make the fantasies
come true.
--
--

Colin Bignell
Yellow
2017-11-13 11:49:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nightjar
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS. However, that is
what seemed to be implied
...
Were Vote Leave really in a position to make this sort of promise? ...
No, which meant that they could promise anything they liked, safe in the
knowledge that they would not be the ones who had to make the fantasies
come true.
The upset was about the amount of the claim, the £350 million, not the
suggestion that money we would no longer send to the EU could be spent
on the NHS instead.

Certainly we have a shed load of Remoaners demanding that this amount is
paid up, anyway.

What on the other hand, and quite interestingly, I have never heard is
any of these people saying "now we are all clear the actual net amount
sent to the EU is nearer £160 million a week, I demand that is sent to
the NHS as promised".

It is always about the £350 million. And the demand *always* comes from
Remoaners, not Leavers.
Ian Jackson
2017-11-13 11:26:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
In message <ou1lnv$7eh$***@dont-email.me>, Dan S. MacAbre <***@way.com>
writes
Post by James Harris
Can you back that up? I suspect not. ISTM it is sore losers who keep
claiming that Brexiteers believed it. But apart from those who promised
it I don't think many do or did. Did you believe it? No. Nor did other
sensible people. So there's no point you keep pretending they did!
Were Vote Leave really in a position to make this sort of promise? And
have people all of a sudden become hopelessly credulous when it comes
to the claims of political campaigners? It's not like the government
were hoping for a leave vote anyway, so why would anyone expect them to
honour this?
Have you just begun to realise that those making the Leave propaganda
would probably NOT be the ones who would be in a position to carry them
through - and even if they were, might find them impractical or
impossible to implement?
--
Ian
Dan S. MacAbre
2017-11-13 11:35:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
Can you back that up? I suspect not. ISTM it is sore losers who keep
claiming that Brexiteers believed it. But apart from those who promised
it I don't think many do or did. Did you believe it? No. Nor did other
sensible people. So there's no point you keep pretending they did!
Were Vote Leave really in a position to make this sort of promise? And
have people all of a sudden become hopelessly credulous when it comes
to the claims of political campaigners? It's not like the government
were hoping for a leave vote anyway, so why would anyone expect them
to honour this?
Have you just begun to realise that those making the Leave propaganda
would probably NOT be the ones who would be in a position to carry them
through - and even if they were, might find them impractical or
impossible to implement?
Not at all. I thought the whole thing was a pantomime from the
beginning, with claims coming from both sides that started out with the
merely hyperbolic, evolving with the passage of time into the
hysterical. On the day, I voted to remain, but I didn't have strong
feelings either way. Your life is what you make it. To believe that
this is going to make or break anyone is to cede territory to the statists.
Handsome Jack
2017-11-13 11:33:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
writes
Post by James Harris
Can you back that up? I suspect not. ISTM it is sore losers who keep
claiming that Brexiteers believed it. But apart from those who promised
it I don't think many do or did. Did you believe it? No. Nor did other
sensible people. So there's no point you keep pretending they did!
Were Vote Leave really in a position to make this sort of promise? And
have people all of a sudden become hopelessly credulous when it comes
to the claims of political campaigners? It's not like the government
were hoping for a leave vote anyway, so why would anyone expect them
to honour this?
Have you just begun to realise that those making the Leave propaganda
would probably NOT be the ones who would be in a position to carry them
through
No, of course he hasn't. He's just reminding people like you about it,
since you seem to keep forgetting it.
--
Jack
Nightjar
2017-11-13 09:22:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS. However, that is
what seemed to be implied
Agreed.
Post by Nightjar
and what most of the Leave voters who were
swayed by the slogan probably assumed they meant.
Can you back that up? I suspect not. ISTM it is sore losers who keep
claiming that Brexiteers believed it. But apart from those who promised
it I don't think many do or did.
I did not claim that most Leave voters were swayed by the slogan. I
referred to the assumption made by most of the Leave voters who were
swayed by the slogan. There is a significant difference.
Post by James Harris
Did you believe it? ...
My voting to remain should be ample evidence that I rejected the
arguments of the Leave campaign.
--
--

Colin Bignell
James Harris
2017-11-13 10:19:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS. However, that is
what seemed to be implied
Agreed.
Post by Nightjar
and what most of the Leave voters who were
swayed by the slogan probably assumed they meant.
Can you back that up? I suspect not. ISTM it is sore losers who keep
claiming that Brexiteers believed it. But apart from those who promised
it I don't think many do or did.
I did not claim that most Leave voters were swayed by the slogan. I
referred to the assumption made by most of the Leave voters who were
swayed by the slogan. There is a significant difference.
Post by James Harris
Did you believe it? ...
My voting to remain should be ample evidence that I rejected the
arguments of the Leave campaign.
If you weren't persuaded by the red-bus slogan then why would others
have been? The Remain side continually brings up that one slogan; it's
become a totemic issue for them. But I don't see any evidence that those
who voted Brexit believed it any more than did those who voted Remain.

In fact, isn't it likely that some voted Remain because of Project Fear?
--
James Harris
Ophelia
2017-11-13 12:33:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
Post by Nightjar
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it...
Of course not. They knew that the claim of £350 million a week was
false, so they couldn't promise that much to the NHS. However, that is
what seemed to be implied
Agreed.
Post by Nightjar
and what most of the Leave voters who were
swayed by the slogan probably assumed they meant.
Can you back that up? I suspect not. ISTM it is sore losers who keep
claiming that Brexiteers believed it. But apart from those who promised
it I don't think many do or did.
I did not claim that most Leave voters were swayed by the slogan. I
referred to the assumption made by most of the Leave voters who were
swayed by the slogan. There is a significant difference.
Post by James Harris
Did you believe it? ...
My voting to remain should be ample evidence that I rejected the
arguments of the Leave campaign.
If you weren't persuaded by the red-bus slogan then why would others
have been? The Remain side continually brings up that one slogan; it's
become a totemic issue for them. But I don't see any evidence that those
who voted Brexit believed it any more than did those who voted Remain.

In fact, isn't it likely that some voted Remain because of Project Fear?

James Harris

==

The Remoaners are so clever! They know EXACTLY what we voted for and what we
did not. I wonder if they held a secret referendum!

No one asked me!
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
James Harris
2017-11-13 13:20:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13/11/2017 12:33, Ophelia wrote:

...
Post by Ophelia
The Remoaners are so clever! They know EXACTLY what we voted for and what we
did not. I wonder if they held a secret referendum!
Yes, they know what motivated Leavers. They can see in our minds. And
whether its European peace, the UK economy or immigration they know what
the future holds. Remarkable people. So much smarter than Brexiteers.
And not at all delusional!
--
James Harris
Ian Jackson
2017-11-13 13:53:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
...
Post by Ophelia
The Remoaners are so clever! They know EXACTLY what we voted for and what we
did not. I wonder if they held a secret referendum!
Yes, they know what motivated Leavers. They can see in our minds. And
whether its European peace, the UK economy or immigration they know
what the future holds. Remarkable people. So much smarter than
Brexiteers. And not at all delusional!
The Remainers had an unfair advantage in that they were able to base
their decisions on a situation that actually exists.

The Leavers had the distinct disadvantage of being obliged to base their
decisions on a situation that doesn't exist, and instead had to rely on
a lot of speculation, optimistic hopes - and (of course) pure,
unadulterated patriotism.

Being a generous soul, in the event I'm tempted to say, "Didn't the
Leavers do well!" - but I don't really think it would be appropriate.
--
Ian
Dan S. MacAbre
2017-11-13 14:01:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
...
Post by Ophelia
The Remoaners are so clever! They know EXACTLY what we voted for and what we
did not. I wonder if they held a secret referendum!
Yes, they know what motivated Leavers. They can see in our minds. And
whether its European peace, the UK economy or immigration they know
what the future holds. Remarkable people. So much smarter than
Brexiteers. And not at all delusional!
The Remainers had an unfair advantage in that they were able to base
their decisions on a situation that actually exists.
Both arguments can be turned around. Leavers could also base an
argument on the situation that exists, it's just that they didn't like it.

And remainers, too, did speculate about the future. Except that their
view of Britain outside the EU was a negative one.

I'd suggest that assessments of the present, and speculation about the
future, featured strongly on both sides.
Post by Ian Jackson
The Leavers had the distinct disadvantage of being obliged to base their
decisions on a situation that doesn't exist, and instead had to rely on
a lot of speculation, optimistic hopes - and (of course) pure,
unadulterated patriotism.
'Unadulterated' patriotism? You almost make it sound like an accusation :-)
Post by Ian Jackson
Being a generous soul, in the event I'm tempted to say, "Didn't the
Leavers do well!" - but I don't really think it would be appropriate.
Ian Jackson
2017-11-13 14:17:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
In message <ouc8kn$6c7$***@dont-email.me>, Dan S. MacAbre <***@way.com>
writes
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
'Unadulterated' patriotism? You almost make it sound like an accusation :-)
A couple of evenings ago, on Iain Dale's phone-in, a lady who was a 100%
Brexitese would indeed have finished her contribution by singing Rule
Britannia - and Iain Dale would have let her if it hadn't been that he
was running out of time.
--
Ian
Dan S. MacAbre
2017-11-13 14:22:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
'Unadulterated' patriotism? You almost make it sound like an
accusation :-)
A couple of evenings ago, on Iain Dale's phone-in, a lady who was a 100%
Brexitese would indeed have finished her contribution by singing Rule
Britannia - and Iain Dale would have let her if it hadn't been that he
was running out of time.
Well, I wouldn't bother myself; but fair play to her :-)
Ian Jackson
2017-11-13 15:45:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
In message <ouc9ru$er6$***@dont-email.me>, Dan S. MacAbre <***@way.com>
writes
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
'Unadulterated' patriotism? You almost make it sound like an accusation :-)
A couple of evenings ago, on Iain Dale's phone-in, a lady who was a 100%
Brexitese would indeed have finished her contribution by singing Rule
Britannia - and Iain Dale would have let her if it hadn't been that he
was running out of time.
Well, I wouldn't bother myself; but fair play to her :-)
I wonder if she actually knows all the words? When I were a lad, we used
to sing 'ayzh-ure main', and 'shall be slaves'. They seem to do it
differently these days.
--
Ian
Dan S. MacAbre
2017-11-13 16:03:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
'Unadulterated' patriotism? You almost make it sound like an accusation :-)
A couple of evenings ago, on Iain Dale's phone-in, a lady who was a 100%
Brexitese would indeed have finished her contribution by singing Rule
Britannia - and Iain Dale would have let her if it hadn't been that he
was running out of time.
Well, I wouldn't bother myself; but fair play to her :-)
I wonder if she actually knows all the words? When I were a lad, we used
to sing 'ayzh-ure main', and 'shall be slaves'. They seem to do it
differently these days.
You mean she was intending to sing the whole thing? I certainly couldn't.
tim...
2017-11-13 18:50:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
'Unadulterated' patriotism? You almost make it sound like an accusation :-)
A couple of evenings ago, on Iain Dale's phone-in, a lady who was a 100%
Brexitese would indeed have finished her contribution by singing Rule
Britannia - and Iain Dale would have let her if it hadn't been that he
was running out of time.
Well, I wouldn't bother myself; but fair play to her :-)
I wonder if she actually knows all the words? When I were a lad, we used
to sing 'ayzh-ure main', and 'shall be slaves'. They seem to do it
differently these days.
You mean she was intending to sing the whole thing? I certainly couldn't.
I couldn't manage the second verse of god save the queen(king)

tim
Yellow
2017-11-13 16:24:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 13:53:40 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
...
Post by Ophelia
The Remoaners are so clever! They know EXACTLY what we voted for and what we
did not. I wonder if they held a secret referendum!
Yes, they know what motivated Leavers. They can see in our minds. And
whether its European peace, the UK economy or immigration they know
what the future holds. Remarkable people. So much smarter than
Brexiteers. And not at all delusional!
The Remainers had an unfair advantage in that they were able to base
their decisions on a situation that actually exists.
The Leavers had the distinct disadvantage of being obliged to base their
decisions on a situation that doesn't exist, and instead had to rely on
a lot of speculation, optimistic hopes - and (of course) pure,
unadulterated patriotism.
That is quite wrong because my decision to leave was also based on a
situation that actually exists.

Neither leavers nor remainers can see the future for sure. we can only
imagine how it will be. If though, as a remainer, your imagination tells
you that the EU tomorrow will be the same as the EU today then it is
giving you a flawed picture of the likely future. The danger of a cock-
sure attitude perhaps?
Post by Ian Jackson
Being a generous soul, in the event I'm tempted to say, "Didn't the
Leavers do well!" - but I don't really think it would be appropriate.
Ophelia
2017-11-13 17:43:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
"Yellow" wrote in message news:***@News.Individual.NET...

On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 13:53:40 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
...
Post by Ophelia
The Remoaners are so clever! They know EXACTLY what we voted for and what we
did not. I wonder if they held a secret referendum!
Yes, they know what motivated Leavers. They can see in our minds. And
whether its European peace, the UK economy or immigration they know
what the future holds. Remarkable people. So much smarter than
Brexiteers. And not at all delusional!
The Remainers had an unfair advantage in that they were able to base
their decisions on a situation that actually exists.
The Leavers had the distinct disadvantage of being obliged to base their
decisions on a situation that doesn't exist, and instead had to rely on
a lot of speculation, optimistic hopes - and (of course) pure,
unadulterated patriotism.
That is quite wrong because my decision to leave was also based on a
situation that actually exists.

Neither leavers nor remainers can see the future for sure. we can only
imagine how it will be. If though, as a remainer, your imagination tells
you that the EU tomorrow will be the same as the EU today then it is
giving you a flawed picture of the likely future. The danger of a cock-
sure attitude perhaps?

==

Do you doubt it?
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
James Harris
2017-11-14 08:29:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
...
Post by Ophelia
The Remoaners are so clever! They know EXACTLY what we voted for and what we
did not. I wonder if they held a secret referendum!
Yes, they know what motivated Leavers. They can see in our minds. And
whether its European peace, the UK economy or immigration they know
what the future holds. Remarkable people. So much smarter than
Brexiteers. And not at all delusional!
The Remainers had an unfair advantage in that they were able to base
their decisions on a situation that actually exists.
The Leavers had the distinct disadvantage of being obliged to base their
decisions on a situation that doesn't exist, and instead had to rely on
a lot of speculation, optimistic hopes - and (of course) pure,
unadulterated patriotism.
Being a generous soul, in the event I'm tempted to say, "Didn't the
Leavers do well!" - but I don't really think it would be appropriate.
As long as we get a Brucie Bonus!

I'd like to add to your comments that it didn't need to be a blind vote.
The UK and the EU could have worked up the outline of a pragmatic
separation agreement and put that to the British public: either Remain,
or Leave on these terms. I would suggest that if the EU felt secure in
itself and the model it is imposing on Europe, or it it was a genuine
friend to the UK it would have been willing to do that. But if it
believes it is a friend it is not so in any terms which we would
understand. Instead, it wants to keep itself together by coercion.

Alternatively, the UK government could have said we would get two
referenda: one on the principle and then, if we voted Leave, another on
the specific terms. But, likely fearing that that would make it too easy
for us to vote Leave in the first referendum, it explicitly ruled that out.

The public, therefore, had no choice but to vote blind. In the face of
the propaganda and the scaremongering we were subjected to and the
greater uncertainty of the Leave option I am immensely proud of the
British people for choosing the harder course. I expect history books to
look back on this time and recognise that the people took power back
again from the elite, and that the people were right.

If Scotland is going to have another independence referendum it has a
golden opportunity that the UK as a whole did not have. Scotland can
wait to see exactly how Brexit works out in practice. Then it can choose
between two positions, both of which are not theoretical but realities.
--
James Harris
TMS320
2017-11-16 16:44:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Being a generous soul, in the event I'm tempted to say, "Didn't the
Leavers do well!" - but I don't really think it would be appropriate.
I wonder how many leave voters will be dead by the time we leave.
Perhaps nearer the time we should strike these votes out and recount.
Ophelia
2017-11-16 16:52:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Being a generous soul, in the event I'm tempted to say, "Didn't the
Leavers do well!" - but I don't really think it would be appropriate.
I wonder how many leave voters will be dead by the time we leave.
Perhaps nearer the time we should strike these votes out and recount.

==

So, only the young and healthy voted to remain? It seems remainers know
*everything* about leavers ... how and why they voted, what they actually
voted for, their level of education ... etc. etc. .... hmmm???

If remainers were as psychic as they think they are, why didn't they
foretell that leavers would win the referendum <g>
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
R. Mark Clayton
2017-11-16 19:59:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by TMS320
Post by Ian Jackson
Being a generous soul, in the event I'm tempted to say, "Didn't the
Leavers do well!" - but I don't really think it would be appropriate.
I wonder how many leave voters will be dead by the time we leave.
Perhaps nearer the time we should strike these votes out and recount.
==
So, only the young and healthy voted to remain? It seems remainers know
*everything* about leavers ... how and why they voted, what they actually
voted for, their level of education ... etc. etc. .... hmmm???
We have some idea why they voted leave - about half of them to kick out the untermensche.

Opinion polling has discovered quite a strong age bias, however the samples are only in the region of 10,000, so whilst one standard deviation in the results is only 0.3%, but respondents lie so that is only a strong probability.

OTOH comparison of the census responses and the result by area analyses in excess of 25,000,000 data points and shows an extremely strong correlation between low educational attainment and leave voting - something Brexiteers alternately deny or deride depending which side of the bed they got out of that morning, but deep down they know it is both true and dismally sad.
Post by TMS320
If remainers were as psychic as they think they are, why didn't they
foretell that leavers would win the referendum <g>
Usually jumpers don't.
Post by TMS320
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
JNugent
2017-11-17 16:21:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
"TMS320"  wrote...
Post by Ian Jackson
Being a generous soul, in the event I'm tempted to say, "Didn't the
Leavers do well!" - but I don't really think it would be appropriate.
I wonder how many leave voters will be dead by the time we leave.
Perhaps nearer the time we should strike these votes out and recount.
==
So, only the young and healthy voted to remain?  It seems remainers
know *everything* about leavers ... how and why they voted, what they
actually voted for, their level of education ... etc. etc.  .... hmmm???
If remainers were as psychic as they think they are, why didn't they
foretell that leavers would win the referendum <g>
:-)

Ophelia
2017-11-13 17:29:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
"James Harris" wrote in message news:ouc66j$g1a$***@dont-email.me...

On 13/11/2017 12:33, Ophelia wrote:

...
Post by Ophelia
The Remoaners are so clever! They know EXACTLY what we voted for and what we
did not. I wonder if they held a secret referendum!
Yes, they know what motivated Leavers. They can see in our minds. And
whether its European peace, the UK economy or immigration they know what
the future holds. Remarkable people. So much smarter than Brexiteers.
And not at all delusional!

James Harris

==

They wish. They sound so stupid. The way they carry on about the 'money
promised to the EU' it makes me wonder if they have any other argument. Do
they??
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
Vidcapper
2017-11-14 07:51:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
...
Post by Ophelia
The Remoaners are so clever! They know EXACTLY what we voted for and what we
did not. I wonder if they held a secret referendum!
Yes, they know what motivated Leavers. They can see in our minds. And
whether its European peace, the UK economy or immigration they know what
the future holds. Remarkable people. So much smarter than Brexiteers.
And not at all delusional!
Many of those I've encountered elsewhere online have automatically
assumed the worst possible reasons for my Leave vote, and refuse to be
dissuaded even after I carefully explain what my reasons actually were.
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
Joe
2017-11-13 10:21:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 09:22:52 +0000
Post by Nightjar
My voting to remain should be ample evidence that I rejected the
arguments of the Leave campaign.
But why were you paying any attention at all to the arguments of, of all
people, politicians? Could you not make up your own mind, as I did? I
didn't bother listening to how anyone, in either camp, told me I should
vote. I thought it was ludicrous that Corbyn, for all his other faults,
was criticised for 'not giving enough guidance' to Labour voters on how
they should vote about Brexit.

What they could all usefully have done, and didn't, was to remind people
of the solid facts available to support their positions. Things that the
EU had actually done, good or bad. *Always* look at what people do, not
what they say. All these 'opinion formers' actually did was to
fantasise about the future.

Here's one example: Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty is currently under
discussion. There wouldn't *be* a Lisbon Treaty if the populations of
two solid 'good European' countries hadn't voted against accepting the
EU Constitution. The EU simply took the Constitution and reworked it
into a Treaty, which could not be accepted or refused by mere people.

*There* is a real EU action, firmly enshrined in the history books and
undeniable. There are many others. The majority of them lead me to
conclude that I don't want my country to associate with this gang of
liars and bandits. Nothing at all to do with 'what Nigel said', 'what
Tony said', or any other of the empty posturings before the Referendum.

I can't believe that I was the only person in the country to actually
think before I voted. Surely some others of you must have...
--
Joe
James Harris
2017-11-13 10:31:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 09:22:52 +0000
Post by Nightjar
My voting to remain should be ample evidence that I rejected the
arguments of the Leave campaign.
But why were you paying any attention at all to the arguments of, of all
people, politicians? Could you not make up your own mind, as I did? I
didn't bother listening to how anyone, in either camp, told me I should
vote. I thought it was ludicrous that Corbyn, for all his other faults,
was criticised for 'not giving enough guidance' to Labour voters on how
they should vote about Brexit.
What they could all usefully have done, and didn't, was to remind people
of the solid facts available to support their positions. Things that the
EU had actually done, good or bad. *Always* look at what people do, not
what they say. All these 'opinion formers' actually did was to
fantasise about the future.
Here's one example: Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty is currently under
discussion. There wouldn't *be* a Lisbon Treaty if the populations of
two solid 'good European' countries hadn't voted against accepting the
EU Constitution. The EU simply took the Constitution and reworked it
into a Treaty, which could not be accepted or refused by mere people.
*There* is a real EU action, firmly enshrined in the history books and
undeniable. There are many others. The majority of them lead me to
conclude that I don't want my country to associate with this gang of
liars and bandits. Nothing at all to do with 'what Nigel said', 'what
Tony said', or any other of the empty posturings before the Referendum.
I can't believe that I was the only person in the country to actually
think before I voted. Surely some others of you must have...
As I've said before, since keeping the putative status quo was the much
easier option to take it is likely that those who didn't know much about
the EU voted for what they saw as the safer option. Therefore, I would
think Brexiteers were generally better informed than Remainers. To vote
to Leave was a big step into the unknown. People don't do that en masse
unless they have looked at the pros and cons, as you did.
--
James Harris
Ian Jackson
2017-11-13 10:54:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
As I've said before, since keeping the putative status quo was the much
easier option to take it is likely that those who didn't know much
about the EU voted for what they saw as the safer option. Therefore, I
would think Brexiteers were generally better informed than Remainers.
To vote to Leave was a big step into the unknown. People don't do that
en masse unless they have looked at the pros and cons, as you did.
While I'm sure that some Remainers DID indeed take the easy option, and
simply voted for the status quo, to conclude that Brexiteers voted to
leave because they were better informed really IS a conclusion too far.
[Was that guy in Sunderland who expected the return of shipbuilding and
coalmining better informed?]

If you'll excuse me for again referring to what I've heard radio
phoners-in and media interviewees saying, quite a lot said that they
simply wanted OUT (plus more than a few "We've got our sovereignty back"
and "Rule Britannia!") - but I've never heard any Remainers saying that
they simply wanted IN. I wonder why?
--
Ian
Handsome Jack
2017-11-13 11:31:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
If you'll excuse me for again referring to what I've heard radio
phoners-in and media interviewees saying, quite a lot said that they
simply wanted OUT (plus more than a few "We've got our sovereignty
back" and "Rule Britannia!") - but I've never heard any Remainers
saying that they simply wanted IN. I wonder why?
Probably because you only hear or remember what it suits you to hear or
remember.
--
Jack
Ian Jackson
2017-11-13 14:09:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Handsome Jack
Post by Ian Jackson
If you'll excuse me for again referring to what I've heard radio
phoners-in and media interviewees saying, quite a lot said that they
simply wanted OUT (plus more than a few "We've got our sovereignty
back" and "Rule Britannia!") - but I've never heard any Remainers
saying that they simply wanted IN. I wonder why?
Probably because you only hear or remember what it suits you to hear or
remember.
I speak as one who often does hear what doesn't particularly 'suit me'.
For example, as soon as the nightly 'The Archers' have finished, I
usually switch over to LBC to listen to at least part of Nigel Farrell's
(literally) incredible pro-Brexit party-political phone-ins. I also hear
him on Sunday mornings.

As for remembering what suits me - well, I probably DO remember best the
most notable and outlandish contributions from the phone-in callers.
Fortunately, there are quite a lot of these, so even if I forget some of
them, it isn't long before there are a few more to take their place.
--
Ian
Yellow
2017-11-13 12:04:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 10:54:34 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
As I've said before, since keeping the putative status quo was the much
easier option to take it is likely that those who didn't know much
about the EU voted for what they saw as the safer option. Therefore, I
would think Brexiteers were generally better informed than Remainers.
To vote to Leave was a big step into the unknown. People don't do that
en masse unless they have looked at the pros and cons, as you did.
While I'm sure that some Remainers DID indeed take the easy option, and
simply voted for the status quo, to conclude that Brexiteers voted to
leave because they were better informed really IS a conclusion too far.
If you do not believe leave voters are better informed then I am
concluding that is because you consider that remain voters were better
informed instead - yet as James has just pointed out, it took quite a
leap to vote against the status quo.

You can argue all you want that it was a leap through ignorance, but
that is not how referendums have *ever* worked before. If people are
ignorant, they simply do not vote or choose to vote for the status quo
instead.

So what for sure we cannot conclude is that remain voter were the ones
who knew the most. They might have of course, but we do not have any
evidence to support that stance.
Post by Ian Jackson
[Was that guy in Sunderland who expected the return of shipbuilding and
coalmining better informed?]
If you'll excuse me for again referring to what I've heard radio
phoners-in and media interviewees saying, quite a lot said that they
simply wanted OUT (plus more than a few "We've got our sovereignty back"
and "Rule Britannia!") - but I've never heard any Remainers saying that
they simply wanted IN. I wonder why?
O'Brien was arguing on the radio this morning that a couple with an
income of over £100,000 can be "poor" and was commiserating with a man
who pays £4,000 a month in child care and mortgage payments and is
worried that if an appliance breaks down he does not have the money to
replace it.

Off topic, but it shows what a nut job, London-centric, show it really
is.
Bod
2017-11-13 12:45:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Post by Ian Jackson
If you'll excuse me for again referring to what I've heard radio
phoners-in and media interviewees saying, quite a lot said that they
simply wanted OUT (plus more than a few "We've got our sovereignty back"
and "Rule Britannia!") - but I've never heard any Remainers saying that
they simply wanted IN. I wonder why?
O'Brien was arguing on the radio this morning that a couple with an
income of over £100,000 can be "poor" and was commiserating with a man
who pays £4,000 a month in child care and mortgage payments and is
worried that if an appliance breaks down he does not have the money to
replace it.
Off topic, but it shows what a nut job, London-centric, show it really
is.
No, it shows what a nut job O'Brien is. He's so far left that he's gone
completely round the bend.
--
Bod
James Harris
2017-11-13 13:23:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13/11/2017 12:04, Yellow wrote:

...
Post by Yellow
O'Brien was arguing on the radio this morning that a couple with an
income of over £100,000 can be "poor" and was commiserating with a man
who pays £4,000 a month in child care and mortgage payments and is
worried that if an appliance breaks down he does not have the money to
replace it.
Off topic, but it shows what a nut job, London-centric, show it really
is.
The sound like spoiled whiners! James O'Brien's show sounds like a form
of torture to listen to!

BTW, as an alternative there is Julia Hartley-Brewer on at 10am each
weekday if you can get Talk Radio.
--
James Harris
Yellow
2017-11-13 16:29:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 13:23:31 +0000, James Harris <james.harris.1
Post by James Harris
...
Post by Yellow
O'Brien was arguing on the radio this morning that a couple with an
income of over £100,000 can be "poor" and was commiserating with a man
who pays £4,000 a month in child care and mortgage payments and is
worried that if an appliance breaks down he does not have the money to
replace it.
Off topic, but it shows what a nut job, London-centric, show it really
is.
The sound like spoiled whiners! James O'Brien's show sounds like a form
of torture to listen to!
I sometimes put it on in the morning if I am having a late shower and
Radio 4 has Woman's Hour on as that is not a show I generally enjoy.
Post by James Harris
BTW, as an alternative there is Julia Hartley-Brewer on at 10am each
weekday if you can get Talk Radio.
If it is on DAB then I should be able to get it. :-)
James Harris
2017-11-14 08:38:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 13:23:31 +0000, James Harris <james.harris.1
Post by James Harris
...
Post by Yellow
O'Brien was arguing on the radio this morning that a couple with an
income of over £100,000 can be "poor" and was commiserating with a man
who pays £4,000 a month in child care and mortgage payments and is
worried that if an appliance breaks down he does not have the money to
replace it.
Off topic, but it shows what a nut job, London-centric, show it really
is.
The sound like spoiled whiners! James O'Brien's show sounds like a form
of torture to listen to!
I sometimes put it on in the morning if I am having a late shower and
Radio 4 has Woman's Hour on as that is not a show I generally enjoy.
Post by James Harris
BTW, as an alternative there is Julia Hartley-Brewer on at 10am each
weekday if you can get Talk Radio.
If it is on DAB then I should be able to get it. :-)
Yes, it is on DAB. Some of Julia's Brexit interviews have been classics!

http://talkradio.co.uk/how-to-listen
--
James Harris
Ian Jackson
2017-11-13 15:34:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 10:54:34 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
As I've said before, since keeping the putative status quo was the much
easier option to take it is likely that those who didn't know much
about the EU voted for what they saw as the safer option. Therefore, I
would think Brexiteers were generally better informed than Remainers.
To vote to Leave was a big step into the unknown. People don't do that
en masse unless they have looked at the pros and cons, as you did.
While I'm sure that some Remainers DID indeed take the easy option, and
simply voted for the status quo, to conclude that Brexiteers voted to
leave because they were better informed really IS a conclusion too far.
If you do not believe leave voters are better informed then I am
concluding that is because you consider that remain voters were better
informed instead
That is probably another conclusion too far - although it can't be
denied that Remain voters had existing experience to rely on.
Post by Yellow
- yet as James has just pointed out, it took quite a
leap to vote against the status quo.
The Leavers indeed boldly voted for what no man voted for before. But
does that necessarily make what they voted for a good idea?
Post by Yellow
You can argue all you want that it was a leap through ignorance, but
that is not how referendums have *ever* worked before. If people are
ignorant, they simply do not vote or choose to vote for the status quo
instead.
Not necessarily. They might vote for what they think are quite obviously
'the facts' - but these could, in reality, be more like
easy-to-understand-and-digest, no ifs - no buts, alternative facts.
Post by Yellow
So what for sure we cannot conclude is that remain voter were the ones
who knew the most.
You could say that the Remainers didn't have the sparkling, creative
imagination of the Leavers.
Post by Yellow
They might have of course, but we do not have any
evidence to support that stance.
Post by Ian Jackson
[Was that guy in Sunderland who expected the return of shipbuilding and
coalmining better informed?]
If you'll excuse me for again referring to what I've heard radio
phoners-in and media interviewees saying, quite a lot said that they
simply wanted OUT (plus more than a few "We've got our sovereignty back"
and "Rule Britannia!") - but I've never heard any Remainers saying that
they simply wanted IN. I wonder why?
O'Brien was arguing on the radio this morning that a couple with an
income of over £100,000 can be "poor" and was commiserating with a man
who pays £4,000 a month in child care and mortgage payments and is
worried that if an appliance breaks down he does not have the money to
replace it.
I heard some of this, and it seems that you have generally misunderstood
what he was getting at.
Post by Yellow
Off topic, but it shows what a nut job, London-centric, show it really
is.
It was really a discussion about why groups of people living in areas
that are not that far apart can have a typical difference of life
expectancy of up to 20 years.
--
Ian
Yellow
2017-11-13 16:44:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:34:22 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Yellow
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 10:54:34 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
As I've said before, since keeping the putative status quo was the much
easier option to take it is likely that those who didn't know much
about the EU voted for what they saw as the safer option. Therefore, I
would think Brexiteers were generally better informed than Remainers.
To vote to Leave was a big step into the unknown. People don't do that
en masse unless they have looked at the pros and cons, as you did.
While I'm sure that some Remainers DID indeed take the easy option, and
simply voted for the status quo, to conclude that Brexiteers voted to
leave because they were better informed really IS a conclusion too far.
If you do not believe leave voters are better informed then I am
concluding that is because you consider that remain voters were better
informed instead
That is probably another conclusion too far - although it can't be
denied that Remain voters had existing experience to rely on.
Post by Yellow
- yet as James has just pointed out, it took quite a
leap to vote against the status quo.
The Leavers indeed boldly voted for what no man voted for before. But
does that necessarily make what they voted for a good idea?
Post by Yellow
You can argue all you want that it was a leap through ignorance, but
that is not how referendums have *ever* worked before. If people are
ignorant, they simply do not vote or choose to vote for the status quo
instead.
Not necessarily. They might vote for what they think are quite obviously
'the facts' - but these could, in reality, be more like
easy-to-understand-and-digest, no ifs - no buts, alternative facts.
So let's step back again...

Now Remainers are informed because they know the actual facts while
Leavers are uninformed because they only know the 'alternative' facts?

LOL!

The snake is swallowing its tail.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Yellow
So what for sure we cannot conclude is that remain voter were the ones
who knew the most.
You could say that the Remainers didn't have the sparkling, creative
imagination of the Leavers.
You may be right, if remainers as a group really do think the EU in 10
years time will be the same as it is today.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Yellow
They might have of course, but we do not have any
evidence to support that stance.
Post by Ian Jackson
[Was that guy in Sunderland who expected the return of shipbuilding and
coalmining better informed?]
If you'll excuse me for again referring to what I've heard radio
phoners-in and media interviewees saying, quite a lot said that they
simply wanted OUT (plus more than a few "We've got our sovereignty back"
and "Rule Britannia!") - but I've never heard any Remainers saying that
they simply wanted IN. I wonder why?
O'Brien was arguing on the radio this morning that a couple with an
income of over £100,000 can be "poor" and was commiserating with a man
who pays £4,000 a month in child care and mortgage payments and is
worried that if an appliance breaks down he does not have the money to
replace it.
I heard some of this, and it seems that you have generally misunderstood
what he was getting at.
Oh no you don't. I heard what I heard and O'Brien was saying that you do
not need to be on a low income to be poor (disposable income) and to
have been affected by his hobbyhorse of austerity.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Yellow
Off topic, but it shows what a nut job, London-centric, show it really
is.
It was really a discussion about why groups of people living in areas
that are not that far apart can have a typical difference of life
expectancy of up to 20 years.
Yes I know - and he was that most un-typical of UK places, South
Kensington, to "prove" his point that since 2010 (when the Tories got
in) even affluent people earning more than £100,000 a year have gone to
hell in a handcart.

He was playing to his audience, telling them that people with loads of
money from a UK point of view but who are on the lower rungs in a place
where an average house is £1.5 million are suffering this government too
and that he could feel their pain.
tim...
2017-11-13 18:52:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Yes I know - and he was that most un-typical of UK places, South
Kensington, to "prove" his point that since 2010 (when the Tories got
in) even affluent people earning more than £100,000 a year have gone to
hell in a handcart.
He was playing to his audience, telling them that people with loads of
money from a UK point of view but who are on the lower rungs in a place
where an average house is £1.5 million are suffering this government too
and that he could feel their pain.
and have an IQ so low that they can't work out that "moving house" is the
solution to their problem

tim
James Harris
2017-11-13 13:07:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
As I've said before, since keeping the putative status quo was the much
easier option to take it is likely that those who didn't know much
about the EU voted for what they saw as the safer option. Therefore, I
would think Brexiteers were generally better informed than Remainers.
To vote to Leave was a big step into the unknown. People don't do that
en masse unless they have looked at the pros and cons, as you did.
While I'm sure that some Remainers DID indeed take the easy option, and
simply voted for the status quo, to conclude that Brexiteers voted to
leave because they were better informed really IS a conclusion too far.
[Was that guy in Sunderland who expected the return of shipbuilding and
coalmining better informed?]
:-) - when I got to this point in your post I thought you'd been
Post by Ian Jackson
If you'll excuse me for again referring to what I've heard radio
phoners-in and media interviewees saying, quite a lot said that they
simply wanted OUT (plus more than a few "We've got our sovereignty back"
and "Rule Britannia!") - but I've never heard any Remainers saying that
they simply wanted IN. I wonder why?
I see your point, and I agree such people may not have known much about
what the future would hold. Who does? But couldn't they be either older
voters who remembered life pre-EEC or they could know a lot about the EU
and so want out of it?

By contrast, a number of Remain voters don't know the difference between
the EU and Europe. Or they think that Brexit is about not liking
Europeans. Or they think that Brexit is about the UK isolating itself.
Or they think that Brexit will make us poorer in the long term. Or they
think that they won't be able to work and study in Europe. And so on.

My point is that while many (on either side) knew what they were voting
for (or voting against) there would have been quite a lot who didn't
really know much about it (e.g. there was a report that "what is the EU"
topped internet searches just before the referendum) and for them,
voting for "no change" would have seemed by far the safest option,
especially given the media saturation by Project Fear in the run-up to
the referendum.

No worries, I don't expect to convince you.
--
James Harris
Ian Jackson
2017-11-13 11:21:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Can you back that up? I suspect not. ISTM it is sore losers who keep
claiming that Brexiteers believed it. But apart from those who promised
it I don't think many do or did. Did you believe it? No. Nor did other
sensible people. So there's no point you keep pretending they did!
I think that quite a lot of Brexiteers either totally believed it, or
were at least significantly swayed by it.

However, when anyone suggests that they might have been duped, it's only
natural for some to say, "Who? Me? Duped? Of course I wasn't! How dare
you insult my intelligence!" [In the circumstances, I probably would
myself.] It's only rarely that you hear a "Yes - I admit was had".
--
Ian
Yellow
2017-11-13 12:20:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 11:21:57 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
Can you back that up? I suspect not. ISTM it is sore losers who keep
claiming that Brexiteers believed it. But apart from those who promised
it I don't think many do or did. Did you believe it? No. Nor did other
sensible people. So there's no point you keep pretending they did!
I think that quite a lot of Brexiteers either totally believed it, or
were at least significantly swayed by it.
However, when anyone suggests that they might have been duped, it's only
natural for some to say, "Who? Me? Duped? Of course I wasn't! How dare
you insult my intelligence!" [In the circumstances, I probably would
myself.] It's only rarely that you hear a "Yes - I admit was had".
You if they admit to being "duped" you win, and if they deny it, you
erm.... win.

Interesting logic.
James Harris
2017-11-13 13:13:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
Can you back that up? I suspect not. ISTM it is sore losers who keep
claiming that Brexiteers believed it. But apart from those who promised
it I don't think many do or did. Did you believe it? No. Nor did other
sensible people. So there's no point you keep pretending they did!
I think that quite a lot of Brexiteers either totally believed it, or
were at least significantly swayed by it.
However, when anyone suggests that they might have been duped, it's only
natural for some to say, "Who? Me? Duped? Of course I wasn't! How dare
you insult my intelligence!" [In the circumstances, I probably would
myself.] It's only rarely that you hear a "Yes - I admit was had".
So /you/ think that "quite a lot" were taken in by it but are now too
shy to say so...! How do you know what people think...? Isn't this just
another case of Remainers deluding themselves into believing the world
is as they would wish to see it?

Besides, the money is still being paid to the EU at the moment and
Johnson, for example, has said he still expects the money to go to the
EU - so I don't see why there should have been the sudden onset of
embarrassment that you claim exists.
--
James Harris
James Harris
2017-11-13 13:28:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13/11/2017 13:13, James Harris wrote:

...
Post by James Harris
Besides, the money is still being paid to the EU at the moment and
Johnson, for example, has said he still expects the money to go to the
EU
Oops, I mean "go to the NHS". So used to the EU taking it...!
--
James Harris
Omega
2017-11-09 10:31:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
our NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it.
Those who lost the referendum - and, sadly, the media - keep saying that
all of the money was promised for the NHS. But that was NOT said on the
side of the bus. And it is not my recollection as to what Vote Leave
23 April 2016: 'We would also regain control over the £350m subscription
we pay Brussels every week. We could spend it on schools, the NHS, the
environment, cutting the deficit-- the choice will become ours again.'
(Gisela Stuart)
I.e. not all of it.
4 June 2016:  "The government should use some of the billions saved from
leaving the EU to give at least a £100m per week cash transfusion to the
NHS." (Gove and Johnson)
I.e. not all of it.
Were _you_ annoyed by Vote Leave at the time? If so, and you now claim
that all of it was for the NHS ... then you are just as dishonest. If
not more so.
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/gisela_stuart_exposes_the_risks_of_staying_in_the_eu.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36450749
As a fervent leaver, I am adamant we spend no more money on an ailing NHS!

We must, if we want a viable service. sort out the parasites at all
levels and the appalling waste and definitely end 'bed blocking'
together with paying Mickey Mouse Money for drugs and treatments and the
endless other inefficiencies.

Stop bloody silly programmes as Flu jabs when the efficacy, year after
year is no more than 3%, but the actual death rate from these jabs NEVER
publicised though believed to be a lot higher than 3%! We kill people
with these programmes!

Let's get back to a culture where we don't fill up GPs surgerys' because
we have a cold and me fucking leg is aching after a 22 mile marathon!

Someone told me last week, the NHS employ 1.2 million people, 700,000 of
whom are clinically obese. Imagine the efficiency rate of the output of
these people if they slimmed a little and the higher sickness rate these
fat fuckers impose on an already breaking system?

I'm also reliably informed, hordes of nurses leave because of bullying
from colleagues, nothing at all to do with unsocial hours or pay for
that matter! Can someone else, in the trade, confirm this?

Keep my money away from these people! They must sort out this monster
otherwise, without pumping more and more money.

Then there's education ... I'll fuck off now!

omega
Ophelia
2017-11-09 12:05:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund our
NHS instead".
It did not say ALL of it.
Those who lost the referendum - and, sadly, the media - keep saying that
all of the money was promised for the NHS. But that was NOT said on the
side of the bus. And it is not my recollection as to what Vote Leave said.
23 April 2016: 'We would also regain control over the £350m subscription
we pay Brussels every week. We could spend it on schools, the NHS, the
environment, cutting the deficit-- the choice will become ours again.'
(Gisela Stuart)
I.e. not all of it.
4 June 2016: "The government should use some of the billions saved from
leaving the EU to give at least a £100m per week cash transfusion to the
NHS." (Gove and Johnson)
I.e. not all of it.
Were _you_ annoyed by Vote Leave at the time? If so, and you now claim
that all of it was for the NHS ... then you are just as dishonest. If not
more so.
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/gisela_stuart_exposes_the_risks_of_staying_in_the_eu.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36450749
As a fervent leaver, I am adamant we spend no more money on an ailing NHS!

We must, if we want a viable service. sort out the parasites at all
levels and the appalling waste and definitely end 'bed blocking'
together with paying Mickey Mouse Money for drugs and treatments and the
endless other inefficiencies.

Stop bloody silly programmes as Flu jabs when the efficacy, year after
year is no more than 3%, but the actual death rate from these jabs NEVER
publicised though believed to be a lot higher than 3%! We kill people
with these programmes!

Let's get back to a culture where we don't fill up GPs surgerys' because
we have a cold and me fucking leg is aching after a 22 mile marathon!

Someone told me last week, the NHS employ 1.2 million people, 700,000 of
whom are clinically obese. Imagine the efficiency rate of the output of
these people if they slimmed a little and the higher sickness rate these
fat fuckers impose on an already breaking system?

I'm also reliably informed, hordes of nurses leave because of bullying
from colleagues, nothing at all to do with unsocial hours or pay for
that matter! Can someone else, in the trade, confirm this?

Keep my money away from these people! They must sort out this monster
otherwise, without pumping more and more money.

Then there's education ... I'll fuck off now!

omega


==

lol. I can't argue with your comments:)
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
BurfordTJustice
2017-11-09 13:04:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
With all the "experts" here why does the NHS have any problems?

Apparently the "experts" would rather thump chest and run empty mouths
than go volunteer to help fix the problem, or maybe they don't really
have a fix after all.



"James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:otvoum$ei8$***@dont-email.me...
: The big red bus said "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund
: our NHS instead".
:
: It did not say ALL of it.
:
: Those who lost the referendum - and, sadly, the media - keep saying that
: all of the money was promised for the NHS. But that was NOT said on the
: side of the bus. And it is not my recollection as to what Vote Leave
: said. Checking back in the run-up to the referendum:
:
: 23 April 2016: 'We would also regain control over the £350m subscription
: we pay Brussels every week. We could spend it on schools, the NHS, the
: environment, cutting the deficit-- the choice will become ours again.'
: (Gisela Stuart)
:
: I.e. not all of it.
:
: 4 June 2016: "The government should use some of the billions saved from
: leaving the EU to give at least a £100m per week cash transfusion to the
: NHS." (Gove and Johnson)
:
: I.e. not all of it.
:
:
: Were _you_ annoyed by Vote Leave at the time? If so, and you now claim
: that all of it was for the NHS ... then you are just as dishonest. If
: not more so.
:
:
: Refs.:
:
:
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/gisela_stuart_exposes_the_risks_of_staying_in_the_eu.html
:
: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36450749
:
:
: --
: James Harris
:
tim...
2017-11-09 15:21:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
"James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:otvoum$ei8$***@dont-email.me...
I'll give you tuppence for it
Dan S. MacAbre
2017-11-09 16:17:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
I'll give you tuppence for it
Even then I expect you'd soon regret it, watching the money pour out of
your bank account faster than the Denmark Strait Cataract.
Loading...