On the contrary, it’s never been easy to find facts and to challenge the views held any paper, news outlet etc.

I’m not of the belief that in the present is harder to find than the past.

The problem with the present is the sheer volume of facts/opinions/lies/misunderstandings.

I’d have got my coat after that pun, Sunday morning or not. Has perchypanther taught you nothing?

So the great British public merely do what they are told – wow, that’s depressing. A nation incapable of independent thought.

Yes, largely a nation incapable of seeing through the BS, not bothered enough to do their own research to form their own opinions etc,.

You haven’t spent much time talking to the great British public have you.

Where exactly do you suggest going to get such unbiased facts? I hear Breitbart is reliably consistent…

So do we just ignore what they, the unworthy, say then? Or a quick IQ test at the voting both? Or general knowledge – name five members of the shadow cabinet and their roles etc…

Its not just facts though its the way stories are presented.
You’ll get ” children collide with Range Rover” and “cyclist mugs old lady” which spins those stories in line with the agenda. edit just remembered the ” greens caused Grenfell” because the cladding was insulation!

Then you get all online bots real or otherwise(chewk) in sufficient numbers give the impression there is a consensus on something when there isn’t. Hiring people to create online personas and promote ideas and prosucts is cheap and easy.

I still think most people voted out to stop migration but it wasnt the EU that was forcing migration on the UK it was companies that wanted cheap labour and they still want it.

Someone just needs to stand up and say “we’ll have a new vote with clear options” and if one of those was staying in with better immigration control they would win by a landslide.

On the contrary, it’s never been easy to find facts and to challenge the views held any paper, news outlet etc. not to do so is either apathy, indifference or laziness. It’s a pretty lame excuse to claim that we lost the referendum because the majority of voters were merely sheep….

I think you give people too much credit. By definition almost half of the population are of below average intelligence.

It’s never been easier to find ‘facts’ which back up your own belief system. Almost universally people aren’t going to buy newspapers which challenge them, they’re going to buy the ones which agree with them. So, if you’re a little bit racist then you’ll be reading the Express, which has been running almost daily headlines about how the reason everything’s going to shit is because we’re being overrun by brown people and it’s all the EU’s fault. You become entrenched.

The sad fact is that very few people stop to fact check, to question what they read or what they’re told. Nonsense chain letters like margarine being one molecule away from plastic crop up daily on Facebook, sometimes from people who should know better. I saw one only today about “Necropants,” with comments going “OMG is that real?” 30 seconds’ Googling found an article from the museum where they’re being exhibited, explaining that they’re an artistic mock-up based on ancient Icelandic folklore. It’s not hard, but folk just don’t do it.

I think that’s why the results were / are so close. I think people don’t really know what’s for the best.

Yeah, I think you’re absolutely right. I don’t doubt that for many people it was a vote of ignorance, I’ve heard a lot of folk say they didn’t know how to vote and so went for leave / remain based on a single issue they’d picked up on. For all the extremists now crying “we knew what we were voting for,” I’d hazard that the vast majority of voters (on both sides) knew very little indeed about what they were voting for.

I’m far from an expert but I certainly know a lot more now than I did 12 months ago. Whether that’s the case for the majority of others I don’t know (see above), maybe for every vocal leave / remain voter there could be a dozen more people who are apathetic and are just bored of hearing about it now.

Someone just needs to stand up and say “we’ll have a new vote with clear options and if one of those was staying in with better immigration control they would win by a landslide.

I’ve said this from the outset. One of the big failings of Remain IMHO is it was presented – and interpreted – as “do nothing.” A number of people voted Leave as they figured “well, this is shit, let’s try something different.”

Most if not all of the vaguely credible reasons cited for voting Leave, shoring up immigration policy for instance (to be more in line with the rest of the EU, pass me a new ironyometer), we already had the power to fix and chose not to do so.

Leaving is going to make half of the country displeased. Remaining and doing nothing is going to make the other half of the country displeased. Remaining and addressing people’s concerns isn’t going to please those who want to bring back the shilling but it surely stands to please considerably more folk than either of the other two options. And y’know, strikes me as the only way any government is going to get out of this mess with any shred of reputation left intact.

So do we just ignore what they, the unworthy, say then? Or a quick IQ test at the voting both? Or general knowledge – name five members of the shadow cabinet and their roles etc…

Why would you want to allow someone to make a decision which could potentially have life-changing repercussions nationally and internationally for generations to come if they think that the Four Freedoms is a Motown tribute act?

So yes, of course we ignore what the unworthy have to say, with the caveat that we’re all unworthy. That’s the point. This is why we elect politicians to make difficult decisions for us. In our political democratic system we vote for people, not individual policies.

The referendum was akin to asking a group of six-year olds whether they wanted ice cream or Brussels sprouts for tea. The kids will tell you what they want, passionately even, but it’s not what’s best for them.

I think you give people too much credit

Well that’s a new accusation from here 😉 but judging by the other thread, you may well be correct. The constant lies are as entertaining as they are ridiculous!

Doesn’t address the fundamental issue of democracy though and leaves us with the winners were too stupid to undertstand/easily led argument. Pretty sad…

Doesn’t address the fundamental issue of democracy though and leaves us with the winners were too stupid to undertstand/easily led argument. Pretty sad…

1) I’m not saying the winners were too stupid, I’m saying that the electorate as a whole are “too stupid” as you put it, or more accurately they are ill-qualified to be making that decision.

2) I appreciate that in the Land of the Leave the definition of “anti-democratic” has been twisted to mean “anyone who disagrees with us,” but what you’re referring to here isn’t democracy, it’s ochlocracy.

Would you have said the same thing is the result had gone marginally our way?

On your argument they are ill-equipped to participate in any vote. You may be correct, but that is not our system is it? We believe in democracy and indeed impose this system on other societies on the basis that we think that it is the best approach

On your argument they are ill-equipped to participate in any vote

Yes. They – we – are ill-equipped to participate in any vote on individual policy. We will vote for what we think we want rather than what’s best for the country.

You may be correct, but that is not our system is it? We believe in democracy

As a wise man once said: you keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

In a parliamentary democracy we vote for people to represent us and make decisions on our behalf. We do not, and absolutely should not, vote on individual policy decisions. A referendum has no place in a democracy (unless it’s merely an opinion poll and parliament is free to act in favour or against it on the basis of our best interests).

Indeed heaven forbid we give the thickos a vote – keep them down where they belong.

(arguably its this attitude that is resulting in the bizarre political outcomes that were witnessing right now)

But…. but…… look at Dave’s new Shepherds Hut! How cool is that?! It’s where he’s going to write his memoirs and tell us all about it. Can’t wait personally ….

But will the thickos get what they want?
350 million a week for the NHS? No.
Reduced immigration?
White . Yes
3rd world people of the wrong colour and religion. No , most likely more.
Control taken back?
No. The tories will still be foisting shit on you but telling you that you voted for it.

Indeed heaven forbid we give the thickos a vote – keep them down where they belong.

Do you have your browser set to write-only, or are you deliberately twisting what I’m saying?

If we don’t leave then the pound will strengthen wiping out a lot of gains I’ve made in the stock market…we agree with Vince though and we should stay

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40842017

Are you taking bets?

😆

Indeed heaven forbid we give the thickos a vote – keep them down where they belong.

Give us thickos a vote! Preferably between two actual options for a future relationship with the EEA… and I’d suggest one of those being EU membership with opt outs for the bits we don’t think is right for the UK… the other option can be whatever the Leave campaigners can agree on as an alternative to this.

Oh, and in answer to the original question, I honestly don’t know.

The tide is turning for sure. Whilst I’m against a second referendum (for reasons as discussed earlier) I’m pretty confident that the result would be in favour of Remain this time around. Plenty of MPs are against leaving too.

Problem is, the people who brought us to this point are still around. We’ve still got rags like The Express spinning ‘news’ to demonise the EU and stir up their special brand of erupting fury, and we’ve still got the likes of Aaron Banks and his Leave.EU bankroll. We’ve still got party leaders sacking MPs who disagree with them (democratic, hey). Remain always appealed to the head vs Leave’s appeal to the heart, and the latter is demonstrably a more effective strategy. We can debunk lies till the cows come home, but people believe what they want to believe and the damage has already been done.

I want to hope that we can still turn this around as more and more people are seeing reality bite. But it’s going to take more organisation and collaboration within parliament for that to come about. Again as I said earlier, I think perhaps offering a serious alternative to Brexit that isn’t simply “do nothing” would go a long way towards changing minds.

5+ years to rollout Universal Credit, 10s of millions spent, and its still not complete. Leaving Europe will make Uni Credit look like child’s play.

Even if they find the will, the useless shower of toffs ain’t got the nouse!

There’s a serious question to be asked about how the media can shape and influence public debate.
New media and old/ mainstream media are little different IMO.
There is an appearance of a wide variety of media but much of it is under the same ownership.

I read the guardian every day but don’t like quinoa, and regard vegetarians with suspicion

Do I win a steak pudding?

Last time I checked the polls were still saying 52% wanted to leave, and the leader of the opposition is a eurosceptic so I can’t see how we would end up staying even if we did have a second referendum, which is super unlikely anyway

Last time I checked the polls were still saying 52% wanted to leave

That’s the other thing of course. Changing people’s minds is often incredibly difficult. Just look at, well, pretty much any debate on STW. “Oh, I see, you’re right and I was wrong” said almost no forum member ever. (I’m sure it does happen, but it’s rare.)

On that specific issue, I genuinely think you should be licenced to create an online account. Something that could verified as belonging to a real identifiable person.

( I’ll stop short of drink posting laws though!)

Last time I checked the polls were still saying 52% wanted to leave

Got a link?

Most recent one I know:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-remain-win-new-eu-exit-vote-survation-poll-a7820286.html

Last time I checked the polls were still saying 52% wanted to leave

And of that 52%, what proportion prefer the replacement deal to the option of not Leaving?
An unanswerable question of course, as no one has a clue what that replacement deal looks like yet.
A choice between two REAL arrangements must be made before we leave, not “status quo or anything else you can dream up.”

I do actually think peoples minds are changed, even if they dont admit it even to themselves.

Plastic bottles waste for example is an issue I just wasnt aware of until put straight by someone if this parish.

Got a link?

Most recent one I know:

I’m not immediately seeing a source for that beyond “a poll suggests…” – what poll?

I think we should be treating most polls with a pinch of salt anyway. Getting a truly unbiased result is difficult, doubly so if it’s an online poll where organised Leave / Remain groups can jump on it and hammer them with votes. If you ran the same poll on the Express, Guardian and New European websites you’d get very different results.

Anything outside of YouGov I’d treat with scepticism, and TBH I’m not entirely convinced about YG either (not because of any site bias but because it’s difficult to get fair representative data).

Do I win a steak pudding?

Nope. You win an organically raised Alpaca like Tofu Burger on the finest hand made Artis Anal sourdough bread made with traditional Farmers crack yeast.

Cougar – you can call it twisting what you said if that makes you feel more comfortable with the idea that some (Brexshiteers) are incapable of independent and rational thought. However, you sanitise it, its the same argument that is leading the oppressed to reject the staus quo.

Your lot are too thick to understand this very difficult issue – so your vote is irrelevant. You see, you don’t understand….

Actually the bit that seems difficult to understand is the easy bit – we did a crap job at arguing why we should remain and we lost. That’s our fault not that of the “thickos”

Can we blame This thicko?

You’re still doing it.

I’m not saying that people are stupid or thick (the only person using those terms is you, presumably for sensational effect). I’m saying that the majority of people are not equipped to make sensible policy decisions for the good of the country. This is why we have MPs. Now whilst the ability of those MPs may be debatable, it is at least their job to understand this stuff and they have teams of people to advise them.

If you needed brain surgery, would you rather it was done by a brain surgeon or by Steve from Accounts? Only, Steve’s quite clever, he’s got a Masters degree in Accounting and everything.

However, you sanitise it, its the same argument that is leading the oppressed to reject the staus quo.

This may well be true, but the solution isn’t to put the “oppressed” in change and let them get on with it.

Don’t worry, I accept the truth is a bit embarrassing. I get round it by saying that some of my best friends were Brexshitters, but…

Given that most MPs failed to understand the issues involved*, we would end up with no one voting on ths issue under your logic – forget your other fancy word, that is autocracy.

* given how patently obvious it is that our interests were better served by keeping the status quo, it’s a poor indictment that we could deliver such and easy message to the man-in–the-street. Or perhaps it wasn’t that obvious.

Funny how many remoaners castigated CMD for his brilliant daal the time – presumably became he was a Tory/OE and now wish we could have what he delivered!!

Actually looking back at the Scottish Indy referendum, perhaps you are correct after all. Remember all that BS – 670 pages of it.

Nope, you’re still doing it.

Given that most MPs failed to understand the issues involved*, we would end up with no one voting on ths issue under your logic – forget your other fancy word, that is autocracy.

Is it a comprehension failure, or a moral failure? I genuinely don’t know the answer to that, but it wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if there wasn’t a degree of corruption gone on in some quarters. Some of our career politicians are surely just out for number one.

But if no-one genuinely understands it, maybe we shouldn’t be having a vote on it at all until the people taking part the vote have boned up on the subject a bit? (I’m assuming you’re meaning a parliamentary vote here.) Something of the scale of Brexit should be a carefully considered decision weighing up all the options, comparing the pros and cons of doing so, made by people who actually understand the situation and are acting in our best interests. It’s not a Friday afternoon “any other business” minute.

Throwing the country under the bus because the electorate isn’t educated on the subject is merely stupid, doing it because parliament doesn’t understand it would be bloody shameful.

Interesting you should mention an autocracy – that’s actually not a million miles from what we’ve ended up with. Look at the court case, that was an attempt by May to remove the (so-called) Opposition from the process. If you challenge May (or Corbyn) you get kicked out.

Well we shouldn’t vote on the NHS, austerity (sic), foreign policy issues etc since people consistently demonstrate a lack of understanding of the issues involved.

I read he other day that someone had been convinced that the labour manifesto was fully costed – no really.. Should they be disqualidfied from voting for not being able to understand basic issues?

Cougar

“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results”

You might as well cut out all the debate and just go and hit your head on a wall – it will give you more satisfaction

You appear to be missing (or just ignoring) one of the fundamental issues here. Remain did a perfectly decent job of explaining the facts*. The problem is that people voted based upon emotions not facts and Leave did a much better job of appealing to people’s emotions. What’s more, one of the primary tactics involved was lying – it didn’t really matter that the lies could be shown to be lies because not only did people ignore that but the lies had their emotional impact even so.

You could I suppose argue that Remain should have done a better job of appealing to people’s emotion rather than their reason (by lying more), but is that the way we want politics to go?

* for the record when the referendum was called I was probably still leaning towards Leave, but that changed when I worked out what the facts were.