The Consequences of Brexit (part 2)

[Justin Smith 10]

Pew research indicates that 6% of the UK population favour further European integration. Staying in the EU means further European integration. Therefore 42% of the population voted in the referendum for something they don't want because of project fear. Now that the fear is diminished so is support for remain.

 

http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/06/07/euroskepticism-beyond-brexit/

 

Not sure I agree with your extrapolations there.

 

---------- Post added 02-12-2016 at 13:56 ----------

 

That is good logic, almost.

 

Even without Brexit, she should have won. Labour managed an all time lowest vote.

 

I don`t think she`d have won without Brexit, she had a massive swing in her favour, just like Witney. But the Richmond constituency also has strong anti Heathrow expansion feelings, so I`m fairly sure Goldsmith would have retained the seat.

 

---------- Post added 02-12-2016 at 13:57 ----------

 

Or could it be that the issue of whether we leave the EU has been decided and most folk have moved on. They are looking for an MP to represent the constituency not one to fight old battles. It's like revisiting Orgreave. It might amuse a few who still burn Thatcher images on bonfires but it doesn't win elections. It is reflected in Labour's performance and how they stand in the polls.

 

Do you really believe that ? And how can that be true anyway, when the terms for leaving the EU haven`t even been decided on ?

[unbeliever 10]

Not sure I agree with your extrapolations there.

 

I was waiting for somebody to spot the logical flaw.

Brexiting means jumping from the current level of European integration to essentially zero European integration. So you can't ask "do people want more European integration or not", the choice is between more European integration and zero European integration and they've not been polled on that.

So I can't really use the numbers from that survey, but it does show qualitatively that the longer we stay in, the more we'll want out, and tat we're a nation which is very negative about the EU.

So I still think it's reasonable to infer that the potential leave majority (if people vote with their true wishes, rather than on their fears) is likely substantially larger than the result of the referendum suggested.

[aa2900 10]

I read the Guardian and the Telegraph mostly. How abot you?

 

You're grasping at straws if you think the UK people are turning against Brexit.

With many of the doom predictions already shown as lies mistaken much of the fear that remain depended on for their votes is gone.

 

I wonder how many people who claim the Richmond result was about Brexit recall this?

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/26/lib-dem-brexit-referendum-candidate-says-people-must-accept-refe/

[Justin Smith 10]

I was waiting for somebody to spot the logical flaw.

Brexiting means jumping from the current level of European integration to essentially zero European integration. So you can't ask "do people want more European integration or not", the choice is between more European integration and zero European integration and they've not been polled on that.

So I can't really use the numbers from that survey, but it does show qualitatively that the longer we stay in, the more we'll want out, and tat we're a nation which is very negative about the EU.

So I still think it's reasonable to infer that the potential leave majority (if people vote with their true wishes, rather than on their fears) is likely substantially larger than the result of the referendum suggested.

 

I think it`s even more likely that more people voted Leave having believed some of the lies and distortions told to them. I`d be interested to know what effect the Trump presidency would have had on the referendum result had it ben known before. On eth one hand it might have actually increased it, particularly amongst those who don`t know much about politics, But it may have had the opposite effect to some others. I`m more worried about leaving the EU now we've got someone talking about trade wars and stuff due to occupy the Whitehouse.

 

---------- Post added 02-12-2016 at 15:44 ----------

 

I wonder how many people who claim the Richmond result was about Brexit recall this?

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/26/lib-dem-brexit-referendum-candidate-says-people-must-accept-refe/

 

I think this is the salient sentence :

 

But, as someone who didn’t want this course of action, I have some questions. I want some clarity on certain things

 

But, all these Brexiteers saying the Richmond results is meaningless, why has not one answered my point about the Witney result, which was a similar swing to the Lob Dems ?

[unbeliever 10]

But, all these Brexiteers saying the Richmond results is meaningless, why has not one answered my point about the Witney result, which was a similar swing to the Lob Dems ?

 

 

Swings to opposition parties are normal for mid-term by-elections and Labour are a mess, so it was going to be UKIP or Lib Dems. A remain dominated constituency is hardly going to vote UKIP.

[Zamo 10]

Swings to opposition parties are normal for mid-term by-elections and Labour are a mess, so it was going to be UKIP or Lib Dems. A remain dominated constituency is hardly going to vote UKIP.

 

Especially when UKIP didn't field a candidate. Nor did the Tories.

[Litotes 63]

Pew research indicates that 6% of the UK population favour further European integration. Staying in the EU means further European integration. Therefore 42% of the population voted in the referendum for something they don't want because of project fear. Now that the fear is diminished so is support for remain.

 

http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/06/07/euroskepticism-beyond-brexit/

 

84% of statistics are made up

[the_bloke 17]

Especially when UKIP didn't field a candidate. Nor did the Tories.

 

Quite. Labour managed to lose their deposit in a three horse election. Some of the news spin is a bit silly about the result as well, calling it a landslide when the Lib Dems actually only won 4.5% more of the votes than Goldsmith.

 

Olney has already managed to look poor on national radio today and had to end an interview as she got into a muddle.

[Litotes 63]

They voted 70% to remain in the referendum, and now 52% for the remain candidate offered to them. They've not changed their minds about anything really.

You can't really think that a vote in 1 constituency out of 650, where if anything remain has lost votes, compares in any way to the referendum.

 

So why are you comparing it?

[unbeliever 10]

So why are you comparing it?

 

What?!? Context! Look what I was replying to. What the ... !

[andyofborg 11]

84% of statistics are made up

 

17% aren't made up

[altus 540]

Quite. Labour managed to lose their deposit in a three horse election. Some of the news spin is a bit silly about the result as well, calling it a landslide when the Lib Dems actually only won 4.5% more of the votes than Goldsmith.

They are calling it a landslide because the Lib Dems overturned Goldsmith's 23000 majority in the last election.

 

If you're trying to point out that 4.5% isn't very much, I'd just like to remind you it's greater than the 3.78% leave won by in the EU referendum.