Consequences of Brexit [part 7] Read first post before posting

[Lex Luthor 10]

6 hours ago, Top Cats Hat said:

 

I hear that Gary Glitter and Jimmy Saville have also now come out in favour of Leave.

Top Cats Hat is a confirmed Remainer. 

[Top Cats Hat 10]

For all those predicting a rush to the far-right after Brexit didn’t happen, ‘For Britain’ came a pathetic 11th out of 11 candidates in the Newport by election with less than 1% of the vote! 😂

[apelike 10]

Doesn't say much for any of the candidates when only 37.1% bothered to turnout to vote compared to 67.5% in the GE.

[tinfoilhat 11]

9 minutes ago, apelike said:

Doesn't say much for any of the candidates when only 37.1% bothered to turnout to vote compared to 67.5% in the GE.

I was about to say something similar - frankly theparties could have (might have done for all I know - at least ukip had a “name” up there) put anyone up and the turnout would have been the same.

 

Its very much a consequence of brexit and how badly it’s been handled. We’ve no faith in our politicians any more.

[Top Cats Hat 10]

17 minutes ago, apelike said:

Doesn't say much for any of the candidates when only 37.1% bothered to turnout to vote compared to 67.5% in the GE.

It wasn’t a GE it was a by election which usually has a turnout of around 40% so this one was about average and actually more than many previous by elections.

[Bob Arctor 11]

6 hours ago, apelike said:

All that shows is someone is capable of putting together some snippets trying to show he is right in his assumptions when he is actually wrong.

 

People did know what they were voting for and at the time there was never any mention of any deal at all only leave the EU. The idea was then put forward much later after the referendum of leaving with a negotiated deal instead, and because of that idea leaving without a deal also came into play. The remainers then capitalised on that trying to falsely make out and twisting the idea that the people voting leave didnt know what they were voting for and didnt vote for leaving without a deal. Both assumptions are wrong as at that time a deal was never mentioned and never on the cards as the timing of events shows.

 

In one of the Electoral Commission Reports and surveys reported in Sept 2016, also taken note of by the Lords in a referendum briefing paper, it states quite clearly that 75% of the population that voted knew what they were voting for. I would rather believe that report and them than believe an ardent remainer who just craves for attention on twitter. 

 

Some quotes from that report:

 

Voters’ views about information at the referendum

 

3.58 "Our public opinion research asked people how much they felt they knew about the referendum on 23 June 2016. Eighty four percent said that they knew a great deal (34%) or a fair amount (50%) about what the referendum was for. This compares well with data from other elections and referendums."

 

Did people feel informed about the referendum?

 

3.65 "Our public opinion survey also explored whether voters had enough information about the ‘leave’ and ‘remain’ arguments to be able to make an informed decision how to vote in the referendum. Sixty two percent of respondents agreed that they did compared to 28% who disagreed. There was a clear pattern by age group with those aged 18-34 least likely to agree they had enough information to make an informed decision (52% agreed), 35-54 year olds more likely (63% agreed) and those aged 55+ most likely (70% agreed)."

 

http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/215279/2016-EU-referendum-report.pdf

 

Whether people believe they were well informed is irrelevant to whether they were well informed though, because you don't know what you don't know. How many people who voted knew the main implications of the Belfast Agreement, for example? 

[Cyclone 10]

I'm not sure that the political establishment had even considered the Irish situation, it certainly hadn't made the news until about a year ago.

[melthebell 862]

38 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

I'm not sure that the political establishment had even considered the Irish situation, it certainly hadn't made the news until about a year ago.

I was just gonna say, Ireland wasn't even mentioned until about a year ago

[bendix 10]

6 hours ago, Top Cats Hat said:

For all those predicting a rush to the far-right after Brexit didn’t happen, ‘For Britain’ came a pathetic 11th out of 11 candidates in the Newport by election with less than 1% of the vote! 😂

Is For Britain the far right extremist group led by a former Labour Party member and parliamentary candidate?

 

 

[melthebell 862]

So, we're asking for an extension until the end of June, lol, 29th March looks so far away

[alchresearch 214]

8 hours ago, Top Cats Hat said:

For all those predicting a rush to the far-right after Brexit didn’t happen, ‘For Britain’ came a pathetic 11th out of 11 candidates in the Newport by election with less than 1% of the vote! 😂

Yet UKIP did OK.

[Magilla 510]

9 hours ago, apelike said:

People did know what they were voting for and at the time there was never any mention of any deal at all only leave the EU. The idea was then put forward much later after the referendum of leaving with a negotiated deal instead, and because of that idea leaving without a deal also came into play.

*Every* leave campaign campaigned on getting a deal, and how easy and great that deal would be.

 

We had everything from "car makers will force the EU" to "they need us more than we need them".

 

Any suggestion of not getting that deal, despite the obvious flaws, was delcared "project fear".

 

No one voted for no-deal, it was explicitely and repeatedly ruled out by all the campaigns on the winning side.

 

9 hours ago, apelike said:

The remainers then capitalised on that trying to falsely make out and twisting the idea that the people voting leave didnt know what they were voting for and didnt vote for leaving without a deal.

They couldn't have done, according to the leave campaigns it was never on offer!

 

9 hours ago, apelike said:

Both assumptions are wrong as at that time a deal was never mentioned and never on the cards as the timing of events shows.

Revisionist nonsense.

 

9 hours ago, apelike said:

 

In one of the Electoral Commission Reports and surveys reported in Sept 2016, also taken note of by the Lords in a referendum briefing paper, it states quite clearly that 75% of the population that voted knew what they were voting for. I would rather believe that report and them than believe an ardent remainer who just craves for attention on twitter. 

 

Some quotes from that report:

[snip]

*Thought* they knew what they were voting for... an important distinction.