I know you live abroad, but the idea that most mass media-tv, radio and press, were pro Brexit in the run-up to the referendum is plain absurd.
I won't labour the point but my consumption of British media is entirely unaffected by my location. And I consume a lot of it.
The idea that the Sun, the Star the Mail, the Express, the Telegraph, the Spectator, various shock jocks on LBC and Talk Radio were not pro Brexit is equally absurd. And that is before we begin to consider the poisonous Russian funded dross that infects people's Facebook feeds, which by its nature isn't even seen by a lot of people.
I've given a lot of thought to the roots of populism. Of course we all should. Why don't you start a thread on it? And spending time on the Continent means that I've come to realise something you may not have done. The socio-demographic make up of the populist vote is very similar across many different countries. But interestingly, the successful trigger points populist agenda in each country are quite different and, of course led by national issues. If you think that all the populists across Europe are all banging on about the EU to the extent that our populists are, you are very much mistaken. Perhaps you should try reading the English version of Spiegel if you want to understand the AfD vote, rather than relying on the Telegraph. For example.
I don't seek to insult people, as individuals. I can't easily tell on here much about someone's background or the extent or source of their "disenchantment" unless they write about it. I might however be so annoyed by the views some people express that I respond by calling them drivel. Whether that is some of your Brexit related views of the world, or whether it is some idiot claiming that we should be signing better strikers than Josh Magennis. I don't see why on CL we should respond more cautiously to someone's views on politics than to their views about football. If anything it should be the other way round, surely?
Yet more evidence that the EU Commission is not all powerful and that the member states retain control (even if, as it happens, I agree with you @stonemuse, they make bad decisions when exercising that control).
This thread is boring now, it shows why brexit was voted for...
Those that were meant to be informing the public of their choices for either side spent their whole campaign squabbling like children, launching insults and generally confusing the masses. This has continued both between voters and politicians now instead.
Fact is too many young people didn't bother to vote, the majority of older people still managed to get out and vote despite infirmities and frailties, simply showing they cared more about getting their vote down on paper... Whilst the younger generation skipped the vote expecting others to pick up their slack as usual.
Fingers crossed we achieve either a deal that makes us, or the whole thing is pulled to protect the national interests.
This thread is boring now, it shows why brexit was voted for...
Those that were meant to be informing the public of their choices for either side spent their whole campaign squabbling like children, launching insults and generally confusing the masses. This has continued both between voters and politicians now instead.
Fact is too many young people didn't bother to vote, the majority of older people still managed to get out and vote despite infirmities and frailties, simply showing they cared more about getting their vote down on paper... Whilst the younger generation skipped the vote expecting others to pick up their slack as usual.
Fingers crossed we achieve either a deal that makes us, or the whole thing is pulled to protect the national interests.
...Fact is too many young people didn't bother to vote, the majority of older people still managed to get out and vote despite infirmities and frailties, simply showing they cared more about getting their vote down on paper... Whilst the younger generation skipped the vote expecting others to pick up their slack as usual...
Definitely something in this. In my polling station I'm always impressed with the number of old, many with serious health problems, who get out to vote: The Brexit referendum was the same as ever in this respect. I think a real difference in this election was the comparative levels of excitement of the Brexiteers and Remainers. Those who wanted out were genuinely excited that they had the opportunity to vote for change. Those who wanted to remain were all a bit MEH about it. They already had what they wanted. I was convinced at the time, and have seen nothing to sway me since, that the overall percentage of people in the country who wanted to remain was higher higher that the percentage that wanted to leave. The trouble was that it's not as exciting voting for more of the same as it is voting for something different. This doesn't usually matter too much for general elections as the effect will pull one way and then the other. It is though one of several reason why constitutional matters need a safe-guard in the system (two thirds/second vote/ratification...) sadly we never had this and so we have to live with a skewed result.
@Southbank has frequently used that phrase, and presumably had them in mind when he wrote (my emphasis in bold)
"And unfortunately in the process it comes across as despising ordinary people who voted for Brexit and painting them as stupid and gullible. Is the idea, do you think, that if you insult people for long enought they will change their minds?"
Right then. Here is a serious test. For those of you who think Remainers are "The out of touch metropolitan elite", let's define what you actually mean by the phrase, in terms of the debate on Charlton Life and its most regular posters. Based on your perceptions, please explain why you think a certain Lifer is OOTME and another not. To help start it, i'll just name some regular posters to the Brexit threads
And anyone else I've missed who regularly reflects the spectrum of opinion
"Metropolitan" is interesting because if we are all Charlton supporters it surely means we were all born and raised in a great metropolis. "Out of touch" will be more difficult because if you disagree with a Remain poster, you may automatically think he or she is "out of touch". Is there a Remain poster whom you think is not out of touch, whereas someone, say me, is? What's the difference between them?
Which then brings us to "elite". This will be the interesting one. Who on CL is in the elite, and who is not? Most importantly why do you put them there? Define it. What are the criteria? Perceived wealth? Education? Command of the language? Perceived reasons why the Lifer has good reason to be "disenchanted" while another one does not?
Let's try to keep it civil (if you want to let rip at OOTME types, and you think I symbolise them, by all means let rip at me, but tell me why you put me in that group).
I think it's about time that jibe was brought out in the open and thoroughly examined (and not just on CL). Who is ready to give it a go?
Unfortunately Prague I doubt metropolitan applies to me, I'm one of those Kent Addicks. Maybe on a clear day I can make out Canary Wharf's top light from the West wing of my stately home.
@Southbank has frequently used that phrase, and presumably had them in mind when he wrote (my emphasis in bold)
"And unfortunately in the process it comes across as despising ordinary people who voted for Brexit and painting them as stupid and gullible. Is the idea, do you think, that if you insult people for long enought they will change their minds?"
Right then. Here is a serious test. For those of you who think Remainers are "The out of touch metropolitan elite", let's define what you actually mean by the phrase, in terms of the debate on Charlton Life and its most regular posters. Based on your perceptions, please explain why you think a certain Lifer is OOTME and another not. To help start it, i'll just name some regular posters to the Brexit threads
And anyone else I've missed who regularly reflects the spectrum of opinion
"Metropolitan" is interesting because if we are all Charlton supporters it surely means we were all born and raised in a great metropolis. "Out of touch" will be more difficult because if you disagree with a Remain poster, you may automatically think he or she is "out of touch". Is there a Remain poster whom you think is not out of touch, whereas someone, say me, is? What's the difference between them?
Which then brings us to "elite". This will be the interesting one. Who on CL is in the elite, and who is not? Most importantly why do you put them there? Define it. What are the criteria? Perceived wealth? Education? Command of the language? Perceived reasons why the Lifer has good reason to be "disenchanted" while another one does not?
Let's try to keep it civil (if you want to let rip at OOTME types, and you think I symbolise them, by all means let rip at me, but tell me why you put me in that group).
I think it's about time that jibe was brought out in the open and thoroughly examined (and not just on CL). Who is ready to give it a go?
I don't believe anyone has to give any evidence or reasoning for their accusations/claims anymore.
It would seem the onus is now on the requester to trawl back through the pages to prove that what someone else is claiming is actually false.
Either that or you just have to take their word for it.
Those two scenarios have played out and worked recently for two prominent posters on these sort of threads who, when challenged to provide evidence of a claim, either ran away or claimed the burden of proof for their claim sat with others.
If you challenge this mindset then you are both boring and obsessive
@Southbank has frequently used that phrase, and presumably had them in mind when he wrote (my emphasis in bold)
"And unfortunately in the process it comes across as despising ordinary people who voted for Brexit and painting them as stupid and gullible. Is the idea, do you think, that if you insult people for long enought they will change their minds?"
Right then. Here is a serious test. For those of you who think Remainers are "The out of touch metropolitan elite", let's define what you actually mean by the phrase, in terms of the debate on Charlton Life and its most regular posters. Based on your perceptions, please explain why you think a certain Lifer is OOTME and another not. To help start it, i'll just name some regular posters to the Brexit threads
And anyone else I've missed who regularly reflects the spectrum of opinion
"Metropolitan" is interesting because if we are all Charlton supporters it surely means we were all born and raised in a great metropolis. "Out of touch" will be more difficult because if you disagree with a Remain poster, you may automatically think he or she is "out of touch". Is there a Remain poster whom you think is not out of touch, whereas someone, say me, is? What's the difference between them?
Which then brings us to "elite". This will be the interesting one. Who on CL is in the elite, and who is not? Most importantly why do you put them there? Define it. What are the criteria? Perceived wealth? Education? Command of the language? Perceived reasons why the Lifer has good reason to be "disenchanted" while another one does not?
Let's try to keep it civil (if you want to let rip at OOTME types, and you think I symbolise them, by all means let rip at me, but tell me why you put me in that group).
I think it's about time that jibe was brought out in the open and thoroughly examined (and not just on CL). Who is ready to give it a go?
So you want me to define a phrase I have never used?
@Southbank has frequently used that phrase, and presumably had them in mind when he wrote (my emphasis in bold)
"And unfortunately in the process it comes across as despising ordinary people who voted for Brexit and painting them as stupid and gullible. Is the idea, do you think, that if you insult people for long enought they will change their minds?"
Right then. Here is a serious test. For those of you who think Remainers are "The out of touch metropolitan elite", let's define what you actually mean by the phrase, in terms of the debate on Charlton Life and its most regular posters. Based on your perceptions, please explain why you think a certain Lifer is OOTME and another not. To help start it, i'll just name some regular posters to the Brexit threads
And anyone else I've missed who regularly reflects the spectrum of opinion
"Metropolitan" is interesting because if we are all Charlton supporters it surely means we were all born and raised in a great metropolis. "Out of touch" will be more difficult because if you disagree with a Remain poster, you may automatically think he or she is "out of touch". Is there a Remain poster whom you think is not out of touch, whereas someone, say me, is? What's the difference between them?
Which then brings us to "elite". This will be the interesting one. Who on CL is in the elite, and who is not? Most importantly why do you put them there? Define it. What are the criteria? Perceived wealth? Education? Command of the language? Perceived reasons why the Lifer has good reason to be "disenchanted" while another one does not?
Let's try to keep it civil (if you want to let rip at OOTME types, and you think I symbolise them, by all means let rip at me, but tell me why you put me in that group).
I think it's about time that jibe was brought out in the open and thoroughly examined (and not just on CL). Who is ready to give it a go?
So you want me to define a phrase I have never used?
Weird.
I didn't assume you used the phrase. Do you believe that most Remainers can be categorised as "OOTME"? If not, then case closed in terms of your view on the use of the phrase.
However the main reason why I included you in the list was quite different. As far as I am aware you and I are much the same age, from the way you write I perceive you to have a similar educational background, and a similar overall standard of living. We sit on different sides of the Brexit argument. So I wanted to see if someone who believes in this OOTME, puts me in that category but not you, especially when it comes to the definition of the word "elite".
@Southbank has frequently used that phrase, and presumably had them in mind when he wrote (my emphasis in bold)
"And unfortunately in the process it comes across as despising ordinary people who voted for Brexit and painting them as stupid and gullible. Is the idea, do you think, that if you insult people for long enought they will change their minds?"
Right then. Here is a serious test. For those of you who think Remainers are "The out of touch metropolitan elite", let's define what you actually mean by the phrase, in terms of the debate on Charlton Life and its most regular posters. Based on your perceptions, please explain why you think a certain Lifer is OOTME and another not. To help start it, i'll just name some regular posters to the Brexit threads
And anyone else I've missed who regularly reflects the spectrum of opinion
"Metropolitan" is interesting because if we are all Charlton supporters it surely means we were all born and raised in a great metropolis. "Out of touch" will be more difficult because if you disagree with a Remain poster, you may automatically think he or she is "out of touch". Is there a Remain poster whom you think is not out of touch, whereas someone, say me, is? What's the difference between them?
Which then brings us to "elite". This will be the interesting one. Who on CL is in the elite, and who is not? Most importantly why do you put them there? Define it. What are the criteria? Perceived wealth? Education? Command of the language? Perceived reasons why the Lifer has good reason to be "disenchanted" while another one does not?
Let's try to keep it civil (if you want to let rip at OOTME types, and you think I symbolise them, by all means let rip at me, but tell me why you put me in that group).
I think it's about time that jibe was brought out in the open and thoroughly examined (and not just on CL). Who is ready to give it a go?
So you want me to define a phrase I have never used?
Anyone categorising the Remain vote as the sole preserve of the bourgeoisie, and the Leave vote as the sole preserve of lower-income working sorts, has it very, very badly wrong. A lot of poor people voted Remain and a fuckload of rich bastards voted Leave
...Fact is too many young people didn't bother to vote, the majority of older people still managed to get out and vote despite infirmities and frailties, simply showing they cared more about getting their vote down on paper... Whilst the younger generation skipped the vote expecting others to pick up their slack as usual...
Definitely something in this. In my polling station I'm always impressed with the number of old, many with serious health problems, who get out to vote: The Brexit referendum was the same as ever in this respect. I think a real difference in this election was the comparative levels of excitement of the Brexiteers and Remainers. Those who wanted out were genuinely excited that they had the opportunity to vote for change. Those who wanted to remain were all a bit MEH about it. They already had what they wanted. I was convinced at the time, and have seen nothing to sway me since, that the overall percentage of people in the country who wanted to remain was higher higher that the percentage that wanted to leave. The trouble was that it's not as exciting voting for more of the same as it is voting for something different. This doesn't usually matter too much for general elections as the effect will pull one way and then the other. It is though one of several reason why constitutional matters need a safe-guard in the system (two thirds/second vote/ratification...) sadly we never had this and so we have to live with a skewed result.
It's of note, is it not, that no decisions of one parliament are binding on a later one? Which is why there is a never-ending churn of new legislation with old legislation being repealed.
Yet, in this matter, the people (albeit in abject ignorance) have made a choice and that cannot and should not be over-turned? Why? The question we were asked (which I'll come back) to was just a hokey cokey in out shake it all about question). There was precious little in the way of actual facts (not even a mention of Gibraltar) on all the different facets of what in/out meant or indeed what type of out was on offer - we still don't know this! It has all been and continues to be a democratic disaster.
The question: it was heavily - and probably properly - changed by The Electoral Commission. It is almost certain in my view that the original question would have achieved a remain result. In any event, in putting forward its recommendation to change the question, which was accepted by Government, the Commission did a number of focus groups and interviews with Joe Public. Here's a few snippets from their paper. Some voters didn't know we were in the EU. (Yes, really). Some thought that by voting remain, they would be voting for joining the Euro as well as remaining in the EU, some thought they were being asked if we should join.
And finally, a few quotes from the focus groups:
“For people like me it needs a bit more understanding…European Union…I just can’t get my head around what that means.”
“Membership is a bit loose, nobody really knows what it means to be a member; what are the costs, what are the benefits? I think there should be some information in simple English so that everybody understands what the situation means.”
“I think people need to understand the repercussions if they say yes or no.”
“It’s obviously something you know you’re aware of, but you don’t actually know what you’re ticking yes to.”
“If you’re not a member of the European Union what would you be then?”
“I think there should be another box saying undecided or some word like that because you’re not giving people a choice.”
“There should be an option, like ‘negotiate more terms…do you sever all ties or do you stay but lose the membership?”
It seems clear, then, from people's views that a very significant number felt they were being asked a question when they did not know what the potential outcomes were. The whole process has been and remains an unedifying spectacle.
BTW, 76% of those that would like a return of the death penalty also voted leave. And yet, Parliament does not give us a referendum on that matter does it? Trusting the people has never been a sensible plan.
Brexit was a vote for change, a rejection of the status quo. Remainers who do not want change, do not want to challenge the status quo consider Brexit voters stupid for voting for change without being able to control what the change would deliver. Bloomberg backs you up to the hilt, as would anyone whose life is run by statistics.
It is elitism to believe your views backed up by elite economists cannot be dismissed. Only stupid people would say I don’t give shit a about statistics, Giving a shit about where the EU is heading is stupid. You must be stupid not to trust the EU to better your life and to criticise its contrived democratic processes.
You must be stupid to think the EU is dominated by Germany’s interests, or that the likes of Lithuania have any power to affect the UK’s interests. Worse still, that allows you to be called racist.
Metropolitan is just reflecting the majority demographic of urban Remain voters.
One poster was so embarrassed at getting caught in his lie he's stopped posting.
That or learning to fly a Boeing down the local library didn't play out too well.
That's out of order imo. He objected to the implication that he was making up what he saw as a direct impact of Brexit on his own business. He wasnt making some vague claim or stating a more general point on the wider economy that could be subject to challenge. He just said that a particular cost component of his own business had increased in price.
I don't think he expected to be called out as a liar and to have to provide more detail on what he had in front of him and what was effecting his business.
I know he had the documents proving his point and was going to upload them to shut up those accusing him of lying, like yourself, but came to the conclusion that he shouldn't really have to do this on CL and as a result has decided not to post for now. I hope that he takes a break and comes back.
Brexiteers seem very keen on demanding evidence when it suits but less keen on taking note of anything that doesn't support their view. Imo of course.
One poster was so embarrassed at getting caught in his lie he's stopped posting.
That or learning to fly a Boeing down the local library didn't play out too well.
That's out of order imo. He objected to the implication that he was making up what he saw as a direct impact of Brexit on his own business. He wasnt making some vague claim or stating a more general point on the wider economy that could be subject to challenge. He just said that a particular cost component of his own business had increased in price.
I don't think he expected to be called out as a liar and to have to provide more detail on what he had in front of him and what was effecting his business.
I know he had the documents proving his point and was going to upload them to shut up those accussing him of lying, like yourself, but came to the conclusion that he shouldn't really have to do this on CL and as a result has decided not to post for now. I hope that he takes a break and comes back.
Brexiteers seem very keen on demanding evidence when it suits but less keen on taking note of anything that doesn't support their view. Imo of course.
Unfortunately I do not see a source for those statistics in the link. If the stats are true, they only reflect registered voters... This does not account for the huge percentage of people who could have registered but simply didn't bother or didn't see the importance of registering ahead of time,
...Fact is too many young people didn't bother to vote, the majority of older people still managed to get out and vote despite infirmities and frailties, simply showing they cared more about getting their vote down on paper... Whilst the younger generation skipped the vote expecting others to pick up their slack as usual...
Definitely something in this. In my polling station I'm always impressed with the number of old, many with serious health problems, who get out to vote: The Brexit referendum was the same as ever in this respect. I think a real difference in this election was the comparative levels of excitement of the Brexiteers and Remainers. Those who wanted out were genuinely excited that they had the opportunity to vote for change. Those who wanted to remain were all a bit MEH about it. They already had what they wanted. I was convinced at the time, and have seen nothing to sway me since, that the overall percentage of people in the country who wanted to remain was higher higher that the percentage that wanted to leave. The trouble was that it's not as exciting voting for more of the same as it is voting for something different. This doesn't usually matter too much for general elections as the effect will pull one way and then the other. It is though one of several reason why constitutional matters need a safe-guard in the system (two thirds/second vote/ratification...) sadly we never had this and so we have to live with a skewed result.
1. I am still fairly certain I was one of only a handful (maybe 10?) people from teens to late 20's that were queuing at my polling station. This was not just for the last election (a Horsham polling station), but also for the referendum (a Horley polling station), this was despite there being maybe 75-100 people queuing up to vote at each polling station.
2. I think this is a fantastic point that seems to have been forgotten...
The out vote was a lot more passionately championed at the time and it was only the morning of the result that there was such a huge sigh of "what have we done?"
3. This is the final bit that really matters to me in what you have posted - if a majority of politicians truly believe this will genuinely damage the UK's economic welfare, then why can nothing be done to stop it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think an independent report (not the newspaper) needs to be made available once the negotiations have reached the decision point.
It needs to contain all the facts of what has been negotiated, what the costs will be, what the most likely affect is to our economy and in turn our cost to each household of the decision to leave and it is only at this point that a decision should be made, whilst all the facts and costs are available.
The government should then either agree to a final in or out vote knowing that the public would now have all the facts and make it clear that the decision after a fully informed independently detailed report has at least been made available is final.
Our government won't do this though for fear that people will complain about the money wasted reaching this point if article 50 and the Brexit decision were reversed.
So instead we head out, with no choice as to whether we agree with the outcome of May's negotiations. It's almost a backwards way of doing business...
You don't agree to sell off your assets before agreeing the % of assets you want to sell and at what price.
I guess we just have to endure the ride now and see what happens
Anyone categorising the Remain vote as the sole preserve of the bourgeoisie, and the Leave vote as the sole preserve of lower-income working sorts, has it very, very badly wrong. A lot of poor people voted Remain and a fuckload of rich bastards voted Leave
Also there were some old gits like me who voted remain and some young whipper snappers who voted leave. There are a number of the older generation who have a belief that a united Europe aids peace and progress for everybody, sadly not enough of us.
One poster was so embarrassed at getting caught in his lie he's stopped posting.
That or learning to fly a Boeing down the local library didn't play out too well.
That's out of order imo. He objected to the implication that he was making up what he saw as a direct impact of Brexit on his own business. He wasnt making some vague claim or stating a more general point on the wider economy that could be subject to challenge. He just said that a particular cost component of his own business had increased in price.
I don't think he expected to be called out as a liar and to have to provide more detail on what he had in front of him and what was effecting his business.
I know he had the documents proving his point and was going to upload them to shut up those accussing him of lying, like yourself, but came to the conclusion that he shouldn't really have to do this on CL and as a result has decided not to post for now. I hope that he takes a break and comes back.
Brexiteers seem very keen on demanding evidence when it suits but less keen on taking note of anything that doesn't support their view. Imo of course.
Which would all be fine, apart from the fact he's demanded evidence from others in the past.
If it was a brexit voter doing the same, I'm not convinced you'd be as happy just to take them at face value.
Brexit was a vote for change, a rejection of the status quo. Remainers who do not want change, do not want to challenge the status quo consider Brexit voters stupid for voting for change without being able to control what the change would deliver. Bloomberg backs you up to the hilt, as would anyone whose life is run by statistics.
It is elitism to believe your views backed up by elite economists cannot be dismissed. Only stupid people would say I don’t give shit a about statistics, Giving a shit about where the EU is heading is stupid. You must be stupid not to trust the EU to better your life and to criticise its contrived democratic processes.
You must be stupid to think the EU is dominated by Germany’s interests, or that the likes of Lithuania have any power to affect the UK’s interests. Worse still, that allows you to be called racist.
Metropolitan is just reflecting the majority demographic of urban Remain voters.
Dippenhall I admire your consistency. The philosophical divide between you and I is probably that you are a nationalist but I am an internationalist.
In that sense the (let's leave implied racism out of this) nationalists won, the (let's leave criticism of other countries out of this) internationalists lost.
It is what it is.
What we are left with looks like an unholy mess that nobody in the UK seems to be able to sort out. It is my contention that the UK has to make 100% of the running on this because Brexit was 100% a UK decision.
One poster was so embarrassed at getting caught in his lie he's stopped posting.
That or learning to fly a Boeing down the local library didn't play out too well.
That's out of order imo. He objected to the implication that he was making up what he saw as a direct impact of Brexit on his own business. He wasnt making some vague claim or stating a more general point on the wider economy that could be subject to challenge. He just said that a particular cost component of his own business had increased in price.
I don't think he expected to be called out as a liar and to have to provide more detail on what he had in front of him and what was effecting his business.
I know he had the documents proving his point and was going to upload them to shut up those accusing him of lying, like yourself, but came to the conclusion that he shouldn't really have to do this on CL and as a result has decided not to post for now. I hope that he takes a break and comes back.
Brexiteers seem very keen on demanding evidence when it suits but less keen on taking note of anything that doesn't support their view. Imo of course.
that did go a bit far but I believe the original challenge was to name the material that had doubled in cost not provide any business receipts etc.
Unfortunately I do not see a source for those statistics in the link. If the stats are true, they only reflect registered voters... This does not account for the huge percentage of people who could have registered but simply didn't bother or didn't see the importance of registering ahead of time,
...Fact is too many young people didn't bother to vote, the majority of older people still managed to get out and vote despite infirmities and frailties, simply showing they cared more about getting their vote down on paper... Whilst the younger generation skipped the vote expecting others to pick up their slack as usual...
Definitely something in this. In my polling station I'm always impressed with the number of old, many with serious health problems, who get out to vote: The Brexit referendum was the same as ever in this respect. I think a real difference in this election was the comparative levels of excitement of the Brexiteers and Remainers. Those who wanted out were genuinely excited that they had the opportunity to vote for change. Those who wanted to remain were all a bit MEH about it. They already had what they wanted. I was convinced at the time, and have seen nothing to sway me since, that the overall percentage of people in the country who wanted to remain was higher higher that the percentage that wanted to leave. The trouble was that it's not as exciting voting for more of the same as it is voting for something different. This doesn't usually matter too much for general elections as the effect will pull one way and then the other. It is though one of several reason why constitutional matters need a safe-guard in the system (two thirds/second vote/ratification...) sadly we never had this and so we have to live with a skewed result.
1. I am still fairly certain I was one of only a handful (maybe 10?) people from teens to late 20's that were queuing at my polling station. This was not just for the last election (a Horsham polling station), but also for the referendum (a Horley polling station), this was despite there being maybe 75-100 people queuing up to vote at each polling station.
2. I think this is a fantastic point that seems to have been forgotten...
The out vote was a lot more passionately championed at the time and it was only the morning of the result that there was such a huge sigh of "what have we done?"
3. This is the final bit that really matters to me in what you have posted - if a majority of politicians truly believe this will genuinely damage the UK's economic welfare, then why can nothing be done to stop it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think an independent report (not the newspaper) needs to be made available once the negotiations have reached the decision point.
It needs to contain all the facts of what has been negotiated, what the costs will be, what the most likely affect is to our economy and in turn our cost to each household of the decision to leave and it is only at this point that a decision should be made, whilst all the facts and costs are available.
The government should then either agree to a final in or out vote knowing that the public would now have all the facts and make it clear that the decision after a fully informed independently detailed report has at least been made available is final.
Our government won't do this though for fear that people will complain about the money wasted reaching this point if article 50 and the Brexit decision were reversed.
So instead we head out, with no choice as to whether we agree with the outcome of May's negotiations. It's almost a backwards way of doing business...
You don't agree to sell off your assets before agreeing the % of assets you want to sell and at what price.
I guess we just have to endure the ride now and see what happens
For the record I'm in agreement that turnout among older voters has, was and will almost always be higher than the younger demographic. It's just, in the case if last year's referendum the turnout for younger voters seemed to have been, initially, grossly underestimated. This has led to this perception that the younger voters couldn't be bothered, when their turnout appears to be less than for other demographics but not to the perceived extent.
One poster was so embarrassed at getting caught in his lie he's stopped posting.
That or learning to fly a Boeing down the local library didn't play out too well.
That's out of order imo. He objected to the implication that he was making up what he saw as a direct impact of Brexit on his own business. He wasnt making some vague claim or stating a more general point on the wider economy that could be subject to challenge. He just said that a particular cost component of his own business had increased in price.
I don't think he expected to be called out as a liar and to have to provide more detail on what he had in front of him and what was effecting his business.
I know he had the documents proving his point and was going to upload them to shut up those accussing him of lying, like yourself, but came to the conclusion that he shouldn't really have to do this on CL and as a result has decided not to post for now. I hope that he takes a break and comes back.
Brexiteers seem very keen on demanding evidence when it suits but less keen on taking note of anything that doesn't support their view. Imo of course.
Which would all be fine, apart from the fact he's demanded evidence from others in the past.
If it was a brexit voter doing the same, I'm not convinced you'd be as happy just to take them at face value.
The problem was the poster demanding this evidence was a Brexit troll who regularly pops up on this forum under different names (this time AstoriaAddick) before getting banned. And the evidence being demanded was private/personal and relating to his business which he had every right to choose not to reveal. Yet another example of false equivalency.
One poster was so embarrassed at getting caught in his lie he's stopped posting.
That or learning to fly a Boeing down the local library didn't play out too well.
That's out of order imo. He objected to the implication that he was making up what he saw as a direct impact of Brexit on his own business. He wasnt making some vague claim or stating a more general point on the wider economy that could be subject to challenge. He just said that a particular cost component of his own business had increased in price.
I don't think he expected to be called out as a liar and to have to provide more detail on what he had in front of him and what was effecting his business.
I know he had the documents proving his point and was going to upload them to shut up those accussing him of lying, like yourself, but came to the conclusion that he shouldn't really have to do this on CL and as a result has decided not to post for now. I hope that he takes a break and comes back.
Brexiteers seem very keen on demanding evidence when it suits but less keen on taking note of anything that doesn't support their view. Imo of course.
That cuts both ways. Imo of course.
Of course Len. It's just it seems overwhelmingly one sided in terms of facts and figures against leaving the moment. Maybe that will change in time and I genuinely hope it does and we start to see some verifiable positives as an outcome.
One poster was so embarrassed at getting caught in his lie he's stopped posting.
That or learning to fly a Boeing down the local library didn't play out too well.
That's out of order imo. He objected to the implication that he was making up what he saw as a direct impact of Brexit on his own business. He wasnt making some vague claim or stating a more general point on the wider economy that could be subject to challenge. He just said that a particular cost component of his own business had increased in price.
I don't think he expected to be called out as a liar and to have to provide more detail on what he had in front of him and what was effecting his business.
I know he had the documents proving his point and was going to upload them to shut up those accussing him of lying, like yourself, but came to the conclusion that he shouldn't really have to do this on CL and as a result has decided not to post for now. I hope that he takes a break and comes back.
Brexiteers seem very keen on demanding evidence when it suits but less keen on taking note of anything that doesn't support their view. Imo of course.
Which would all be fine, apart from the fact he's demanded evidence from others in the past.
If it was a brexit voter doing the same, I'm not convinced you'd be as happy just to take them at face value.
The problem was the poster demanding this evidence was a Brexit troll who regularly pops up on this forum under different names (this time AstoriaAddick) before getting banned. And the evidence being demanded was private/personal and relating to his business which he had every right to choose not to reveal. Yet another example of false equivalency.
Several people, including AFKA asked for clarification as to what had doubled in price, simply stating what it was would have satisfied most. Anyone coming on here making claims like that should expect to be challenged, no matter what side of the argument they sit.
The poster is question also has a history of making ridiculous claims, which night have added to some asking him to clarify.
One poster was so embarrassed at getting caught in his lie he's stopped posting.
That or learning to fly a Boeing down the local library didn't play out too well.
That's out of order imo. He objected to the implication that he was making up what he saw as a direct impact of Brexit on his own business. He wasnt making some vague claim or stating a more general point on the wider economy that could be subject to challenge. He just said that a particular cost component of his own business had increased in price.
I don't think he expected to be called out as a liar and to have to provide more detail on what he had in front of him and what was effecting his business.
I know he had the documents proving his point and was going to upload them to shut up those accussing him of lying, like yourself, but came to the conclusion that he shouldn't really have to do this on CL and as a result has decided not to post for now. I hope that he takes a break and comes back.
Brexiteers seem very keen on demanding evidence when it suits but less keen on taking note of anything that doesn't support their view. Imo of course.
Which would all be fine, apart from the fact he's demanded evidence from others in the past.
If it was a brexit voter doing the same, I'm not convinced you'd be as happy just to take them at face value.
The problem was the poster demanding this evidence was a Brexit troll who regularly pops up on this forum under different names (this time AstoriaAddick) before getting banned. And the evidence being demanded was private/personal and relating to his business which he had every right to choose not to reveal. Yet another example of false equivalency.
Thats not true - it was me that raised it originally and all I asked for was the name of the commodity as it could impact on my business.
Comments
I won't labour the point but my consumption of British media is entirely unaffected by my location. And I consume a lot of it.
The idea that the Sun, the Star the Mail, the Express, the Telegraph, the Spectator, various shock jocks on LBC and Talk Radio were not pro Brexit is equally absurd. And that is before we begin to consider the poisonous Russian funded dross that infects people's Facebook feeds, which by its nature isn't even seen by a lot of people.
I've given a lot of thought to the roots of populism. Of course we all should. Why don't you start a thread on it? And spending time on the Continent means that I've come to realise something you may not have done. The socio-demographic make up of the populist vote is very similar across many different countries. But interestingly, the successful trigger points populist agenda in each country are quite different and, of course led by national issues. If you think that all the populists across Europe are all banging on about the EU to the extent that our populists are, you are very much mistaken. Perhaps you should try reading the English version of Spiegel if you want to understand the AfD vote, rather than relying on the Telegraph. For example.
I don't seek to insult people, as individuals. I can't easily tell on here much about someone's background or the extent or source of their "disenchantment" unless they write about it. I might however be so annoyed by the views some people express that I respond by calling them drivel. Whether that is some of your Brexit related views of the world, or whether it is some idiot claiming that we should be signing better strikers than Josh Magennis. I don't see why on CL we should respond more cautiously to someone's views on politics than to their views about football. If anything it should be the other way round, surely?
Those that were meant to be informing the public of their choices for either side spent their whole campaign squabbling like children, launching insults and generally confusing the masses. This has continued both between voters and politicians now instead.
Fact is too many young people didn't bother to vote, the majority of older people still managed to get out and vote despite infirmities and frailties, simply showing they cared more about getting their vote down on paper... Whilst the younger generation skipped the vote expecting others to pick up their slack as usual.
Fingers crossed we achieve either a deal that makes us, or the whole thing is pulled to protect the national interests.
m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/brexit-food-crisps-gove-drink_uk_59ef6c1ae4b04917c5938930?ncid=tweetlnkukhpmg00000008&utm_hp_ref=uk-homepage
@Southbank has frequently used that phrase, and presumably had them in mind when he wrote (my emphasis in bold)
"And unfortunately in the process it comes across as despising ordinary people who voted for Brexit and painting them as stupid and gullible. Is the idea, do you think, that if you insult people for long enought they will change their minds?"
Right then. Here is a serious test. For those of you who think Remainers are "The out of touch metropolitan elite", let's define what you actually mean by the phrase, in terms of the debate on Charlton Life and its most regular posters. Based on your perceptions, please explain why you think a certain Lifer is OOTME and another not. To help start it, i'll just name some regular posters to the Brexit threads
Me, obviously
@Dippenhall
@Bournemouth Addick
@stonemuse
@ShootersHillGuru
@Southbank
@Cordoban Addick
@Chippycafc
@Addickted
@Fiiish
@Covered End
And anyone else I've missed who regularly reflects the spectrum of opinion
"Metropolitan" is interesting because if we are all Charlton supporters it surely means we were all born and raised in a great metropolis. "Out of touch" will be more difficult because if you disagree with a Remain poster, you may automatically think he or she is "out of touch". Is there a Remain poster whom you think is not out of touch, whereas someone, say me, is? What's the difference between them?
Which then brings us to "elite". This will be the interesting one. Who on CL is in the elite, and who is not? Most importantly why do you put them there? Define it. What are the criteria? Perceived wealth? Education? Command of the language? Perceived reasons why the Lifer has good reason to be "disenchanted" while another one does not?
Let's try to keep it civil (if you want to let rip at OOTME types, and you think I symbolise them, by all means let rip at me, but tell me why you put me in that group).
I think it's about time that jibe was brought out in the open and thoroughly examined (and not just on CL). Who is ready to give it a go?
It would seem the onus is now on the requester to trawl back through the pages to prove that what someone else is claiming is actually false.
Either that or you just have to take their word for it.
Those two scenarios have played out and worked recently for two prominent posters on these sort of threads who, when challenged to provide evidence of a claim, either ran away or claimed the burden of proof for their claim sat with others.
If you challenge this mindset then you are both boring and obsessive
That or learning to fly a Boeing down the local library didn't play out too well.
Weird.
However the main reason why I included you in the list was quite different. As far as I am aware you and I are much the same age, from the way you write I perceive you to have a similar educational background, and a similar overall standard of living. We sit on different sides of the Brexit argument. So I wanted to see if someone who believes in this OOTME, puts me in that category but not you, especially when it comes to the definition of the word "elite".
Still "weird"? If yes, oh well, whatever.
Yet, in this matter, the people (albeit in abject ignorance) have made a choice and that cannot and should not be over-turned? Why? The question we were asked (which I'll come back) to was just a hokey cokey in out shake it all about question). There was precious little in the way of actual facts (not even a mention of Gibraltar) on all the different facets of what in/out meant or indeed what type of out was on offer - we still don't know this! It has all been and continues to be a democratic disaster.
The question: it was heavily - and probably properly - changed by The Electoral Commission. It is almost certain in my view that the original question would have achieved a remain result.
In any event, in putting forward its recommendation to change the question, which was accepted by Government, the Commission did a number of focus groups and interviews with Joe Public. Here's a few snippets from their paper. Some voters didn't know we were in the EU. (Yes, really). Some thought that by voting remain, they would be voting for joining the Euro as well as remaining in the EU, some thought they were being asked if we should join.
And finally, a few quotes from the focus groups:
“For people like me it needs a bit more understanding…European Union…I just can’t get my head around what that means.”
“Membership is a bit loose, nobody really knows what it means to be a member; what are the costs, what are the benefits? I think there should be some information in simple English so that everybody understands what the situation means.”
“I think people need to understand the repercussions if they say yes or no.”
“It’s obviously something you know you’re aware of, but you don’t actually know what you’re ticking yes to.”
“If you’re not a member of the European Union what would you be then?”
“I think there should be another box saying undecided or some word like that because you’re not giving people a choice.”
“There should be an option, like ‘negotiate more terms…do you sever all ties or do you stay but lose the membership?”
It seems clear, then, from people's views that a very significant number felt they were being asked a question when they did not know what the potential outcomes were. The whole process has been and remains an unedifying spectacle.
BTW, 76% of those that would like a return of the death penalty also voted leave. And yet, Parliament does not give us a referendum on that matter does it? Trusting the people has never been a sensible plan.
It is elitism to believe your views backed up by elite economists cannot be dismissed. Only stupid people would say I don’t give shit a about statistics, Giving a shit about where the EU is heading is stupid. You must be stupid not to trust the EU to better your life and to criticise its contrived democratic processes.
You must be stupid to think the EU is dominated by Germany’s interests, or that the likes of Lithuania have any power to affect the UK’s interests. Worse still, that allows you to be called racist.
Metropolitan is just reflecting the majority demographic of urban Remain voters.
I don't think he expected to be called out as a liar and to have to provide more detail on what he had in front of him and what was effecting his business.
I know he had the documents proving his point and was going to upload them to shut up those accusing him of lying, like yourself, but came to the conclusion that he shouldn't really have to do this on CL and as a result has decided not to post for now. I hope that he takes a break and comes back.
Brexiteers seem very keen on demanding evidence when it suits but less keen on taking note of anything that doesn't support their view. Imo of course.
2. I think this is a fantastic point that seems to have been forgotten...
The out vote was a lot more passionately championed at the time and it was only the morning of the result that there was such a huge sigh of "what have we done?"
3. This is the final bit that really matters to me in what you have posted - if a majority of politicians truly believe this will genuinely damage the UK's economic welfare, then why can nothing be done to stop it?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think an independent report (not the newspaper) needs to be made available once the negotiations have reached the decision point.
It needs to contain all the facts of what has been negotiated, what the costs will be, what the most likely affect is to our economy and in turn our cost to each household of the decision to leave and it is only at this point that a decision should be made, whilst all the facts and costs are available.
The government should then either agree to a final in or out vote knowing that the public would now have all the facts and make it clear that the decision after a fully informed independently detailed report has at least been made available is final.
Our government won't do this though for fear that people will complain about the money wasted reaching this point if article 50 and the Brexit decision were reversed.
So instead we head out, with no choice as to whether we agree with the outcome of May's negotiations. It's almost a backwards way of doing business...
You don't agree to sell off your assets before agreeing the % of assets you want to sell and at what price.
I guess we just have to endure the ride now and see what happens
There are a number of the older generation who have a belief that a united Europe aids peace and progress for everybody, sadly not enough of us.
If it was a brexit voter doing the same, I'm not convinced you'd be as happy just to take them at face value.
In that sense the (let's leave implied racism out of this) nationalists won, the (let's leave criticism of other countries out of this) internationalists lost.
It is what it is.
What we are left with looks like an unholy mess that nobody in the UK seems to be able to sort out. It is my contention that the UK has to make 100% of the running on this because Brexit was 100% a UK decision.
m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/eu-referendum-turnout-young-people_uk_57813af5e4b074297db32456
The poster is question also has a history of making ridiculous claims, which night have added to some asking him to clarify.