One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
All these Frank Spencers 'Oooh, what are we going to DO BETTY?' - do they realise how pathetic they sound? MAKE OUR OWN DECISIONS is what we'll do - you know, how two thirds of the world still operates? Leaving the EU is of course a beginning, not an end. But the alternative is no beginning at all. Staying in is no guarantee of any sort of future, merely that we won't have a say in that future. It is absolution from responsibility, not security.
I prefer 'abnegation of responsibility' as the descriptor. But I agree the sentiment.
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
Like three million jobs being lost, exports to EU falling to near absolute zero and the EU saving every family £3000 a year??
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
yes but the problem is your interpretation of the facts.
basically people who are to busy rushing around to have time to think are voting remain whereas more mature people and those with the opportunity for full reflection are voting leave,
One thing to consider is that an awful lot of people who say they'll leave could well completely bottle it in the privacy of the polling booth when they actually have to vote.
I expect a fair bit of that. That's why I discount Leave leads of anything less than 5-6%.
You have to factor in a national Gaylord Ponceyboots factor.
I think that will be offset by young voters who ardent remainers but can't be arsed to get to the ballot box.
I don't get that PoV that sees voting as a waste of time but voting in Big Brother Xfactorstrictlycomedancingonicewank and buying national lottery tickets a valuable use of time.
Well, OK, I sort of do but am amused by the lack of consistency and logic in their answers.
Because you can do all of that voting via a mobile phone, but voting in a real election, you cannot vote via a mobile
It's almost like Cameron considered this before opposing any form of electronic voting in strike ballots, isn't it?
All these Frank Spencers 'Oooh, what are we going to DO BETTY?' - do they realise how pathetic they sound? MAKE OUR OWN DECISIONS is what we'll do - you know, how two thirds of the world still operates? Leaving the EU is of course a beginning, not an end. But the alternative is no beginning at all. Staying in is no guarantee of any sort of future, merely that we won't have a say in that future. It is absolution from responsibility, not security.
The EU is something we participate in, not something that is done to us.
There is an argument that we should leave the EU, but that is dependent on those suggesting that course of action coming up with a coherent alternative. Since that hasn't happened, a decision to leave would be like leaving a dull marriage to an unattractive but reliable middle-aged partner to be ready to frolic naked with the weirdos on the bus: the idea is arresting but the reality is both daunting and ultimately unattractive to anyone who isn't one of the weirdos on the bus.
The marriage analogy is a good one. We're in a marriage that costs us an awful amount of money, stops us seeing our friends and where we're sidelined from most decision making. However, we still are an attractive catch for others on the market, while the wife is suddenly looking worse for wear and getting difficult in her old age. There's a couple of options that show interest in us outside the marriage, but we can't decide which is best in our current state.
Do we hang on in the empty shell of a marriage, or do we start the divorce and have confidence in ourselves to find something better??
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
Lib Dems and Facts. Strange bedfellows. I bet you're itching to post a bar chart with some dodgy stats.
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
yes but the problem is your interpretation of the facts.
basically people who are to busy rushing around to have time to think are voting remain whereas more mature people and those with the opportunity for full reflection are voting leave,
More that many of those who have a job believe ( rightly or wrongly ) they may not have one if we Leave and that those who are retired or do not want a job do not care if jobs are lost .
All these Frank Spencers 'Oooh, what are we going to DO BETTY?' - do they realise how pathetic they sound? MAKE OUR OWN DECISIONS is what we'll do - you know, how two thirds of the world still operates? Leaving the EU is of course a beginning, not an end. But the alternative is no beginning at all. Staying in is no guarantee of any sort of future, merely that we won't have a say in that future. It is absolution from responsibility, not security.
The EU is something we participate in, not something that is done to us.
There is an argument that we should leave the EU, but that is dependent on those suggesting that course of action coming up with a coherent alternative. Since that hasn't happened, a decision to leave would be like leaving a dull marriage to an unattractive but reliable middle-aged partner to be ready to frolic naked with the weirdos on the bus: the idea is arresting but the reality is both daunting and ultimately unattractive to anyone who isn't one of the weirdos on the bus.
Some marriages aren't worth staying in. The alternative needn't be to frolic with anyone for some time. Worst case scenario, we won't have a special trade deal with the EU. Worst case. This will make exporting to the EU a bit harder, and importing from it a bit more expensive. Sorry but I find the prospect of 4% on the price of brie hard to get exercised about.
All these Frank Spencers 'Oooh, what are we going to DO BETTY?' - do they realise how pathetic they sound? MAKE OUR OWN DECISIONS is what we'll do - you know, how two thirds of the world still operates? Leaving the EU is of course a beginning, not an end. But the alternative is no beginning at all. Staying in is no guarantee of any sort of future, merely that we won't have a say in that future. It is absolution from responsibility, not security.
The EU is something we participate in, not something that is done to us.
There is an argument that we should leave the EU, but that is dependent on those suggesting that course of action coming up with a coherent alternative. Since that hasn't happened, a decision to leave would be like leaving a dull marriage to an unattractive but reliable middle-aged partner to be ready to frolic naked with the weirdos on the bus: the idea is arresting but the reality is both daunting and ultimately unattractive to anyone who isn't one of the weirdos on the bus.
The marriage analogy is a good one. We're in a marriage that costs us an awful amount of money, stops us seeing our friends and where we're sidelined from most decision making. However, we still are an attractive catch for others on the market, while the wife is suddenly looking worse for wear and getting difficult in her old age. There's a couple of options that show interest in us outside the marriage, but we can't decide which is best in our current state.
Do we hang on in the empty shell of a marriage, or do we start the divorce and have confidence in ourselves to find something better??
Sounds like you're suffering from a midlife crisis to me.
One thing to consider is that an awful lot of people who say they'll leave could well completely bottle it in the privacy of the polling booth when they actually have to vote.
I expect a fair bit of that. That's why I discount Leave leads of anything less than 5-6%.
You have to factor in a national Gaylord Ponceyboots factor.
I think that will be offset by young voters who ardent remainers but can't be arsed to get to the ballot box.
I don't get that PoV that sees voting as a waste of time but voting in Big Brother Xfactorstrictlycomedancingonicewank and buying national lottery tickets a valuable use of time.
Well, OK, I sort of do but am amused by the lack of consistency and logic in their answers.
Because you can do all of that voting via a mobile phone, but voting in a real election, you cannot vote via a mobile
It's almost like Cameron considered this before opposing any form of electronic voting in strike ballots, isn't it?
Another thing Cameron's got right.
EV should be resisted in all forms at the moment. The tech isn't there to do it safely or securely.
One thing to consider is that an awful lot of people who say they'll leave could well completely bottle it in the privacy of the polling booth when they actually have to vote.
I expect a fair bit of that. That's why I discount Leave leads of anything less than 5-6%.
You have to factor in a national Gaylord Ponceyboots factor.
I think that will be offset by young voters who ardent remainers but can't be arsed to get to the ballot box.
I don't get that PoV that sees voting as a waste of time but voting in Big Brother Xfactorstrictlycomedancingonicewank and buying national lottery tickets a valuable use of time.
Well, OK, I sort of do but am amused by the lack of consistency and logic in their answers.
Because you can do all of that voting via a mobile phone, but voting in a real election, you cannot vote via a mobile
Do you really think we'd see an order of magnitude of difference if voting could be done by phone?
I seem to recall similar discussions long before the age of smartphones.
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
yes but the problem is your interpretation of the facts.
basically people who are to busy rushing around to have time to think are voting remain whereas more mature people and those with the opportunity for full reflection are voting leave,
More that many of those who have a job believe ( rightly or wrongly ) they may not have one if we Leave and that those who are retired or do not want a job do not care if jobs are lost .
many people also believe their livelihood is at risk if we stay in, do their views not count ?
All these Frank Spencers 'Oooh, what are we going to DO BETTY?' - do they realise how pathetic they sound? MAKE OUR OWN DECISIONS is what we'll do - you know, how two thirds of the world still operates? Leaving the EU is of course a beginning, not an end. But the alternative is no beginning at all. Staying in is no guarantee of any sort of future, merely that we won't have a say in that future. It is absolution from responsibility, not security.
The EU is something we participate in, not something that is done to us.
There is an argument that we should leave the EU, but that is dependent on those suggesting that course of action coming up with a coherent alternative. Since that hasn't happened, a decision to leave would be like leaving a dull marriage to an unattractive but reliable middle-aged partner to be ready to frolic naked with the weirdos on the bus: the idea is arresting but the reality is both daunting and ultimately unattractive to anyone who isn't one of the weirdos on the bus.
The marriage analogy is a good one. We're in a marriage that costs us an awful amount of money, stops us seeing our friends and where we're sidelined from most decision making. However, we still are an attractive catch for others on the market, while the wife is suddenly looking worse for wear and getting difficult in her old age. There's a couple of options that show interest in us outside the marriage, but we can't decide which is best in our current state.
Do we hang on in the empty shell of a marriage, or do we start the divorce and have confidence in ourselves to find something better??
Sounds like you're suffering from a midlife crisis to me.
Says the person that dreams of naked frolics with randomers from public transport.
All these Frank Spencers 'Oooh, what are we going to DO BETTY?' - do they realise how pathetic they sound? MAKE OUR OWN DECISIONS is what we'll do - you know, how two thirds of the world still operates? Leaving the EU is of course a beginning, not an end. But the alternative is no beginning at all. Staying in is no guarantee of any sort of future, merely that we won't have a say in that future. It is absolution from responsibility, not security.
The EU is something we participate in, not something that is done to us.
There is an argument that we should leave the EU, but that is dependent on those suggesting that course of action coming up with a coherent alternative. Since that hasn't happened, a decision to leave would be like leaving a dull marriage to an unattractive but reliable middle-aged partner to be ready to frolic naked with the weirdos on the bus: the idea is arresting but the reality is both daunting and ultimately unattractive to anyone who isn't one of the weirdos on the bus.
Well, at least we know now your preferred way of sourcing a new partner should your relationship come to end.
Mr. Jessop, quite. Electronic voting is ridiculous. As Jeff Goldblum might say, they're considering whether or not they could but are neglecting whether or not they should.
All these Frank Spencers 'Oooh, what are we going to DO BETTY?' - do they realise how pathetic they sound? MAKE OUR OWN DECISIONS is what we'll do - you know, how two thirds of the world still operates? Leaving the EU is of course a beginning, not an end. But the alternative is no beginning at all. Staying in is no guarantee of any sort of future, merely that we won't have a say in that future. It is absolution from responsibility, not security.
The EU is something we participate in, not something that is done to us.
There is an argument that we should leave the EU, but that is dependent on those suggesting that course of action coming up with a coherent alternative. Since that hasn't happened, a decision to leave would be like leaving a dull marriage to an unattractive but reliable middle-aged partner to be ready to frolic naked with the weirdos on the bus: the idea is arresting but the reality is both daunting and ultimately unattractive to anyone who isn't one of the weirdos on the bus.
Some marriages aren't worth staying in. The alternative needn't be to frolic with anyone for some time. Worst case scenario, we won't have a special trade deal with the EU. Worst case. This will make exporting to the EU a bit harder, and importing from it a bit more expensive. Sorry but I find the prospect of 4% on the price of brie hard to get exercised about.
Yet another option on the list. Leavers really don't have a clue what they want.
They don't have the ability to accept that there are downsides as well as upsides to leaving the EU. It's this lack of realism that is superabundant on the Leave side which is so offputting.
You can pretty well guarantee that if there were ever a Leave vote, an absolute majority of those voting Leave would be feeling betrayed in short order. That doesn't sound to me like a healthy state of affairs.
One thing to consider is that an awful lot of people who say they'll leave could well completely bottle it in the privacy of the polling booth when they actually have to vote.
I expect a fair bit of that. That's why I discount Leave leads of anything less than 5-6%.
You have to factor in a national Gaylord Ponceyboots factor.
I think that will be offset by young voters who ardent remainers but can't be arsed to get to the ballot box.
I don't get that PoV that sees voting as a waste of time but voting in Big Brother Xfactorstrictlycomedancingonicewank and buying national lottery tickets a valuable use of time.
Well, OK, I sort of do but am amused by the lack of consistency and logic in their answers.
Because you can do all of that voting via a mobile phone, but voting in a real election, you cannot vote via a mobile
It's almost like Cameron considered this before opposing any form of electronic voting in strike ballots, isn't it?
Another thing Cameron's got right.
EV should be resisted in all forms at the moment. The tech isn't there to do it safely or securely.
Not sure I agree from a tech perspective. IIRC Cameron's argument had more to do with moral fibre and "being bothered" to vote in some physical form (which doesn't sit easily with the rush towards compulsory online tax filing for example).
The Labour leadership election, while the source of all sorts of controversy, seemed to get the electronic voting thing fairly well sorted.
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
yes but the problem is your interpretation of the facts.
basically people who are to busy rushing around to have time to think are voting remain whereas more mature people and those with the opportunity for full reflection are voting leave,
More that many of those who have a job believe ( rightly or wrongly ) they may not have one if we Leave and that those who are retired or do not want a job do not care if jobs are lost .
many people also believe their livelihood is at risk if we stay in, do their views not count ?
Are there many ? Perhaps you can provide some figures to show how many think that .
One thing to consider is that an awful lot of people who say they'll leave could well completely bottle it in the privacy of the polling booth when they actually have to vote.
I expect a fair bit of that. That's why I discount Leave leads of anything less than 5-6%.
You have to factor in a national Gaylord Ponceyboots factor.
I think that will be offset by young voters who ardent remainers but can't be arsed to get to the ballot box.
I don't get that PoV that sees voting as a waste of time but voting in Big Brother Xfactorstrictlycomedancingonicewank and buying national lottery tickets a valuable use of time.
Well, OK, I sort of do but am amused by the lack of consistency and logic in their answers.
Because you can do all of that voting via a mobile phone, but voting in a real election, you cannot vote via a mobile
Do you really think we'd see an order of magnitude of difference if voting could be done by phone?
I seem to recall similar discussions long before the age of smartphones.
One thing to consider is that an awful lot of people who say they'll leave could well completely bottle it in the privacy of the polling booth when they actually have to vote.
I expect a fair bit of that. That's why I discount Leave leads of anything less than 5-6%.
You have to factor in a national Gaylord Ponceyboots factor.
I think that will be offset by young voters who ardent remainers but can't be arsed to get to the ballot box.
I don't get that PoV that sees voting as a waste of time but voting in Big Brother Xfactorstrictlycomedancingonicewank and buying national lottery tickets a valuable use of time.
Well, OK, I sort of do but am amused by the lack of consistency and logic in their answers.
Because you can do all of that voting via a mobile phone, but voting in a real election, you cannot vote via a mobile
Do you really think we'd see an order of magnitude of difference if voting could be done by phone?
I seem to recall similar discussions long before the age of smartphones.
It's an interesting question: how much does ease of voting actually alter a vote? Is it possible some people vote differently when filling out a PV than they would if they made their way to a polling station (leaving aside possible coercion in a PV) ?
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
yes but the problem is your interpretation of the facts.
basically people who are to busy rushing around to have time to think are voting remain whereas more mature people and those with the opportunity for full reflection are voting leave,
More that many of those who have a job believe ( rightly or wrongly ) they may not have one if we Leave and that those who are retired or do not want a job do not care if jobs are lost .
many people also believe their livelihood is at risk if we stay in, do their views not count ?
Are there many ? Perhaps you can provide some figures to show how many think that .
There are lots, many of them on this thread, maybe you should try to engage with them instead of trolling.
One thing to consider is that an awful lot of people who say they'll leave could well completely bottle it in the privacy of the polling booth when they actually have to vote.
I expect a fair bit of that. That's why I discount Leave leads of anything less than 5-6%.
You have to factor in a national Gaylord Ponceyboots factor.
I think that will be offset by young voters who ardent remainers but can't be arsed to get to the ballot box.
I don't get that PoV that sees voting as a waste of time but voting in Big Brother Xfactorstrictlycomedancingonicewank and buying national lottery tickets a valuable use of time.
Well, OK, I sort of do but am amused by the lack of consistency and logic in their answers.
Because you can do all of that voting via a mobile phone, but voting in a real election, you cannot vote via a mobile
Do you really think we'd see an order of magnitude of difference if voting could be done by phone?
I seem to recall similar discussions long before the age of smartphones.
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
yes but the problem is your interpretation of the facts.
basically people who are to busy rushing around to have time to think are voting remain whereas more mature people and those with the opportunity for full reflection are voting leave,
More that many of those who have a job believe ( rightly or wrongly ) they may not have one if we Leave and that those who are retired or do not want a job do not care if jobs are lost .
many people also believe their livelihood is at risk if we stay in, do their views not count ?
Are there many ? Perhaps you can provide some figures to show how many think that .
There are lots, many of them on this thread, maybe you should try to engage with them instead of trolling.
You mean debate with the ones who trot out the word liar in every post . I do read their posts though and I cannot recall a single poster on here who has posted that they think their own job is at risk if we vote Remain , perhaps you can point me to one or two .
One thing to consider is that an awful lot of people who say they'll leave could well completely bottle it in the privacy of the polling booth when they actually have to vote.
I expect a fair bit of that. That's why I discount Leave leads of anything less than 5-6%.
You have to factor in a national Gaylord Ponceyboots factor.
I think that will be offset by young voters who ardent remainers but can't be arsed to get to the ballot box.
I don't get that PoV that sees voting as a waste of time but voting in Big Brother Xfactorstrictlycomedancingonicewank and buying national lottery tickets a valuable use of time.
Well, OK, I sort of do but am amused by the lack of consistency and logic in their answers.
Because you can do all of that voting via a mobile phone, but voting in a real election, you cannot vote via a mobile
Do you really think we'd see an order of magnitude of difference if voting could be done by phone?
I seem to recall similar discussions long before the age of smartphones.
Yes and via online voting too
I remain to be convinced.
I'm not a fan of it, but it will boost turnout if you can vote without leaving your house.
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
yes but the problem is your interpretation of the facts.
basically people who are to busy rushing around to have time to think are voting remain whereas more mature people and those with the opportunity for full reflection are voting leave,
More that many of those who have a job believe ( rightly or wrongly ) they may not have one if we Leave and that those who are retired or do not want a job do not care if jobs are lost .
many people also believe their livelihood is at risk if we stay in, do their views not count ?
Are there many ? Perhaps you can provide some figures to show how many think that .
There are lots, many of them on this thread, maybe you should try to engage with them instead of trolling.
You mean debate with the ones who trot out the word liar in every post . I do read their posts though and I cannot recall a single poster on here who has posted that they think their own job is at risk if we vote Remain , perhaps you can point me to one or two .
Yes Mark I'm one, to date I don't beieve I have accused you of lying and I think my livelihood in manufacturing will be more secure outside the EU.
All these Frank Spencers 'Oooh, what are we going to DO BETTY?' - do they realise how pathetic they sound? MAKE OUR OWN DECISIONS is what we'll do - you know, how two thirds of the world still operates? Leaving the EU is of course a beginning, not an end. But the alternative is no beginning at all. Staying in is no guarantee of any sort of future, merely that we won't have a say in that future. It is absolution from responsibility, not security.
The EU is something we participate in, not something that is done to us.
There is an argument that we should leave the EU, but that is dependent on those suggesting that course of action coming up with a coherent alternative. Since that hasn't happened, a decision to leave would be like leaving a dull marriage to an unattractive but reliable middle-aged partner to be ready to frolic naked with the weirdos on the bus: the idea is arresting but the reality is both daunting and ultimately unattractive to anyone who isn't one of the weirdos on the bus.
Some marriages aren't worth staying in. The alternative needn't be to frolic with anyone for some time. Worst case scenario, we won't have a special trade deal with the EU. Worst case. This will make exporting to the EU a bit harder, and importing from it a bit more expensive. Sorry but I find the prospect of 4% on the price of brie hard to get exercised about.
Yet another option on the list. Leavers really don't have a clue what they want.
They don't have the ability to accept that there are downsides as well as upsides to leaving the EU. It's this lack of realism that is superabundant on the Leave side which is so offputting.
You can pretty well guarantee that if there were ever a Leave vote, an absolute majority of those voting Leave would be feeling betrayed in short order. That doesn't sound to me like a healthy state of affairs.
Nope, I'd be ecstatic.
Any disappointments I'd direct at the UK government of the day, which would then both have the power and accountability to me.
One thing to consider is that an awful lot of people who say they'll leave could well completely bottle it in the privacy of the polling booth when they actually have to vote.
I expect a fair bit of that. That's why I discount Leave leads of anything less than 5-6%.
You have to factor in a national Gaylord Ponceyboots factor.
I think that will be offset by young voters who ardent remainers but can't be arsed to get to the ballot box.
I don't get that PoV that sees voting as a waste of time but voting in Big Brother Xfactorstrictlycomedancingonicewank and buying national lottery tickets a valuable use of time.
Well, OK, I sort of do but am amused by the lack of consistency and logic in their answers.
Because you can do all of that voting via a mobile phone, but voting in a real election, you cannot vote via a mobile
Do you really think we'd see an order of magnitude of difference if voting could be done by phone?
I seem to recall similar discussions long before the age of smartphones.
It's an interesting question: how much does ease of voting actually alter a vote? Is it possible some people vote differently when filling out a PV than they would if they made their way to a polling station (leaving aside possible coercion in a PV) ?
I suppose a key point is the timing of the votes. So an advantage of electronic over postal is that the voting window can presumably be condensed, which seems attractive in terms of having all electors voting at approximately the same time. If you take this time factor out it's hard to imagine much difference in behaviour on PV but maybe there's a tendency to feel more self-conscious/nervous in a polling station and vote for "safe" or "acceptable" options. Hard to work out how one could get any reliable data to analyse it.
One thing to consider is that an awful lot of people who say they'll leave could well completely bottle it in the privacy of the polling booth when they actually have to vote.
I expect a fair bit of that. That's why I discount Leave leads of anything less than 5-6%.
You have to factor in a national Gaylord Ponceyboots factor.
I think that will be offset by young voters who ardent remainers but can't be arsed to get to the ballot box.
I don't get that PoV that sees voting as a waste of time but voting in Big Brother Xfactorstrictlycomedancingonicewank and buying national lottery tickets a valuable use of time.
Well, OK, I sort of do but am amused by the lack of consistency and logic in their answers.
Because you can do all of that voting via a mobile phone, but voting in a real election, you cannot vote via a mobile
It's almost like Cameron considered this before opposing any form of electronic voting in strike ballots, isn't it?
Another thing Cameron's got right.
EV should be resisted in all forms at the moment. The tech isn't there to do it safely or securely.
Not sure I agree from a tech perspective. IIRC Cameron's argument had more to do with moral fibre and "being bothered" to vote in some physical form (which doesn't sit easily with the rush towards compulsory online tax filing for example).
The Labour leadership election, while the source of all sorts of controversy, seemed to get the electronic voting thing fairly well sorted.
How do you know it was well sorted?
Don't make me get out the video again ...
This sort of discussion is always helped by going back to basics. What are the fundamentals you want from the actual physical process of voting? Security (ensuring the vote cannot be altered), obscurity (protecting the way a voter's voted), accuracy (ensuring the end result accurately matches the electorate's wishes) and freedom (ensuring the voter is under no pressure to vote a certain way) are some good ones to start with.
The problem is that I cannot see how EV (especially online EV) can match those requirements. Our current system does, if only because we've worked out the way people can game it on a large scale and built in safeguards.
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
Democracy's a real bitch, isn't it?
The vote of someone you dislike counts for exactly the same as your own.
One thing to consider is that an awful lot of people who say they'll leave could well completely bottle it in the privacy of the polling booth when they actually have to vote.
I expect a fair bit of that. That's why I discount Leave leads of anything less than 5-6%.
You have to factor in a national Gaylord Ponceyboots factor.
I think that will be offset by young voters who ardent remainers but can't be arsed to get to the ballot box.
I don't get that PoV that sees voting as a waste of time but voting in Big Brother Xfactorstrictlycomedancingonicewank and buying national lottery tickets a valuable use of time.
Well, OK, I sort of do but am amused by the lack of consistency and logic in their answers.
Because you can do all of that voting via a mobile phone, but voting in a real election, you cannot vote via a mobile
Do you really think we'd see an order of magnitude of difference if voting could be done by phone?
I seem to recall similar discussions long before the age of smartphones.
It's an interesting question: how much does ease of voting actually alter a vote? Is it possible some people vote differently when filling out a PV than they would if they made their way to a polling station (leaving aside possible coercion in a PV) ?
Step 1 is getting young people onto the electoral register.
Plenty can't be arsed/don't want to do that.
Honestly, applying for a PV is the easiest thing in the world. But you do have to fill it out, and post it.
All these Frank Spencers 'Oooh, what are we going to DO BETTY?' - do they realise how pathetic they sound? MAKE OUR OWN DECISIONS is what we'll do - you know, how two thirds of the world still operates? Leaving the EU is of course a beginning, not an end. But the alternative is no beginning at all. Staying in is no guarantee of any sort of future, merely that we won't have a say in that future. It is absolution from responsibility, not security.
The EU is something we participate in, not something that is done to us.
There is an argument that we should leave the EU, but that is dependent on those suggesting that course of action coming up with a coherent alternative. Since that hasn't happened, a decision to leave would be like leaving a dull marriage to an unattractive but reliable middle-aged partner to be ready to frolic naked with the weirdos on the bus: the idea is arresting but the reality is both daunting and ultimately unattractive to anyone who isn't one of the weirdos on the bus.
Some marriages aren't worth staying in. The alternative needn't be to frolic with anyone for some time. Worst case scenario, we won't have a special trade deal with the EU. Worst case. This will make exporting to the EU a bit harder, and importing from it a bit more expensive. Sorry but I find the prospect of 4% on the price of brie hard to get exercised about.
Yet another option on the list. Leavers really don't have a clue what they want.
They don't have the ability to accept that there are downsides as well as upsides to leaving the EU. It's this lack of realism that is superabundant on the Leave side which is so offputting.
You can pretty well guarantee that if there were ever a Leave vote, an absolute majority of those voting Leave would be feeling betrayed in short order. That doesn't sound to me like a healthy state of affairs.
It's not an alternative, it's the fundament. When the baseline, worst case, scenario is actually outlined - we know longer have a 'free' market (that we pay handsomely for) with the EU, it becomes as scary as sock monsters under the bed. All the Remain Frank Spencer panicky chaff looks ridiculous. The real risk; the real unknown, is staying in, where there is no floor of how bad it could get, because even EU laws themselves are continually bent and twisted and offer no protection.
All these Frank Spencers 'Oooh, what are we going to DO BETTY?' - do they realise how pathetic they sound? MAKE OUR OWN DECISIONS is what we'll do - you know, how two thirds of the world still operates? Leaving the EU is of course a beginning, not an end. But the alternative is no beginning at all. Staying in is no guarantee of any sort of future, merely that we won't have a say in that future. It is absolution from responsibility, not security.
The EU is something we participate in, not something that is done to us.
There is an argument that we should leave the EU, but that is dependent on those suggesting that course of action coming up with a coherent alternative. Since that hasn't happened, a decision to leave would be like leaving a dull marriage to an unattractive but reliable middle-aged partner to be ready to frolic naked with the weirdos on the bus: the idea is arresting but the reality is both daunting and ultimately unattractive to anyone who isn't one of the weirdos on the bus.
Some marriages aren't worth staying in. The alternative needn't be to frolic with anyone for some time. Worst case scenario, we won't have a special trade deal with the EU. Worst case. This will make exporting to the EU a bit harder, and importing from it a bit more expensive. Sorry but I find the prospect of 4% on the price of brie hard to get exercised about.
Yet another option on the list. Leavers really don't have a clue what they want.
They don't have the ability to accept that there are downsides as well as upsides to leaving the EU. It's this lack of realism that is superabundant on the Leave side which is so offputting.
You can pretty well guarantee that if there were ever a Leave vote, an absolute majority of those voting Leave would be feeling betrayed in short order. That doesn't sound to me like a healthy state of affairs.
One thing to consider is that an awful lot of people who say they'll leave could well completely bottle it in the privacy of the polling booth when they actually have to vote.
I expect a fair bit of that. That's why I discount Leave leads of anything less than 5-6%.
You have to factor in a national Gaylord Ponceyboots factor.
I think that will be offset by young voters who ardent remainers but can't be arsed to get to the ballot box.
I don't get that PoV that sees voting as a waste of time but voting in Big Brother Xfactorstrictlycomedancingonicewank and buying national lottery tickets a valuable use of time.
Well, OK, I sort of do but am amused by the lack of consistency and logic in their answers.
Because you can do all of that voting via a mobile phone, but voting in a real election, you cannot vote via a mobile
Do you really think we'd see an order of magnitude of difference if voting could be done by phone?
I seem to recall similar discussions long before the age of smartphones.
It's an interesting question: how much does ease of voting actually alter a vote? Is it possible some people vote differently when filling out a PV than they would if they made their way to a polling station (leaving aside possible coercion in a PV) ?
Step 1 is getting young people onto the electoral register.
Plenty can't be arsed/don't want to do that.
Honestly, applying for a PV is the easiest thing in the world. But you do have to fill it out, and post it.
That wasn't quite what I meant. But if I was in charge (yeah, right) there'd be compulsory voting ...
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
yes but the problem is your interpretation of the facts.
basically people who are to busy rushing around to have time to think are voting remain whereas more mature people and those with the opportunity for full reflection are voting leave,
More that many of those who have a job believe ( rightly or wrongly ) they may not have one if we Leave and that those who are retired or do not want a job do not care if jobs are lost .
many people also believe their livelihood is at risk if we stay in, do their views not count ?
Are there many ? Perhaps you can provide some figures to show how many think that .
There are lots, many of them on this thread, maybe you should try to engage with them instead of trolling.
You mean debate with the ones who trot out the word liar in every post . I do read their posts though and I cannot recall a single poster on here who has posted that they think their own job is at risk if we vote Remain , perhaps you can point me to one or two .
Perhaps because there is no serious risk of mass redundancy for anyone if we leave the EU, have you considered that?
It's not an alternative, it's the fundament. When the baseline, worst case, scenario is actually outlined - we know longer have a 'free' market (that we pay handsomely for) with the EU, it becomes as scary as sock monsters under the bed. All the Remain Frank Spencer panicky chaff looks ridiculous. The real risk; the real unknown, is staying in, where there is no floor of how bad it could get, because even EU laws themselves are continually bent and twisted and offer no protection.
To go back to my first point, the point that you carefully keep sidestepping - Leave have no idea what Leave means. Everyone has their own pet version and most of them are mutually contradictory.
If Britain votes Leave, we're heading for an almighty argument where at best almost no one will get what they want. And for what? In all probability, some notional concept of "sovereignty" that doesn't really exist in the interconnected world in which we now live unless we retreat into manic protectionism or North Korean-style autarky.
As a proposition, it sucks harder than a non-EU vacuum cleaner.
This sort of discussion is always helped by going back to basics. What are the fundamentals you want from the actual physical process of voting? Security (ensuring the vote cannot be altered), obscurity (protecting the way a voter's voted), accuracy (ensuring the end result accurately matches the electorate's wishes) and freedom (ensuring the voter is under no pressure to vote a certain way) are some good ones to start with.
The problem is that I cannot see how EV (especially online EV) can match those requirements. Our current system does, if only because we've worked out the way people can game it on a large scale and built in safeguards.
I agree with the questions. As far as security goes: it seems no easier to nick someone's voting code and use it than it does to nick their polling card and head down the station (since you don't need ID). I mean you need to be the right sex, or at least androgynous, for the latter version, but that's the only limitation. Provided the starting point is a physical polling card with a code then the risk of large scale fraud seems very limited.
Obscurity and accuracy seem straightforward as anyone who's tried to find out what a teenager is up to on Snapchat can tell you. Freedom is a big issue, but again no worse than with a postal vote (you can stand over someone with the same threat of physical violence whether they are using their phone or filling a card for you to post). So overall I don't see that EV is a step down from PV, though for those who support polling station only I can see I distinction. on your final test.
Andy Burnham says he'd bet that Leave will win. "We think we're going to lose, but please vote for us". Peter Mandelson's toes must curl when he hears such stuff.
The following appraisal is similarly stupid: "The campaign to remain in the EU needs to shift on to the patriotic argument because, if we leave it to the other side, we’ll allow them to sell a false prospectus of patriotism."
Has he just realised that the referendum is about foreign policy, about more (supposed) national independence (Leave), versus less (supposed) national independence (Remain)?
And he thinks Remain can win on patriotism? Is he joking?
This next bit shows that at least he's got a clue: "There’s a danger that the next four months become an emotional argument versus a rational argument. All the figures are bouncing off people already."
Indeed. As anybody could have told them. Remain won't win by clogging people's ears up with percentages. Campaigns win by emotion. Mass politics is about emotion. Sometimes, but only sometimes, campaigns harness rationality to the emotion. More specifically, one side sometimes attracts people who think they're not simply self-interested but truly rational, and who get an emotional kick from wallowing in that self-image. That's why even some non-LibDems in Oxford and Cambridge voted for electoral reform. But such markets are largely irrelevant in the coming referendum. Sure, campaigns always hook rationalisation up to their brands, but rationalisation isn't rationality. Andy should go to Advertising 101.
Remain haven't got an equivalent of the Orange Order to make the "passionate" case for Remaining.
"Are you for or against the established politicians, who for decades have ignored the reality of immigration and who still do talk crap about it?" is how many people view the issue that's being voted on. The notion of momentum is built in to the idea of Leaving. That puts Remain in big trouble. If the major parties had some competent leaders, the referendum would have been called years ago and Remain might have had a chance. Letting it drag on was the worst mistake.
Eurovision-style pap - "we all wave different flags, but we love our continent and the EU" - isn't going to win it for Remain.
Remain are obviously the "better the devil you know" side, but they're unlikely to win by playing on fear, because fear and loathing are the other side's cards. Leave are making the running. The idea that "all those Muslims and darkies will move from Calais to Kent if Britain leaves the EU" has had little impact. That was a ridiculous line anyway. People who enter Britain through the Channel come from France, and few who seek asylum in Britain allege persecution by France.
I'll give Remain a clue: dig the dirt on Leave's leaders.
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
yes but the problem is your interpretation of the facts.
basically people who are to busy rushing around to have time to think are voting remain whereas more mature people and those with the opportunity for full reflection are voting leave,
More that many of those who have a job believe ( rightly or wrongly ) they may not have one if we Leave and that those who are retired or do not want a job do not care if jobs are lost .
The people most likely to want to stay are students.
By political persuasion it's the tiny leftish factions of the Greens, Plaid, SNP and Lib Dems.
People who have bought their houses outright - those most likely to have 'built' Britain with their taxes - are the keenest leavers.
Part time workers - those who may be most affected by limitless labour supplies of cheap foreign alternatives - are Leavers as well - along with self starting, independently minded self employed.
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
Democracy's a real bitch, isn't it?
The vote of someone you dislike counts for exactly the same as your own.
Yes you Leavers will find that out in 100 days and I expect a large number will not accept that decision .
All these Frank Spencers 'Oooh, what are we going to DO BETTY?' - do they realise how pathetic they sound? MAKE OUR OWN DECISIONS is what we'll do - you know, how two thirds of the world still operates? Leaving the EU is of course a beginning, not an end. But the alternative is no beginning at all. Staying in is no guarantee of any sort of future, merely that we won't have a say in that future. It is absolution from responsibility, not security.
The EU is something we participate in, not something that is done to us.
There is an argument that we should leave the EU, but that is dependent on those suggesting that course of action coming up with a coherent alternative. Since that hasn't happened, a decision to leave would be like leaving a dull marriage to an unattractive but reliable middle-aged partner to be ready to frolic naked with the weirdos on the bus: the idea is arresting but the reality is both daunting and ultimately unattractive to anyone who isn't one of the weirdos on the bus.
Some marriages aren't worth staying in. The alternative needn't be to frolic with anyone for some time. Worst case scenario, we won't have a special trade deal with the EU. Worst case. This will make exporting to the EU a bit harder, and importing from it a bit more expensive. Sorry but I find the prospect of 4% on the price of brie hard to get exercised about.
Yet another option on the list. Leavers really don't have a clue what they want.
They don't have the ability to accept that there are downsides as well as upsides to leaving the EU. It's this lack of realism that is superabundant on the Leave side which is so offputting.
You can pretty well guarantee that if there were ever a Leave vote, an absolute majority of those voting Leave would be feeling betrayed in short order. That doesn't sound to me like a healthy state of affairs.
Well that's simply not true.
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
This might not sound very PC but would Europe be in better shape if Angela Merkel had listened to a few more Al Wilson records ?
Would Europe be in a better state if Germany had a Chancellor like Trump, you mean?
I think Germany has had a Chancellor like that a couple of times in the past!
You mean Helmut Kohl, no doubt.
How are you feeling about your Leave bet? It's come in a fair bit. Was at 3.0 earlier.
Was thinking a bit further back than that.
Not much profit yet. I hope that Leave gets down to evens at least so I can trade out all green. Surely as it gets closer and a few get wobbly with the polls it should pan out that way.
One thing to consider is that an awful lot of people who say they'll leave could well completely bottle it in the privacy of the polling booth when they actually have to vote.
I expect a fair bit of that. That's why I discount Leave leads of anything less than 5-6%.
You have to factor in a national Gaylord Ponceyboots factor.
I think that will be offset by young voters who ardent remainers but can't be arsed to get to the ballot box.
I don't get that PoV that sees voting as a waste of time but voting in Big Brother Xfactorstrictlycomedancingonicewank and buying national lottery tickets a valuable use of time.
Well, OK, I sort of do but am amused by the lack of consistency and logic in their answers.
Because you can do all of that voting via a mobile phone, but voting in a real election, you cannot vote via a mobile
Do you really think we'd see an order of magnitude of difference if voting could be done by phone?
I seem to recall similar discussions long before the age of smartphones.
Yes and via online voting too
I remain to be convinced.
I'm not a fan of it, but it will boost turnout if you can vote without leaving your house.
Doesn't really appeal. Given how easy it is for someone to vote by post or by proxy if they cannot make it to a polling station, do we even want the votes of people who will only vote if they don't have to leave the house? It doesn't do anything to prevent them being disengaged, which is surely the bigger issue.
It's not an alternative, it's the fundament. When the baseline, worst case, scenario is actually outlined - we know longer have a 'free' market (that we pay handsomely for) with the EU, it becomes as scary as sock monsters under the bed. All the Remain Frank Spencer panicky chaff looks ridiculous. The real risk; the real unknown, is staying in, where there is no floor of how bad it could get, because even EU laws themselves are continually bent and twisted and offer no protection.
To go back to my first point, the point that you carefully keep sidestepping - Leave have no idea what Leave means. Everyone has their own pet version and most of them are mutually contradictory.
If Britain votes Leave, we're heading for an almighty argument where at best almost no one will get what they want. And for what? In all probability, some notional concept of "sovereignty" that doesn't really exist in the interconnected world in which we now live unless we retreat into manic protectionism or North Korean-style autarky.
As a proposition, it sucks harder than a non-EU vacuum cleaner.
If all you want is that the UK parliament should be paramount in making UK law then I think you may well get what you want. If I vote Leave then that will be roughly my expectation.
It's not an alternative, it's the fundament. When the baseline, worst case, scenario is actually outlined - we know longer have a 'free' market (that we pay handsomely for) with the EU, it becomes as scary as sock monsters under the bed. All the Remain Frank Spencer panicky chaff looks ridiculous. The real risk; the real unknown, is staying in, where there is no floor of how bad it could get, because even EU laws themselves are continually bent and twisted and offer no protection.
To go back to my first point, the point that you carefully keep sidestepping - Leave have no idea what Leave means. Everyone has their own pet version and most of them are mutually contradictory.
If Britain votes Leave, we're heading for an almighty argument where at best almost no one will get what they want. And for what? In all probability, some notional concept of "sovereignty" that doesn't really exist in the interconnected world in which we now live unless we retreat into manic protectionism or North Korean-style autarky.
As a proposition, it sucks harder than a non-EU vacuum cleaner.
That's interesting.
Slightly at odds with your other posts that it's because we would have "sovereignty" that we would use it to be mean to The Gays, and lynch foreigners.
All these Frank Spencers 'Oooh, what are we going to DO BETTY?' - do they realise how pathetic they sound? MAKE OUR OWN DECISIONS is what we'll do - you know, how two thirds of the world still operates? Leaving the EU is of course a beginning, not an end. But the alternative is no beginning at all. Staying in is no guarantee of any sort of future, merely that we won't have a say in that future. It is absolution from responsibility, not security.
The EU is something we participate in, not something that is done to us.
There is an argument that we should leave the EU, but that is dependent on those suggesting that course of action coming up with a coherent alternative. Since that hasn't happened, a decision to leave would be like leaving a dull marriage to an unattractive but reliable middle-aged partner to be ready to frolic naked with the weirdos on the bus: the idea is arresting but the reality is both daunting and ultimately unattractive to anyone who isn't one of the weirdos on the bus.
Are you seriously suggesting that everyone should stick in whatever loveless marriage they've found themselves in?
Mr. Meeks, assuming the European Parliament votes that way, and no changes are subsequently made. Given the desire of the eurozone to integrate more, and the general drive towards ever closer union, changes will be made. It's only a question of what changes, and when.
Edited extra bit: I think Pandemonium, or lack thereof, depends at least somewhat on what the changes (or failure to implement Cameron's renegotiation) are. It may be a damp squib.
It's not an alternative, it's the fundament. When the baseline, worst case, scenario is actually outlined - we know longer have a 'free' market (that we pay handsomely for) with the EU, it becomes as scary as sock monsters under the bed. All the Remain Frank Spencer panicky chaff looks ridiculous. The real risk; the real unknown, is staying in, where there is no floor of how bad it could get, because even EU laws themselves are continually bent and twisted and offer no protection.
To go back to my first point, the point that you carefully keep sidestepping - Leave have no idea what Leave means. Everyone has their own pet version and most of them are mutually contradictory.
If Britain votes Leave, we're heading for an almighty argument where at best almost no one will get what they want. And for what? In all probability, some notional concept of "sovereignty" that doesn't really exist in the interconnected world in which we now live unless we retreat into manic protectionism or North Korean-style autarky.
As a proposition, it sucks harder than a non-EU vacuum cleaner.
This is nonsense. There are two models that people desire. One is an EEA model where get rid of 90% of EU law, maintain 100% market access and limit migration to those who can survive without benefits. The other is a bilateral deal where we get out of 100% of EU law, maintain 98% of market access and limit migration to a points system. They are both pretty similar at the end of the day and far closer to each other than a future of being a second string EU member orbiting the Eurozone.
So you can play up your imagined division between Leavers but its all in your imagination. You're better off sticking with your childish personal attacks about people having middle aged crises.
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
If Britain votes Leave, Britiain leaves the EU from the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Leave means.
It may be that new terms are made in the future even after a Leave vote. If so, we can expect future debates. But no one can pretend that's not the the prospectus offered by Leave.
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
yes but the problem is your interpretation of the facts.
basically people who are to busy rushing around to have time to think are voting remain whereas more mature people and those with the opportunity for full reflection are voting leave,
More that many of those who have a job believe ( rightly or wrongly ) they may not have one if we Leave and that those who are retired or do not want a job do not care if jobs are lost .
many people also believe their livelihood is at risk if we stay in, do their views not count ?
Are there many ? Perhaps you can provide some figures to show how many think that .
There are lots, many of them on this thread, maybe you should try to engage with them instead of trolling.
You mean debate with the ones who trot out the word liar in every post . I do read their posts though and I cannot recall a single poster on here who has posted that they think their own job is at risk if we vote Remain , perhaps you can point me to one or two .
Fishermen, although there are not many of them left so job losses should be minimal.
They don't have the ability to accept that there are downsides as well as upsides to leaving the EU. It's this lack of realism that is superabundant on the Leave side which is so offputting.
You can pretty well guarantee that if there were ever a Leave vote, an absolute majority of those voting Leave would be feeling betrayed in short order. That doesn't sound to me like a healthy state of affairs.
Sure, but, City of London aside, there won't be a huge difference between the state of affairs if Britain leaves the EU and the state of affairs if Britain stays in. Britain will have a special status in its relations with those continentals, either way. Did I say "City of London aside"? The catch is that that monster can't be put aside just like that.
Emotionally and symbolically, though, the referendum result will be hugely significant. A Remain win won't say "you irrational types have just been slapped down, so get more rational, woncha?" It'll say "issues have been swept under the carpet again - but for how long?" Try five minutes. A Leave win will scream "Emotional Release!" and "Truth has Broken Through!"
I'm pro-Remain, by the way. I just think Leave is at an amazingly good price in the betting markets.
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
If Britain votes Leave, Britiain leaves the EU from the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Leave means.
It may be that new terms are made in the future even after a Leave vote. If so, we can expect future debates. But no one can pretend that's not the the prospectus offered by Leave.
All these Frank Spencers 'Oooh, what are we going to DO BETTY?' - do they realise how pathetic they sound? MAKE OUR OWN DECISIONS is what we'll do - you know, how two thirds of the world still operates? Leaving the EU is of course a beginning, not an end. But the alternative is no beginning at all. Staying in is no guarantee of any sort of future, merely that we won't have a say in that future. It is absolution from responsibility, not security.
The EU is something we participate in, not something that is done to us. a dull marriage to an unattractive but reliable middle-aged partner to be ready to frolic naked with the weirdos on the bus: the idea is arresting but the reality is both daunting and ultimately unattractive to anyone who isn't one of the weirdos on the bus.
Some marriages aren't worth staying in. The alternative needn't be to frolic with anyone for some time. Worst case scenario, we won't have a special trade deal with the EU. Worst case. This will make exporting to the EU a bit harder, and importing from it a bit more expensive. Sorry but I find the prospect of 4% on the price of brie hard to get exercised about.
Yet another option on the list. Leavers really don't have a clue what they want.
They don't have the ability to accept that there are downsides as well as upsides to leaving the EU. It's this lack of realism that is superabundant on the Leave side which is so offputting.
You can pretty well guarantee that if there were ever a Leave vote, an absolute majority of those voting Leave would be feeling betrayed in short order. That doesn't sound to me like a healthy state of affairs.
Well that's simply not true.
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
Jeremy Corbyn has argued staying in based on a very different model of the EU. Andrew Duff wants to stay in so we can join with full integration. The most likely is none of these models, with us im an outer ring with a centralised Eurozone (but how centralised we don't know) passing laws over us.
It's not an alternative, it's the fundament. When the baseline, worst case, scenario is actually outlined - we know longer have a 'free' market (that we pay handsomely for) with the EU, it becomes as scary as sock monsters under the bed. All the Remain Frank Spencer panicky chaff looks ridiculous. The real risk; the real unknown, is staying in, where there is no floor of how bad it could get, because even EU laws themselves are continually bent and twisted and offer no protection.
To go back to my first point, the point that you carefully keep sidestepping - Leave have no idea what Leave means. Everyone has their own pet version and most of them are mutually contradictory.
If Britain votes Leave, we're heading for an almighty argument where at best almost no one will get what they want. And for what? In all probability, some notional concept of "sovereignty" that doesn't really exist in the interconnected world in which we now live unless we retreat into manic protectionism or North Korean-style autarky.
As a proposition, it sucks harder than a non-EU vacuum cleaner.
That's interesting.
Slightly at odds with your other posts that it's because we would have "sovereignty" that we would use it to be mean to The Gays, and lynch foreigners.
When you scratch the surface and ask what people actually want to be able to do that they can't do in the EU, the answers that come back are:
1) dispense with the human rights culture (presumably after leaving the ECHR, though strictly speaking that's irrelevant) 2) stop foreigners coming in 3) prop up failing industries
To be fair, I'd put those under "manic protectionism" rather than "North Korean-style autarky".
The anti-immigrant and reactionary overtones that usually go with that are a noxious side-effect.
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
If Britain votes Leave, Britiain leaves the EU from the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Leave means.
It may be that new terms are made in the future even after a Leave vote. If so, we can expect future debates. But no one can pretend that's not the the prospectus offered by Leave.
Which LEAVE are you proposing ? EEA [ free movement ! ], EFTA, ............glorious isolation !
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
Democracy's a real bitch, isn't it?
The vote of someone you dislike counts for exactly the same as your own.
Yes you Leavers will find that out in 100 days and I expect a large number will not accept that decision .
If the vote goes against us, I doubt if Leave will stage an armed uprising. Obviously, we'll keep campaigning for what we believe in.
After all, the Lib Dems didn't just throw in the towel, after losing two thirds of their support in 2015.
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
yes but the problem is your interpretation of the facts.
basically people who are to busy rushing around to have time to think are voting remain whereas more mature people and those with the opportunity for full reflection are voting leave,
More that many of those who have a job believe ( rightly or wrongly ) they may not have one if we Leave and that those who are retired or do not want a job do not care if jobs are lost .
The people most likely to want to stay are students.
By political persuasion it's the tiny leftish factions of the Greens, Plaid, SNP and Lib Dems.
People who have bought their houses outright - those most likely to have 'built' Britain with their taxes - are the keenest leavers.
Part time workers - those who may be most affected by limitless labour supplies of cheap foreign alternatives - are Leavers as well - along with self starting, independently minded self employed.
Part time workers - I am not too sure. Their "job rights" like equal pay, equal holidays have been given by the EU and protected by the EU. I am not sure a future UK government will protect that. The same goes for the 48 hours directive.
Andy Burnham says he'd bet that Leave will win. "We think we're going to lose, but please vote for us". Peter Mandelson's toes must curl when he hears such stuff.
The following appraisal is similarly stupid: "The campaign to remain in the EU needs to shift on to the patriotic argument because, if we leave it to the other side, we’ll allow them to sell a false prospectus of patriotism."
Has he just realised that the referendum is about foreign policy, about more (supposed) national independence (Leave), versus less (supposed) national independence (Remain)?
And he thinks Remain can win on patriotism? Is he joking?
This next bit shows that at least he's got a clue: "There’s a danger that the next four months become an emotional argument versus a rational argument. All the figures are bouncing off people already."
Remain haven't got an equivalent of the Orange Order to make the "passionate" case for Remaining.
"Are you for or against the established politicians, who for decades have ignored the reality of immigration and who still do talk crap about it?" is how many people view the issue that's being voted on. The notion of momentum is built in to the idea of Leaving. That puts Remain in big trouble. If the major parties had some competent leaders, the referendum would have been called years ago and Remain might have had a chance. Letting it drag on was the worst mistake.
Eurovision-style pap - "we all wave different flags, but we love our continent and the EU" - isn't going to win it for Remain.
Remain are obviously the "better the devil you know" side, but they're unlikely to win by playing on fear, because fear and loathing are the other side's cards. Leave are making the running. The idea that "all those Muslims and darkies will move from Calais to Kent if Britain leaves the EU" has had little impact. That was a ridiculous line anyway. People who enter Britain through the Channel come from France, and few who seek asylum in Britain allege persecution by France.
I'll give Remain a clue: dig the dirt on Leave's leaders.
It's difficult to make a patriotic case that's based on Britain's impotence, outwith the EU.
It's not an alternative, it's the fundament. When the baseline, worst case, scenario is actually outlined - we know longer have a 'free' market (that we pay handsomely for) with the EU, it becomes as scary as sock monsters under the bed. All the Remain Frank Spencer panicky chaff looks ridiculous. The real risk; the real unknown, is staying in, where there is no floor of how bad it could get, because even EU laws themselves are continually bent and twisted and offer no protection.
To go back to my first point, the point that you carefully keep sidestepping - Leave have no idea what Leave means. Everyone has their own pet version and most of them are mutually contradictory.
If Britain votes Leave, we're heading for an almighty argument where at best almost no one will get what they want. And for what? In all probability, some notional concept of "sovereignty" that doesn't really exist in the interconnected world in which we now live unless we retreat into manic protectionism or North Korean-style autarky.
As a proposition, it sucks harder than a non-EU vacuum cleaner.
That's interesting.
Slightly at odds with your other posts that it's because we would have "sovereignty" that we would use it to be mean to The Gays, and lynch foreigners.
When you scratch the surface and ask what people actually want to be able to do that they can't do in the EU, the answers that come back are:
1) dispense with the human rights culture (presumably after leaving the ECHR, though strictly speaking that's irrelevant) 2) stop foreigners coming in 3) prop up failing industries
To be fair, I'd put those under "manic protectionism" rather than "North Korean-style autarky".
The anti-immigrant and reactionary overtones that usually go with that are a noxious side-effect.
The most important aspect of LEAVE opinion but deliberately understated is IMMIGRATION. Basically, stopping Johnny Foreigner coming in. All other topics like free trade etc. is a sideshow to most of them.
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
If Britain votes Leave, Britiain leaves the EU from the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Leave means.
It may be that new terms are made in the future even after a Leave vote. If so, we can expect future debates. But no one can pretend that's not the the prospectus offered by Leave.
False symmetry is a specialism of Leavers. It ignores the fact that government policy is to remain in the EU. A leave vote would be a repudiation of government policy and require a new one to be drawn up.
The greatest source of amusement for me at present is knowing that precisely the most passionate Leavers would be precisely the angriest posters in a year or two's time after a Leave vote when their dreams had not been met.
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
If Britain votes Leave, Britiain leaves the EU from the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Leave means.
It may be that new terms are made in the future even after a Leave vote. If so, we can expect future debates. But no one can pretend that's not the the prospectus offered by Leave.
Which LEAVE are you proposing ? EEA [ free movement ! ], EFTA, ............glorious isolation !
Personally EEA but that's a debate for the future.
It's not an alternative, it's the fundament. When the baseline, worst case, scenario is actually outlined - we know longer have a 'free' market (that we pay handsomely for) with the EU, it becomes as scary as sock monsters under the bed. All the Remain Frank Spencer panicky chaff looks ridiculous. The real risk; the real unknown, is staying in, where there is no floor of how bad it could get, because even EU laws themselves are continually bent and twisted and offer no protection.
To go back to my first point, the point that you carefully keep sidestepping - Leave have no idea what Leave means. Everyone has their own pet version and most of them are mutually contradictory.
If Britain votes Leave, we're heading for an almighty argument where at best almost no one will get what they want. And for what? In all probability, some notional concept of "sovereignty" that doesn't really exist in the interconnected world in which we now live unless we retreat into manic protectionism or North Korean-style autarky.
As a proposition, it sucks harder than a non-EU vacuum cleaner.
That's interesting.
Slightly at odds with your other posts that it's because we would have "sovereignty" that we would use it to be mean to The Gays, and lynch foreigners.
When you scratch the surface and ask what people actually want to be able to do that they can't do in the EU, the answers that come back are:
1) dispense with the human rights culture (presumably after leaving the ECHR, though strictly speaking that's irrelevant) 2) stop foreigners coming in 3) prop up failing industries
To be fair, I'd put those under "manic protectionism" rather than "North Korean-style autarky".
The anti-immigrant and reactionary overtones that usually go with that are a noxious side-effect.
The most important aspect of LEAVE opinion but deliberately understated is IMMIGRATION. Basically, stopping Johnny Foreigner coming in. All other topics like free trade etc. is a sideshow to most of them.
in your head maybe, but out in the real world ....
I've just listened to Keir Starmer summing up for Labour on the Investigatory Powers Bill - I found him totally incoherent and was even slurring his words. I couldn't make out if Hilary Benn and Andy Burnham were impressed or not, they looked so miserable.
All these Frank Spencers 'Oooh, what are we going to DO BETTY?' - do they realise how pathetic they sound? MAKE OUR OWN DECISIONS is what we'll do - you know, how two thirds of the world still operates? Leaving the EU is of course a beginning, not an end. But the alternative is no beginning at all. Staying in is no guarantee of any sort of future, merely that we won't have a say in that future. It is absolution from responsibility, not security.
The EU is something we participate in, not something that is done to us. a dull marriage to an unattractive but reliable middle-aged partner to be ready to frolic naked with the weirdos on the bus: the idea is arresting but the reality is both daunting and ultimately unattractive to anyone who isn't one of the weirdos on the bus.
Yet another option on the list. Leavers really don't have a clue what they want.
They don't have the ability to accept that there are downsides as well as upsides to leaving the EU. It's this lack of realism that is superabundant on the Leave side which is so offputting.
You can pretty well guarantee that if there were ever a Leave vote, an absolute majority of those voting Leave would be feeling betrayed in short order. That doesn't sound to me like a healthy state of affairs.
Well that's simply not true.
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
Jeremy Corbyn has argued staying in based on a very different model of the EU. Andrew Duff wants to stay in so we can join with full integration. The most likely is none of these models, with us im an outer ring with a centralised Eurozone (but how centralised we don't know) passing laws over us.
But what is on offer is the Cameron deal. Corbyn and Duff (who?) would need to win an election before they could change the terms the UK now has.
The most important aspect of LEAVE opinion but deliberately understated is IMMIGRATION. Basically, stopping Johnny Foreigner coming in. All other topics like free trade etc. is a sideshow to most of them.
Unfortunately I think that's true. But the single factor that continues to tip me towards leave is that I think free movement of labour is too high a price to pay for free trade; essentially it's hardwiring a privilege of capital over labour which I don't see building a healthy society. But even if I think that lots of other people take the same view because they don't like foreigners, that's not a reason to change my own vote.
Realistically it looks like our economy needs and will continue to need a substantial amount of immigration to retain an appropriate age profile in the workforce, and that seems fine. We just need to be able to decide which skillsets we require (which may well included substantial unskilled immigration) rather than have no control.
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
yes but the problem is your interpretation of the facts.
basically people who are to busy rushing around to have time to think are voting remain whereas more mature people and those with the opportunity for full reflection are voting leave,
More that many of those who have a job believe ( rightly or wrongly ) they may not have one if we Leave and that those who are retired or do not want a job do not care if jobs are lost .
The people most likely to want to stay are students.
By political persuasion it's the tiny leftish factions of the Greens, Plaid, SNP and Lib Dems.
People who have bought their houses outright - those most likely to have 'built' Britain with their taxes - are the keenest leavers.
Part time workers - those who may be most affected by limitless labour supplies of cheap foreign alternatives - are Leavers as well - along with self starting, independently minded self employed.
Part time workers - I am not too sure. Their "job rights" like equal pay, equal holidays have been given by the EU and protected by the EU. I am not sure a future UK government will protect that. The same goes for the 48 hours directive.
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
If Britain votes Leave, Britiain leaves the EU from the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Leave means.
It may be that new terms are made in the future even after a Leave vote. If so, we can expect future debates. But no one can pretend that's not the the prospectus offered by Leave.
Which LEAVE are you proposing ? EEA [ free movement ! ], EFTA, ............glorious isolation !
Personally EEA but that's a debate for the future.
At least, you are coherent. Would you agree then there needs to be another referendum if LEAVE were to win between EEA or EFTA or something else ?
Or, would you leave [sic ] that to the government or Parliament ?
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
If Britain votes Leave, Britiain leaves the EU from the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Leave means.
It may be that new terms are made in the future even after a Leave vote. If so, we can expect future debates. But no one can pretend that's not the the prospectus offered by Leave.
False symmetry is a specialism of Leavers. It ignores the fact that government policy is to remain in the EU. A leave vote would be a repudiation of government policy and require a new one to be drawn up.
The greatest source of amusement for me at present is knowing that precisely the most passionate Leavers would be precisely the angriest posters in a year or two's time after a Leave vote when their dreams had not been met.
It's not an alternative, it's the fundament. When the baseline, worst case, scenario is actually outlined - we know longer have a 'free' market (that we pay handsomely for) with the EU, it becomes as scary as sock monsters under the bed. All the Remain Frank Spencer panicky chaff looks ridiculous. The real risk; the real unknown, is staying in, where there is no floor of how bad it could get, because even EU laws themselves are continually bent and twisted and offer no protection.
To go back to my first point, the point that you carefully keep sidestepping - Leave have no idea what Leave means. Everyone has their own pet version and most of them are mutually contradictory.
If Britain votes Leave, we're heading for an almighty argument where at best almost no one will get what they want. And for what? In all probability, some notional concept of "sovereignty" that doesn't really exist in the interconnected world in which we now live unless we retreat into manic protectionism or North Korean-style autarky.
As a proposition, it sucks harder than a non-EU vacuum cleaner.
That's interesting.
Slightly at odds with your other posts that it's because we would have "sovereignty" that we would use it to be mean to The Gays, and lynch foreigners.
When you scratch the surface and ask what people actually want to be able to do that they can't do in the EU, the answers that come back are:
1) dispense with the human rights culture (presumably after leaving the ECHR, though strictly speaking that's irrelevant) 2) stop foreigners coming in 3) prop up failing industries
To be fair, I'd put those under "manic protectionism" rather than "North Korean-style autarky".
The anti-immigrant and reactionary overtones that usually go with that are a noxious side-effect.
To be honest, I think you're engaging in a bit of rationalisation now you've made up your mind.
Despite you brandishing him as a "Leaver" Philip Thompson was actually on the fence like you a few months ago, and leaning to Remain, but has now come off the fence the other way and not for any of the reasons you ascribe to stereotype those you now oppose.
One interest point in the ORB poll , is that the groups with a majority favouring Remain are those which are earning money for the country , the employed , self employed , those unemployed who want a job , whereas those groups favouring Leave are the Retired and those unemployed who do not want a job .
Haha what are you sayin'?
Just giving you some facts , I know you Leavers don't like them .
yes but the problem is your interpretation of the facts.
basically people who are to busy rushing around to have time to think are voting remain whereas more mature people and those with the opportunity for full reflection are voting leave,
More that many of those who have a job believe ( rightly or wrongly ) they may not have one if we Leave and that those who are retired or do not want a job do not care if jobs are lost .
The people most likely to want to stay are students.
By political persuasion it's the tiny leftish factions of the Greens, Plaid, SNP and Lib Dems.
People who have bought their houses outright - those most likely to have 'built' Britain with their taxes - are the keenest leavers.
Part time workers - those who may be most affected by limitless labour supplies of cheap foreign alternatives - are Leavers as well - along with self starting, independently minded self employed.
Part time workers - I am not too sure. Their "job rights" like equal pay, equal holidays have been given by the EU and protected by the EU. I am not sure a future UK government will protect that. The same goes for the 48 hours directive.
The EU is massively in favour of flexible working/zero hours contracts... The sooner the left realise they have been bought off with a few scraps the better.
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
If Britain votes Leave, Britiain leaves the EU from the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Leave means.
It may be that new terms are made in the future even after a Leave vote. If so, we can expect future debates. But no one can pretend that's not the the prospectus offered by Leave.
False symmetry is a specialism of Leavers. It ignores the fact that government policy is to remain in the EU. A leave vote would be a repudiation of government policy and require a new one to be drawn up.
The greatest source of amusement for me at present is knowing that precisely the most passionate Leavers would be precisely the angriest posters in a year or two's time after a Leave vote when their dreams had not been met.
Your post ignores the fact that government policy is the very definition of transient and not permanent politics.
Since the last Europe Referendum: # The parties of government have changed at an election four times # Six Prime Ministers have been in Downing Street # There have been nine general elections # There have been nine Chancellor's of the Exchequer # There have been sixteen Home Secretary's
To suggest that government policy should be at all relevant to this referendum is laughable. Government policy is a matter for general elections, not referenda.
The most important aspect of LEAVE opinion but deliberately understated is IMMIGRATION. Basically, stopping Johnny Foreigner coming in. All other topics like free trade etc. is a sideshow to most of them.
Unfortunately I think that's true. But the single factor that continues to tip me towards leave is that I think free movement of labour is too high a price to pay for free trade; essentially it's hardwiring a privilege of capital over labour which I don't see building a healthy society. But even if I think that lots of other people take the same view because they don't like foreigners, that's not a reason to change my own vote.
Realistically it looks like our economy needs and will continue to need a substantial amount of immigration to retain an appropriate age profile in the workforce, and that seems fine. We just need to be able to decide which skillsets we require (which may well included substantial unskilled immigration) rather than have no control.
Free movement is not the same as free trade, it's a lot more, well, flexible and a lot better from an export and import perspective. If we do vote to Leave - and that looks the likelist outcome right now - we will negotiate a new deal with the EU and/or join EFTA/EEA. Either way we will be as bound to honour the new agreement as we are to honouring the present one. And that will involve a binding agreement on immigration.
I've just listened to Keir Starmer summing up for Labour on the Investigatory Powers Bill - I found him totally incoherent and was even slurring his words. I couldn't make out if Hilary Benn and Andy Burnham were impressed or not, they looked so miserable.
An interesting trio. Well, ok an uninteresting trio.
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
If Britain votes Leave, Britiain leaves the EU from the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Leave means.
It may be that new terms are made in the future even after a Leave vote. If so, we can expect future debates. But no one can pretend that's not the the prospectus offered by Leave.
False symmetry is a specialism of Leavers. It ignores the fact that government policy is to remain in the EU. A leave vote would be a repudiation of government policy and require a new one to be drawn up.
The greatest source of amusement for me at present is knowing that precisely the most passionate Leavers would be precisely the angriest posters in a year or two's time after a Leave vote when their dreams had not been met.
Your post ignores the fact that government policy is the very definition of transient and not permanent politics.
Since the last Europe Referendum: # The parties of government have changed at an election four times # Six Prime Ministers have been in Downing Street # There have been nine general elections # There have been nine Chancellor's of the Exchequer # There have been sixteen Home Secretary's
To suggest that government policy should be at all relevant to this referendum is laughable. Government policy is a matter for general elections, not referenda.
We know what Remain means. We haven't a Scooby what Leave means.
What's laughable is your attempt to suggest that there is much doubt about the first or the slightest clarity about the second.
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
If Britain votes Leave, Britiain leaves the EU from the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Leave means.
It may be that new terms are made in the future even after a Leave vote. If so, we can expect future debates. But no one can pretend that's not the the prospectus offered by Leave.
False symmetry is a specialism of Leavers. It ignores the fact that government policy is to remain in the EU. A leave vote would be a repudiation of government policy and require a new one to be drawn up.
The greatest source of amusement for me at present is knowing that precisely the most passionate Leavers would be precisely the angriest posters in a year or two's time after a Leave vote when their dreams had not been met.
Your post ignores the fact that government policy is the very definition of transient and not permanent politics.
Since the last Europe Referendum: # The parties of government have changed at an election four times # Six Prime Ministers have been in Downing Street # There have been nine general elections # There have been nine Chancellor's of the Exchequer # There have been sixteen Home Secretary's
To suggest that government policy should be at all relevant to this referendum is laughable. Government policy is a matter for general elections, not referenda.
We know what Remain means. We haven't a Scooby what Leave means.
What's laughable is your attempt to suggest that there is much doubt about the first or the slightest clarity about the second.
Does remain mean the status quo? What safeguards have been put in place to protect the UK from the ECJ engaging in judicial activism?
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
If Britain votes Leave, Britiain leaves the EU from the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Leave means.
It may be that new terms are made in the future even after a Leave vote. If so, we can expect future debates. But no one can pretend that's not the the prospectus offered by Leave.
Which LEAVE are you proposing ? EEA [ free movement ! ], EFTA, ............glorious isolation !
Personally EEA but that's a debate for the future.
At least, you are coherent. Would you agree then there needs to be another referendum if LEAVE were to win between EEA or EFTA or something else ?
Or, would you leave [sic ] that to the government or Parliament ?
If it was up to me I'd recommend a negotiation to join the EEA as a transition to leaving with a referendum to endorse our joining the EEA (which I think would be won overwhelmingly, it'd have vast majority of today's Remain and about half of today's Leave backing it).
If the referendum fails then we leave outright and just negotiate simply trade deals like Canada etc
It's not an alternative, it's the fundament. When the baseline, worst case, scenario is actually outlined - we know longer have a 'free' market (that we pay handsomely for) with the EU, it becomes as scary as sock monsters under the bed. All the Remain Frank Spencer panicky chaff looks ridiculous. The real risk; the real unknown, is staying in, where there is no floor of how bad it could get, because even EU laws themselves are continually bent and twisted and offer no protection.
To go back to my first point, the point that you carefully keep sidestepping - Leave have no idea what Leave means. Everyone has their own pet version and most of them are mutually contradictory.
If Britain votes Leave, we're heading for an almighty argument where at best almost no one will get what they want. And for what? In all probability, some notional concept of "sovereignty" that doesn't really exist in the interconnected world in which we now live unless we retreat into manic protectionism or North Korean-style autarky.
As a proposition, it sucks harder than a non-EU vacuum cleaner.
That's interesting.
Slightly at odds with your other posts that it's because we would have "sovereignty" that we would use it to be mean to The Gays, and lynch foreigners.
When you scratch the surface and ask what people actually want to be able to do that they can't do in the EU, the answers that come back are:
1) dispense with the human rights culture (presumably after leaving the ECHR, though strictly speaking that's irrelevant) 2) stop foreigners coming in 3) prop up failing industries
To be fair, I'd put those under "manic protectionism" rather than "North Korean-style autarky".
The anti-immigrant and reactionary overtones that usually go with that are a noxious side-effect.
To be honest, I think you're engaging in a bit of rationalisation now you've made up your mind.
Despite you brandishing him as a "Leaver" Philip Thompson was actually on the fence like you a few months ago, and leaning to Remain, but has now come off the fence the other way and not for any of the reasons you ascribe to stereotype those you now oppose.
Well I met someone today who was very strongly for 'leave'. Her reasons were only that she was fed up with our courts being over ruled by the EU.
The first job for Remain is a rapid re-education program
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
If Britain votes Leave, Britiain leaves the EU from the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Leave means.
It may be that new terms are made in the future even after a Leave vote. If so, we can expect future debates. But no one can pretend that's not the the prospectus offered by Leave.
False symmetry is a specialism of Leavers. It ignores the fact that government policy is to remain in the EU. A leave vote would be a repudiation of government policy and require a new one to be drawn up.
The greatest source of amusement for me at present is knowing that precisely the most passionate Leavers would be precisely the angriest posters in a year or two's time after a Leave vote when their dreams had not been met.
Your post ignores the fact that government policy is the very definition of transient and not permanent politics.
Since the last Europe Referendum: # The parties of government have changed at an election four times # Six Prime Ministers have been in Downing Street # There have been nine general elections # There have been nine Chancellor's of the Exchequer # There have been sixteen Home Secretary's
To suggest that government policy should be at all relevant to this referendum is laughable. Government policy is a matter for general elections, not referenda.
We know what Remain means. We haven't a Scooby what Leave means.
What's laughable is your attempt to suggest that there is much doubt about the first or the slightest clarity about the second.
Comments
Trump should win ~62% of today's delegates, Kasich 21% [assuming OH], Cruz 13% and Rubio 2%.
Trump should extend his delegate lead over Cruz from <100 to near 300...
basically people who are to busy rushing around to have time to think are voting remain whereas more mature people and those with the opportunity for full reflection are voting leave,
Do we hang on in the empty shell of a marriage, or do we start the divorce and have confidence in ourselves to find something better??
EV should be resisted in all forms at the moment. The tech isn't there to do it safely or securely.
Jeet Heer
Wow. National Review's raw, undisguished contempt on white working class makes Trumpism seems by contrast attractive https://t.co/PU3YHgoHHc
I seem to recall similar discussions long before the age of smartphones.
Personally, I'd try Tinder or internet dating.
And I'd do my frolicking in private too.
They don't have the ability to accept that there are downsides as well as upsides to leaving the EU. It's this lack of realism that is superabundant on the Leave side which is so offputting.
You can pretty well guarantee that if there were ever a Leave vote, an absolute majority of those voting Leave would be feeling betrayed in short order. That doesn't sound to me like a healthy state of affairs.
The Labour leadership election, while the source of all sorts of controversy, seemed to get the electronic voting thing fairly well sorted.
Security of the vote trumps turnout every time.
Edited to be a bit more polite.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10dmK7O-KSY
Any disappointments I'd direct at the UK government of the day, which would then both have the power and accountability to me.
Don't make me get out the video again ...
This sort of discussion is always helped by going back to basics. What are the fundamentals you want from the actual physical process of voting? Security (ensuring the vote cannot be altered), obscurity (protecting the way a voter's voted), accuracy (ensuring the end result accurately matches the electorate's wishes) and freedom (ensuring the voter is under no pressure to vote a certain way) are some good ones to start with.
The problem is that I cannot see how EV (especially online EV) can match those requirements. Our current system does, if only because we've worked out the way people can game it on a large scale and built in safeguards.
How are you feeling about your Leave bet? It's come in a fair bit. Was at 3.0 earlier.
The vote of someone you dislike counts for exactly the same as your own.
Plenty can't be arsed/don't want to do that.
Honestly, applying for a PV is the easiest thing in the world. But you do have to fill it out, and post it.
"Each member of a governing party would be in acute danger if he failed to perceive changing winds. Deafness can quickly lead to dismissal."
http://www.welt.de/debatte/kolumnen/Weltlage/article153325600/In-England-waeren-Merkels-Tage-gezaehlt.html
We have exit polls:
http://www.naplesnews.com/news/politics/elections/Election-2016-Unofficial-Collier-Lee-exit-poll-results-371906112.html
It's for Naples City in Florida.
Trump 51%
Rubio 20
Cruz 17
Kasich 10
Hillary 73
Sanders 27
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-35817121
If Britain votes Leave, we're heading for an almighty argument where at best almost no one will get what they want. And for what? In all probability, some notional concept of "sovereignty" that doesn't really exist in the interconnected world in which we now live unless we retreat into manic protectionism or North Korean-style autarky.
As a proposition, it sucks harder than a non-EU vacuum cleaner.
Obscurity and accuracy seem straightforward as anyone who's tried to find out what a teenager is up to on Snapchat can tell you. Freedom is a big issue, but again no worse than with a postal vote (you can stand over someone with the same threat of physical violence whether they are using their phone or filling a card for you to post). So overall I don't see that EV is a step down from PV, though for those who support polling station only I can see I distinction. on your final test.
The following appraisal is similarly stupid: "The campaign to remain in the EU needs to shift on to the patriotic argument because, if we leave it to the other side, we’ll allow them to sell a false prospectus of patriotism."
Has he just realised that the referendum is about foreign policy, about more (supposed) national independence (Leave), versus less (supposed) national independence (Remain)?
And he thinks Remain can win on patriotism? Is he joking?
This next bit shows that at least he's got a clue: "There’s a danger that the next four months become an emotional argument versus a rational argument. All the figures are bouncing off people already."
Indeed. As anybody could have told them. Remain won't win by clogging people's ears up with percentages. Campaigns win by emotion. Mass politics is about emotion. Sometimes, but only sometimes, campaigns harness rationality to the emotion. More specifically, one side sometimes attracts people who think they're not simply self-interested but truly rational, and who get an emotional kick from wallowing in that self-image. That's why even some non-LibDems in Oxford and Cambridge voted for electoral reform. But such markets are largely irrelevant in the coming referendum. Sure, campaigns always hook rationalisation up to their brands, but rationalisation isn't rationality. Andy should go to Advertising 101.
Remain haven't got an equivalent of the Orange Order to make the "passionate" case for Remaining.
"Are you for or against the established politicians, who for decades have ignored the reality of immigration and who still do talk crap about it?" is how many people view the issue that's being voted on. The notion of momentum is built in to the idea of Leaving. That puts Remain in big trouble. If the major parties had some competent leaders, the referendum would have been called years ago and Remain might have had a chance. Letting it drag on was the worst mistake.
Eurovision-style pap - "we all wave different flags, but we love our continent and the EU" - isn't going to win it for Remain.
Remain are obviously the "better the devil you know" side, but they're unlikely to win by playing on fear, because fear and loathing are the other side's cards. Leave are making the running. The idea that "all those Muslims and darkies will move from Calais to Kent if Britain leaves the EU" has had little impact. That was a ridiculous line anyway. People who enter Britain through the Channel come from France, and few who seek asylum in Britain allege persecution by France.
I'll give Remain a clue: dig the dirt on Leave's leaders.
By political persuasion it's the tiny leftish factions of the Greens, Plaid, SNP and Lib Dems.
People who have bought their houses outright - those most likely to have 'built' Britain with their taxes - are the keenest leavers.
Part time workers - those who may be most affected by limitless labour supplies of cheap foreign alternatives - are Leavers as well - along with self starting, independently minded self employed.
I just hope Shia LaBoeuf either isn't in, or his character gets killed pronto.
If Britain votes Remain, Britain remains in the EU on the basis of the terms negotiated by David Cameron. Like them or not (I find them pretty uninspiring), that's what Remain means.
It may be that those terms are not honoured in the future even after a Remain vote. If so, we can expect pandemonium. But no one can pretend that's not the prospectus offered by Remain.
Not much profit yet. I hope that Leave gets down to evens at least so I can trade out all green. Surely as it gets closer and a few get wobbly with the polls it should pan out that way.
Sometimes simple makes sense.
Trump and Hillary win Florida with massive margins.
If only we had one from places like Ohio and Missouri or even Illinois.
Slightly at odds with your other posts that it's because we would have "sovereignty" that we would use it to be mean to The Gays, and lynch foreigners.
Edited extra bit: I think Pandemonium, or lack thereof, depends at least somewhat on what the changes (or failure to implement Cameron's renegotiation) are. It may be a damp squib.
So you can play up your imagined division between Leavers but its all in your imagination. You're better off sticking with your childish personal attacks about people having middle aged crises.
It may be that new terms are made in the future even after a Leave vote. If so, we can expect future debates. But no one can pretend that's not the the prospectus offered by Leave.
Indiana Jones and the Lost Mall of Mobility Scooters?
Emotionally and symbolically, though, the referendum result will be hugely significant. A Remain win won't say "you irrational types have just been slapped down, so get more rational, woncha?" It'll say "issues have been swept under the carpet again - but for how long?" Try five minutes. A Leave win will scream "Emotional Release!" and "Truth has Broken Through!"
I'm pro-Remain, by the way. I just think Leave is at an amazingly good price in the betting markets.
;-)
1) dispense with the human rights culture (presumably after leaving the ECHR, though strictly speaking that's irrelevant)
2) stop foreigners coming in
3) prop up failing industries
To be fair, I'd put those under "manic protectionism" rather than "North Korean-style autarky".
The anti-immigrant and reactionary overtones that usually go with that are a noxious side-effect.
After all, the Lib Dems didn't just throw in the towel, after losing two thirds of their support in 2015.
It's best to stick to plagues of frogs.
The greatest source of amusement for me at present is knowing that precisely the most passionate Leavers would be precisely the angriest posters in a year or two's time after a Leave vote when their dreams had not been met.
Realistically it looks like our economy needs and will continue to need a substantial amount of immigration to retain an appropriate age profile in the workforce, and that seems fine. We just need to be able to decide which skillsets we require (which may well included substantial unskilled immigration) rather than have no control.
Or, would you leave [sic ] that to the government or Parliament ?
Despite you brandishing him as a "Leaver" Philip Thompson was actually on the fence like you a few months ago, and leaning to Remain, but has now come off the fence the other way and not for any of the reasons you ascribe to stereotype those you now oppose.
Since the last Europe Referendum:
# The parties of government have changed at an election four times
# Six Prime Ministers have been in Downing Street
# There have been nine general elections
# There have been nine Chancellor's of the Exchequer
# There have been sixteen Home Secretary's
To suggest that government policy should be at all relevant to this referendum is laughable. Government policy is a matter for general elections, not referenda.
What's laughable is your attempt to suggest that there is much doubt about the first or the slightest clarity about the second.
If the referendum fails then we leave outright and just negotiate simply trade deals like Canada etc
The first job for Remain is a rapid re-education program