Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Ruby Slippers wrote:If people couldn't be bothered to vote then they must accept a majority view of those that could! I wonder whether the 18-24 year olds either weren't particularly bothered either way about the result, or could they have been so arrogant to believe that the status quo would be kept whether they voted or not?
perhaps they respected their elders and didn't think they would be so stupid.
I doubt that very much, Bombay! Respect doesn't seem to be part of the current makeup of the young in the UK.
Surely the "elders" have grandchildren and children the majority of whom I spoke to voted with them mainly in mind they voted in a way that they thought would provide a better future for the younger generation.
Whether they were right or wrong remains to be seen.
The fact that Tony Blair thinks they voted incorrectly is his opinion, he is now a private citizen and whilst he is entitled to his opinion and to voice it to imply that the majority of the population are thick, uninformed, etc speaks volumes about the man himself.
Just a pity he didn't listen to alternative views before he announced the existence of weapons of mass destruction.
Ruby Slippers wrote:If people couldn't be bothered to vote then they must accept a majority view of those that could! I wonder whether the 18-24 year olds either weren't particularly bothered either way about the result, or could they have been so arrogant to believe that the status quo would be kept whether they voted or not?
perhaps they respected their elders and didn't think they would be so stupid.
Or....along with the government and the majority of "experts" they thought a REMAIN outcome was a foregone conclusion...and apathy prevailed.
In the, now unlikely, event they were given a second opportunity they might well turn out in sufficient numbers to reverse the decision .
I doubt we'll ever know.
I detect a theme amongst some that the very idea of "changing your mind" is anathema
I also detect a lot of "asserting what other people thought when voting".....always a dubious pastime!
I have to admit, Newcastle, that I got the shock of my life when the final result was revealed! I honestly didn't expect it to be that way, especially after reading and hearing so many vitriolic comments from 'remainers' - who coincidentally happened to be expats living in other EU countries, in the main.
I see that Bombay’s final word on the subject was like his referendum vote and is keen to accept the figures when they SEEM to support his own view, which they do not. No one can say how anyone else voted and as Newcastle acknowledges the pollsters got it seriously wrong and no doubt it is the same with these figures, as RS has said if those younger voters who outnumber all of the groups who Bombay thinks will be dead within 10 years had got off their backsides to vote then it may have been different. The percentages given by Newcastle are in themselves misleading as they only show the percentage of people in those age groups that actually voted, the ‘leave or ‘remain’ part is pure speculation. I am not sure which age group Bombay falls within, but taking his words seriously he seems to think that anyone over 50 should not have had a vote and the 14,232,400 voters between 25 and 49 years old should decide on everyone else’s behalf and the other 17,594,560 voters who bothered to turn out should not count?
perhaps they respected their elders and didn't think they would be so stupid.
Why should they have done that? you obviously don't unless it suits your logic.
I bet you thought the same way when in Egypt they voted in the Muslim Brotherhood and wrecked the economy and your business interests along with it, or was that down to all the young voters who exercised their voting rights for the first time? When the people decided they had enough of Morsi were they wrong to kick him out? Well the majority here felt the same about the EU and like Egypt if they felt differently then they could have voted differently or turned out in higher numbers, no point in whining after the result.
The only reason those who bought the snake oil are afraid of another referendum on the deal reached to leave or come to it any other referendum is because they know many but not all obviously have realized their mistake and it would be a landslide to stay. If they were remotely sure it would be the same outcome or increase their margin they would hold one tomorrow.
This referendum was a stupid ploy by Cameron to shut these twats up in his party and to the amazement of Farage and the Britexiters in the Tories they won
One obvious reason why the public will NOT be given the opportunity to reconsider is that the politicos, having f*cked up royally once, will not be interested in the possibility of having to disclaim all the rhetoric they have been spouting over the last months about the "benefits and advantages" of going it alone.
newcastle wrote:One obvious reason why the public will NOT be given the opportunity to reconsider is that the politicos, having f*cked up royally once, will not be interested in the possibility of having to disclaim all the rhetoric they have been spouting over the last months about the "benefits and advantages" of going it alone.
It really wouldn't look good
the main problem is there should never have been a referendum in the first place that is why we have Parliament and the Lords and if needs be vote on something tangible like whats the alternate will be not 350m a day for the Health service or no immigrants.
Bombay, I'm completely at a loss to understand why and how the remain vote affects you. Would you care to explain why? From your previous posts, you are committed to Egypt, so your comments would appear to be completely extraneous.
Just in case anyone is thinking the opposite - I have no animosity towards Bombay or anyone else for their opinions, or voicing them. My comments are being made in the cause of furthering debate, rather than censuring anyone else's.
RS its for the same reason that you find Scotsmen all over the world singing songs about how good it is in Scotland and the same reason that Obama stuck his nose in, the reason being they want you to vote for their own interests and not for the good of the UK. The reason people voted the way they did is because they do not like the way their country is going and they want to get back control again. If the likes of Bombay wishes to live in another country then that is his choice, but please do not tell the rest of us who live here that we are either stupid, racist or that we did not understand the implications, or too old to have a vote. How in gods name can you set out all the conditions of your exit prior to taking a referendum vote? Especially with an EU elite that refused to hold any prior discussions. Even a simpleton can see that as soon as you set out your stall and say for example “we want to remain in the free trade area, but not have free movement of people” as being one of our conditions, then the EU will just refuse the items that they know would stop our exiting in the first place. You are all so keen on saying it is up to Parliament, but not to keen on letting the government of the day get on with its job of setting out its negotiating position, I would love to play 3 card brag with you, it would be easy money as you would tell me your hand before I decided to gamble. The vote in parliament was overwhelmingly in favour of implementing article 50 and all sides could have their say including Mr B-Liars old party who’s decision he now wishes to circumvent. Just imagine that any government goes into a negotiating strategy that then has to be approved in another referendum, does anyone actually think that the EU would agree to any deal that would be considered OK by everyone in the UK? They would simply have to dismiss any terms we put forward without any further need to discuss our terms of exit as they would be in a win win situation.
The simple question on the ballot paper that was headed “Referendum on the United Kingdom’s membership of the European Union” was as follows:
“Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”
A straight forward question with no ambiguity.
Followed by a tick box that said: “Remain a member of the European Union”
And another that said: “Leave the European Union”
That was it, no questions on immigration or NHS funding, just a simple question with two choices and it was up to every individual who voted to make up their own minds on the matter, so which part of that democratic process do you not understand?
carrie wrote:More or less you were all too thick to come to a reasonable conclusion.
Maybe not "too thick", but in general less educated.
"- The data confirms previous indications that local results were strongly associated with the educational attainment of voters - populations with lower qualifications were significantly more likely to vote Leave. (The data for this analysis comes from one in nine wards)"
"- The level of education had a higher correlation with the voting pattern than any other major demographic measure from the census."
1.I do not have to explain my view to anyone but I will.
2.I have not made my comments directed at anyone, I understand direct attacks are against the rules, an administrator should know this.
For the record I hold a British Passport where I choose to live is irrelevant I do not or never have subscribed to the me me me attitude if I did i may well have left here ages ago.
I believe its wrong for the UK full stop I do not believe the referendum was held for the interest of the UK and believe given the opportunity there would be an overwhelming different outcome. Which is why the those who that are deluded into thinking they won something (like Jack did when won his ticket on the TITANIC) are vehemently against a vote on the terms or a second vote full stop including the Tories, it took a court order to get last weeks debate.
We should have a referendum on giving the NHS an extra, say, 50 billion pounds immediately.
It would probably fly through.....leaving parliament (assuming you insist they simply follow a public vote) to deal with the fallout.....i.e. finding the money. The"yes" campaigners could raise the possibility of getting the money by scrapping Trident.
That's why referendums are basically a bad idea.....especially where complex issues are reduced to a yes/no vote.
If used at all, they are best confined to issues which do not have complex , long term ramifications. Abolishing the monarchy in favour of a republic would be an appropriate subject for a referendum. Or reinstating capital punishment (since we'll no longer be constrained by european norms)
During the referendum campaign - and even today - nobody was certain what the long term financial implications of leaving would be for the UK. Completely opposite scenarios were touted by each side, based largely on guesswork. I cannot believe the general public understood, let alone were persuaded by, any of the arguments on the financial issues.....control over our borders and legislation were the key factors.
Cameron was terrified that UKIP, campaigning on an exit promise, would damage his prospects at the election and therefore made a promise which has cost him his job and the outcome of which will not be assessable for some years. He obviously didn't consider seriously the possibility of the vote being for exiting EU.
Whether our new found "independence" comes at a price worth paying - we'll know in years to come. Maybe we'll even benefit financially....to the chagrin of those "doom & gloom" so-called financial experts.
To quote Who2..... audentes Fortuna iuvat !!
To be honest, even 8 months down the line, I don't know whether I'm in favour or not of leaving EU.
But what does get up my nose is people saying that I, or anyone unpersuaded by the referendum, should shut up and accept that we leave on terms, currently unknown, on which neither I nor parliament will be consulted.
newcastle wrote:We should have a referendum on giving the NHS an extra, say, 50 billion pounds immediately.
It would probably fly through.....leaving parliament (assuming you insist they simply follow a public vote) to deal with the fallout.....i.e. finding the money. The"yes" campaigners could raise the possibility of getting the money by scrapping Trident.
That's why referendums are basically a bad idea.....especially where complex issues are reduced to a yes/no vote.
If used at all, they are best confined to issues which do not have complex , long term ramifications. Abolishing the monarchy in favour of a republic would be an appropriate subject for a referendum. Or reinstating capital punishment (since we'll no longer be constrained by european norms)
During the referendum campaign - and even today - nobody was certain what the long term financial implications of leaving would be for the UK. Completely opposite scenarios were touted by each side, based largely on guesswork. I cannot believe the general public understood, let alone were persuaded by, any of the arguments on the financial issues.....control over our borders and legislation were the key factors.
Cameron was terrified that UKIP, campaigning on an exit promise, would damage his prospects at the election and therefore made a promise which has cost him his job and the outcome of which will not be assessable for some years. He obviously didn't consider seriously the possibility of the vote being for exiting EU.
Whether our new found "independence" comes at a price worth paying - we'll know in years to come. Maybe we'll even benefit financially....to the chagrin of those "doom & gloom" so-called financial experts.
To quote Who2..... audentes Fortuna iuvat !!
To be honest, even 8 months down the line, I don't know whether I'm in favour or not of leaving EU.
But what does get up my nose is people saying that I, or anyone unpersuaded by the referendum, should shut up and accept that we leave on terms, currently unknown, on which neither I nor parliament will be consulted.
Exactly.
Like it or not its going to take years and older people won't be here for the benefits that may come, there are certainly non at present or to come in the foreseeable future.
Steady on Bombay, you are not immune to your views being challenged and no one is attacking you any more than you are attacking me, if things are said in context of where you choose to live or to make your money it is no different than you calling everyone over 50 an old fogey and ill informed or Farley Flavours describing everyone who voted for Brexit as uneducated, I am quite prepared to accept his challenge on that score in both an academic and business capacity if he wishes, as he obviously puts himself in the higher intelligence group and therefore by implication his opinion carries more weight in a referendum than mine and 17 million others should, educated or not.
"- The level of education had a higher correlation with the voting pattern than any other major demographic measure from the census."
I don’t suppose the desire for Scottish Independence had any influence on their voting pattern then?
Bang goes the above argument!
there are certainly non at present or to come in the foreseeable future.
How do you know that? Already the weaker £ is bringing in more business to the UK, many engineering companies I know have seen a surge in orders, especially from Germany. For every downside there is a plus and none of us can say which way things are going until after we leave the EU, if we had believed the previous ‘experts’ we would have still been in the ERM and adopted the Euro.
Horus wrote:Steady on Bombay, you are not immune to your views being challenged and no one is attacking you any more than you are attacking me, if things are said in context of where you choose to live or to make your money it is no different than you calling everyone over 50 an old fogey and ill informed or Farley Flavours describing everyone who voted for Brexit as uneducated, I am quite prepared to accept his challenge on that score in both an academic and business capacity if he wishes, as he obviously puts himself in the higher intelligence group and therefore by implication his opinion carries more weight in a referendum than mine and 17 million others should, educated or not.
"- The level of education had a higher correlation with the voting pattern than any other major demographic measure from the census."
I don’t suppose the desire for Scottish Independence had any influence on their voting pattern then?
Bang goes the above argument!
there are certainly non at present or to come in the foreseeable future.
How do you know that? Already the weaker £ is bringing in more business to the UK, many engineering companies I know have seen a surge in orders, especially from Germany. For every downside there is a plus and none of us can say which way things are going until after we leave the EU, if we had believed the previous ‘experts’ we would have still been in the ERM and adopted the Euro.
I have never mentioned you once only the voter's who voted leave in general.
I never said "I know" I said it's what I believe. Germany need lots of materials to build all the banks and offices for the companies that will leave the UK especially the banks they have been trying to get to Frankfurt for years.
What I do know and would put money on it if there was another vote we would not be leaving all the leavers know this and that's why they don't want any other votes.
How many votes should there be, if a next one voted to remain would then the exiters demand yet another, there could be a "best of 3"
The people have decided, we preach democracy through out the world surely now it would be best for everyone just to concentrate on getting the best deal available for the UK leaving the EU, I can't see it doing much for our negotiating stance when other countries see so much division. Dire warnings were issued by the Governor of the Bank of England as to the immediate impact of an "out" vote none of which seem to have taken place and he has admitted that he was wrong.
The devaluation of the pound has many positive impacts making our exports much cheaper thereby helping the manufacturing industries, even farmers, who depended on EU subsidies so very much, seem to be coming round to the idea of leaving.
I like Bombay don't live in the UK but just because we don't doesn't mean we are not entitled to an opinion on the matter even though we disagree, friendly disagreements are healthy.
If Theresa May cannot negotiate an "acceptable" deal with EU - whatever that means - should we just crash out on WTO terms or reconsider exiting....on the reasonable assumption that the EU would be happy for us to withdraw our notice to leave?
