Should the UK remain a member of the EU

[Pureblood]

1 hour ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

The lies wouldn't be so worrying if the vote had been, say, 80/20; we could reassure ourselves with the idea that the lies probably didn't fool enough people to swing the vote.

 

On a 51.9/48.1 split, you would really have to stubbornly tell yourself that the lies about the NHS, about immigrants, about Turkey, about sovereignty, etc. etc. had no effect whatsoever; and that's just not plausible.

 

The lies and corruption swung the vote.

All politicians lie, though.  That's their job. 

 

I can reluctantly accept that we have to leave in some capacity on the basis of the Referendum result.  What I can't accept is the hard Brexit or no deal approach, as none of that was mentioned prior to the Referendum as an inevitable consequence of Leave winning.  Instead they talked about a Norway deal, retaining single market membership in some way and so on.  But after the vote, slowly but steadily, the hard Brexiteers have manipulated the public narrative to equate leaving as meaning leaving with no deal, and that that's what it meant all along, and that sucks balls. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

Their job isn’t to lie. 

[Gnasher]

3 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

The lies wouldn't be so worrying if the vote had been, say, 80/20; we could reassure ourselves with the idea that the lies probably didn't fool enough people to swing the vote.

 

On a 51.9/48.1 split, you would really have to stubbornly tell yourself that the lies about the NHS, about immigrants, about Turkey, about sovereignty, etc. etc. had no effect whatsoever; and that's just not plausible.

 

The lies and corruption swung the vote.

 

A bit of context, yes it was approx 52-48 split but what you seem to have forgot angry is we had a huge turnout. No won the vote by approx 1mil plus 300 thousand. Thats a lot of votes.

 

You also fail (suprise suprise) to mention the lies told on both sides. Osbourns emergency budget, the looming house price crash spring to mind.

[Rico1304]

2 hours ago, Gnasher said:

 

A bit of context, yes it was approx 52-48 split but what you seem to have forgot angry is we had a huge turnout. No won the vote by approx 1mil plus 300 thousand. Thats a lot of votes.

 

You also fail (suprise suprise) to mention the lies told on both sides. Osbourns emergency budget, the looming house price crash spring to mind.

So because everyone lied it’s ok? What complete bollocks. If the result had been 60/40 in Leave’s favour then lots of the arguments would fall away. The fact it was a ‘dishonest’ campaign is more reason not less. 

 

And of course (surprise surprise) fail to mention the billions spent avoiding the impacts immediately after the vote. 

[Stickman]

13 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

 

 

 

Hopefully this horrible cunt "Big Phil Campion" who looks like he does security for Britain First gets fucked off from Sky's The Pledge because of this although seeing as it's Sky he'll probably get a pay rise

 

[sir roger]

Should be photo-shopped to BORN GORMLESS

[Dr Nowt]

Big Phil Campion looks like he goes on caravan holidays with Lee Froch.

[clangers]

7 hours ago, Gnasher said:

 

A bit of context, yes it was approx 52-48 split but what you seem to have forgot angry is we had a huge turnout. No won the vote by approx 1mil plus 300 thousand. Thats a lot of votes.

 

You also fail (suprise suprise) to mention the lies told on both sides. Osbourns emergency budget, the looming house price crash spring to mind.

Very true, both sides lied however leave won and as the winning side advocating change it is their promises being scrutinised so it's perfectly reasonable to compare their truth with the reality of Brexit. Leave did not campaign on the basis of a no-deal Brexit as an example.

[mattyq]

7 hours ago, Gnasher said:

 

A bit of context, yes it was approx 52-48 split but what you seem to have forgot angry is we had a huge turnout. No won the vote by approx 1mil plus 300 thousand. Thats a lot of votes.

 

You also fail (suprise suprise) to mention the lies told on both sides. Osbourns emergency budget, the looming house price crash spring to mind.

You often see this trotted out by dimwits and liars... fortunately it's not true

The turnout for the ref was 72%... for the Scottish ref it was 85%

For every election from 1945 until 2001 the turnout was higher than the ref

It's an average sized turnout 3% higher than the last General Election

[Pureblood]

9 hours ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Their job isn’t to lie. 

It's intrinsic to what they do, unless you turn a blind eye to reality. 

[Boss]

1 hour ago, mattyq said:

You often see this trotted out by dimwits and liars... fortunately it's not true

The turnout for the ref was 72%... for the Scottish ref it was 85%

For every election from 1945 until 2001 the turnout was higher than the ref

It's an average sized turnout 3% higher than the last General Election

 

Wrong. 1997, 1970 less turnout. 

[Boss]

John Major General Election 1992 - Highest turnout in modern times.

77.7% 

44,673,256 people 

 

EU Referendum 2016

72.21%

46,500,001 people

 

Higher turnout in the EU referendum than any general election in history.

[Babb'sBurstNad]

7 minutes ago, Boss said:

John Major General Election 1992 - Highest turnout in modern times.

77.7% 

44,673,256 people 

 

EU Referendum 2016

72.21%

46,500,001 people

 

More people voted in the EU referendum than any general election in history. 

More people, but not a higher turnout.

[Boss]

Yeah, that's what I meant. 

[deiseach]

2 hours ago, mattyq said:

You often see this trotted out by dimwits and liars... fortunately it's not true

The turnout for the ref was 72%... for the Scottish ref it was 85%

For every election from 1945 until 2001 the turnout was higher than the ref

It's an average sized turnout 3% higher than the last General Election

The highest turnouts in UK elections are invariably in Northern Ireland which really shows how vibrant and resilient democracy is there said no-one ever.

[Gnasher]

9 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

So because everyone lied it’s ok? What complete bollocks. If the result had been 60/40 in Leave’s favour then lots of the arguments would fall away. The fact it was a ‘dishonest’ campaign is more reason not less. 

 

And of course (surprise surprise) fail to mention the billions spent avoiding the impacts immediately after the vote. 

No thats not what i said. Angry made a resonable point about the lies told before the vote i simply added a fuller picture by arguing it happend on both sides, i never said it was ok.

 

As Osbourn and Cameron were in govt at the time and a letter was sent to every household in the uk maybe they had the uppee hand in the misinfomation stakes.  For example i would envisage the average joe would put weight to a sitting chancelor than an unelected farage type motormouth.

[Rico1304]

2 hours ago, Gnasher said:

No thats not what i said. Angry made a resonable point about the lies told before the vote i simply added a fuller picture by arguing it happend on both sides, i never said it was ok.

 

As Osbourn and Cameron were in govt at the time and a letter was sent to every household in the uk maybe they had the uppee hand in the misinfomation stakes.  For example i would envisage the average joe would put weight to a sitting chancelor than an unelected farage type motormouth.

If you had a match and I told you not to throw it on your house in case it set on fire. Then you did, and it started to burn but then I turned up with the fire brigade and put it out - you weren’t right.  

 

Jesus. 

[Gnasher]

3 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

If you had a match and I told you not to throw it on your house in case it set on fire. Then you did, and it started to burn but then I turned up with the fire brigade and put it out - you weren’t right.  

 

Jesus. 

Errrr ok rico ok.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

19 hours ago, Gnasher said:

 

A bit of context, yes it was approx 52-48 split but what you seem to have forgot angry is we had a huge turnout. No won the vote by approx 1mil plus 300 thousand. Thats a lot of votes.

 

You also fail (suprise suprise) to mention the lies told on both sides. Osbourns emergency budget, the looming house price crash spring to mind.

You'll never catch me defending anything Osborne has ever said or done, but there's a logical flaw in the examples of "lies" that you've chosen.

 

The Leave campaigns made claims that they knew were false: that the EU made a large proportion of UK law; that the UK sent £350m a week to the EU; that Turkey's accession was imminent; that the UK was at "Breaking Point" with brown people; etc. These were all lies.

 

What you've cited from the Remain side is some forecasts which didn't materialise.  You might argue that those forecasts were based on false premises  (as some of them - from both sides - may well have been). But they are not lies, per se.

 

Here's an example.

Carole Kirkwood says it will probably rain tomorrow, but it turns out to be sunny.  She isn't lying.

Conversely, if I look out of the window on a sunny day and tell you it's raining, that would be a lie. And that is what the Leave campaigns did relentlessly. 

[Boss]

1 minute ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

You'll never catch me defending anything Osborne has ever said or done, but there's a logical flaw in the examples of "lies" that you've chosen.

 

The Leave campaigns made claims that they knew were false: that the EU made a large proportion of UK law; that the UK sent £350m a week to the EU; that Turkey's accession was imminent; that the UK was at "Breaking Point" with brown people; etc. These were all lies.

 

What you've cited from the Remain side is some forecasts which didn't materialise.  You might argue that those forecasts were based on false premises  (as some of them - from both sides - may well have been). But they are not lies, per se.

 

Here's an example.

Carole Kirkwood says it will probably rain tomorrow, but it turns out to be sunny.  She isn't lying.

Conversely, if I look out of the window on a sunny day and tell you it's raining, that would be a lie. And that is what the Leave campaigns did relentlessly. 

 

Lies from Remain 

 

1. Tusk - Western Civilisation would be destroyed if the UK vote to leave

2. Cameron - Gave a speech about "rows of headstones" invoking WW3 if we left

3. Osbourne - Punitive spending cuts and tax hikes that never happened

4. Soubry - Brexit would cause an immediate recession

5. Cameron - We can change the Eu from within

6. Remain Campaign - 3 million people would lose their job if we left the EU

7. Companies would leave the UK in their droves

8. Cameron - He would NOT resign if Britain votes to leave

9. Clegg - EU army claims are a "dangerous fantasy" in relation to Farage. 3 months later EU army proposed by Juncker

10. Cameron - UK can manage it's immigration policy within the EU

11. Various Universities - UK will lose Horizon 2020 funding

12. Cameron - Jobless EU migrants can be kicked out

13. Remain Campaign - Each family will be £4,300 worse off

14. Cameron - There will be migrant camps in Kent

15. Cameron - Brexit would lead to a mass invasion of asylum seekers

16. Remain campaign leaflet - Being in the EU ensures we are controlling immigration and have strong borders (sent to every household in the country)

 

That's just off the top of my head.

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Most of those things were forecasts that didn't  (fully) materialise - although some have partly come true, even though we haven't left yet. Others may yet come true, depending on how and when we leave the EU. 

 

Others are basically true: for example, the UK could have chosen to be tougher on EU jobseekers and the UK could have exercised its influence within the EU more effectively. 

 

It's really nothing to compare to the tsunami of bullshit that Leave campaigners surfed on.

[Boss]

1 hour ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Most of those things were forecasts that didn't  (fully) materialise - although some have partly come true, even though we haven't left yet. Others may yet come true, depending on how and when we leave the EU. 

 

Others are basically true: for example, the UK could have chosen to be tougher on EU jobseekers and the UK could have exercised its influence within the EU more effectively. 

 

It's really nothing to compare to the tsunami of bullshit that Leave campaigners surfed on.

 

Isn't that just a nice way of saying bullshit .... forecasts that didn't materialise?

[Gnasher]

6 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

You'll never catch me defending anything Osborne has ever said or done, but there's a logical flaw in the examples of "lies" that you've chosen.

 

The Leave campaigns made claims that they knew were false: that the EU made a large proportion of UK law; that the UK sent £350m a week to the EU; that Turkey's accession was imminent; that the UK was at "Breaking Point" with brown people; etc. These were all lies.

 

What you've cited from the Remain side is some forecasts which didn't materialise.  You might argue that those forecasts were based on false premises  (as some of them - from both sides - may well have been). But they are not lies, per se.

 

Here's an example.

Carole Kirkwood says it will probably rain tomorrow, but it turns out to be sunny.  She isn't lying.

Conversely, if I look out of the window on a sunny day and tell you it's raining, that would be a lie. And that is what the Leave campaigns did relentlessly. 

It was a bit more than a  "logical flaw" in Osbourns threat angry, 

 

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/would-osbornes-promised-emergency-budget-actually-materialise-after-brexit-i-very-much-doubt-it-a7083946.html

 

 

It was a lie. A lie that got proved ro be a lie.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

17 hours ago, Boss said:

 

Higher turnout

 

17 hours ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

not a higher turnout.

 

17 hours ago, Boss said:

Yeah, that's what I meant. 

.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

4 hours ago, Boss said:

 

Isn't that just a nice way of saying bullshit .... forecasts that didn't materialise?

No.

If you want to understand what bullshit is, I'd recommend Harry Frankfurt's "On Bullshit".

Forecasts are something completely different.