People who claim Brexiters are less intelligent than Bremainers...

Scroll to see replies

So in otherwords, uneducated voters, the people this thread is aimed at, were deceived. £350mil is not going to the NHS. I'd be surprised if even 15% of that went to the NHS.
The massive eye grabbing £350mil was one of their main selling points. And conveniently Farage only admitted it was bs literally the day after the election.

And I love how you you leave out the part where you lied by saying the figure wasn't from the leave campaign just 1 post ago. Gj mate.

And you think you're more educated being what 17 doing A levels than somebody with far more field experience and market experience? Im sure fisherman and steel workers would find your 'education' very relevant and informing indeed, considering you seem to just be parroting arguments found in the guardian it doesn't seem to be very well researched anyway.

You completely neglect the fact that we now have a 250m surplus of money into the country that would otherwise did not have before. You'd be 'surprised' your speculations and opinions of where you anticipate the money is spent is as irrelevant as anybody's conjecture so don't try to muddle fact and opinion. The fact is 250m+ that isn't going to develop other countries but to develop ours.

'One of their main selling points' lol - just read polls why people voted and you will see that is a load of bs, and you clearly know it but you're trying to paint this picture that people have been completely misled and are now bitter about it. In reality less than 1% of voters regret voting leave so clearly the point has no weight whatsoever

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why

I never said it wasn't in the leave campaign, lol love it how you have to resort to now fabricating what somebody has said, that's what we call a straw man. Show me where i said it wasn't included in the leave campaign whatsoever.

Original post by lucabrasi98

Keep telling yourself that caricature to help you sleep at night, If the poll shown that only 1% of leave voters not regretting their votes is accurate then clearly they were not misled on lies when those inaccuracies became apparent because they otherwise would have now changed their mind.

Farage does not represent the official leave campaign as he said himself, Anjem Choudary supported the Remain campaign, what is your point?

Original post by lucabrasi98

The same guy boasting about how smart he is goes and calls protesting undemocratic in the same thread. For the record the referendum is non binding. For all I know they could just assess the situation and reject the referendum itself in parliament. They're still due to further debate it.

Thats me alright :biggrin:

yeah petitioning to overrule a democratically elected decision with the mandate of some 17.2m people by a petition of 3m, riddled with petition fraud and endorsements from people in tunisia, iceland and australia is definitely democratic indeed.

All parties have already said that they will respect the vote and are now putting the very first steps in place to begin its process, obscure backbenchers like Lammy and the butt hurt SNP will not change anything.

Original post by lucabrasi98

And if you'd actually bother to research, they aren't straight up asking for a revote because "muh it's not fair!". They're asking for revotes to be done if there's below a 60% majority and lower than a 75% voter turnout. It can apply to any referendum. 51:49 is too narrow of a margin to decide the fate of the country, don't you agree? If the referendum was held on a different time of the year with different, for all we know there could be a 2% swing either way. However there will never be an 11% swing in votes just because of a small change in conditions. I think wanting a 60% majority on important decisions is fair.

The point has already been reasoned to be bogus because a 75% turnout would mean that every remain supporter who voted would be disincentivised from even turning up which would completely make a mockery of a democratic system. It is just a laughable attempt to try to preserve the status-quo, if you want to argue that line at least petition MPs to block the vote citing representative democracy as somehow more important than direct democracy.

Original post by lucabrasi98

Somehow, I'm not surprised by your lack of research into your own arguments.

Considering you make points which are pretty much recycled in the Guardian and social media im not surprised of any of your points and the reasoning of them has shown to have very little weight. Stick to your A level Maths and Physics. Uni awaits this October :biggrin:

Reply 221

hellodave5

Original post by moggis

I thought I was going to agree with this post but I couldn't disagree more.

The overwhelming majority of leave voters have been itching to vote leave for YEARS.

It's no doubt true that a few 100,000s were convinced by untruths to vote leave but if any dide were 'manipulated ' it was surely the remainers.

I think one reason remain got so many votes is because a lot of people will have believed the utter crap Osbourne and Cameron came out with might actually be true and didn't want to take a risk.

Thanks for the message, discussion is always positive.
Perhaps so that they have wanted to leave for a long time; but for the right reasons?
In honesty, I think it was a significant proportion that was duped - maybe like 25-50%.
What was wrong with the stay campaign? I see there to be considerable problems leaving which I don't think that people that voted leave really comprehend as a general rule.

Reply 222

lucabrasi98

Original post by AverageExcellence

You completely neglect the fact that we now have a 250m surplus of money into the country that would otherwise did not have before.

I don't care about the point. That's not what I'm arguing about. I'm arguing about the blatant lying. But at least even you see that. And I'm not neglecting it, I'm also factoring in how much we'll lose in the process. But when people like Gove are telling all leavers to ignore expert opinion, I can't say I'm surprised to you too quoting that figure and ignoring the economic repercussions in general. I wonder why basically every economist and the majority of politicians were against the leave?

Lol right after I read that gibberish I saw this in the sidebar http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=4189443

Original post by AverageExcellence

I never said it wasn't in the leave campaign, lol love it how you have to resort to now fabricating what somebody has said,

Ooops... I'm not going to lie, I read "asked a guy who wasn't even on the leave campaign" as "it wasn't even on the leave campaign.
Ignore that (apologies)

Original post by AverageExcellence

Keep telling yourself that caricature to help you sleep at night, If the poll shown that only 1% of leave voters not regretting their votes is accurate then clearly they were not misled on lies when those inaccuracies became apparent because they otherwise would have now changed their mind.
Farage does not represent the official leave campaign as he said himself, Anjem Choudary supported the Remain campaign, what is your point?

A poll aimed at a demographic of 40+ who were voting leave anyway as a majority shows few would change their decision! Wow you really shocked me there. In the same poll. Wow you've shocked me there. That means only 1% of the 17mil who voted leave now regret their decision right?

Funnily enough the bbc have already done a poll on this. Can't remember the figures but it was significantly higher than 1%. Unlike your source, they know how to correctly sample it seems.

And if a person like Farage who is supporting leave, the person who, of all people you'd expect to me one of the most informed in the country on the benefits and disadvantages. A person most likely prepped by a PR team and has a team of economists and statisticians that have led him to conclude that the leave vote is right for him and supplied him with plenty of data to argue his (deluded) point. If even HE can say the figure was a huge mistake then surely that must start ringing bells. When he started rambling on about the money we'd be gaining (conveniently ignoring the money we'd be losing), he was asked again if he thought the NHS would still see that quoted £350mil. He still said no.

Original post by AverageExcellence

All parties have already said that they will respect the vote and are now putting the very first steps in place to begin its process, obscure backbenchers like Lammy and the butt hurt SNP will not change anything.The point has already been reasoned to be bogus because a 75% turnout would mean that every remain supporter who voted would be disincentivised from even turning up which would completely make a mockery of a democratic system. It is just a laughable attempt to try to preserve the status-quo, if you want to argue that line at least petition MPs to block the vote citing representative democracy as somehow more important than direct democracy.

Please stop dodging the point.

Let me get this straight, you believe no minimum turnouts and a potential 51/49 "majority" is enough to decide the fate of an entire country?

Who exactly reasoned it to be bogus? Voices in your head? If anything, more people would turn up to vote than before. Only downside is I think there'd always be more incentive the the side that lost which is why I can't support the petition. It's not completely fair. If that part was taken out then I'd sign it in an instant.

Surely you can't argue with needing a 60:40 majority though? Or are you that stubborn. And you're looking at it the wrong way. It's completely democratic. You're just too narrow minded to see the bigger picture. It's about more than this referendum alone. There will always be people pissed but no decision in this country should be won when 49% of the country is unhappy. . 39% however, that's a very clear minority being unhappy with no discrepancy.

Original post by AverageExcellence

What an informative point. You are the one who was completely misinformed on your own argument by claiming the petition for for a "simple revote". Of course being the idiot that you are, instead of realizing you've messed up and apologizing you resort to... whatever that was. And now you're ironically spitting out your dummy.

As for your other link, good lord. What was your mindset? "The best way to prove that the NHS wasn't incentive behind many peoples decision is... to provide a link where NHS wasn't even included as an option in polls!"

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 223

Samiz

Original post by lucabrasi98

Firstly, if you're going to talk about uneducated/educated voters, I'd expect you to be educated enough to know that Farage had nothing to do with the £350m figure, he always distanced himself from using that figure himself and he was not part of the Official Leave Campaign that used it. And it was actually found to be, not BS, but misleading, midway through the Vote Leave campaign through Fact Check and Reality Check. So no, it wasn't only found to be a lie after the results.

Guess what there were also remain arguments that were found to be lies too. Like the 3,000,000 jobs that would be lost if we left the EU. Or that families would be £4,300 worse off. Or George Osborne's emergency budget that was ridiculed today by Lord King as the "nadir" point of the campaign. So if we're going to talk about deception on one side, let's try to at least be a bit impartial yeah? If the Remain side won, I'd have as much right as you to argue that they won on a complete lie of the job losses and emergency budget. There were lies on both sides.

Original post by lucabrasi98

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017

That's funny. Farage seemed to say he'd do the same if remain won. But I guess it's only undemocratic when you don't agree with it right?

Also I haven't signed the petition. But you realize that the right to protest is one of the most democratic things there is? Especially when leave won on the basis of a clear lie? Or are you trolling at this point?

The same guy boasting about how smart he is goes and calls protesting undemocratic in the same thread. For the record the referendum is non binding. For all I know they could just assess the situation and reject the referendum itself in parliament. They're still due to further debate it.

Farage's claims that you refer to were dismissed by David Cameron literally straight after, who categorically said there would be no second referendum if Remain won, and the same applies to the other result. And whilst the referendum may not be binding, I'm sorry to inform you that today in Parliament David Cameron told the MPs that the democratic result will be accepted and implemented.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 224

AverageExcellence

Original post by lucabrasi98

It has been ruled an error to have displayed it like that clearly, but to try to extrapolate from that and make out it was a gigantic piece of the propaganda is just not representative of any surveys or opinion polls done on the EU. We can keep going around in circles on it, but again the point still stands that we have 250m+ of money that could well be used where it is needed including but not limited to the NHS.

In relation to what seemed like unanimous support for the EU this hasn't been taken into context very well. If you polled somebody and said would we be better off next week if we voted leave, or if the vote was for what the economic future would be 1 week from it, then it would have been overwhelmingly remain. However as i keep saying it is a vote for the generations. If you ask economists what will the economy be like in 10 years, then experts will be far more controversial. Of course politicians support it because their success relies on relatively short term popularity, if they make a decision that yields short term downturns its their head who rolls.

Original post by lucabrasi98

Ooops... I'm not going to lie, I read "asked a guy who wasn't even on the leave campaign" as "it wasn't even on the leave campaign.
Ignore that (apologies)

Fair play

Original post by lucabrasi98

yeah if 1% had regretted their decision, 170,000 then it would not be enough to change the referedum result. Going by BBC polling clearly they haven't sampled right for the last 2 major votes, and they have been very strong for remain so they would want to espouse that, just like how they keep publishing stories of random minorities getting racially abused like we've suddenly turned into nazi germany. People likely get racially abused every day before the referendum it is the ugly side of life, but it is by no means fair to try to carry that onto the contemporary political situation, it is the same people who tried to politicise jo cox's murder.

They would have to suggest the amount of people who regret their vote enough to change would be closer to 7.5 8% which is a hell of a lot, but i doubt that.

Original post by lucabrasi98

And if a person like Farage who is supporting leave.... If even HE can say the figure was a huge mistake then surely that must start ringing bells. When he started rambling on about the money we'd be gaining (conveniently ignoring the money we'd be losing), he was asked again if he thought the NHS would still see that quoted £350mil. He still said no.

How many times can you keep pegging the same point again and again very unconvincingly. Ill explain it one more time hopefully it sinks in this time.
1) he was not part of the campaign which made the comment and said he would not have sanctioned it
2) Asking a random man not in government whether he could guarantee it would happen is just as valuable is asking YOU if you could guarantee it would happen, of course the answer is no.
3) He (Farage) never claimed it WILL go on the NHS but that the money can be used to subsidise schools, healthcare doctors - his point was as it should have been, far more general use of the money
4) He emphasised the overall benefit of having a featherbed as he put it of over 350m to spend however we choose. Hence why the so called 'lie' is a complete non issue propagated by remain to make controversy where there is none. If you want to make the same point again and let points and facts simply bounce off you then theres not much more to say than you are being ignorant.

Original post by lucabrasi98

Please stop dodging the point.

Let me get this straight, you believe no minimum turnouts and a potential 51/49 "majority" is enough to decide the fate of an entire country?

A majority vote is a majority vote, it is the same rules we applied to all referendums because the majority have the right, the argument is basically like saying if Tories win by 51% of the vote why should they get to legislate for the entire country, just because it isn't the decision you want you think its not democratic, sorry but thats not how it works.

Original post by lucabrasi98

Who exactly reasoned it to be bogus?

You do maths you can work it out, if 72% of the voter turnout voted in total and the vote was fairly close, then if remain supporters don't turn up then even if the vote is 90% in favour of leave then the turnout will be less than 75% which would not be democratic at all because it means a segment of the population have a defacto veto. Its not too hard to grasp. Funny how you cry babies try to impose ridiculous standards and move the goal posts to get your own way, are you the same people that begrudge old people for voting and think we should let 14 year olds vote? loool.

By those voting standards too Scotland would find it very difficult to become independent because even by the very extreme polls showing now 59% of the population is saying they wish to secede from the UK, so that would mean the remain camp would simply have to stay at home to make it null an void, considering that the last turnout was 84% at a vote of 55 - 45.

Original post by lucabrasi98

Surely you can't argue with needing a 60:40 majority though? Or are you that stubborn. And you're looking at it the wrong way. It's completely democratic.

No it isn't because it means there would never be any reform on anything significant, politics especially on bilateral issues is controversial, it would just be gerrymandering the vote to prevent reforms, just look at Ireland, if you applied your rules to the Island of Island in 1916 despite there being a majority representation to leave the UK they would not have been able to because they only had 55% of the actual vote, and 75% of the seats. In short no matter how ridiculous a bit of legislation project fear would also ensure status quo remained the same. It would be create a de-facto technocracy.

Original post by lucabrasi98

You're just too narrow minded to see the bigger picture. It's about more than this referendum alone. There will always be people pissed but no decision in this country should be won when 49% of the country is unhappy. . 39% however, that's a very clear minority being unhappy with no discrepancy.

Its called being an adult, you don't get your own way all the time, that is life. Deal with it. There is no such thing as a political decision everybody or an overwhelming majority of people are happy with.

Original post by lucabrasi98

What an informative point. You are the one who was completely misinformed on your own argument by claiming the petition for for a "simple revote".

I think ive shown more awareness than you because all you can do is parrot the same point again and again despite explanation of the bigger picture, but because it doesn't fit your cosy rhetoric you let the bigger picture bounce straight off you, typical really of a guardian reading remainer. Come up with something fresh.

I'd pay you the complement to say you know that speak of a referendum on the pretence of 'fair' democracy is a pretence to gerrymander the conditions to ensure a remain vote. If you deny that then you are simply deluding yourself.

Original post by lucabrasi98

As for your other link, good lord. What was your mindset? "The best way to prove that the NHS wasn't incentive behind many peoples decision is... to provide a link where NHS wasn't even included as an option in polls!"

It didn't come up because it wasn't a primary factor people took into account when voting, considering we're dealing with massive factors like sovereignty, immigration and the economy. Why would the NHS really come into play that isn't somewhat implied by immigration and the economy?

Nobody said YES 350m towards the NHS, i love the EU i support everything about it but if we can get 350m then thats the answer... you are literally caricaturing things to support your own narrative and you must know it deep down.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 225

KingBradly

The most intelligent people I know voted for a brexit. As it is an unusual stance among young people, I imagine those people actually had to think independently to come to their own conclusion. Most young remainers I know seem to have only supported it because their friends did too, and if they didn't they would be judged very poorly.

Reply 226

AverageExcellence

Original post by KingBradly

This is a very good point, remainers seem to pray on people's need to be approved of.
- Either you vote remain or you're a bigot
- Either vote remain or you must be an uneducated knuckle dragging moron.

You can see how many weak willed young folk fell into the peer pressure.

Reply 227

Chakede

Original post by AverageExcellence

wish i had the bravery and individuality to vote like an idiot. then i would be cool

Reply 228

AverageExcellence

Original post by Chakede

wish i had the bravery and individuality to vote like an idiot. then i would be cool

Say what you want mate, at least i don't make out im intellectually superior then pray to a sky cookie god in the sky for magic candy when im dead.

Reply 229

Chakede

Original post by AverageExcellence

Say what you want mate, at least i don't make out im intellectually superior then pray to a sky cookie god in the sky for magic candy when im dead.

yeh ok. i dont expect you to be an intellectual giant. just not a moron
but i suppose thats the trade-off to be cool - whats it like to be such a rebel?

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 230

AverageExcellence

Original post by Chakede

yeh ok. i dont expect you to be an intellectual giant. just not a moron
but i suppose thats the trade-off to be cool - whats it like to be such a rebel?

It feels good to stand with a majority of my countrymen in getting out of the EU bus before it crashes in 10 years or sooner.

How does it feel to be an intellectual social justice warrior?

Reply 231

Chakede

Original post by AverageExcellence

It feels good to stand with a majority of my countrymen in getting out of the EU bus before it crashes in 10 years or sooner.

even if you crash the UK bus long beforehand?

i suppose as long as that bus has no foreigners on it it doesnt matter...

Reply 232

AverageExcellence

Original post by Chakede

even if you crash the UK bus long beforehand?

i suppose as long as that bus has no foreigners on it it doesnt matter...

What is it with you and foreigners? sounds like you've got a bit of a chip on your shoulder... want to share?

Got the second gen inferiority complex?

Reply 233

Chakede

Original post by AverageExcellence

What is it with you and foreigners? sounds like you've got a bit of a chip on your shoulder... want to share?

Got the second gen inferiority complex?

who me? not really, im quite happy with what ive acheived here. in answer to your intellectual social justice warrior question - no im not, i like most others here dont like the idea of ignorance and scapegoating marring a vote on what was fundamental to the prosperity to the country i and we all live in. so its quite selfish concern in that respect

Reply 234

AverageExcellence

Original post by Chakede

Do you honestly believe that over 17 million people across the entire UK are foaming at the mouth racists who scapegoated their problems?

Reply 235

1420787

Original post by AverageExcellence

I believe the suggestion was to require 60% based on a turnout of 75%, or similar language. The general implication of this is that the equivalent number of Leave votes would be accepted, regardless of how many turned out to vote Remain. That aspect of votes requiring a certain turnout is generally implicit otherwise, as you said, all that would be required to defeat the opposition would be to not vote.

Reply 236

Chakede

Original post by AverageExcellence

Do you honestly believe that over 17 million people across the entire UK are foaming at the mouth racists who scapegoated their problems?

no, arguabley theres just 5-6 million racists, but the other 11 or so million are gullible and uninformed enough to fall for the racist dogma ( without recognising it for what it is)

Reply 237

AverageExcellence

Original post by Chakede

no, arguabley theres just 5-6 million racists, but the other 11 or so million are gullible and uninformed enough to fall for the racist dogma ( without recognising it for what it is)

So the UK is racist against white people? the EU makes up largely white european immigration.

Reply 238

1420787

Original post by AverageExcellence

So the UK is racist against white people? the EU makes up largely white european immigration.

Xenophobic as well as racist then :wink:

Reply 239

Chakede

Original post by AverageExcellence

So the UK is racist against white people? the EU makes up largely white european immigration.

i think a lot of the more retarded brexit voters see a vote against eu as their vote against all foreigners - white black or brown - hence the multitude of reports over the last two days of brexiters telling black, muslims, to 'go home' as well as polish and romanian school kids. this is the level of the dregs you are 'proudly standing alongside' on your eu free bus.