PaulC 156 here:
And the fact that the average polls are showing a swing toward remain does the case no harm.
More especially so as the majority of those who've died since the referendum would have been leavers and the majority of those formerly too young to vote are remainers. So the Young People get to decide. Can't be too bad can it!
It is quite true that older people were more likely to have voted Leave and younger people more likely Remain.
It is also true that a few hundred thousand of the older people who voted Leave two-and-a-half years ago have since died, and a few hundred thousand more younger people, who are more likely to vote Leave, are now eligible to vote.
So another Referendum is a slam dunk for Remain then?
What this ignores is that a few hundred thousand middle aged people who voted Remain last time will have crossed the Rubicon and would vote Leave if there were another Referendum; it all cancels out neatly.
Monday, 3 December 2018
Remainer non-logic
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
28 comments:
I ignored the changers as they likely cancel out. As many change to remain as to brexit.
So it's simply a matter of dead brexiters versus live remainers. Simples.
Hey paulc156 - "So it's simply a matter of dead brexiters versus live remainers" what a disgraceful comment.
Really, you smug Remainers have no self-awareness whatsoever.
Read this http://theviewfromcullingworth.blogspot.com/2018/12/matthew-dancona-is-bigot-not-me.html and look in the mirror.
"What this ignores is that a few hundred thousand middle aged people who voted Leave last time will have crossed the Rubicon and would vote Brexit if there were another Referundum; it all cancels out neatly."
I think that should read: "...middle aged people who voted Remain last time..."
S. I read the article. The only thing I would point out is that those very same areas which voted leave with the most enthusiasm will pay the economic costs such as they are. The London 'elites' won't be hit in their pockets very hard if at all.
I would have been fine with leave were it accompanied by a realistic vision and not dominated by exaggerated ivory tower issues like sovereignty or fear of the European who comes from the East and nicks all the jobs and shag our women and drink out beer and so on and so forth.
@PC156 "I would have been fine with leave were it accompanied by a realistic vision and not dominated by exaggerated ivory tower issues like sovereignty or fear of the European who comes from the East and nicks all the jobs and shag our women and drink out beer and so on and so forth."
Like the article said, you assume that people believe all this stuff - like they are thick or something and can't judge for themselves. So only the little guys can be conned but you young and educated types have all the wisdom and 'right-think'. Are you a parody account?
And I would've been fine with Remain if it was accompanied by a realistic assessment of the EU and all its faults rather than exaggerated claims as to the benefits of EU directives and economic policies plus fear-mongering about the consequences of leaving.
See what I did there?
F, well spotted, I have updated.
Just as you speak to people S, so do I. And the two common themes I heard from Brexiteers are too many immigrants and/or sovereignty. They been sold a pup by Brexit.
They will get the immigration in any case, just it could be from anywhere and not so much from Europe. That's whether we do Mays deal or go WTO. And if we go for Mays deal or a close varient we'll likely end up bound by the European courts still paying some monies in but no say in future directives laws etc.
Now, (unless you're afraid of the likely result) why wouldn't you want 'living' people to have a say in that?
@PC156
"And the two common themes I heard from Brexiteers are too many immigrants and/or sovereignty" - so a 'no deal' is what leavers voted for as the economics wasn't their concern.
I actually have no problem with another ref - but make it Leave (i.e properly.... 'no deal', if you must) or Remain, not this three-way nonsense.
Then our disagreement is merely one of detail. You say 2 choices, I say three...or let's call the whole thing off! (ie. The 3rd choice ;)...)
@PC156
As Lola said on another thread - there is really no need or justification for a 2nd ref if you accept that most Leavers.....
* Are not thick racists but may have issues around immigration - personally I don't but you cannot deny it is a legitimate concern for some communities
* Voted for sovereignty (as you yourself agreed earlier) rather than mere economic self-interest
* Were well informed of the potential economic consequences of leaving - project fear #1 effectively hyped up any issues around 'no deal' so to say people weren't 'informed' is ridiculous
However if TPTB insist on a 2nd ref it should be 'No Deal' or Remain - a simple easily understood choice. Your lot can run project fear again (version six is it now?) and Leave can point out
* the mendacity of the EU commission, Macron, Merkel et al
* the fact that we'll lose all of our rebate and opt-ots
* the real prospect of being forced into an EU Army
* that we'll have to commit to join the Euro and therefore participate in the bail-outs for Club-Med
* etc, etc, etc
and we'll see how it goes.
Shiney +1
S. That sounds like 'Leavers do Project Fear'. You just left out the issue of
there being no additional £350m p/day to spend on the nhs and the mass immigration from Turkey thingy. Scary!
Shiney +2
Paul156 Nope. That's Project Fact.
Oh almost forgot...we don't get that great FREE trade deal from Trumpton,...I mean the US.
paul156 Nope. If the US applies duties to our exports to them those taxes are incident upon their citizens, NOT our exporters. The whole point of tariffs is to protect indigenous industries from competition by keeping prices high. Witness EU taxes on cars (to protect German carmakers), cheese and wine (to protect French farmers and shoes (to protect Italian cobblers).
Once we are Out and can scrap all this nonsense the prices prices here will fall.
Note, a free trade deal by definition is not about free trade. You don't need a deal to do free trade.
P156c, do you mean that great trade deal that the EU was going to do with the US and all the twitterati were screaming would be the end of the world as we know it?
No. That deal would never get past the donald. AMERICA FIRST AMERICA FIRST!
I'm referring to the one where Trump flogs us his chlorinated chickens.
I don't get this chlorinated chicken problem. For decades our UK water supply was chlorinated, often so much in our area that you could smell the chlorine when it was sprayed in a shower. When preparing a meal food got washed and cooked in said 'chlorinated water' - veggies, chickens, whatever. Swimming pools always stank of chlorine. We are still alive, as are many americans who eat chicken.
It appears that now our water is less (or not?) chlorinated and if you leave a container of water - eg the watering can - for a couple of weeks it grows black mould.
@paul156 Nobody is going to be forced to buy chlorinated chickens if they do not want them. In fact, no adult is going to be forced to each chickens at all, unless they are living in an institution.
They might prefer them to the campylobacter-infected chicken that comply to EU regulations. Since these also permit known carcinogens E250-E252, talk of chlorinated chicken sounds like hypocrisy and has helped to discredit the remainer case.
The real Brexit case, curiously enough made only by a few Brexiters, is the EU's damaging trade and economic policies which are a major factor in regional economic imbalance both within most EU countries and across the EU as a whole.
Perhaps the people of Sunderland have twigged this, even if they are not particularly good at making the point.
Physiocrat "The real Brexit case, curiously enough made only by a few Brexiters, is the EU's damaging trade and economic policies which are a major factor in regional economic imbalance both within most EU countries and across the EU as a whole. " and me...
W. "I don't get this chlorinated chicken problem."
The problem has nothing to do with the efficacy of chlorine in decontaminating chicken. The reason chlorine is widely used in the US is because there are no legal requirements in the US as to how many chickens you can cram into a small area so they get covered in shit and stuff and 'require' extensive washing with chlorine to decontaminate them. due to the level of infection.
Factory farming is pretty barbaric full stop but the US takes such farming to extremes of cruelty.
P. 'Nobody is going to be forced to buy chlorinated chickens if they do not want them.'
That depends on whether it has to be labelled as chlorinated or not doesn't it? At the moment what the chicken corpses are washed in is not regarded as an ingredient so there would be no legal requirement to inform anyone.
Personally I would rather it was banned here whether we are in or out of the EU. That's just because I think libertarian ideals can and should be extended to how we treat other species.
"Factory farming is pretty barbaric full stop but the US takes such farming to extremes of cruelty."
Ah, it's an animal welfare issue, is it? Well, I'm right behind you on that one. Even the EU compliant factory farmed chickens have a life of hell. Buy free range or not at all is the answer. However, I could have sworn this is being pushed as a health issue.
"Nobody is going to be forced to buy chlorinated chickens if they do not want them.'
That depends on whether it has to be labelled as chlorinated or not doesn't it? "
If the country of origin states USA (which it must) then you DO have a choice.
B and P156. Agreed on chicken. I use a good butcher. he tries to sell good chicken raised well but his customers won't pay the £5. They go to Tesco for a £2.50 one. He also sells not actually free range but barn reared pork and it v good.
"but his customers won't pay the £5. They go to Tesco for a £2.50 one."
Saving themselves less than the cost of a pint of beer or a packet of fags for something that is almost, but not entirely, completely unlike chicken.
It always amazes me that we are prepared to eat rubbish in this country to save ourselves a few pence, but will quite happily spend ten times the amount in other areas.
Sh, +1
Plus it was the same hubric logic used last time which caught everyone out so beautufully
Post a Comment