Put your cards on the table, EU makes last Brexit call to Britain

[nauseus]

38 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

If there is a significant convergence of minds, why strike out alone and create something new if the perfect example already exists? An apt metaphor for the EU and Brexit, don't you think?

If that's supposed to mean that the EU is perfect, no, I don't.

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, The Renegade said:

Something that I have banged on about continuously.

 

Remainer warcry.

 

It woz the Russians that done it ?

 

It woz Cambridge Analytica that done it ? Which is rib tickling funny as they got their info from fakebook ??

 

Guess who the biggest users of fakebook are ? ??

 

Remainers ??

 

 

I think you are missing the point by a country mile.

 

The aim of fake news is not to convince people with one or two detailed, convoluted stories, but to keep pushing a constant stream of fake stories that convey a unified theme. Most people browse the headlines rather than go indepth to the articles, especially when it comes to social media - click like, share, then move on. 100k likes provides validity to a story, no matter how much hogwash it may be. The reality is that most people have never even opened the link but just accepted the headline because it fitted with the narrative that they either wanted to hear, or that they were used to hearing.

 

A case in point - I know a 70-something woman who is not particularly engaged in politics, but religiously votes for the SNP and Scottish independence. One day she mentioned to me that she hates Nicola Sturgeon with a passion. I was a bit surprised and asked why, but she was unable to articulate a reason - in fact there was no specific reasion; she just didn't like her. This is what happens when the media prints negative stories, or neutral stories with negtive, hyperbolic headlines. The target audience are those people who are generally nonplussed by the detail but subconsciously pick on the recurring theme: suddenly everyone agrees - the EU is evil and the only thing that will save the UK is Brexit.

[The Renegade]

6 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

That aside, I would be very interested to see the evidence about social media use amongst Brexiteer - care to share the data that confirms your claim?

I did not mention brexiteers.

 

But here is a great big graph that is very easy to understand.

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/274829/age-distribution-of-active-social-media-users-worldwide-by-platform/

 

45 and above are the smallest users by far, of social media.

 

45 and above is by far the biggest age group that voted leave.

 

 

[RuamRudy]

9 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

I did not mention brexiteers.

 

But here is a great big graph that is very easy to understand.

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/274829/age-distribution-of-active-social-media-users-worldwide-by-platform/

 

45 and above are the smallest users by far, of social media.

 

45 and above is by far the biggest age group that voted leave.

 

 

This guy (Oxford, Harvard, LSE) disagrees with you:

 

"Not only were there twice as many Brexit supporters on Instagram, but they were also five times more active than Remain activists. The same pattern could be found on Twitter, where we found that the Leave camp outnumbers the Remain camp 7 to 1."

 

"...the top 3 most frequently used hashtags in the data come from the Leave camp and were well integrated into all networked conversations online: #Brexit, #Beleave, #VoteLeave. Using the Internet, the Leave camp was able to create the perception of wide-ranging public support for their cause that acted like a self-fulfilling prophecy, attracting many more voters back to Brexit." (emphasis mine)

[dick dasterdly]

26 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

You do realise, don't you, that simply copying and pasting words from your previous post and inserting them into your reply doesn't miraculously convert them from being wrong to being right?

 

That aside, I would be very interested to see the evidence about social media use amongst Brexiteer - care to share the data that confirms your claim?

It's this type of post that makes me despair ☹️.

 

Do you honestly think that the 'oldies' are generally more interested in fb/twitter (and the like), compared to the younger generations??

[aright]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Oh it’s £10 million now is it.

 

It’ll be £350million before long.

 

4 hours ago, bristolboy said:

per week

How petty can Remainers get?

 

"Nearly £10million pounds of taxpayers’ money is to be spent sending a leaflet to every UK home warning about the dangers of a “Brexit”, prompting a Cabinet row over the use of public money."

 

 

 

 

 

[The Renegade]

12 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

This guy (Oxford, Harvard, LSE) disagrees with you:

One guy can disagree with STATISTICA all he likes.

 

I prefer to take the word of STATISTICA ( Not my word ) over one guy.

 

But then I am not the one clinging to any straw that I can grab a hold of ??

[bristolboy]

2 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

One guy can disagree with STATISTICA all he likes.

 

I prefer to take the word of STATISTICA ( Not my word ) over one guy.

 

But then I am not the one clinging to any straw that I can cling to ??

Wow, you seem impervious to understanding this simple fact: even though groups more likely to support Brexit may be underrepresented in these various social media. there are still lots of them. So it makes compelling sense to create campaigns that target them. What is so difficult to understand about that? It's clear that the mathematician named John Allan Paulos had good reason to coin the term innumeracy as the mathematical counterpart to illiteracy. 

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

One guy can disagree with STATISTICA all he likes.

 

I prefer to take the word of STATISTICA ( Not my word ) over one guy.

 

But then I am not the one clinging to any straw that I can cling to ??

 

You quote social media usage by age and therefore deduce that this must mean Brexiteers had limited social media interaction; this guy shows through empirical data that Leave wiped the floor with Remain when it came to social media usage and you suggest that your leap of logic is the correct one? Well, you can lead a horse to water, as they say.

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, bristolboy said:

Wow, you seem impervious to understanding this simple fact: even though groups more likely to support Brexit may be underrepresented in these various social media. there are still lots of them. So it makes compelling sense to create campaigns that target them. What is so difficult to understand about that? It's clear that the mathematician named John Allan Paulos had good reason to coin the term innumeracy as the mathematical counterpart to illiteracy. 

Never mind how you try to interpret the information, the FACT is that the younger generations are far more interested (and therefore likely influenced by?) facebook.....

 

One would have to be incredibly biased to insist otherwise.

[RuamRudy]

Just now, dick dasterdly said:

Never mind how you try to interpret the information, the FACT is that the younger generations are far more interested (and therefore likely influenced by?) facebook.....

 

One would have to be incredibly biased to insist otherwise.

It's is not bias - it is empirical fact.

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Never mind how you try to interpret the information, the FACT is that the younger generations are far more interested (and therefore likely influenced by?) facebook.....

 

One would have to be incredibly biased to insist otherwise.

But also, bear in mind that possibly the octogenarians were not the intended audience - these people were, mostly, already in the bag, so to speak.

The campaign could have been intended to win over those waverers in the younger demographics. Just like tradtional electioneering, you don't spend your cash and resources trying to win over your supporters.

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, RuamRudy said:

It's is not bias - it is empirical fact.

I'm obviously missing something here.

 

You think it is the older generation that were influenced by fb/twitter and the like?

[The Renegade]

10 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

It's is not bias - it is empirical fact.

Based on, from your link

 

Quote

For example, we have captured 30 weeks of data from Instagram, analysing over 18k users and 30k posts.

 

Yes indeed, a great example of an '' empirical fact ''

 

Who should I trust ? A guy who is linked to the pro - remain LSE or 

 

https://www.statista.com/

[CG1 Blue]

2 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

If there is a significant convergence of minds, why strike out alone and create something new if the perfect example already exists? An apt metaphor for the EU and Brexit, don't you think?

Where is this perfect example of convergence of minds relating to the EU?

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

Never mind how you try to interpret the information, the FACT is that the younger generations are far more interested (and therefore likely influenced by?) facebook.....

 

One would have to be incredibly biased to insist otherwise.

No. They would not be influenced by facebook. But rather by a facebook campaign. Was there a surreptitious campaign? In addition, it's also true that young people are less likely to vote. So that has to be counterbalanced against their superior numbers.

[stephenterry]

The whole argument relating to older and younger referendum voters is that when Brexit is initiated, and completely crashes the UK economy, is that the younger generation will have to pay for it, not the old codgers who are in nursing homes or dead, and probably not also many bar-stool and internet warrior retirees on this forum who see themselves as British saviours - or are just bleeding cantankerous.

 

My view, which has been taken completely out of context by Brexiteer posters, relates to a people's vote on the final deal (if that occurs), suggesting that - for the above reasons - only the younger age group, e.g. c.45 and below should be invited to vote. But my caveat, which was completely ignored by same Brexiteers, stated that it would never happen in reality even though it was intended to be a 'wouldn't it be more democratic to only let those people vote who will be paying for Brexit failures?' And it will fail, miserably.

 

As Britain is steeped in voting protocol, I cannot see any government agreeing to any arbitrary age limit even if Britannia sinks below the waves come April 2019. And stays there with brexiteers on board.

 

 

 

 

 

     

[stephenterry]

9 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

No. They would not be influenced by facebook. But rather by a facebook campaign. Was there a surreptitious campaign? In addition, it's also true that young people are less likely to vote. So that has to be counterbalanced against their superior numbers.

Not completely accurate, BB. There is due to be a students campaign right after end of summer term across the nation, and the intention is to encourage whole swathes of eligible young people to vote against brexit, by way of canvassing their MPs and whatever means to influence the government to change course.  

 

This generation are those who will have to pay for Brexit failures and I support them, 100%.

[CG1 Blue]

11 hours ago, kwilco said:

23 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

Could it be that the UK average wage has been dragged down by migration into the country from lower paid eastern European nationals?

Also, the first table I got from Google paints a different picture, with Bulgaria at just €586 per month, and with 12 countries having less than €1000 take home pay per month:

 

https://www.reinisfischer.com/average-salary-european-union-2018

 

 

 

But only in UK? That makes sense......Not

I gather you weren't old enough to vote in the referendum, from the tone and content of your posts in this forum. So I can understand why you might be even more frustrated as a Remainer.

 

Could you elaborate on this "But only in the UK" comment please? Do you think UK citizens are also migrating to eastern Europe for work and dragging down their average wage?

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

It's this type of post that makes me despair ☹️.

 

Do you honestly think that the 'oldies' are generally more interested in fb/twitter (and the like), compared to the younger generations??

A totally false argument.

 

The vote was won by a 4% margin, leave spent massively on social media campaigns and there is evidence that Leave have not fully declared the extent of that spending.

 

The question is did the social media campaigns swing the vote?

 

The directors of Cambridge Analytica openly boasted for 'swinging elections' with social media campaigns, Leave handed over large sums of money to buy media campaigns.

 

Talking about older people's use of the internet and or influence of social media on older people is a distraction from the actual questions.

 

• Did social media swing the referendum vote?
• Was spending on those social media campaigns legal?
• Where foreign governments involved in social media campaigns to swing the referendum vote?

 

The continuing revelations around Cambridge Analytica, Arron Banks and his Russian contacts and the 'revisions to memory' that arise with each revelation suggest we have a lot more to learn about the use of social media during the referendum. 

[stephenterry]

Scenario after Brexit. Family of four Brits with 2 young kids waiting in an airport queue, firstly wondering whether their flight will be able to cross EU air-space  - as it hasn't been negotiated - and enter Gibraltar, via Spain, and an immigration officer tells them to go and join the non-EU queue at both departures and arrivals which is a throng of similar family tourists, probably a 3 hour clearance, delay if lucky each time.

 

As opposed to now when same family show their Brit/EU passports and are waved through the fast lane at both countries. Well you voted for it...  

[stephenterry]

1 minute ago, vogie said:

Show me where I cannot quote a paragraph of a post, there isn't one.

Wait until the mods get to you.

[CG1 Blue]

15 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

The whole argument relating to older and younger referendum voters is that when Brexit is initiated, and completely crashes the UK economy, is that the younger generation will have to pay for it, not the old codgers who are in nursing homes or dead, and probably not also many bar-stool and internet warrior retirees on this forum who see themselves as British saviours - or are just bleeding cantankerous.

 

My view, which has been taken completely out of context by Brexiteer posters, relates to a people's vote on the final deal (if that occurs), suggesting that - for the above reasons - only the younger age group, e.g. c.45 and below should be invited to vote. But my caveat, which was completely ignored by same Brexiteers, stated that it would never happen in reality even though it was intended to be a 'wouldn't it be more democratic to only let those people vote who will be paying for Brexit failures?' And it will fail, miserably.

 

As Britain is steeped in voting protocol, I cannot see any government agreeing to any arbitrary age limit even if Britannia sinks below the waves come April 2019. And stays there with brexiteers on board.

 

 

 

 

 

     

Another view would be that people aged 18-25 are not yet experienced enough in life, and have not had time to form their own views.  Most are still following in their parents' footsteps, or are still under the influence of college/uni lecturers. They have limited experience in the workplace, are still in low paid junior positions, and are less independent.

So let's exclude those and only have 25-45 year olds voting.

Hang on - what if a 30 year old is obese, a heavy smoker and drinker, or has a debilitating illness which may kill them in the next ten years - we can't have them voting can we? After all, Brexit won't affect them.

 

Apologies for my sarcasm (grumpy England fan today), but hopefully you get my point.

 

In any case, the UK will be better off post-Brexit so this is a pointless argument ?

[Chomper Higgot]

11 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Another view would be that people aged 18-25 are not yet experienced enough in life, and have not had time to form their own views.  Most are still following in their parents' footsteps, or are still under the influence of college/uni lecturers. They have limited experience in the workplace, are still in low paid junior positions, and are less independent.

So let's exclude those and only have 25-45 year olds voting.

Hang on - what if a 30 year old is obese, a heavy smoker and drinker, or has a debilitating illness which may kill them in the next ten years - we can't have them voting can we? After all, Brexit won't affect them.

 

Apologies for my sarcasm (grumpy England fan today), but hopefully you get my point.

 

In any case, the UK will be better off post-Brexit so this is a pointless argument ?

Apologies for my sarcasm (grumpy England fan today), but hopefully you get my point.

 

In any case, the UK will be better off post-Brexit so this is a pointless argument

 

The cup isn't coming home, nor is Brexit. - BINO!

 

 

[sandyf]

4 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

"Of course what has business got to do with it, jobs are nothing more than collateral damage."

 

I apologise for 'cherry-picking' one sentence, but big business leaders only care about themselves and how to increase THEIR salaries.  The evidence to support this POV is overwhelming IMO.

 

We have cedric brown... (a prime example, who was more than happy to reduce the workforce to increase his own salary....) /out-sourcing to countries with even cheaper labour/constant 're-structuring' of companies and the like, to reduce the salary of those at the bottom/middle of the chain etc. etc. ?.

 

 

Your point is not without validity, the morality of big business has been a contentious issue for long enough, but it is not the point in question.

It must be acknowledged that these people are responsible for a large percentage of the working population and it is not in the interests of the workforce to burden the business unnecessarily.

Those that think the CE mark is a trivial matter have obviously never worked in manufacturing.

[stephenterry]

I do hope the Brexiteers manage to table a humble request in parliament for the government to release Davis's own 'white paper' draft which was amended by May.

 

Should be interesting reading.

[The Renegade]

3 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

I do hope the Brexiteers manage to table a humble request in parliament for the government to release Davis's own 'white paper' draft which was amended by May.

 

Should be interesting reading.

This one you mean ?

 

Quote

Hardline Tory Brexiters plan to try to force Theresa May to publish a rival draft of the white paper drawn up by David Davis in the run-up to last week’s Chequers summit, which Downing Street ditched.

 

The abandoned draft set out something closer to a Canada-style trade deal, with additional elements drawn from other EU agreements, sources told the Guardian – an alternative to the approach to be set out in the government’s Brexit white paper, due to be published on Thursday.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/11/brexiters-bid-to-force-release-of-david-davis-rival-white-paper

 

It will make very interesting reading. 

 

It wasn't amended by May, it was '' Ditched by May '' Which might just lead to May being ditched.

[darksidedog]

A fair number of posts and replies have been removed. I am going to need to quote quite a bit of the rule book to explain it all.

We had bickering baiting, flaming, out and out trolling and generally quite a piss poor performance by a bunch of you.

The only reason no one is getting a holiday, is because there are so many of you offending and I don't have the time for all of it.

Please stay on topic, or you will need to find something else to do for the next few days other than the forum.

 

7) You will respect fellow members and post in a civil manner. No personal attacks, hateful or insulting towards other members, (flaming) Stalking of members on either the forum or via PM will not be allowed.

8.) You will not post disruptive or inflammatory messages, vulgarities, obscenities or profanities.

9) You will not post inflammatory messages on the forum, or attempt to disrupt discussions to upset its participants, or trolling. Trolling can be defined as the act of purposefully antagonizing other people on the internet by posting controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

16) You will not make changes to quoted material from other members posts, except for purposes of shortening the quoted post. This cannot be done in such a manner that it alters the context of the original post.

[The Renegade]

1 hour ago, stephenterry said:

stated that it would never happen in reality even though it was intended to be a 'wouldn't it be more democratic to only let those people vote who will be paying for Brexit failures?'

By what twisted, out of this world logic is only allowing a certain section of voters to vote '' be more democratic '' ?

 

Regardless if it was a'' What if or otherwise ''

 

Spin it around and let '' Only tax payers vote '' following your strange logic, that would also be '' Democratic ''

[nontabury]

15 hours ago, kwilco said:

Let not forget the cards that the UK is holding ....

 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/revealed-plans-for-doomsday-no-deal-brexit-02mld2jg2

 

"In the second scenario, not even the worst, the port of Dover will collapse on day one. The supermarkets in Cornwall and Scotland will run out of food within a couple of days, and hospitals will run out of medicines within two weeks.”

I Apologise for posting this once again, but it is appropriate for yet another 

ridicules scare story. But then if you read through all the remainers posts, this is all they have. Pathetic.