Brexit has completely failed for UK, say clear majority of Britons – poll

[chickenslegs]

1 minute ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

 

The reasons for the Brexit vote wasn't racist .

Like , the UK leaving the E.U , which is predominately White , so align the U.K with non White Countries like Japan and India .

  Remaining in the E.U could considered to be more racist , because they want to remain in White Europe

 

I did not suggest that the reason for the Brexit vote was racism. I said that there were some Brexit voters were motivated by racism.

 

It is a fact that racism exists in the UK (probably everywhere else too). Do you think that the majority of UK racists voted to remain?

[hotandsticky]

2 hours ago, chickenslegs said:

I did not suggest that the reason for the Brexit vote was racism. I said that there were some Brexit voters were motivated by racism.

 

It is a fact that racism exists in the UK (probably everywhere else too). Do you think that the majority of UK racists voted to remain?

 

 

I cannot imagine that any racist would vote Remain.....ever.

 

 

In the same that a wet-neck, left wing Liberal would never vote for Brexit.

 

Edited January 1 by hotandsticky

[Photoguy21]

Brexit hasnt failed, the government is not fit for purpose that is the problem.

[gamb00ler]

11 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

Customers? So the polls are there to attract customers? 

 

If so, it goes without saying, only what is likely to attract custom will be shown. Polls in the interest of business will he published. Others will be discarded. 

 

I hope you don't own a business!  You clearly don't have much knowledge about how that part of the economy works.

 

Does an organization expend resources to conduct a poll just for fun?  I don't think so.  Polling organizations do so because they hope to get something in return for their effort.  News media hope to gain readership, Opinium hopes to turn a profit by getting paid by other entities, universities/colleges conduct polls to gain information and experience for their students and staff.

 

Political organizations are the usual suspects that discard/hide unflattering polls.  They don't mind the wasted money/resources..... it's somebody else's.

Edited January 2 by gamb00ler

[Yellowtail]

6 hours ago, hotandsticky said:

 

 

I cannot imagine that any racist would vote Remain.....ever.

 

 

In the same that a wet-neck, left wing Liberal would never vote for Brexit.

 

What about an Iranian racist? 

[Yellowtail]

10 hours ago, chickenslegs said:

IMO many Brexit supporters were fooled into believing that withdrawal from the EU would stop the influx of non European (African/Asian) immigrants. Of course, this has proven to be a false hope.

 

I would not say that all of those Brexiteers were racists, but I'm sure that many were.

 

Do you think it is racist to not want waves of low and no skilled people that will be a burden on social programs, are often illiterate in their own language and speak none of yours, love their own culture, often despise your culture, and will likely never assimilate?

 

Rich people implement virtu-signaling policies that ONLY the poor will suffer the consequences of, and they better pretend to like it, or they'll be called racist haters. What's not to like?

 

I don't doubt there are racists, everywhere, but let's keep in mind, we are talking about a country that was almost solely responsible for the eradication of slavery in the western world, so I think it a little suspect to assume half of them hate brown people. 

[RayC]

16 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

Thus, confirming my point. Thanks.

 

Exactly what point has been confirmed?

[RayC]

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Do you think it is racist to not want waves of low and no skilled people that will be a burden on social programs, are often illiterate in their own language and speak none of yours, love their own culture, often despise your culture, and will likely never assimilate?

 

There are almost certainly some immigrants to the UK who fall into one or more of those categories. However imo the vast majority do not, and many of those that do try to remove themselves from that classification.

 

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

 

 

[hotandsticky]

3 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

What about an Iranian racist? 

 

 

Did he have a mandate to vote in the Brexit referendum?

[youreavinalaff]

6 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

I hope you don't own a business!  You clearly don't have much knowledge about how that part of the economy works.

 

Does an organization expend resources to conduct a poll just for fun?  I don't think so.  Polling organizations do so because they hope to get something in return for their effort.  News media hope to gain readership, Opinium hopes to turn a profit by getting paid by other entities, universities/colleges conduct polls to gain information and experience for their students and staff.

 

Political organizations are the usual suspects that discard/hide unflattering polls.  They don't mind the wasted money/resources..... it's somebody else's.

Yes. We'll done.

 

Exactly my point.

[RayC]

17 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Yes. We'll done.

 

Exactly my point.

 

So are you saying the following:

 

1) By conducting this survey Opinium hopes it might increase its' customer base (imo a reasonable assumption)

2) By publishing the results of this survey 'The Guardian' hopes to increase its readership (again imo a reasonable assumption)

3) If the results of the survey had not been what 'The Guardian' considers "favourable" the results might not have been published (a much more contentious assumption but for the sake of argument let's assume this is true).

 

My question is: How does any of this cast doubt on the validity of the survey results? 

[youreavinalaff]

8 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

So are you saying the following:

 

1) By conducting this survey Opinium hopes it might increase its' customer base (imo a reasonable assumption)

2) By publishing the results of this survey 'The Guardian' hopes to increase its readership (again imo a reasonable assumption)

3) If the results of the survey had not been what 'The Guardian' considers "favourable" the results might not have been published (a much more contentious assumption but for the sake of argument let's assume this is true).

 

My question is: How does any of this cast doubt on the validity of the survey results? 

Yes.

 

I don't remember questioning the results. I questioned the headline.

Edited January 2 by youreavinalaff

[Yellowtail]

8 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

So are you saying the following:

 

1) By conducting this survey Opinium hopes it might increase its' customer base (imo a reasonable assumption)

2) By publishing the results of this survey 'The Guardian' hopes to increase its readership (again imo a reasonable assumption)

3) If the results of the survey had not been what 'The Guardian' considers "favourable" the results might not have been published (a much more contentious assumption but for the sake of argument let's assume this is true).

 

My question is: How does any of this cast doubt on the validity of the survey results? 

"The Guardian" is supposed to be a newspaper yes? So, what was the point of printing the poll?  It's clearly not news. 

 

Did "The Guardian" previously support Brexit, and now they have changed their position? Admitting they're wrong might be news. 

 

I'm guessing they just want to stir the pot and drive public opinion further against Brexit, unless of course they (like the US press does with financial polls) go into a long litany of why the public is wrong, and how Brexit is actually good. Have they done that? 

 

I do not doubt the poll is accurate in as much as the numbers reflect how the respondents answered the questions.

 

 

 

[RayC]

30 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Yes.

 

I don't remember questioning the results. I questioned the headline.

 

Your original post:

 

"Just over 2000 polled.

 

Not a clear majority of Britons.

 

A majority of those polled, by the Guardian, at an unknown location, of an unknown age, background.........the list goes on."

 

That seems to question the methodology and if you question the methodology, surely it must cast doubt upon the results?

[RayC]

19 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

"The Guardian" is supposed to be a newspaper yes? So, what was the point of printing the poll?  It's clearly not news. 

 

Why is it "clearly not news"? I'd argue the exact opposite.

 

Brexit is arguably the biggest UK domestic event for 50+ years. The fact that newspapers - 'The Guardian' is not alone - continue to discuss the merits of the decision seems extremely apt. 

 

19 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

Did "The Guardian" previously support Brexit, and now they have changed their position? Admitting they're wrong might be news. 

 

Yes that would be news. It would also defy logic as the overwhelming body of evidence suggests that, to date, Brexit has been an abject failure.

 

19 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I'm guessing they just want to stir the pot and drive public opinion further against Brexit, unless of course they (like the US press does with financial polls) go into a long litany of why the public is wrong, and how Brexit is actually good. Have they done that? 

 

I'm guessing that they want to publish news. The fact that this news supports their editorial stance obviously isn't a coincidence but would you expect 'The Express' to suppress an anti-EU poll/ story? I wouldn't.

 

I don't understand the US comparison but, as I mentioned in the previous paragraph, there is a large body of evidence supporting the view that, to date, Brexit has been a failure.

 

19 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

I do not doubt the poll is accurate in as much as the numbers reflect how the respondents answered the questions.

 

 

Then at least we agree about that.

[youreavinalaff]

26 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

Your original post:

 

"Just over 2000 polled.

 

Not a clear majority of Britons.

 

A majority of those polled, by the Guardian, at an unknown location, of an unknown age, background.........the list goes on."

 

That seems to question the methodology and if you question the methodology, surely it must cast doubt upon the results?

No. I questioned the headline. I said,

 

" Not a clear majority of Britons".

 

Had the headline said something like " of 2132 prople polled.........." we would be having this conversation.

 

[xylophone]

9 minutes ago, RayC said:

as the overwhelming body of evidence suggests that, to date, Brexit has been an abject failure.

I would have to agree with that, and the "decision" to leave was fraught with misinformation from many fronts – – such a poor decision IMO.

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, RayC said:

 

Why is it "clearly not news"? I'd argue the exact opposite.

 

Brexit is arguably the biggest UK domestic event for 50+ years. The fact that newspapers - 'The Guardian' is not alone - continue to discuss the merits of the decision seems extremely apt. 

 

 

Yes that would be news. It would also defy logic as the overwhelming body of evidence suggests that, to date, Brexit has been an abject failure.

 

 

I'm guessing that they want to publish news. The fact that this news supports their editorial stance obviously isn't a coincidence but would you expect 'The Express' to suppress an anti-EU poll/ story? I wouldn't.

 

I don't understand the US comparison but, as I mentioned in the previous paragraph, there is a large body of evidence supporting the view that, to date, Brexit has been a failure.

 

 

Then at least we agree about that.

 

So how it news? 

[RayC]

28 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

So how it news? 

 

It's news because the repercussions of the Brexit vote are still evolving. It will cease to be news if a line can be drawn under and a decision made about the absolute success or failure of it.

[Yellowtail]

1 minute ago, RayC said:

 

It's news because the repercussions of the Brexit vote are still evolving. It will cease to be news if a line can be drawn under and a decision made about the absolute success or failure of it.

So, what were the repercussions the paper discussed? 

 

[RayC]

2 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

No. I questioned the headline. I said,

 

" Not a clear majority of Britons".

 

Had the headline said something like " of 2132 prople polled.........." we would be having this conversation.

 

 

I think the headline overstates the results but not for the reasons you infer i.e. that you cannot extrapolate the findings of this survey to the wider UK electorate.

 

Assuming that the survey methodology was sound - and I can't find any articles suggesting otherwise - then the results can be said to be representative of the views of the British electorate as a whole. 

 

However, for most of the questions whilst the percentage of respondents who believe that Brexit is having a negative impact is vastly superior to the percentage believing it to be positive, in most cases that number is slightly under 50%.

 

Brexiters shouldn't take too much comfort from this fact as, in most cases, it would require almost 100% of the 'Dont knows' to change their mind and think of Brexit in a favourable light to materially alter the perception that Brexit is having a negative impact.  A pretty unlikely event imo.

 

[RayC]

27 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So, what were the repercussions the paper discussed? 

 

 

It's there in the responses to the various questions. For example, over 50% of respondents think that Brexit is having a negative impact on the economy. I'd call that a pretty serious repercussion (and news).

[stuandjulie]

On 1/1/2024 at 10:14 AM, youreavinalaff said:

Just over 2000 polled.

 

Not a clear majority of Britons.

 

A majority of those polled, by the Guardian, at an unknown location, of an unknown age, background.........the list goes on.

Obviously no idea how polls are conducted.

 

[youreavinalaff]

3 minutes ago, stuandjulie said:

Obviously no idea how polls are conducted.

 

Obviously you haven't read through the entire thread.

[Yellowtail]

7 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

It's there in the responses to the various questions. For example, over 50% of respondents think that Brexit is having a negative impact on the economy. I'd call that a pretty serious repercussion (and news).

That's hilarious, thanks!

[stuandjulie]

3 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Obviously you haven't read through the entire thread.

I have and my comment stands

[RayC]

Just now, Yellowtail said:

That's hilarious, thanks!

 

Have you heard the one about a majority of survey respondents who consider that Brexit is harming the UK economy?

 

Obviously we have a different sense of humour and imo I can't see that statement having the masses rolling in the aisles.

[youreavinalaff]

2 minutes ago, RayC said:

Have you heard the one about a majority of survey respondents who consider that Brexit is harming the UK economy?

That would make a good, better, headline.

 

 

[Yellowtail]

14 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

Have you heard the one about a majority of survey respondents who consider that Brexit is harming the UK economy?

Yeah, it's a joke.

14 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

Obviously we have a different sense of humour and imo I can't see that statement having the masses rolling in the aisles.

What I see as hilarious, is that when I asked you: "So, what were the repercussions the paper discussed?" your response was: It's there in the responses to the various questions. For example, over 50% of respondents think that Brexit is having a negative impact on the economy. I'd call that a pretty serious repercussion (and news)." The correct response was nothing. 

 

Abd is it really news that people are blaming Brexit for the bad economy? The article does nothing to show how Brexit is negatively affecting the economy, it only points out what the public's perception is, which they do all they can to influence. 

 

So, the paper did not discuss any of the ramifications, nor did it explain how Brexit has negatively affected (for example) the economy. They just used the opportunity to post of a list of bad they want the rest of the public to blame on Brexit. 

 

They are using a public opinion poll to drive public opinion for the upcoming election. 

 

[RayC]

42 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Yeah, it's a joke.

 

As I said, we obviously have a different sense of humour 

 

42 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

What I see as hilarious, is that when I asked you: "So, what were the repercussions the paper discussed?" your response was: It's there in the responses to the various questions. For example, over 50% of respondents think that Brexit is having a negative impact on the economy. I'd call that a pretty serious repercussion (and news)." The correct response was nothing. 

 

Maybe in your opinion not mine.

 

It's not only our sense of humour which differs. It's our definition of repercussion and news

 

42 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

Abd is it really news that people are blaming Brexit for the bad economy? The article does nothing to show how Brexit is negatively affecting the economy, it only points out what the public's perception is, which they do all they can to influence. 

 

Have a look here for starters if you want to see some in-depth articles discussing the negative effects of Brexit.

 

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/research-papers/?_sft_theme=the-economics-of-brexit

 

If that doesn't sate your appetite, there is also an informative video from the FT (available on their website or YouTube) about the consequences of Brexit. The OBR have a report as well. There are far too many other sources to list here.

 

42 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

So, the paper did not discuss any of the ramifications, nor did it explain how Brexit has negatively affected (for example) the economy. They just used the opportunity to post of a list of bad they want the rest of the public to blame on Brexit. 

 

Presumably the survey's objective was simply to investigate whether people perceived Brexit as having a positive or negative impact and not to explore the reasons why they held their views. 

 

The reason why 'The Guardian' commissioned the survey and published the results is irrelevant. The results are plain for all to see, and the only logical conclusion that can be drawn from them is that the UK electorate perceive Brexit to have been a failure up to now. 

 

42 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

They are using a public opinion poll to drive public opinion for the upcoming election. 

 

 

Seems to be some circular reasoning there?

 

So this all part of 'The Guardians' plan to get people to vote LibDem?

Edited January 2 by RayC
Missing word added