Brexit- Update: Britain has voted to leave the EU

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by peter12

So what do you say to the skilled machinist who voted Leave as opposed to the BA Anthropology who voted Remain?

This is a really weird just hypothetical you're going with here. I'd like to think I'd evaluate them based on their reasons for voting than on their occupations. I grew up with mostly blue collar friends, and then moved to a city where most of my friends come from upper-class, well-educated parents. I'm very aware of the fact that not every labourer is knuckle-dragger and not every university grad is automatically a MENSA candidate.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

There is always an initial over reaction when a big change happens, but it doesn't always indicate a trend or future economic direction. When the Soviet Union collapsed, many commodities took a big hit and economies all over Europe and Asia were affected for a while. In the long run, not too many people outside of Russian nationalists would argue it wasn't for the best.

The "remain" side pushing doom and gloom scenarios is as much to blame as anything as it is in their best interest to void the results of the democratic referendum. They want to scare people into changing their minds.

It is unfortunate that a handful of racists stole attention away from the other issues. Immigration control is a logical and sensible mechanism to apply. I think we would all agree that you wouldn't want 6 billion people moving to Canada as the country would never survive. That's obviously an exaggeration of what is happening in Europe, but the principle is the same. It's not fair for foreign governments to dictate immigration quotas to countries struggling to absorb them.

Immigration is a tough one. A struggle for governments since there were governments. In North America, immigration was was English and protestant. Then it became other parts of Europe and catholic. Then Chinese, then East Indian and so on. Many US presidential elections have been run on religion and immigration. It's tough because there are only so many jobs to go around. How does a government protect jobs for the natives while giving the immigrants a fair chance. Some go too far one way, some go too far the other. What is the balance?. What about minimum wage? What about paying under the table? What about outsourcing? What about school quotas? As there are more and more university graduates, there are more and more 2nd generation immigrants graduating.

How does a non-EU Britain address this? We let only 'these types of immigrants' in but the next generation changes, and the next, and the next.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Farage, just like Boris, proved that he really is just a #####. Neither had the balls to see this through.

[nik-]

Well, listening to him speak, it was clear from the start he was just an agitator and not a leader.

[FlameOn]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I wouldn't short the US dollar, Hillary is like 90% to win.

To be fair UK was 86.2% remain immediately prior to the election.

[UKflames]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

yeah the masses just arent happy with government and in the UK, they took their anger out on the EU and somewhat on Cameron too.

I am afraid i have to respectfully disagree with this statement. The masses actually aren't happy with the EU and showed them accordingly, the fact the government was pro remain was incidental. People stopped looking at them as the government, politicians were either in or out.

[UKflames]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Farage, just like Boris, proved that he really is just a #####. Neither had the balls to see this through.

Neither was in a position to 'see this through', Farage especially as his party was not in power, after the result there was nothing more for him to do. Boris could have gone on to 'see it through' but was undone by political jockeying, not his doing.

Both achieved what they set out to do, which was to get a Leave result.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Kybosh

Is it just me, or does this man have the tiniest, most feminine, hands of all time? Hands that have not once opened a door, let alone held a shovel.

And now the circle is complete...

[redforever]

I like how Rex Murphy usually sums things up.

Rationalizing a loss is, of course, not a new phenomenon. But building a rationalization on the idea that the crowd you lost to cannot, as the phrase has it, walk and chew gum at the same time, is a novel excursion. If you lost to a pack of fools and social Neanderthals, and if you lost with your side having all respectable opinion, the organs of academia, the press and business interests on your side, then it should prompt some serious and not-too-flattering introspection. In a nutshell, if the Leave side was so stupid and out of touch with everything in the modern age, how on earth did Remain, with all that intelligence and authority, lose the vote?

I could cite examples big and small. But my main point is that, contrary to the mewling complaints and arrogant dismissal of last week’s vote as a product of ignorance and folly combined, there were serious reasons behind the votes of many who opted to leave the EU. And much of the result flowed directly from the manners and practices of the bureaucrats in Brussels who over the years did more to advance the cause of those who voted Leave than the Leave campaign itself.

I think a lot of people who voted Leave saw a massive power grab underway, the creation of a super-entity that had contempt for local sensibilities, was insulated from every notion of accountability and regarded the individual citizens of its forced-march member states as kulaks and peasants of a new order. No wonder the Europhiles lost. Those who voted to leave weren’t stupid. They were just angry.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-co...and-with-cause

[Resolute 14]

Because world history isn't absolutely littered with examples of anger resulting in stupid decisions...

[Swift]

In a nutshell, if the Leave side was so stupid and out of touch with everything in the modern age, how on earth did Remain, with all that intelligence and authority, lose the vote?

Um, there were more people voting on the Leave side than on the Remain side? Pretty basic arithmetic, Rex.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

To be fair UK was 86.2% remain immediately prior to the election.

No it wasn't. Unless you are referring specifically to Gibraltar only.
Polls had it close with maybe a maximum of a 4 point margin for remain

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Because world history isn't absolutely littered with examples of anger resulting in stupid decisions...

True. So the question is how to address the anger so more stupid decisions aren't made. Vilifying the angry is a pompous and ineffective tactic. So let's try something else.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

True. So the question is how to address the anger so more stupid decisions aren't made. Vilifying the angry is a pompous and ineffective tactic. So let's try something else.

I don't know. There have been several studies that have shown that those with uninformed beliefs tend to dig in further when presented with information that should inform them on the subject. Maybe mocking them isn't a great tactic but we're kind of out of options.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I don't know. There have been several studies that have shown that those with uninformed beliefs tend to dig in further when presented with information that should inform them on the subject. Maybe mocking them isn't a great tactic but we're kind of out of options.

That's not quite true. Studies show that the misinformed when presented with true information dig in. The uninformed tend to change when presented with evidence. So the question becomes how do you persuade people once they have formed an opinion based on incorrect information.

Though this might just be semantics with the point you are trying to make. Five third eight had an interesting article referencing several a studies which I am to lazy to source.

[FlameOn]

Originally Posted by Bagor

No it wasn't. Unless you are referring specifically to Gibraltar only.
Polls had it close with maybe a maximum of a 4 point margin for remain

We're quoting odds, not percentage of the actual vote. No way Clinton gets 90% of vote either.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by GGG

That's not quite true. Studies show that the misinformed when presented with true information dig in. The uninformed tend to change when presented with evidence. So the question becomes how do you persuade people once they have formed an opinion based on incorrect information.

Though this might just be semantics with the point you are trying to make. Five third eight had an interesting article referencing several a studies which I am to lazy to source.

Yeah, I actually wrote a paper on this for a university class a few years back related to anti-vaxxers and I wish I could remember the name of study I used. Pretty depressing stuff.

[Barnet Flame]

Originally Posted by Bagor

No it wasn't. Unless you are referring specifically to Gibraltar only.
Polls had it close with maybe a maximum of a 4 point margin for remain

Not popular vote, but the likelihood of Remain prevailing was approaching something like that level in the run up to the poll. It was the driver behind the surge in the value of the pound in the run up to the poll.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by rubecube

This is a really weird just hypothetical you're going with here. I'd like to think I'd evaluate them based on their reasons for voting than on their occupations. I grew up with mostly blue collar friends, and then moved to a city where most of my friends come from upper-class, well-educated parents. I'm very aware of the fact that not every labourer is knuckle-dragger and not every university grad is automatically a MENSA candidate.

That's not the point though. You are calling Leave voters stupid and ignorant, but the evidence proves otherwise. Many of these people have respectable trades, and the cognitive skills to go along with them. Something else must have motivated them to vote Brexit, but you don't want to address that.

Even you equating labour with labourer shows your bias. Skilled labour is quite a bit different.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by GGG

That's not quite true. Studies show that the misinformed when presented with true information dig in. The uninformed tend to change when presented with evidence. So the question becomes how do you persuade people once they have formed an opinion based on incorrect information.

Though this might just be semantics with the point you are trying to make. Five third eight had an interesting article referencing several a studies which I am to lazy to source.

This is probably a lot murkier than you are making it out to be. What about fields or subjects with very little consensus?