The Brexit Arms

[BrexitArmsLandlady]

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
🍺 🍻🍷🍹🥂🍾🍸🍺🍻🍷🍹🥂

Welcome to The Brexit Arms!
Looking forwards, not backward!

All welcome 🍺

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

corcory it is hearsay if you've taken the word of someone with no evidence as to its provenance.

If there is an EU directive stating what questions a social care form needs to ask, surely you can point me to it?

MichaelBendfaster

Sorry but that is just the point.
Leavers wanted to leave.
It's not about any issues are big things we can point to.

I realise this upset the Remainers, but like the dad and the Vacuum after 40 years, DC the IDIOT said ok you can vote, and the core feeling was hell yes.. lets go.

@MichaelBendfaster

I got one. Bendy bananas. I want bendy bananas ..

Oh wait. That's the United Nations ...

Codex Alimentarius

free of malformation or abnormal curvature of the fingers;

As said before if you have over half of the people willing to vote leave, then the people at the top have so misjudge the people who voted them in that they have to readjust and go the way requested even if they are shocked at the result.

Leavers wanted to leave. It's not about any issues are big things we can point to.

the core feeling was hell yes.. lets go.

mummy, you and I are not disagreeing exactly. I am just trying to understand why, in the absence of being able to 'point to' things that are concretely wrong or damaging about our EU membership, and in the face of evidence strongly suggesting that we benefit more from it than we suffer, people were happy to leave and are happy with the way things are going because of a ' core feeling'.

I don't disagree with you about Cameron being an idiot either. But, even given the free vote, people could still have voted the other way.

You know as well as I do that lots of things stated by leavers are our opinions

Opinions are fine, the problem is you were touting your social care form story as 'fact' not 'opinion' corcory

I did crunch the numbers, and really it came down to the following.

under 24 wanted to stay,
25 to 64 didn't really care.
65 and over had spent 40 years knowing this was not what they voted for and when the vote came along, they said we are going.

So as said the lack of education to the middle ground left them uncaring of which way it went.
Even if ALL the voting under 24' s had said stay and about 30% voted to leave it still wouldn't have out voted the over 65's as their numbers were so much higher.
So you have to think that if people who have lived and worked it feel that way, there has to be a reason for this feeling...

If work tell you they need you to change your forms due to an EU need to know info, most people accept it, the fact this seems to be a NHS / Care related would mean most people accept it has come down from on high.

Think your being very nasty in the way your decrying the information BEAR, seeing as you were not present, but your powers of KNOWING are once again very impressive .. or you could just be plain wrong.

25 to 64 didn't really care

Not sure that’s true - post referendum polls showed that under-45s were pro-Remain.

YouGov:
18-24 - 71% Remain
25-49 - 54% Remain

Lord Ashcroft:
18-24 - 73% Remain
25-34 - 62% Remain
35-44 - 52% Remain

Ipsos:
18-24 - 75% Remain
25-34 - 60% Remain
35-44 - 55% Remain

Oh here we go with the ‘nasty’ malarkey. It’s pitiful that it always ends up with Leavers playing this card when they can’t think of any other response.

If there is an EU directive which specifies what questions need to be asked on a social care form I’m happy be proved WRONG!!!!

Sadly I’m not just a sheep that believes everything I’m told without proof though.

I’m not just going to accept things as facts unlike so many of you seem to be happy to do.

That’s not being nasty at all- it’s being pragmatic and sensible.

There are countless examples of the EU being made a scapegoat for rules we actually want to impose.

Even the reverse is true- look at the recent fiasco over credit card card charges being banned which TM took credit for when in fact it was the nasty EU’s directive.

AgnesSkinner

Sorry I mean the under 24's were decisive to go.
The 25 to 64 when averaged out not more one than the other by a few points.
The over 65's had greater numbers than the under 24's,
90% had a got a vote and of those that voted the number who wanted to leave was Millions more and carried the vote.

As I said this is about the number of actual people who voted not a percentage.

mummmy2017 Sun 21-Jan-18 23:45:58
Ok this took some doing.. these are rounded figures and I ured towards remain to get the numbers..
UK population.. figures 63 million
Voting age 50 million.. Split according to Wikipedia 2016
Somewhere I found the figures as to how many of the age groups were registered to vote
The link above gave the % for each age. EU voting split.
33Million.. The 17 M to 16M with some not voting..

18.to 24 4.03 voted 29% 1.247 L 2.783 R
25 to 64 19.892 vote 49.70 % 9.904 L 9.988 R
65 and over 9.36 voted 64% 5.990 L 3.370 R

I know it's a bit nerdish to try to work the figures , but I was curious to find out some sort of split...

I’d say at 60% the 25-34s were pretty decisive too.

And if you think that 52% to 55% of the under 45s were ambivalent then you need to stop with “the will of the people, we voted to leave” stuff, because 51.9% of those who voted means that the UK as a whole was pretty ambivalent too.

18.to 24 4.03 voted 29%

What does this mean?

It's the % of those who could vote who voted to leave in that age group

In the age group of 18 years to 24years. 4.03 voted.
29% voted to leave.
1.247 Leave
2.783 Remain.

AgnesSkinner

I do agree this result was brought about simply by the sheer lack of the possible voting public who simply didn't care enough to use the vote that they had.

I have been shocked by people I personally know who just didn't bother to vote, even though they could have. Saying they couldn't decide so didn't' bother.

I am a bit sceptical about all the voting analysis carried out on the basis of polling. The factor from the actual results which is most striking is that the 3 Remain areas of the country (Scotland, N Ireland, London) were also the areas with the lowest turnout.

This is most apparent in Scotland and cannot be attributed to a pattern of non-voting. Turnout in the 2014 Indyref was 84.6% but only 67.2% in the EUref. The difference equates to roughly 1 million votes.

A couple of decent roundups.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028

www.itv.com/news/london/2016-06-24/at-a-glance-how-london-voted-in-the-eu-referendum/

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36599102

Quite a few people I know just thought no way we would be stupid enough to vote Leave and didn't bother! Well, they'd be first in line on ref2 day given the state of the property market

So Bear I am supposed to go to a carers meeting and question the head of Dept. who has come to answer our queries about a newly implemented assessment and ask her to verify her facts, questioning where she got her assumptions from otherwise I am a sheep!
If you were at that meeting you would question her about the statement she gave us about an EU directive and ask her for proof?
Ye right! That had nothing at all to do with the meeting.

corcory I'm not disputing what you are saying was said at the meeting; I'm saying there are countless examples where the EU have been cited as the reason something does or doesn't happen and it's nothing to do with the EU.

No one has been able to provide any evidence that the EU are so prescriptive that they dictated what specific questions were on a UK social care form.

I choose to not assume it's the fault of the EU until I have proof otherwise.

You choose to do the opposite.

I guess that sums up why we are where we are doesn't it?

Reminds me of Daniel Kahneman. It feels like a difference in the way we use our brains.

System 1 is an automatic, fast and often unconscious way of thinking. It is autonomous and efficient, requiring little energy or attention, but is prone to biases and systematic errors.

System 2 is an effortful, slow and controlled way of thinking. It requires energy and can’t work without attention but, once engaged, it has the ability to filter the instincts of System 1.

Bear, you are a heavy System 2 user. Mummmy is in my view System 1 ...

Wrt the turnout, I'm far more interested in the non-voters than the people who did - there's loads of studies & theories about why people may have voted as they did, but none? regarding those who didn't.

Londonmum's comment is quite pertinent I think (not having a pop, honest! I'm genuinely interested in this angle):

Quite a few people I know just thought no way we would be stupid enough to vote Leave and didn't bother! Well, they'd be first in line on ref2 day given the state of the property market

It fits with the narrative of those who are used to things going their way (living in a bubble/detached from the rest of society/the 'have's etc) not being able to countenance that other people think differently to them.

They were so comfortable & cocooned in their own reality & world view that they couldn't imagine things going against them.

I'm really, honestly not trying to be obnoxious! I'm genuinely interested & would love to see research regarding the non-voters (not those who made an active choice to abstain, but those who simply didn't bother).
I suspect non-voters in the lower socio-economic groups was due to apathy etc as is usual, but it's strange that there was low political engagement for groups that I would have expected there to be iyswim.

Very simplistic representation Olivia.
We all use cognitive shortcuts in daily life as it would not be possible for us to live otherwise.

Bear is as much a 'system 1' user as mummmy.

Loving the photo on this

DD needs a speech bubble saying 'Look, Squirrel'