By the way. Can we stop using the word binary ?

[7sisters]

Ten years ago people just used phrases like, either or, black or white, before all these pretentious media types all signed up for yet another poncey term...
C*nts ..

[Chief Arrowhead]

Ten years ago people just used phrases like, either or, black or white, before all these pretentious media types all signed up for yet another poncey term...
C*nts ..

That's a bifurcated complaint, imo.

[71 Guns - channeling the spirit of Mr Hat]

Ten years ago people just used phrases like, either or, black or white, before all these pretentious media types all signed up for yet another poncey term...
C*nts ..
01101110 01101111 00100000 01110111 01100101 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100111 01110100

[WES]

Yes. Or no.

One of the two. :nod:

[IUFG]

01101110 01101111 00100000 01110111 01100101 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100111 01110100

01001001 00100000 01100001 01100111 01110010 01100101 01100101

[71 Guns - channeling the spirit of Mr Hat]

01001001 00100000 01100001 01100111 01110010 01100101 01100101
01101100 01101111 01101100

[IUFG]

01101100 01101111 01101100

00111010 01110100 01101000 01110101 01101101 01100010 01110101 01110000 00111010

[Peter]

Yes. Or no.

One of the two. :nod:

Isnt that how we got ourselves in a mess with the referendum? I think each voter should have been asked to draft a paragraph outlining their views on the EU and what they would like to see happen going forward.

[IUFG]

Isnt that how we got ourselves in a mess with the referendum? I think each voter should have been asked to draft a paragraph outlining their views on the EU and what they would like to see happen going forward.

If we had approached the referendum with the same number of options as, say, gender identity, the referendum would have been described as absolutely ludicrous, no doubt.

[WES]

Isnt that how we got ourselves in a mess with the referendum? I think each voter should have been asked to draft a paragraph outlining their views on the EU and what they would like to see happen going forward.

Absolutely not. The issue with the referendum - as you well know - was that the options were 'yes' or 'an undefined no of some kind that no one really understood'.

Quite the antithesis of binary.

[Burney]

Absolutely not. The issue with the referendum - as you well know - was that the options were 'yes' or 'an undefined no of some kind that no one really understood'.

Quite the antithesis of binary.

Because the consequences of a 'yes' vote were obviously clearly defined, weren't they?

I would remind you that the same generation that voted 'Yes' in 1975 voted 'No' in 2016 in their droves because what they thought they'd voted for back then had turned into something else and they felt betrayed and cheated.

The notion that Leave voters didn't know what they were voting for but Remain voters did doesn't stand up to a moment's serious scrutiny, I'm afraid. Just because you think you're voting for the status quo doesn't mean that's what you're going to get.

[Peter]

Because the consequences of a 'yes' vote were obviously clearly defined, weren't they?

I would remind you that the same generation that voted 'Yes' in 1975 voted 'No' in 2016 in their droves because what they thought they'd voted for back then had turned into something else and they felt betrayed and cheated.

The notion that Leave voters didn't know what they were voting for but Remain voters did doesn't stand up to a moment's serious scrutiny, I'm afraid. Just because you think you're voting for the status quo doesn't mean that's what you're going to get.

That isnt strictly true, b. Our PRime Minister went through a round of negotiations with the EU and set out our future relationship. Added to the fact that we were already members itis fair to say there was a far clearer picture of what staying looked like than leaving. It is quite hard to argue against that.

THis doesn't translate into remain voters being one huge mass of clear-minded, rational EU lovers with a clear voice. But they knew what staying in the EU meant and still voted for it. Leave voters were presented with nothing in detail- horror stories on one side, bold promises on the other butno clear picture of how we would leave.

They still voted for it. I honestly thought it would put people off. I think a clearer picture of what departure looked like might have yielded a bigger leave vote.

[Burney]

That isnt strictly true, b. Our PRime Minister went through a round of negotiations with the EU and set out our future relationship. Added to the fact that we were already members itis fair to say there was a far clearer picture of what staying looked like than leaving. It is quite hard to argue against that.

THis doesn't translate into remain voters being one huge mass of clear-minded, rational EU lovers with a clear voice. But they knew what staying in the EU meant and still voted for it. Leave voters were presented with nothing in detail- horror stories on one side, bold promises on the other butno clear picture of how we would leave.

They still voted for it. I honestly thought it would put people off. I think a clearer picture of what departure looked like might have yielded a bigger leave vote.

But millions of people didn't believe Cameron's outlined vision: that's the point. They had had promises from Prime Ministers about the EU in the past and felt let down and lied to.
The whole point about the EU is that it has not proved to be what we were sold. History made it clear that the 'vision' Remain had for the future was absolutely worthless, since our relationship with the EU has been characterised by perpetual mission creep on their part and perpetual, mendacious insistence that that wasn't really the case from our leaders. The idea that we could ever have any kind of credible roadmap for the future within the EU that didn't chime with its express, federalist mission has always been ludicrous.

[Peter]

But millions of people didn't believe Cameron's outlined vision: that's the point. They had had promises from Prime Ministers about the EU in the past and felt let down and lied to.
The whole point about the EU is that it has not proved to be what we were sold. History made it clear that the 'vision' Remain had for the future was absolutely worthless, since our relationship with the EU has been characterised by perpetual mission creep on their part and perpetual, mendacious insistence that that wasn't really the case from our leaders. The idea that we could ever have any kind of credible roadmap for the future within the EU that didn't chime with its express, federalist mission has always been ludicrous.

With respect, what people are told and whether they believe it are not the same thing. I think it is tough to argue that the consequences of remaining were as unclear as the consequences of leaving.

The funny thing is that remainers nowwant to complain that the leave vote didnt know what they were voting for. For decades Brexiteers have argued that those voting in 1975 didnt know what they were voting for.

[WES]

Because the consequences of a 'yes' vote were obviously clearly defined, weren't they?

I would remind you that the same generation that voted 'Yes' in 1975 voted 'No' in 2016 in their droves because what they thought they'd voted for back then had turned into something else and they felt betrayed and cheated.

The notion that Leave voters didn't know what they were voting for but Remain voters did doesn't stand up to a moment's serious scrutiny, I'm afraid. Just because you think you're voting for the status quo doesn't mean that's what you're going to get.

No, sorry but that's just an illogical argument. No one knows what's going to happen in the future, that applies equally to all outcomes.

However what Remain meant in the short term was very clear, what Leave meant in the short term - as we are now seeing - no one knows at all. :shrug:

A much better argument for voting Leave is that the alternative was so unpalatable that the Leave voters felt they had to vote as such and hope they got something better in the short term and much better in the long term. That's a valid argument.

[Burney]

With respect, what people are told and whether they believe it are not the same thing. I think it is tough to argue that the consequences of remaining were as unclear as the consequences of leaving.

The funny thing is that remainers nowwant to complain that the leave vote didnt know what they were voting for. For decades Brexiteers have argued that those voting in 1975 didnt know what they were voting for.

Well it's pretty clear that those voting Yes in 1975 didn't know what they were voting for. That's why they voted Leave in 2016. :shrug: