UKC

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/01/eu-referendum-leave-hypnoti...

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/29/leave-donor-plans-new-party...

youtube.com/watch?v=0dosmKwrAbI&

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-poll-most-brits-want-general...

So, to summarise:-

The Leave campaign paid a hypnotist to advise them on their online videos.

They paid millions to an American campaign adviser who told them to forget facts and concentrate on whipping up xenophobia, and, to quote Arron Banks, boy did they do so.

Their campaign involved dishonesty 'on an industrial scale', according to one of Britain's leading academics in the field.

Two-thirds of respondents feel that they were misled by Leave's campaign.

As far as one can tell from the data, it is quite possible that a rerun today would have a different result, and in some age groups as many as 50% of non-voters, the majority remainers, wish they had voted.

A sizeable majority of us think we should have a general election before we go any further.

It's not the most compelling democratic mandate, is it?

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

No it isn't.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

So what are you suggesting would change next time round?
Would the campaign, on both sides, suddenly get fact based and polite?

In reply to KevinD:

I was about to say, surely the same lies wouldn't work twice? But thinking about it, they probably would

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

F***ing hell.

I'm as upset as anyone else that Remain lost. I'm seriously bothered by the atmosphere which the campaigns created under which the vote proceeded. And so on.

But for crying out loud, the Guardian needs to stop running these "was the referendum illegal because blah blah blah" articles. It's just prolonging people's pain.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Maybe the whole of the UK should just split up into minor principalities and city states, and each decide it's own fate by small elections. Thus there could be scattering of places that still stay in the EU, and others that quit.

In reply to KevinD:



I think my suggestion would be more to the effect that this isn't a question which is suitable for a referendum, and/or that we should consider more seriously whether they are actually a good idea, given the potential they allow for demagogues to influence the result by lying.

Having said that, listening to the repulsive Banks does remind me again how *utterly* useless the Remain campaign was. If they had any online presence at all I didn't notice it, whereas you could hardly log on for groups of one kind and another contacting you to Get Britain Out or Put Britain First or some such shite.

It's alarming in quite a basic way to read of the manipulation techniques used. Of how effective it is to ask 'Are you worried about crime committed by foreign criminals in the UK', and how ineffective to reply, 'Not really, because incidence of crime is much lower among immigrants than the native population.', for instance.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Interesting: https://www.nchlondon.ac.uk/2016/07/01/professor-c-graylings-letter-650-mps...

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Fortunately, I didn't see any of the supposedly odious videos on my social media feeds. But, of course, my problem is that my social media feeds only echo my own feelings...

"Have you stopped beating your wife?"

ps. Yes: the referendum mandate is based on a pack of outright lies. Does this make it lack legitimacy? Well, I think so.

In reply to Trevers:


Yep.


Also yep.


No. There is a case to answer (several actually) and I would argue against reacting with a dose of good old British (Christ does that term reek of shit now) stiff upper lipism. If you think something stinks, don't just breath it in. And the stakes are very, very high.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


I think part of the problem is a lot of those who wanted out were passionate about it. Whereas those who wanted in generally tended to be not so much.


They also apply to general elections as well. Trying to remember what is the proper name for those sort of leading questions. A traditional trick was to do a phone call pretending to be a neutral polling company.
"So jcm. If you knew that candidate X went to an orphanage to eat his lunch in front of starving children would that change your vote?"

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Think you missed out the bit about the earth is really flat and moon made of blue cheese.

Knock it on the head and get out more.