OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[swaledale]

Neither did I ever say ‘7 years of leaving’. I said ‘almost seven years on from the Referendum’...so yes, let’s ‘get that right’.

Broken promises? How about the words on Boris’ battle bus as probably the most notable...the ‘oven ready deal’...the suggestion that resolving the NI issue would be simple? How’s that just for starters.

GP...of course we digress. We started out looking at Statista’s suggested statistics about how the Brexit view had changed and now you’ve moved to blaming ‘idiots’ who voted for Brexit, Andy talking anecdotally about his family/rock n roll buddies while resurrecting the term ‘remoaners’ and general, no longer relevant, comment on who did and who didn’t vote back in 2016.

P.S. It’s a public forum Tricky...why would I pm you on something that isn’t personal?

rA it is already becoming clear that the arch Brexiteers are now claiming it isn't Brexit, its the fact it wasn't delivered properly - this is despite a) Most of the promises made at the time being undeliverable and b) It now being obvious just what the negative impact of Brexit is, which was highlighted at the time but dismissed as project fear.

Of course for some sovereignty is worth it - though why in that case we have just entered a trade deal which means the UK being a rule taker (one of the criticisms of the EU) but more than that allows companies and international corporations to sue the Government if they adopt policies or legislation that negatively impacts them.

In any case the move towards reintegration with the Eu at least economically is already starting, as reality overcomes the ideological ****wittery of certain politicians and Brexit supporters.

[swaledale]

That’s one of your more amusing statements

This comment merely confirms your inability to comprehend matters. Shame really.

[Andy_Faber]

[QUOTE=ramAnag;40263433]

Utter nonsense. How on earth do you reach that conclusion?
I was answering GP’s point that there had been no ‘digression’, when clearly there has.

Beyond that you joined Tricky in questioning the validity of my original statistics (from Statista) and then somehow substituted those figures with the beliefs of your own family, friend(s), neighbours and colleagues.
I’d suggest Statista’s two thousand might just be a little more reliable than your anecdotes and that you’re just disingenuously trying to introduce ‘cancel culture’ into a debate which it is totally irrelevant to.

I ‘joined’ no-one, just aimed to clarify the source of stats you’d referred to (partly by me referring to a post you hadn’t read, hadn’t understood or had chosen to ignore). I think GPs response on this earlier today is better than I have time to write at present

My anecdotes were in response to a post from Ramshank not yourself and given that you’ve been gaslit into not believing any of my anecdotes they obviously weren’t intended for your consumption

The cancel culture thing was just a bit of joshing

[ramAnag]

[QUOTE=Andy_Faber;40263579]

I ‘joined’ no-one, just aimed to clarify the source of stats you’d referred to (partly by me referring to a post you hadn’t read, hadn’t understood or had chosen to ignore). I think GPs response on this earlier today is better than I have time to write at present

My anecdotes were in response to a post from Ramshank not yourself and given that you’ve been gaslit into not believing any of my anecdotes they obviously weren’t intended for your consumption

The cancel culture thing was just a bit of joshing

Ah yes...of course...good old Andy and his jolly old ‘joshing’. The ever ready AF escape route.

‘Gaslit’? Who the hell has ‘gaslit’ me? You really do talk some bollux AF...and it’s not a matter of believing or disbelieving your anecdotes...it’s a question of which has more credibility, Statista’s sample of 2000 voters (apparently not enough according to Tricky) or your friends, family and various associates? Let’s just say I’d go with the former.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Or neither?

[ramAnag]

Or neither?

Of course.
But if I tried to use the voting of my friends and acquaintances as indicative of national levels of support for Brexit (Leave = 4, Remain = 24) you’d (rightly) dismiss the idea.
Similarly if I said that since the Referendum one of the ‘leavers’ had died and another had recognised the error of their ways, while all the
‘remainers’ were unchanged, so therefore support for Leave must be in decline you’d (again rightly) ridicule the suggestion.

The only conclusion you might be able to reach from the above is with regard to the company I keep.

So why not pay some attention to the Statista figures, especially seeing as Tricky’s initial objections seem to have been exposed by MA as ‘questionable’? Like all polls it’s imperfect and probably flawed, but it seems to provide a better and more up to date analysis of current opinion than anything else on offer.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Of course.
But if I tried to use the voting of my friends and acquaintances as indicative of national levels of support for Brexit (Leave = 4, Remain = 24) you’d (rightly) dismiss the idea.
Similarly if I said that since the Referendum one of the ‘leavers’ had died and another had recognised the error of their ways, while all the
‘remainers’ were unchanged, so therefore support for Leave must be in decline you’d (again rightly) ridicule the suggestion.

The only conclusion you might be able to reach from the above is with regard to the company I keep.

So why not pay some attention to the Statista figures, especially seeing as Tricky’s initial objections seem to have been exposed by MA as ‘questionable’? Like all polls it’s imperfect and probably flawed, but it seems to provide a better and more up to date analysis of current opinion than anything else on offer.

Statista samples are likely less biased than personal friend groups as the friends n family are more likely to reflect (in your case at least) same voting patterns. Your group, largely remainers, aren't changing anyway.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Statista samples are likely less biased than personal friend groups as the friends n family are more likely to reflect (in your case at least) same voting patterns. Your group, largely remainers, aren't changing anyway.

Oops, pressed post too early.

So why do I distrust the polls? (1)
the polls were wrong in 2016 despite Swales rather dubious theory that the polls predicting a remain win were right, and the referendum result was not.
(2) applying the 80/20 rule, there would be at best 400 potential swing voters in the sample. Not enough to give much certainty.

A sample of 2000 might be enough to form a conclusion on a straight "do you like a new chocolate bar" type question, but when you ask "do you still like it after you've eaten it every day for 4 years" it isn't.

Anecdotally I concede that there is a backlash against Brexit, but that's always the case after any decision put to the public. Bye elections after general elections almost always see the party in power lose or see their majority slashed.

So overall I don't doubt that "if they would have known then what they know now" the 2016 result would have been different. However I don't feel the poll in question adds anything to my personal observations - which itself has no statistical validity either.

Finally, I promise, who actually commissioned the survey and what skin did they have in the game as regards outcome? Pollsters I'm sure figure out what outcome those who are paying for the poll want. And pollsters realize they will get paid better if the outcome is what's wanted.

[Trickytreesreds]

Neither did I ever say ‘7 years of leaving’. I said ‘almost seven years on from the Referendum’...so yes, let’s ‘get that right’.

Broken promises? How about the words on Boris’ battle bus as probably the most notable...the ‘oven ready deal’...the suggestion that resolving the NI issue would be simple? How’s that just for starters.

GP...of course we digress. We started out looking at Statista’s suggested statistics about how the Brexit view had changed and now you’ve moved to blaming ‘idiots’ who voted for Brexit, Andy talking anecdotally about his family/rock n roll buddies while resurrecting the term ‘remoaners’ and general, no longer relevant, comment on who did and who didn’t vote back in 2016.

P.S. It’s a public forum Tricky...why would I pm you on something that isn’t personal?

I meant if you was waiting from answer from me.

[Trickytreesreds]

Just to be clear here, for those still yearning to rejoin the EU.

What are the criteria for joining the EU?

In order for a country to become part of the EU, the same must meet all the membership criteria, otherwise also known as ‘Copenhagen Criteria’. The main criteria are the free-market economy, a stable democracy and the rule of law, and the acceptance of all EU legislation, including the euro.

We won't agree to that.

[ramAnag]

‘So overall I don't doubt that "if they would have known then what they know now" the 2016 result would have been different. However I don't feel the poll in question adds anything to my personal observations...’

Finally, I promise, who actually commissioned the survey and what skin did they have in the game as regards outcome? Pollsters I'm sure figure out what outcome those who are paying for the poll want. And pollsters realize they will get paid better if the outcome is what's wanted.

So...we largely agree (on that first paragraph). Thank goodness for that. It’s all I’ve suggested.

As regards the second...you’re even more cynical than I thought. You possibly (probably) know more about polls than I do - certainly do if you feel you can ‘promise’ - but I’d never imagined that ALL polls had the sort of vested interest you describe.
Maybe I’m naive - not a common allegation - but who is it you think wants Statista to reach the conclusions they, seemingly independently, do?

Anyway...Raab’s gone!

[ramAnag]

Tricky...I don’t understand why you want me to pm you. It’s just as easy for you to answer through the forum.

Who’s said we are ‘yearning to rejoin the EU’? All that’s been suggested is that leaving has been a damaging thing to have done, that the decision to leave was based on lies and untruths and that some form of renegotiation is now inevitable.

Much of the damage has been done and, out of interest, who are your ‘we’ who ‘won’t agree to that’?

[Geoff Parkstone]

I'd be one of the "we" who won't agree to joining the euro, unless there is massive harmonisation of tax policies across Europe first - which seems unlikely

[Geoff Parkstone]

So...we largely agree (on that first paragraph). Thank goodness for that. It’s all I’ve suggested.

As regards the second...you’re even more cynical than I thought. You possibly (probably) know more about polls than I do - certainly do if you feel you can ‘promise’ - but I’d never imagined that ALL polls had the sort of vested interest you describe.
Maybe I’m naive - not a common allegation - but who is it you think wants Statista to reach the conclusions they, seemingly independently, do?

Anyway...Raab’s gone!

Statista is German and hence untrustworthy but good at taking penalties.....

[Andy_Faber]

Statista is German and hence untrustworthy but good at taking penalties.....

Beware, putting 'Good' and 'German' in the same sentence might set Swale off