Poll: The EU Referendum: How Will You Vote? (May Poll)

[Amp34]

Can we stop with the economic argument, it has no basis in this discussion.

The only thing that matters remotely to the economy is the trade element.

Fox made a comment earlier about Laws being amended to suit needs. This is true, however with iirc the exception of 1 matter the UK have been outvoted and thus vetoed. Democracy and Sovereignty = null.

Was having a chat earlier (again with yet another outer... where are these in voters? ) Think my mind has been settled on the fact that the difference on this vote is going to come from Women.

Discussion along the following lines: Women are less likely to vote for things they "think" won't affect them. When fear comes into play Women immediately are more likely to take action based on the first available source relating to that fear. Any psychiatrists want to verify?

Scaring women may be Project Fears best bet as thinking about it most of the on the fencers I have spoke to have been women.

We have already been through this. It's a combination of the social circles you keep and the fact that many people that aren't absolutely passionate about the subject aren't going to set themselves up for an argument against someone with a passionate opposite view.

 

[RaohNS]

no and rofl,

Ignorance is bliss. Anyone who actually read my response to you will know that your response holds no water and the fact you choose not to engage it proves it.

Enjoy your time in the dark

 

[Glaucus]

We have already been through this. It's a combination of the social circles you keep and the fact that many people that aren't absolutely passionate about the subject aren't going to set themselves up for an argument against someone with a passionate opposite view.

this is very much it.
social circle no one is voting out, at work. it's very much foaming at the mouth and cvting out. The reasons are brilliant if it was so important.

almost universally its based on immigrants stealing my jobs, despite the extremely low immigrant number employeed, and extremely good pay for something you need no qualifications for.
second on there list is eu regulations and they cant understand why efficient hoovers that actually have to be able to clean is good. or use the banana cant be bent rubbish.

 

[RaohNS]

We have already been through this. It's a combination of the social circles you keep and the fact that many people that aren't absolutely passionate about the subject aren't going to set themselves up for an argument against someone with a passionate opposite view.

I know, I did see. However lying as to your stance just to avoid a "potential" argument? Seems strange. Logic fail there.

I do think there is a lot of factors relating to the Womens vote that are being exploited. Even if 50% of women vote for Remain that's 8million+ votes in the bag right there.

 

[RaohNS]

this is very much it.
social circle no one is voting out, at work. it's very much foaming at the mouth and cvting out. The reasons are brilliant if it was so important.

almost universally its based on immigrants stealing my jobs, despite the extremely low immigrant number employeed, and extremely good pay for something you need no qualifications for.
second on there list is eu regulations and they cant understand why efficient hoovers that actually have to be able to clean is good. or use the banana cant be bent rubbish.

That's the run of the mill council estate argument if I am reading that correctly.

Its not those regulations though is it? What brand of idiotic government would need a foreign autonomy to tell it your hoovers have to work and here is the legislation we have produced? A failed argument if ever there was one.

Whatever is discussed here-in will not matter one iota come June 24th.

What will be will continue come any of the binary vote we have been given.

 

[Glaucus]

That's the run of the mill council estate argument if I am reading that correctly.

Its not those regulations though is it? What brand of idiotic government would need a foreign autonomy to tell it your hoovers have to work and here is the legislation we have produced? A failed argument if ever there was one.

Whatever is discussed here-in will not matter one iota come June 24th.

What will be will continue come any of the binary vote we have been given.

rofl, so why haven't we had such regualtions before.
where is our government over the last several decades ensuring consumer rights.

it is far from a failed argument.

and no it wont make any difference. which is why there is little discussion in here.
and no these aren't council estate people. They just like to see themselves as down trodden despite working in a job that is above average wage for little effort and no qualifications. much like a lot of people in here, who are so hard done by, when in reality they are not.

 

[Amp34]

You don't necessarily need to agree, just steer the subject away or make noncommittal grunts, which when someone is talking at you usually means they assume you agree.

Still not sure where your getting this woman angle from. The data suggests there is negligible difference between men and women in this issue. It sounds more like you are trying to justify your "superiority" on the issue, not being swayed by "fear" and manipulation. Which is a bull**** argument and not far off the conspirital arguments about the referendum already being decided and fixed (mentioned by several people in this thread).

 

[muon]

Ignore economic arguments?

That's easy to say when 9/10 predictions are against you.

Might there even be a link?

This is one of the easiest things to predict. Any introduction of a barrier to trade is detrimental. The only scenario leaving the EU isn't detrimental is if we get the exact same deals we have within the EU, with the EU itself, USA, China, Japan etc. That simply won't happen. It is even less likely to happen with the EU as there will be a consequence of removing the free movement of people and not following EU trading standards.

You even have an ex WTO boss saying that the UK will risks a "huge blow" by relying on WTO arrangements when dealing with countries around the world.

The leave campaign managed to get 8 economists to support their campaign.

 

[Amp34]

Ignore economic arguments?

That's easy to say when 9/10 predictions are against you.

Might there even be a link.

Should probably just ignore the immigration argument as well, or perhaps any sovereignty argument...?

 

[RaohNS]

rofl, so why haven't we had such regualtions before.
where is our government over the last several decades ensuring consumer rights.

it is far from a failed argument.

and no it wont make any difference. which is why there is little discussion in here.
and no these aren't council estate people. They just like to see themselves as down trodden despite working in a job that is above average wage for little effort and no qualifications. much like a lot of people in here, who are so hard done by, when in reality they are not.

Regulation is sometimes surplus to requirement.

So, you support customers having rights but are against an EU customer spending £1 but getting 50p in return? O rly.

It is a failed argument. Or are you trying to say a UK Government couldn't copy or incorporate a nationally reflective piece of legislation or standard?

Indeed it is just the same recycled arguments placed in a different context or in a way to give the illusion of something new. Much like the answers given.

Immigration does factor into a reason to leave though. At this present moment we are told what we are going to accommodate. We may not do it, but threats and bluster prove how tyrannical the EU entity is.

I believe a lot of people in this country are hard done to. Sorry to disagree with you. We could state literally hundreds of anecdotes I'm very sure.

Recessions are for the poor to bear and all

 

[opethdisciple]

I probably wont vote at all.

I feel like unless I have an in depth understanding of the implications of my vote then I am better off not voting at all.

For me this is the biggest issue with democracy. Tyranny of the Majority as it's been called.

Also don't they say better the devil you know rather than the devil you don't?

From what I have been reading in the media it sounds like it would be best to stay in the EU.

 

[Glaucus]

wtf are you on about.
uk government wont do it as proved, and not only that left to their own devices they will remove such regulations,

immigration shouldn't, as we need free trade, to get free trade we will have to sign up to eu free movement just like other countries have had to.



your arguments half make no sense at all, and the other half you haven't even remotely thought through.

 

[RaohNS]

You don't necessarily need to agree, just steer the subject away or make noncommittal grunts, which when someone is talking at you usually means they assume you agree.

Still not sure where your getting this woman angle from. The data suggests there is negligible difference between men and women in this issue. It sounds more like you are trying to justify your "superiority" on the issue, not being swayed by "fear" and manipulation. Which is a bull**** argument and not far off the conspirital arguments about the referendum already being decided and fixed (mentioned by several people in this thread).

"Superiority"? Not at all. Women are less likely to read up thoroughly, more likely to go based on impulse eg System is not broken for me so I will stay.

So fear is now dismissed from any form of criticism or impact on votes? Fear is almost the entire basis of the Remain camps reasoning.

 

[Glaucus]

oh god. must be a troll.

 

[Stretch]

I've come to the conclusion the whole debate is pretty much a waste of time.

The future depends on two things no one know the answer to.

1. What deal will the EU give us if we leave.

2. What deal will the EU give us if we stay.

Any attempt to answer either of these questions is pure speculation/scaremongering/fantasy, but they're the only questions that matter.

 

[Caged]

Nobody is arguing that the UK Government couldn't introduce legislation that protects workers, the environment, and consumers in the way that EU legislation has. They are pointing out that decades of not doing it - while making noises that they don't like the current legislation - means that the balance of probability isn't in favour of these sorts of protections remaining in place in the event of a Leave vote.

 

[RaohNS]

Ignore economic arguments?

That's easy to say when 9/10 predictions are against you.

Might there even be a link?

This is one of the easiest things to predict. Any introduction of a barrier to trade is detrimental. The only scenario leaving the EU isn't detrimental is if we get the exact same deals we have within the EU, with the EU itself, USA, China, Japan etc. That simply won't happen. It is even less likely to happen with the EU as there will be a consequence of removing the free movement of people and not following EU trading standards.

You even have an ex WTO boss saying that the UK will risks a "huge blow" by relying on WTO arrangements when dealing with countries around the world.

The leave campaign managed to get 8 economists to support their campaign.

Yes, ignore them. There is £6trillion here and another 100% on top. Purchasing power. That drives the economy not the other way around.

9/10 against... that means there is still 1 in favour. You could have 90% of conflicting information but from sources that are questionable. Even the BBC are towing the rope.

Why is such a similar deal unlikely? Are our Politicians too stupid to set these deals up themselves? I'll throw back to you the before the EU line. Things did not grind to a halt.

Who said about stopping following EU trading standards? I certainly didn't. In fact if it opens up the purchasing power even the EU can't withstand the loss of the UK opportunities.

If Britain does leave - and I hope it does - the EU will begin to crumble and the mantle of power will fall back to nation governments with a standardised set of trade deals.... allegory there-in

 

[Narj]

Yes, but any attempt to dismantle existing protections means public outrage and that that they are out at the next general election. This is, to me, the heart of the matter. I'm bored with the economic guesswork and more interested in locally accountable democracy.

Demand for electoral reform if we Brexit will be too high to ignore IMO. I want Cameron and Gideon out and I'm not particularly keen on Boris, either. If we get STV or PR then we can have sensible compromise and something tthat works for the majority.

Having a government that's respectful to and even fearful of the electorate is a great situation to be in. The EU will push towards integration via stealth and our inflluence will be diluted as more members join. It's a sinking ship.

 

[RaohNS]

wtf are you on about.
uk government wont do it as proved, and not only that left to their own devices they will remove such regulations,

immigration shouldn't, as we need free trade, to get free trade we will have to sign up to eu free movement just like other countries have had to.

your arguments half make no sense at all, and the other half you haven't even remotely thought through.

Really Glaucus? Don't know what happened to your thought train (see below)

Switzerland have incredibly low legislation.

We have infinitely complex legislation and more to come. You are almost arguing against yourself here.

"They will remove such regulations" but earlier "The government didn't create legislation to protect consumers".... do you even read what you put?

Free trade... this may be difficult for you to realise but we do not have free trade with Europe. We pay a membership fee.

 

[muon]

Before the EU?

Here you go. The ECSC was created in 1951 and the EEC in 1958 with founding members (Belgium, France, Italy, Luxumbourg, Netherlands and West Germany).

This is from a slightly old paper so only goes up to 2003.

UK growth was abysmal relative to our neighbours before we joined the EU. Right now the UK is doing quite well versus the EU, and we want to leave and see what happens with our fingers crossed.