Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result

[Dr Jekyll]

///ajd said:

So you're saying some leavers were helped to decide to vote leave because they thought that some remainers thought they might be a bit racist.

Is that what you're saying? Did that factor in your vote?

I was helped to decide to vote leave by the fact that the Remain campaign concentrated on creating an offensive stereotype of their opponents rather than tackle the arguments. Clearly they were unable to come up with any sensible reason why the UK should belong to a protectionist bureaucracy run by an unhinged Anglophobe.

[///ajd]

bmw535i said:

You know full well that the manner in which the remain campaign was conducted swayed people to vote leave.

It was a factor in my vote yes. I was called a "xenophobic loser" when I suggested I may vote leave. It certainly helped me to realise that a lot of remainers are extremely bigoted.

Did one someone in real life call you a xenophobic loser - and this was a tangible event that made you want to vote leave?

Wow.

It is not bigoted to suggest someone who acts as if they don't like foreign people, someone who doesn't like foreign people. Did you act in a way that might have suggested you didn't want foreign people coming to the UK? Was immigration a factor in your vote that you were vocal about? How did you express this concern?

Edited by ///ajd on Sunday 21st August 18:29

[anonymous-user]

///ajd said:

Did one someone in real life call you a xenophobic loser - and this was a tangible event that made you want to vote leave?

Wow.

It is not bigoted to suggest someone who acts as if they don't like foreign people, someone who doesn't like foreign people. Did you act in a way that might have suggested foreign people? Was immigration a factor in your vote that you were vocal about? How did you express this concern?

It was a factor in my vote yes. I've already said that. No need to misquote or twist my words. It was one factor.

Your post doesn't make a great deal of sense, but I don't act like I don't like foreign people so it was a bigoted comment. I'd suggest you look up the term. Having concerns over uncontrolled immigration is not the same as disliking foreign people. If you don't accept that, fair enough.

Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 21st August 18:48

Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 21st August 18:59

[230TE]

///ajd said:

You might say its nonsense and bigoted, but its not to me - the lack of direct impacts on posters here from immigration, suggests to me that the feeling we need to control immigration is something they have been persuaded to believe by rhetoric. The similarity of these views is telling in my view - its like a breifing sheet from UKIP HQ.

Whoa. Stop there a moment. The only direct impact immigration has had on me personally is that the supply of cheap, fast German cars has dried up, because all the old 328is and A4 2.8 Quattros are now in Poland. Yet I am concerned about the strain that uncontrolled immigration might be placing on communities, public services and infrastructure in my part of the UK. (Rural East Anglia, where the last significant social upheaval was when tractors were invented.) By your logic, that makes me a bigot. Do I have to have lost my job to an immigrant to be allowed a view on the subject?

[don4l]

jsf said:

///ajd said:

jsf said:

Well considering you now can see that not wanting freedom of movement only has dark reasons, when you previously thought that was the case, I'd consider I helped educate you sucessfully. You should thank me for opening your bigoted eyes a little.

The only people I see trying to make the connection between people who want controlled immigration and people who wish all foreigners to be kept out are you and your ilk.

There may be the occasional person who wants all foreigners kept out, but that's not the majority view, its very much the minority view, yet you continue to peddle this position, despite this being constantly challenged by people on here.

If you let this nonsense drop you may get more people to listen to you.

You might say its nonsense and bigoted, but its not to me - the lack of direct impacts on posters here from immigration, suggests to me that the feeling we need to control immigration is something they have been persuaded to believe by rhetoric. The similarity of these views is telling in my view - its like a breifing sheet from UKIP HQ.

I'm not being intolerant of these views, just pointing out how I percieve them.

You are trying to make me shut up which suggests you are intolerant of my views.

Look up the definition of bigot.

I take it back, you are a lost cause.

I stopped reading his bigotted nonsense ages ago.

Feeding a troll only encourages them.

Edited by don4l on Sunday 21st August 23:46

[///ajd]

bmw535i said:

You know full well that the manner in which the remain campaign was conducted swayed people to vote leave.

It was a factor in my vote yes. I was called a "xenophobic loser" when I suggested I may vote leave. It certainly helped me to realise that a lot of remainers are extremely bigoted.

I'm not sure you know what bigotry means.

Here is the definition:

"intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself"

If remainers say that they think some people might hold a certain view, that is not necessarily bigotry - they are not declaring whether they find the view tolerable or not.

If they said people with x view should not vote or shut up - then that would be bigotry. But just challenging or saying you disagree is not bigotry.

I haven't said people should not have a view on controlling immigration - I've said that I haven't found compelling evidence that immigration is an issue in the UK, and hence wonder why some feel it is an issue.

I do think some people who think immigration is a massive problem in the UK might have been persuaded to think that by the relentless rhetoric by UKIP rather than direct negative experiences themselves. That is not saying they are wrong, or being intolerant, it is just a theory of why they hold that view, given they don't seem to have direct experience. It could be wrong, it could be from direct experience.

I have seen no direct negative experience of immigration reported here, but I have asked to hear about it if there are cases. I'm still all ears. I find it interesting that with so many brexiters seemingly feeling strongly about immigration on here, there are no direct experiences of the issues that they want to use to justify their views.

[230TE]

///ajd said:

I have seen no direct negative experience of immigration reported here

Given the typical PH demographic you probably won't see many. It's very easy to be insulated from any negative experiences if you're like me - middle aged, middle class, uni educated and self-employed in a niche business that is pretty much fireproof as far as competition from immigrants is concerned. But your logic seems akin to saying that you can't have an informed view on the root causes of chronic famine in Ethiopia unless you have starved to death. Some of us read things other than the Daily Mail, you know. And not all of us rely on St Nigel to tell us what we should be thinking.

[anonymous-user]

///ajd said:

I'm not sure you know what bigotry means.

Here is the definition:

"intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself"

If remainers say that they think some people might hold a certain view, that is not necessarily bigotry - they are not declaring whether they find the view tolerable or not.

If they said people with x view should not vote or shut up - then that would be bigotry. But just challenging or saying you disagree is not bigotry.

I haven't said people should not have a view on controlling immigration - I've said that I haven't found compelling evidence that immigration is an issue in the UK, and hence wonder why some feel it is an issue.

I do think some people who think immigration is a massive problem in the UK might have been persuaded to think that by the relentless rhetoric by UKIP rather than direct negative experiences themselves. That is not saying they are wrong, or being intolerant, it is just a theory of why they hold that view, given they don't seem to have direct experience. It could be wrong, it could be from direct experience.

I have seen no direct negative experience of immigration reported here, but I have asked to hear about it if there are cases. I'm still all ears. I find it interesting that with so many brexiters seemingly feeling strongly about immigration on here, there are no direct experiences of the issues that they want to use to justify their views.

So someone calling me a xenophobic loser because I hold different opinions regarding immigration is bigotry. Thanks for confirming. I'm not intolerant of people expressing an opinion to allow uncontrolled immigration, but I see a lot of people being intolerant towards those who want to control it. The accusation made me a.) keep my voting intention secret from anyone I knew and b.) firmly believe that leave was the right way to vote (amongst many other factors)

Perhaps people don't want to share their personal experiences on the internet where they will likely be subjected to intolerance, bigotry and accusations of racism or "Faragism" as they like to say.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/politics/welcome-...

What you don't seem to understand is that analysing why people voted for what is now completely irrelevant. You are just attracting mockery with your embarrassing ongoing campaign. Yes, it's amusing and yes, you're only making yourself look a bit strange, but it is perhaps time to drop it and concentrate on other more important things? The whole subject seems to have consumed you with a desire to persuade everyone they are wrong and it's just all a bit sad.

[B'stard Child]

///ajd said:

I haven't said people should not have a view on controlling immigration - I've said that I haven't found compelling evidence that immigration is an issue in the UK, and hence wonder why some feel it is an issue.

I do think some people who think immigration is a massive problem in the UK might have been persuaded to think that by the relentless rhetoric by UKIP rather than direct negative experiences themselves. That is not saying they are wrong, or being intolerant, it is just a theory of why they hold that view, given they don't seem to have direct experience. It could be wrong, it could be from direct experience.

I have seen no direct negative experience of immigration reported here, but I have asked to hear about it if there are cases. I'm still all ears. I find it interesting that with so many brexiters seemingly feeling strongly about immigration on here, there are no direct experiences of the issues that they want to use to justify their views.

I'm not 100% sure I should bother but what the heck - it's a discussion forum

I made an offer pre referendum to MrT - I'll make you the same one - come and have a stay in a market town in Norfolk

I fundamentally believe immigration is a good thing - however when it is uncontrolled I believe it can be a very destructive force

Now you may not see any of it's destruction but I see it every day and whilst immigration wasn't the primary factor in my vote out it had an influence

Just because you don't see it every day doesn't mean the issue doesn't exist

[230TE]

///ajd said:

I haven't said people should not have a view on controlling immigration - I've said that I haven't found compelling evidence that immigration is an issue in the UK, and hence wonder why some feel it is an issue.

///ajd said:

So in summary all this "match our migration to our needs" is a smoke screen for not wanting foreigners to come in. This extends to those who come up with arguments to create the impression (which has clearly formed in the minds of many) that migration is a bad thing.

You may disagree, but based on my research and the lack of evidence that FMOL is bad thing, thats the conclusion I come to.

It sounds from the above as though you stopped "wondering" a long time ago and decided that it's all about raaacism, innit? The only thing you wonder about is why people continue to challenge you on this one, when in your own mind you are so obviously right.

Virtue signalling on social media gets tedious very quickly.

[Hugo a Gogo]

jsf said:

///ajd said:

Limiting FMOL is a bad thing though - only fuelled by dark ideas as far as I can see. This maybe one of the reasons the EU is so against it.

Do you consider being able to plan and implement a countries infrastructure to match their current population and future population growth requirements a dark idea?

Do you consider being able to tailor your immigration policy to cater towards the skill shortages your nation requires a dark idea?

Do you consider being able to implement an immigration policy that does not discriminate against the majority of world nations a dark idea?

can, for example, England do those things as regards 'immigration' from other regions in the UK? or London from the rest of the UK? or Westminster from other areas of London?

why is it so different when scaled up to the UK as a whole? some sort of Blood & Soil rhetoric?

[andymadmak]

"Dark ideas" - Is that ///ajd's latest euphemism for calling Brexit voters racists? (Whilst all the while protesting his innocence... - oh, I see he dresses this up as "research" now, )

It's pointless trying to debate with these guys. They can't see beyond their own opinions. They look for the tiniest nuance (as they perceive it) in language and pounce on it as though they are Grand Inquisitors. The mixture of hyperbole, insinuation, innuendo and banana car logic that they use would be funny if it was not so tragic. Remember, we share road space with these people.......

[Pan Pan Pan]

Hugo a Gogo said:

jsf said:

///ajd said:

Limiting FMOL is a bad thing though - only fuelled by dark ideas as far as I can see. This maybe one of the reasons the EU is so against it.

Do you consider being able to plan and implement a countries infrastructure to match their current population and future population growth requirements a dark idea?

Do you consider being able to tailor your immigration policy to cater towards the skill shortages your nation requires a dark idea?

Do you consider being able to implement an immigration policy that does not discriminate against the majority of world nations a dark idea?

can, for example, England do those things as regards 'immigration' from other regions in the UK? or London from the rest of the UK? or Westminster from other areas of London?

why is it so different when scaled up to the UK as a whole? some sort of Blood & Soil rhetoric?

If you don't `really' know the answer to this/your question, then there is little point in discussing the issue with you.

[Hugo a Gogo]

why is it different? does your answer include the word 'sovereignty'

[SunsetZed]

I voted leave but I'm not a bigot, I tolerate remainers (even though they got it wrong, everything makes mistakes). Even bitter and twisted ones like ajd who still haven't come to terms with the views of the majority being a good way forward.

Just thought I'd chuck that in there

[Hugo a Gogo]

SunsetZed said:

I voted leave but I'm not a bigot, I tolerate remainers (even though they got it wrong, everything makes mistakes). Even bitter and twisted ones like ajd who still haven't come to terms with the views of the majority being a good way forward.

Just thought I'd chuck that in there

what do the majority think is the way forward though, I still haven't heard, in/out of FoM, single market, hard/soft

[Sylvaforever]

andymadmak said:

"Dark ideas" - Is that ///ajd's latest euphemism for calling Brexit voters racists? (Whilst all the while protesting his innocence... - oh, I see he dresses this up as "research" now, )

It's pointless trying to debate with these guys. They can't see beyond their own opinions. They look for the tiniest nuance (as they perceive it) in language and pounce on it as though they are Grand Inquisitors. The mixture of hyperbole, insinuation, innuendo and banana car logic that they use would be funny if it was not so tragic. Remember, we share road space with these people.......

[andymadmak]

Hugo a Gogo said:

what do the majority think is the way forward though, I still haven't heard, in/out of FoM, single market, hard/soft

I doubt that the majority have a single, collective, common vision for the way forward that they all subscribe to, given that there is no single over arching reason why all Brexit voters voted Brexit. Everyone's decision will have been personal to them. Why is that so hard for Remainers to grasp? Is the failure to understand this perhaps the reason why ///ajd et al seem determined to ascribe "dark ideas" to Brexit voters?

What the Brexit voters I have spoken to do recognise is that our Government will negotiate a deal, and that deal will end up being scrutinised to death. Some will be disappointed in it, others will be euphoric about it, most will probably see the final deal as in some way acceptable.
Were I to be a betting man I would say that FMOL may well end up looking something at least a bit like this :

EU citizens already here and with a job can stay indefinitely
EU citizens already here for at least 10 years can stay regardless of job status (i.e., those with roots here, although how this is defined will probably need more thought than just my 10 years example)
EU citizens that own property in the UK can stay
Some form of preferential fast track system for visa applications from within the EU (maybe even a "come first and review retrospectively" type system)
EU citizens coming in the future wanting to work will require either evidence of a job waiting for them or will apply for a work visa in a skill area identified by the Government as desirable (The NHS option) or may be admitted for a defined period under flexible temporary schemes designed to accommodate short term needs within the economy (the oft quoted example being seasonal fruit pickers, but there are others)
Student and other educational type visas can also be administered relatively easily

Those Brexiters for whom uncontrolled immigration was an issue to some degree will probably be happy with some sort of scheme based on the above. I've not met a single Brexiter who did not see the merit in continuing at least some immigration. The golden part is to understand who is being let in and for what reasons, rather than the mass uncontrolled scramble that we had before. (oh dear, is that a "dark idea" appearing )

As for the other questions, well we shall wait to see what the Government brings forward. The Tories would be committing electoral suicide if they do not deliver something that the majority can relate to as being "Brexit". The British people are ultimately pragmatists by and large, and a little give and take in the negotiations is to be expected.
Of course, the EU negotiating team could play hard ball. And that would damage both Europe and the UK. Not a good result, and since the EU is already in enough financial trouble it's hard to see that the EU would want to risk more just so that it could be seen to be hard on the UK for having the temerity to leave the club.
Some argue that they have to be seen to be hard, but the counter to that is that if they are hard on the UK, and the UK then goes on to thrive and prosper outside the EU then the pressure within the EU for further exits will grow exponentially imho.
The language will define the outcome. So my expectation is that interspersed between public outburst of tough talking in public on both sides, will be a recognition that the final deal will have to be made to work for all. So I expect single market access will be found in some way, albeit with some blurring on FMOL (as set out above) and a continuing (much much smaller) contribution to the EU financial pot (possibly dressed up as subscriptions to continued cooperation in some areas)

In the final analysis, I don't know if any or none of the above will happen. It's all just speculation based on the sure and certain knowledge that, in the end, money will talk and deals will be done.

[FiF]

andymadmak said:

Student and other educational type visas can also be administered relatively easily

You'd think, but the issue is that there are not sufficient resources in the various areas now. It's more complicated than just visas.

For example, cutting very long story short, a fully sponsored Ph.D studentship in a scientific study, supervisory expertise clearly at a UK university. Best candidate by far is from Africa. No question of any problem with visa application or question of finances, which are the usual stumbling blocks, but due to the nature of the subject this has to be assessed by Home Office, mainly for anti terrorism reasons. So the start of the 4 weeks it would take to get the visa has to wait for the various security assessments, need to add on 2 months, probably, only 4 people in government handling all this. The machinations of Government just aren't up to it nor adequately resourced.

All that's before we start to discuss entry with the other EU country where some of the experimental work will have to be done. No names but that nation really doesn't have a good track record with racist attitudes and treatment of black individuals.

Looking at the problem from another angle, inadequate resourcing is something raised in the Mail, waits for usual smears, by an asylum judge. Very happy to see applications from genuinely needy cases and enjoys giving people a chance to rebuild their lives. Yet frustrated by the backlog in the system caused by streams of dishonest fabricated stories, many ludicrous, in the knowledge that when these claims are justifiably refused that only 5-10% ever leave these shores. Border Agency, Visas and Immigration or whatever they're called this week are drastically under resourced.

I can assure you it's easy to say educational tier 4 visas can be easily handled, but in reality the system and resourcing needs to radically change.

[Hugo a Gogo]

andymadmak said:

Hugo a Gogo said:

what do the majority think is the way forward though, I still haven't heard, in/out of FoM, single market, hard/soft

I doubt that the majority have a single, collective, common vision for the way forward that they all subscribe to, given that there is no single over arching reason why all Brexit voters voted Brexit. Everyone's decision will have been personal to them. Why is that so hard for Remainers to grasp? Is the failure to understand this perhaps the reason why ///ajd et al seem determined to ascribe "dark ideas" to Brexit voters?

hold on, it was in response to this

SunsetZed said:

I voted leave but I'm not a bigot, I tolerate remainers (even though they got it wrong, everything makes mistakes). Even bitter and twisted ones like ajd who still haven't come to terms with the views of the majority being a good way forward.

Just thought I'd chuck that in there

if you collected all possible 'ways forward' that people wanted, arguably 'staying in the EU as is' would have been the majority
all the remainers wanted that, many of the leavers wanted one of several quite different options