How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 4)

[anonymous-user]

sidicks said:

I pointed that out 2 hours ago

I hadn't read that bit when I replied

[Skywalker]

Suppose the held another referendum and Remain (in all their guises) lost again.

Best 3 out of 5?

[TaylotS2K]

Skywalker said:

Suppose the held another referendum and Remain (in all their guises) lost again.

Best 3 out of 5?

I know right! Ridiculous.

(The despicable ) David Lammy is moaning that there is now a bunch of 18,19 and 20 year olds that would vote remain if they were eligible to vote when the referendum took place. It's absolutely shambolic of Lammy to dismiss the older generations vote, you know, those that have lots of life experience, seen changes for the worse or better and can make an informed decision.

[amusingduck]

TaylotS2K said:

I know right! Ridiculous.

(The despicable ) David Lammy is moaning that there is now a bunch of 18,19 and 20 year olds that would vote remain if they were eligible to vote when the referendum took place. It's absolutely shambolic of Lammy to dismiss the older generations vote, you know, those that have lots of life experience, seen changes for the worse or better and can make an informed decision.

I wonder what % of the 2016 voters were eligible to vote in the 1975 referendum.

Using his logic, the 2016 referendum was long overdue - lots of people who'd never had a chance to voice their opinion.

[TaylotS2K]

amusingduck said:

TaylotS2K said:

I know right! Ridiculous.

(The despicable ) David Lammy is moaning that there is now a bunch of 18,19 and 20 year olds that would vote remain if they were eligible to vote when the referendum took place. It's absolutely shambolic of Lammy to dismiss the older generations vote, you know, those that have lots of life experience, seen changes for the worse or better and can make an informed decision.

I wonder what % of the 2016 voters were eligible to vote in the 1975 referendum.

Using his logic, the 2016 referendum was long overdue - lots of people who'd never had a chance to voice their opinion.

Quite. It was long overdue.

[B'stard Child]

amusingduck said:

I wonder what % of the 2016 voters were eligible to vote in the 1975 referendum.

Using his logic, the 2016 referendum was long overdue - lots of people who'd never had a chance to voice their opinion.

Does this help

Year	0 to 15 years (%)	16 to 64 years (%)	Aged 65 and over (%)	UK population
1976	24.5	61.2	14.2	56,216,121
1986	20.5	64.1	15.4	56,683,835
1996	20.7	63.5	15.9	58,164,374
2006	19.2	64.9	15.9	60,827,067
2016	18.9	63.1	18.0	65,648,054

Probably need a more detailed breakdown agewise

But a bit of fag packet maths says roughly 50% of the population would have been able to vote both times

the 0-15 years in 76 would be 41 - 56 years but never got the chance to vote in 1975

The 16 - 64 years old range would be in the 57 - 85 years old (I know 18 was the threshold but 2 years is neither here nor there)

And all the over 65's would be 106 or older so pushing up daisies

[SpeckledJim]

It's a real brain-fart of an argument.

Either he knows that, but thinks the people who hear it are daft enough not to realise = standard mendacious politician

Or he doesn't know that = pwoppa dense MP who should be expected to be a bit brighter than this.

[Coolbanana]

TaylotS2K said:

... It's absolutely shambolic of Lammy to dismiss the older generations vote, you know, those that have lots of life experience, seen changes for the worse or better and can make an informed decision.

Lot's of Life Experience at being pretty average or even failures who wanted to blame the EU rather than look into the mirror and see the bitter face of someone who has not achieved as much as they had hoped and need an excuse!

Older most certainly does not mean wiser and 'Life Experience' is very subjective and can mean nothing of value at all to an aspirant younger person looking to make their mark.

Most of those I have encountered who voted Leave who are of an older generation seem to be holding a grudge and tend to blame everyone but themselves for their Lot in Life. They wanted everything presented to them on a plate but unlike the generation before them, didn't seem to have the work ethic nor ambition. They always blamed successive Governments for their inadequacies but in 2016 got an opportunity to step that up to the EU. A chance to apportion blame anew; they just couldn't resist!

Obviously, this doesn't hold true for all but given the appalling ignorance of many voters on the Leave side - and still those who just do not understand the concept of Democracy despite it having been spelt out for them in baby language - it is clear that many voted for a Shining Pink Unicorn with a Rainbow Mane leading to a Pot of Gold without any true understanding of what they would gain or lose. They simply followed the Piper's tunes and trusted the Brexit Propaganda Lies.

Some clearly still do, albeit others are slowing waking up. Hence I still have my popcorn in good supply, watching the fun unfold.

[Helicopter123]

TaylotS2K said:

Skywalker said:

Suppose the held another referendum and Remain (in all their guises) lost again.

Best 3 out of 5?

I know right! Ridiculous.

(The despicable ) David Lammy is moaning that there is now a bunch of 18,19 and 20 year olds that would vote remain if they were eligible to vote when the referendum took place. It's absolutely shambolic of Lammy to dismiss the older generations vote, you know, those that have lots of life experience, seen changes for the worse or better and can make an informed decision.

David Lammy would make an outstanding Home Secretary IMO.

[sidicks]

Helicopter123 said:

David Lammy would make an outstanding Home Secretary IMO.

With Gary Lineker as Chancellor and Gabby Yorath as Defence secretary?

[CaptainSlow]

B'stard Child said:

But a bit of fag packet maths says roughly 50% of the population would have been able to vote both times

I make it closer to 30% of the population....or 50% of the electorate (18+)

[CaptainSlow]

Helicopter123 said:

David Lammy would make an outstanding Home Secretary IMO.

Diane Abbott would be my first choice, she's earned it by shadowing the role so well in recent years.

[SpeckledJim]

There's a very easy test for all the bleating. Very simple.

"DID YOU THINK THIS WAS RELEVANT IN MAY 2016, WHEN YOU THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO WIN?"

I'm yet to find a complaint, hurdle, hiccup, straw-clutch or yesbut from Lammy, Blair, Major, Ashdown, Lineker, Umunna, Logan, Parris that passes this test.

If David Lammy had been on record as being concerned about the opinions of 15 year olds in May 2016, I'd be somewhat impressed with his consistency, if not by the legitimacy of the argument.

But he wasn't. Was he?

[SpeckledJim]

Coolbanana said:

Lot's of Life Experience at being pretty average or even failures who wanted to blame the EU rather than look into the mirror and see the bitter face of someone who has not achieved as much as they had hoped and need an excuse!

Older most certainly does not mean wiser and 'Life Experience' is very subjective and can mean nothing of value at all to an aspirant younger person looking to make their mark.

Most of those I have encountered who voted Leave who are of an older generation seem to be holding a grudge and tend to blame everyone but themselves for their Lot in Life. They wanted everything presented to them on a plate but unlike the generation before them, didn't seem to have the work ethic nor ambition. They always blamed successive Governments for their inadequacies but in 2016 got an opportunity to step that up to the EU. A chance to apportion blame anew; they just couldn't resist!

Obviously, this doesn't hold true for all but given the appalling ignorance of many voters on the Leave side - and still those who just do not understand the concept of Democracy despite it having been spelt out for them in baby language - it is clear that many voted for a Shining Pink Unicorn with a Rainbow Mane leading to a Pot of Gold without any true understanding of what they would gain or lose. They simply followed the Piper's tunes and trusted the Brexit Propaganda Lies.

Some clearly still do, albeit others are slowing waking up. Hence I still have my popcorn in good supply, watching the fun unfold.

You can afford a good supply of popcorn!? In this terrible recession!? Tony, is that you?

[Russian Troll Bot]

amusingduck said:

TaylotS2K said:

I know right! Ridiculous.

(The despicable ) David Lammy is moaning that there is now a bunch of 18,19 and 20 year olds that would vote remain if they were eligible to vote when the referendum took place. It's absolutely shambolic of Lammy to dismiss the older generations vote, you know, those that have lots of life experience, seen changes for the worse or better and can make an informed decision.

I wonder what % of the 2016 voters were eligible to vote in the 1975 referendum.

Using his logic, the 2016 referendum was long overdue - lots of people who'd never had a chance to voice their opinion.

And to follow it further, what about the 15, 16 and 17 year olds who would be too young to vote in a second referendum? Shouldn't we have another one in a few years so they can vote, and again so those who are currently 12 and 13 get their say?



Meanwhile, in the "impartial" world of Sky News, a company investing in the UK can only be doing it to avoid the fallout of Brexit

https://news.sky.com/story/kopparberg-to-produce-c...

[Garvin]

Coolbanana said:

Lot's of Life Experience at being pretty average or even failures who wanted to blame the EU rather than look into the mirror and see the bitter face of someone who has not achieved as much as they had hoped and need an excuse!

Older most certainly does not mean wiser and 'Life Experience' is very subjective and can mean nothing of value at all to an aspirant younger person looking to make their mark.

Most of those I have encountered who voted Leave who are of an older generation seem to be holding a grudge and tend to blame everyone but themselves for their Lot in Life. They wanted everything presented to them on a plate but unlike the generation before them, didn't seem to have the work ethic nor ambition. They always blamed successive Governments for their inadequacies but in 2016 got an opportunity to step that up to the EU. A chance to apportion blame anew; they just couldn't resist!

Obviously, this doesn't hold true for all but given the appalling ignorance of many voters on the Leave side - and still those who just do not understand the concept of Democracy despite it having been spelt out for them in baby language - it is clear that many voted for a Shining Pink Unicorn with a Rainbow Mane leading to a Pot of Gold without any true understanding of what they would gain or lose. They simply followed the Piper's tunes and trusted the Brexit Propaganda Lies.

Some clearly still do, albeit others are slowing waking up. Hence I still have my popcorn in good supply, watching the fun unfold.

How does this failure of the crinklies stack up with them being the most wealthy generation and forecast to be much better off than the younger generations following on? Are you saying they are looking to blame the EU and seek retribution for being so well off?

[Garvin]

Helicopter123 said:

David Lammy would make an outstanding Home Secretary IMO.

Now i know, without a shadow of a doubt, that you are trolling.

[Murph7355]

SpeckledJim said:

It's a real brain-fart of an argument.

Either he knows that, but thinks the people who hear it are daft enough not to realise = standard mendacious politician

Or he doesn't know that = pwoppa dense MP who should be expected to be a bit brighter than this.

He knows people are stupid enough to vote for him. So the odds are good!

[dromond]

Helicopter123 said:

TaylotS2K said:

Skywalker said:

Suppose the held another referendum and Remain (in all their guises) lost again.

Best 3 out of 5?

I know right! Ridiculous.

(The despicable ) David Lammy is moaning that there is now a bunch of 18,19 and 20 year olds that would vote remain if they were eligible to vote when the referendum took place. It's absolutely shambolic of Lammy to dismiss the older generations vote, you know, those that have lots of life experience, seen changes for the worse or better and can make an informed decision.

David Lammy would make an outstanding Home Secretary IMO.

A bunch that would be countered by the 18, 19 and 20 year olds that have been watching and seeing just how dictatorial the corrupt EU
have been towards the UK over the last 2 years?, Lammy has no idea how many in that age bracket would vote remain, just like I have no idea how many would vote leave, I haven't been round every 18 to 20 year old and asked them, neither has he, once again biased guesswork at the fore.

Its a stupid hypothesis and as relevant as saying think how many more remain voters there would have been if none had died in the 2 years running up to the referendum, beyond silly!, they weren't voters at that time, that idea precludes that you need to have multiple referendums to take account of those that weren't old enough at the time, how long do you carry that idea on?.

[amusingduck]

Russian Troll Bot said:

amusingduck said:

TaylotS2K said:

I know right! Ridiculous.

(The despicable ) David Lammy is moaning that there is now a bunch of 18,19 and 20 year olds that would vote remain if they were eligible to vote when the referendum took place. It's absolutely shambolic of Lammy to dismiss the older generations vote, you know, those that have lots of life experience, seen changes for the worse or better and can make an informed decision.

I wonder what % of the 2016 voters were eligible to vote in the 1975 referendum.

Using his logic, the 2016 referendum was long overdue - lots of people who'd never had a chance to voice their opinion.

And to follow it further, what about the 15, 16 and 17 year olds who would be too young to vote in a second referendum? Shouldn't we have another one in a few years so they can vote, and again so those who are currently 12 and 13 get their say?

Of course. Democracy doesn't stop just because a vote went one way or the other. That's all this is about, Democracy and Principles

What, do you think they're just gonna change the rules afterwards? Based on what?!