UK and the EU

And there's another scenario. Those that struggled to decide, voted remain, but would vote leave if asked again now in light of recent developments and revelations.

 

pretty much like the betting...

 

I doubt it. Unless they had superhuman intelligence to the point of ESP and precognition, because there were just so many different factors to consider, some of which only came to light after the result was announced.

I think it's more likely that most people voted on gut instinct and fear of change. The leavers fearing change imposed by the eu, and the remainers fearing change from the status quo.

 

This isn't a contradiction to what I said.

 

Personally, I think this is a factor in why the outcome was, to many, an "unexpected" outcome: voters *did* have time and *did* have the intelligence to reach a decision they felt more comfortable with when weighed against the (perceived) alternative. Thus, I agree with you

I believe both sides, in the main, voted based on "intelligence" - who is to say they did not (?) - because then you get the media hype of "Remains = intelligent", "Leave Voters = uneducated Which, to be most fair to both sides, is very shallow!

One of the elements missing from the equation has nothing to do with "intelligence" per se, or degrees thereof, nor does it have to do with "time" (one could argue "which" time? The 40/50 years of development to draw upon? The time when the previous PM stated he would hold a referendum, *if* re-elected? Or, the "time" both sides had to come up with some kind of plausible argument, one way or t'other? ).

What is missing from the arguments, very simply, are: perception mixed with a dollop of personal experience!
For some, the EU experiment proved a very positive, and lucrative one; for others, it may have appeared to be a very negative one and, to a degree, depending on their experiences, one which increased their perception of relational poverty, or, in some instances (EU has too much control) a rational fear based on "control".

My understanding, albeit limited, is that people never *only* vote according to intelligence/time. You only have to read threads on here to see how many forum users form an opinion on subjects in relation to their own personal situation, experience, how they may be feeling at that time and their hoped for outcome. Its a human condition

Voting preferences, whether we like it or not, will always be based on personal experience, personal goals, perception and then, perhaps, have a bit of intelligence thrown into the mix for good measure and even that will depend upon what they read and how they *perceive* its meaning.

To my mind, the Remain Votes were valid; the Leave Votes were equally valid.
The result was accomplished based on a Democracy.
Thank goodness we do not live under a Dictatorship! Then, I might be forced to seek asylum ... but, since Brexit ... ... not too sure where I might be welcome (said very much tongue-in-cheek )

 

daitheplant said: ↑

With general elections in France and Germany next year, both Merkel and Hollande want us to get Brexit over and done with ASAP so as they can concentrate on keeping their jobs.

Oooh, you Cynic you, Dai.................but I reckon there's a lot of truth there.

Armandii, it was not my observation, but that of a french reporter being interviewed on Radio Wales yesterday morning. The same thing was hinted at by a German reporter on the same programme.

 

In a referendum, yes your vote does count, in a general election it only counts in marginal seats.
And there lies the problem of voter apathy.

 

Do I get the impression that most members wanted to stay IN?lol lol lol

 

I agree, up to a point
I would hope that the younger generation will apply themselves to voting from now on whether they live in a marginal seat area, or otherwise. Marginal seats could shift with only a few dozen votes thus making those areas particularly powerful depending on the electorate. Hence why politicians invest more time and (essentially) money campaigning in those areas. In turn, that gives more grease to the elbow of voters in those areas.

Also, factor in social media: people, whether we like it or not, do take notice of what their "friends" think - hey, easier than trawling through loads of boring stuff if you are not that way inclined Now, if a particular MP in a marginal seat misreads the signs/temperament/influences/views of those voters, then ...
Hang on ... .... ... silly me Didn't that happen in the last General Election?

 

He actually "Agreed" with your post

 

Perhaps it's should clarify my point, as it looks like it's been misunderstood.

Of course most people made an intelligent judgement.

My point is that even based on an objective assessment of past and present pros and cons of eu membership, it was impossible to be 100% confident in any forecasted pros and cons of eu membership.

If things were always going to stay the same, then it would be possible to make an informed decision. But nothing is constant. Everything changes all the time and the eu is no exception.

So in effect, we were asked to make a judgement on what we think will be best in the long term. We had to either go with gut instinct, or try to guess the future, or some degree of both.

In a futile effort to guess the future, I did a lot of research. The more I learned, the more questions presented themselves. As I continued my research to the eleventh hour, I saw compelling reasons to vote BOTH ways. However since the result, even more news has presented itself, which in my opinion could not have been predicted with any degree of accuracy, which gives further compelling reasons one way or the other that might change someone's decision if they were asked to vote again.

 

Meanwhile six more innocent people up to yet have been slaughtered in Munich as more nutters have decided to arm themselves and have gone on the rampage.RIP to all those who have lost their lives today...

 

All the more reason for us to take back control of our borders.