David Aaronovitch: "The Brexit generation is dying out."

[MM]

David Aaronovitch, Viewsnight:

The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking to
a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from my
family died this year," she told me. As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal, the Brexit majority would
be reduced to zero by that most natural of wastages. It went something
like this: 600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of
Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as
against about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added.
and if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers and
sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a Remain
majority.

It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for the
Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing they
broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their parents
did. Dig down and three factors stand out. Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands include
political parties.

As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ

Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!

MM

[James Harris]

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking to
a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from my
family died this year," she told me. As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal, the Brexit majority would
be reduced to zero by that most natural of wastages. It went something
like this: 600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of
Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as
against about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added.
and if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers and
sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a Remain
majority.
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for the
Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing they
broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their parents
did. Dig down and three factors stand out. Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands include
political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!

Yes, we have to keep winning the argument until people can see for
themselves what a wise choice Brexit was.

Norway had a similar journey. In 1994 they held a referendum on joining
the EU. Despite their government trying to persuade them to join they
decided 52:48 not to. And over time, the anti-EU feeling has only
increased. Now, only around 22% want to join. 78% want to stay out!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway%E2%80%93European_Union_relations#Opinion_polling

I suspect Norwegians faced similar arguments: we must be in the EU for
our economic prosperity - the typical cry of the establishment who would
do well out of membership. But the people of the country are too smart.
They recognise that they and their children are better off out.

Expect to see Britain's opinion polling taking a similar journey once we
leave.

[Norman Wells]

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking to
a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from my
family died this year," she told me. As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal,

What 'other things'? And why should they be equal?

Post by MM
the Brexit majority would
be reduced to zero by that most natural of wastages. It went something
like this: 600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of
Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as
against about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added.
and if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers and
sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a Remain
majority.

No we won't. He's made a typical error of those who can't see the wood
for the trees.

If the way we vote is dependent on age, you cannot just consider what
happens at the very young and very old ends of the scale, which he has.
You also have to consider what happens in the middle.

If, say, to simplify things, all those over 40 vote to leave the EU and
all those under 40 vote to remain in it, sure there will be a gradual
replacement of Leavers who die with new young Remainers who join the
cohort, and that's the thrust of his argument.

But there's also a change of sides going on in those who turn 40 in the
period under question. It follows from the original premise.

Post by MM
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for the
Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing they
broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their parents
did.

There was never any such compact or even correlation. Ever since time
began, the young have always favoured socialism over conservatism, and
in my experience they've therefore voted differently from their parents.

Over time, however, they realise their youthful, dreamy embrace of
socialism isn't really practical, and will take far more of their income
than they are prepared to pay, and they become more conservative.

If that were not so, then the last 60 years or so would have seen the
complete extinction of the Conservative party and lifelong Labour
governments. Which we don't seem to have.

Post by MM
Dig down and three factors stand out. Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands include
political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ

That was over 50 years ago. We still have a Conservative government,
and Trump is even in the White House. Why should the revolution start now?

Post by MM
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!

No, it's just typical ill thought out nonsense.

[FMurtz]

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking to
a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from my
family died this year," she told me.  As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal,

What 'other things'?  And why should they be equal?

Post by MM
the Brexit majority would
be reduced to zero by that most natural of wastages. It went something
like this: 600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of
Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as
against about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added.
and if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers and
sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a Remain
majority.

No we won't.  He's made a typical error of those who can't see the wood
for the trees.
If the way we vote is dependent on age, you cannot just consider what
happens at the very young and very old ends of the scale, which he has.
You also have to consider what happens in the middle.
If, say, to simplify things, all those over 40 vote to leave the EU and
all those under 40 vote to remain in it, sure there will be a gradual
replacement of Leavers who die with new young Remainers who join the
cohort, and that's the thrust of his argument.
But there's also a change of sides going on in those who turn 40 in the
period under question.  It follows from the original premise.

Post by MM
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for the
Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing they
broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their parents
did.

There was never any such compact or even correlation.  Ever since time
began, the young have always favoured socialism over conservatism, and
in my experience they've therefore voted differently from their parents.
Over time, however, they realise their youthful, dreamy embrace of
socialism isn't really practical, and will take far more of their income
than they are prepared to pay, and they become more conservative.
If that were not so, then the last 60 years or so would have seen the
complete extinction of the Conservative party and lifelong Labour
governments.  Which we don't seem to have.

Post by MM
 Dig down and three factors stand out.  Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands include
political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ

That was over 50 years ago.  We still have a Conservative government,
and Trump is even in the White House.  Why should the revolution start now?

Post by MM
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!

No, it's just typical ill thought out nonsense.

MM believes the more he waffles the more his musings will become fact,
he would be well served to shut up for a few years then come back after
the fact, and not look so silly.

[johnny-knowall]

Post by FMurtz

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking to
a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from my
family died this year," she told me. As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal,

What 'other things'? And why should they be equal?

Post by MM
the Brexit majority would
be reduced to zero by that most natural of wastages. It went something
like this: 600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of
Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as
against about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added.
and if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers and
sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a Remain
majority.

No we won't. He's made a typical error of those who can't see the wood
for the trees.
If the way we vote is dependent on age, you cannot just consider what
happens at the very young and very old ends of the scale, which he has.
You also have to consider what happens in the middle.
If, say, to simplify things, all those over 40 vote to leave the EU and
all those under 40 vote to remain in it, sure there will be a gradual
replacement of Leavers who die with new young Remainers who join the
cohort, and that's the thrust of his argument.
But there's also a change of sides going on in those who turn 40 in the
period under question. It follows from the original premise.

Post by MM
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for the
Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing they
broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their parents
did.

There was never any such compact or even correlation. Ever since time
began, the young have always favoured socialism over conservatism, and
in my experience they've therefore voted differently from their parents.
Over time, however, they realise their youthful, dreamy embrace of
socialism isn't really practical, and will take far more of their income
than they are prepared to pay, and they become more conservative.
If that were not so, then the last 60 years or so would have seen the
complete extinction of the Conservative party and lifelong Labour
governments. Which we don't seem to have.

Post by MM
Dig down and three factors stand out. Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands include
political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ

That was over 50 years ago. We still have a Conservative government,
and Trump is even in the White House. Why should the revolution start now?

Post by MM
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!

No, it's just typical ill thought out nonsense.

MM believes the more he waffles the more his musings will become fact,
he would be well served to shut up for a few years then come back after
the fact, and not look so silly.

He has been in denial for 18 months now. I doubt he will ever recover enough
to not look silly.

[Incubus]

Post by FMurtz

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking to
a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from my
family died this year," she told me.  As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal,

What 'other things'?  And why should they be equal?

Post by MM
the Brexit majority would
be reduced to zero by that most natural of wastages. It went something
like this: 600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of
Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as
against about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added.
and if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers and
sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a Remain
majority.

No we won't.  He's made a typical error of those who can't see the
wood for the trees.
If the way we vote is dependent on age, you cannot just consider what
happens at the very young and very old ends of the scale, which he
has. You also have to consider what happens in the middle.
If, say, to simplify things, all those over 40 vote to leave the EU
and all those under 40 vote to remain in it, sure there will be a
gradual replacement of Leavers who die with new young Remainers who
join the cohort, and that's the thrust of his argument.
But there's also a change of sides going on in those who turn 40 in
the period under question.  It follows from the original premise.

Post by MM
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for the
Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing they
broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their parents
did.

There was never any such compact or even correlation.  Ever since time
began, the young have always favoured socialism over conservatism, and
in my experience they've therefore voted differently from their parents.
Over time, however, they realise their youthful, dreamy embrace of
socialism isn't really practical, and will take far more of their
income than they are prepared to pay, and they become more conservative.
If that were not so, then the last 60 years or so would have seen the
complete extinction of the Conservative party and lifelong Labour
governments.  Which we don't seem to have.

Post by MM
 Dig down and three factors stand out.  Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands include
political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ

That was over 50 years ago.  We still have a Conservative government,
and Trump is even in the White House.  Why should the revolution start now?

Post by MM
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!

No, it's just typical ill thought out nonsense.

MM believes the more he waffles the more his musings will become fact,
he would be well served to shut up for a few years then come back after
the fact, and not look so silly.

Here's a list of predictions MM has made that have come to pass:

[Ned Latham]

Post by FMurtz

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking
to a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from
my family died this year," she told me.  As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal,

What 'other things'?  And why should they be equal?

Post by MM
the Brexit majority would be reduced to zero by that most natural of
wastages. It went something like this: 600,000 voters die every
year.Given the age profile of Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be
amongst the deceased, as against about 150,000 Remainers. In
addition, new voters are added. and if they voted in the same way as
their slightly older brothers and sisters, then by the time we leave
in 2020, we would have a Remain majority.

No we won't.  He's made a typical error of those who can't see the
wood for the trees.
If the way we vote is dependent on age, you cannot just consider what
happens at the very young and very old ends of the scale, which he
has. You also have to consider what happens in the middle.
If, say, to simplify things, all those over 40 vote to leave the EU
and all those under 40 vote to remain in it, sure there will be a
gradual replacement of Leavers who die with new young Remainers who
join the cohort, and that's the thrust of his argument.
But there's also a change of sides going on in those who turn 40 in
the period under question.  It follows from the original premise.

Post by MM
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for
the Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing
they broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their
parents did.

There was never any such compact or even correlation.  Ever since time
began, the young have always favoured socialism over conservatism, and
in my experience they've therefore voted differently from their parents.
Over time, however, they realise their youthful, dreamy embrace of
socialism isn't really practical, and will take far more of their
income than they are prepared to pay, and they become more
conservative.
If that were not so, then the last 60 years or so would have seen the
complete extinction of the Conservative party and lifelong Labour
governments.  Which we don't seem to have.

Post by MM
 Dig down and three factors stand out.  Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this
stance cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands
include political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ

That was over 50 years ago.  We still have a Conservative government,
and Trump is even in the White House.  Why should the revolution start now?

Post by MM
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!

No, it's just typical ill thought out nonsense.

MM believes the more he waffles the more his musings will become fact,
he would be well served to shut up for a few years then come back after
the fact, and not look so silly.

Europe showing UK the middle finger during the Brexit negotiations is a
good start for any bad omen prediction, eh?
The screaming, teeth grinding and jaw clenching comes later!

Brexit-wanking is a right retarded mental disease ignoring the facts of
our contemporary Universe.

[JNugent]

Post by Ned Latham

Post by FMurtz

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking
to a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from
my family died this year," she told me.  As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal,

What 'other things'?  And why should they be equal?

Post by MM
the Brexit majority would be reduced to zero by that most natural of
wastages. It went something like this: 600,000 voters die every
year.Given the age profile of Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be
amongst the deceased, as against about 150,000 Remainers. In
addition, new voters are added. and if they voted in the same way as
their slightly older brothers and sisters, then by the time we leave
in 2020, we would have a Remain majority.

No we won't.  He's made a typical error of those who can't see the
wood for the trees.
If the way we vote is dependent on age, you cannot just consider what
happens at the very young and very old ends of the scale, which he
has. You also have to consider what happens in the middle.
If, say, to simplify things, all those over 40 vote to leave the EU
and all those under 40 vote to remain in it, sure there will be a
gradual replacement of Leavers who die with new young Remainers who
join the cohort, and that's the thrust of his argument.
But there's also a change of sides going on in those who turn 40 in
the period under question.  It follows from the original premise.

Post by MM
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for
the Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing
they broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their
parents did.

There was never any such compact or even correlation.  Ever since time
began, the young have always favoured socialism over conservatism, and
in my experience they've therefore voted differently from their parents.
Over time, however, they realise their youthful, dreamy embrace of
socialism isn't really practical, and will take far more of their
income than they are prepared to pay, and they become more
conservative.
If that were not so, then the last 60 years or so would have seen the
complete extinction of the Conservative party and lifelong Labour
governments.  Which we don't seem to have.

Post by MM
 Dig down and three factors stand out.  Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this
stance cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands
include political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ

That was over 50 years ago.  We still have a Conservative government,
and Trump is even in the White House.  Why should the revolution start now?

Post by MM
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!

No, it's just typical ill thought out nonsense.

MM believes the more he waffles the more his musings will become fact,
he would be well served to shut up for a few years then come back after
the fact, and not look so silly.

Europe showing UK the middle finger during the Brexit negotiations is a
good start for any bad omen prediction, eh?
The screaming, teeth grinding and jaw clenching comes later!
Brexit-wanking is a right retarded mental disease ignoring the facts of
our contemporary Universe.

Do you remember that popular bumper sticker whih read (as fas as I
remember it):

"This car may be a wreck, but it's paid for - and it's in front of you!"?

[pamela]

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was
talking to a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four
Brexiteers from my family died this year," she told me. As it
happens, the pollster Peter Kellner was listening in and he
shared some calculations he'd made about when, other things
being equal, the Brexit majority would be reduced to zero by
600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of Brexit
voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as against
about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added. and
if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers
and sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a
Remain majority.
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair.
My demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last
summer for the Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in
so not doing they broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly
vote as their parents did. Dig down and three factors stand
out. Younger voters from Generation X, through Millennials, to
Generation Z, are much less likely to own their own homes,
significantly more connected to each other by recent technology,
and much more socially liberal, so that things regarded as moot
by older groups are no longer up for debate. As Ipsos MORI put
it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and sexual
equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands
include political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is
rapidly agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend
your hand, for the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!
MM

Those observations mean the outcome of the referendum could be
reversed within the space of a single Parliament by changing
demographics alone.

Then add in the rising number of Leavers who regret voting for
Brexit now that they know they'll not get anything like what they
were promised.

It's no wonder hardcore Leavers are terrified of another
referendum.

It's also no wonder the government is going for a soft Brexit or
they will lose important support from marginal voters in an
election.

[James Harris]

Post by pamela

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was
talking to a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four
Brexiteers from my family died this year," she told me. As it
happens, the pollster Peter Kellner was listening in and he
shared some calculations he'd made about when, other things
being equal, the Brexit majority would be reduced to zero by
600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of Brexit
voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as against
about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added. and
if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers
and sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a
Remain majority.
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair.
My demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last
summer for the Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in
so not doing they broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly
vote as their parents did. Dig down and three factors stand
out. Younger voters from Generation X, through Millennials, to
Generation Z, are much less likely to own their own homes,
significantly more connected to each other by recent technology,
and much more socially liberal, so that things regarded as moot
by older groups are no longer up for debate. As Ipsos MORI put
it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and sexual
equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands
include political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is
rapidly agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend
your hand, for the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!
MM

Those observations mean the outcome of the referendum could be
reversed within the space of a single Parliament by changing
demographics alone.

Except that, as Norman points out, as well as the old dying out the
young become old.

Post by pamela
Then add in the rising number of Leavers who regret voting for
Brexit now that they know they'll not get anything like what they
were promised.

IME it's a common fallacy to think that voters on either side voted "for
what they were promised"; Leave voters in particular didn't vote for
what Boris Johnson said but voted Leave because they wanted to leave the
EU. The "promises" were a sideshow.

Post by pamela
It's no wonder hardcore Leavers are terrified of another
referendum.
It's also no wonder the government is going for a soft Brexit or
they will lose important support from marginal voters in an
election.

Well, as the government is going for such a slow Brexit perhaps they
have changing demographics in mind.... Between the referendum and when
we can start to reap some of the economic benefits of Brexit there will
be about five years of negatives. That's a long time to expect people to
trust in the process.

[Ian Jackson]

Post by James Harris
IME it's a common fallacy to think that voters on either side voted
"for what they were promised"; Leave voters in particular didn't vote
for what Boris Johnson said but voted Leave because they wanted to
leave the EU. The "promises" were a sideshow.

To a certain extent, this is probably true,

However, while I doubt if Boris ever promised the shipbuilding would
return to Wearside (etc), all of the attractive promises must have had
quite a lot of influence in some sections of the electorate. Not many
would vote to leave the EU for no reason at all,

That said, the vote of some leavers actually had very little to with the
EU as such, Some simply voted for 'change' - and some as a protest
against the present / traditional system of government in the UK.

[James Harris]

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
IME it's a common fallacy to think that voters on either side voted
"for what they were promised"; Leave voters in particular didn't vote
for what Boris Johnson said but voted Leave because they wanted to
leave the EU. The "promises" were a sideshow.

To a certain extent, this is probably true,
However, while I doubt if Boris ever promised the shipbuilding would
return to Wearside (etc), all of the attractive promises must have had
quite a lot of influence in some sections of the electorate. Not many
would vote to leave the EU for no reason at all,
That said, the vote of some leavers actually had very little to with the
EU as such, Some simply voted for 'change' - and some as a protest
against the present / traditional system of government in the UK.

We need to be careful in ascribing reasons. ISTM most of us believe that
others around us see the world from the same point of view that we do,
and we struggle to understand the viewpoints of others.

A good example is the many forecasts which predicted an economic crash
if we voted to Leave the EU. It seems that the forecasters - coming from
an elite group - thought Brexit would be bad for them economically and
they therefore assumed that the general population would believe the
same, and one consequence would be that people would stop spending. But
as we know, consumer spending held up much better than the forecasters
expected. People in general didn't react as the forecasters expected.
They didn't react as the forecasters would have done because they did
not have the same beliefs or the same priorities as the forecasters.

As for the real reasons why people voted for Brexit, the best source
I've seen is Ashcroft's exit poll. It's not perfect but it should be
impartial and it captures the mood on the day of the vote, not weeks
later. It contains some surprises. For example, he did not find that
people voted as a protest or simply for change, as you claim. Nor was
the main reason immigration (or xenophobia, as others suggest) which
Remainers and journalists often assume. In fact, the main reason was
"the principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK" -
in other words, sovereignty or independence.

https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/

[Ian Jackson]

Post by James Harris

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
IME it's a common fallacy to think that voters on either side voted
"for what they were promised"; Leave voters in particular didn't vote
for what Boris Johnson said but voted Leave because they wanted to
leave the EU. The "promises" were a sideshow.

To a certain extent, this is probably true,
However, while I doubt if Boris ever promised the shipbuilding would
return to Wearside (etc), all of the attractive promises must have had
quite a lot of influence in some sections of the electorate. Not many
would vote to leave the EU for no reason at all,
That said, the vote of some leavers actually had very little to with the
EU as such, Some simply voted for 'change' - and some as a protest
against the present / traditional system of government in the UK.

We need to be careful in ascribing reasons. ISTM most of us believe
that others around us see the world from the same point of view that we
do, and we struggle to understand the viewpoints of others.
A good example is the many forecasts which predicted an economic crash
if we voted to Leave the EU. It seems that the forecasters - coming
from an elite group - thought Brexit would be bad for them economically
and they therefore assumed that the general population would believe
the same, and one consequence would be that people would stop spending.
But as we know, consumer spending held up much better than the
forecasters expected. People in general didn't react as the forecasters
expected. They didn't react as the forecasters would have done because
they did not have the same beliefs or the same priorities as the forecasters.
As for the real reasons why people voted for Brexit, the best source
I've seen is Ashcroft's exit poll. It's not perfect but it should be
impartial and it captures the mood on the day of the vote, not weeks
later. It contains some surprises. For example, he did not find that
people voted as a protest or simply for change, as you claim. Nor was
the main reason immigration (or xenophobia, as others suggest) which
Remainers and journalists often assume. In fact, the main reason was
"the principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK" -
in other words, sovereignty or independence.
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/

That's indeed an excellent breakdown of how and why we voted.

It's very obvious that the increasingly older voter was increasingly
more likely to vote Leave - the majority crossover being at around 45.
It could therefore be argued that, if no one changed their mind, in a
year or two a Remain majority would became a certainty.

On the other hand, it's said that the young are idealistic and left-wing
- but as they grow older (presumably 'in the light of experience', and
being 'sadder and wiser') they become more realistic and right-wing. It
therefore could be argued that, if 'right-wing' equates to 'Leave', then
the majority crossover age might simply stay the same.

But yet again, as the younger Leavers grow old, they could also
increasingly begin to realise the error of their ways, and join the
Remain camp. I suppose that depends on what success the first few years
of Brexit appear to be having.

[pamela]

Post by Ian Jackson
That's indeed an excellent breakdown of how and why we voted.
It's very obvious that the increasingly older voter was
increasingly more likely to vote Leave - the majority crossover
being at around 45. It could therefore be argued that, if no one
changed their mind, in a year or two a Remain majority would
became a certainty.

The chart is not weighted to show numbers in each age group but
only ratios of voting.

As usual a relatively small proportion of young voters cast their
vote but when they subsequently realised their point of view had
been very under-represented they turned out in force for the next
vote - Theresa May's general election. Similarly with a second
referendum.

Post by Ian Jackson
On the other hand, it's said that the young are idealistic and
left-wing - but as they grow older (presumably 'in the light of
experience', and being 'sadder and wiser') they become more
realistic and right-wing. It therefore could be argued that, if
'right-wing' equates to 'Leave', then the majority crossover age
might simply stay the same.
But yet again, as the younger Leavers grow old, they could also
increasingly begin to realise the error of their ways, and join
the Remain camp. I suppose that depends on what success the
first few years of Brexit appear to be having.

Age alone is not the only determinant. Forthcoming cohorts of old
people are far less likely to be as nationalistic as the current ones
on account of quite different life experiences. The current
Snowflake generation is not going to have the same outlook at age 75
as the Baby Boomers do at that age.

[Norman Wells]

Post by pamela

Post by Ian Jackson
That's indeed an excellent breakdown of how and why we voted.
It's very obvious that the increasingly older voter was
increasingly more likely to vote Leave - the majority crossover
being at around 45. It could therefore be argued that, if no one
changed their mind, in a year or two a Remain majority would
became a certainty.

The chart is not weighted to show numbers in each age group but
only ratios of voting.
As usual a relatively small proportion of young voters cast their
vote but when they subsequently realised their point of view had
been very under-represented they turned out in force for the next
vote - Theresa May's general election. Similarly with a second
referendum.

And you'd like that to be decided by those who were too thick to vote in
the first one, eh? Those who did not realise that it mattered? Those
who were so uninterested they didn't read the leaflets or follow events?

Seems a strange cohort to be relying on to get the vote you want.

Post by pamela

Post by Ian Jackson
On the other hand, it's said that the young are idealistic and
left-wing - but as they grow older (presumably 'in the light of
experience', and being 'sadder and wiser') they become more
realistic and right-wing. It therefore could be argued that, if
'right-wing' equates to 'Leave', then the majority crossover age
might simply stay the same.
But yet again, as the younger Leavers grow old, they could also
increasingly begin to realise the error of their ways, and join
the Remain camp. I suppose that depends on what success the
first few years of Brexit appear to be having.

Age alone is not the only determinant. Forthcoming cohorts of old
people are far less likely to be as nationalistic as the current ones
on account of quite different life experiences. The current
Snowflake generation is not going to have the same outlook at age 75
as the Baby Boomers do at that age.

You mean they'll stay well away from any argument or debate, pay no
attention, gather no knowledge, remain ignorant, and all vote the same
way as their similarly uninterested pathetic friends?

Yup, sounds like a plan.

[James Harris]

...

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/

That's indeed an excellent breakdown of how and why we voted.
It's very obvious that the increasingly older voter was increasingly
more likely to vote Leave - the majority crossover being at around 45.

Yes.

Post by Ian Jackson
It could therefore be argued that, if no one changed their mind, in a
year or two a Remain majority would became a certainty.

"If" is a big word.

Post by Ian Jackson
On the other hand, it's said that the young are idealistic and left-wing
- but as they grow older (presumably 'in the light of experience', and
being 'sadder and wiser') they become more realistic and right-wing. It
therefore could be argued that, if 'right-wing' equates to 'Leave', then
the majority crossover age might simply stay the same.
But yet again, as the younger Leavers grow old, they could also
increasingly begin to realise the error of their ways, and join the
Remain camp. I suppose that depends on what success the first few years
of Brexit appear to be having.

We can only speculate but I suspect the young were more interested in
opportunities to travel, openness between countries, the idea of
cooperation, prevention of conflict, a European ideal of
neighbourliness, and tacking pollution.

But I would counter most of those as follows. Travel might be harder but
might not if a deal is negotiated, we can still work with European
nations as we see fit, the EU may not be the preventer of war it claims
to be, leaving the EU is not leaving Europe, and pollution can still be
tackled without nations being in the EU. So most of the reasons of young
people are not valid, or they are linked to misunderstandings as to what
the UK was proposing doing. I hope that as younger people become more
aware of what Brexit will really mean that they see they won't need to
lose most of the things they now fear losing.

One day, even you might agree that it's a good idea. :-)

At the moment, though, I suspect that your side will have lost support
because the dire warnings of economic doom have not come true.

But IMO there's certainly a case for seeing how Brexit works out and
then deciding on whether to seek to rejoin the EU. So for those who
didn't get the outcome they wanted from the referendum, all is not lost.

[Ian Jackson]

Post by pamela
Those observations mean the outcome of the referendum could be
reversed within the space of a single Parliament by changing
demographics alone.
Then add in the rising number of Leavers who regret voting for
Brexit now that they know they'll not get anything like what they
were promised.
It's no wonder hardcore Leavers are terrified of another
referendum.

On the other hand, if the present-day old folk (those who are probably
convinced leavers) are dying, and are being replaced by the present-day
younger folk (those who are probably convinced remainers) - plus the
rising 18 year-olds (who will soon be able to vote for the first time,
and who are probably also more likely to vote to remain), maybe the
Brexiteers' safest policy would be to demand a new referendum ASAP,
before they lose their present (slim) advantage.

[Norman Wells]

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by pamela
Those observations mean the outcome of the referendum could be
reversed within the space of a single Parliament by changing
demographics alone.
Then add in the rising number of Leavers who regret voting for
Brexit now that they know they'll not get anything like what they
were promised.
It's no wonder hardcore Leavers are terrified of another
referendum.

On the other hand, if the present-day old folk (those who are probably
convinced leavers) are dying, and are being replaced by the present-day
younger folk (those who are probably convinced remainers) - plus the
rising 18 year-olds (who will soon be able to vote for the first time,
and who are probably also more likely to vote to remain), maybe the
Brexiteers' safest policy would be to demand a new referendum ASAP,
before they lose their present (slim) advantage.

Yes, that'll work. Bound to.

[Fredxx]

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by pamela
Those observations mean the outcome of the referendum could be
reversed within the space of a single Parliament by changing
demographics alone.
Then add in the rising number of Leavers who regret voting for
Brexit now that they know they'll not get anything like what they
were promised.
It's no wonder hardcore Leavers are terrified of another
referendum.

On the other hand, if the present-day old folk (those who are probably
convinced leavers) are dying, and are being replaced by the present-day
younger folk (those who are probably convinced remainers) - plus the
rising 18 year-olds (who will soon be able to vote for the first time,
and who are probably also more likely to vote to remain), maybe the
Brexiteers' safest policy would be to demand a new referendum ASAP,
before they lose their present (slim) advantage.

As people mature their opinions change, Labour voters become Tory voters
and Remain voters become Brexit voters.

[Ash Burton]

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by pamela
Those observations mean the outcome of the referendum could be
reversed within the space of a single Parliament by changing
demographics alone.
Then add in the rising number of Leavers who regret voting for
Brexit now that they know they'll not get anything like what they
were promised.
It's no wonder hardcore Leavers are terrified of another
referendum.

On the other hand, if the present-day old folk (those who are probably
convinced leavers) are dying, and are being replaced by the present-day
younger folk (those who are probably convinced remainers) - plus the
rising 18 year-olds (who will soon be able to vote for the first time,
and who are probably also more likely to vote to remain), maybe the
Brexiteers' safest policy would be to demand a new referendum ASAP,
before they lose their present (slim) advantage.

There's a lot of probably's and likely's in that, too many for there to
be any chance of it happening.

[Joe]

On Sat, 06 Jan 2018 08:52:55 +0000

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out.

And being recreated all the time. I was a Remainer in 1975, I'm not now.

Post by MM
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!

I'm mildly impressed by your persistence, but I reckon that the number
of Leavers in upm that you've converted to Remain is a nice round
figure.

[R. Mark Clayton]

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking to
a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from my
family died this year," she told me. As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal, the Brexit majority would
be reduced to zero by that most natural of wastages. It went something
like this: 600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of
Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as
against about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added.
and if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers and
sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a Remain
majority.
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for the
Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing they
broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their parents
did. Dig down and three factors stand out. Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands include
political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!
MM

Rather over-simplified MM.

The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational attainment. This does tend to increase with age as there were fewer opportunities when pensioners were in their teens.

Nevertheless in addition to my analysis of the results against census returns, I have read elsewhere that the Leave vote amongst those who left school at 15 or 16 [usually without any qualifications] was two to one.

As it happens life expectancy also correlates with educational attainment - IIRC those with degrees living six years longer, so not only will the age demographic work towards a remain majority, but Leave supporters tend to die off younger...

[Fredxx]

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking to
a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from my
family died this year," she told me. As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal, the Brexit majority would
be reduced to zero by that most natural of wastages. It went something
like this: 600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of
Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as
against about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added.
and if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers and
sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a Remain
majority.
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for the
Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing they
broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their parents
did. Dig down and three factors stand out. Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands include
political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!
MM

Rather over-simplified MM.
The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational attainment.

The biggest indicator of a Tory voting is also low educational attainment.

You certainly come across as a loser Remoaner of low educational
attainment, in fact its a wonder you're not a Brexiter.

[R. Mark Clayton]

Post by Fredxx

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking to
a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from my
family died this year," she told me. As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal, the Brexit majority would
be reduced to zero by that most natural of wastages. It went something
like this: 600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of
Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as
against about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added.
and if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers and
sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a Remain
majority.
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for the
Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing they
broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their parents
did. Dig down and three factors stand out. Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands include
political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!
MM

Rather over-simplified MM.
The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational attainment.

Which I backed up with incontrovertible evidence from official sources.

Post by Fredxx
The biggest indicator of a Tory voting is also low educational attainment.

That could be true, but I would have thought it was Labour as the most strongly Leave areas (ergo the areas with lowest educational attainment) were mostly Labour - do you have a link to any study that backs your assertion?

Post by Fredxx
You certainly come across as a loser Remoaner of low educational
attainment, in fact its a wonder you're not a Brexiter.

Brextremists hate my finding and usually just resort to insult in response.

[James Harris]

...

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational attainment.

Which I backed up with incontrovertible evidence from official sources.

I haven't seen that. Could you repost the link, please.

[Fredxx]

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational attainment.

Which I backed up with incontrovertible evidence from official sources.

I haven't seen that. Could you repost the link, please.

I have come across tables that indicate this, in part explained that
older people tend not to have degrees.

[R. Mark Clayton]

Post by Fredxx

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational attainment.

Which I backed up with incontrovertible evidence from official sources.

I haven't seen that. Could you repost the link, please.

I have come across tables that indicate this, in part explained that
older people tend not to have degrees.

Yes older people not having A'levels partly explains the age bias in the Leave vote, but not the other way around.

[Ash Burton]

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by Fredxx

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational attainment.

Which I backed up with incontrovertible evidence from official sources.

I haven't seen that. Could you repost the link, please.

I have come across tables that indicate this, in part explained that
older people tend not to have degrees.

Yes older people not having A'levels partly explains the age bias in the Leave vote, but not the other way around.

Having a higher educational attainment level does not automatically
equate to higher intelligence level and definitely does not mean
'younger remain voters' have a better understanding of politics.

40 to 50 years ago only a small percentage of schoolleavers ever studied
for A-levels.

Citing low educational attainment as an indicator of leave voting tells
you nothing other than that fact but some Remoaners seem to be using it
as a link to ignorance of the consequences of Brexit when nothing could
be further from the truth.

[R. Mark Clayton]

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational attainment.

Which I backed up with incontrovertible evidence from official sources.

I haven't seen that. Could you repost the link, please.

Oh you have James, you definitely have.

Then again perhaps your memory is slipping: -

Loading Image...

Note in particular the references to the Office of National Statistics and the Electoral Commission.

Post by James Harris
--
James Harris

[Fredxx]

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational attainment.

Which I backed up with incontrovertible evidence from official sources.

I haven't seen that. Could you repost the link, please.

Oh you have James, you definitely have.
Then again perhaps your memory is slipping: -
https://www.dropbox.com/s/545xjy1zd8cmur0/Leave_correlation_with_education.jpg?dl=0
Note in particular the references to the Office of National Statistics and the Electoral Commission.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election/

Please note that Tory voters don't have as high educational attainment
as Labour voters.

Does that mean they are as thick as leavers?

[James Harris]

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational attainment.

Which I backed up with incontrovertible evidence from official sources.

I haven't seen that. Could you repost the link, please.

Oh you have James, you definitely have.
Then again perhaps your memory is slipping: -
https://www.dropbox.com/s/545xjy1zd8cmur0/Leave_correlation_with_education.jpg?dl=0

Well, if you say I've seen that link then so be it but I don't remember
it. Do you know what specifically "L0 - L2 (no quals to GCSE)" means?

Post by R. Mark Clayton
Note in particular the references to the Office of National Statistics and the Electoral Commission.

There are none on the link you gave. It is just a graphic.

[R. Mark Clayton]

Post by James Harris

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational attainment.

Which I backed up with incontrovertible evidence from official sources.

I haven't seen that. Could you repost the link, please.

Oh you have James, you definitely have.
Then again perhaps your memory is slipping: -
https://www.dropbox.com/s/545xjy1zd8cmur0/Leave_correlation_with_education.jpg?dl=0

Well, if you say I've seen that link then so be it but I don't remember
it. Do you know what specifically "L0 - L2 (no quals to GCSE)" means?

Yes persons who did not pass A' levels nor have an "other qualifications" (the latter a few percent.

There is an equivalent A'level+ v. remain vote chart, but is nearly a mirror image of the Leave vote one.

Post by James Harris

Post by R. Mark Clayton
Note in particular the references to the Office of National Statistics and the Electoral Commission.

There are none on the link you gave. It is just a graphic.

Sorry the notes are not in the graphic: -

"
Sources
Educational level – National Office of Statistics – 2011 Census – England and Wales.
EU result – Electoral Commission - UK

Errors – a small number of E&W authorities don’t look up – probably due to boundary changes.
Scottish authorities not included
Apprentices and people with ‘other’ qualifications* not included.
Census predates referendum – educational qualifications levels are likely to have increased slightly everywhere.
Census data for working age only (16 - 65)
16&17yo won't have taken A'level yet.

Still probably 25million data samples – each dot represent a local authority area in the former looked up in the latter – the trend is stunningly clear.


* probably professionals like FCA, Barristers, FIoD, MBCS etc.
"


The trend is Leave_Vote% = (1.0962*Low_Educational_Attainment + 1.884)%

I haven't worked out the standard deviation, but it is fairly small.

Post by James Harris
--
James Harris

[James Harris]

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational attainment.

Which I backed up with incontrovertible evidence from official sources.

I haven't seen that. Could you repost the link, please.

Oh you have James, you definitely have.
Then again perhaps your memory is slipping: -
https://www.dropbox.com/s/545xjy1zd8cmur0/Leave_correlation_with_education.jpg?dl=0

Well, if you say I've seen that link then so be it but I don't remember
it. Do you know what specifically "L0 - L2 (no quals to GCSE)" means?

Yes persons who did not pass A' levels nor have an "other qualifications" (the latter a few percent.

Are you sure? No A levels sounds like "No quals _beyond_ GCSE" rather
than _to_ GCSE. So does L0-L2 mean (1) no GCSEs or (2) no quals of any
kind or (3) no A levels and beyond?

Post by R. Mark Clayton
There is an equivalent A'level+ v. remain vote chart, but is nearly a mirror image of the Leave vote one.

That sounds as though there is a correlation between those who have A
levels and those who voted Remain? As below, a link to the original
study would be more useful than the graphic and the extracts you are
posting. Maybe you could post that...?

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris

Post by R. Mark Clayton
Note in particular the references to the Office of National Statistics and the Electoral Commission.

There are none on the link you gave. It is just a graphic.

Sorry the notes are not in the graphic: -
"
Sources
Educational level – National Office of Statistics – 2011 Census – England and Wales.
EU result – Electoral Commission - UK
Errors – a small number of E&W authorities don’t look up – probably due to boundary changes.
Scottish authorities not included
Apprentices and people with ‘other’ qualifications* not included.
Census predates referendum – educational qualifications levels are likely to have increased slightly everywhere.
Census data for working age only (16 - 65)
16&17yo won't have taken A'level yet.
Still probably 25million data samples – each dot represent a local authority area in the former looked up in the latter – the trend is stunningly clear.
* probably professionals like FCA, Barristers, FIoD, MBCS etc.
"
The trend is Leave_Vote% = (1.0962*Low_Educational_Attainment + 1.884)%
I haven't worked out the standard deviation, but it is fairly small.

Thanks, though I've been looking for the original data without success.
Could you possibly post a link to the study? I presume from what you
have posted that someone has correlated the 2011 census by voting area
with the referendum result - and that that's what the findings are from.
A simple link to the study would be more useful than extracts.

[James Harris]

...

Post by James Harris

Post by R. Mark Clayton
Sources
Educational level – National Office of Statistics – 2011 Census – England and Wales.
EU result – Electoral Commission - UK
Errors – a small number of E&W authorities don’t look up – probably due to boundary changes.
Scottish authorities not included
Apprentices and people with ‘other’ qualifications* not included.
Census predates referendum – educational qualifications levels are likely to have increased slightly everywhere.
Census data for working age only (16 - 65)
16&17yo won't have taken A'level yet.
Still probably 25million data samples – each dot represent a local authority area in the former looked up in the latter – the trend is stunningly clear.
* probably professionals like FCA, Barristers, FIoD, MBCS etc.
"
The trend is Leave_Vote% = (1.0962*Low_Educational_Attainment + 1.884)%
I haven't worked out the standard deviation, but it is fairly small.

Thanks, though I've been looking for the original data without success.
Could you possibly post a link to the study? I presume from what you
have posted that someone has correlated the 2011 census by voting area
with the referendum result - and that that's what the findings are from.
A simple link to the study would be more useful than extracts.

Any update, Mark? Am still waiting for a link to the original data so I
can check it for myself. It's not that I don't trust your summaries but
I would like to see the broader info and in context.

[Yellow]

On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 21:27:05 +0000, James Harris <james.harris.1

Post by James Harris
...

Post by James Harris

Post by R. Mark Clayton
Sources
Educational level ? National Office of Statistics ? 2011 Census ? England and Wales.
EU result ? Electoral Commission - UK
Errors ? a small number of E&W authorities don?t look up ? probably due to boundary changes.
Scottish authorities not included
Apprentices and people with ?other? qualifications* not included.
Census predates referendum ? educational qualifications levels are likely to have increased slightly everywhere.
Census data for working age only (16 - 65)
16&17yo won't have taken A'level yet.
Still probably 25million data samples ? each dot represent a local authority area in the former looked up in the latter ? the trend is stunningly clear.
* probably professionals like FCA, Barristers, FIoD, MBCS etc.
"
The trend is Leave_Vote% = (1.0962*Low_Educational_Attainment + 1.884)%
I haven't worked out the standard deviation, but it is fairly small.

Thanks, though I've been looking for the original data without success.
Could you possibly post a link to the study? I presume from what you
have posted that someone has correlated the 2011 census by voting area
with the referendum result - and that that's what the findings are from.
A simple link to the study would be more useful than extracts.

Any update, Mark? Am still waiting for a link to the original data so I
can check it for myself. It's not that I don't trust your summaries but
I would like to see the broader info and in context.

Do you really think he is going let you have that link? :-)

[Martin Brown]

Post by James Harris
...

Post by James Harris

Post by R. Mark Clayton
Sources
Educational level – National Office of Statistics – 2011 Census –
England and Wales.
EU result – Electoral Commission - UK
Errors –     a small number of E&W authorities don’t look up –
probably due to boundary changes.
              Scottish authorities not included
              Apprentices and people with ‘other’ qualifications* not
included.
              Census predates referendum – educational qualifications
levels are likely to have increased slightly everywhere.
              Census data for working age only (16 - 65)
              16&17yo won't have taken A'level yet.
Still probably 25million data samples – each dot represent a local
authority area in the former looked up in the latter – the trend is
stunningly clear.
* probably professionals like FCA, Barristers, FIoD, MBCS etc.
"
The trend is Leave_Vote% = (1.0962*Low_Educational_Attainment + 1.884)%
I haven't worked out the standard deviation, but it is fairly small.

Thanks, though I've been looking for the original data without success.
Could you possibly post a link to the study? I presume from what you
have posted that someone has correlated the 2011 census by voting area
with the referendum result - and that that's what the findings are from.
A simple link to the study would be more useful than extracts.

Any update, Mark? Am still waiting for a link to the original data so I
can check it for myself. It's not that I don't trust your summaries but
I would like to see the broader info and in context.

Not quite the same dataset as Mark referred to but the statistics for
degree qualifications vs voting leave are clear enough:

http://www.statsguy.co.uk/brexit-voting-and-education/

The uneducated voted predominantly for leave.

[Fredxx]

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by Fredxx

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was
talking to a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four
Brexiteers from my family died this year," she told me. As it
happens, the pollster Peter Kellner was listening in and he
shared some calculations he'd made about when, other things
being equal, the Brexit majority would be reduced to zero by
600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of Brexit
voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as
against about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are
added. and if they voted in the same way as their slightly
older brothers and sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020,
we would have a Remain majority.
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair.
My demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last
summer for the Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in
so not doing they broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly
vote as their parents did. Dig down and three factors stand
out. Younger voters from Generation X, through Millennials, to
Generation Z, are much less likely to own their own homes,
significantly more connected to each other by recent
technology, and much more socially liberal, so that things
regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender,
racial and sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't
share this stance cannot expect to be considered by Generation
Z." Those brands include political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is
rapidly agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend
your hand, for the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!
MM

Rather over-simplified MM.
The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational
attainment.

Which I backed up with incontrovertible evidence from official
sources.

Post by Fredxx
The biggest indicator of a Tory voting is also low educational attainment.

That could be true, but I would have thought it was Labour as the
most strongly Leave areas (ergo the areas with lowest educational
attainment) were mostly Labour - do you have a link to any study that
backs your assertion?

Except Labour voters have a higher educational attainment than Tory.

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by Fredxx
You certainly come across as a loser Remoaner of low educational
attainment, in fact its a wonder you're not a Brexiter.

Brextremists hate my finding and usually just resort to insult in response.

If you were bright enough you might see that calling me and my friends
of low educational attainment to be an insult.

Perhaps that explains why you don't have the brains to vote Labour. Or
simply that loser Remoaners just resort to insult when they err.... lose.

[R. Mark Clayton]

SNIP

Post by Fredxx

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by Fredxx

Post by R. Mark Clayton
Rather over-simplified MM.
The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational
attainment.

Which I backed up with incontrovertible evidence from official sources.

Post by Fredxx
The biggest indicator of a Tory voting is also low educational attainment.

That could be true, but I would have thought it was Labour as the
most strongly Leave areas (ergo the areas with lowest educational
attainment) were mostly Labour - do you have a link to any study that
backs your assertion?

Except Labour voters have a higher educational attainment than Tory.

Do they - seriously have you got anywhere that conforms that?

Post by Fredxx

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by Fredxx
You certainly come across as a loser Remoaner of low educational
attainment, in fact its a wonder you're not a Brexiter.

Brextremists hate my finding and usually just resort to insult in response.

If you were bright enough you might see that calling me and my friends
of low educational attainment to be an insult.

No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.

That is a fact NOT an insult.

Post by Fredxx
Perhaps that explains why you don't have the brains to vote Labour. Or
simply that loser Remoaners just resort to insult when they err.... lose.

[Fredxx]

Post by R. Mark Clayton
SNIP

Post by Fredxx

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by Fredxx

Post by R. Mark Clayton
Rather over-simplified MM.
The biggest indicator to Leave voting was low educational
attainment.

Which I backed up with incontrovertible evidence from official sources.

Post by Fredxx
The biggest indicator of a Tory voting is also low educational attainment.

That could be true, but I would have thought it was Labour as the
most strongly Leave areas (ergo the areas with lowest educational
attainment) were mostly Labour - do you have a link to any study that
backs your assertion?

Except Labour voters have a higher educational attainment than Tory.

Do they - seriously have you got anywhere that conforms that?

Post by Fredxx

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by Fredxx
You certainly come across as a loser Remoaner of low educational
attainment, in fact its a wonder you're not a Brexiter.

Brextremists hate my finding and usually just resort to insult in response.

If you were bright enough you might see that calling me and my friends
of low educational attainment to be an insult.

No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

Post by Fredxx
Perhaps that explains why you don't have the brains to vote Labour. Or
simply that loser Remoaners just resort to insult when they err.... lose.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election/

Does this mean Tory voters are as thick as Leavers?

[R. Mark Clayton]

SNIP

Post by Fredxx

Post by Fredxx
Perhaps that explains why you don't have the brains to vote Labour. Or
simply that loser Remoaners just resort to insult when they err.... lose.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election/
Does this mean Tory voters are as thick as Leavers?

Interesting, I will have a good read.

The Leave vote correlation is with low educational attainment not intelligence, and whilst there is little variation of [adult] intelligence over the years for historic reasons younger people are more likely to have passed A'levels.



OTOH there is a [negative] correlation between intelligence and religosity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence
i.e. thick people are much more likely than clever people to believe in god(s).

[Norman Wells]

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The Leave vote correlation is with low educational attainment not intelligence, and whilst there is little variation of [adult] intelligence over the years for historic reasons younger people are more likely to have passed A'levels.

What then is the point of looking for any correlation between how people
vote and 'low educational attainment'?

The only possible point, surely, is that Remainers think Leavers are
generally thick, with the implication that they shouldn't be allowed to
vote or that their votes don't really count. Now you're saying it's not so.

[Fredxx]

Post by Norman Wells

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The Leave vote correlation is with low educational attainment not
intelligence, and whilst there is little variation of [adult]
intelligence over the years for historic reasons younger people are
more likely to have passed A'levels.

What then is the point of looking for any correlation between how people
vote and 'low educational attainment'?
The only possible point, surely, is that Remainers think Leavers are
generally thick, with the implication that they shouldn't be allowed to
vote or that their votes don't really count.  Now you're saying it's not
so.

Its an obsession with Remoaners since they have very little to argue about.

They seem to think they are above everyone else and simply hate
democracy of one man, one vote. Some Tory Remoaners think should have
more say and an extra vote than us plebs.

[Ian Jackson]

In message <p2t4hr$i2c$***@dont-email.me>, Fredxx <***@nospam.com>
writes

Post by Fredxx

Post by Norman Wells

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The Leave vote correlation is with low educational attainment not
intelligence, and whilst there is little variation of [adult]
intelligence over the years for historic reasons younger people are
more likely to have passed A'levels.

What then is the point of looking for any correlation between how
people vote and 'low educational attainment'?
The only possible point, surely, is that Remainers think Leavers are
generally thick, with the implication that they shouldn't be allowed
to vote or that their votes don't really count.  Now you're saying
it's not so.

Its an obsession with Remoaners since they have very little to argue about.

Well, this morning Nigel Farage had his 2 hours on LBC - and (as usual)
a lot of his time was spent arguing strongly against those who are
anti-Brexit. One thing he said that surprised me was that those leading
the opposition to Brexit are mainly from the ruling classes (eg 'SIR'
Vince Cable and 'SIR' Nick Clegg). In reality, are Boris Johnson, David
Davis, Iain Duncan Smith, Theresa May (et al) actually among the ranks
of the down-trodden members of the servile lower classes?

[By the way, whatever you think of Nigel, I really think that anyone
interested in Brexit should try and listen to him. He's on LBC, Mon to
Thurs, 7 to 8pm - and 10am to noon on Sundays. You'll often be amazed at
what you hear!]

Post by Fredxx
They seem to think they are above everyone else and simply hate
democracy of one man, one vote.

I don't know where you get these daft ideas from.

Post by Fredxx
Some Tory Remoaners think should have more say and an extra vote than
us plebs.

Would they be right-wing Tories or the left-wing Tories? [Not being a
Tory, I wouldn't know.]

[pensive hamster]

Post by Norman Wells

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The Leave vote correlation is with low educational attainment not intelligence, and whilst there is little variation of [adult] intelligence over the years for historic reasons younger people are more likely to have passed A'levels.

What then is the point of looking for any correlation between how people
vote and 'low educational attainment'?
The only possible point, surely, is that Remainers think Leavers are
generally thick, with the implication that they shouldn't be allowed to
vote or that their votes don't really count. Now you're saying it's not so.

It's not the only possible point. My theory, for what it's worth,
is that people voted along tribal lines in the referendum, and
that there are basically two tribes in this context: what I would
call the liberal intelligensia; and the yeomen.

The liberal intelligensia tend to have passed more exams, and
to value foreign culture, etc. The yeomen are more "salt of the
earth" types, and generally aren't that impressed with foreign
culture. Essentially, the two tribes have differing temperaments
and worldviews.

You may not think much of my theory, but it is another possible
interpretation of the apparent correlation between educational
attainment and voting Remain or Leave.

[James Harris]

Post by pensive hamster

Post by Norman Wells

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The Leave vote correlation is with low educational attainment not intelligence, and whilst there is little variation of [adult] intelligence over the years for historic reasons younger people are more likely to have passed A'levels.

What then is the point of looking for any correlation between how people
vote and 'low educational attainment'?
The only possible point, surely, is that Remainers think Leavers are
generally thick, with the implication that they shouldn't be allowed to
vote or that their votes don't really count. Now you're saying it's not so.

It's not the only possible point. My theory, for what it's worth,
is that people voted along tribal lines in the referendum, and
that there are basically two tribes in this context: what I would
call the liberal intelligensia; and the yeomen.

The rich and the poor? Or, put another way, rather than anything fancy
it may be better to divide it by those who were doing well out of EU
membership and those who were not.

Post by pensive hamster
The liberal intelligensia tend to have passed more exams, and
to value foreign culture, etc. The yeomen are more "salt of the
earth" types, and generally aren't that impressed with foreign
culture. Essentially, the two tribes have differing temperaments
and worldviews.

I don't agree with that. Brexiteers know that leaving the EU is not
about leaving Europe. We still love foreign culture. We still love
cooperating. We still love European people. We just don't want to be
ruled by people we cannot vote for and against.

Post by pensive hamster
You may not think much of my theory, but it is another possible
interpretation of the apparent correlation between educational
attainment and voting Remain or Leave.

As mentioned earlier, the demographic with lower education are often
those who are poorer. Therefore perhaps they voted to leave the EU not
because they are less intelligent but simply because they wanted to
improve their lot in life. The continual attempts by Remainers to say
they did so because they are less educated is misguided, short-sighted
and, frankly, offensive.

[Ophelia]

Post by pensive hamster

Post by Norman Wells

Post by R. Mark Clayton
The Leave vote correlation is with low educational attainment not
intelligence, and whilst there is little variation of [adult]
intelligence over the years for historic reasons younger people are more
likely to have passed A'levels.

What then is the point of looking for any correlation between how people
vote and 'low educational attainment'?
The only possible point, surely, is that Remainers think Leavers are
generally thick, with the implication that they shouldn't be allowed to
vote or that their votes don't really count. Now you're saying it's not so.

It's not the only possible point. My theory, for what it's worth,
is that people voted along tribal lines in the referendum, and
that there are basically two tribes in this context: what I would
call the liberal intelligensia; and the yeomen.

The rich and the poor? Or, put another way, rather than anything fancy
it may be better to divide it by those who were doing well out of EU
membership and those who were not.

Post by pensive hamster
The liberal intelligensia tend to have passed more exams, and
to value foreign culture, etc. The yeomen are more "salt of the
earth" types, and generally aren't that impressed with foreign
culture. Essentially, the two tribes have differing temperaments
and worldviews.

I don't agree with that. Brexiteers know that leaving the EU is not
about leaving Europe. We still love foreign culture. We still love
cooperating. We still love European people. We just don't want to be
ruled by people we cannot vote for and against.

Post by pensive hamster
You may not think much of my theory, but it is another possible
interpretation of the apparent correlation between educational
attainment and voting Remain or Leave.

As mentioned earlier, the demographic with lower education are often
those who are poorer. Therefore perhaps they voted to leave the EU not
because they are less intelligent but simply because they wanted to
improve their lot in life. The continual attempts by Remainers to say
they did so because they are less educated is misguided, short-sighted
and, frankly, offensive.

James Harris
==

Don't let them rile you. They Lost:)

Don't let their non stop whining get you down:))

[James Harris]

On 08/01/2018 18:00, Ophelia wrote:

...

Post by Ophelia
Don't let them rile you. They Lost:)

Don't worry. They don't. :-)

Post by Ophelia
Don't let their non stop whining get you down:))

[tim...]

Post by R. Mark Clayton
SNIP

Post by Fredxx

Post by Fredxx
Perhaps that explains why you don't have the brains to vote Labour. Or
simply that loser Remoaners just resort to insult when they err.... lose.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election/
Does this mean Tory voters are as thick as Leavers?

Interesting, I will have a good read.

you don't need to read it

it's a fucking blindingly obvious extrapolation from the know facts.

Older people have a lower educational attainment, not because they are less
intelligent but because they were educated during a period where it was rare
for anybody to go on to university for social reason, thus fewer of them
have degrees.

and, oh look, more oldies vote Tory than Labour.

tim

[Ash Burton]

Post by tim...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
SNIP

Post by Fredxx

Post by Fredxx
Perhaps that explains why you don't have the brains to vote

Labour. Or

Post by Fredxx
simply that loser Remoaners just resort to insult when they

err.... >> lose.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election/
Does this mean Tory voters are as thick as Leavers?

Interesting, I will have a good read.

you don't need to read it
it's a fucking blindingly obvious extrapolation from the know facts.
Older people have a lower educational attainment, not because they are
less intelligent but because they were educated during a period where it
was rare for anybody to go on to university for social reason, thus
fewer of them have degrees.
and, oh look, more oldies vote Tory than Labour.
tim

Higher educational attainment is not always a guarantee of knowledge or
intelligence or indeed common sense. In some cases even university
degree holders find it gets them nothing more than a job in a burger bar.

[MM]

Post by tim...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
SNIP

Post by Fredxx

Post by Fredxx
Perhaps that explains why you don't have the brains to vote Labour. Or
simply that loser Remoaners just resort to insult when they err.... lose.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election/
Does this mean Tory voters are as thick as Leavers?

Interesting, I will have a good read.

you don't need to read it
it's a fucking blindingly obvious extrapolation from the know facts.
Older people have a lower educational attainment, not because they are less
intelligent but because they were educated during a period where it was rare
for anybody to go on to university for social reason, thus fewer of them
have degrees.
and, oh look, more oldies vote Tory than Labour.

Whatever. Fact is, as Aaronovitch points out, more Brexiters
proportionately are dying than Remainers.

MM

[The Todal]

Post by MM

Post by tim...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
SNIP

Post by Fredxx

Post by Fredxx
Perhaps that explains why you don't have the brains to vote Labour. Or
simply that loser Remoaners just resort to insult when they err.... lose.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election/
Does this mean Tory voters are as thick as Leavers?

Interesting, I will have a good read.

you don't need to read it
it's a fucking blindingly obvious extrapolation from the know facts.
Older people have a lower educational attainment, not because they are less
intelligent but because they were educated during a period where it was rare
for anybody to go on to university for social reason, thus fewer of them
have degrees.
and, oh look, more oldies vote Tory than Labour.

Whatever. Fact is, as Aaronovitch points out, more Brexiters
proportionately are dying than Remainers.

A statistic plucked from the air, based on Aaronovitch's gut feeling
about these things.

And more demented brain-damaged people are dying than healthy people.

[James Harris]

On 06/01/2018 19:24, R. Mark Clayton wrote:

...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

[Ophelia]

"James Harris" wrote in message news:p2thfc$90i$***@dont-email.me...

On 06/01/2018 19:24, R. Mark Clayton wrote:

...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely strong
correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

James Harris

==

He has changed his tune. He was using it as an insult from day 1 and has
done so ever since ... until someone pointed out a few facts !!

[Ian Jackson]

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

If you keep telling them that being in the EU is one of the reasons that
they're poor - they probably WILL.

[Ash Burton]

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
 That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

If you keep telling them that being in the EU is one of the reasons that
they're poor - they probably WILL.

You don't have to keep telling them they are poorer, they might not be
so well educated but they can easily work out for themselves that free
movement of people from lower wage economies is having a negative effect
on their incomes.

[Ophelia]

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

If you keep telling them that being in the EU is one of the reasons that
they're poor - they probably WILL.

You don't have to keep telling them they are poorer, they might not be
so well educated but they can easily work out for themselves that free
movement of people from lower wage economies is having a negative effect
on their incomes.

==

Exactly!

[pamela]

Post by Ash Burton

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an
extremely strong correlation between low educational
attainment and voting leave.  That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment,
but correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from.
For example, those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer;
does that mean if you pay people less they become
EU-sceptic...?

If you keep telling them that being in the EU is one of the
reasons that they're poor - they probably WILL.

You don't have to keep telling them they are poorer, they might
not be so well educated but they can easily work out for
themselves that free movement of people from lower wage
economies is having a negative effect on their incomes.

Or are workers from lower wage economies doing the jobs no one in
this country wants to do? While providing the inhabitants with
valued services at cheap prices.

UK workers displaced by unskilled labour from another country
should consider upping their game and acquiring the skills
required in a 21st century workplace.

[James Harris]

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

If you keep telling them that being in the EU is one of the reasons that
they're poor - they probably WILL.

Curious how many Remainers continue to think people voted Brexit because
of what they were told. I wonder if the subliminal message is that
Remainers voted Remain because of what they were told, and that's why
they assume that Brexiteers did so.

[Ian Jackson]

Post by James Harris

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

If you keep telling them that being in the EU is one of the reasons that
they're poor - they probably WILL.

Curious how many Remainers continue to think people voted Brexit
because of what they were told. I wonder if the subliminal message is
that Remainers voted Remain because of what they were told, and that's
why they assume that Brexiteers did so.

I'm sure that many in both camps voted because of what they were told.

However, many analysts have since said that the Leavers tended to vote
with their hearts, while the Remainers voted with their minds.

Apart from those Brexiteers who genuinely saw and/or experienced the
effects of uncontrolled immigration and some of the few EU regulations
that really are to the disadvantage of the UK, much of why they voted to
leave was essentially based on largely misplaced emotion. From the
phone-ins I've heard, most Leavers are strongly in favour of leaving the
EU. You rarely hear many who are only luke-warm about leaving.

On the other hand, Remainers usually ignored the Union Jack waving and
the singing of Rule Britannia - and looked at life through 21st century
eyes instead of those of the 19th and 20th century. Few Leavers think
that the EU is the best thing since sliced bread, but instead they
simply feel that its advantages outweigh its disadvantages.

[James Harris]

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

If you keep telling them that being in the EU is one of the reasons that
they're poor - they probably WILL.

Curious how many Remainers continue to think people voted Brexit
because of what they were told. I wonder if the subliminal message is
that Remainers voted Remain because of what they were told, and that's
why they assume that Brexiteers did so.

I'm sure that many in both camps voted because of what they were told.

With respect, that's what someone from a camp which did so would think.

Post by Ian Jackson
However, many analysts have since said that the Leavers tended to vote
with their hearts, while the Remainers voted with their minds.

Ah, "analysts"! Am not having a go at you but that's what RT calls
people who are willing to speak against the West. "Here are some words
from a political analyst" can mean some words from a spotty youth in his
bedroom who hates the USA. The term "analyst" is meaningless.

Post by Ian Jackson
Apart from those Brexiteers who genuinely saw and/or experienced the
effects of uncontrolled immigration and some of the few EU regulations
that really are to the disadvantage of the UK, much of why they voted to
leave was essentially based on largely misplaced emotion. From the
phone-ins I've heard, most Leavers are strongly in favour of leaving the
EU. You rarely hear many who are only luke-warm about leaving.

As I've said before, phone-ins are self selecting. They will attract
those who want to sound off rather than those who are of a more
contemplative character. So what you hear when listening to them will be
a curious subset of the population. Phone-ins are not representative.

Post by Ian Jackson
On the other hand, Remainers usually ignored the Union Jack waving and
the singing of Rule Britannia - and looked at life through 21st century
eyes instead of those of the 19th and 20th century. Few Leavers think
that the EU is the best thing since sliced bread, but instead they
simply feel that its advantages outweigh its disadvantages.

That's strange. I've seen videos of plenty of Remainers who think the EU
is wonderful because they don't know much about what it is but it's
something to do with working together. Look at how many Remain voters
think that Brexit is about xenophobia because they have seen a few white
supremacists.

And Remainers wave the EU flag as much if not more than some Brexiteers
wave the Union Jack.

[tim...]

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

If you keep telling them that being in the EU is one of the reasons that
they're poor - they probably WILL.

Curious how many Remainers continue to think people voted Brexit because
of what they were told. I wonder if the subliminal message is that
Remainers voted Remain because of what they were told, and that's why they
assume that Brexiteers did so.

I'm sure that many in both camps voted because of what they were told.
However, many analysts have since said that the Leavers tended to vote
with their hearts, while the Remainers voted with their minds.

Including the millions who did so "because we have to be on the inside to
change it"

do me a favour!

tim

[The Todal]

Post by tim...

Post by Ian Jackson
However, many analysts have since said that the Leavers tended to vote
with their hearts, while the Remainers voted with their minds.

Including the millions who did so "because we have to be on the inside
to change it"

Which is surely true. Isn't it?

Post by tim...
do me a favour!

What sort of favour are you hoping for?

[Yellow]

On Mon, 8 Jan 2018 14:27:56 +0000, James Harris <james.harris.1

Post by James Harris

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

If you keep telling them that being in the EU is one of the reasons that
they're poor - they probably WILL.

Curious how many Remainers continue to think people voted Brexit because
of what they were told. I wonder if the subliminal message is that
Remainers voted Remain because of what they were told, and that's why
they assume that Brexiteers did so.

If it is that simple, that leave voters only did so because of what they
were told, why did they not simply believe the government that leaving
would make them poorer, and vote to remain?

[James Harris]

Post by Yellow
On Mon, 8 Jan 2018 14:27:56 +0000, James Harris <james.harris.1

Post by James Harris

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

If you keep telling them that being in the EU is one of the reasons that
they're poor - they probably WILL.

Curious how many Remainers continue to think people voted Brexit because
of what they were told. I wonder if the subliminal message is that
Remainers voted Remain because of what they were told, and that's why
they assume that Brexiteers did so.

If it is that simple, that leave voters only did so because of what they
were told, why did they not simply believe the government that leaving
would make them poorer, and vote to remain?

I remember week after week a number of people on Question Time asking
the politicians for more info. Of course, plain and simple information
was never forthcoming. I suspect that they and many like them, if they
never did their own research, ended up voting Remain because it seemed
safer to stick to the evil we know. They may not have believed that
things would be as dire as the UK government predicted but even if it
were only half right then things would still get very bad.

In other words, it's more likely that those who were ignorant of what
the referendum was about became Remain voters. The amazing thing is that
many of them still don't understand the referendum or why the country
voted for Brexit.

[The Todal]

Post by James Harris

Post by Yellow
On Mon, 8 Jan 2018 14:27:56 +0000, James Harris <james.harris.1

Post by James Harris

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
   That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

If you keep telling them that being in the EU is one of the reasons that
they're poor - they probably WILL.

Curious how many Remainers continue to think people voted Brexit because
of what they were told. I wonder if the subliminal message is that
Remainers voted Remain because of what they were told, and that's why
they assume that Brexiteers did so.

If it is that simple, that leave voters only did so because of what they
were told, why did they not simply believe the government that leaving
would make them poorer, and vote to remain?

I remember week after week a number of people on Question Time asking
the politicians for more info. Of course, plain and simple information
was never forthcoming. I suspect that they and many like them, if they
never did their own research, ended up voting Remain because it seemed
safer to stick to the evil we know. They may not have believed that
things would be as dire as the UK government predicted but even if it
were only half right then things would still get very bad.
In other words, it's more likely that those who were ignorant of what
the referendum was about became Remain voters. The amazing thing is that
many of them still don't understand the referendum or why the country
voted for Brexit.

Come off it. The truth is much simpler than that. Remain voters tend to
trust experts. Leave voters tend to trust their own instincts and any
demagogue who appeals to their own instincts.

A Remain voter would say that the only people speaking in favour of
leaving seemed to be people whose expertise is in doubt. Nobody would
call Boris Johnson an economic expert. When the PM and the Chancellor
are in favour of Remain, that's a major influence on Remainers.

And why wasn't it a great enough influence on Leavers? Presumably there
was a lingering suspicion that the PM and the Chancellor were dishonest
or are making secret profits out of the EU. Or just that anyone who
supports the status quo is lacking in the imagination and confidence
that we need in order to make our Brexit a soaraway success.

[Yellow]

Post by The Todal

Post by James Harris

Post by Yellow
On Mon, 8 Jan 2018 14:27:56 +0000, James Harris <james.harris.1

Post by James Harris

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
   That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

If you keep telling them that being in the EU is one of the reasons that
they're poor - they probably WILL.

Curious how many Remainers continue to think people voted Brexit because
of what they were told. I wonder if the subliminal message is that
Remainers voted Remain because of what they were told, and that's why
they assume that Brexiteers did so.

If it is that simple, that leave voters only did so because of what they
were told, why did they not simply believe the government that leaving
would make them poorer, and vote to remain?

I remember week after week a number of people on Question Time asking
the politicians for more info. Of course, plain and simple information
was never forthcoming. I suspect that they and many like them, if they
never did their own research, ended up voting Remain because it seemed
safer to stick to the evil we know. They may not have believed that
things would be as dire as the UK government predicted but even if it
were only half right then things would still get very bad.
In other words, it's more likely that those who were ignorant of what
the referendum was about became Remain voters. The amazing thing is that
many of them still don't understand the referendum or why the country
voted for Brexit.

Come off it. The truth is much simpler than that. Remain voters tend to
trust experts.

Do you really believe that? As it is not my sense at all. Obviously it
depends on the expert as there are different kinds, but it seems to me
that many people have lost the faith in the ones in the financial
forecasting business - since 2008.

Post by The Todal
Leave voters tend to trust their own instincts and any
demagogue who appeals to their own instincts.

Ultimately, when you vote, that is the bottom line.

Post by The Todal
A Remain voter would say that the only people speaking in favour of
leaving seemed to be people whose expertise is in doubt. Nobody would
call Boris Johnson an economic expert. When the PM and the Chancellor
are in favour of Remain, that's a major influence on Remainers.

So you think so many people voted to remain only because they believed
Project Fear?

Post by The Todal
And why wasn't it a great enough influence on Leavers?

Oh come on - it was ridiculous. And it got wilder and wilder as the
referendum started to get away from them, making up numbers to the
penny, of how much per household we would be worse off in 10 years time.
That clearly lost people because it was just too stupid to be
believable.

The punishment budget threat *must* have lost people too, it just must
have!

People voted to remain despite Project Fear, not because of it - surely.

Post by The Todal
Presumably there
was a lingering suspicion that the PM and the Chancellor were dishonest

They were caught on the hop because Cameron simply believed Tory voters
would follow his lead so that was all that was required while Osborne,
by his own admission, simply did not think a leave vote was a
possibility.

(Source - Tim Shipton's book)

Post by The Todal
or are making secret profits out of the EU.

Not heard that one myself.

Post by The Todal
Or just that anyone who
supports the status quo is lacking in the imagination and confidence
that we need in order to make our Brexit a soaraway success.

Not seen anyone suggest that elsewhere, and instead the logic goes that
if people are unsure how to vote then a vote for the status quo is the
most likely voting choice.

[The Todal]

Post by Yellow

Post by The Todal
A Remain voter would say that the only people speaking in favour of
leaving seemed to be people whose expertise is in doubt. Nobody would
call Boris Johnson an economic expert. When the PM and the Chancellor
are in favour of Remain, that's a major influence on Remainers.

So you think so many people voted to remain only because they believed
Project Fear?

Yes, if you like the term "project fear".

If a scientist tells me that there is global warming, I believe him. If
an economist or a leading politician tells me that we're better off in
the EU, I believe him. I think that's the mind-set of most Remainers.

The alternative mind-set is to say, I don't believe you're really an
expert and even if you are, I'm not convinced by your analysis.

Post by Yellow

Post by The Todal
And why wasn't it a great enough influence on Leavers?

Oh come on - it was ridiculous. And it got wilder and wilder as the
referendum started to get away from them, making up numbers to the
penny, of how much per household we would be worse off in 10 years time.
That clearly lost people because it was just too stupid to be
believable.

But it might have been true, and it still might turn out to be true. As
with global warming, it's easy enough to say that the predictions are
far-fetched and that they remind you of great panics from previous
decades that turned out to be misconceived.

The people who make the predictions aren't stupid. They believe in their
predictions.

Post by Yellow
The punishment budget threat *must* have lost people too, it just must
have!

It was a careless misjudgement by the Chancellor. It probably convinced
many people, including many Remainers, that the Chancellor wasn't really
a financial wizard who had mastered the country's economy, and actually
he was a bit of an amateur.

Post by Yellow
People voted to remain despite Project Fear, not because of it - surely.

We cannot know what motivated each voter or most of the voters. I
believe that most people who voted Remain did so from a firm conviction
that leaving the EU would be bad for jobs, prosperity and would lead to
less tax revenue and therefore less financial support for the NHS and
schools.

If you like, that means voting to remain because they believed in
Project Fear.

I don't know what else a Remainer could theoretically be voting for. Not
out of an ideological belief that we need more immigration or that we
need to give more power to Brussels, or that we should be glad to be
part of a federal Europe and end up with a EU army. I don't know of
anyone who would have supported any of that.

Post by Yellow

Post by The Todal
Presumably there
was a lingering suspicion that the PM and the Chancellor were dishonest

They were caught on the hop because Cameron simply believed Tory voters
would follow his lead so that was all that was required while Osborne,
by his own admission, simply did not think a leave vote was a
possibility.
(Source - Tim Shipton's book)

Post by The Todal
or are making secret profits out of the EU.

Not heard that one myself.

I think the Daily Mail is quite fond of accusing politicians (or judges)
of being "traitors" and then quoting the various ways that these
individuals or their family members have profited from the EU in ways
that aren't widely known.

Post by Yellow

Post by The Todal
Or just that anyone who
supports the status quo is lacking in the imagination and confidence
that we need in order to make our Brexit a soaraway success.

Not seen anyone suggest that elsewhere, and instead the logic goes that
if people are unsure how to vote then a vote for the status quo is the
most likely voting choice.

I think it may work slightly differently. If people trust the government
they are sure how to vote. If they are unsure how to vote they generally
deliver a protest vote against the government.

[Yellow]

Post by The Todal

Post by Yellow

Post by The Todal
A Remain voter would say that the only people speaking in favour of
leaving seemed to be people whose expertise is in doubt. Nobody would
call Boris Johnson an economic expert. When the PM and the Chancellor
are in favour of Remain, that's a major influence on Remainers.

So you think so many people voted to remain only because they believed
Project Fear?

Yes, if you like the term "project fear".
If a scientist tells me that there is global warming, I believe him. If
an economist or a leading politician tells me that we're better off in
the EU, I believe him. I think that's the mind-set of most Remainers.

For me, it depends on who is making the claims and I am a big fan of
looking for collaborating sources to make sure I am getting the complete
picture.

Did you know that there are scientists with PhDs for example, who claim
the Bible is literally true and that the world is only 10,000 years old.
Would you believe that claim simply because it was made by "a
scientist"?

And I certainly would not be be swallowing whole *anything* a politician
tells me - leading or otherwise. Crumbs, where the heck would that lead
us!

Post by The Todal
The alternative mind-set is to say, I don't believe you're really an
expert and even if you are, I'm not convinced by your analysis.

With all due respect, what you have posted above comes across as being
extremely naive.

Post by The Todal

Post by Yellow

Post by The Todal
And why wasn't it a great enough influence on Leavers?

Oh come on - it was ridiculous. And it got wilder and wilder as the
referendum started to get away from them, making up numbers to the
penny, of how much per household we would be worse off in 10 years time.
That clearly lost people because it was just too stupid to be
believable.

But it might have been true, and it still might turn out to be true.

No! It could never be true because a moment's investigation showed it up
for the nonsense it was. They guessed a figure for a drop in GDP and
then divided that by the number of households - it was complete and
utter garbage. And it was garbage spouted to the penny.

The only thing they were experts in was taking the piss out of the
public under the guise of "but we are experts".

Post by The Todal
As
with global warming, it's easy enough to say that the predictions are
far-fetched and that they remind you of great panics from previous
decades that turned out to be misconceived.

It is now called "climate change" on the back of the warming stopping
for a few years. :-)

Personally, I have little opinion on climate change as it is out of my
hands, real or not, except to say that it worries me a lot when raising
taxes is used as an alternative to actually doing something about it. If
anything colours my opinion on it being real or not, it is that.

Trading carbon credits so a dirty country can continue being dirty while
another makes money - that makes no sense to me at all.

But if I were to follow it, I would be just a tad concerned about what
came out about the "experts" of East Anglia University a few years ago.

As I said - not a topic of great interest to me, so I am no "expert".

Post by The Todal
The people who make the predictions aren't stupid. They believe in their
predictions.

How to put this.... Sometimes people know they are right so feel
justified in presenting their point of view in a way that ensures other
people agree with them.

This is why you must always look for collaborating information as well
as taking an interest in who the people presenting the information
actually are and looking into what their interest is.

Post by The Todal

Post by Yellow
The punishment budget threat *must* have lost people too, it just must
have!

It was a careless misjudgement by the Chancellor. It probably convinced
many people, including many Remainers, that the Chancellor wasn't really
a financial wizard who had mastered the country's economy, and actually
he was a bit of an amateur.

I am sure it convinced just as many people who believed that £350
million a week would go to the NHS. :-)

Post by The Todal

Post by Yellow
People voted to remain despite Project Fear, not because of it - surely.

We cannot know what motivated each voter or most of the voters. I
believe that most people who voted Remain did so from a firm conviction
that leaving the EU would be bad for jobs, prosperity and would lead to
less tax revenue and therefore less financial support for the NHS and
schools.

Myself, I think many remain voters had no conviction at all and just
voted for the status-quo, but the rest - sure, they voted the way they
did because they felt that staying in the EU would probably be the best
outcome for themselves.

Post by The Todal
If you like, that means voting to remain because they believed in
Project Fear.
I don't know what else a Remainer could theoretically be voting for. Not
out of an ideological belief that we need more immigration or that we
need to give more power to Brussels, or that we should be glad to be
part of a federal Europe and end up with a EU army. I don't know of
anyone who would have supported any of that.

There are clearly people out there who do think we need more
immigration. There are clearly people out there who like the idea of a
federal Europe/EU. There are clearly people out there who have no issue
with the idea of an EU army.

You just have to watch The Daily Politics for a few weeks if you need
proof of that.

Post by The Todal

Post by Yellow

Post by The Todal
Presumably there
was a lingering suspicion that the PM and the Chancellor were dishonest

They were caught on the hop because Cameron simply believed Tory voters
would follow his lead so that was all that was required while Osborne,
by his own admission, simply did not think a leave vote was a
possibility.
(Source - Tim Shipton's book)

Post by The Todal
or are making secret profits out of the EU.

Not heard that one myself.

I think the Daily Mail is quite fond of accusing politicians (or judges)
of being "traitors" and then quoting the various ways that these
individuals or their family members have profited from the EU in ways
that aren't widely known.

Some politicians clearly make a fortune out of the EU - but that is not
a secret. Not least because the subject of pensions has been quite a hot
potato over the last few weeks and months.

Post by The Todal

Post by Yellow

Post by The Todal
Or just that anyone who
supports the status quo is lacking in the imagination and confidence
that we need in order to make our Brexit a soaraway success.

Not seen anyone suggest that elsewhere, and instead the logic goes that
if people are unsure how to vote then a vote for the status quo is the
most likely voting choice.

I think it may work slightly differently. If people trust the government
they are sure how to vote. If they are unsure how to vote they generally
deliver a protest vote against the government.

Nah - that's rubbish, not least because the campaigns were cross party,
with the Lib Dems, Greens and Labour (if not Corbyn himself) as parties
campaigned to remain in the EU. But further because there is simply no
evidence to support that people in any numbers voted to leave the EU
simply to piss of the government.

Lord Ashcroft's exit poll make for useful reading on this topic.

[JNugent]

Post by The Todal

Post by James Harris

Post by Yellow
On Mon, 8 Jan 2018 14:27:56 +0000, James Harris <james.harris.1

Post by James Harris

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
   That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

If you keep telling them that being in the EU is one of the reasons that
they're poor - they probably WILL.

Curious how many Remainers continue to think people voted Brexit because
of what they were told. I wonder if the subliminal message is that
Remainers voted Remain because of what they were told, and that's why
they assume that Brexiteers did so.

If it is that simple, that leave voters only did so because of what they
were told, why did they not simply believe the government that leaving
would make them poorer, and vote to remain?

I remember week after week a number of people on Question Time asking
the politicians for more info. Of course, plain and simple information
was never forthcoming. I suspect that they and many like them, if they
never did their own research, ended up voting Remain because it seemed
safer to stick to the evil we know. They may not have believed that
things would be as dire as the UK government predicted but even if it
were only half right then things would still get very bad.
In other words, it's more likely that those who were ignorant of what
the referendum was about became Remain voters. The amazing thing is
that many of them still don't understand the referendum or why the
country voted for Brexit.

Come off it. The truth is much simpler than that. Remain voters tend to
trust experts. Leave voters tend to trust their own instincts and any
demagogue who appeals to their own instincts.
A Remain voter would say that the only people speaking in favour of
leaving seemed to be people whose expertise is in doubt. Nobody would
call Boris Johnson an economic expert. When the PM and the Chancellor
are in favour of Remain, that's a major influence on Remainers.
And why wasn't it a great enough influence on Leavers? Presumably there
was a lingering suspicion that the PM and the Chancellor were dishonest
or are making secret profits out of the EU. Or just that anyone who
supports the status quo is lacking in the imagination and confidence
that we need in order to make our Brexit a soaraway success.

"Nobody would call Boris Johnson an economic expert."

Is it only about economics (or rather, economic performance), then?

[R. Mark Clayton]

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment

These were ONS classifications used in the 2011 census.

Post by James Harris
, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

It is a tricky thing to derive conclusions from. For instance people with low educational attainment usually earn much less than people with high educational attainment of the same age.

It is not difficult to demonstrate the correlation between Leave vote and low educational attainment - that took me under an hour on 24th June 2016.

As the data I used is in the public domain, you or anyone can repeat the calculation and get the same result.

Post by James Harris
--
James Harris

[James Harris]

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment

These were ONS classifications used in the 2011 census.

Post by James Harris
, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

It is a tricky thing to derive conclusions from. For instance people with low educational attainment usually earn much less than people with high educational attainment of the same age.

That's what I wondered. You seem to confirm that there is a strong
correlation between three variables:

1. low educational attainment
2. low income
3. votes for Brexit

That raises an important question: Which of the first two led to the
Brexit vote? Was it low educational attainment, as Remainers assert, or
was the low income a bigger cause of the vote?

I would have thought that low income - i.e. not doing well financially
out of EU membership - would be /far/ more likely to cause a vote for
change, just as many who were doing well out of the EU wanted to stay in.

Further, this raises another issue: Remainers misusing correlation to
imply causation - implying the conclusion they would like to believe in
rather than being honest over the fact that there are other possible
causes.

What say you?

Post by R. Mark Clayton
It is not difficult to demonstrate the correlation between Leave vote and low educational attainment - that took me under an hour on 24th June 2016.
As the data I used is in the public domain, you or anyone can repeat the calculation and get the same result.

[Fredxx]

Post by James Harris

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment

These were ONS classifications used in the 2011 census.

Post by James Harris
, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

It is a tricky thing to derive conclusions from.  For instance people
with low educational attainment usually earn much less than people
with high educational attainment of the same age.

That's what I wondered. You seem to confirm that there is a strong
  1. low educational attainment
  2. low income
  3. votes for Brexit
That raises an important question: Which of the first two led to the
Brexit vote? Was it low educational attainment, as Remainers assert, or
was the low income a bigger cause of the vote?
I would have thought that low income - i.e. not doing well financially
out of EU membership - would be /far/ more likely to cause a vote for
change, just as many who were doing well out of the EU wanted to stay in.
Further, this raises another issue: Remainers misusing correlation to
imply causation - implying the conclusion they would like to believe in
rather than being honest over the fact that there are other possible
causes.
What say you?

I would say loser Remoaners grasp every straw to be vindictive towards
Brexiters.

[pensive hamster]

Post by Fredxx

Post by James Harris

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment

These were ONS classifications used in the 2011 census.

Post by James Harris
, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

It is a tricky thing to derive conclusions from.  For instance people
with low educational attainment usually earn much less than people
with high educational attainment of the same age.

That's what I wondered. You seem to confirm that there is a strong
  1. low educational attainment
  2. low income
  3. votes for Brexit
That raises an important question: Which of the first two led to the
Brexit vote? Was it low educational attainment, as Remainers assert, or
was the low income a bigger cause of the vote?
I would have thought that low income - i.e. not doing well financially
out of EU membership - would be /far/ more likely to cause a vote for
change, just as many who were doing well out of the EU wanted to stay in.
Further, this raises another issue: Remainers misusing correlation to
imply causation - implying the conclusion they would like to believe in
rather than being honest over the fact that there are other possible
causes.
What say you?

I would say loser Remoaners grasp every straw to be vindictive towards
Brexiters.

I would say that some Brexiteers, intoxicated with their
unexpected victory, grasp every straw to be vindictive
towards Remainers.

[James Harris]

Post by pensive hamster

Post by Fredxx

Post by James Harris

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment

These were ONS classifications used in the 2011 census.

Post by James Harris
, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

It is a tricky thing to derive conclusions from.  For instance people
with low educational attainment usually earn much less than people
with high educational attainment of the same age.

That's what I wondered. You seem to confirm that there is a strong
  1. low educational attainment
  2. low income
  3. votes for Brexit
That raises an important question: Which of the first two led to the
Brexit vote? Was it low educational attainment, as Remainers assert, or
was the low income a bigger cause of the vote?
I would have thought that low income - i.e. not doing well financially
out of EU membership - would be /far/ more likely to cause a vote for
change, just as many who were doing well out of the EU wanted to stay in.
Further, this raises another issue: Remainers misusing correlation to
imply causation - implying the conclusion they would like to believe in
rather than being honest over the fact that there are other possible
causes.
What say you?

I would say loser Remoaners grasp every straw to be vindictive towards
Brexiters.

I would say that some Brexiteers, intoxicated with their
unexpected victory, grasp every straw to be vindictive
towards Remainers.

Surely there are extremists on both sides, and focussing on them and
their views is a distraction - and completely irrelevant to the real
issues of whether Brexit will be good or bad (which is what such
discussions often try to infer).

Put another way, it's best to ignore the messenger.

[Fredxx]

Post by pensive hamster

Post by Fredxx

Post by James Harris

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely
strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment

These were ONS classifications used in the 2011 census.

Post by James Harris
, but
correlation is a tricky thing to draw conclusions from. For example,
those who voted for Brexit may have been poorer; does that mean if you
pay people less they become EU-sceptic...?

It is a tricky thing to derive conclusions from.  For instance people
with low educational attainment usually earn much less than people
with high educational attainment of the same age.

That's what I wondered. You seem to confirm that there is a strong
  1. low educational attainment
  2. low income
  3. votes for Brexit
That raises an important question: Which of the first two led to the
Brexit vote? Was it low educational attainment, as Remainers assert, or
was the low income a bigger cause of the vote?
I would have thought that low income - i.e. not doing well financially
out of EU membership - would be /far/ more likely to cause a vote for
change, just as many who were doing well out of the EU wanted to stay in.
Further, this raises another issue: Remainers misusing correlation to
imply causation - implying the conclusion they would like to believe in
rather than being honest over the fact that there are other possible
causes.
What say you?

I would say loser Remoaners grasp every straw to be vindictive towards
Brexiters.

I would say that some Brexiteers, intoxicated with their
unexpected victory, grasp every straw to be vindictive
towards Remainers.

If you exclude Harry, who isn't taken seriously, how many other Brexiter
actually start topics?

Most topics are generally started by Renmoaners. I don't ever recall
starting one, BICBW.

[Ian Jackson]

Post by pensive hamster

Post by Fredxx
I would say loser Remoaners grasp every straw to be vindictive towards
Brexiters.

I would say that some Brexiteers, intoxicated with their
unexpected victory, grasp every straw to be vindictive
towards Remainers.

While it's not unusual to hear some sections of the Brexit community
calling those who oppose Brexit 'Traitors!' and 'Enemies Of The
People!', I can't recall any Remainers similarly targeting those who
could, in some quarters, be considered to be hell-bent on ruining the UK
and turning us into a third-world country.

I wonder why?

[The Todal]

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by pensive hamster

Post by Fredxx
I would say loser Remoaners grasp every straw to be vindictive towards
Brexiters.

I would say that some Brexiteers, intoxicated with their
unexpected victory, grasp every straw to be vindictive
towards Remainers.

While it's not unusual to hear some sections of the Brexit community
calling those who oppose Brexit 'Traitors!' and 'Enemies Of The
People!', I can't recall any Remainers similarly targeting those who
could, in some quarters, be considered to be hell-bent on ruining the UK
and turning us into a third-world country.
I wonder why?

The usual slogan from ardent Leavers is "we won, you lost!"

It's the same mindset that causes many people to get stuck in the past
and to believe that winning the second world war makes us as a nation
permanently superior to Germany. Such people probably play their DVD of
The Great Escape regularly throughout the year and sing the tune at
football matches.

The fervent desire to be on the winning side is symptomatic of a general
failure in life. Even if no employer values their services, it's some
consolation to these people to know that they have inadvertently found
themselves in a majority over the referendum issue, and they hope to
milk that fact as evidence that their luck may now have turned and the
money they have been splurging on weekly lottery tickets might perhaps
now bear fruit.

[JNugent]

Post by The Todal

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by pensive hamster

Post by Fredxx
I would say loser Remoaners grasp every straw to be vindictive towards
Brexiters.

I would say that some Brexiteers, intoxicated with their
unexpected victory, grasp every straw to be vindictive
towards Remainers.

While it's not unusual to hear some sections of the Brexit community
calling those who oppose Brexit 'Traitors!' and 'Enemies Of The
People!', I can't recall any Remainers similarly targeting those who
could, in some quarters, be considered to be hell-bent on ruining the
UK and turning us into a third-world country.
I wonder why?

The usual slogan from ardent Leavers is "we won, you lost!"

Even if that were an accurate rendering, would it be factually incorrect?

Did we all misperceive the result and simply fail to realise that Remain
had won?

Post by The Todal
It's the same mindset that causes many people to get stuck in the past
and to believe that winning the second world war makes us as a nation
permanently superior to Germany. Such people probably play their DVD of
The Great Escape regularly throughout the year and sing the tune at
football matches.
The fervent desire to be on the winning side is symptomatic of a general
failure in life. Even if no employer values their services, it's some
consolation to these people to know that they have inadvertently found
themselves in a majority over the referendum issue, and they hope to
milk that fact as evidence that their luck may now have turned and the
money they have been splurging on weekly lottery tickets might perhaps
now bear fruit.

Yet more evidence of your exceptionally-vivid imagination.

[pamela]

Post by JNugent

Post by The Todal

Post by Ian Jackson
In message

Post by pensive hamster

Post by Fredxx
I would say loser Remoaners grasp every straw to be
vindictive towards Brexiters.

I would say that some Brexiteers, intoxicated with their
unexpected victory, grasp every straw to be vindictive
towards Remainers.

While it's not unusual to hear some sections of the Brexit
community calling those who oppose Brexit 'Traitors!' and
'Enemies Of The People!', I can't recall any Remainers
similarly targeting those who could, in some quarters, be
considered to be hell-bent on ruining the UK and turning us
into a third-world country.
I wonder why?

The usual slogan from ardent Leavers is "we won, you lost!"

Even if that were an accurate rendering, would it be factually
incorrect?
Did we all misperceive the result and simply fail to realise
that Remain had won?

Remainers won the advisory referendum but it is the government and
more so Parliament who decides what to implement.

Remainers did not "win" any say-so over what would be carried out.

Post by JNugent

Post by The Todal
It's the same mindset that causes many people to get stuck in
the past and to believe that winning the second world war makes
us as a nation permanently superior to Germany. Such people
probably play their DVD of The Great Escape regularly
throughout the year and sing the tune at football matches.
The fervent desire to be on the winning side is symptomatic of
a general failure in life. Even if no employer values their
services, it's some consolation to these people to know that
they have inadvertently found themselves in a majority over the
referendum issue, and they hope to milk that fact as evidence
that their luck may now have turned and the money they have
been splurging on weekly lottery tickets might perhaps now bear
fruit.

Yet more evidence of your exceptionally-vivid imagination.

A fluke success in the referendum now powers Leavers' thinking
into believing they can endlessly repeat the previous fluke in EU
exit negotiations or rest of the world trade agreements.

Just because naivety won the referendum, it doesn't mean naivety
is a sensible way forward.

[pamela]

Post by pamela

Post by JNugent

Post by The Todal

Post by Ian Jackson
In message

Post by pensive hamster

Post by Fredxx
I would say loser Remoaners grasp every straw to be
vindictive towards Brexiters.

I would say that some Brexiteers, intoxicated with their
unexpected victory, grasp every straw to be vindictive
towards Remainers.

While it's not unusual to hear some sections of the Brexit
community calling those who oppose Brexit 'Traitors!' and
'Enemies Of The People!', I can't recall any Remainers
similarly targeting those who could, in some quarters, be
considered to be hell-bent on ruining the UK and turning us
into a third-world country.
I wonder why?

The usual slogan from ardent Leavers is "we won, you lost!"

Even if that were an accurate rendering, would it be factually incorrect?
Did we all misperceive the result and simply fail to realise
that Remain had won?

Remainers won the advisory referendum but it is the government
and more so Parliament who decides what to implement.
Remainers did not "win" any say-so over what would be carried
out.

Post by JNugent

Post by The Todal
It's the same mindset that causes many people to get stuck in
the past and to believe that winning the second world war
makes us as a nation permanently superior to Germany. Such
people probably play their DVD of The Great Escape regularly
throughout the year and sing the tune at football matches.
The fervent desire to be on the winning side is symptomatic of
a general failure in life. Even if no employer values their
services, it's some consolation to these people to know that
they have inadvertently found themselves in a majority over
the referendum issue, and they hope to milk that fact as
evidence that their luck may now have turned and the money
they have been splurging on weekly lottery tickets might
perhaps now bear fruit.

Yet more evidence of your exceptionally-vivid imagination.

A fluke success in the referendum now powers Leavers' thinking
into believing they can endlessly repeat the previous fluke in
EU exit negotiations or rest of the world trade agreements.
Just because naivety won the referendum, it doesn't mean naivety
is a sensible way forward.

To add...

Perhaps Leavers are like Douglas Adams' galactic hitchhikers
dependent on an Infinite Improbability Drive.

However what they really need do is look into the Total
Persepective Vortex.

:)

[JNugent]

Post by pamela

Post by JNugent

Post by The Todal

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by pensive hamster

Post by Fredxx
I would say loser Remoaners grasp every straw to be
vindictive towards Brexiters.

I would say that some Brexiteers, intoxicated with their
unexpected victory, grasp every straw to be vindictive
towards Remainers.

While it's not unusual to hear some sections of the Brexit
community calling those who oppose Brexit 'Traitors!' and
'Enemies Of The People!', I can't recall any Remainers
similarly targeting those who could, in some quarters, be
considered to be hell-bent on ruining the UK and turning us
into a third-world country.
I wonder why?

The usual slogan from ardent Leavers is "we won, you lost!"

Even if that were an accurate rendering, would it be factually incorrect?
Did we all misperceive the result and simply fail to realise
that Remain had won?

Remainers won the advisory referendum but it is the government and
more so Parliament who decides what to implement.

Ah... there's your problem right there.

Post by pamela
Remainers did not "win" any say-so over what would be carried out.

Indeed they didn't. They... er... lost.

Post by pamela

Post by JNugent

Post by The Todal
It's the same mindset that causes many people to get stuck in
the past and to believe that winning the second world war makes
us as a nation permanently superior to Germany. Such people
probably play their DVD of The Great Escape regularly
throughout the year and sing the tune at football matches.
The fervent desire to be on the winning side is symptomatic of
a general failure in life. Even if no employer values their
services, it's some consolation to these people to know that
they have inadvertently found themselves in a majority over the
referendum issue, and they hope to milk that fact as evidence
that their luck may now have turned and the money they have
been splurging on weekly lottery tickets might perhaps now bear
fruit.

Yet more evidence of your exceptionally-vivid imagination.

A fluke success in the referendum now powers Leavers' thinking
into believing they can endlessly repeat the previous fluke in EU
exit negotiations or rest of the world trade agreements.
Just because naivety won the referendum, it doesn't mean naivety
is a sensible way forward.

Tell us a bit more of what your extraordinary mind-reading powers enable
you to see inside the heads of others.

We're all agog, I'm sure.

[pamela]

Post by JNugent

Post by pamela

Post by JNugent

Post by The Todal

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by pensive hamster

Post by Fredxx
I would say loser Remoaners grasp every straw to be
vindictive towards Brexiters.

I would say that some Brexiteers, intoxicated with their
unexpected victory, grasp every straw to be vindictive
towards Remainers.

While it's not unusual to hear some sections of the Brexit
community calling those who oppose Brexit 'Traitors!' and
'Enemies Of The People!', I can't recall any Remainers
similarly targeting those who could, in some quarters, be
considered to be hell-bent on ruining the UK and turning us
into a third-world country.
I wonder why?

The usual slogan from ardent Leavers is "we won, you lost!"

Even if that were an accurate rendering, would it be factually incorrect?
Did we all misperceive the result and simply fail to realise
that Remain had won?

Remainers won the advisory referendum but it is the government
and more so Parliament who decides what to implement.

Ah... there's your problem right there.

Post by pamela
Remainers did not "win" any say-so over what would be carried
out.

Indeed they didn't. They... er... lost.

Post by pamela

Post by JNugent

Post by The Todal
It's the same mindset that causes many people to get stuck in
the past and to believe that winning the second world war
makes us as a nation permanently superior to Germany. Such
people probably play their DVD of The Great Escape regularly
throughout the year and sing the tune at football matches.
The fervent desire to be on the winning side is symptomatic
of a general failure in life. Even if no employer values
their services, it's some consolation to these people to know
that they have inadvertently found themselves in a majority
over the referendum issue, and they hope to milk that fact as
evidence that their luck may now have turned and the money
they have been splurging on weekly lottery tickets might
perhaps now bear fruit.

Yet more evidence of your exceptionally-vivid imagination.

A fluke success in the referendum now powers Leavers' thinking
into believing they can endlessly repeat the previous fluke in
EU exit negotiations or rest of the world trade agreements.
Just because naivety won the referendum, it doesn't mean
naivety is a sensible way forward.

Tell us a bit more of what your extraordinary mind-reading
powers enable you to see inside the heads of others.
We're all agog, I'm sure.

Hurts that I am so accurate, does it? :wink:

By the way, why does your newsreader make such a mess of blank quoted
lines. I would clean them up so others can see where you've gonewrong
but your reply would only mess them up again.

Do you think your AV scanner is doing it? You don't need an AV to
scan outgoing Usenet posts.

[JNugent]

Post by pamela

Post by JNugent

Post by pamela

Post by JNugent

Post by The Todal

Post by Ian Jackson

Post by pensive hamster

Post by Fredxx
I would say loser Remoaners grasp every straw to be
vindictive towards Brexiters.

I would say that some Brexiteers, intoxicated with their
unexpected victory, grasp every straw to be vindictive
towards Remainers.

While it's not unusual to hear some sections of the Brexit
community calling those who oppose Brexit 'Traitors!' and
'Enemies Of The People!', I can't recall any Remainers
similarly targeting those who could, in some quarters, be
considered to be hell-bent on ruining the UK and turning us
into a third-world country.
I wonder why?

The usual slogan from ardent Leavers is "we won, you lost!"

Even if that were an accurate rendering, would it be factually incorrect?
Did we all misperceive the result and simply fail to realise
that Remain had won?

Remainers won the advisory referendum but it is the government
and more so Parliament who decides what to implement.

Ah... there's your problem right there.

Post by pamela
Remainers did not "win" any say-so over what would be carried out.

Indeed they didn't. They... er... lost.

Post by pamela

Post by JNugent

Post by The Todal
It's the same mindset that causes many people to get stuck in
the past and to believe that winning the second world war
makes us as a nation permanently superior to Germany. Such
people probably play their DVD of The Great Escape regularly
throughout the year and sing the tune at football matches.
The fervent desire to be on the winning side is symptomatic
of a general failure in life. Even if no employer values
their services, it's some consolation to these people to know
that they have inadvertently found themselves in a majority
over the referendum issue, and they hope to milk that fact as
evidence that their luck may now have turned and the money
they have been splurging on weekly lottery tickets might
perhaps now bear fruit.

Yet more evidence of your exceptionally-vivid imagination.

A fluke success in the referendum now powers Leavers' thinking
into believing they can endlessly repeat the previous fluke in
EU exit negotiations or rest of the world trade agreements.
Just because naivety won the referendum, it doesn't mean
naivety is a sensible way forward.

Tell us a bit more of what your extraordinary mind-reading
powers enable you to see inside the heads of others.
We're all agog, I'm sure.

You think you were accurate, do you?

Post by pamela
By the way, why does your newsreader make such a mess of blank quoted
lines. I would clean them up so others can see where you've gonewrong
but your reply would only mess them up again.
Do you think your AV scanner is doing it? You don't need an AV to
scan outgoing Usenet posts.

It looks fine from here. I sometimes shorten long "right arrow" lines in
order to render exchanges more distinct.

But that's a diversion.

You wrote: "Remainers won the advisory referendum but it is the
government and more so Parliament who decides what to implement" and
that coud not be more wrong - could it?

[Yellow]

Post by JNugent

Post by pamela

Post by JNugent
Tell us a bit more of what your extraordinary mind-reading
powers enable you to see inside the heads of others.
We're all agog, I'm sure.

You think you were accurate, do you?

Post by pamela
By the way, why does your newsreader make such a mess of blank quoted
lines. I would clean them up so others can see where you've gonewrong
but your reply would only mess them up again.
Do you think your AV scanner is doing it? You don't need an AV to
scan outgoing Usenet posts.

It looks fine from here.

For what it is worth, they are look fine from here too.

Post by JNugent
I sometimes shorten long "right arrow" lines in
order to render exchanges more distinct.
But that's a diversion.

Yep - that's the idea. :-)

Post by JNugent
You wrote: "Remainers won the advisory referendum but it is the
government and more so Parliament who decides what to implement" and
that coud not be more wrong - could it?

[Yellow]

On Mon, 8 Jan 2018 03:04:55 -0800 (PST), R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment

These were ONS classifications used in the 2011 census.

And only looks at A levels and degrees, if memory serves from previous
discussions, completely disregarding all the other types of
qualification and education that people have and placing them in the
"low educational attainment" category.

So the data is flawed even before you start mucking about with it.

[R. Mark Clayton]

Post by Yellow
On Mon, 8 Jan 2018 03:04:55 -0800 (PST), R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment

These were ONS classifications used in the 2011 census.

And only looks at A levels and degrees, if memory serves from previous
discussions, completely disregarding all the other types of
qualification and education that people have and placing them in the
"low educational attainment" category.
So the data is flawed even before you start mucking about with it.

You never read posts properly do you?

About 5% of people (under 2 million*) had "other qualifications" overall and only a handful of areas had more than 10%. This category was excluded from the correlation, because their level of educational attainment was not known.

Yes there are factors skewing the correlation - like 16 and 17 year olds wouldn't have taken A'levels yet, but the effects are small.


* compared with ~16M who [each] had low or high educational attainment.

[Yellow]

On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 02:52:00 -0800 (PST), R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by Yellow
On Mon, 8 Jan 2018 03:04:55 -0800 (PST), R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris
...

Post by R. Mark Clayton
No I pointed out that on about 25M samples there was an extremely strong correlation between low educational attainment and voting leave.
That is a fact NOT an insult.

It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment

These were ONS classifications used in the 2011 census.

And only looks at A levels and degrees, if memory serves from previous
discussions, completely disregarding all the other types of
qualification and education that people have and placing them in the
"low educational attainment" category.
So the data is flawed even before you start mucking about with it.

You never read posts properly do you?

I now have this image of you with your testicles growing out of your
cheeks and your nob out of your forehead.

Funny. :-)

Post by R. Mark Clayton
About 5% of people (under 2 million*) had "other qualifications" overall and only a handful of areas had more than 10%. This category was excluded from the correlation, because their level of educational attainment was not known.

Indeed - a chunk of people have been miss-catagorised. We agree.

Post by R. Mark Clayton
Yes there are factors skewing the correlation - like 16 and 17 year olds wouldn't have taken A'levels yet, but the effects are small.

What have 16 and 17 got to do with it? They could not vote in the
referendum.

Post by R. Mark Clayton
* compared with ~16M who [each] had low or high educational attainment.

Someone with a shit degree in a silly subject from a modern non-
university has been categorised as having "high educational attainment"
while someone with an HND is categorised as having "low educational
attainment" - that just damages the value of the entire data set, like
it or not.

[R. Mark Clayton]

Post by Yellow
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 02:52:00 -0800 (PST), R. Mark Clayton

SNIP

Post by Yellow

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by Yellow

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris
It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment

These were ONS classifications used in the 2011 census.

And only looks at A levels and degrees, if memory serves from previous
discussions, completely disregarding all the other types of
qualification and education that people have and placing them in the
"low educational attainment" category.
So the data is flawed even before you start mucking about with it.

You never read posts properly do you?

I now have this image of you with your testicles growing out of your
cheeks and your nob out of your forehead.
Funny. :-)

Well I have a picture of you as some where I might put my nob.

Leave your childish insults at the school door please.

Post by Yellow

Post by R. Mark Clayton
About 5% of people (under 2 million*) had "other qualifications" overall and only a handful of areas had more than 10%. This category was excluded from the correlation, because their level of educational attainment was not known.

Indeed - a chunk of people have been miss-catagorised. We agree.

No we don't because for the reason they could not be categorised they were not included in the correlation. Similarly about 1M apprentices were excluded. Still leaves ~32M to correlate by area against the ~33M who voted - in statistics terms that is a very, very large sample er like about half the total population.

Post by Yellow

Post by R. Mark Clayton
Yes there are factors skewing the correlation - like 16 and 17 year olds wouldn't have taken A'levels yet, but the effects are small.

What have 16 and 17 got to do with it? They could not vote in the
referendum.

They were included in the educational attainment stat's, and as it happens would have been old enough to vote in the referendum five years later.

Post by Yellow

Post by R. Mark Clayton
* compared with ~16M who [each] had low or high educational attainment.

Someone with a shit degree in a silly subject from a modern non-
university has been categorised as having "high educational attainment"
while someone with an HND is categorised as having "low educational
attainment" - that just damages the value of the entire data set, like
it or not.

HND is above A' levels and is clearly in the higher educational attainment category.

Specifically

"
No qualifications: No formal qualifications.

Level 1: 1-4 GCSEs or equivalent qualifications.

Level 2: 5 GCSEs or equivalent qualifications.

Apprenticeships.

Level 3: 2 or more A-levels or equivalent qualifications.

Level 4 or above: Bachelors degree or equivalent, and higher qualifications.

Other qualifications including foreign qualifications.
"


I know you hate these statistics, but stop picking non existent holes in them.

[Yellow]

On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 10:19:11 -0800 (PST), R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by Yellow
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 02:52:00 -0800 (PST), R. Mark Clayton

SNIP

Post by Yellow

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by Yellow

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by James Harris
It may well be a fact, for some definition of low attainment

These were ONS classifications used in the 2011 census.

And only looks at A levels and degrees, if memory serves from previous
discussions, completely disregarding all the other types of
qualification and education that people have and placing them in the
"low educational attainment" category.
So the data is flawed even before you start mucking about with it.

You never read posts properly do you?

I now have this image of you with your testicles growing out of your
cheeks and your nob out of your forehead.
Funny. :-)

Well I have a picture of you as some where I might put my nob.

The word is cunt. :-p

Post by R. Mark Clayton
Leave your childish insults at the school door please.

If you cannot take it then do not start it - simples.

[jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)]

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ

Sounds like a jew asshole who doesn't BELONG in B'ritain, let alone
the EU.

-------------------> 'Israeel'
- -

" I don't even have the heart to tell him I've never infested
Arizona."
- Klaun Shittinb'ricks (1940 - ), acknowledging that he lied
from the very beginning, A jew scam, as expected

Iudaei orbem terrarum infestant.
- correct Latin

"But vhere vill ve be able to vatch gay jews taking black cock up ze
ass?"
- Klaun Shittinb'ricks (1940 - ), bemoaning the depletion of jews
in Hollyvood and the effect on his viewing preferences
Message-ID: <***@4ax.com>

"Actually, it is obvious he's not all there. Most wannabes are short
on IQ and have severe mental problems. I have yet to see a post from
this cretin that makes sense. Usually, he just does his "You are a
Nazi........." and even *that* he aped from some other imbecile. His
other attempts at posting in usenet usually consist of one line or
even one word drivel."
- Boadicea, about GBLTP dreckgook Ejershito

[The Peeler]

On Sat, 06 Jan 2018 06:19:45 -0800, serbian bitch Razovic, the resident
psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous sexual cripple, making an ass
of herself as "jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry'

Post by jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ

Sounds like a jew asshole who doesn't BELONG in B'ritain, let alone
the EU.

You sound like a subnormal idiot who doesn't belong among humanity!

Post by jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
-------------------> 'Israeel'

Your head -> your arse https://pixxxels.org/image/knucs8flj/

[Ash Burton]

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking to
a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from my
family died this year," she told me. As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal, the Brexit majority would
be reduced to zero by that most natural of wastages. It went something
like this: 600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of
Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as
against about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added.
and if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers and
sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a Remain
majority.
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for the
Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing they
broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their parents
did. Dig down and three factors stand out. Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands include
political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!
MM

More like wishful thinking on your part.

[The Todal]

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ

Aaronovitch is a regular Times contributor. Full of bluster and bullshit
and infected by the pundit's tendency to extrapolate from conversations
with his own family and friends and little social circle.

I don't bother to read him these days.

[R. Mark Clayton]

Post by The Todal

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ

Aaronovitch is a regular Times contributor. Full of bluster and bullshit
and infected by the pundit's tendency to extrapolate from conversations
with his own family and friends and little social circle.
I don't bother to read him these days.

and a former card carrying member of the Communist Party.

[RH156RH]

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking to
a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from my
family died this year," she told me. As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal, the Brexit majority would
be reduced to zero by that most natural of wastages. It went something
like this: 600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of
Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as
against about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added.
and if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers and
sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a Remain
majority.
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for the
Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing they
broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their parents
did. Dig down and three factors stand out. Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands include
political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!
MM

Moronovitch misses the obvious, namely, the age of all voters moves forward so that remain age group majority voters move into the majority leave age group. As people become more conservative as they grow older the odds are that remainers will become leavers. RH

[R. Mark Clayton]

Post by RH156RH

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking to
a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from my
family died this year," she told me. As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal, the Brexit majority would
be reduced to zero by that most natural of wastages. It went something
like this: 600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of
Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as
against about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added.
and if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers and
sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a Remain
majority.
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for the
Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing they
broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their parents
did. Dig down and three factors stand out. Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands include
political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!
MM

Moronovitch misses the obvious, namely, the age of all voters moves forward so that remain age group majority voters move into the majority leave age group. As people become more conservative as they grow older the odds are that remainers will become leavers. RH

Nice theory, but places with older more educated people (like Brighton) voted remain.

[Yellow]

On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 02:53:22 -0800 (PST), R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by RH156RH

Post by MM
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
The Brexit generation is dying out. The other evening I was talking to
a friend from Yorkshire about you know what. "Four Brexiteers from my
family died this year," she told me. As it happens, the pollster
Peter Kellner was listening in and he shared some calculations he'd
made about when, other things being equal, the Brexit majority would
be reduced to zero by that most natural of wastages. It went something
like this: 600,000 voters die every year.Given the age profile of
Brexit voters 450,000 of them would be amongst the deceased, as
against about 150,000 Remainers. In addition, new voters are added.
and if they voted in the same way as their slightly older brothers and
sisters, then by the time we leave in 2020, we would have a Remain
majority.
It's not my intention to be callous -- look at this grey hair. My
demographic voted solidly for leaving, and solidly last summer for the
Conservatives. But younger voters didn't. And in so not doing they
broke an old compact that kids overwhelmingly vote as their parents
did. Dig down and three factors stand out. Younger voters from
Generation X, through Millennials, to Generation Z, are much less
likely to own their own homes, significantly more connected to each
other by recent technology, and much more socially liberal, so that
things regarded as moot by older groups are no longer up for debate.
As Ipsos MORI put it in their end of year report, "Gender, racial and
sexual equality are expected, and brands which don't share this stance
cannot expect to be considered by Generation Z." Those brands include
political parties.
As that boomer to end all babies put it, "Our old road is rapidly
agin', please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand, for
the times, they are a-changin'."
http://youtu.be/_TSgi9WsoaQ
Food for thought, eh, Brexiters!
MM

Moronovitch misses the obvious, namely, the age of all voters moves forward so that remain age group majority voters move into the majority leave age group. As people become more conservative as they grow older the odds are that remainers will become leavers. RH

Nice theory, but places with older more educated people (like Brighton) voted remain.

I clearly know Brighton a heck of lot better than you do having actually
lived there, and am interested to know why you believe a lot of older,
more educated people live there?

The older demographic as it happens is exactly the same as along the
coast in Adur and Worthing, which of course voted to leave the EU and in
fact the difference is that a lot more young and "trendy" people live in
Brighton, often from London.

How else do you think the Greens ever got in, and how else do you figure
that they have a Green MP?

It is not because of all the 70 year olds - you can trust me on this.

[R. Mark Clayton]

On Tuesday, 9 January 2018 17:29:09 UTC, Yellow wrote:
SNIP

Post by Yellow

Post by R. Mark Clayton
Nice theory, but places with older more educated people (like Brighton) voted remain.

I clearly know Brighton a heck of lot better than you do having actually
lived there, and am interested to know why you believe a lot of older,

It is / was a retirement town, however only 13% are over 65 (source local council), although the average age is 37 so you may have a point there.

Post by Yellow
more educated people live there?

because ONS asked them all. 58% have A'levels or better and surprise surprise 68% remain vote.

Post by Yellow
The older demographic as it happens is exactly the same as along the
coast in Adur and Worthing, which of course voted to leave the EU and in
fact the difference is that a lot more young and "trendy" people live in
Brighton, often from London.

Adur - only 39% with higher educational attainment - 55% Leave
Worthing - 44% with higher educational attainment - 53% Leave

The difference is a lot more better educated people live in Brighton [and London].

Post by Yellow
How else do you think the Greens ever got in, and how else do you figure
that they have a Green MP?
It is not because of all the 70 year olds - you can trust me on this.

Rottingdean has the highest proportion of pensioners (30%) in Brighton & Hove and yep it votes Conservative, but guess what its referendum result was declared at ward level and was strongly remain.

E05002433 Rottingdean Coastal Brighton and Hove 4950 3097 P 61.51 38.49

although this is slightly off trend as only 44% have higher qualifications, but 34% of those over 65.

Source available if you want to keep quibbling.

[Yellow]

On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 11:24:09 -0800 (PST), R. Mark Clayton

Post by R. Mark Clayton
SNIP

Post by Yellow

Post by R. Mark Clayton
Nice theory, but places with older more educated people (like Brighton) voted remain.

I clearly know Brighton a heck of lot better than you do having actually
lived there, and am interested to know why you believe a lot of older,

It is / was a retirement town,

Brighton is most certainly not a retirement *city* and you have clearly
never been there if you think otherwise.

Post by R. Mark Clayton
however only 13% are over 65 (source local council), although the
average age is 37 so you may have a point there.

I know - I lived there!

Post by R. Mark Clayton

Post by Yellow
more educated people live there?

Funny place to break the sentence as you have changed its meaning by
doing so.

You do like to twist and turn the data, don't you.

Post by R. Mark Clayton
because ONS asked them all. 58% have A'levels or better and surprise surprise 68% remain vote.

Shall we put the sentence back together. Yes, I think so....

I said - I am interested to know why you believe a lot of older, more
educated people live there?

Because there aren't. There are normal older people, same as the rest of
that area that did not vote to leave the EU.

Brighton voted to leave the EU for one reason and for one reason only
and that is because it is full of trendy, idealistic, younger people,
many of them Green voters, hence the first Green Council and the only
Green MP in the UK.

Twist and turn the data however you want to but the plain reason
Brighton and Hove voted how it did is because of the age and type of
person who chooses to live there.

[kat]

Post by Yellow
Twist and turn the data however you want to but the plain reason
Brighton and Hove voted how it did is because of the age and type of
person who chooses to live there.

Brighton is home to both the University of Sussex and the University of
Brighton, and universities - and therefore their staff and students - like EU
funds.

Is it a huge surprise if people, living in towns and cities with universities,
who benefit from the EU, towns which will naturally have a greater percentage
of people with " higher educational attainment" voted to stay in ( and keep
getting the money )?

Is it such a great surprise that places without a university might have fewer
people with this higher educational attainment and thus, not benefiting from
this largess, might vote otherwise?