FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Positivity
Positivity
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees." I am guessing not as much as other nations.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees." Great news! Still too many people want to close our borders entirely at 37%, so more work needed. This is a good story though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees." I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. Great news! Still too many people want to close our borders entirely at 37%, so more work needed. This is a good story though. " Imagine in an article of positives, you still find the negative 
Oh how I'd hate to be that way inclined. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. " Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. Great news! Still too many people want to close our borders entirely at 37%, so more work needed. This is a good story though. Imagine in an article of positives, you still find the negative
Oh how I'd hate to be that way inclined."Sorry for not pretending that everything is roses. Nearly 40% of those polled would close the doors to refugees entirely. Forgive me for not thinking that’s a great result. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. Great news! Still too many people want to close our borders entirely at 37%, so more work needed. This is a good story though. Imagine in an article of positives, you still find the negative
Oh how I'd hate to be that way inclined.
Sorry for not pretending that everything is roses. Nearly 40% of those polled would close the doors to refugees entirely. Forgive me for not thinking that’s a great result. "No one is 'pretending', I just struggle to see how always looking for the negatives has any sort of positive impact. You do you all you please, I'm just glad I don't see life through those glasses. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's difficult to see that a government and country that is taking in 640,000 immigrants net per year (isn't that about 1% of our population) could be considered anti immigrant. I take polls with a pinch of salt. People know what the pollsters want to hear, and being pro refugee is a high status opinion. Everyone knows what is expected of them. But genuine refugees should be welcome. Even refugees fleeing war, pestilence and oppression in the EU, particularly Emperor Macron's France. I had a few pleasant holidays in France some years back, but it's obviously gone downhill since then. And best not to think about what life must be like in Italy or Hungary. " The poll was specifically about genuine refugees. As you said, everyone should be open to them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. Great news! Still too many people want to close our borders entirely at 37%, so more work needed. This is a good story though. Imagine in an article of positives, you still find the negative
Oh how I'd hate to be that way inclined.
Sorry for not pretending that everything is roses. Nearly 40% of those polled would close the doors to refugees entirely. Forgive me for not thinking that’s a great result.
No one is 'pretending', I just struggle to see how always looking for the negatives has any sort of positive impact. You do you all you please, I'm just glad I don't see life through those glasses.
"Just to add to that. The article doesn't state 'close borders indefinitely' so we do not know whether the opinion was 'until we sort out the backlog' or not. It could be that they wanted borders closed short term to deal with the mess we have already. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. Great news! Still too many people want to close our borders entirely at 37%, so more work needed. This is a good story though. Imagine in an article of positives, you still find the negative
Oh how I'd hate to be that way inclined.
Sorry for not pretending that everything is roses. Nearly 40% of those polled would close the doors to refugees entirely. Forgive me for not thinking that’s a great result.
No one is 'pretending', I just struggle to see how always looking for the negatives has any sort of positive impact. You do you all you please, I'm just glad I don't see life through those glasses.
"I’m actually a very positive person. There’s much to be grateful for, we live in an age of medical advancement, technological wonder and connectivity worldwide. There’s also much to be hopeful for, like the natural demographic death of the Conservative Party, and my band’s first gig in August. But a poll revealing that nigh-40% of responders feel we should close out doors to refugees (not migrants, or asylum seekers - refugees) is not something to cheer too broadly about, even if the figures are heading in the right direction. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. Great news! Still too many people want to close our borders entirely at 37%, so more work needed. This is a good story though. Imagine in an article of positives, you still find the negative
Oh how I'd hate to be that way inclined.
Sorry for not pretending that everything is roses. Nearly 40% of those polled would close the doors to refugees entirely. Forgive me for not thinking that’s a great result.
No one is 'pretending', I just struggle to see how always looking for the negatives has any sort of positive impact. You do you all you please, I'm just glad I don't see life through those glasses.
Just to add to that. The article doesn't state 'close borders indefinitely' so we do not know whether the opinion was 'until we sort out the backlog' or not.
It could be that they wanted borders closed short term to deal with the mess we have already."Stop defending people who’d turn away refugees. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. Great news! Still too many people want to close our borders entirely at 37%, so more work needed. This is a good story though. Imagine in an article of positives, you still find the negative
Oh how I'd hate to be that way inclined.
Sorry for not pretending that everything is roses. Nearly 40% of those polled would close the doors to refugees entirely. Forgive me for not thinking that’s a great result.
No one is 'pretending', I just struggle to see how always looking for the negatives has any sort of positive impact. You do you all you please, I'm just glad I don't see life through those glasses.
Just to add to that. The article doesn't state 'close borders indefinitely' so we do not know whether the opinion was 'until we sort out the backlog' or not.
It could be that they wanted borders closed short term to deal with the mess we have already.
Stop defending people who’d turn away refugees."I didn't defend them. I said we do not know the context. Besides if I wanted to defend them, I would. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's difficult to see that a government and country that is taking in 640,000 immigrants net per year (isn't that about 1% of our population) could be considered anti immigrant. I take polls with a pinch of salt. People know what the pollsters want to hear, and being pro refugee is a high status opinion. Everyone knows what is expected of them. But genuine refugees should be welcome. Even refugees fleeing war, pestilence and oppression in the EU, particularly Emperor Macron's France. I had a few pleasant holidays in France some years back, but it's obviously gone downhill since then. And best not to think about what life must be like in Italy or Hungary. The poll was specifically about genuine refugees. As you said, everyone should be open to them. " Why should they be open to them? I personally am, but I make no judgement on people who aren't. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's difficult to see that a government and country that is taking in 640,000 immigrants net per year (isn't that about 1% of our population) could be considered anti immigrant. I take polls with a pinch of salt. People know what the pollsters want to hear, and being pro refugee is a high status opinion. Everyone knows what is expected of them. But genuine refugees should be welcome. Even refugees fleeing war, pestilence and oppression in the EU, particularly Emperor Macron's France. I had a few pleasant holidays in France some years back, but it's obviously gone downhill since then. And best not to think about what life must be like in Italy or Hungary. The poll was specifically about genuine refugees. As you said, everyone should be open to them. Why should they be open to them? I personally am, but I make no judgement on people who aren't." Because refugees are fleeing war, famine or suchlike. That could be you or I, or them, one day | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's difficult to see that a government and country that is taking in 640,000 immigrants net per year (isn't that about 1% of our population) could be considered anti immigrant. I take polls with a pinch of salt. People know what the pollsters want to hear, and being pro refugee is a high status opinion. Everyone knows what is expected of them. But genuine refugees should be welcome. Even refugees fleeing war, pestilence and oppression in the EU, particularly Emperor Macron's France. I had a few pleasant holidays in France some years back, but it's obviously gone downhill since then. And best not to think about what life must be like in Italy or Hungary. The poll was specifically about genuine refugees. As you said, everyone should be open to them. Why should they be open to them? I personally am, but I make no judgement on people who aren't. Because refugees are fleeing war, famine or suchlike. That could be you or I, or them, one day " Very likely, with a Labour government on the horizon. But to be honest this country has made such a total mess of immigration policy over the last fifty years that it doesn't surprise me if some people are anti immigrant and anti refugee. It's an inevitable consequence of incompetence. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's difficult to see that a government and country that is taking in 640,000 immigrants net per year (isn't that about 1% of our population) could be considered anti immigrant. I take polls with a pinch of salt. People know what the pollsters want to hear, and being pro refugee is a high status opinion. Everyone knows what is expected of them. But genuine refugees should be welcome. Even refugees fleeing war, pestilence and oppression in the EU, particularly Emperor Macron's France. I had a few pleasant holidays in France some years back, but it's obviously gone downhill since then. And best not to think about what life must be like in Italy or Hungary. The poll was specifically about genuine refugees. As you said, everyone should be open to them. Why should they be open to them? I personally am, but I make no judgement on people who aren't. Because refugees are fleeing war, famine or suchlike. That could be you or I, or them, one day Very likely, with a Labour government on the horizon. But to be honest this country has made such a total mess of immigration policy over the last fifty years that it doesn't surprise me if some people are anti immigrant and anti refugee. It's an inevitable consequence of incompetence." You are clearly anti-Labour and pro-Tory which is of course your prerogative. But over the last 50 years how many of those did we have a Labour led Govt and how many a Tory led Govt? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's difficult to see that a government and country that is taking in 640,000 immigrants net per year (isn't that about 1% of our population) could be considered anti immigrant. I take polls with a pinch of salt. People know what the pollsters want to hear, and being pro refugee is a high status opinion. Everyone knows what is expected of them. But genuine refugees should be welcome. Even refugees fleeing war, pestilence and oppression in the EU, particularly Emperor Macron's France. I had a few pleasant holidays in France some years back, but it's obviously gone downhill since then. And best not to think about what life must be like in Italy or Hungary. The poll was specifically about genuine refugees. As you said, everyone should be open to them. Why should they be open to them? I personally am, but I make no judgement on people who aren't. Because refugees are fleeing war, famine or suchlike. That could be you or I, or them, one day Very likely, with a Labour government on the horizon. But to be honest this country has made such a total mess of immigration policy over the last fifty years that it doesn't surprise me if some people are anti immigrant and anti refugee. It's an inevitable consequence of incompetence." Well the tories have put far more people on the streets and into food poverty than New Labour did  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's difficult to see that a government and country that is taking in 640,000 immigrants net per year (isn't that about 1% of our population) could be considered anti immigrant. I take polls with a pinch of salt. People know what the pollsters want to hear, and being pro refugee is a high status opinion. Everyone knows what is expected of them. But genuine refugees should be welcome. Even refugees fleeing war, pestilence and oppression in the EU, particularly Emperor Macron's France. I had a few pleasant holidays in France some years back, but it's obviously gone downhill since then. And best not to think about what life must be like in Italy or Hungary. The poll was specifically about genuine refugees. As you said, everyone should be open to them. Why should they be open to them? I personally am, but I make no judgement on people who aren't. Because refugees are fleeing war, famine or suchlike. That could be you or I, or them, one day Very likely, with a Labour government on the horizon. But to be honest this country has made such a total mess of immigration policy over the last fifty years that it doesn't surprise me if some people are anti immigrant and anti refugee. It's an inevitable consequence of incompetence. You are clearly anti-Labour and pro-Tory which is of course your prerogative. But over the last 50 years how many of those did we have a Labour led Govt and how many a Tory led Govt?" I'm not pro Tory. I am anti Labour. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's difficult to see that a government and country that is taking in 640,000 immigrants net per year (isn't that about 1% of our population) could be considered anti immigrant. I take polls with a pinch of salt. People know what the pollsters want to hear, and being pro refugee is a high status opinion. Everyone knows what is expected of them. But genuine refugees should be welcome. Even refugees fleeing war, pestilence and oppression in the EU, particularly Emperor Macron's France. I had a few pleasant holidays in France some years back, but it's obviously gone downhill since then. And best not to think about what life must be like in Italy or Hungary. The poll was specifically about genuine refugees. As you said, everyone should be open to them. Why should they be open to them? I personally am, but I make no judgement on people who aren't. Because refugees are fleeing war, famine or suchlike. That could be you or I, or them, one day Very likely, with a Labour government on the horizon. But to be honest this country has made such a total mess of immigration policy over the last fifty years that it doesn't surprise me if some people are anti immigrant and anti refugee. It's an inevitable consequence of incompetence. Well the tories have put far more people on the streets and into food poverty than New Labour did "What's that got to do with refugees? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's difficult to see that a government and country that is taking in 640,000 immigrants net per year (isn't that about 1% of our population) could be considered anti immigrant. I take polls with a pinch of salt. People know what the pollsters want to hear, and being pro refugee is a high status opinion. Everyone knows what is expected of them. But genuine refugees should be welcome. Even refugees fleeing war, pestilence and oppression in the EU, particularly Emperor Macron's France. I had a few pleasant holidays in France some years back, but it's obviously gone downhill since then. And best not to think about what life must be like in Italy or Hungary. The poll was specifically about genuine refugees. As you said, everyone should be open to them. Why should they be open to them? I personally am, but I make no judgement on people who aren't. Because refugees are fleeing war, famine or suchlike. That could be you or I, or them, one day Very likely, with a Labour government on the horizon. But to be honest this country has made such a total mess of immigration policy over the last fifty years that it doesn't surprise me if some people are anti immigrant and anti refugee. It's an inevitable consequence of incompetence. Well the tories have put far more people on the streets and into food poverty than New Labour did
What's that got to do with refugees?"You decided to turn it into party politics, mucker. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's difficult to see that a government and country that is taking in 640,000 immigrants net per year (isn't that about 1% of our population) could be considered anti immigrant. I take polls with a pinch of salt. People know what the pollsters want to hear, and being pro refugee is a high status opinion. Everyone knows what is expected of them. But genuine refugees should be welcome. Even refugees fleeing war, pestilence and oppression in the EU, particularly Emperor Macron's France. I had a few pleasant holidays in France some years back, but it's obviously gone downhill since then. And best not to think about what life must be like in Italy or Hungary. The poll was specifically about genuine refugees. As you said, everyone should be open to them. Why should they be open to them? I personally am, but I make no judgement on people who aren't. Because refugees are fleeing war, famine or suchlike. That could be you or I, or them, one day Very likely, with a Labour government on the horizon. But to be honest this country has made such a total mess of immigration policy over the last fifty years that it doesn't surprise me if some people are anti immigrant and anti refugee. It's an inevitable consequence of incompetence. Well the tories have put far more people on the streets and into food poverty than New Labour did
What's that got to do with refugees?
You decided to turn it into party politics, mucker."What does "mucker" mean? Is that some faux term of endearment? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with genuine refugees. But the people washing up on our beach 365 days a year are nothing of the kind." That’s why we have an asylum process, is it not? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. " It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's difficult to see that a government and country that is taking in 640,000 immigrants net per year (isn't that about 1% of our population) could be considered anti immigrant. I take polls with a pinch of salt. People know what the pollsters want to hear, and being pro refugee is a high status opinion. Everyone knows what is expected of them. But genuine refugees should be welcome. Even refugees fleeing war, pestilence and oppression in the EU, particularly Emperor Macron's France. I had a few pleasant holidays in France some years back, but it's obviously gone downhill since then. And best not to think about what life must be like in Italy or Hungary. " Doing your very best to disprove the OP. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. " Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has." I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. " What does this tool allow governments and media to do? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with genuine refugees. But the people washing up on our beach 365 days a year are nothing of the kind." "That’s why we have an asylum process, is it not? " So you're happy with the idea that people that aren't genuine refugees could be refused entry? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do?" You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with genuine refugees. But the people washing up on our beach 365 days a year are nothing of the kind. That’s why we have an asylum process, is it not? " We do have an asylum process, but it's not fit for purpose. Why? Because it was systematically abused by chancers and criminals. Now THAT'S the real irony in the migrant boats story - it's genuine asylum seekers who have suffered most. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc." Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you?" Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". " You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. " You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. " Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery." Works though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. " I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. " There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. " Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same." It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. " I'm not sure if you understand or don't understand how your words and statements play out as they are read by someone who is not as politically motivated as you are on this subject. Above you say: "even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees" The same message could have read: "even if the UK are more tolerant" This makes me feel you are planting seeds of negativity when I read it. Another subject you mention a lot is distraction used by the government, it does come across as only you and people who think like you know the truth, and anyone who disagrees is being fooled. You also add billionaires into the mix that told leave voters how to vote, and as far as I know you have never once accepted that people could vote leave based on nothing more than their own thoughts and beliefs. This is why asked you what tool is being used by the government and media, are you 100% sure the tool you mention is not being used on you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). " I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. I'm not sure if you understand or don't understand how your words and statements play out as they are read by someone who is not as politically motivated as you are on this subject. Above you say: "even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees" The same message could have read: "even if the UK are more tolerant" This makes me feel you are planting seeds of negativity when I read it. Another subject you mention a lot is distraction used by the government, it does come across as only you and people who think like you know the truth, and anyone who disagrees is being fooled. You also add billionaires into the mix that told leave voters how to vote, and as far as I know you have never once accepted that people could vote leave based on nothing more than their own thoughts and beliefs. This is why asked you what tool is being used by the government and media, are you 100% sure the tool you mention is not being used on you?" Of course people could have voted leave based upon their own thoughts and beliefs - but let’s not forget the targeted ads run by Leave.EU and vote leave. They don’t spend time, effort and money on those schemes for no reason. Advertising and propaganda works. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. I'm not sure if you understand or don't understand how your words and statements play out as they are read by someone who is not as politically motivated as you are on this subject. Above you say: "even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees" The same message could have read: "even if the UK are more tolerant" This makes me feel you are planting seeds of negativity when I read it. Another subject you mention a lot is distraction used by the government, it does come across as only you and people who think like you know the truth, and anyone who disagrees is being fooled. You also add billionaires into the mix that told leave voters how to vote, and as far as I know you have never once accepted that people could vote leave based on nothing more than their own thoughts and beliefs. This is why asked you what tool is being used by the government and media, are you 100% sure the tool you mention is not being used on you?" Not sure why you're making this personal. If you hold an opposing view to mine. That's fine. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though." Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though." What do attribute the disproportionate attention people place on immigrants to? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. What do attribute the disproportionate attention people place on immigrants to?" What disproportionate attention? You are aware how algorithms work, this is almost exactly the reason you think the way you do. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. I'm not sure if you understand or don't understand how your words and statements play out as they are read by someone who is not as politically motivated as you are on this subject. Above you say: "even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees" The same message could have read: "even if the UK are more tolerant" This makes me feel you are planting seeds of negativity when I read it. Another subject you mention a lot is distraction used by the government, it does come across as only you and people who think like you know the truth, and anyone who disagrees is being fooled. You also add billionaires into the mix that told leave voters how to vote, and as far as I know you have never once accepted that people could vote leave based on nothing more than their own thoughts and beliefs. This is why asked you what tool is being used by the government and media, are you 100% sure the tool you mention is not being used on you? Not sure why you're making this personal. If you hold an opposing view to mine. That's fine." Nothing personal in this at all, you suggest anyone who doesn't agree with you are being taken in and pretty much stupid. That is rather personal and does go some way towards the replies you get. I was pointing out how you repeat those messages either consciously or unconsciously. Personally I don't think you would insult someone by directly calling them stupid. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. " I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers." There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. I'm not sure if you understand or don't understand how your words and statements play out as they are read by someone who is not as politically motivated as you are on this subject. Above you say: "even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees" The same message could have read: "even if the UK are more tolerant" This makes me feel you are planting seeds of negativity when I read it. Another subject you mention a lot is distraction used by the government, it does come across as only you and people who think like you know the truth, and anyone who disagrees is being fooled. You also add billionaires into the mix that told leave voters how to vote, and as far as I know you have never once accepted that people could vote leave based on nothing more than their own thoughts and beliefs. This is why asked you what tool is being used by the government and media, are you 100% sure the tool you mention is not being used on you? Not sure why you're making this personal. If you hold an opposing view to mine. That's fine. Nothing personal in this at all, you suggest anyone who doesn't agree with you are being taken in and pretty much stupid." You've completely fabricated this. Hence why I said you're getting personal " That is rather personal and does go some way towards the replies you get. I was pointing out how you repeat those messages either consciously or unconsciously. Personally I don't think you would insult someone by directly calling them stupid. " I'm not calling anyone stupid. I'm discussing my opinions on the effect of media and government anti immigrant rhetoric. It lines up nicely with when the Tories need a distraction, and with the perception that immigration, in my example, the second biggest concern for Tory voters. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. " I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. I'm not sure if you understand or don't understand how your words and statements play out as they are read by someone who is not as politically motivated as you are on this subject. Above you say: "even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees" The same message could have read: "even if the UK are more tolerant" This makes me feel you are planting seeds of negativity when I read it. Another subject you mention a lot is distraction used by the government, it does come across as only you and people who think like you know the truth, and anyone who disagrees is being fooled. You also add billionaires into the mix that told leave voters how to vote, and as far as I know you have never once accepted that people could vote leave based on nothing more than their own thoughts and beliefs. This is why asked you what tool is being used by the government and media, are you 100% sure the tool you mention is not being used on you? Not sure why you're making this personal. If you hold an opposing view to mine. That's fine. Nothing personal in this at all, you suggest anyone who doesn't agree with you are being taken in and pretty much stupid. You've completely fabricated this. Hence why I said you're getting personal That is rather personal and does go some way towards the replies you get. I was pointing out how you repeat those messages either consciously or unconsciously. Personally I don't think you would insult someone by directly calling them stupid. I'm not calling anyone stupid. I'm discussing my opinions on the effect of media and government anti immigrant rhetoric. It lines up nicely with when the Tories need a distraction, and with the perception that immigration, in my example, the second biggest concern for Tory voters." You are still confusing immigration as a whole with small boat crossings. Maybe that why people don't fully understand what it is you're trying to say. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity." The leave campaigns were able to target two separate groups - the ‘we like europe but believe in sovereignty’ ones. They were targeted with one kind of advertising - and the ‘send ‘em all back’ ones - who were given a different kind of advert. Those who were staunchly remain or pro-EU received none of the above, obviously a waste of time even trying. The leave campaign was good. Very good. The remain campaign was indeed poor beyond belief. Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). That’s testament to the leave campaigns that they won - and the online campaign (plus ‘that’ bus) was an important factor. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. I'm not sure if you understand or don't understand how your words and statements play out as they are read by someone who is not as politically motivated as you are on this subject. Above you say: "even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees" The same message could have read: "even if the UK are more tolerant" This makes me feel you are planting seeds of negativity when I read it. Another subject you mention a lot is distraction used by the government, it does come across as only you and people who think like you know the truth, and anyone who disagrees is being fooled. You also add billionaires into the mix that told leave voters how to vote, and as far as I know you have never once accepted that people could vote leave based on nothing more than their own thoughts and beliefs. This is why asked you what tool is being used by the government and media, are you 100% sure the tool you mention is not being used on you? Not sure why you're making this personal. If you hold an opposing view to mine. That's fine. Nothing personal in this at all, you suggest anyone who doesn't agree with you are being taken in and pretty much stupid. You've completely fabricated this. Hence why I said you're getting personal That is rather personal and does go some way towards the replies you get. I was pointing out how you repeat those messages either consciously or unconsciously. Personally I don't think you would insult someone by directly calling them stupid. I'm not calling anyone stupid. I'm discussing my opinions on the effect of media and government anti immigrant rhetoric. It lines up nicely with when the Tories need a distraction, and with the perception that immigration, in my example, the second biggest concern for Tory voters." Immigration or illegal boat crossings? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You are still confusing immigration as a whole with small boat crossings. Maybe that why people don't fully understand what it is you're trying to say." Didn't see this  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity. The leave campaigns were able to target two separate groups - the ‘we like europe but believe in sovereignty’ ones. They were targeted with one kind of advertising - and the ‘send ‘em all back’ ones - who were given a different kind of advert. Those who were staunchly remain or pro-EU received none of the above, obviously a waste of time even trying. The leave campaign was good. Very good. The remain campaign was indeed poor beyond belief. Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). That’s testament to the leave campaigns that they won - and the online campaign (plus ‘that’ bus) was an important factor. " The remain campaign could have targeted 'we like Europe but believe in sovereignty' too. I'm assuming they did as I seen plenty of Pro-EU/Anti-Brexit messages. The fact that they chose to target people in a negative manner is their fault. As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees." That's welcome news to see such findings. What I often read in here and experience in real life talking to others about this subject is often completely opposite. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%)." You never did provide a link to where you're getting your polling data from. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. I'm not sure if you understand or don't understand how your words and statements play out as they are read by someone who is not as politically motivated as you are on this subject. Above you say: "even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees" The same message could have read: "even if the UK are more tolerant" This makes me feel you are planting seeds of negativity when I read it. Another subject you mention a lot is distraction used by the government, it does come across as only you and people who think like you know the truth, and anyone who disagrees is being fooled. You also add billionaires into the mix that told leave voters how to vote, and as far as I know you have never once accepted that people could vote leave based on nothing more than their own thoughts and beliefs. This is why asked you what tool is being used by the government and media, are you 100% sure the tool you mention is not being used on you? Not sure why you're making this personal. If you hold an opposing view to mine. That's fine. Nothing personal in this at all, you suggest anyone who doesn't agree with you are being taken in and pretty much stupid. You've completely fabricated this. Hence why I said you're getting personal That is rather personal and does go some way towards the replies you get. I was pointing out how you repeat those messages either consciously or unconsciously. Personally I don't think you would insult someone by directly calling them stupid. I'm not calling anyone stupid. I'm discussing my opinions on the effect of media and government anti immigrant rhetoric. It lines up nicely with when the Tories need a distraction, and with the perception that immigration, in my example, the second biggest concern for Tory voters. You are still confusing immigration as a whole with small boat crossings. Maybe that why people don't fully understand what it is you're trying to say." Fair enough | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). You never did provide a link to where you're getting your polling data from." Feel free to Google. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity. The leave campaigns were able to target two separate groups - the ‘we like europe but believe in sovereignty’ ones. They were targeted with one kind of advertising - and the ‘send ‘em all back’ ones - who were given a different kind of advert. Those who were staunchly remain or pro-EU received none of the above, obviously a waste of time even trying. The leave campaign was good. Very good. The remain campaign was indeed poor beyond belief. Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). That’s testament to the leave campaigns that they won - and the online campaign (plus ‘that’ bus) was an important factor. The remain campaign could have targeted 'we like Europe but believe in sovereignty' too. I'm assuming they did as I seen plenty of Pro-EU/Anti-Brexit messages. The fact that they chose to target people in a negative manner is their fault. As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it." Remain won the debate at every turn. People didn't want to hear it, and believed the simple solutions to complex problems offered by the leave campaigns. The proof is in the brexit pudding. So to speak. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity. The leave campaigns were able to target two separate groups - the ‘we like europe but believe in sovereignty’ ones. They were targeted with one kind of advertising - and the ‘send ‘em all back’ ones - who were given a different kind of advert. Those who were staunchly remain or pro-EU received none of the above, obviously a waste of time even trying. The leave campaign was good. Very good. The remain campaign was indeed poor beyond belief. Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). That’s testament to the leave campaigns that they won - and the online campaign (plus ‘that’ bus) was an important factor. The remain campaign could have targeted 'we like Europe but believe in sovereignty' too. I'm assuming they did as I seen plenty of Pro-EU/Anti-Brexit messages. The fact that they chose to target people in a negative manner is their fault. As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. People didn't want to hear it, and believed the simple solutions to complex problems offered by the leave campaigns. The proof is in the brexit pudding. So to speak. " This is a fair point - who wins a debate, the one who produces memorable lies or the one who presents boring facts? There was no economic argument for leaving, as we now see, but the leave campaign presented a memorable economic lie. The leave campaign was undoubtedly effective - but remain failed to counter the lies effectively, nor present an impassioned argument for remain. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity. The leave campaigns were able to target two separate groups - the ‘we like europe but believe in sovereignty’ ones. They were targeted with one kind of advertising - and the ‘send ‘em all back’ ones - who were given a different kind of advert. Those who were staunchly remain or pro-EU received none of the above, obviously a waste of time even trying. The leave campaign was good. Very good. The remain campaign was indeed poor beyond belief. Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). That’s testament to the leave campaigns that they won - and the online campaign (plus ‘that’ bus) was an important factor. The remain campaign could have targeted 'we like Europe but believe in sovereignty' too. I'm assuming they did as I seen plenty of Pro-EU/Anti-Brexit messages. The fact that they chose to target people in a negative manner is their fault. As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. People didn't want to hear it, and believed the simple solutions to complex problems offered by the leave campaigns. The proof is in the brexit pudding. So to speak. This is a fair point - who wins a debate, the one who produces memorable lies or the one who presents boring facts? There was no economic argument for leaving, as we now see, but the leave campaign presented a memorable economic lie. The leave campaign was undoubtedly effective - but remain failed to counter the lies effectively, nor present an impassioned argument for remain." I agree. I wouldn't blame the remain campaign for the brexit clusterfuck, as some people do. But they played a part. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You never did provide a link to where you're getting your polling data from." "Feel free to Google." Feel free to tell me which search terms to use, or to DM me the link if you're worried about posting it here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it." "Remain won the debate at every turn." I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity. The leave campaigns were able to target two separate groups - the ‘we like europe but believe in sovereignty’ ones. They were targeted with one kind of advertising - and the ‘send ‘em all back’ ones - who were given a different kind of advert. Those who were staunchly remain or pro-EU received none of the above, obviously a waste of time even trying. The leave campaign was good. Very good. The remain campaign was indeed poor beyond belief. Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). That’s testament to the leave campaigns that they won - and the online campaign (plus ‘that’ bus) was an important factor. The remain campaign could have targeted 'we like Europe but believe in sovereignty' too. I'm assuming they did as I seen plenty of Pro-EU/Anti-Brexit messages. The fact that they chose to target people in a negative manner is their fault. As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. People didn't want to hear it, and believed the simple solutions to complex problems offered by the leave campaigns. The proof is in the brexit pudding. So to speak. This is a fair point - who wins a debate, the one who produces memorable lies or the one who presents boring facts? There was no economic argument for leaving, as we now see, but the leave campaign presented a memorable economic lie. The leave campaign was undoubtedly effective - but remain failed to counter the lies effectively, nor present an impassioned argument for remain." noone won the debate because it was agreed what the debate was on. Leaving the EU has a very tight definition that noone really was debating (hence "not the brexit I voted for" bono etc.) And if you're not debating that the what are you debating? Secondly, even if there some pre agreed definition, imo remain lost because it won the debates that people didn't care about (at least when it came to deciding) and didn't even turn up to get debates they did care about, or played their hand poorly versus leave ("We can control immigration under the EU" is a shit position. "We will bring in xyz controls to manage your concern" may have tipped a few over.) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds." You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist"." The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity. The leave campaigns were able to target two separate groups - the ‘we like europe but believe in sovereignty’ ones. They were targeted with one kind of advertising - and the ‘send ‘em all back’ ones - who were given a different kind of advert. Those who were staunchly remain or pro-EU received none of the above, obviously a waste of time even trying. The leave campaign was good. Very good. The remain campaign was indeed poor beyond belief. Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). That’s testament to the leave campaigns that they won - and the online campaign (plus ‘that’ bus) was an important factor. The remain campaign could have targeted 'we like Europe but believe in sovereignty' too. I'm assuming they did as I seen plenty of Pro-EU/Anti-Brexit messages. The fact that they chose to target people in a negative manner is their fault. As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. People didn't want to hear it, and believed the simple solutions to complex problems offered by the leave campaigns. The proof is in the brexit pudding. So to speak. " You can think that remain 'won the debate at every turn' and 'the proof is in the Brexit pudding' The reality is that Leave won the vote, which means that inevitably Remain lost the overall debate. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds." And whilst leave changed minds (or at least energised traditional non-voters to get out there), they sold a crock - as everyone is now discovering. ‘Project fear’ may have been overplayed, but it was closer to the truth than ‘sunlit uplands’ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did." The vitriol wasn’t one sided - at least on social media. Remainers were called traitors, accused of ‘talking the country down’ and so on. (I always wondered why the leavers couldn’t simply talk it back up again if they were the majority…) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did." So those individuals ruined the remain debate even though they had nothing to do with the remain campaign? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity. The leave campaigns were able to target two separate groups - the ‘we like europe but believe in sovereignty’ ones. They were targeted with one kind of advertising - and the ‘send ‘em all back’ ones - who were given a different kind of advert. Those who were staunchly remain or pro-EU received none of the above, obviously a waste of time even trying. The leave campaign was good. Very good. The remain campaign was indeed poor beyond belief. Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). That’s testament to the leave campaigns that they won - and the online campaign (plus ‘that’ bus) was an important factor. The remain campaign could have targeted 'we like Europe but believe in sovereignty' too. I'm assuming they did as I seen plenty of Pro-EU/Anti-Brexit messages. The fact that they chose to target people in a negative manner is their fault. As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. People didn't want to hear it, and believed the simple solutions to complex problems offered by the leave campaigns. The proof is in the brexit pudding. So to speak. You can think that remain 'won the debate at every turn' and 'the proof is in the Brexit pudding' The reality is that Leave won the vote, which means that inevitably Remain lost the overall debate." How about this perspective. Remain: leaving the EU will be long, complex, costly and provide little to no benefits. As evidenced by A, B, C, D etc. Leave: brexit will be great, there is no downside. There is no evidence to back this up. The real consequences of leaving are "project fear". Remain won the debate at every turn. People were not convinced to leave the EU on logic, information, debate, evidence. Whatever it was, I'm sure we all have our ideas. Yours is that they didn't like being called "racists" by some people. Which is nothing to do with the debate. Who was right about brexit. Has it turned out to be A. Bad for the country, long, complex, providing little to no benefit. Or is it B. Amazing, with no downside? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did. The vitriol wasn’t one sided - at least on social media. Remainers were called traitors, accused of ‘talking the country down’ and so on. (I always wondered why the leavers couldn’t simply talk it back up again if they were the majority…)" Traitors vs racists? I'm not saying it didn't happen but are we really comparing those 2 words? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did. So those individuals ruined the remain debate even though they had nothing to do with the remain campaign?" Same with the 'thick, racist leave voters', they weren't part of the campaign. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity. The leave campaigns were able to target two separate groups - the ‘we like europe but believe in sovereignty’ ones. They were targeted with one kind of advertising - and the ‘send ‘em all back’ ones - who were given a different kind of advert. Those who were staunchly remain or pro-EU received none of the above, obviously a waste of time even trying. The leave campaign was good. Very good. The remain campaign was indeed poor beyond belief. Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). That’s testament to the leave campaigns that they won - and the online campaign (plus ‘that’ bus) was an important factor. The remain campaign could have targeted 'we like Europe but believe in sovereignty' too. I'm assuming they did as I seen plenty of Pro-EU/Anti-Brexit messages. The fact that they chose to target people in a negative manner is their fault. As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. People didn't want to hear it, and believed the simple solutions to complex problems offered by the leave campaigns. The proof is in the brexit pudding. So to speak. You can think that remain 'won the debate at every turn' and 'the proof is in the Brexit pudding' The reality is that Leave won the vote, which means that inevitably Remain lost the overall debate. How about this perspective. Remain: leaving the EU will be long, complex, costly and provide little to no benefits. As evidenced by A, B, C, D etc. Leave: brexit will be great, there is no downside. There is no evidence to back this up. The real consequences of leaving are "project fear". Remain won the debate at every turn. People were not convinced to leave the EU on logic, information, debate, evidence. Whatever it was, I'm sure we all have our ideas. Yours is that they didn't like being called "racists" by some people. Which is nothing to do with the debate. Who was right about brexit. Has it turned out to be A. Bad for the country, long, complex, providing little to no benefit. Or is it B. Amazing, with no downside?" Do you genuinely believe the debate was only between 2 official campaigns? That's a little niave. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did. The vitriol wasn’t one sided - at least on social media. Remainers were called traitors, accused of ‘talking the country down’ and so on. (I always wondered why the leavers couldn’t simply talk it back up again if they were the majority…) Traitors vs racists? I'm not saying it didn't happen but are we really comparing those 2 words?" Yes. We’re talking about political debate - not the playground. Both were unacceptable and tiresome. As were actual MP’s using phrases like ‘remoaner’ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did. The vitriol wasn’t one sided - at least on social media. Remainers were called traitors, accused of ‘talking the country down’ and so on. (I always wondered why the leavers couldn’t simply talk it back up again if they were the majority…) Traitors vs racists? I'm not saying it didn't happen but are we really comparing those 2 words? Yes. We’re talking about political debate - not the playground. Both were unacceptable and tiresome. As were actual MP’s using phrases like ‘remoaner’ " Whether you like it or not, it turned into a playground on both sides. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did. The vitriol wasn’t one sided - at least on social media. Remainers were called traitors, accused of ‘talking the country down’ and so on. (I always wondered why the leavers couldn’t simply talk it back up again if they were the majority…) Traitors vs racists? I'm not saying it didn't happen but are we really comparing those 2 words? Yes. We’re talking about political debate - not the playground. Both were unacceptable and tiresome. As were actual MP’s using phrases like ‘remoaner’ Whether you like it or not, it turned into a playground on both sides." Agreed. A fine example of referendums being a generally bad idea. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did. The vitriol wasn’t one sided - at least on social media. Remainers were called traitors, accused of ‘talking the country down’ and so on. (I always wondered why the leavers couldn’t simply talk it back up again if they were the majority…) Traitors vs racists? I'm not saying it didn't happen but are we really comparing those 2 words? Yes. We’re talking about political debate - not the playground. Both were unacceptable and tiresome. As were actual MP’s using phrases like ‘remoaner’ Whether you like it or not, it turned into a playground on both sides. Agreed. A fine example of referendums being a generally bad idea." I don't think they are a bad idea tbh, they give us an idea of the countries feelings towards certain matters. Parliament fucked Brexit, not the people. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity. The leave campaigns were able to target two separate groups - the ‘we like europe but believe in sovereignty’ ones. They were targeted with one kind of advertising - and the ‘send ‘em all back’ ones - who were given a different kind of advert. Those who were staunchly remain or pro-EU received none of the above, obviously a waste of time even trying. The leave campaign was good. Very good. The remain campaign was indeed poor beyond belief. Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). That’s testament to the leave campaigns that they won - and the online campaign (plus ‘that’ bus) was an important factor. The remain campaign could have targeted 'we like Europe but believe in sovereignty' too. I'm assuming they did as I seen plenty of Pro-EU/Anti-Brexit messages. The fact that they chose to target people in a negative manner is their fault. As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. People didn't want to hear it, and believed the simple solutions to complex problems offered by the leave campaigns. The proof is in the brexit pudding. So to speak. You can think that remain 'won the debate at every turn' and 'the proof is in the Brexit pudding' The reality is that Leave won the vote, which means that inevitably Remain lost the overall debate. How about this perspective. Remain: leaving the EU will be long, complex, costly and provide little to no benefits. As evidenced by A, B, C, D etc. Leave: brexit will be great, there is no downside. There is no evidence to back this up. The real consequences of leaving are "project fear". Remain won the debate at every turn. People were not convinced to leave the EU on logic, information, debate, evidence. Whatever it was, I'm sure we all have our ideas. Yours is that they didn't like being called "racists" by some people. Which is nothing to do with the debate. Who was right about brexit. Has it turned out to be A. Bad for the country, long, complex, providing little to no benefit. Or is it B. Amazing, with no downside? Do you genuinely believe the debate was only between 2 official campaigns? That's a little niave." Are we opening up the discussion to cover Dave Vs Bob in the Crown on Thursday 28th Feb. Susan Vs Doris on Sun lunchtime etc etc? In which case. I am out. I can't comment on any of that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did. The vitriol wasn’t one sided - at least on social media. Remainers were called traitors, accused of ‘talking the country down’ and so on. (I always wondered why the leavers couldn’t simply talk it back up again if they were the majority…) Traitors vs racists? I'm not saying it didn't happen but are we really comparing those 2 words? Yes. We’re talking about political debate - not the playground. Both were unacceptable and tiresome. As were actual MP’s using phrases like ‘remoaner’ Whether you like it or not, it turned into a playground on both sides. Agreed. A fine example of referendums being a generally bad idea. I don't think they are a bad idea tbh, they give us an idea of the countries feelings towards certain matters. Parliament fucked Brexit, not the people." In the sense that Brexit should have been (at most) EFTA and not full departure, I agree. But yes, single referendums on complex subjects with enormous Impacts, coupled with an enormously apolitical public - recipe for disaster. At least a confirmatory vote or requirement for a supermajority should be required. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity. The leave campaigns were able to target two separate groups - the ‘we like europe but believe in sovereignty’ ones. They were targeted with one kind of advertising - and the ‘send ‘em all back’ ones - who were given a different kind of advert. Those who were staunchly remain or pro-EU received none of the above, obviously a waste of time even trying. The leave campaign was good. Very good. The remain campaign was indeed poor beyond belief. Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). That’s testament to the leave campaigns that they won - and the online campaign (plus ‘that’ bus) was an important factor. The remain campaign could have targeted 'we like Europe but believe in sovereignty' too. I'm assuming they did as I seen plenty of Pro-EU/Anti-Brexit messages. The fact that they chose to target people in a negative manner is their fault. As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. People didn't want to hear it, and believed the simple solutions to complex problems offered by the leave campaigns. The proof is in the brexit pudding. So to speak. You can think that remain 'won the debate at every turn' and 'the proof is in the Brexit pudding' The reality is that Leave won the vote, which means that inevitably Remain lost the overall debate. How about this perspective. Remain: leaving the EU will be long, complex, costly and provide little to no benefits. As evidenced by A, B, C, D etc. Leave: brexit will be great, there is no downside. There is no evidence to back this up. The real consequences of leaving are "project fear". Remain won the debate at every turn. People were not convinced to leave the EU on logic, information, debate, evidence. Whatever it was, I'm sure we all have our ideas. Yours is that they didn't like being called "racists" by some people. Which is nothing to do with the debate. Who was right about brexit. Has it turned out to be A. Bad for the country, long, complex, providing little to no benefit. Or is it B. Amazing, with no downside? Do you genuinely believe the debate was only between 2 official campaigns? That's a little niave. Are we opening up the discussion to cover Dave Vs Bob in the Crown on Thursday 28th Feb. Susan Vs Doris on Sun lunchtime etc etc? In which case. I am out. I can't comment on any of that. " No were opening up the debate to cover both sides as a whole, not just official campaigns. As I said, I think it would be niave to just dismiss everyone other than official campaigns | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did. The vitriol wasn’t one sided - at least on social media. Remainers were called traitors, accused of ‘talking the country down’ and so on. (I always wondered why the leavers couldn’t simply talk it back up again if they were the majority…) Traitors vs racists? I'm not saying it didn't happen but are we really comparing those 2 words? Yes. We’re talking about political debate - not the playground. Both were unacceptable and tiresome. As were actual MP’s using phrases like ‘remoaner’ Whether you like it or not, it turned into a playground on both sides. Agreed. A fine example of referendums being a generally bad idea. I don't think they are a bad idea tbh, they give us an idea of the countries feelings towards certain matters. Parliament fucked Brexit, not the people. In the sense that Brexit should have been (at most) EFTA and not full departure, I agree. But yes, single referendums on complex subjects with enormous Impacts, coupled with an enormously apolitical public - recipe for disaster. At least a confirmatory vote or requirement for a supermajority should be required. " Parliament had plenty to discuss re. how the exit happened. What we needed was a cross-party committee to implement a proper deal but instead they chose to fight, nothing new there. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity. The leave campaigns were able to target two separate groups - the ‘we like europe but believe in sovereignty’ ones. They were targeted with one kind of advertising - and the ‘send ‘em all back’ ones - who were given a different kind of advert. Those who were staunchly remain or pro-EU received none of the above, obviously a waste of time even trying. The leave campaign was good. Very good. The remain campaign was indeed poor beyond belief. Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). That’s testament to the leave campaigns that they won - and the online campaign (plus ‘that’ bus) was an important factor. The remain campaign could have targeted 'we like Europe but believe in sovereignty' too. I'm assuming they did as I seen plenty of Pro-EU/Anti-Brexit messages. The fact that they chose to target people in a negative manner is their fault. As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. People didn't want to hear it, and believed the simple solutions to complex problems offered by the leave campaigns. The proof is in the brexit pudding. So to speak. You can think that remain 'won the debate at every turn' and 'the proof is in the Brexit pudding' The reality is that Leave won the vote, which means that inevitably Remain lost the overall debate. How about this perspective. Remain: leaving the EU will be long, complex, costly and provide little to no benefits. As evidenced by A, B, C, D etc. Leave: brexit will be great, there is no downside. There is no evidence to back this up. The real consequences of leaving are "project fear". Remain won the debate at every turn. People were not convinced to leave the EU on logic, information, debate, evidence. Whatever it was, I'm sure we all have our ideas. Yours is that they didn't like being called "racists" by some people. Which is nothing to do with the debate. Who was right about brexit. Has it turned out to be A. Bad for the country, long, complex, providing little to no benefit. Or is it B. Amazing, with no downside? Do you genuinely believe the debate was only between 2 official campaigns? That's a little niave. Are we opening up the discussion to cover Dave Vs Bob in the Crown on Thursday 28th Feb. Susan Vs Doris on Sun lunchtime etc etc? In which case. I am out. I can't comment on any of that. No were opening up the debate to cover both sides as a whole, not just official campaigns. As I said, I think it would be niave to just dismiss everyone other than official campaigns" Fair enough. On the whole the remain camp had information and evidence. The leave camp had neither. Result of brexit = much closer to what the remain camp said it would be like. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity. The leave campaigns were able to target two separate groups - the ‘we like europe but believe in sovereignty’ ones. They were targeted with one kind of advertising - and the ‘send ‘em all back’ ones - who were given a different kind of advert. Those who were staunchly remain or pro-EU received none of the above, obviously a waste of time even trying. The leave campaign was good. Very good. The remain campaign was indeed poor beyond belief. Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). That’s testament to the leave campaigns that they won - and the online campaign (plus ‘that’ bus) was an important factor. The remain campaign could have targeted 'we like Europe but believe in sovereignty' too. I'm assuming they did as I seen plenty of Pro-EU/Anti-Brexit messages. The fact that they chose to target people in a negative manner is their fault. As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. People didn't want to hear it, and believed the simple solutions to complex problems offered by the leave campaigns. The proof is in the brexit pudding. So to speak. You can think that remain 'won the debate at every turn' and 'the proof is in the Brexit pudding' The reality is that Leave won the vote, which means that inevitably Remain lost the overall debate. How about this perspective. Remain: leaving the EU will be long, complex, costly and provide little to no benefits. As evidenced by A, B, C, D etc. Leave: brexit will be great, there is no downside. There is no evidence to back this up. The real consequences of leaving are "project fear". Remain won the debate at every turn. People were not convinced to leave the EU on logic, information, debate, evidence. Whatever it was, I'm sure we all have our ideas. Yours is that they didn't like being called "racists" by some people. Which is nothing to do with the debate. Who was right about brexit. Has it turned out to be A. Bad for the country, long, complex, providing little to no benefit. Or is it B. Amazing, with no downside? Do you genuinely believe the debate was only between 2 official campaigns? That's a little niave. Are we opening up the discussion to cover Dave Vs Bob in the Crown on Thursday 28th Feb. Susan Vs Doris on Sun lunchtime etc etc? In which case. I am out. I can't comment on any of that. No were opening up the debate to cover both sides as a whole, not just official campaigns. As I said, I think it would be niave to just dismiss everyone other than official campaigns Fair enough. On the whole the remain camp had information and evidence. The leave camp had neither. Result of brexit = much closer to what the remain camp said it would be like. " We disagree but I don't think there's much point in continuing. Remain won the battles but lost the war. That's the reality of it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees. I'm very hopeful that this forum isn't a representative cross section of British society. Tbf, I don't see as much negativity towards refugees than some here do. This article would confirm my thoughts. It's interesting, thank you for sharing. It is contrary to what I would have thought. Not from this forum necessarily. But from the general level of anti immigrant rhetoric in the media here. Still, given the actual levels of immigration shows how little influence the far right media actually has. I don't understand your point. Immigration is used by the government and media as a tool. What does this tool allow governments and media to do? You're really asking this question? Amazing. Divert attention from whatever the latest scandal is. To blame for all the problems in the country. To drum up support from people who think some people in a small boat are the cause of all their problems. Etc. Do you think the government and media uses this tool to distract the idiot public with any other topics, or is it just immigration? Do you think maybe it's more that other people are concerned about immigration but you are not? You don't understand why this is the case so you think there is some kind of Machiavellian manipulation going on? Why can you see this but the rest of the idiot public can't? Is it the tin foil hat that protects you? Healing the divide as always. Not sure why you keep calling people "idiots". You think I'm a gullible fool for being concerned about immigration, that I'm so stupid that I can't see that I'm just being manipulated by the Far Right BBC and Guardian on behalf of their Tory Masters. If I were more intelligent or resilient I'd see this. Yet you criticise me for being divisive. You made all of that up, then got offended by it. I poke fun at you for complaining that the UK is divided, then posting the most divisive nonsense you can think of. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're being ironic, and I'm joining in. If you're for real, then sad times. Tory immigration policy has been an epic failure, the numbers speak for themselves. Quite why the government would conspire with the hostile media to draw attention to its worst policy failure is a mystery. Works though. I know own your thoughts on it and wouldn't necessarily disagree that thoughts thoughts are what is attempted. However, do you really think it works? According to the poll it doesn't. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the media and the Tories pushing the anti immigrant rhetoric drums up support. There's an article in the Politico from March titled "stop the boats - now the second biggest concern of UK Tory voters". As one, of many examples to evidence this. Let's not forget that immigration was used as a tool to persuade people to vote to leave the EU. And the final point is that, even if the UK is less intolerant towards refugees. That intolerance still exists. It's my opinion that the Tory party use this to their advantage. Of course intolerance exists, it exists on every topic worldwide. Your article from politico (I haven't read it) says its the second biggest concern among Tory voters, does that tell you that Tories are intolerant to immigrants or that they see a massive problem with small boats? They aren't one and the same. It's evidence that Tory voters have small boats as their second biggest concern. I can't say if their analysis is correct or not. I just intended it to evidence the effectiveness of the anti immigrant rhetoric spouted by the Government and by the right leaning media. I don't think it's a coincidence that we see the same cycle over and over. 1. Some Tory scandal or other. 2. Increase in anti immigrant rhetoric. 3. Small boats become the second biggest concern for Tory voters (as an example). I appreciate the way you see it even if I don't agree. The poll I've posted manages to contradict your article. I genuinely don't think the media really are as powerful as you'd like to believe, I suppose if that's true you wouldn't be able to blame them though. Traditional media aren’t as powerful as they once were, true - but we consume our media in different ways now and the effect is still powerful. Perhaps even more so, with viral YouTube clips, email schemes, targeted advertising etc. I keep hearing that it's powerful, I've yet to see it proven just how powerful. The UK sit 3rd highest in positivity towards immigrants, yet we don't hear about any other country. Its all algorithms and echo chambers. There’s some very good books by Tim Shipman on the recut referendum (all out war) and the following year (Fall Out) which discuss just how powerful the Leave camp’s social media campaigns were - and how it caught everyone on the hop as it hadn’t been used in the U.K prior. I didn’t see any overt advertising from the leave camps in the run up to the referendum - and that’s the point. I’m not their target. I have no idea Leave ran an effective campaign, just as I believe Remain ran an uneffective campaign. It is my belief that Remain actually done more to lose that campaign than Leave did to win it, far too much negativity. The leave campaigns were able to target two separate groups - the ‘we like europe but believe in sovereignty’ ones. They were targeted with one kind of advertising - and the ‘send ‘em all back’ ones - who were given a different kind of advert. Those who were staunchly remain or pro-EU received none of the above, obviously a waste of time even trying. The leave campaign was good. Very good. The remain campaign was indeed poor beyond belief. Frankly given the historic nature of polling, it should have been a comfortable remain win - we’re traditionally a country which was ambivalent about Europe, but also not prone to rocking the boat, and by the 1990’s hardcore eurosceptics were always a vanishing minority (around 10%). That’s testament to the leave campaigns that they won - and the online campaign (plus ‘that’ bus) was an important factor. The remain campaign could have targeted 'we like Europe but believe in sovereignty' too. I'm assuming they did as I seen plenty of Pro-EU/Anti-Brexit messages. The fact that they chose to target people in a negative manner is their fault. As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. People didn't want to hear it, and believed the simple solutions to complex problems offered by the leave campaigns. The proof is in the brexit pudding. So to speak. You can think that remain 'won the debate at every turn' and 'the proof is in the Brexit pudding' The reality is that Leave won the vote, which means that inevitably Remain lost the overall debate. How about this perspective. Remain: leaving the EU will be long, complex, costly and provide little to no benefits. As evidenced by A, B, C, D etc. Leave: brexit will be great, there is no downside. There is no evidence to back this up. The real consequences of leaving are "project fear". Remain won the debate at every turn. People were not convinced to leave the EU on logic, information, debate, evidence. Whatever it was, I'm sure we all have our ideas. Yours is that they didn't like being called "racists" by some people. Which is nothing to do with the debate. Who was right about brexit. Has it turned out to be A. Bad for the country, long, complex, providing little to no benefit. Or is it B. Amazing, with no downside? Do you genuinely believe the debate was only between 2 official campaigns? That's a little niave. Are we opening up the discussion to cover Dave Vs Bob in the Crown on Thursday 28th Feb. Susan Vs Doris on Sun lunchtime etc etc? In which case. I am out. I can't comment on any of that. No were opening up the debate to cover both sides as a whole, not just official campaigns. As I said, I think it would be niave to just dismiss everyone other than official campaigns Fair enough. On the whole the remain camp had information and evidence. The leave camp had neither. Result of brexit = much closer to what the remain camp said it would be like. We disagree but I don't think there's much point in continuing. Remain won the battles but lost the war. That's the reality of it." I agree with the battles & war comment. 
I'd see it like that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did. The vitriol wasn’t one sided - at least on social media. Remainers were called traitors, accused of ‘talking the country down’ and so on. (I always wondered why the leavers couldn’t simply talk it back up again if they were the majority…) Traitors vs racists? I'm not saying it didn't happen but are we really comparing those 2 words? Yes. We’re talking about political debate - not the playground. Both were unacceptable and tiresome. As were actual MP’s using phrases like ‘remoaner’ Whether you like it or not, it turned into a playground on both sides. Agreed. A fine example of referendums being a generally bad idea. I don't think they are a bad idea tbh, they give us an idea of the countries feelings towards certain matters. Parliament fucked Brexit, not the people. In the sense that Brexit should have been (at most) EFTA and not full departure, I agree. But yes, single referendums on complex subjects with enormous Impacts, coupled with an enormously apolitical public - recipe for disaster. At least a confirmatory vote or requirement for a supermajority should be required. Parliament had plenty to discuss re. how the exit happened. What we needed was a cross-party committee to implement a proper deal but instead they chose to fight, nothing new there." Indeed. Theresa May set out the red lines immediately and shouldn’t have. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did. The vitriol wasn’t one sided - at least on social media. Remainers were called traitors, accused of ‘talking the country down’ and so on. (I always wondered why the leavers couldn’t simply talk it back up again if they were the majority…) Traitors vs racists? I'm not saying it didn't happen but are we really comparing those 2 words? Yes. We’re talking about political debate - not the playground. Both were unacceptable and tiresome. As were actual MP’s using phrases like ‘remoaner’ Whether you like it or not, it turned into a playground on both sides. Agreed. A fine example of referendums being a generally bad idea. I don't think they are a bad idea tbh, they give us an idea of the countries feelings towards certain matters. Parliament fucked Brexit, not the people." semantics but brexit was delivered. Parliament may have fucked up capitalising on brexit in some people's minds, but a) that wa always the risk and b) that was the public's choice through voting in the MPs that it did (different people will see this as.me meaning the remainer MPs sabotaging the will of the people or incompetent brexiteers who couldn't deliver on what they promised). Either which way, if one voted for brexit, you voted knowing it could be fucked up, and took that risk. Imo, that's still on you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did. The vitriol wasn’t one sided - at least on social media. Remainers were called traitors, accused of ‘talking the country down’ and so on. (I always wondered why the leavers couldn’t simply talk it back up again if they were the majority…) Traitors vs racists? I'm not saying it didn't happen but are we really comparing those 2 words? Yes. We’re talking about political debate - not the playground. Both were unacceptable and tiresome. As were actual MP’s using phrases like ‘remoaner’ Whether you like it or not, it turned into a playground on both sides. Agreed. A fine example of referendums being a generally bad idea. I don't think they are a bad idea tbh, they give us an idea of the countries feelings towards certain matters. Parliament fucked Brexit, not the people. semantics but brexit was delivered. Parliament may have fucked up capitalising on brexit in some people's minds, but a) that wa always the risk and b) that was the public's choice through voting in the MPs that it did (different people will see this as.me meaning the remainer MPs sabotaging the will of the people or incompetent brexiteers who couldn't deliver on what they promised). Either which way, if one voted for brexit, you voted knowing it could be fucked up, and took that risk. Imo, that's still on you. " Was there any form of brexit that would have delivered anything positive? A lot of people fought hard to avoid the most damaging catastrophic hard brexit championed by the disaster capitalists in the ERG. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did. The vitriol wasn’t one sided - at least on social media. Remainers were called traitors, accused of ‘talking the country down’ and so on. (I always wondered why the leavers couldn’t simply talk it back up again if they were the majority…) Traitors vs racists? I'm not saying it didn't happen but are we really comparing those 2 words? Yes. We’re talking about political debate - not the playground. Both were unacceptable and tiresome. As were actual MP’s using phrases like ‘remoaner’ Whether you like it or not, it turned into a playground on both sides. Agreed. A fine example of referendums being a generally bad idea. I don't think they are a bad idea tbh, they give us an idea of the countries feelings towards certain matters. Parliament fucked Brexit, not the people. semantics but brexit was delivered. Parliament may have fucked up capitalising on brexit in some people's minds, but a) that wa always the risk and b) that was the public's choice through voting in the MPs that it did (different people will see this as.me meaning the remainer MPs sabotaging the will of the people or incompetent brexiteers who couldn't deliver on what they promised). Either which way, if one voted for brexit, you voted knowing it could be fucked up, and took that risk. Imo, that's still on you. Was there any form of brexit that would have delivered anything positive? A lot of people fought hard to avoid the most damaging catastrophic hard brexit championed by the disaster capitalists in the ERG." Even the ‘best’ Brexit - EFTA - would have impacted us, by removing our say at the EU table, and making us a law taker rather than a law maker. But it would have swerved the economic hit and the lost citizens rights. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I said, Remain lost that debate, it wasn't Leave that won it. Remain won the debate at every turn. I disagree. In my recollection the debate always came down to "you're racist" / "no I'm not". Remain often came away looking like the winner, but all they had done is to stop their opponents speaking, they hadn't actually changed anyone's minds. You recall incorrectly. Didn't see the remain campaign once call anyone "racist". The campaign may not have called anyone racist but more than plenty of remainers did. The vitriol wasn’t one sided - at least on social media. Remainers were called traitors, accused of ‘talking the country down’ and so on. (I always wondered why the leavers couldn’t simply talk it back up again if they were the majority…) Traitors vs racists? I'm not saying it didn't happen but are we really comparing those 2 words? Yes. We’re talking about political debate - not the playground. Both were unacceptable and tiresome. As were actual MP’s using phrases like ‘remoaner’ Whether you like it or not, it turned into a playground on both sides. Agreed. A fine example of referendums being a generally bad idea. I don't think they are a bad idea tbh, they give us an idea of the countries feelings towards certain matters. Parliament fucked Brexit, not the people. semantics but brexit was delivered. Parliament may have fucked up capitalising on brexit in some people's minds, but a) that wa always the risk and b) that was the public's choice through voting in the MPs that it did (different people will see this as.me meaning the remainer MPs sabotaging the will of the people or incompetent brexiteers who couldn't deliver on what they promised). Either which way, if one voted for brexit, you voted knowing it could be fucked up, and took that risk. Imo, that's still on you. Was there any form of brexit that would have delivered anything positive? A lot of people fought hard to avoid the most damaging catastrophic hard brexit championed by the disaster capitalists in the ERG." some brexits will have some positive. Whether they offset the costs probably depends on both your views of the costs and benefits, and the importance. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/17/uk-is-among-countries-with-the-most-positive-attitude-towards-refugees-poll-finds Surely not? If this forums is anything to go by, Brits absolutely hate refugees." Can't possibly be. I was assured we were a nation of rscists and bigots | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are not all Tories Morley" All Tories are racists and bigots? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Exactly " 
So being that the Tories are the largest party in the country, we must be a nation of racists and bigots. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know " 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know " Is that Tories as in Tory MP's / minister's or Tory party members or people that vote Tory all the time or people that vote Tory sometimes | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You said that not me " Said what? You need to use the quote button? I believe I asked you a question and you said 'exactly'. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous."No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness. "You think there's 7m racists in the country? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You asked are all Tories bigots and racists " About 14m people voted Tories in the last election | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You asked are all Tories bigots and racists About 14m people voted Tories in the last election" And? Ask them not me | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You asked are all Tories bigots and racists About 14m people voted Tories in the last electionAnd? Ask them not me " You said they were all racists. Am I talking to a bot? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You implied they are racists" Does this following question look like an implication to you? "All Tories are racists and bigots?" That's what I wrote, to which your reply was 'exactly'. Fuck me sideways | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Exactly " Nice bigoted view. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My reply was to Morleymam,you then said are all Tories racists "
It's there for all to see | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
You think there's 7m racists in the country?"About 10%? Yeah. That would be about average | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness. "Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Exactly Nice bigoted view." Says the man won’t have a bad word said about Johnson | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes I have just re/read the thread and it was you who w14 million people are racists " I read the thread and it did come across as you were saying all tories are racist. If that is not what you meant it is easy to say that it wasn’t | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency "No, I was told that figure some years ago. Anecdotal - but from someone with experience in the field of discrimination. Can you present an alternative figure? Ballpark is ok. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency "It may be worse than 10% https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
No, I was told that figure some years ago. Anecdotal - but from someone with experience in the field of discrimination.
Can you present an alternative figure? Ballpark is ok. "No I can’t because it is impossible to estimate anywhere near a figure that could be taken seriously due to the nature of the question and so many other factors. But here you are, giving us anecdotal evidence from a fictional character, unless this person is the same person who is an expert in tropical diseases (I think that what it was) doubling up for the occasion and using their plucked out of the air number. You do set out your stall based on virtually nothing | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
No, I was told that figure some years ago. Anecdotal - but from someone with experience in the field of discrimination.
Can you present an alternative figure? Ballpark is ok.
No I can’t because it is impossible to estimate anywhere near a figure that could be taken seriously due to the nature of the question and so many other factors.
But here you are, giving us anecdotal evidence from a fictional character, unless this person is the same person who is an expert in tropical diseases (I think that what it was) doubling up for the occasion and using their plucked out of the air number.
You do set out your stall based on virtually nothing "No, this person is involved in HR, and is unrelated to me beyond employment. Unlike the expert on tropical disease and communicable illness who is my brother. Neither of them are fictional and I’m not quite certain why you would think so - unless of course you just like attempting to discredit people who may just have access to knowledge that you don’t possess. I agree re the complexity of ascertaining a figure for how many people are racist - if you looked at it as ‘who possesses subconscious bias?’ the figure would be much, much higher than 10%, but if presented as ‘who is an active and outright racist?’ It would be lower. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657"Do those surveys take into account children? I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So the posts from Wammski certainly appeared to say that all Tories are racists and bigots but as he did not use the quote function it may just be the timing of the posts. Wammski would you kindly confirm if you think all Tories are racists and bigots or not as the case may be. Also whatever the amount of racists there are in the UK do they only vote Tory or could some Labour or lib dems or Snp voters be racist" I absolutely do not buy that at all. There's was plenty of time elapsed between posts | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative."And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible. As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs."That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen. Were not even in the top 10, you should look East. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So the posts from Wammski certainly appeared to say that all Tories are racists and bigots but as he did not use the quote function it may just be the timing of the posts. Wammski would you kindly confirm if you think all Tories are racists and bigots or not as the case may be. Also whatever the amount of racists there are in the UK do they only vote Tory or could some Labour or lib dems or Snp voters be racist I absolutely do not buy that at all. There's was plenty of time elapsed between posts" To be honest I did not look at the exact times. He claims to be answering in response to Morleyman though I'm not sure that makes sense. Not using the quote feature makes it less clear. Possibly done on purpose but maybe just a coincidence. Personally I was just wondering if I was being accused of being a racist and bigot. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs.
That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen.
Were not even in the top 10, you should look East."It’s not a competition. 10% is probably a fair estimate, wouldn’t you say? (Depending upon the definition of racism used) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs.
That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen.
Were not even in the top 10, you should look East.
It’s not a competition.
10% is probably a fair estimate, wouldn’t you say? (Depending upon the definition of racism used)"No one said it was a competition but if you want racism wiped out you need to look east. That's what you said isn't it? 0%. I have no idea what a fair estimate is. 10% tells me there's 6m racists in the UK, I wouldn't like to think so. But like you said (depends how you define racist) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In no way did i mean all Tories are racists or torysupportors" Good to hear | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs.
That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen.
Were not even in the top 10, you should look East.
It’s not a competition.
10% is probably a fair estimate, wouldn’t you say? (Depending upon the definition of racism used)"Tell me you know nothing about accurate data without telling me you know nothing about accurate data | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs.
That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen.
Were not even in the top 10, you should look East.
It’s not a competition.
10% is probably a fair estimate, wouldn’t you say? (Depending upon the definition of racism used)
Tell me you know nothing about accurate data without telling me you know nothing about accurate data"I never claimed it was accurate data - I said it was anecdotal, but probably in the ballpark. Nice try though | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs.
That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen.
Were not even in the top 10, you should look East.
It’s not a competition.
10% is probably a fair estimate, wouldn’t you say? (Depending upon the definition of racism used)
Tell me you know nothing about accurate data without telling me you know nothing about accurate data
I never claimed it was accurate data - I said it was anecdotal, but probably in the ballpark.
Nice try though "You said just enough | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs.
That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen.
Were not even in the top 10, you should look East.
It’s not a competition.
10% is probably a fair estimate, wouldn’t you say? (Depending upon the definition of racism used)
Tell me you know nothing about accurate data without telling me you know nothing about accurate data
I never claimed it was accurate data - I said it was anecdotal, but probably in the ballpark.
Nice try though
You said just enough "If you have some hard data I’d be interested to see it, it’s quite an interesting topic. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs.
That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen.
Were not even in the top 10, you should look East.
It’s not a competition.
10% is probably a fair estimate, wouldn’t you say? (Depending upon the definition of racism used)
Tell me you know nothing about accurate data without telling me you know nothing about accurate data
I never claimed it was accurate data - I said it was anecdotal, but probably in the ballpark.
Nice try though
You said just enough
If you have some hard data I’d be interested to see it, it’s quite an interesting topic."As I said, I do not and would not dare too guess a figure based on my assumption of possibility on such an emotive subject. You do you though and throw a number into the mix because it sounds about right. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs.
That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen.
Were not even in the top 10, you should look East.
It’s not a competition.
10% is probably a fair estimate, wouldn’t you say? (Depending upon the definition of racism used)
Tell me you know nothing about accurate data without telling me you know nothing about accurate data
I never claimed it was accurate data - I said it was anecdotal, but probably in the ballpark.
Nice try though
You said just enough
If you have some hard data I’d be interested to see it, it’s quite an interesting topic.
As I said, I do not and would not dare too guess a figure based on my assumption of possibility on such an emotive subject.
You do you though and throw a number into the mix because it sounds about right."No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. Not sure what point you’re attempting to make here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs.
That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen.
Were not even in the top 10, you should look East.
It’s not a competition.
10% is probably a fair estimate, wouldn’t you say? (Depending upon the definition of racism used)
Tell me you know nothing about accurate data without telling me you know nothing about accurate data
I never claimed it was accurate data - I said it was anecdotal, but probably in the ballpark.
Nice try though
You said just enough
If you have some hard data I’d be interested to see it, it’s quite an interesting topic.
As I said, I do not and would not dare too guess a figure based on my assumption of possibility on such an emotive subject.
You do you though and throw a number into the mix because it sounds about right.
No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out.
Not sure what point you’re attempting to make here."Cohering a number into a conversation that does not hold weight. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs.
That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen.
Were not even in the top 10, you should look East.
It’s not a competition.
10% is probably a fair estimate, wouldn’t you say? (Depending upon the definition of racism used)
Tell me you know nothing about accurate data without telling me you know nothing about accurate data
I never claimed it was accurate data - I said it was anecdotal, but probably in the ballpark.
Nice try though
You said just enough
If you have some hard data I’d be interested to see it, it’s quite an interesting topic.
As I said, I do not and would not dare too guess a figure based on my assumption of possibility on such an emotive subject.
You do you though and throw a number into the mix because it sounds about right.
No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out.
Not sure what point you’re attempting to make here.
Cohering a number into a conversation that does not hold weight."Dave down the crown told me there are no racists in the UK. Not sure who's right though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs.
That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen.
Were not even in the top 10, you should look East.
It’s not a competition.
10% is probably a fair estimate, wouldn’t you say? (Depending upon the definition of racism used)
Tell me you know nothing about accurate data without telling me you know nothing about accurate data
I never claimed it was accurate data - I said it was anecdotal, but probably in the ballpark.
Nice try though
You said just enough
If you have some hard data I’d be interested to see it, it’s quite an interesting topic.
As I said, I do not and would not dare too guess a figure based on my assumption of possibility on such an emotive subject.
You do you though and throw a number into the mix because it sounds about right.
No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out.
Not sure what point you’re attempting to make here.
Cohering a number into a conversation that does not hold weight."So prove it wrong, then. I’d love it to be proven wrong, 10% is way too high for any civilised nation - but thats the figure I was given. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs.
That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen.
Were not even in the top 10, you should look East.
It’s not a competition.
10% is probably a fair estimate, wouldn’t you say? (Depending upon the definition of racism used)
Tell me you know nothing about accurate data without telling me you know nothing about accurate data
I never claimed it was accurate data - I said it was anecdotal, but probably in the ballpark.
Nice try though
You said just enough
If you have some hard data I’d be interested to see it, it’s quite an interesting topic.
As I said, I do not and would not dare too guess a figure based on my assumption of possibility on such an emotive subject.
You do you though and throw a number into the mix because it sounds about right.
No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out.
Not sure what point you’re attempting to make here.
Cohering a number into a conversation that does not hold weight.
So prove it wrong, then. I’d love it to be proven wrong, 10% is way too high for any civilised nation - but thats the figure I was given. "The burden of proof sits with the person supplying the data | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs.
That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen.
Were not even in the top 10, you should look East.
It’s not a competition.
10% is probably a fair estimate, wouldn’t you say? (Depending upon the definition of racism used)
Tell me you know nothing about accurate data without telling me you know nothing about accurate data
I never claimed it was accurate data - I said it was anecdotal, but probably in the ballpark.
Nice try though
You said just enough
If you have some hard data I’d be interested to see it, it’s quite an interesting topic.
As I said, I do not and would not dare too guess a figure based on my assumption of possibility on such an emotive subject.
You do you though and throw a number into the mix because it sounds about right.
No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out.
Not sure what point you’re attempting to make here.
Cohering a number into a conversation that does not hold weight.
So prove it wrong, then. I’d love it to be proven wrong, 10% is way too high for any civilised nation - but thats the figure I was given.
The burden of proof sits with the person supplying the data"Yeah, I probably won’t get a senior HR manager to pop on to fabs, tbf. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Tories are not everyone which i am sure you know 'A nation of' meaning largely or majority
Of course the Tories are not everyone.
Although to say this country has circa 14m racists is absolutely ludicrous.
No, it’s probably no more than about 6-7m in all fairness.
Plucking numbers out of the air again I see. I like your consistency
It may be worse than 10%
https://theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657
Do those surveys take into account children?
I'd argue that children are much less likely to be racist than adults and being that theres circa 10m under 14s in the UK, if it doesn't take those into account, its not actually representative.
And that would be a very good thing indeed. Let’s hope it’s very unrepresentative and we’re way below the figures suggested possible.
As soon as we can get to 0% bigotry (if only it were possible) the better for humanity. But of course then Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk would have to find actual jobs.
That's from utopia, unfortunately it's never gonna happen.
Were not even in the top 10, you should look East.
It’s not a competition.
10% is probably a fair estimate, wouldn’t you say? (Depending upon the definition of racism used)
Tell me you know nothing about accurate data without telling me you know nothing about accurate data
I never claimed it was accurate data - I said it was anecdotal, but probably in the ballpark.
Nice try though
You said just enough
If you have some hard data I’d be interested to see it, it’s quite an interesting topic.
As I said, I do not and would not dare too guess a figure based on my assumption of possibility on such an emotive subject.
You do you though and throw a number into the mix because it sounds about right.
No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out.
Not sure what point you’re attempting to make here.
Cohering a number into a conversation that does not hold weight.
So prove it wrong, then. I’d love it to be proven wrong, 10% is way too high for any civilised nation - but thats the figure I was given.
The burden of proof sits with the person supplying the data
Yeah, I probably won’t get a senior HR manager to pop on to fabs, tbf. "You never know they could already be on here  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
)
But the article is written by the authors it seem.
Note: no skin in this game. Trying to move the thread in as it is stuck in repeat.
"We repeated these questions on biological racism in a more recent (2019) nationally representative online survey. The findings were very similar – 19% agreed that some groups were born less intelligent, and 38% agreed that some groups were born less hard working."
https:www.theconversation.com/amp/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out." I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ..." You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think "You're a rather angry person for a so called Liberal, I'm not sure why but do you genuinely feel it helps your cause? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think
You're a rather angry person for a so called Liberal, I'm not sure why but do you genuinely feel it helps your cause?"Am I? *looks around* I’m incredibly chill, as it happens. Must be your comprehension again, I guess. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out." "I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ..." "You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think" I can see why you called yourself 'fun fella', you're just such a pleasure to talk to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think
You're a rather angry person for a so called Liberal, I'm not sure why but do you genuinely feel it helps your cause?
Am I? *looks around*
I’m incredibly chill, as it happens. Must be your comprehension again, I guess. "Is your zen like mood attributed to the brexit benefit you found you had earlier today? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think I can see why you called yourself 'fun fella', you're just such a pleasure to talk to." I am, as it happens. I just don’t appreciate being questioned and taken for a liar because o have the audacity to post (and state clearly) an anecdotal figure that I was given. As I say, you don’t like/agree, disprove it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think
You're a rather angry person for a so called Liberal, I'm not sure why but do you genuinely feel it helps your cause?
Am I? *looks around*
I’m incredibly chill, as it happens. Must be your comprehension again, I guess.
Is your zen like mood attributed to the brexit benefit you found you had earlier today?
"Nah, am still searching for those benefits. I’m sure they’ll be here any day now. David Davis said so. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think
You're a rather angry person for a so called Liberal, I'm not sure why but do you genuinely feel it helps your cause?
Am I? *looks around*
I’m incredibly chill, as it happens. Must be your comprehension again, I guess. "Looks like I'm not alone in seeing it. But if the persona you present here is chill, I'd hate to see you angry | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think I can see why you called yourself 'fun fella', you're just such a pleasure to talk to. I am, as it happens. I just don’t appreciate being questioned and taken for a liar because o have the audacity to post (and state clearly) an anecdotal figure that I was given. As I say, you don’t like/agree, disprove it." I think I know what the problem is, the word anecdotal, are using it correctly? Anecdotal(of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think I can see why you called yourself 'fun fella', you're just such a pleasure to talk to. I am, as it happens. I just don’t appreciate being questioned and taken for a liar because o have the audacity to post (and state clearly) an anecdotal figure that I was given. As I say, you don’t like/agree, disprove it. I think I know what the problem is, the word anecdotal, are using it correctly? Anecdotal(of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research." Which is why I didn’t claim it as fact. If someone can present a fact that disputes that claim, then go for it. I’d love to think we have a smaller percentage of racists in the U.K | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think
You're a rather angry person for a so called Liberal, I'm not sure why but do you genuinely feel it helps your cause?
Am I? *looks around*
I’m incredibly chill, as it happens. Must be your comprehension again, I guess.
Is your zen like mood attributed to the brexit benefit you found you had earlier today?
Nah, am still searching for those benefits. I’m sure they’ll be here any day now. David Davis said so."I've provided you a benefit. If you retire to Italy you can't be thrown out thanks to brexit | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think I can see why you called yourself 'fun fella', you're just such a pleasure to talk to. I am, as it happens. I just don’t appreciate being questioned and taken for a liar because o have the audacity to post (and state clearly) an anecdotal figure that I was given. As I say, you don’t like/agree, disprove it." As far as I seen only one person called you a liar (me) and it had absolutely nothing to do with the figures you speak of. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think
You're a rather angry person for a so called Liberal, I'm not sure why but do you genuinely feel it helps your cause?
Am I? *looks around*
I’m incredibly chill, as it happens. Must be your comprehension again, I guess.
Is your zen like mood attributed to the brexit benefit you found you had earlier today?
Nah, am still searching for those benefits. I’m sure they’ll be here any day now. David Davis said so.
I've provided you a benefit.
If you retire to Italy you can't be thrown out thanks to brexit"But I could be thrown out in the event of policy/visa change. Unlike when were an EU member. Hmmm… | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think I can see why you called yourself 'fun fella', you're just such a pleasure to talk to. I am, as it happens. I just don’t appreciate being questioned and taken for a liar because o have the audacity to post (and state clearly) an anecdotal figure that I was given. As I say, you don’t like/agree, disprove it. As far as I seen only one person called you a liar (me) and it had absolutely nothing to do with the figures you speak of." Might wanna look back a few posts, which is what I was referring to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think
You're a rather angry person for a so called Liberal, I'm not sure why but do you genuinely feel it helps your cause?
Am I? *looks around*
I’m incredibly chill, as it happens. Must be your comprehension again, I guess.
Is your zen like mood attributed to the brexit benefit you found you had earlier today?
Nah, am still searching for those benefits. I’m sure they’ll be here any day now. David Davis said so.
I've provided you a benefit.
If you retire to Italy you can't be thrown out thanks to brexit
But I could be thrown out in the event of policy/visa change. Unlike when were an EU member.
Hmmm…"I thought you could retire to Italy when we were in the EU? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think
You're a rather angry person for a so called Liberal, I'm not sure why but do you genuinely feel it helps your cause?
Am I? *looks around*
I’m incredibly chill, as it happens. Must be your comprehension again, I guess.
Is your zen like mood attributed to the brexit benefit you found you had earlier today?
Nah, am still searching for those benefits. I’m sure they’ll be here any day now. David Davis said so.
I've provided you a benefit.
If you retire to Italy you can't be thrown out thanks to brexit
But I could be thrown out in the event of policy/visa change. Unlike when were an EU member.
Hmmm…
I thought you could retire to Italy when we were in the EU? "That’s how desperate we are for Brexit positives these days. ‘In the event of a hypothetical italexit at some point in the future, your status might not have been secure had you retired there’ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think I can see why you called yourself 'fun fella', you're just such a pleasure to talk to. I am, as it happens. I just don’t appreciate being questioned and taken for a liar because o have the audacity to post (and state clearly) an anecdotal figure that I was given. As I say, you don’t like/agree, disprove it. As far as I seen only one person called you a liar (me) and it had absolutely nothing to do with the figures you speak of. Might wanna look back a few posts, which is what I was referring to. " I don't see anyone calling you a liar, I may just be missing it though, can you quote it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think
You're a rather angry person for a so called Liberal, I'm not sure why but do you genuinely feel it helps your cause?
Am I? *looks around*
I’m incredibly chill, as it happens. Must be your comprehension again, I guess.
Is your zen like mood attributed to the brexit benefit you found you had earlier today?
Nah, am still searching for those benefits. I’m sure they’ll be here any day now. David Davis said so.
I've provided you a benefit.
If you retire to Italy you can't be thrown out thanks to brexit
But I could be thrown out in the event of policy/visa change. Unlike when were an EU member.
Hmmm…
I thought you could retire to Italy when we were in the EU? "You could but if he had retired like many had before brexit he could have faced being thrown out once we left the EU. Now we are out of brexit, that can't happen so if applies through the correct channels he will be granted access and not lose it. The worry of leaving the EU is now gone so that surely is a brexit benefit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think
You're a rather angry person for a so called Liberal, I'm not sure why but do you genuinely feel it helps your cause?
Am I? *looks around*
I’m incredibly chill, as it happens. Must be your comprehension again, I guess.
Is your zen like mood attributed to the brexit benefit you found you had earlier today?
Nah, am still searching for those benefits. I’m sure they’ll be here any day now. David Davis said so.
I've provided you a benefit.
If you retire to Italy you can't be thrown out thanks to brexit
But I could be thrown out in the event of policy/visa change. Unlike when were an EU member.
Hmmm…
I thought you could retire to Italy when we were in the EU?
That’s how desperate we are for Brexit positives these days.
‘In the event of a hypothetical italexit at some point in the future, your status might not have been secure had you retired there’"I didn't say that... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think I can see why you called yourself 'fun fella', you're just such a pleasure to talk to. I am, as it happens. I just don’t appreciate being questioned and taken for a liar because o have the audacity to post (and state clearly) an anecdotal figure that I was given. As I say, you don’t like/agree, disprove it. As far as I seen only one person called you a liar (me) and it had absolutely nothing to do with the figures you speak of. Might wanna look back a few posts, which is what I was referring to. I don't see anyone calling you a liar, I may just be missing it though, can you quote it?" What do you read into “ I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ..” | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think
You're a rather angry person for a so called Liberal, I'm not sure why but do you genuinely feel it helps your cause?
Am I? *looks around*
I’m incredibly chill, as it happens. Must be your comprehension again, I guess.
Is your zen like mood attributed to the brexit benefit you found you had earlier today?
Nah, am still searching for those benefits. I’m sure they’ll be here any day now. David Davis said so.
I've provided you a benefit.
If you retire to Italy you can't be thrown out thanks to brexit
But I could be thrown out in the event of policy/visa change. Unlike when were an EU member.
Hmmm…
I thought you could retire to Italy when we were in the EU?
You could but if he had retired like many had before brexit he could have faced being thrown out once we left the EU.
Now we are out of brexit, that can't happen so if applies through the correct channels he will be granted access and not lose it.
The worry of leaving the EU is now gone so that surely is a brexit benefit."So a benefit of Brexit is that we can retire to Italy even though whilst we were in the EU we could retire to Italy | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think I can see why you called yourself 'fun fella', you're just such a pleasure to talk to. I am, as it happens. I just don’t appreciate being questioned and taken for a liar because o have the audacity to post (and state clearly) an anecdotal figure that I was given. As I say, you don’t like/agree, disprove it. As far as I seen only one person called you a liar (me) and it had absolutely nothing to do with the figures you speak of. Might wanna look back a few posts, which is what I was referring to. I don't see anyone calling you a liar, I may just be missing it though, can you quote it? What do you read into “ I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ..” " I read that as 'you're the one who said it so I'm asking you to back it up' You do often like to shout about being called a liar though, are people not allowed to ask you to back up your claims and dismiss them if you can't? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I threw a number into the mix because someone with a degree of knowledge on the subject gave it to me, anecdotally, as I pointed out. I'm sure you believe the number, because you heard it from someone that you trust and respect. But we're hearing the number from you, so ... You’re making the mistake of assuming I give a toss what you think
You're a rather angry person for a so called Liberal, I'm not sure why but do you genuinely feel it helps your cause?
Am I? *looks around*
I’m incredibly chill, as it happens. Must be your comprehension again, I guess.
Is your zen like mood attributed to the brexit benefit you found you had earlier today?
Nah, am still searching for those benefits. I’m sure they’ll be here any day now. David Davis said so.
I've provided you a benefit.
If you retire to Italy you can't be thrown out thanks to brexit
But I could be thrown out in the event of policy/visa change. Unlike when were an EU member.
Hmmm…
I thought you could retire to Italy when we were in the EU?
That’s how desperate we are for Brexit positives these days.
‘In the event of a hypothetical italexit at some point in the future, your status might not have been secure had you retired there’
I didn't say that..."Oh I’m sorry - you said Brexit, not Italexit. Yet residences were secured for those who’d already made homes in the EU pre-Brexit. So you’re presenting an even more hypothetical situation. Great benefit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
