[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I am a member of 'Joe Public'and so are DOZENS of my friends and associates as are dozens more of people who I could best term 'acquaintances', and we ALL voted for Brexit.

Among these people are four Company Directors, two Doctors, two Solicitors, several Nurses, three Policemen, several Teachers, and several SME business owners, as well as dozens of 'Blue Collar Workers, several unemployed and quite a few 'Ducker And Divers'.

The one other thing which we all have in common - apart from our Brexit vote - is that ALL of us understand the real issues concerning the EU and our membership of it.

So while you are, of course, entitled to your opinion, you will forgive me if I elect not to pay heed to it, and this is based upon the fact - that in my opinion, which I am as EQUALLY entitled to - it is ALL YOUR posts which are so ill informed and erroneous as to the true facts concerning current affairs, including politics and the EU, that they attest to YOU having the woeful LACK of any REAL understanding of the issues often debated on here, NOT 'Joe Public'.

And none of this has any effect on the majority of people on both sides who likely voted what they voted for based on soundbites and sensationalism rather than solid facts.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

And none of this has any effect on the majority of people on both sides who likely voted what they voted for based on soundbites and sensationalism rather than solid facts.

more generalised insults for tens of millions , shameful

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

And none of this has any effect on the majority of people on both sides who likely voted what they voted for based on soundbites and sensationalism rather than solid facts.

No, but I do not care about any 'majority of people on both sides' only about myself when I am being erroneously labelled and demeaned by being 'tarred with that famous 'same brush' which some use to make sweeping and mocking generalisations about 'Joe Public' - which are both arrogantly presumptive and erroneous anyway.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

No, but I do not care about any 'majority of people on both sides' only about myself when I am being erroneously labelled and demeaned by being 'tarred with that famous 'same brush' which some use to make sweeping and mocking generalisations about 'Joe Public' - which are both arrogantly presumptive and erroneous anyway.

Kirk, this isn't about you. I'm just going to repeat that for your benefit. This isn't about you. You are tarring yourself with the brush for an excuse to be outraged over something.

I said that a large number of people on both sides would have voted despite not knowing what they were actually voting for because they voted based on the headlines and soundbites. That's a true comment, most people don't understand that leaving the EU changes very little in terms of laws or Immigration yet those were the deciding factors for a lot of people who most likely didn't look into the actual issues of staying or leaving.

Expecting the public to make informed decisions based on research and impartiality is incredibly naive.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Kirk, this isn't about you. I'm just going to repeat that for your benefit. This isn't about you. You are tarring yourself with the brush for an excuse to be outraged over something.

I said that a large number of people on both sides would have voted despite not knowing what they were actually voting for because they voted based on the headlines and soundbites. That's a true comment, most people don't understand that leaving the EU changes very little in terms of laws or Immigration yet those were the deciding factors for a lot of people who most likely didn't look into the actual issues of staying or leaving.

Expecting the public to make informed decisions based on research and impartiality is incredibly naive.

Is your first paragraph referring to Kizzy's post or your later one?

In the first instance, I'm aftaid that it WAS about me. I am a member of Joe Public.

In the second instance, it is ALSO about me, because you elected to QUOTE my post and COMMENT upon it.

Your claim that I am tarring myself with the same brush is totally ludicrous Dezzy.

The demeaning post which I rightfully objected to did not state; "Joe Public but excluding Kirk".

I need NO excuse to be outraged by some of the posts on here which repeatedly demean Brexit voters as being stupid, clueless, ill informed or worse.

The text which I have emboldened is redundant if you are addressing that to me Dezzy, because I have never stated ANYWHERE any opinion which contradicts what you say in it, and that is because I AGREE with you. Some people on BOTH sides DID vote after being persuaded by sound bites and headlines.

However, SOME people is a far cry from all 'Joe Public' - which IS what I responded to.

I will take exception to your claims below however:

"most people don't understand that leaving the EU changes very little in terms of laws or Immigration yet those were the deciding factors for a lot of people who most likely didn't look into the actual issues of staying or leaving."

Simply because NO ONE KNOWS just WHAT existing actualities will or will not be affected or changed by Brexit. We have NOT even Brexited proper yet, and the WHATEVER plans the Government is working on is not being revealed to anyone.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Is your first paragraph referring to Kizzy's post or your later one?

In the first instance, I'm aftaid that it WAS about me. I am a member of Joe Public.

In the second instance, it is ALSO about me, because you elected to QUOTE my post and COMMENT upon it.

Your claim that I am tarring myself with the same brush is totally ludicrous Dezzy.

The demeaning post which I rightfully objected to did not state; "Joe Public but excluding Kirk".

I need NO excuse to be outraged by some of the posts on here which repeatedly demean Brexit voters as being stupid, clueless, ill informed or worse.

The text which I have emboldened is redundant if you are addressing that to me Dezzy, because I have never stated ANYWHERE any opinion which contradicts what you say in it, and that is because I AGREE with you. Some people on BOTH sides DID vote after being persuaded by sound bites and headlines.

However, SOME people is a far cry from all 'Joe Public' - which IS what I responded to.

I will take exception to your claims below however:

"most people don't understand that leaving the EU changes very little in terms of laws or Immigration yet those were the deciding factors for a lot of people who most likely didn't look into the actual issues of staying or leaving."

Simply because NO ONE KNOWS just WHAT existing actualities will or will not be affected or changed by Brexit. We have NOT even Brexited proper yet, and the WHATEVER plans the Government is working on is not being revealed to anyone.

You replied to my posts, none of which referred to or acknowledged you in any way. Like I said before, what I said has nothing to do with you and if you decide to tar yourself with that brush just so you can get mad about it then that's on you.

In terms of Laws or Immigration, nothing is likely to change, especially if we wish to strike a deal to enter the single market. The only affect that the Brexit has had so far is to decrease the value of the pound which is worrying in itself considering the announcement alone did that.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

You replied to my posts, none of which referred to or acknowledged you in any way. Like I said before, what I said has nothing to do with you and if you decide to tar yourself with that brush just so you can get mad about it then that's on you.

WHAT??? YOU QUOTED ME FIRST AND COMMENTED - HERE IT IS:


Today, 12:15 PM #130
Dezzy
Babs
TiBB Staff

Dezzy's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 30,904

Favourites (more):
BB17: Jayne
CBB17: Tiffany Pollard
BB16: Nick
CBB15: Michelle Visage

30,000+ Posts on TiBB

20,000+ posts on TiBB

TiBB Eurovision

TiBB 5 Year award.

Pub quiz winners

TiBB Honorary Member


Total Awards: 6

Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirklancaster View Post
I am a member of 'Joe Public'and so are DOZENS of my friends and associates as are dozens more of people who I could best term 'acquaintances', and we ALL voted for Brexit.

Among these people are four Company Directors, two Doctors, two Solicitors, several Nurses, three Policemen, several Teachers, and several SME business owners, as well as dozens of 'Blue Collar Workers, several unemployed and quite a few 'Ducker And Divers'.

The one other thing which we all have in common - apart from our Brexit vote - is that ALL of us understand the real issues concerning the EU and our membership of it.

So while you are, of course, entitled to your opinion, you will forgive me if I elect not to pay heed to it, and this is based upon the fact - that in my opinion, which I am as EQUALLY entitled to - it is ALL YOUR posts which are so ill informed and erroneous as to the true facts concerning current affairs, including politics and the EU, that they attest to YOU having the woeful LACK of any REAL understanding of the issues often debated on here, NOT 'Joe Public'."

And none of this has any effect on the majority of people on both sides who likely voted what they voted for based on soundbites and sensationalism rather than solid facts.
__________________

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

WHAT??? YOU QUOTED ME FIRST AND COMMENTED - HERE IT IS:


Today, 12:15 PM #130
Dezzy
Babs
TiBB Staff

Dezzy's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 30,904

Favourites (more):
BB17: Jayne
CBB17: Tiffany Pollard
BB16: Nick
CBB15: Michelle Visage

30,000+ Posts on TiBB

20,000+ posts on TiBB

TiBB Eurovision

TiBB 5 Year award.

Pub quiz winners

TiBB Honorary Member


Total Awards: 6

Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirklancaster View Post
I am a member of 'Joe Public'and so are DOZENS of my friends and associates as are dozens more of people who I could best term 'acquaintances', and we ALL voted for Brexit.

Among these people are four Company Directors, two Doctors, two Solicitors, several Nurses, three Policemen, several Teachers, and several SME business owners, as well as dozens of 'Blue Collar Workers, several unemployed and quite a few 'Ducker And Divers'.

The one other thing which we all have in common - apart from our Brexit vote - is that ALL of us understand the real issues concerning the EU and our membership of it.

So while you are, of course, entitled to your opinion, you will forgive me if I elect not to pay heed to it, and this is based upon the fact - that in my opinion, which I am as EQUALLY entitled to - it is ALL YOUR posts which are so ill informed and erroneous as to the true facts concerning current affairs, including politics and the EU, that they attest to YOU having the woeful LACK of any REAL understanding of the issues often debated on here, NOT 'Joe Public'."

And none of this has any effect on the majority of people on both sides who likely voted what they voted for based on soundbites and sensationalism rather than solid facts.
__________________

Just because you didn't quote my post doesn't mean that post wasn't aimed at me for saying that a lot of the public are uninformed and don't pay attention to the actual issues.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

And none of this has any effect on the majority of people on both sides who likely voted what they voted for based on soundbites and sensationalism rather than solid facts.

You can't possibly know that.Despite what you might think.Most people aren't brainless drones in this country.Yes there are people like that but saying 'the majority' are is pure conjecture.
I would think the majority did a little digging themselves since the internet is now a thing.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

You can't possibly know that.Despite what you might think.Most people aren't brainless drones in this country.Yes there are people like that but saying 'the majority' are is pure conjecture.
I would think the majority did a little digging themselves since the internet is now a thing.

And I think it's naive to think that most voters take the time to understand the issues. They don't, it's so unrealistic to think that most people on any side make informed choices.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

And I think it's naive to think that most voters take the time to understand the issues. They don't, it's so unrealistic to think that most people on any side make informed choices.

brexitors did more so than bremainiacs. the bankrupt nations the endless unemployment, the open borders and radical terrorism, the massive lies of the mass media, the corporate tax dodging cartels , the endless illegal arms trading, the paid off lobbyists, the mass over population etc etc

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

And I think it's naive to think that most voters take the time to understand the issues. They don't, it's so unrealistic to think that most people on any side make informed choices.

Do you see yourself as coming under the umbrella of 'most people'. You seem to think this does not apply to you. Please enlighten me as to why!

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Do you see yourself as coming under the umbrella of 'most people'. You seem to think this does not apply to you. Please enlighten me as to why!

For some bizarre reason bremainiacs seem to think they are wholly superior to all the brexiteers. The truth is the exact opposite.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Do you see yourself as coming under the umbrella of 'most people'. You seem to think this does not apply to you. Please enlighten me as to why!

You're asking me to explain the blatantly obvious.

Go ask most people who voted in the last election and ask them if they know who their local MP is and what their stances are on various issues. I'm telling you now that most people won't know or care. That's being uninformed.

Brexit was pretty much decided on the issue of immigration despite the fact that neither possibility would have changed immigration for better or worse thus the people who voted Remain or Leave based on that are uninformed.

People voted for Trump because he represented a mindset that appealed to them or they opposed Hillary or the soundbites of building walls to keep rapists and muslims out appealed to them. I imagine very few people voted for him based on his policies, most of which benefit the 1% and is predicted to be disastrous for the middle and working classes of America. People voted for him because of who he is, not what he'd bring to the table. That's being uninformed.

I'm not uninformed as are most people here because we all take time to look into the issues we discuss. It's rather naive to believe that everyone puts in the same effort as we do.

I noticed you didn't brign anything to the discussion with that post aside from an attempt to get a personal dig in though. You should consider trying to add something of value to discussions in the future.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

You're asking me to explain the blatantly obvious.

Go ask most people who voted in the last election and ask them if they know who their local MP is and what their stances are on various issues. I'm telling you now that most people won't know or care. That's being uninformed.

Brexit was pretty much decided on the issue of immigration despite the fact that neither possibility would have changed immigration for better or worse thus the people who voted Remain or Leave based on that are uninformed.

People voted for Trump because he represented a mindset that appealed to them or they opposed Hillary or the soundbites of building walls to keep rapists and muslims out appealed to them. I imagine very few people voted for him based on his policies, most of which benefit the 1% and is predicted to be disastrous for the middle and working classes of America. People voted for him because of who he is, not what he'd bring to the table. That's being uninformed.

I'm not uninformed as are most people here because we all take time to look into the issues we discuss. It's rather naive to believe that everyone puts in the same effort as we do.

I noticed you didn't brign anything to the discussion with that post aside from an attempt to get a personal dig in though. You should consider trying to add something of value to discussions in the future.

There’s a difference between uniformed and ill informed. I agree, people should aspire to look up each individual candidates’ positions. However, personally, this research can only be so effective, as many of these all important policies and promises are often forgotten once elected. (I should know, I follow these developments post-election) Many candidates end up falling in line with their party once elected or just continue with tried and tested politics with randomly injected experimentation per their party—if they’re not an incumbent and need to show efficacy.

This leads to a lot of disillusionment on the part of the voter in terms of what information/facts are most relevant/useful to deciding the best choice on their ballot. That’s why major platforms are so effective and it’s also why we have a party system in place… to keep these agendas more or less stream lined and in line with the different thought groups in politics. In my experience, democrats in Houston are different than democrats in MD… that said, the two are still similar socially speaking ... and this would be really the only pertinent information to gather from a candidate’s platform seeing as you can’t really verify “Well we want to reorganize the way we record our records… “ ok… but how do you verify how it was run before? How do we know this is a good position? What was wrong with the other system? Did they lose records? Begin the hours of googling one minor talking point…

Anyway, the way a campaign here is run is complicated. Many are compare and contrast campaigns. Half the time you don’t know what they will do once they’re in. It’s either they are for or against something… ok, but if they are “for” something, what exactly will they do in contrast? (Hint: Specifics and political campaigns don’t exactly go together)

You can go to campaign events, and sometimes you will get very helpful information… on the other hand, you may at best obtain a veneer or just a mirroring of one's party positions. From a digital perspective, in the recent election I looked at the website of each member on every ticket (of which there were numerous)… very few had websites setup (unheard of in this age of digital literacy). Of the ones that were functioning and had the actual positions, most had maybe only a handful of major positions they were running on. Most matched the general party platform. No need to see the website.

Most American news is contrast-based as well, so you can get a reasonable idea of the differences of platforms from not only watching the news over the years, but past experience as it relates to those issues... which I argue has far more power in someone's vote rather than political talking points… even if the individual candidates themselves are not cited, in practice it is true that parties stick together...

In terms of facts and actual helpful information: I argue 1st hand knowledge or otherwise having been around people in the community who have dealt with these issues face to face have more effect on a vote than the media or a candidacy. Again, this is local, but in Texas, in our local communities, many people associate or socialize with some sort of thought group who subscribes to certain beliefs and they will have conversations or talk about local events and how it affects them. Often times, especially at work, and especially in my field and my husband’s… we know many people who deal in politics. Many know a neighbor in the city who is active or has had access to this anecdotal knowledge. So that is where they get their research to some degree... which is these conversations that happen more frequently here than many places. So in how things are really managed. This is the valuable information that most people consider most helpful to deciding their vote… is usually based on a lifetime of experiences, anecdotal experiences, cumulative sources in the news (through years of watching and reading) and having seen other campaigns occasionally and listening to spokespeople/sheriffs/other major political figures talk on the news... this decides their POV for the most part. Having looked at many platforms, I can say this would not change had they seen all their websites and positions... as most don't feel their vote will be earth-shattering and in their minds, they would rather they vote in a way it counted. Straight ticket for some... or based on contrast and compare campaigns.

It’s not helpful to know the policy positions of a candidate, as you don’t really understand the cause and effect of said policies without first hand experience in knowing how those policies can have a positive/negative effect so you can ask penetrating questions to the candidate on how they would choose to implement it (if you can get a straight forward answer)…

For example, I know locally we had a sheriff who ran on fiscal responsibility… that was his platform. He made the numbers look “right”, but in actuality he was bleeding the department dry and the workforce that was bled as a result of the mismanagement has accumulated after every single bid to now a watershed. Though, you can’t see this without having that first hand knowledge. Most people get the facade, and because people here know talk is cheap, this is more relevant to them than talking points.

So I think that many people vote a straight ticket for numerous reasons and for the most part, I think they are sound reasons. Though I disagree with this method, we are fairly well versed in party politics and it makes sense from the perspective of the cynical American voter. It’s not so simple to say “How dare they not know every individual in govt”, they are uninformed!... however, they may pay attention the party or platforms that are in place… which tbqf, have a lot more individual influence than the running of our country, even in our local council… as our govt is meant to function with party control now, as an intertwined machine and not so much focus on the individual.

Even if you vote in a wildcard candidate, it’s hard to see what you would get from this as 1) That person could fail to have influence where you want it overall because of red tape (due to party control/gerrymandering) and 2) Running this sort of campaign is fiscally and emotionally expensive, so it would be hard for them to get re-elected without a spotlight… so what often happens is people look at the opposing well-known party candidate… well, he often takes positions you dislike even more (which both parties are schitzophrenic, value-wise to each other)… so you’re in a catch 22. Either way you lose.

Most positions where I looked at individually, there wasn’t really any viable opposition (no websites, no campaign, hardly visible on google… … so better to be informed about the party’s activities at the local level (which many people are), rather than the individual candidates. For example, in Houston I am fine with the blue candidates in social positions or running the city (mayor) –as long as they don’t bankrupt the city … but in places like the jail, where I know there has been rampant mismanagement by Team blue, I vote red. I also vote red on justices because I believe in the death penalty, but a hand slap. When I’ve looked at the individual websites for these individuals… pretty much all typical party positions. Occasionally, they had some individual focuses on things such “well we’d like to do this to limit this”… but those are rare and honestly, unless I am well-versed in the way that system works (would have to spend all day learning about how courts handle cases as if I’m to become paralegal), I have no way of verifying whether this is a good policy/platform, etc…

Anyway, most Americans are very cynical and fickle voters. Though admittedly, the US’ voting base is quite apathetic compared to other 1st world countries… I think last election was a record low in fact. Still, we’re only concerned here about actual voters and I think that you’re missing the forest for the trees. Most of our politics is a domino effect, is becoming as complicated as our tax code (thanks to injecting social issues in every candidacy…even railroad commissioner ) … at the base of it, if it’s not about how you think a sheriff should be a sheriff (if you know nothing about being a LEO), as much as it’s about what effects you in particular and for most voters, that’s what they care about… so why stress the minutia? It’s easier in those cases for most people to vote party than to pretend as if they understand how a railroad works, etc. If people are unhappy of the state of their community, whether there is word of mouth (positive or not) or there being major issues that need to be addressed… aside from platforms, that voter's enthusiasm is going to shift one way or another. However, that’s how most people get their information—is word of mouth and by following the local media and current events in some form. So I think ill-informed—yes—but really, it depends on what it is… and how much does it really even matter to you and I when our government is a two party system that favors the elite?

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

You're asking me to explain the blatantly obvious.

Go ask most people who voted in the last election and ask them if they know who their local MP is and what their stances are on various issues. I'm telling you now that most people won't know or care. That's being uninformed.

Brexit was pretty much decided on the issue of immigration despite the fact that neither possibility would have changed immigration for better or worse thus the people who voted Remain or Leave based on that are uninformed.

People voted for Trump because he represented a mindset that appealed to them or they opposed Hillary or the soundbites of building walls to keep rapists and muslims out appealed to them. I imagine very few people voted for him based on his policies, most of which benefit the 1% and is predicted to be disastrous for the middle and working classes of America. People voted for him because of who he is, not what he'd bring to the table. That's being uninformed.

I'm not uninformed as are most people here because we all take time to look into the issues we discuss. It's rather naive to believe that everyone puts in the same effort as we do.

I noticed you didn't brign anything to the discussion with that post aside from an attempt to get a personal dig in though. You should consider trying to add something of value to discussions in the future.

Call it 'coming to the point', isn't that what you asked another poster to do, a poster who you accused of 'writing an essay' in his very detailed and well informed response to a post of yours.

Which is it to be - to the point or adding to the debate with detailed posts - you can't have it both ways. Maybe too detailed is too challenging , so maybe I should be brief and to the point.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Call it 'coming to the point', isn't that what you asked another poster to do, a poster who you accused of 'writing an essay' in his very detailed and well informed response to a post of yours.

Which is it to be - to the point or adding to the debate with detailed posts - you can't have it both ways. Maybe too detailed is too challenging , so maybe I should be brief and to the point.

To be fair on the last page Kirk stated to Joey that his posts were baffling and time consuming.... Maybe Joeys posts are just too detailed and challenging for him?
Considering the post you refer to was in the main an off topic reference to myself, then to question the validity of it is perfectly acceptable.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Call it 'coming to the point', isn't that what you asked another poster to do, a poster who you accused of 'writing an essay' in his very detailed and well informed response to a post of yours.

Which is it to be - to the point or adding to the debate with detailed posts - you can't have it both ways. Maybe too detailed is too challenging , so maybe I should be brief and to the point.

So you have nothing to add and can't counter what I've said and are trying to be evasive by getting personal, okay. I'll take it as a sign of you giving up.