TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile

View Poll Results: Should Britain leave the European Union?

Voters
60. You may not vote on this poll
  • YES!...Must Brexit!

    20 33.33%
  • NO!...We Must Remain!

    32 53.33%
  • I have no idea what I want, yet I will vote anyway!

    8 13.33%
Page 24 of 39 FirstFirst ... 4914192021222324252627282934 ... LastLast
Results 576 to 600 of 961

Thread: BREXIT --->

  1. #576
    Moderator
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: Wales
    Surprisingly, Brexit Voters Respond Angrily To News EU Agencies Will Withdraw From UK Within Weeks.

    Brexit voters have responded angrily to news that EU diplomats are plotting to withdraw flagship agencies from Britain ‘within weeks’.

    The Daily Express reported the move was a ‘Brexit punishment’ - despite admitting the loss of the European Banking Authority and the European Medical Agency (EMA) was inevitable after the triggering of Article 50.

    Readers of the paper who voted Leave reacted with outrage.
    One wonders what people expected.

  2. #577
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Quote Originally Posted by nickie View Post
    One wonders what people expected.
    Apparently something without consequences.

  3. #578
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Yeah, why would EU institutions like these be located anywhere else than in the EU?

  4. #579
    Moderator
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: Wales
    Snap general election could be on the menu for 8th June.

    Theresa May says that the only way to "guarantee certainty and stability for the years ahead is to hold this election and seek your support for the decisions I must take".
    I wasn't expecting that. It's only just been announced so I'm still getting my head round ramifications.

  5. #580
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by nickie View Post
    Snap general election could be on the menu for 8th June.
    I wasn't expecting that. It's only just been announced so I'm still getting my head round ramifications.
    This is what I wrote a year ago.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gryzemuis View Post
    Cameron will resign. (Already happened, I just read).
    An interim-government will take over.
    The interim-government will arrage new elections. These will take at least a year.
    The interim-government will start work on actually leaving the EU.
    The interim-government will say: "we take the voters in the referendum so seriously, we will already start implementing new laws for them". There will be slightly more border patrol in Dover and Calais. Maybe a few illegal immigrants will be deported (with lots of press attending, but low numbers of immigrants). A few new arrangements with the EU will be made. The UK will pay a little less money to the EU. Etc.

    A new government will be in place in 18-24 months.
    The new government will say: "the majority of Brits have voted for us. we believe a brexit is against the interest of the british people. we believe the majority of brits have changed their view on the issue. we believe the new laws have satisfied their wishes. we think a brexit is not necessary anymore. the referendum had only an advisery role, and was not binding".
    The UK stays in the EU.
    I was a bit surprised when Brexit seemed to actually move forward after the referendum. It seemed the EU was pushing more than the UK was pushing. I had not expected that. The EU commission seemed dead set to kick the UK out of the EU ASAP. And to try to make the consequences as bad and painful as possible for the UK. Just to set an example, and scare other countries from trying or threatening to leave the EU as well.

    But now the UK is back on track. New government. More delay. We'll see what happens. Personally I still think chances are less than 50/50 that Brexit will really happen.

  6. #581
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Well, this should be interesting. She's probably betting on Labour not being able to pull themselves together.

  7. #582
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Qantas
    I need to be educated about this. Why would the Conservative party, who occupies a comfortable majority of seats in Parliament three years out from the next election, want to hold an election now? I know the Labour Party is polling badly, but that doesn't mean anything if this election becomes another referendum on Brexit. In the last Brexit poll I saw (Feb?), public opinion was still close to 50/50. Given the timing of the election, I would expect that single issue to inflate the Labour vote by quite a bit, so it's hard for me to see how the Conservatives can improve their position. And even if they could increase their majority somehow, what would that allow them to do that they can't do now?

  8. #583
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: Switzerland
    The negative effects that many expect to come of Brexit haven't arrived yet, so they don't damage the Tories. If they waited longer, then any negative impact would fall back on them. In addition, Corbyn's resistance to Brexit has been lukewarm at best, so it's unlikely that Labour will be seen as the anti-Brexit party and the general election will be interpreted as an inofficial second referendum on Brexit. (If anything, the Lib Dems are positioning themselves much more as the anti-Brexit party.) In other words, the Tories can almost only gain from an general election, and they can almost only lose by getting that election later.

  9. #584
    Moderator
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: Wales
    I've no idea why. I read somewhere that May believed the country was coming together (I'd not noticed) but Westminster was squabbling, or words to that effect. Perhaps she believes that she'll get more/clearer support from the country in order to tell the MPs to stfu or something.

    I've also heard she wants a clearer mandate for when Trump takes us into WWIII. But I don't think I believe that despite some new all-singing, all-dancing US planes arriving over here recently.

    Edit: This is what she says, apparently.

    May says she needs an election now because other parties are opposed to the government’s Brexit plans

    May says the government has a plan for Brexit that will allow the UK to regain control of its laws and borders.

    This is the right approach.

    But the other parties oppose it, she says.

    There should be unity in Westminster, she says.

    But there is not, she says.

    Labour has threatened to vote against the final deal.

    The Lib Dems want to grind parliamentary business to a standstill.

    The SNP opposes what the government is doing.

    And peers have said they will oppose the government all the way.

    She says she is not prepared to allow her opponents to jeopardise the Brexit negotiations.

    If there is not an election now, game-playing will continue.

    And she says the Brexit talks will conclude as election speculation is intensifying.

  10. #585
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2016
    Location: Trollinus Maximus
    CA just cancelled CAL-Exit.
    sucks as it would be nice to split from the liberals........

  11. #586
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    If you live in California, and want to split from the liberals, better start digging a moat.

  12. #587
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2016
    Location: Trollinus Maximus
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    If you live in California, and want to split from the liberals, better start digging a moat.
    too much concrete here for that. I tried..................

  13. #588
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2008
    Quote Originally Posted by heywood View Post
    Why would the Conservative party, who occupies a comfortable majority of seats in Parliament three years out from the next election, want to hold an election now?
    To strengthen their mandate maybe? They might want to get rid of that bit in their last manifesto which claims that they'd stay inside the single market.

    Quote Originally Posted by heywood View Post
    In the last Brexit poll I saw (Feb?), public opinion was still close to 50/50. Given the timing of the election, I would expect that single issue to inflate the Labour vote by quite a bit, so it's hard for me to see how the Conservatives can improve their position
    As Thirith said. Labour are getting carved up. Scotland overwhelmingly voted remain, but won't vote Labour (it's all SNP now). There're also divisions between the north of England who voted to leave, and the metropolitan areas who voted remain. The former might see the Conservatives as getting things done, and the latter leaning to the Lib Dems who are emphatically pro-EU. I don't know the fine details of what's likely on a council level though, so it probably won't turn out as dramatic as it sounds.

    All the Conservatives have had to deal with is UKIP, who are already melting away.

  14. #589
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Qantas
    Are the Conservatives more popular now than in 2015? I'm not as clued-in about UK politics as I used to be when I was living there for months at a time, so I may be talking out my arse, but I was thinking that in the 2015 election, the Conservatives were able to maximize their take by playing both sides. The leadership was pro-EU but they promised to hold the referendum anyway. So they were able to attract some former Lib Dem voters who were into fiscal responsibility etcetera, and at the same time they could attract Euroskeptic voters who wanted the referendum away from UKIP and Labour. Now that the referendum has passed and Article 50 has been triggered and the party leaders are vowing to get on with Brexit, they can't play that game anymore. They currently hold something like 100 seats more than Labour, and the Lib Dems were all but killed off in the last election. How much higher can they go from there if the country is close to evenly divided over Brexit?

  15. #590
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2001
    Location: uk
    In comparison to Corbyn's Labour party of constant back stabbing and leadership squabbling? I think pretty much everyone is.

    I think the Conservatives expect to gain more seats from Labour than they might lose to the Lib Dems. I've not bother to look too closely at the numbers but most of the more Remain voting constituencies aren't currently Conservative anyway. Many areas that were more narrowly in favour of Remain have a larger Conservative majority than Remain, the thinking being that whilst they will probably be considerably closer this time they won't lose that many of them.

  16. #591
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2002
    Location: I think I've been here
    This is your chance UK, to make that slightly puzzled face and say: By God, we took a misstep there, didn't we?

  17. #592
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    I--and by I I mean I'm stealing this from someone else's comment--I feel like the UK should just take a break from elections for a while and think about what it's done and where it is in the world. How many elections can the people take?

    I'd say it for the US too, but we just have our regularly scheduled ones. Midterms next year are going to be a riot.

  18. #593
    Moderator
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: Wales
    Good thinking, dema. Ordinarily we have general elections every 5 years which is about right, I guess. 4.5 years of trying to do stuff and .5 years trying to persuade people to vote for them again.

    I'd like to know wtf May thinks she's doing phoning Trump about our election. What pearls of wisdom can she possibly get from someone who doesn't even seem to know where his ships are.

  19. #594
    Still Subjective
    Registered: Dec 1999
    Location: Idiocy will never die
    This is pure power consolidation and a reversal of what she insisted on last year.


    Tories will win because there is no viable opposition, and May will take that as an agreement for hard Brexit and a simultaneous refusal of a second Scottish referendum.

    It's a crock.

  20. #595
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    While everybody is bitching about this and that this last year, I think in the eyes of history this will be this year's most important story, the year Big Data and AI algorithms overthrew the world's two most established democracies.

    https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...cked-democracy

  21. #596
    Moderator
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: Wales
    I read that this morning. I'm still trying to get my head round what it's saying.

  22. #597
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Qantas
    It seems to be saying that analytics and targeted marketing were used in the Brexit and US Presidential campaigns, and a couple of the companies used by the Leave side are also used by the Republicans, and tied to the Trump campaign. The author tried hard to make it sound like a sinister conspiracy, but I don't see anything surprising about it. The Remain and Clinton campaigns used the same techniques.

    The 2012 Obama campaign famously ran a big data analytics operation that set the mold for future campaigns. A couple of articles about it:

    http://www.infoworld.com/article/261...obama-win.html
    http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articl...ection-Victory

    During the 2016 Presidential campaign, it was thought/assumed that the Clinton campaign was making greater use of analytics than the Trump campaign. One example:

    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...sing-big-data/

    The Remain side was using big data too, although I don't know the companies involved. Here is an overview:

    http://www.referendumanalysis.eu/eu-...igital-battle/

    Much has been said about money buying elections, but the Brexit and US Presidential campaigns demonstrate that isn't necessarily true. I read that the Remain side spent about £19m and Leave spent about £13m. In the US campaign, the Clinton side spent nearly double what the Trump side spent.

    So the real question is: does this kind of marketing really make a difference? I know that in theory, the more finely you can target your marketing, the more return you can get on your spending. Ideally all of your advertising is individually tailored to the recipient. But in practice, the algorithms that currently generate individually targeted ads seem pretty dumb and they are always a step or two behind my research or shopping history. And in the US election, it seemed like the targeted ads on-line were just preaching to their respective choirs, i.e. people with a Republican profile tended to get more pro-Trump/anti-Clinton advertising and vice versa. I've yet to see an indication that the algorithms have gotten smart enough to identify persuadable voters and their key issues.

    There is also the issue of advertising fatigue. I don't know what it was like over there during the peak of Brexit campaign, but over here during the Presidential campaign I felt bombarded with advertising. In the last couple months most commercial breaks on TV were filled with all campaign ads, we received targeting mailings almost every day, robocalls, and my internet experience was plastered with micro-targeted ads. I probably got it worse than most because I live in a "swing" state. The volume of it was so much that it's hard to imagine anyone really paying attention to it.
    Last edited by heywood; 8th May 2017 at 11:12.

  23. #598
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by heywood View Post
    Much has been said about money buying elections, but the Brexit and US Presidential campaigns demonstrate that isn't necessarily true. I read that the Remain side spent about £19m and Leave spent about £13m. In the US campaign, the Clinton side spent nearly double what the Trump side spent.
    But Trump also got billions of dollars worth of "free" coverage. Anyway, it's long been said that money is more effective the smaller the campaign and the more minor the office.

  24. #599
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2001
    Location: Somewhere
    all this brexit talk and I still dont have my bacon

  25. #600
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    It's very hard to say big data & analytics should be illegal or somehow unethical. But it is a form of emotional manipulation, so you shouldn't trust the results. (In courts, the US has rules against emotional manipulation, so it's not unprecedented.)

    Re the difference between left and right, on that I think there's a natural imbalance. The emotions that drive Right opinion are things like disgust and fear, which are very easy to stoke with targeted messaging, and the person is less likely ro reject it as manipulation. Whereas the motivating emotions for Left opinion are things like empathy and justice, which are more abstract, harder to evoke in ways that don't backfire (eg, it's not going to favor big pocket candidates that can afford the campaigns), and maybe most importantly the target audience is a lot more likely to reject the messaging as manipulative.


    But even if it's not unethical per se, it just seems there's something troubling about democracy being at the mercy of blatant emotional manipulation, and that it's so effective. What if we're at the limits of human capacity and these algorithms can stoke Rightist fears every time on cue, and that just becomes the new normal? Sounds like such a sad status quo to end up with.

Page 24 of 39 FirstFirst ... 4914192021222324252627282934 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •