By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I dont get it... If they were so stupid, then why couldn't they be persuaded to vote remain, by the vastly more intelligent remainers?
This is in fact an excellent argument. I haven’t heard it put like that until just now. Bravo, sincerely.
In the spirit of reconciliation and happiness at the end of the Banter Era (RIP) and as a result of promotion I have cleared out my ignore list. Look forwards to reading your posts!
I dont get it... If they were so stupid, then why couldn't they be persuaded to vote remain, by the vastly more intelligent remainers?
Because stupid people are notoriously difficult at recognising relative intelligence (see the Dunning-Kruger effect) and are easily swayed by the kind of simplistic but vacuous (and often dishonest) soundbites that were the stock in trade of the Vote Leave cabal. An inability to appraise the quality and veracity of the information presented to them was a further contributing factor. Hope that helps.
Because stupid people are notoriously difficult at recognising relative intelligence (see the Dunning-Kruger effect) and are easily swayed by the kind of simplistic but vacuous (and often dishonest) soundbites that were the stock in trade of the Vote Leave cabal. An inability to appraise the quality and veracity of the information presented to them was a further contributing factor. Hope that helps.
I think what you’ve said there raises a good point. Simple, vacuous and often dishonest sums up the leave campaign.
We all know now that a lot of the “ facts “ leave campaign were spouting were vastly exaggerated or untrue however from a campaign perspective the leave campaign did a much better job at garnering votes than remain. ( not sure if “ better “ is the correct word there ? ) than the remain one.
I think what you’ve said there raises a good point. Simple, vacuous and often dishonest sums up the leave campaign.
We all know now that a lot of the “ facts “ leave campaign were spouting were vastly exaggerated or untrue however from a campaign perspective the leave campaign did a much better job at garnering votes than remain. ( not sure if “ better “ is the correct word there ? ) than the remain one.
Change is always an easier sell than maintaining the status quo. That's why the Tories still try to pitch themselves as the party to change the country's fortunes and fix its woes when they've been in power for 13 years and have caused most of the problems they say they'll fix. More of the same is a tough thing to pitch. It certainly helped the leave campaign that we have woefully inadequate regulation of electoral campaigning, meaning they were able to overspend and get a slap on the wrist and put out false or highly misleading claims that stuck in the memory before they could be debunked.
I think what you’ve said there raises a good point. Simple, vacuous and often dishonest sums up the leave campaign.
We all know now that a lot of the “ facts “ leave campaign were spouting were vastly exaggerated or untrue however from a campaign perspective the leave campaign did a much better job at garnering votes than remain. ( not sure if “ better “ is the correct word there ? ) than the remain one.
If you are explaining then you are losing, so lies become the order of the day
Change is always an easier sell than maintaining the status quo. That's why the Tories still try to pitch themselves as the party to change the country's fortunes and fix its woes when they've been in power for 13 years and have caused most of the problems they say they'll fix. More of the same is a tough thing to pitch. It certainly helped the leave campaign that we have woefully inadequate regulation of electoral campaigning, meaning they were able to overspend and get a slap on the wrist and put out false or highly misleading claims that stuck in the memory before they could be debunked.
[Post edited 23 Nov 2023 11:49]
Which is why Chief Executives come into established (even successful) businesses and promptly trash them. Got to make their mark, even if change is not needed.
See also the (self described) madman just elected in Argentina. Change of any sort, even berserkly destructive, is better than trying to make the status quo work properly.
People are lazy and want wand-waving instant solutions to complex problems.
Which is why Chief Executives come into established (even successful) businesses and promptly trash them. Got to make their mark, even if change is not needed.
See also the (self described) madman just elected in Argentina. Change of any sort, even berserkly destructive, is better than trying to make the status quo work properly.
People are lazy and want wand-waving instant solutions to complex problems.
I dont get it... If they were so stupid, then why couldn't they be persuaded to vote remain, by the vastly more intelligent remainers?
Because narrative trumps facts. Especially when the majority of the press and too many politicians were pushing the narratives before, during and after the referendum.
The Brexiteers had their echo chamber and alternative reality even without social media. Not to say that the hardcore Remainers didn’t either but that also prevented discussion of the underlying drivers of the dissatisfaction and disenfranchisement populism thrives on.
Change is always an easier sell than maintaining the status quo. That's why the Tories still try to pitch themselves as the party to change the country's fortunes and fix its woes when they've been in power for 13 years and have caused most of the problems they say they'll fix. More of the same is a tough thing to pitch. It certainly helped the leave campaign that we have woefully inadequate regulation of electoral campaigning, meaning they were able to overspend and get a slap on the wrist and put out false or highly misleading claims that stuck in the memory before they could be debunked.
[Post edited 23 Nov 2023 11:49]
Regressive change is an easier sell maybe e.g. Make America Great Again or the British exceptionalism and nostalgia for empire that characterised the Leave vote. Especially with a dose of xenophobia and a sprinkle of racism.
Progressive change, certainly in the UK, seems like a very remote prospect. Even with popular and necessary policies, we see an establishment, political class and media resisting any real change to their circumstances and the money/influence/power the status quo has given them.
Change is always an easier sell than maintaining the status quo. That's why the Tories still try to pitch themselves as the party to change the country's fortunes and fix its woes when they've been in power for 13 years and have caused most of the problems they say they'll fix. More of the same is a tough thing to pitch. It certainly helped the leave campaign that we have woefully inadequate regulation of electoral campaigning, meaning they were able to overspend and get a slap on the wrist and put out false or highly misleading claims that stuck in the memory before they could be debunked.
[Post edited 23 Nov 2023 11:49]
Is change really always an easier sell? In 1975 referendum, voters decided to stay in the Common Market, in 2011 Altervative Voting referendum voters retained the first past the post system and in 2014 Scottish voters opted to remain part of the Union.
Seems far too many Remainers just made a very pisspoor case for staying in the EU, often preferring to ridicule the intelligence of the Brexit voting working class.
Leading Remainers from the Blair years onwards were too arrogant, complacent and thick to see the growing threat which they had helped develop.
Now we must all pay the price because it was a catastrophic outcome.
It is exactly that sort of headline that caused Brexit to happen, it seems the media and political establishment have learned nothing from the past decade.
They also tend to correlate the lack of a University education with a lack of intelligence, which is also opinion, and not fact, because there is no way of proving that statement without any real science behind it, it is just raw prejudice and assumption. This isn't just "Brexit" but they also make this assumption and generalising about many groups, including us football fans.
If you insult people, they don't tend to vote for you or your cause - I would say not understanding that fundamental fact is pretty stupid. It's not how you win anyone over, bright or not. Until you learn that, you won't win people over. It works both ways, as slating those on the left as emotionally weak and so on won't help your argument either. It's just playground stuff.
Is change really always an easier sell? In 1975 referendum, voters decided to stay in the Common Market, in 2011 Altervative Voting referendum voters retained the first past the post system and in 2014 Scottish voters opted to remain part of the Union.
Seems far too many Remainers just made a very pisspoor case for staying in the EU, often preferring to ridicule the intelligence of the Brexit voting working class.
Leading Remainers from the Blair years onwards were too arrogant, complacent and thick to see the growing threat which they had helped develop.
Now we must all pay the price because it was a catastrophic outcome.
Which arguments that should have been made by the remain campaign do you feel weren't made? And where in their campaign materials did they ridicule people?
It is exactly that sort of headline that caused Brexit to happen, it seems the media and political establishment have learned nothing from the past decade.
They also tend to correlate the lack of a University education with a lack of intelligence, which is also opinion, and not fact, because there is no way of proving that statement without any real science behind it, it is just raw prejudice and assumption. This isn't just "Brexit" but they also make this assumption and generalising about many groups, including us football fans.
If you insult people, they don't tend to vote for you or your cause - I would say not understanding that fundamental fact is pretty stupid. It's not how you win anyone over, bright or not. Until you learn that, you won't win people over. It works both ways, as slating those on the left as emotionally weak and so on won't help your argument either. It's just playground stuff.
Yep, hard to disagree with any of the points you make about the media and how those on one side approach trying to change minds.
It is exactly that sort of headline that caused Brexit to happen, it seems the media and political establishment have learned nothing from the past decade.
They also tend to correlate the lack of a University education with a lack of intelligence, which is also opinion, and not fact, because there is no way of proving that statement without any real science behind it, it is just raw prejudice and assumption. This isn't just "Brexit" but they also make this assumption and generalising about many groups, including us football fans.
If you insult people, they don't tend to vote for you or your cause - I would say not understanding that fundamental fact is pretty stupid. It's not how you win anyone over, bright or not. Until you learn that, you won't win people over. It works both ways, as slating those on the left as emotionally weak and so on won't help your argument either. It's just playground stuff.
Except that's explicitly what the study has disproven.
University education is irrelevant, per this study. They looked at cognitive ability.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
