Brexit

[Deleted]

Jun 28, 2016 7:53:52 GMT -5 tgo said:

Jun 28, 2016 7:36:34 GMT -5 @cam said:

But doesn't the Google data quoted above make you wonder how many people actually didn't know what they were voting for (or against?)

Maybe they're not dimwits - but if you don't bother to educate yourself about the implications of your vote until after you vote, that's a dimwit move:

www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/06/25/after-residents-voted-for-brexit-this-british-county-realized-the-e-u-might-stop-sending-them-money/

I find it amusing and yet also a depressing example of the elitism that has already been mentioned that because this was googled a lot, leftists immediately say - "oh, look at the idiots, now they are looking into what they voted on because none of them could have possibly known what they were doing before they voted since they didn't do what we told them they should do" - when it seems a lot more likely to me that those who voted to remain now are looking in to what it means to leave, doesn't mean their vote wasn't fully informed either, they surely had 1 or 2 good reasons they thought instructed their vote and they pulled the lever and now that they lost they want to know what is going to happen.

And - in the Cornwall example - you have people who surely had 1 or 2 good reasons they thought instructed their vote, so they pulled that lever. And now that they got what they wanted, they've come to realize that maybe they didn't want it after all. But too late now...

I don't think that it's elitist to hope that everyone who casts a vote for something actually has some grasp of what they're voting for (or against), and what the implications of that vote might be.

[tgo]

I agree that wanting people to be informed on what they vote on is a worthy goal - the fact that most are not informed is why I shake my head when people want to come up with ways to make it easier to vote but that is another discussion.

What I take issue with is assuming that if someone votes in a way that you disagree with they must have done so because they were uninformed. That may be the case but it could also be the case that there are different ways to view important issues and intelligent people can differ. The fact that google saw tons of searches about the affects of the vote does not mean that people who voted to leave didn't cast an informed vote. Furthermore, I find it hard to believe that those who cast uninformed votes - and there are certainly many on both sides of every vote every - suddenly wake up the next day and have a sudden need to learn and know more. I could be wrong but my assumption just makes a lot more sense, those who voted Remain now want to know what is going to happen.

[TC]

Jun 28, 2016 10:36:41 GMT -5 tgo said:

I agree that wanting people to be informed on what they vote on is a worthy goal - the fact that most are not informed is why I shake my head when people want to come up with ways to make it easier to vote but that is another discussion.

What I take issue with is assuming that if someone votes in a way that you disagree with they must have done so because they were uninformed. That may be the case but it could also be the case that there are different ways to view important issues and intelligent people can differ. The fact that google saw tons of searches about the affects of the vote does not mean that people who voted to leave didn't cast an informed vote. Furthermore, I find it hard to believe that those who cast uninformed votes - and there are certainly many on both sides of every vote every - suddenly wake up the next day and have a sudden need to learn and know more. I could be wrong but my assumption just makes a lot more sense, those who voted Remain now want to know what is going to happen.

The amount of cognitive dissonance between the first sentence and second paragraph is truly astounding.

[kchoya]

Jun 27, 2016 19:09:29 GMT -5 HoyaSinceBirth said:

Jun 27, 2016 16:30:11 GMT -5 kchoya said:

The issue that has bothered me most with Brexit is the chorus of those in favor of "Remain" coming out to denigrate those that voted to leave the EU as dimwits who didn't understand what they were voting for, and who were to stupid to follow the "experts" that advised against leaving the EU. It's a strain that we hear from the left in this country, that the supporters of Trump are simply a bunch of racist, bigoted, sexist bumpkins and, to piggyback off of HSB's post, the enlightened electoral college should save the country from the unwashed masses. Matt Taibbi had a good piece on this phenomenon:

Rolling Stone: The Reaction to Brexit Is the Reason Brexit Happened

If the shoe fits...

Thanks for proving my point.

[kchoya]

Jun 28, 2016 11:27:52 GMT -5 TC said:

Jun 28, 2016 10:36:41 GMT -5 tgo said:

I agree that wanting people to be informed on what they vote on is a worthy goal - the fact that most are not informed is why I shake my head when people want to come up with ways to make it easier to vote but that is another discussion.

What I take issue with is assuming that if someone votes in a way that you disagree with they must have done so because they were uninformed. That may be the case but it could also be the case that there are different ways to view important issues and intelligent people can differ. The fact that google saw tons of searches about the affects of the vote does not mean that people who voted to leave didn't cast an informed vote. Furthermore, I find it hard to believe that those who cast uninformed votes - and there are certainly many on both sides of every vote every - suddenly wake up the next day and have a sudden need to learn and know more. I could be wrong but my assumption just makes a lot more sense, those who voted Remain now want to know what is going to happen.

The amount of cognitive dissonance between the first sentence and second paragraph is truly astounding.

You have a strange definition of cognitive dissonance.

Paragraph #1 - it's a worthy goal that people are informed when they enter the voting booth
Paragraph #2 - using google data to leap to conclusions about the motivation/intelligence of a bloc of voters is problematic.

I fail to see the dissonance.

[kchoya]

Jun 28, 2016 8:21:22 GMT -5 @cam said:

Jun 28, 2016 7:53:52 GMT -5 tgo said:

I find it amusing and yet also a depressing example of the elitism that has already been mentioned that because this was googled a lot, leftists immediately say - "oh, look at the idiots, now they are looking into what they voted on because none of them could have possibly known what they were doing before they voted since they didn't do what we told them they should do" - when it seems a lot more likely to me that those who voted to remain now are looking in to what it means to leave, doesn't mean their vote wasn't fully informed either, they surely had 1 or 2 good reasons they thought instructed their vote and they pulled the lever and now that they lost they want to know what is going to happen.

And - in the Cornwall example - you have people who surely had 1 or 2 good reasons they thought instructed their vote, so they pulled that lever. And now that they got what they wanted, they've come to realize that maybe they didn't want it after all. But too late now...

I don't think that it's elitist to hope that everyone who casts a vote for something actually has some grasp of what they're voting for (or against), and what the implications of that vote might be.

It's not elitist to hope for an informed electorate. I think it is elitist to make petulant, self-serving, simple-minded attacks on disobedient pro-Leave voters for being primitive, xenophobic bigots instead of undertaking an earnest, candid attempt to understand what motivated voters to make their respective choices (not saying you're doing this, but stealing language from Glenn Grunwald below).

Brexit Is Only the Latest Proof of the Insularity and Failure of Western Establishment Institutions

The Los Angeles Times’s Vincent Bevins, in an outstanding and concise analysis, wrote that “both Brexit and Trumpism are the very, very wrong answers to legitimate questions that urban elites have refused to ask for 30 years”; in particular, “since the 1980s the elites in rich countries have overplayed their hand, taking all the gains for themselves and just covering their ears when anyone else talks, and now they are watching in horror as voters revolt.” The British journalist Tom Ewing, in a comprehensive Brexit explanation, said the same dynamic driving the U.K. vote prevails in Europe and North America as well: “the arrogance of neoliberal elites in constructing a politics designed to sideline and work around democracy while leaving democracy formally intact.”

[Deleted]

"...to make petulant, self-serving, simple-minded attacks...instead of undertaking an earnest, candid attempt to understand what motivated voters to make their respective choices..."

Unfortunately, this is pretty much the fundamental nature of political discourse (on all sides) in 2016.

[tgo]

Jun 28, 2016 15:27:02 GMT -5 @cam said:

"...to make petulant, self-serving, simple-minded attacks...instead of undertaking an earnest, candid attempt to understand what motivated voters to make their respective choices..."

Unfortunately, this is pretty much the fundamental nature of political discourse (on all sides) in 2016.

Fact

[kchoya]

Jun 28, 2016 7:36:34 GMT -5 @cam said:

Jun 27, 2016 16:30:11 GMT -5 kchoya said:

The issue that has bothered me most with Brexit is the chorus of those in favor of "Remain" coming out to denigrate those that voted to leave the EU as dimwits who didn't understand what they were voting for, and who were to stupid to follow the "experts" that advised against leaving the EU. It's a strain that we hear from the left in this country, that the supporters of Trump are simply a bunch of racist, bigoted, sexist bumpkins and, to piggyback off of HSB's post, the enlightened electoral college should save the country from the unwashed masses. Matt Taibbi had a good piece on this phenomenon:

Rolling Stone: The Reaction to Brexit Is the Reason Brexit Happened

But doesn't the Google data quoted above make you wonder how many people actually didn't know what they were voting for (or against?)

Um, no.

No, Britons Were Not Frantically Googling ‘What Is The EU?’ Hours After Brexit Vote

The problem with using Google Trends as an indication of anything other than a relative increase or decrease over previous norms is that it doesn’t give the whole picture. Yes, there may have been a big spike in searches about what happens if the U.K. leaves the EU, but compared with what? Were there hundreds of thousands of people searching Google for these answers? Millions?

It turns out the figure is likely to be less than 1,000 people, or 0.001 percent of the population.

According to analysis by Remy Smith on Medium, in the month prior to the Brexit vote, 8,100 Britons searched Google for “What is the EU?” which translates to around 261 people a day. So a 250 percent increase could be generated by as few as 650 people searching Google for the answer to this question.

[DallasHoya]

Jun 28, 2016 21:15:12 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Jun 28, 2016 7:36:34 GMT -5 @cam said:

But doesn't the Google data quoted above make you wonder how many people actually didn't know what they were voting for (or against?)

Um, no.

No, Britons Were Not Frantically Googling ‘What Is The EU?’ Hours After Brexit Vote

The problem with using Google Trends as an indication of anything other than a relative increase or decrease over previous norms is that it doesn’t give the whole picture. Yes, there may have been a big spike in searches about what happens if the U.K. leaves the EU, but compared with what? Were there hundreds of thousands of people searching Google for these answers? Millions?

It turns out the figure is likely to be less than 1,000 people, or 0.001 percent of the population.

According to analysis by Remy Smith on Medium, in the month prior to the Brexit vote, 8,100 Britons searched Google for “What is the EU?” which translates to around 261 people a day. So a 250 percent increase could be generated by as few as 650 people searching Google for the answer to this question.

Not to mention no one knows who is searching. The ones searching could just as easily be Remain voters who are trying to figure out what it means to pull out of the EU. Or they could be non-voters. Why do the elites (and some posters) assume that the ones searching are dimwitted Exit voters who don't know what they voted for?

[HoyaSinceBirth]

I think the reason people draw that conclusion is the news reports of leave voters coming forward saying they didn't really think them voting leave would end up with Britain actually leaving the EU or that they wish they could take it back. People draw a connection between those two events.

[Buckets]

The real problem with Brexit is the "Leave" voters have vastly different ideas for what that entails. If 52% of Americans say they don't want to vote for Trump or Hillary in November, but that 52% is split between those hoping for Gary Johnson and those dreaming of a Sanders/Stein ticket, then you're not actually anywhere closer to a solution. What ends up coming of Brexit is inevitably going to anger a hefty portion of the Leave vote.

[kchoya]

Jun 29, 2016 9:57:04 GMT -5 HoyaSinceBirth said:

I think the reason people draw that conclusion is the news reports of leave voters coming forward saying they didn't really think them voting leave would end up with Britain actually leaving the EU or that they wish they could take it back. People draw a connection between those two events.

I think the reason that people draw that conclusion is the WaPo ran a story that leapt to conclusions about the volume of searches, and the motivation of those searching.

WaPo Article

"The British are frantically Googling what the E.U. is, hours after voting to leave it" seems like a headline you'd see at InfoWars or some other site regularly linked to by Drudge, not the Washington Post.

[TC]

Jun 29, 2016 11:47:27 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Jun 29, 2016 9:57:04 GMT -5 HoyaSinceBirth said:

I think the reason people draw that conclusion is the news reports of leave voters coming forward saying they didn't really think them voting leave would end up with Britain actually leaving the EU or that they wish they could take it back. People draw a connection between those two events.

I think the reason that people draw that conclusion is the WaPo ran a story that leapt to conclusions about the volume of searches, and the motivation of those searching.

I think HSB is referencing widely played interviews where voters literally said "I wish I could take back my vote".