EU referendum, brexit and the aftermath

They fixed Trumps election

Did they? Or is this another liberal fantasy?

Trump didn't win because of fake news or because of Russia or any of that conspiratorial bullshit. Trump won because Hillary Clinton was an outstandingly shit candidate. Trump didn't turn out some record number of voters - his share of the vote was smaller than Mitt Romney's in 2012, and look what happened to Mittens. Had Hillary not run such a spectacularly shit campaign - like maybe if you want to win Wisconsin then you should try campaigning in Wisconsin - she would've beaten Trump comfortably. But for some mystical fucking reason her message of 'America is already great, I deserve to be president, stand aside you dirty plebs' didn't chime with the people.

Liberals can't face up to the reality of having lost or face up to the why of their defeat, so they retreat into this comforting derangement where Trump stole the election*, where they were cheated out of power, where they didn't really lose, not really.

#Berniewouldvewon

*there is a serious conversation to be had about the impact of the changes to the voting rights act, I won't deny that.

'Eat more shit--billions of flies can't be wrong.' :)

I do think it makes a difference, yes. Nothing is ever a guarantee of course and no one is immune to manipulation and propaganda (though different people clearly respond to very different things). But if you look at it the other way around, if anything might give you some amount of 'protection' from being manipulated, it's being at least somewhat informed about how things work and what's going on. Especially as in my mind, this presupposes the existence of some skills, such as online research, and having a certain amount of scepticism.

At least there's been some move towards trying to teach more of that in school (e.g. online research skills), and I do think the younger generation growing up now is less likely to read one of those chain letter thingies on Facebook and believe everything it says like some people clearly do.

@Oliver Schick

Bit of a clichee example, but yes: the rub is usually in the interpretation of data. That's why there are people who do nothing else: it's really not straightforward.

[bangs head against desk]

It would be ever so helpful if you could point out what exactly you disagree with.

The point I was making in the first instance - before you entered my life - was that the tone of the thread ('we, the remainers, are the smart ones') was pretty odious. You then came in with some comment about the prevalence of idiots in the world, but now here you are a few pages later saying 'yeah, you wouldn't want to assume that all the smart people voted remain' which was basically my point in the first place.

This is amusing.
As if watching a documentary on Netflix makes you 'woke'

The sentence I responded to was your sarcastic "We lost a referendum because we're smarter than everyone else!" This seems to imply that the success of referenda is usually tied to the people winning it being smarter, which is just not the case. Nor does losing one mean that your stance wasn't smarter.

And yes, for the record, I do think Brexit is a really really daft idea.

democracy has ceased to be

No it hasn't.

By any stretch of the imagination.

Unless, of course, you are begging the question and defining democracy in such a way that your claim holds any water at all.

If you consider democracy to be, at its most basic, the free exercise of choice, then the ability to influence the choice of others is entirely an extension of that freedom.

If you can persuade enough of these people to your point of view (or convince them not to vote at all) then you can win.

That sounds extremely democratic.

@magpie would have made a more valid point had they suggested that marginalising, disenfranchising and excluding various voting blocs (cf. gerrymandering, voter registration etc...) was entirely undemocratic, and killing democracy.

You misspelled 'librul'.

yes, replying earnestly to a joke is often a good idea

Also - if someone has been fucking about with the scales this causes problems too... people believe they're getting something when they're actually being shafted #notadrugdealer #stopfuckingwiththescales

Ah yes, the good old "it was just a prank bro" way out of things.

[bangs head against desk]

Yeah that's not helping any. You're welcome to point out which part of that sentence qualifies it as a joke.

No it hasn't.

Thanks for your vote, we'll let you know what the final count is. :)

[bangs head against desk]

The ignore function is great btw

Are you seriously saying that you thought it was meant sarcastically but you're also taking it at face value as a serious statement?

Oh my fucking god, do I seriously have to explain to you how sarcasm works? Here:

the use of remarks that clearly mean the opposite of what they say, made in order to hurt someone's feelings or to criticize something in a humorous way

"We lost a referendum because we're smarter than everyone else" = "if you're smarter than everyone else, shouldn't you have won the referendum?"

And the answer is no, because that's not how that works.

You know you're doing well when you're bringing out the dictionary definitions

but whilst we're in your dictionary definitions

in a humorous way

I.e. a joke. Please see above comment about responding earnestly to a joke

You know you're doing well when you have nothing relevant to say anymore.

And no, sarcasm is not the same as just 'a joke'.

Has anyone heard this one?

A SwissChap and an Eejit walk into a bar.

Err ... I've forgotten the rest. It was a good joke, though.

You must be lots of fun at parties