"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Ray wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Ray wrote:
So the pictures of him standing in front of that bus all fake?

That's not a promise and it wasn't his bus.

One of the best excuses in recent times. He just happened to be
photographed in front of it, against his will.

Even you should be able to do better than that pathetic effort.

Obviously not.

Even the bus itself had no promise on it.

You should be a politician. They are the only ones allowed to lie through
their teeth.

Even you should be able to do better than that pathetic effort.

Obviously not.

There was no promise on that bus.

In article ,
Ray wrote:
You should be a politician. They are the only ones allowed to lie through
their teeth.

Even you should be able to do better than that pathetic effort.

Obviously not.

There was no promise on that bus.

Does something have to say 'this is a promise' for many to believe it? And
just what do you consider a promise in politics anyway?

--
*A woman drove me to drink and I didn't have the decency to thank her

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 02:42:51 +1100, Ray, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

FLUSH the senile cretin's latest troll****

02:42??? LOL And you've been up and trolling since 01:44 ALREADY!!!

Wanna bet that you will be up and trolling ALL NIGHT LONG, yet AGAIN, you
subnormal senile psychopathic pig?

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 85-year-old trolling senile
cretin from Oz:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Ray wrote:
You should be a politician. They are the only ones allowed to lie
through
their teeth.

Even you should be able to do better than that pathetic effort.

Obviously not.

There was no promise on that bus.

Does something have to say 'this is a promise' for many to believe it?

No, but clearly suggesting that what had previously
been sent to the EU every year could be used locally
instead is nothing even remotely like a promise to
spend it all on the NHS,

And just what do you consider a promise in politics anyway?

What is in the party manifesto in the election campaign is a lot closer to a
promise to do that.

On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 02:42:51 +1100, "Ray" wrote:



"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Ray wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Ray wrote:
So the pictures of him standing in front of that bus all fake?

That's not a promise and it wasn't his bus.

One of the best excuses in recent times. He just happened to be
photographed in front of it, against his will.

Even you should be able to do better than that pathetic effort.

Obviously not.

Even the bus itself had no promise on it.

You should be a politician. They are the only ones allowed to lie through
their teeth.

Even you should be able to do better than that pathetic effort.

Obviously not.

There was no promise on that bus.

Correct. It was a suggestion, which Johnson fully endorsed. Every
stage hypnotist and sleight-of-hand operator knows the power of
suggestion. And all the Little Englanders fell for it.

On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 03:53:03 +1100, Ray, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

FLUSH the sociopathic senile cretin's latest troll****

03:55??? LOL So you've been up and trolling for OVER TWO HOURS already, yet
AGAIN! Seriously, why don't you just euthanize yourself, you useless
despicable piece of trolling senile ****?

--
FredXX to Rot Speed:
"You are still an idiot and an embarrassment to your country. No wonder
we shipped the likes of you out of the British Isles. Perhaps stupidity
and criminality is inherited after all?"
Message-ID:

In message , alan_m
writes
On 04/02/2020 17:01, Custos Custodum wrote:

Correct. It was a suggestion, which Johnson fully endorsed. Every
stage hypnotist and sleight-of-hand operator knows the power of
suggestion. And all the Little Englanders fell for it.



Why do those who oppose leaving believe that 17 million people (and
maybe more during the last general election) were fooled by the 350
million figure especially with so much contemporary publicity saying
that the figure was a lie?

Are you claiming that people who tell lies never win elections?



--
Tim Lamb

alan_m wrote
Custos Custodum wrote

Correct. It was a suggestion, which Johnson fully endorsed. Every stage
hypnotist and sleight-of-hand operator knows the power of suggestion. And
all the Little Englanders fell for it.

Why do those who oppose leaving believe that 17 million people (and maybe
more during the last general election) were fooled by the 350 million
figure especially with so much contemporary publicity saying that the
figure was a lie?

Basically because they stupidly believe that most of the leavers
were fooled and didnt make a rational chose that leaving is better.

On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 20:45:36 +0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 04/02/2020 17:01, Custos Custodum wrote:

Correct. It was a suggestion, which Johnson fully endorsed. Every
stage hypnotist and sleight-of-hand operator knows the power of
suggestion. And all the Little Englanders fell for it.



Why do those who oppose leaving believe that 17 million people (and
maybe more during the last general election) were fooled by the 350
million figure especially with so much contemporary publicity saying
that the figure was a lie?

It wasn't so much the actual figure as the implication that most, if
not all of it would be spent on the NHS. I saw enough clueless vox
pops on TV (no doubt specially selected for their cluelessness) to
know that they had indeed swallowed the lie.

On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 20:45:36 +0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 04/02/2020 17:01, Custos Custodum wrote:

Correct. It was a suggestion, which Johnson fully endorsed. Every
stage hypnotist and sleight-of-hand operator knows the power of
suggestion. And all the Little Englanders fell for it.



Why do those who oppose leaving believe that 17 million people (and
maybe more during the last general election) were fooled by the 350
million figure

1) Only Brexiteers 'believe'. Levers need to know or won't gamble.
2) It didn't need 17M people to believe it, just a few more than those
who voted Remain.
3) They didn't need to be completely fooled, they just needed to be
swayed, given how little fact was being offered at the time.
4) There were two lies on the bus and if anyone believed either then
that could have been enough to sway the vote.
a) £350M/w to the EU
b) That it could fund the NHS 'instead'. [1]
5) Of the money we agreed to pay to the EU (nearer £250M/w), we then
get a good percentage of it back through grants and other benefits.

https://fullfact.org/europe/350-mill...hority-misuse/

"We have never paid the EU £350 million a week and we have never owed
the EU £350 million a week. After we leave the EU, that means we
cannot take back control of £350 million a week."

And how does it actually compare with our other costs:
http://www.hl.co.uk/__data/assets/im...ng-10.1.17.png


especially with so much contemporary publicity saying
that the figure was a lie?

Publicity that really only hit the main press *after* the event.

Please don't keep trying to Jedi mind trick you way past any of the
above. It really doesn't work. the *point* is that it was a scam that
worked (along with the other lies) because just enough people fell for
it. You 'won', well done. Bask in your hollow victory (while you can).

Cheers, T i m

[1] I know it doesn't actually say it *would* be 'given to the NHS
instead' (but 'let's' is pretty close) but once you (= 'the gullible')
have an idea like that set in peoples minds they like to believe it,
especially if they are looking for reasons to blame something they
don't like, even if they don't know why they don't like it (other than
those thoughts that have been put into their minds by racists, Little
Englanders and anti EU fanatics etc).

On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 08:51:26 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH troll****

08:51??? So you've been up and trolling for OVER SEVEN HOURS, ALL NIGHT
LONG, yet AGAIN! Do you ADMIT by now that you ARE clinically insane, senile
Rodent?

--
Norman Wells addressing trolling senile Rodent:
"Ah, the voice of scum speaks."
MID:

On 04/02/2020 22:27, Custos Custodum wrote:
I saw enough clueless vox
pops on TV (no doubt specially selected for their cluelessness) to
know that they had indeed swallowed the lie.


Take any subject and get a journalist to go into the streets with a
microphone and they will get the worthless answers they deserve. It's
much like those doing street surveys. The majority people approached
will tell them politely to **** off. Are the minority who agree to
answer questions now representative of the general population?

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 22:57:19 +0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 04/02/2020 22:27, Custos Custodum wrote:
I saw enough clueless vox
pops on TV (no doubt specially selected for their cluelessness) to
know that they had indeed swallowed the lie.


Take any subject and get a journalist to go into the streets with a
microphone and they will get the worthless answers they deserve. It's
much like those doing street surveys. The majority people approached
will tell them politely to **** off. Are the minority who agree to
answer questions now representative of the general population?

Why wouldn't they be as according to you the same range of people
voted for all of us to leave the EU?

Cheers, T i m

"Custos Custodum" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 20:45:36 +0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 04/02/2020 17:01, Custos Custodum wrote:

Correct. It was a suggestion, which Johnson fully endorsed. Every
stage hypnotist and sleight-of-hand operator knows the power of
suggestion. And all the Little Englanders fell for it.



Why do those who oppose leaving believe that 17 million people (and
maybe more during the last general election) were fooled by the 350
million figure especially with so much contemporary publicity saying
that the figure was a lie?

It wasn't so much the actual figure as the implication
that most, if not all of it would be spent on the NHS.

The bus didn't say would, it actually said could.

I saw enough clueless vox pops on TV (no doubt specially selected for
their cluelessness) to know that they had indeed swallowed the lie.

It was never a lie. At most less than the full story.

In article ,
alan_m wrote:
On 04/02/2020 17:01, Custos Custodum wrote:

Correct. It was a suggestion, which Johnson fully endorsed. Every
stage hypnotist and sleight-of-hand operator knows the power of
suggestion. And all the Little Englanders fell for it.



Why do those who oppose leaving believe that 17 million people (and
maybe more during the last general election) were fooled by the 350
million figure especially with so much contemporary publicity saying
that the figure was a lie?

You didn't need 17 million to believe the lies. A couple of million was
enough to sway the vote. Plenty had perfectly acceptable reasons to want
to leave - even where others disagreed with them.

--
*We are born naked, wet, and hungry. Then things get worse.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
Says a poor loser, who conveniently forgets the tales of economic
collapse told by losers.

Err, we haven't left yet. Other than on paper. Basically nothing has yet
changed to cause (or not) an economic collapse. Next year will be the time
to finally see how things start going.

--
*I tried to catch some fog, but I mist.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 04/02/2020 20:16, Custos Custodum wrote:
On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 19:56:40 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 04/02/2020 17:01, Custos Custodum wrote:
Correct. It was a suggestion, which Johnson fully endorsed. Every
stage hypnotist and sleight-of-hand operator knows the power of
suggestion. And all the Little Englanders fell for it.
No, all the little Europeaners fell for it.

Patent bollox.

Of course it was, but that's how thick little europeaners are.


--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 04/02/2020 20:45, alan_m wrote:
On 04/02/2020 17:01, Custos Custodum wrote:

Correct. It was a suggestion, which Johnson fully endorsed. Every
stage hypnotist and sleight-of-hand operator knows the power of
suggestion. And all the Little Englanders fell for it.



Why do those who oppose leaving believe that 17 million people (and
maybe moreÂ* during the last general election) were fooled by the 350
million figure especially with so much contemporary publicity saying
that the figure was a lie?


Because to admit that their liberal politically correct 'majority' is
actually a minority groupthink echo chaanber would destroy their
fragile egos.

And, having no actual personalities, there would be nothing left.

--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 04/02/2020 20:56, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , alan_m
writes
On 04/02/2020 17:01, Custos Custodum wrote:

Correct. It was a suggestion, which Johnson fully endorsed. Every
stage hypnotist and sleight-of-hand operator knows the power of
suggestion. And all the Little Englanders fell for it.



Why do those who oppose leaving believe that 17 million people (and
maybe moreÂ* during the last general election) were fooled by the 350
million figure especially with so much contemporary publicity saying
that the figure was a lie?

Are you claiming that people who tell lies never win elections?

No. Where did that come from?






--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 04/02/2020 22:27, Custos Custodum wrote:
On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 20:45:36 +0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 04/02/2020 17:01, Custos Custodum wrote:

Correct. It was a suggestion, which Johnson fully endorsed. Every
stage hypnotist and sleight-of-hand operator knows the power of
suggestion. And all the Little Englanders fell for it.



Why do those who oppose leaving believe that 17 million people (and
maybe more during the last general election) were fooled by the 350
million figure especially with so much contemporary publicity saying
that the figure was a lie?

It wasn't so much the actual figure as the implication that most, if
not all of it would be spent on the NHS. I saw enough clueless vox
pops on TV (no doubt specially selected for their cluelessness) to
know that they had indeed swallowed the lie.

"I saw enough clueless vox pops on TV"

Bless!

Never met any real people, just swallowed what the TV presented to him...

Its classical archetypal remoaner-in-a-bubble swallowing predigested
opinions carefully formed for him by the mainstream media.

You should get out more and meet real people

--
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a
kind word alone.

Al Capone

On 04/02/2020 22:57, alan_m wrote:
On 04/02/2020 22:27, Custos Custodum wrote:
I saw enough clueless vox
pops on TV (no doubt specially selected for their cluelessness) to
know that they had indeed swallowed the lie.


Take any subject and get a journalist to go into the streets with a
microphone and they will get the worthless answers they deserve. It's
much like those doing street surveys. The majority people approached
will tell them politely to **** off. Are the minority who agree to
answer questions now representative of the general population?

And all the ones that dont fit the editors preconceptions or agenda end
up on the cutting room floor.


--
"The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll
look exactly the same afterwards."

Billy Connolly

On 04/02/2020 22:29, T i m wrote:


Please don't keep trying to Jedi mind trick you way past any of the
above. It really doesn't work. the *point* is that it was a scam that
worked (along with the other lies) because just enough people fell for
it. You 'won', well done. Bask in your hollow victory (while you can).

You probably need to meet one person I know who voted remain for the
sole reason that if she voted leave her prescription drugs would no
longer be available. I wonder how she formed that opinion?

Based on this unscientific survey of the way people I know voted the
result was only so close because the lies told by those advocating remain.

You endlessly harp on about one lie but conveniently forget that there
were so many lies and half truths told by on both sides of the campaign
that even the "experts" would be hard pressed to understand why people
actually voted the way they did and even then was it based on hard facts
or just a fuzzy feeling that the way they voted was right.


You 'won', well done. Bask in your hollow victory (while you can).

Again you completely misunderstand why many people voted leave and you
will probably continue to remind us that everything that goes wrong in
the future with the economy or industry will be due to brexit.

Will the future plans by car manufacturers be influenced by brexit or by
the intention to ban the sale of all petrol/diesel cars in the UK by
2035, especially if the EU countries (and the rest of the world) don't
match this time scale?

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
alan_m wrote:
On 04/02/2020 17:01, Custos Custodum wrote:

Correct. It was a suggestion, which Johnson fully endorsed. Every
stage hypnotist and sleight-of-hand operator knows the power of
suggestion. And all the Little Englanders fell for it.



Why do those who oppose leaving believe that 17 million people (and
maybe more during the last general election) were fooled by the 350
million figure especially with so much contemporary publicity saying
that the figure was a lie?

You didn't need 17 million to believe the lies. A couple of million was
enough to sway the vote. Plenty had perfectly acceptable reasons to want
to leave - even where others disagreed with them.

Basically, whoever paid for that bus, bought enough votes to influence
the outcome.
However, we are where we are and need to accept the result without
further recrimination.
While it is nice to have someone to blame if things go badly further
obstruction is not helpful for any.


--
Tim Lamb

On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 10:35:49 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


The bus didn't say would, it actually said could.

I saw enough clueless vox pops on TV (no doubt specially selected for
their cluelessness) to know that they had indeed swallowed the lie.

It was never a lie. At most less than the full story.

In auto-contradicting mode again, you clinically insane, incontinent, senile
Ozzie****

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 85-year-old trolling senile
cretin from Oz:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 08:50:37 +0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 04/02/2020 22:29, T i m wrote:


Please don't keep trying to Jedi mind trick you way past any of the
above. It really doesn't work. the *point* is that it was a scam that
worked (along with the other lies) because just enough people fell for
it. You 'won', well done. Bask in your hollow victory (while you can).

You probably need to meet one person I know who voted remain for the
sole reason that if she voted leave her prescription drugs would no
longer be available. I wonder how she formed that opinion?

Based on this unscientific survey of the way people I know voted the
result was only so close because the lies told by those advocating remain.

As I warned, I'm not going to fall for your attempts of distraction
and how we came to a Leave win in the first place:

'Leaving' needed reasons and should have been decided fairly. It
wasn't. Counter the following statements with honesty (if you possibly
can), not give me any more Leaver BS:

so snip pathetic distraction attempt
replaced cowardly snips

1) Only Brexiteers 'believe'. Levers need to know or won't gamble.
2) It didn't need 17M people to believe it, just a few more than those
who voted Remain.
3) They didn't need to be completely fooled, they just needed to be
swayed, given how little fact was being offered at the time.
4) There were two lies on the bus and if anyone believed either then
that could have been enough to sway the vote.
a) £350M/w to the EU
b) That it could fund the NHS 'instead'.
5) Of the money we agreed to pay to the EU (nearer £250M/w), we then
get a good percentage of it back through grants and other benefits.

https://fullfact.org/europe/350-mill...hority-misuse/

It's nothing to do with how it turns out in court, it's all to do with
how you came to be throwing away my future in the first place.

Cheers, T i m

On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 23:17:54 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

snip

It only needed a few percent to sway the vote to Leave.

That was all that was needed.

We know, in you left brainer world.

Shows the feeling against the EU.

It (the tiny majority) shows the feeling of a minority of the UK
Electorate about all sorts of things (inc racism).

Leave cheated and that is against the spirit of true democracy.

Says a poor loser,

I had no dog in the fight remember. The loss was only the loss of true
democracy.

who conveniently forgets the tales of economic
collapse told by losers.

What part about the genuine fear of something negative compared with a
complete fantasy (unsubstantiated) belief re something positive don't
you left brainers get?

Give me some proof how you know leaving will be *very likely* to make
the lives of 'most people' better, or concede it was just a scam that
won the game but could still mean we lose the house.

Cheers, T i m

On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 09:25:02 +0000, Tim Streater
wrote:

snip

Says a poor loser, who conveniently forgets the tales of economic
collapse told by losers.

Yes, he carefully overlooks all the Project Fear lies.

Because (and obviously you wouldn't get this on your own because you
are a left brainer), Leave won and only *Leaving* would be a change
from the status quo.

If you dare someone to jump off a cliff (for no tangible reason, like
the false promise of something) and they don't, there is nothing lost,
it's only if they jump are questions likely to be asked and especially
your part in it.

I *really* CGAF if we left or stayed, as long as whatever we did was
decided honestly and fairly and was done democratically (a straight
advisory referendum first, then a people vote for starters) and where
liars *aren't* allowed to post lies on the sides of busses on the
grounds it's easier to get forgiveness than permission.

Do you think for one second they would have been allowed to post the
lies on the side of the bust if they were required to go though some
sort of honesty audit first?

Also, in your left brainer world, how many Remainers do you actually
think thought the sky would fall in ... but might just be cautious /
concerned that it might not actually do us the good that the Leavers
promised but couldn't justify?

There is nothing dangerous in being a glass half empty person,
especially when there is little tangible proof that the promise of
more water may just be hopes and dreams.

This is the problem with left brainers and cognitive bias, they think
that both sides are equal and that's far from the truth. Leavers and
only leavers were the activists and *have to* 'sell' the facts to
everone else. They didn't, they used tricks and lies.

Democracy is something that happens continuously and why I can't
support (and never will) us Leaving the EU under those bogus grounds.

Cheers, T i m

On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 09:29:27 +0000, Tim Lamb
wrote:

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
alan_m wrote:
On 04/02/2020 17:01, Custos Custodum wrote:

Correct. It was a suggestion, which Johnson fully endorsed. Every
stage hypnotist and sleight-of-hand operator knows the power of
suggestion. And all the Little Englanders fell for it.



Why do those who oppose leaving believe that 17 million people (and
maybe more during the last general election) were fooled by the 350
million figure especially with so much contemporary publicity saying
that the figure was a lie?

You didn't need 17 million to believe the lies. A couple of million was
enough to sway the vote. Plenty had perfectly acceptable reasons to want
to leave - even where others disagreed with them.

Basically, whoever paid for that bus, bought enough votes to influence
the outcome.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3579676.html

"Mr Cummings also coined the group’s official slogan “vote leave, take
control”. An official Vote Leave poster also claimed that “Turkey
(population 76million) is joining the EU.”

Bingo, it really could come down to something as simple (and devious)
as that.

However, we are where we are and need to accept the result without
further recrimination.

Do we though? If someone tricks you into cleaning and painting your
roof with some false promises then it fails, do you just walk away?

While it is nice to have someone to blame if things go badly further
obstruction is not helpful for any.


Other than we haven't left yet, the final deal still isn't struck and
democracy doesn't just happen on one day.

If the idea that not everyone is happy to accept anything the
government now comes up with re us Leaving, they might just moderate
what they do for fear of being voted out at the next election (or
sooner).

Which will be the case if the sh1t really hits the fan.

Cheers, T i m

On 05/02/2020 09:29, Tim Lamb wrote:
Basically, whoever paid for that bus, bought enough votes to influence
the outcome.
Whereas the people who bought ALL the *other* busses saying bollox to
brexit and we love the EU didnt buy enough votes .

Oh dear Tim. ten times more was spent in remain propaganda than leave.

Or are you still in denial?


--
"When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

Josef Stalin

On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 13:12:48 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 05/02/2020 09:29, Tim Lamb wrote:
Basically, whoever paid for that bus, bought enough votes to influence
the outcome.

Whereas the people who bought ALL the *other* busses saying bollox to
brexit and we love the EU didnt buy enough votes .

Because 1) few saw them [1] and 2) remaining wasn't a decision to
change the status quo, only leaving was. People are rarely interested
in voting in what they already have or learning about what they
already know (or think they know).

Oh dear Tim. ten times more was spent in remain propaganda than leave.

See above.

Or are you still in denial?

He never was, he's just dealing with facts (about people) that you
can't even begin to consider.

Cheers, T i m

[1] I saw a few and laughed at the Remainer ones I saw as they were
just funny, not telling lies or trying to scam the gullible.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Because to admit that their liberal politically correct 'majority' is
actually a minority groupthink echo chaanber would destroy their
fragile egos.

Fragile egos can be seen as a good thing. I doubt you'd understand why.

--
*OK, who stopped payment on my reality check?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Its classical archetypal remoaner-in-a-bubble swallowing predigested
opinions carefully formed for him by the mainstream media.

You should get out more and meet real people

Can I ask where you go to meet 'real people'?

--
*The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on my list.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 04/02/2020 22:57, alan_m wrote:
On 04/02/2020 22:27, Custos Custodum wrote:
I saw enough clueless vox
pops on TV (no doubt specially selected for their cluelessness) to
know that they had indeed swallowed the lie.


Take any subject and get a journalist to go into the streets with a
microphone and they will get the worthless answers they deserve. It's
much like those doing street surveys. The majority people approached
will tell them politely to **** off. Are the minority who agree to
answer questions now representative of the general population?

And all the ones that dont fit the editors preconceptions or agenda end
up on the cutting room floor.

You've not kept up with TV technology? Film and cutting rooms ain't been
use in news and current affairs for some 40 years.

--
*A dog's not just for Christmas, it's alright on a Friday night too*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
alan_m wrote:
Please don't keep trying to Jedi mind trick you way past any of the
above. It really doesn't work. the *point* is that it was a scam that
worked (along with the other lies) because just enough people fell for
it. You 'won', well done. Bask in your hollow victory (while you can).

You probably need to meet one person I know who voted remain for the
sole reason that if she voted leave her prescription drugs would no
longer be available. I wonder how she formed that opinion?

How indeed?

Seems to me the majority voted based on beliefs they'd held for a long
long time. Without questioning any of them.

--
*Honk if you love peace and quiet.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/02/2020 09:29, Tim Lamb wrote:
Basically, whoever paid for that bus, bought enough votes to influence
the outcome.
Whereas the people who bought ALL the *other* busses saying bollox to
brexit and we love the EU didnt buy enough votes .

Nothing like appealing to people's wallets. And leave were very keen to
imply everyone would be better off after we leave.

Only recently have they admitted that hard times are very likely ahead for
many.

--
*I'm not a paranoid, deranged millionaire. Dammit, I'm a billionaire.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 09:29, Tim Lamb wrote:
Basically, whoever paid for that bus, bought enough votes to
influence the outcome.
Whereas the people who bought ALL the *other* busses saying bollox to
brexit and we love the EU didnt buy enough votes .

No lies there. Plain statements.

Oh dear Tim. ten times more was spent in remain propaganda than leave.

Oh? Who paid for that then?

Or are you still in denial?

I'm not denying anything. Spaced Tim has an agenda. I see no benefit in
pursuing a lost cause and would prefer the dispute left to the political
groups.



--
Tim Lamb

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Ray wrote:
You should be a politician. They are the only ones allowed to lie through
their teeth.

Even you should be able to do better than that pathetic effort.

Obviously not.

There was no promise on that bus.

Does something have to say 'this is a promise' for many to believe it? And
just what do you consider a promise in politics anyway?

A statement of a fact is not a promise.
A suggestion to do something is not a promise, but in this case it is
being implemented.
--
bert

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 05/02/2020 09:29, Tim Lamb wrote:
Basically, whoever paid for that bus, bought enough votes to influence
the outcome.
Whereas the people who bought ALL the *other* busses saying bollox to
brexit and we love the EU didnt buy enough votes .

Because their buses werent painted with catchy enough
stuff to have everyone talking about them.

Oh dear Tim. ten times more was spent in remain propaganda than leave.

But clearly they ****ed most of that money against the bus walls.

Or are you still in denial?

He will be until he dies, even if brexit works very well indeed.

On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 03:34:22 +1100, jon lopgel, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

FLUSH the clinically insane sleepless senile Arsetralian's latest
troll****

03:34??? LMAO

--
FredXX to Rot Speed:
"You are still an idiot and an embarrassment to your country. No wonder
we shipped the likes of you out of the British Isles. Perhaps stupidity
and criminality is inherited after all?"
Message-ID:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Its classical archetypal remoaner-in-a-bubble swallowing predigested
opinions carefully formed for him by the mainstream media.

You should get out more and meet real people

Can I ask where you go to meet 'real people'?

It doesn't really matter. Even with the best will in the world,
one person trying to sample the views of millions of people by
means of personal meetings has no realist chance of not falling
prey to biases of one kind or another. Even professional opinion
pollsters have to work hard to get good-enough results.

It seems clear enough from discussions here that some people have
experiences that suggest that a majority of real people they meet
think Brexit is a good idea; whilst for others the majority of real
people *they* meet think it is a bad idea.

Mind you, the whole situation can become - at least superficially -
nicely clear cut if you decide that people whose views you dislike
are not "real people", or should be discounted since they have
obviously been misled by propaganda.




#Paul