Crosswords34 mins ago
In Or Out
I am getting a bit confused about the in or out EU vote.
All the poles I have seen, all the chatter I have heard have indicated that the majority would vote out.
Why is it that the 'people in the know' and section of the media and government keep saying that an In vote is far more likely than out?
I know the voting public can be fickle and contrary to what is predicted but why is there such a gap between what I see and hear to what is predicted?
It just really puzzles me.
All the poles I have seen, all the chatter I have heard have indicated that the majority would vote out.
Why is it that the 'people in the know' and section of the media and government keep saying that an In vote is far more likely than out?
I know the voting public can be fickle and contrary to what is predicted but why is there such a gap between what I see and hear to what is predicted?
It just really puzzles me.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by cassa333. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Please remember how the media and "those in the know" called the general election.
I think all "media" is becoming a little bit redundant with the sheer amount of noise supplied by individuals' social media channels. This noise and its effects are not really known to the mainstream media, and so they are now missing huge amounts of data when they make these predictions.
This would be my best guess as to why the EU vote is considered already called by "those in the know".
I think all "media" is becoming a little bit redundant with the sheer amount of noise supplied by individuals' social media channels. This noise and its effects are not really known to the mainstream media, and so they are now missing huge amounts of data when they make these predictions.
This would be my best guess as to why the EU vote is considered already called by "those in the know".
I think your question has more than one answer. Of course I'm giving opinion rather than solid evidence but:
First off some like to seem to be "in the know", but chances are they are no more "in the know" than the rest of us. For sure some may be in positions where they ought to be able to make a better guess than the average individual, but being human they will also have personal preferences which may colour the interpretation they use, the assumptions they make, and any conclusions they draw.
There again some might have a need to 'stay in' with the powerful in the hope of benefiting from the gravy train, golden goodbyes, whatever as a personal gain thing. Common sense tells us that this is going to be the case regardless which individuals one suspects and regardless of available evidence until it's too late.
There again some may have a job where it will be easier for them to get results if they don't have to deal with separate bodies/countries/whatever and can instead just go along with the large group. The idea of having to show some skills and really achieve for a change, would be a little frightening. They may show themselves not to be one of those folk you must give whatever salary they demand or else they go elsewhere, after all.
Still others may be pessimistic with regards to change. It is human nature to want to stick with the familiar. The devil you know. They would be adverse to any small amount of turbulence as things settle down. The fact that it may be, and IMO almost certainly will be, better for the UK after voting for change, does not convince all.
There may be more reasons but perhaps that will suffice for now.
First off some like to seem to be "in the know", but chances are they are no more "in the know" than the rest of us. For sure some may be in positions where they ought to be able to make a better guess than the average individual, but being human they will also have personal preferences which may colour the interpretation they use, the assumptions they make, and any conclusions they draw.
There again some might have a need to 'stay in' with the powerful in the hope of benefiting from the gravy train, golden goodbyes, whatever as a personal gain thing. Common sense tells us that this is going to be the case regardless which individuals one suspects and regardless of available evidence until it's too late.
There again some may have a job where it will be easier for them to get results if they don't have to deal with separate bodies/countries/whatever and can instead just go along with the large group. The idea of having to show some skills and really achieve for a change, would be a little frightening. They may show themselves not to be one of those folk you must give whatever salary they demand or else they go elsewhere, after all.
Still others may be pessimistic with regards to change. It is human nature to want to stick with the familiar. The devil you know. They would be adverse to any small amount of turbulence as things settle down. The fact that it may be, and IMO almost certainly will be, better for the UK after voting for change, does not convince all.
There may be more reasons but perhaps that will suffice for now.
It's because the IN crowd are like a religion, they don't need convincing to believe they have "faith", they don't need logic. Despite repeated attempts I have never been given a reason to stay in that is not also available out. The In crowd are also less vocal at the moment but I think they will silently vote in like loyal devotees. I do so hope I'm wrong.
The first poll I looked at says roughly 50/50 which is pretty much what I thought the position was.
http://
http://
Latest Posts
News52 mins ago
Trump/Ukraine, What Will He Do?
News87 mins ago
Crime Cases Still Using Cassettes
Technology133 mins ago
