Quote:
Originally Posted by jalfrezi
That graphic supports the view that the In campaign's advocates have suffered from complacency.
Really, with most of the economists, large companies and non-emotional arguments firmly on the side of In, they should be romping home in the polls now.
Facts aren't hidden anywhere.
All the good arguments are still on the side of in. Its the electorate's fault.
I think I took someone off the fence onto the side of in earlier this week and she has a PhD. She started with "both sides have so many arguments" and reposted some in and out stuff to Facebook, then I spelled out what the single market is, why European trade is so important and how the FTZ isn't a substitute, how we ratify EU law, why a housing price crash wasn't good (lol this is seriously an out campaign argument, make houses cheaper to buy what could ever go wrong with wiping out much of the wealth of private individuals) and how we have nothing to fear from an evolving culture.
I didn't want to press it but I am sure she was at least nudged towards voting in. But seriously wtf some of those terrible out arguments are self defeating and yet even smart people buy into the bull****.
I don't know what the in campaign could do to have better substantive arguments. Their problem is we don't teach people critical thinking at all.
Its not even about people not knowing things or even being stupid in the classical sense, the problem runs much deeper.