Should Boris return?

[Mottie]

So are you suggesting that the pollsters fiddle the figures?
That's a question, it just needs a yes or no answer. But you're welcome to qualify your answer if you wish.

No but who is to say that those polled give the true answer?

 

[Pat ex]

No but who is to say that those polled give the true answer?

So the old fella, with a walking stick, and his helper assisting him claims he's a youngster?
And the village idiot who is not sure what a qualification is, claims he's an ex-grad?
Oh Mottie, you get sillier every post you make.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Oh Mottie, you get sillier every post you make.

I'm not sure that is true

 

[Mottie]

So the old fella, with a walking stick, and his helper assisting him claims he's a youngster?

No, but either of them could say they voted the opposite of what they did. Frequently done in exit polls.

 

[Pat ex]

No, but either of them could say they voted the opposite of what they did. Frequently done in exit polls.

In order to do that, they would need to know that the results were going to be analysed to that degree, and there's no way they could have known that. And as they couldn't have known that there was no motivation for them to lie.
Plus there would have to have been large scale systematic lying in order to skew the results. That would come under the conspiracy theories.

Additionally, this was a referendum, not an election. There was no planned second vote, so there was no need to try to skew the results in order to influence another referendum.

 

[Notch7]

Remind us all again how you voted.

Yes I’m thick.

not as thick as the people who still support it.

 

[Notch7]

The Irony.

Yes I’m thick

not as thick as people who still support brexit

 

[Mottie]

Yes I’m thick.

 

[Mottie]

No, but either of them could say they voted the opposite of what they did. Frequently done in exit polls.

In order to do that, they would need to know that the results were going to be analysed to that degree, and there's no way they could have known that.

Why?

 

[Pat ex]

Why?

You want me to explain why, that what you've claimed does happen, doesn't happen?
How about you explaining why you think some people tell lies to the exit pollsters, with some official figures, to support your claim.

 

[Mottie]

You want me to explain why, that what you've claimed does happen, doesn't happen?
How about you explaining why you think some people tell lies to the exit pollsters, with some official figures, to support your claim.

I don’t know why people lie to pollsters. Pîssed off at being asked what they consider a personal question maybe?

Same as I don’t know why people sign up to a diy forum solely to make political, anti-Tory posts. Perhaps you can help us out with that one?

 

[Pat ex]

I don’t know why people lie to pollsters. Pîssed off at being asked what they consider a personal question maybe?

So where are the official figures to support your assumption that it happens?
Oh, that's right there are no official figures, nor any analyses, so it's just your guess.

Same as I don’t know why people sign up to a diy forum solely to make political, anti-Tory posts. Perhaps you can help us out with that one?

Swerve almighty again.
For the most frequent accuser of others swerving, you do an awful lot of it.

 

[Andydevon]

Has Pat just asked for evidence that pollsters are being lied too when they don't know they are being lied too unless the voter is asked by the pollster that they have just lied to?

 

[Pat ex]

Has Pat just asked for evidence that pollsters are being lied too when they don't know they are being lied too unless the voter is asked by the pollster that they have just lied to?

That's the gist of it. Mottie claims that the respondents are lying, but he has no evidence to support his conspiracy theory.
He prefers his conspiracy theory to the real truth.
It's called either delusional, or digging a bigger hole.

 

[Andydevon]

No rather missed the point there regarding your assertion and swerving the question from Mottie.