Professor BBB wrote: “Not to mention the lies and manipulation of the Leave campaign, which just exacerbated the problem [for voters].” Notice how Professor BBB feels no need to explain what those lies were or how voters were manipulated or how significant the misinformation was. But just so there is no confusion—there were lots of people on hand to argue the other side. Look at the list. I wonder how is it that they were unable to make themselves understood in a publicly funded vote?
Who Supported Remain?
Her Majesty’s Government was for Remain.
The leading opposition parties were for Remain.
[. . .]
[long list]
[. . .]
The Bar and the legal profession were for Remain. But …. I repeat myself.
Now ask yourself: precisely, who was on the Leave side?
Just some voters—and what do they know?
But here at Conlawprof—we are all good democrats—honest & true.
4 thoughts on “Seth Barrett Tillman: <i>Conlawprof, Voters, and Brexit</i>”
Comments are closed.
The Remain campaign has instigated some awful slander and lies on their part, such as tales of economic collapse or shortages of food and medicine.
The worst one as far as I’m concerned is about the age differential of the vote. The idea that younger voters, less experienced and prone to information overload, should be seen as having a bigger stake than older voters is shameful. Or the argument that younger students that have been indoctrinated into the EU Erasmus+ program must know more about the world then the rubes outside the City. As if the people living and working and dying holding down the fort back home haven’t seen and felt the impact of Euroization, so their opinions just aren’t even worth considering.
Think of the “Remainers” as NeverTrumpers and you will not go far wrong.
Brexit was the first irritant that’s why the nuked scl cambridge analytica.
DAMN the Voters!! Engines, OFF!!!!!1211!!!!!