The EU debate - Part II

My other half is on the National evaluation panel for EU funded projects in the UK, so save the patronising tone, as I can assure you, I know infinitely more about this subject than you.

 

Again, that says more about the company you keep. I don't know anyone that voted along that criteria.

 

I tell you what pal. I get a lot more right than you do!

Now, maybe that ain't saying much as you're such a ****wit, but still!...

 

The ones I was talking about know a damn site more and over a broader range.

 

Of course you do. No, really.

 

You made the claim, the onus is on you to prove it.

 

You've restricted what you'll accept as proof, so I'm asking for clarification.
How can I provide proof of a large group of people feeling duped, without using a study of a wide group of people?
That seems to be impossible, doesn't it?

We all know that the entire Leave campaign was a load of crap, but you seem to think that nobody was influenced by it.
That begs the question of why they bothered to run it, then.

 

You don't have clue about what Mrs Tobes knows. You only think you do.

 

You seriously haven't got a clue. How do you think you end up being asked to be part of the National evaluation panel? Wouldn't be experience over many years of the EU funding mechanism would it?

Some no mark council bod like you thinking you know more about this specific issue is truly hilarious.

 

You formed the opinion, it must have been on something. If you're saying you base it one some opnion poll or other, and a couple of your mates, it's hardly a substantial claim. You dismiss other opinions based on personal experience, so you need something else to support your claim.

It's your claim to give proof on how you come by it.

 

It's actually your claim. You said that people weren't influenced by the lies.
Back that up, please.

 

The people I'm talking of are certainly higher than that, and cover broader areas. Your wife may know her subject, but to assume others don't know theirs is patently ridiculous and arrogant.

 

Nobody I know was influenced by the lies.

You said those that voted remain did so because they were duped. Your proof needed.

 

What's higher than that?

She represents the entirety of her profession for the UK, and the panel is held in Westminster you absolute dolt

Please explain exactly how your 'people' trump that. In your own time....

 

I know enough from what he's posted, to know that the people I'm talking about know more about their subject than she does. The EU grants may well work as he says in her field, but they don't in others.

 

Other professions and areas, you dolt.

Hers working that way, doesn't mean they all do.

 

Nice attempt to shift the burden of proof. You made a claim. Back it up.
You also have no way of proving that anyone that you know was or wasn't influenced by the lies, even yourself.

I didn't say anything about those that voted remain, either. No idea where you got that from.

 

Piss poor attempt at shifting the burden of proof. You made the claim, now back it up.

 

You're literally just repeating me, after admitting that you made the initial claim!
Is this it, now? You can just admit that you're wrong, you know?

 

Hull City AFC (DMD)

You are just un****ing believable!