Windrush -

[fugtifino]

"...the majority of the public view it as a priority."

In your opinion.

[observer]

Generally accepted opinion, in the light of the referendum result and elections in E/Europe and USA.    

[fugtifino]

"Generally accepted opinion..."

But that's still only generally accepted opinion in your opinion.

And it's still bugger all to do with the Windrush thing.

Then there's all that Cambridge Analytica stuff in all those elections you mention.

 

[Confused52]

What is the issue in your mind with the Cambridge Analytica stuff. The misuse of peoples likes on Facebook or the existence of Political advertising at all. In the UK Corbyn used the effect whereby young peoples us of social media kept them on-side within an echo chamber of their choosing and prevented them from seeing an alternative view. It was easily sidestepped here by looking somewhere else as indeed you choose to do, Fugs. But in the states the paid advertising was more of an issue, what your view?

[Confused52]

On the main topic of Windrush, I don't think that the affected people who arrived on their parents passports so lack documentation had any inkling of what might happen in the future. I also think that the error of not providing documentation could not be forseen back when it happened. I assume that it only actually applies where the person was not born in the UK. I am sure that back then one could not forsee the issue with immigration numbers that so exercises people today. I also suspect that no one in authority thought that their staff would be stupid enough to try and deport someone with a lawful right of abode. Then again stupidity is often underestimated isn't it.

[observer]

12 hours ago, fugtifino said:

"Generally accepted opinion..."

But that's still only generally accepted opinion in your opinion.

And it's still bugger all to do with the Windrush thing.

Then there's all that Cambridge Analytica stuff in all those elections you mention.

 

Generally accepted based on elections in Hungary, Czech, Poland, Austria and US, plus our referendum result !      And everything to do with the "windrush thing", as this was the cock up seized on by Liebour to conflate and criticise  Gov immigration policies in general. under the heading of "hostile enviroment",   turning the debate into one of immigration policy in general - so blame Abbot and Lammy.  btw: the Windrush injustice has been going on under successive Govs , INCLUDING Labour.      As for your last sentence -  think we covered Cambridge Analytica  elsewhere,  as being a complete red herring.  

[fugtifino]

On ‎29‎/‎04‎/‎2018 at 12:16 PM, Confused52 said:

What is the issue in your mind with the Cambridge Analytica stuff. The misuse of peoples likes on Facebook or the existence of Political advertising at all. In the UK Corbyn used the effect whereby young peoples us of social media kept them on-side within an echo chamber of their choosing and prevented them from seeing an alternative view. It was easily sidestepped here by looking somewhere else as indeed you choose to do, Fugs. But in the states the paid advertising was more of an issue, what your view?

Main issue is people being targeted with tailored information to influence their voting behaviour without their knowledge or consent: this is not the same method used by Corbyn or Obama. Vote Leave may have exceeded the amount of spending that is allowed for this kind of activity. It's easily sidestepped by me 'cos I don't go anywhere near Faceache.

How much influence this had has yet to be determined, and some think it's minimal (the same people seem to be overly concerned about voter fraud, which we know is minimal), but you've only got to look at the people behind these companies (eg Robert Mercer) to smell a rat. And why, if the influence is minimal, would Vote Leave choose to spend around half their campaign budget on this (around (£4m).

[fugtifino]

On ‎29‎/‎04‎/‎2018 at 1:08 PM, observer said:

Generally accepted based on elections in Hungary, Czech, Poland, Austria and US, plus our referendum result !      And everything to do with the "windrush thing", as this was the cock up seized on by Liebour to conflate and criticise  Gov immigration policies in general. under the heading of "hostile enviroment",   turning the debate into one of immigration policy in general - so blame Abbot and Lammy.  btw: the Windrush injustice has been going on under successive Govs , INCLUDING Labour.      As for your last sentence -  think we covered Cambridge Analytica  elsewhere,  as being a complete red herring.  

I can't work out if you think the Windrush thing went too far, or not far enough. For me there are far too many possible unintended consequences, as we have seen.

It also reminds me of a bloke I used to work with, bit of a rough diamond but without the diamond bit. Depending where he was and who he was with, he was known to spit in his beer and he made sure he was seen to do it. He could then leave it unguarded without the fear that someone else would take it. If you make somewhere less of a place that people want to be, you're gonna end up with somewhere that's a but rubbish.

"...think we covered Cambridge Analytica  elsewhere,  as being a complete red herring...."

Well you may think we did, but that's just your opin...oh, never mind.

Still, what's wrong with a bit of electoral manipulation so long as you get the result you want eh?

[observer]

    It's quite sad to witness the moans of the Remoaners;  the referendum decision has been done and dusted;  and raising the spectre of "undue influence" on the electorate from political propaganda from either side, is to overate the value of political propaganda.  Most folk have had up to 40 years of experience to form an opinion. without any prompting from politicians, in fact, is was most politicians who were behind the curve throughout, and still are.       As for "windrush",  a sad tale of injustice and incompetence, which requires specific rectification. Alas, that's not the Liebour agenda, their agenda is to bring the whole concept of immigration control into disrepute, and thus leave a complete open door to unmanaged immigration, so they are using windrush as a stick to beat the policy.  Boiling it all down into simple terms, anyone who is here illegally should be deported asap,  whether they entered illegally in the back of a lorry or overstayed a legal visa. Not rocket science.     PS. and it now seems over 70% of the public, according to yougov polls, want a "hostile environment", so Lammy and Co can stick that in their pipe and smoke it !   

[Davy51]

The Corbynista  shock & horror is nothing to do with  the immigration policy ,it is just a stick to bring down the Tories in the hope that Corbyn & his gang can be the next HM Gov.

[Confused52]

Obs,  Windrush and the Liebour agenda.   Sorry you are being naïve, there are local elections in London and some other places more enlightened than Warrington with election by thirds. Labour tried to get at Teresa May in the Commons with a disclosure requirement, it failed so you can expect all sorts of squealing about the terrible Tories in the news tonight and in tomorrow's papers. They couldn't have Londoners (a lot of whom are immigrants) thinking Khan was as fault for failing to resource the fight against knife crime and reneging on promises to freeze travel costs when there is the opportunity to claim the Tories are out to deport the lot of them. It will calm down by Saturday!

I agree with you Davy but just make a more detailed point (as usual!)

[Confused52]

5 hours ago, fugtifino said:

Main issue is people being targeted with tailored information to influence their voting behaviour without their knowledge or consent: this is not the same method used by Corbyn or Obama. Vote Leave may have exceeded the amount of spending that is allowed for this kind of activity. It's easily sidestepped by me 'cos I don't go anywhere near Faceache.

How much influence this had has yet to be determined, and some think it's minimal (the same people seem to be overly concerned about voter fraud, which we know is minimal), but you've only got to look at the people behind these companies (eg Robert Mercer) to smell a rat. And why, if the influence is minimal, would Vote Leave choose to spend around half their campaign budget on this (around (£4m).

I am not so concerned with that when the source of interest is derived from a pattern of Likes on Facebook that correlates with support for one party of another. I mentioned echo chamber before and the only people that will have been affected are those who as exhibiting confirmation bias. Such folk are often not very open minded and the advertising has little effect in changing the outcome. Those targeted incorrectly will get annoyed and ignore it or stop looking. Those who are susceptible and open minded are probably not large in percentage terms but are commonly assumed to be young, I don't know if that is true but is is what is said anecdotally.

I have a faceache account but I do not ever send anything, make a comment or Like/Dislike anything, I just lurk! When I asked for a copy of the data they hold on me they could find anything. Oh and done accept friend requests as they impute your preference from those of your friends.

I find it amusing that you comment on Robert Mercer, presumably because he bankrolled Nigel Farage (evil leave team), but the joke was on Nigel because the susceptible types voted against and he gave the money back to Mercer through Cambridge Analytica. I don't think Mercer was doing anything but minimising the money he wasted on a hobby. Cambridge Analytica is in any event no more.

Personally I think the confirmation bias issue on social media and the way it stops those who use it from getting balanced news and opinion is a serious matter. If people want to block out balanced views then they have that right but it shouldn't be made easier than seeing balance. What say you?