3 ms·

My point was that it might have been easier to argue against Brexit, that those arguments might be more readily at hand. Not every debate has equal evidence on

My point was that it might have been easier to argue against Brexit, that those arguments might be more readily at hand. Not every debate has equal evidence on both sides; in fact, that's a rarity. Usually, it's easier to make an argument one way than the other. That doesn't mean the other side is completely invalid, it just means it's harder to argue. And if you're not being compensated, it's less appealing to do that extra work.

PraetorianGourd 4y ago
That is only partially true in most cases. The problem is that partisan rhetoric gets amplified so it became "the Right hates immigrants!" vs. "The Left is selling out our Country" when a rational debate around, "are we getting a result of being in the EU that meets or exceeds what we are putting into it." And it is scary if academia can't debate the latter example. And yes, I know UKIP is very responsible for the acidic rhetoric
zeruch 4y ago
"Not every debate has equal evidence on both sides" Don't tell that to the side with a deficit.