On topic, I think Leave atm are heading for a clear defeat (I'd say, 57:43) but it won't be a landslide because the EU is a visceral issue that creates strong passions. Many have firm, fixed views on it so I don't expect hugely wild swings back to Remain. I think the truth is somewhere between the online and phone polls, probably in the phone polls favour.
In fact, many of those who vote Remain will be eurosceptic with no love for the EU but simply be terrified of economic meltdown. Further, I think many London based commentators are overestimating the latent appeal, for Remain because of where they reside and who they mix with, so I don't think Remain are on course for 70% or anything like that.
On the other hand, most people didn't give a shit about AV. Once they'd clocked on it was bull, they rapidly shifted to "NO".
I think between now and June 23rd, we'll see plenty of shifts and reversals of fortune, and maybe some unknown unknowns. It's too early to say.
There are certainly known unknowns ahead.
.
Migration isn't enough to win.
The key swing demographic to get to 51% will be voting on the money.
Migration may be enough to win it. If it can pull in a 40% level of those who vote it then needs a 10%+ from those focused on sovereignty or a general dislike of our leaders. A coalition of the angry.
It isn't. Most people aren't that angry.
We need to rid ourselves of the myths and be ultra practical.
Myths???
An anti immigration party came from nowhere to win the Euros, quadrupled their vote at the GE,its the most important concern to ordinary people in the polling, there are a million refugees swarming the continent, thousands camped on our doorstep, and you don't want to mention it??
I'd say that's exactly what REMAIN want
Where did I say don't mention it at all?
I just said it's not enough to win. I also think making it a coalition of the angry isn't enough. Leave needs to be warm, positive and optimistic to win.
Look, I don't want to argue with you. At the end of the day, we're both on the same side.
All I'm saying is that we'll need to be reassuring and flexible in our pitches to different audiences.
Think about it. That's all I ask.
Completely agree with the penultimate sentence, that's why it wouldn't bother me if Vote Leave/Grassroots Out, have nothing to do with each other and concentrate on appealing to different parts of the vote
We need to rid ourselves of the myths and be ultra practical.
What Leave need to get across is that the status quo is not an option. We either pull back from the EU - or we'll get deeply immersed in it. What do you want people? We cannot continue as grumpy by-standers. If we vote to Remain, then the EU will say to us:
"You have had your renegotiation. Your people have had your say. They've chosen to Remain.
Now you will stop being bad little Englanders - and start being good little Europeans. Which involves doing as the EU tells you to do."
I really think there is no majority in this country to allow that to happen. If it can be made to see it that way.
Unless we join the Eurozone, which will never happen, we are never going to be truly integrated into the EU, like Sweden and Denmark and the Czechs we are now in the Outer Core
On topic, I think Leave atm are heading for a clear defeat (I'd say, 57:43) but it won't be a landslide because the EU is a visceral issue that creates strong passions. Many have firm, fixed views on it so I don't expect hugely wild swings back to Remain. I think the truth is somewhere between the online and phone polls, probably in the phone polls favour.
On the other hand, most people didn't give a shit about AV. Once they'd clocked on it was bull, they rapidly shifted to "NO".
I think between now and June 23rd, we'll see plenty of shifts and reversals of fortune, and maybe some unknown unknowns. It's too early to say.
There are certainly known unknowns ahead.
.
Migration isn't enough to win.
The key swing demographic to get to 51% will be voting on the money.
Migration may be enough to win it. If it can pull in a 40% level of those who vote it then needs a 10%+ from those focused on sovereignty or a general dislike of our leaders. A coalition of the angry.
It isn't. Most people aren't that angry.
We need to rid ourselves of the myths and be ultra practical.
Myths???
An anti immigration party came from nowhere to win the Euros, quadrupled their vote at the GE,its the most important concern to ordinary people in the polling, there are a million refugees swarming the continent, thousands camped on our doorstep, and you don't want to mention it??
I'd say that's exactly what REMAIN want
Where did I say don't mention it at all?
I just said it's not enough to win. I also think making it a coalition of the angry isn't enough. Leave needs to be warm, positive and optimistic to win.
Look, I don't want to argue with you. At the end of the day, we're both on the same side.
All I'm saying is that we'll need to be reassuring and flexible in our pitches to different audiences.
Think about it. That's all I ask.
Completely agree with the penultimate sentence, that's why it wouldn't bother me if Vote Leave/Grassroots Out, have nothing to do with each other and concentrate on appealing to different parts of the vote
Good stuff. Then we agree entirely.
Excellent
Nice juxtaposition of posts there with the previous from someone who isn't meant to mention me (but doesn't get banned)
As a post-script, the fact that Gisela is a Labour MP, born in Germany and retaining an accent, makes the message that Dave's deal is a dud, infinitely more compelling.
Indeed, I hope she features prominently in the campaign
In case anyone interested didn't see it earlier, spreadsheet showing the new electorate figures for current constituencies. Red means they need to be modified because they have too few voters, green too many.
Well done to Nick for adding those 51 extra voters in Broxtowe.
Thanks for the link, (for fun) A quick bit of number crunching, and the TORYs are the largest party in 52.45% of the UK, which would imply they would win 315 seats in a 600 seat GE, and Labour are the largest in 34.58% giving them 208 seats: Tory majority of 30 seats, and labour 93 short of a majority, and 107 behind the Conservatives. overall not that different from what we have now.
As a post-script, the fact that Gisela is a Labour MP, born in Germany and retaining an accent, makes the message that Dave's deal is a dud, infinitely more compelling.
She was on the Marr show recently and was just as impressive then.
Casino up thread said Vote Leave has bought a knife to a gun fight. I can confirm it's more like a wooden spoon.
The person who is meant to be 'organising' the local campaign has given me emails to forward to people I know about the EU. Nothing tangible is planned until mid-March.
We need to rid ourselves of the myths and be ultra practical.
What Leave need to get across is that the status quo is not an option. We either pull back from the EU - or we'll get deeply immersed in it. What do you want people? We cannot continue as grumpy by-standers. If we vote to Remain, then the EU will say to us:
"You have had your renegotiation. Your people have had your say. They've chosen to Remain.
Now you will stop being bad little Englanders - and start being good little Europeans. Which involves doing as the EU tells you to do."
I really think there is no majority in this country to allow that to happen. If it can be made to see it that way.
Unless we join the Eurozone, which will never happen, we are never going to be truly integrated into the EU, like Sweden and Denmark and the Czechs we are now in the Outer Core
Maybe not but we can unfortunately be a lot more integrated than we are now. And that will come if REMAIN wins in June.
Maybe Leave should fight fire with fire and do a Project Fear in reverse?
"Can you ever REALLY trust the French? Would you trust them with your job? With your children's future? With your savings? If you have any doubt - Vote Leave..."
On topic, I think Leave atm are heading for a clear defeat (I'd say, 57:43) but it won't be a landslide because the EU is a visceral issue that creates strong passions. Many have firm, fixed views on it so I don't expect hugely wild swings back to Remain. I think the truth is somewhere between the online and phone polls, probably in the phone polls favour.
In fact, many of those who vote Remain will be eurosceptic with no love for the EU but simply be terrified of economic meltdown. Further, I think many London based commentators are overestimating the latent appeal, for Remain because of where they reside and who they mix with, so I don't think Remain are on course for 70% or anything like that.
On the other hand, most people didn't give a shit about AV. Once they'd clocked on it was bull, they rapidly shifted to "NO".
oo early to say.
There are certainly known unknowns ahead.
.
Migration isn't enough to win.
The key swing demographic to get to 51% will be voting on the money.
Migration may be enough to win it. If it can pull in a 40% level of those who vote it then needs a 10%+ from those focused on sovereignty or a general dislike of our leaders. A coalition of the angry.
It isn't. Most people aren't that angry.
We need to rid ourselves of the myths and be ultra practical.
Myths???
An anti immigration party came from nowhere to win the Euros, quadrupled their vote at the GE,its the most important concern to ordinary people in the polling, there are a million refugees swarming the continent, thousands camped on our doorstep, and you don't want to mention it??
I'd say that's exactly what REMAIN want
Where did I say don't mention it at all?
I just said it's not enough to win. I also think making it a coalition of the angry isn't enough. Leave needs to be warm, positive and optimistic to win.
Look, I don't want to argue with you. At the end of the day, we're both on the same side.
All I'm saying is that we'll need to be reassuring and flexible in our pitches to different audiences.
Think about it. That's all I ask.
Completely agree with the penultimate sentence, that's why it wouldn't bother me if Vote Leave/Grassroots Out, have nothing to do with each other and concentrate on appealing to different parts of the vote
Good stuff. Then we agree entirely.
Agreed too. People will vote Leave for different reasons.
We need to rid ourselves of the myths and be ultra practical.
What Leave need to get across is that the status quo is not an option. We either pull back from the EU - or we'll get deeply immersed in it. What do you want people? We cannot continue as grumpy by-standers. If we vote to Remain, then the EU will say to us:
"You have had your renegotiation. Your people have had your say. They've chosen to Remain.
Now you will stop being bad little Englanders - and start being good little Europeans. Which involves doing as the EU tells you to do."
I really think there is no majority in this country to allow that to happen. If it can be made to see it that way.
Unless we join the Eurozone, which will never happen, we are never going to be truly integrated into the EU, like Sweden and Denmark and the Czechs we are now in the Outer Core
I know you can't understand why we are not all Cameroons or follow the gospel of Dave,it might help if you have a different opinion to him sometimes on here.
Agreed too. People will vote Leave for different reasons.
Likewise for REMAIN. So many different hopes, wishes and dreams reduced down to two blunt options on the ballot paper. A referendum is such an inelegant instrument.
I know you can't understand why we are not all Cameroons or follow the gospel of Dave,it might help if you have a different opinion to him sometimes on here.
It's like the scorpion and the frog. It's in his nature.
In December 2008, Steve Ankeny and Bill Kruse filed a "Petition for Extraordinary Writ of Prohibition" against the Governor of Indiana to block "any popular votes for Barack Obama and Joe Biden for the appointment as Chief Electors [sic]." A hearing was held, and on March 16, 2009, the Governor's motion to dismiss was granted. The Plaintiffs appealed the ruling to the Indiana Court of Appeals, which upheld it on November 12, 2009.[106]
The appellate decision addressed the question of whether Obama's eligibility was affected by his father's lack of U.S. citizenship, saying that "[b]ased upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are 'natural born Citizens' for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents."[107] On April 1, 2010, the Supreme Court of Indiana rejected, without comment, a request to consider the case.[108]
Lower courts, including appeal courts make errors every day of the week. Only the SCOTUS can either confirm, or set aside its own previous holdings, and that is the only decision that really matters. But they won't, indeed can't, make such a ruling in the case of Obama.
One of the more careful lower court judgements explains why:- "There may very well be a legitimate role for the judiciary to interpret whether the natural born citizen requirement has been satisfied in the case of a presidential candidate who has not already won the election and taken office. However, on the day that President Obama took the presidential oath and was sworn in, he became President of the United States. Any removal of him from the presidency must be accomplished through the Constitution's mechanisms for the removal of a President, either through impeachment or the succession process set forth in the Twenty-Fifth Amendment. Plaintiffs attempt to subvert this grant of power to Congress by convincing the Court that it should disregard the constitutional procedures in place for the removal of a sitting president. The process for removal of a sitting president -- removal for any reason -- is within the province of Congress, not the courts. ... Therefore, the Court finds that it lacks jurisdiction..." (Barnett v. Obama, 2009)
On topic, I think Leave atm are heading for a clear defeat (I'd say, 57:43) but it won't be a landslide because the EU is a visceral issue that creates strong passions. Many have firm, fixed views on it so I don't expect hugely wild swings back to Remain. I think the truth is somewhere between the online and phone polls, probably in the phone polls favour.
In fact, many of those who vote Remain will be eurosceptic with no love for the EU but simply be terrified of economic meltdown. Further, I think many London based commentators are overestimating the latent appeal, for Remain because of where they reside and who they mix with, so I don't think Remain are on course for 70% or anything like that.
On the other hand, most people didn't give a shit about AV. Once they'd clocked on it was bull, they rapidly shifted to "NO".
I think between now and June 23rd, we'll see plenty of shifts and reversals of fortune, and maybe some unknown unknowns. It's too early to say.
There are certainly known unknowns ahead.
Personally I believe that the spring will bring on a migrant crisis far beyond that which we've seen before. We all know that something surrounding migrants will happen in the spring though (It's even possible they don't turn up).
Its very likely that migrants will form a slightly negative backdrop (through sheer numbers) to the idea that we should 'Remain'.
Migration isn't enough to win.
The key swing demographic to get to 51% will be voting on the money.
EFTA countries are 25% richer than the UK and pay a third of the taxes to get the single market. Vote Leave to be £xxx better off immediately and lead to a 25% pay rise. That could win a majority.
people aren't stupid though
The whole REMAIN campaign seems to be based so far on the belief that people really are stupid.
No excuse for LEAVE to follow the same path of course.
The S.E.C. Primary is next Tuesday. I'd be intrigued to hear who PBers think I should vote for, and why. No insults - X is a clown etc - just good valid reasons.
On a completely unrelated note, can I say how glad I am that David Bowie died quietly a few weeks ago because they violently murdered the poor bloke with the tribute at the BRITS tonight.
Departing showrunner Beau Willimon has found a way of putting Underwood on the back foot again, House of Cards has regained its mojo. Spacey twinkles with vehemence as he ratchets up his portrayal of Frank as villainous force of nature; Wright has never been better as burningly ambitious ice queen Claire, who has unearthed a useful foil in ruthless strategist Leann Harvey
On topic, I think Leave atm are heading for a clear defeat (I'd say, 57:43) but it won't be a landslide because the EU is a visceral issue that creates strong passions. Many have firm, fixed views on it so I don't expect hugely wild swings back to Remain. I think the truth is somewhere between the online and phone polls, probably in the phone polls favour.
In fact, many of those who vote Remain will be eurosceptic with no love for the EU but simply be terrified of economic meltdown. Further, I think many London based commentators are overestimating the latent appeal, for Remain because of where they reside and who they mix with, so I don't think Remain are on course for 70% or anything like that.
On the other hand, most people didn't give a shit about AV. Once they'd clocked on it was bull, they rapidly shifted to "NO".
I think between now and June 23rd, we'll see plenty of shifts and reversals of fortune, and maybe some unknown unknowns. It's too early to say.
There are certainly known unknowns ahead.
Personally I believe that the spring will bring on a migrant crisis far beyond that which we've seen before. We all know that something surrounding migrants will happen in the spring though (It's even possible they don't turn up).
Its very likely that migrants will form a slightly negative backdrop (through sheer numbers) to the idea that we should 'Remain'.
Migration isn't enough to win.
The key swing demographic to get to 51% will be voting on the money.
EFTA countries are 25% richer than the UK and pay a third of the taxes to get the single market. Vote Leave to be £xxx better off immediately and lead to a 25% pay rise. That could win a majority.
? Iceland Liechtenstein Norway and Switzerland. Switzerland has 20% immigrant population Norway 15%.and Iceland 10% Liechtenstein is barely a village never mind a country - a pimple of a tax haven on the body of Europe. The comparisons are specious
Just watched PMQs. Cameron an absolute disgrace on the NHS today, when faced with the facts all he does is to continue to repeat untrue statements which he must know are not borne out by the data.
Just because he has an opposing view does not make it a disgrace any more so than you holding your view. The doctors need to be careful with these strikes as they could lose public support rapidly. After all a lot of the public work Saturdays without demanding social wage enhancements and most will be paid a lot less than doctors.
He's making claims that the evidence doesn't support. He knows this and he didn't even answer the allegation just made some cheap gibe about suits. An absolute disgrace.
Maybe Leave should fight fire with fire and do a Project Fear in reverse?
That needs to be part of what happens
A Project Fear in reverse would need to focus on the fact that there will be more integration, determined by the EU, including, for instance:-
- quotas of migrants we are required to take in; - VAT on currently zero-rated items eg food and children's clothes - more harmonised taxation, including taxes imposed by the EU - increasing contributions and the complete loss of the British rebate, costing each family £xxx p.a.
Etc etc.
Now I don't know how likely any of these are. But I've picked them because they've all been mooted at some point in the recent past (and Martin Schultz was mentioning the migrant quota issue only this morning on the radio) and so it is possible that they could be revived.
But the aim of any well run Leave campaign should be to sow doubt about what remaining in the EU means and that this will cost people real money. People will worry about losing jobs if we leave. So Leave need to make them worry about what it will cost them if we stay. Plus it should put Remain on the defensive. If Remain have to start denying that VAT won't be put on food, it still sows a doubt in people's minds and that is time that cannot be spent on other arguments.
Similarly, the migrant quota issue will make people worry about who might be let in and helps undermine the EU keeps us safe argument.
Leave need to pick the most unattractive bits of the EU and say that remaining means more of this and costs you this - it has to be made personal and relevant.
On topic, I think Leave atm are heading for a clear defeat (I'd say, 57:43) but it won't be a landslide because the EU is a visceral issue that creates strong passions. Many have firm, fixed views on it so I don't expect hugely wild swings back to Remain. I think the truth is somewhere between the online and phone polls, probably in the phone polls favour.
In fact, many of those who vote Remain will be eurosceptic with no love for the EU but simply be terrified of economic meltdown. Further, I think many London based commentators are overestimating the latent appeal, for Remain because of where they reside and who they mix with, so I don't think Remain are on course for 70% or anything like that.
On the other hand, most people didn't give a shit about AV. Once they'd clocked on it was bull, they rapidly shifted to "NO".
I think between now and June 23rd, we'll see plenty of shifts and reversals of fortune, and maybe some unknown unknowns. It's too early to say.
There are certainly known unknowns ahead.
Personally I believe that the spring will bring on a migrant crisis far beyond that which we've seen before. We all know that something surrounding migrants will happen in the spring though (It's even possible they don't turn up).
Its very likely that migrants will form a slightly negative backdrop (through sheer numbers) to the idea that we should 'Remain'.
Migration isn't enough to win.
The key swing demographic to get to 51% will be voting on the money.
EFTA countries are 25% richer than the UK and pay a third of the taxes to get the single market. Vote Leave to be £xxx better off immediately and lead to a 25% pay rise. That could win a majority.
? Iceland Liechtenstein Norway and Switzerland. Switzerland has 20% immigrant population Norway 15%.and Iceland 10% Liechtenstein is barely a village never mind a country - a pimple of a tax haven on the body of Europe. The comparisons are specious
I fail to see how immigrant proportions are at all relevant to what I said.
On topic, I think Leave atm are heading for a clear defeat (I'd say, 57:43) but it won't be a landslide because the EU is a visceral issue that creates strong passions. Many have firm, fixed views on it so I don't expect hugely wild swings back to Remain. I think the truth is somewhere between the online and phone polls, probably in the phone polls favour.
In fact, many of those who vote Remain will be eurosceptic with no love for the EU but simply be terrified of economic meltdown. Further, I think many London based commentators are overestimating the latent appeal, for Remain because of where they reside and who they mix with, so I don't think Remain are on course for 70% or anything like that.
On the other hand, most people didn't give a shit about AV. Once they'd clocked on it was bull, they rapidly shifted to "NO".
I think between now and June 23rd, we'll see plenty of shifts and reversals of fortune, and maybe some unknown unknowns. It's too early to say.
There are certainly known unknowns ahead.
Personally I believe that the spring will bring on a migrant crisis far beyond that which we've seen before. We all know that something surrounding migrants will happen in the spring though (It's even possible they don't turn up).
Its very likely that migrants will form a slightly negative backdrop (through sheer numbers) to the idea that we should 'Remain'.
Migration isn't enough to win.
The key swing demographic to get to 51% will be voting on the money.
EFTA countries are 25% richer than the UK and pay a third of the taxes to get the single market. Vote Leave to be £xxx better off immediately and lead to a 25% pay rise. That could win a majority.
? Iceland Liechtenstein Norway and Switzerland. Switzerland has 20% immigrant population Norway 15%.and Iceland 10% Liechtenstein is barely a village never mind a country - a pimple of a tax haven on the body of Europe. The comparisons are specious
I fail to see how immigrant proportions are at all relevant to what I said.
Because the comparisons with EFTA countries are specious. They are a mixture of special cases which also fail the prime criteria for many leavers - immigration
In December 2008, Steve Ankeny and Bill Kruse filed a "Petition for Extraordinary Writ of Prohibition" against the Governor of Indiana to block "any popular votes for Barack Obama and Joe Biden for the appointment as Chief Electors [sic]." A hearing was held, and on March 16, 2009, the Governor's motion to dismiss was granted. The Plaintiffs appealed the ruling to the Indiana Court of Appeals, which upheld it on November 12, 2009.[106]
The appellate decision addressed the question of whether Obama's eligibility was affected by his father's lack of U.S. citizenship, saying that "[b]ased upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are 'natural born Citizens' for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents."[107] On April 1, 2010, the Supreme Court of Indiana rejected, without comment, a request to consider the case.[108]
Lower courts, including appeal courts make errors every day of the week. Only the SCOTUS can either confirm, or set aside its own previous holdings, and that is the only decision that really matters. But they won't, indeed can't, make such a ruling in the case of Obama.
One of the more careful lower court judgements explains why:- "There may very well be a legitimate role for the judiciary to interpret whether the natural born citizen requirement has been satisfied in the case of a presidential candidate who has not already won the election and taken office. However, on the day that President Obama took the presidential oath and was sworn in, he became President of the United States. Any removal of him from the presidency must be accomplished through the Constitution's mechanisms for the removal of a President, either through impeachment or the succession process set forth in the Twenty-Fifth Amendment. Plaintiffs attempt to subvert this grant of power to Congress by convincing the Court that it should disregard the constitutional procedures in place for the removal of a sitting president. The process for removal of a sitting president -- removal for any reason -- is within the province of Congress, not the courts. ... Therefore, the Court finds that it lacks jurisdiction..." (Barnett v. Obama, 2009)
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06z95s1/children-saved-from-the-nazis-the-story-of-sir-nicholas-winton
Is well worth an hour of anyone's time. A humble man but a truly great one, he saved 669 Jewish Czech children in the months leading up to war.
Unbearably sad and deeply moving.
It's only on for a couple more days.
Nice juxtaposition of posts there with the previous from someone who isn't meant to mention me (but doesn't get banned)
The person who is meant to be 'organising' the local campaign has given me emails to forward to people I know about the EU. Nothing tangible is planned until mid-March.
That is not campaigning.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-35631699
Which bit of guilty is difficult to understand?
Why do you keep insulting posters on here ?
I know you can't understand why we are not all Cameroons or follow the gospel of Dave,it might help if you have a different opinion to him sometimes on here.
Where do we think he'll be on the eve of super Tuesday?
That needs to be part of what happens
One of the more careful lower court judgements explains why:-
"There may very well be a legitimate role for the judiciary to interpret whether the natural born citizen requirement has been satisfied in the case of a presidential candidate who has not already won the election and taken office. However, on the day that President Obama took the presidential oath and was sworn in, he became President of the United States. Any removal of him from the presidency must be accomplished through the Constitution's mechanisms for the removal of a President, either through impeachment or the succession process set forth in the Twenty-Fifth Amendment. Plaintiffs attempt to subvert this grant of power to Congress by convincing the Court that it should disregard the constitutional procedures in place for the removal of a sitting president. The process for removal of a sitting president -- removal for any reason -- is within the province of Congress, not the courts. ... Therefore, the Court finds that it lacks jurisdiction..." (Barnett v. Obama, 2009)
No excuse for LEAVE to follow the same path of course.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/2016/02/23/house-of-cards-season-four-first-look-review-a-deliciously-dark/
Can't wait.....next weekend is a total write off for me.
New Thread New Thread
Iceland Liechtenstein Norway and Switzerland.
Switzerland has 20% immigrant population Norway 15%.and Iceland 10%
Liechtenstein is barely a village never mind a country - a pimple of a tax haven on the body of Europe.
The comparisons are specious
A Project Fear in reverse would need to focus on the fact that there will be more integration, determined by the EU, including, for instance:-
- quotas of migrants we are required to take in;
- VAT on currently zero-rated items eg food and children's clothes
- more harmonised taxation, including taxes imposed by the EU
- increasing contributions and the complete loss of the British rebate, costing each family £xxx p.a.
Etc etc.
Now I don't know how likely any of these are. But I've picked them because they've all been mooted at some point in the recent past (and Martin Schultz was mentioning the migrant quota issue only this morning on the radio) and so it is possible that they could be revived.
But the aim of any well run Leave campaign should be to sow doubt about what remaining in the EU means and that this will cost people real money. People will worry about losing jobs if we leave. So Leave need to make them worry about what it will cost them if we stay. Plus it should put Remain on the defensive. If Remain have to start denying that VAT won't be put on food, it still sows a doubt in people's minds and that is time that cannot be spent on other arguments.
Similarly, the migrant quota issue will make people worry about who might be let in and helps undermine the EU keeps us safe argument.
Leave need to pick the most unattractive bits of the EU and say that remaining means more of this and costs you this - it has to be made personal and relevant.