politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trying to work out who will turn out in the referendum of J

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trying to work out who will turn out in the referendum of June 23rd

As we get closer to the referendum there’s a lot of effort going on to try look at the polling more closely so we don’t end with another GE2015.

Read the full story here

MarqueeMark

Is there any work on the age profiles within each of these bands? Or of mobility between them? Do you become more likely to be an AB in later middle age, for example? Where do pensioners sit within these bands? Only when you know of any differences in the age profiles can you then properly weight them...

dugarbandier

Seems to me there's no real hope of getting a truly predictive poll; even if you get the answer correct it's no guarantee that the same methodology would give the correct answer the next time (or even at the same time using an independently collected sample). It's all voodoo.

Meanwhile, what's going on over in Trumpville?

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/30/donald-trump-revokes-pledge-to-support-republican-nominee

something significant? or nothing unusual?

peter_from_putney

But why apparently haven't any of the pollsters been asking their interviewees whether or not they have changed their mind lately as regards whether they intend to vote REMAIN or LEAVE.

I know I keep banging on about this, but we really need to know whether there has been any appreciable underlying shift in opinion one way or another.

The current suspicion is that LEAVE has been closing the gap somewhat, although it is only a suspicion and if this is indeed the case, it might explain why Dave has decided that he needs time to think things through .... a bit late for all that I would have thought!

Charles

The obvious thing, surely, would be to break down by age and by social class (i.e. how are AB 55+ going to vote as presumably they are the most likely to vote, whereas I am not sure whether DE 55+ will be as keen). Or do the sample sizes become too small to be meaningful / is the data not available in the tables?

Interesting that the phone effect as as much as a 7.5% range from the mid-point. But, if so, why did online favour (broadly) the leftish parties last time round? Was it really just a crappy sample that YouGov fixed in place?

CarlottaVance

Charles said:

Or do the sample sizes become too small to be meaningful

Yes. You will need huge base sizes to cross split both social class and age.....Lord Ashcroft?

Plato_Says

Just catching up on Trump vs Cruz.

Trump says he won't back Cruz as the nominee as he's not been treated fairly, Cruz is refusing to confirm that he'd still back Trump.

Kasich is backing off too. Sahil Kapur tweeted the whole thing, worth reading his timeline.

What a circus.

SouthamObserver

All we can say with any real certainty is that there seems to have been a move towards Leave over recent weeks. Turnout is the key. If it's less than 60% it's very hard to see how Remain wins.

Scott_P

@rosschawkins: Fmr cabinet secretary Lord O'Donnell tells @BBCr4today UK wd need longer than 2 years to negotiate EU exit
https://t.co/eg07oxlIwE

Sean_F

The same poll found 67% were certain to vote. 45% of 18-34 year olds were certain, compared to 72% of 35-54 year olds, and 77% of 55+.

That certain to vote figure is likely too high, but if it applied across the board, we'd get the following certain to vote numbers by social class/age.

18-34 year olds. AB 53%, C1 47%, C2 40%, DE 35%.

35-54 year olds AB 80%, C1 74%, C2 67%, DE 62%.

55+ AB 85%, C1 79%, C2 72%, DE 67%.

SouthamObserver

Apparently there is an OMG poll done after the Brussels attacks which shows a sharp swing to Leave and leave ahead.

SouthamObserver

Sean_F said:

The same poll found 67% were certain to vote. 45% of 18-34 year olds were certain, compared to 72% of 35-54 year olds, and 77% of 55+.

That certain to vote figure is likely too high, but if it applied across the board, we'd get the following certain to vote numbers by social class/age.

18-34 year olds. AB 53%, C1 47%, C2 40%, DE 35%.

35-54 year olds AB 80%, C1 74%, C2 67%, DE 62%.

55+ AB 85%, C1 79%, C2 72%, DE 67%.

Has there ever been an opinion poll in which the certainty vote number has been less than the actual turnout?

Plato_Says

Working with polling by Populus Ltd., Singh and his co-author James Kanagasooriam, head of analytics for the company, estimate that online polls lean too far toward a “Leave” vote by about 3 percentage points because of the bias in their sampling. Phone polls overstate support for “Remain” by about 5 percentage points but a second factor then helps correct that error: phone polling discourages people from choosing “Don’t know.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-29/matt-singh-warns-of-brexit-poll-blind-spot

This bit on forced choice is interesting

Online polls make it easier for people to say they haven’t decided how they’re going to vote than phone polling does. When these voters are pushed, they tend to break in favor of the status quo. This effect adds another 5 percentage points to the “Leave” vote in online polls that isn’t reflected in the electorate as a whole, according to the study.

I'm not sure that it's helpful to anyone for people to pick a side when they haven't decided.

OldKingCole

There’s a piece in the Guardian on the subject, which suugests Leave is over-stated.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2016/mar/29/support-leaving-eu-referendum-overstated-polls-analysis-suggests

Not my area of expertise, but it did read a little like whistling in the dark.

SouthamObserver

OldKingCole said:

There’s a piece in the Guardian on the subject, which suugests Leave is over-stated.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2016/mar/29/support-leaving-eu-referendum-overstated-polls-analysis-suggests

Not my area of expertise, but it did read a little like whistling in the dark.

I agree. It's not very well written either.

It's really all about the turnout, nothing else. Anything significantly (5%+) below GE levels and Leave wins. At around GE levels it will be close. Above GE levels and Remain wins.

foxinsoxuk

SouthamObserver said:

All we can say with any real certainty is that there seems to have been a move towards Leave over recent weeks. Turnout is the key. If it's less than 60% it's very hard to see how Remain wins.

Looking at the previous thread header, I am not sure that is true. For example ICM online showed Remain ahead by 2%, something not seen for a month. Overall there looks to be very little consistent change. Possibly the number of undecideds is mildly shrinking.

The breakdown of turnout by SE group and age below looks about right to me. I am not convinced that low turnout favours Leave.

DavidL

"In fact if we compare General Election turnout between constituencies, we find that turnout is not higher in more Eurosceptic areas – in fact it is slightly lower".

I really don't understand how this is relevant to the certainty to vote in the referendum. There is no comparator and if Leave supporters are more strongly motivated, and there seems some evidence for that, then they are more likely to vote in this referendum than they were in the general.

The motivation factors are on a different level but Sindy was an example of this. Poor run down areas, where turnout is traditionally very poor had much higher turnout than had ever been seen before. Many of these people were not even on the electoral register until shortly before Sindy, they were consistent non voters, and yet they turned out.

All of this makes the job of the Pollsters very difficult because there are no effective comparators but the idea that if we have 60% turnout for Brexit it will necessarily be the same dutiful ABs who bother to turn up in general and local elections seems to me to be a very uncertain base from which to work. A different approach, unfortunately subjective and relying on self assessment, would be to ask who cares enough to vote in the referendum. It might give a different answer.

Plato_Says

For some strange reason, a very large number of Arab gentlemen based in the Middle East have taken a keen interest in Khan’s campaign at Hither Green station this morning. Odd, since these accounts usually only tweet in Arabic. Most of them are Saudi-based, and thanks to Google translate we can see their usual musings are about things like the Riyadh restaurant industry.

Either Khan’s Twitter support is bogus or the next London mayor should be looking to help the previously unknown Saudi-Hither Green commuter demographic…

http://order-order.com/2016/03/29/khans-attack-of-the-saudi-arabian-clones/

SouthamObserver

foxinsoxuk said:

SouthamObserver said:

All we can say with any real certainty is that there seems to have been a move towards Leave over recent weeks. Turnout is the key. If it's less than 60% it's very hard to see how Remain wins.

Looking at the previous thread header, I am not sure that is true. For example ICM online showed Remain ahead by 2%, something not seen for a month. Overall there looks to be very little consistent change. Possibly the number of undecideds is mildly shrinking.

The breakdown of turnout by SE group and age below looks about right to me. I am not convinced that low turnout favours Leave.

The Remain lead has dropped sharply in all the phone polls. In the online polls, there seems to be little movement. But if the report in the thread lead is correct, phone polls do overstate the Remain lead. Thus, we are probably at neck and neck, which is not where we were at the start of the year.

kle4

foxinsoxuk said:

SouthamObserver said:

All we can say with any real certainty is that there seems to have been a move towards Leave over recent weeks. Turnout is the key. If it's less than 60% it's very hard to see how Remain wins.

Looking at the previous thread header, I am not sure that is true. For example ICM online showed Remain ahead by 2%, something not seen for a month. Overall there looks to be very little consistent change. Possibly the number of undecideds is mildly shrinking.

The breakdown of turnout by SE group and age below looks about right to me. I am not convinced that low turnout favours Leave.

On the face of it, and operating on 4 hours sleep, I agree on the last bit. The fewer people who vote the more the result will be in the hands of the most likely to vote, richer old people, and they favour remain. You need a turnout high enough that less rich old people are the key, but not so much that young people turnout in droves and swing it with their love of interrailing or whatever.

No excuse if turnout is not great though - people cannot complain it will be devastating to future young people, in the event if a leave vote, or so critical we need to vote again this generation, in The event if a remain win, if turnout is low. So I hope it is high.

SouthamObserver

DavidL said:

"In fact if we compare General Election turnout between constituencies, we find that turnout is not higher in more Eurosceptic areas – in fact it is slightly lower".

I really don't understand how this is relevant to the certainty to vote in the referendum. There is no comparator and if Leave supporters are more strongly motivated, and there seems some evidence for that, then they are more likely to vote in this referendum than they were in the general.

The motivation factors are on a different level but Sindy was an example of this. Poor run down areas, where turnout is traditionally very poor had much higher turnout than had ever been seen before. Many of these people were not even on the electoral register until shortly before Sindy, they were consistent non voters, and yet they turned out.

All of this makes the job of the Pollsters very difficult because there are no effective comparators but the idea that if we have 60% turnout for Brexit it will necessarily be the same dutiful ABs who bother to turn up in general and local elections seems to me to be a very uncertain base from which to work. A different approach, unfortunately subjective and relying on self assessment, would be to ask who cares enough to vote in the referendum. It might give a different answer.

It could just be that lower turnout in Leave areas adversely affects Remain even more than in other parts of the country.

foxinsoxuk

DavidL said:

"In fact if we compare General Election turnout between constituencies, we find that turnout is not higher in more Eurosceptic areas – in fact it is slightly lower".

I really don't understand how this is relevant to the certainty to vote in the referendum. There is no comparator and if Leave supporters are more strongly motivated, and there seems some evidence for that, then they are more likely to vote in this referendum than they were in the general.

The motivation factors are on a different level but Sindy was an example of this. Poor run down areas, where turnout is traditionally very poor had much higher turnout than had ever been seen before. Many of these people were not even on the electoral register until shortly before Sindy, they were consistent non voters, and yet they turned out.

All of this makes the job of the Pollsters very difficult because there are no effective comparators but the idea that if we have 60% turnout for Brexit it will necessarily be the same dutiful ABs who bother to turn up in general and local elections seems to me to be a very uncertain base from which to work. A different approach, unfortunately subjective and relying on self assessment, would be to ask who cares enough to vote in the referendum. It might give a different answer.

Sindyref turnout was the highest in a very long time, but the lowest turnout areas were in Glsgow and Dundee, the only areas that broke for Yes. It looks to me that a rising tide floats all boats.

The people who turnout to vote are generally those people who always do.

DavidL

SouthamObserver said:

DavidL said:

"In fact if we compare General Election turnout between constituencies, we find that turnout is not higher in more Eurosceptic areas – in fact it is slightly lower".

I really don't understand how this is relevant to the certainty to vote in the referendum. There is no comparator and if Leave supporters are more strongly motivated, and there seems some evidence for that, then they are more likely to vote in this referendum than they were in the general.

The motivation factors are on a different level but Sindy was an example of this. Poor run down areas, where turnout is traditionally very poor had much higher turnout than had ever been seen before. Many of these people were not even on the electoral register until shortly before Sindy, they were consistent non voters, and yet they turned out.

All of this makes the job of the Pollsters very difficult because there are no effective comparators but the idea that if we have 60% turnout for Brexit it will necessarily be the same dutiful ABs who bother to turn up in general and local elections seems to me to be a very uncertain base from which to work. A different approach, unfortunately subjective and relying on self assessment, would be to ask who cares enough to vote in the referendum. It might give a different answer.

It could just be that lower turnout in Leave areas adversely affects Remain even more than in other parts of the country.

Yep, after the GE experience it is very difficult to have any confidence in any modelling that the polling companies might think of for a one off like this. If the polls are showing a result within about 8% (as the online polls are already doing and the phone polls are increasingly doing) the result will be very uncertain. Still think Remain will win but polling is not the reason.

blackburn63

Project Fear in full swing this morning, methinks the govt, who will have more data and info than anybody, are worried. It's noticeable however that the name calling on here from certain Remainers has waned.

Amongst the public I never hear the EU discussed after from by committed Leavers, which is very rare.

Low turnout, narrow Leave win, only those that care will be bothered to vote and there's not enough Remainers who'll miss the European football to vote.

Plato_Says

Tom Nuttal
Top three news stories on UK radio: potential steel nationalisation, middle east plane hijacking, EU referendum. Did I wake up in the 70s?

DavidL

foxinsoxuk said:

DavidL said:

"In fact if we compare General Election turnout between constituencies, we find that turnout is not higher in more Eurosceptic areas – in fact it is slightly lower".

I really don't understand how this is relevant to the certainty to vote in the referendum. There is no comparator and if Leave supporters are more strongly motivated, and there seems some evidence for that, then they are more likely to vote in this referendum than they were in the general.

The motivation factors are on a different level but Sindy was an example of this. Poor run down areas, where turnout is traditionally very poor had much higher turnout than had ever been seen before. Many of these people were not even on the electoral register until shortly before Sindy, they were consistent non voters, and yet they turned out.

All of this makes the job of the Pollsters very difficult because there are no effective comparators but the idea that if we have 60% turnout for Brexit it will necessarily be the same dutiful ABs who bother to turn up in general and local elections seems to me to be a very uncertain base from which to work. A different approach, unfortunately subjective and relying on self assessment, would be to ask who cares enough to vote in the referendum. It might give a different answer.

Sindyref turnout was the highest in a very long time, but the lowest turnout areas were in Glsgow and Dundee, the only areas that broke for Yes. It looks to me that a rising tide floats all boats.

The people who turnout to vote are generally those people who always do.

But the people who always turn out and vote formed a much smaller percentage of those who voted than they usually do because there were many traditional non voters who were particularly motivated by that vote. I think that is what we will see here as well but how you measure an effect like that I have no idea.

Plato_Says

The Tata issue is a hot potato for Remain, I'm expecting HMG to make nice noises and then do nothing much, but wait until after 23 June.

blackburn63 said:

Project Fear in full swing this morning, methinks the govt, who will have more data and info than anybody, are worried. It's noticeable however that the name calling on here from certain Remainers has waned.

Amongst the public I never hear the EU discussed after from by committed Leavers, which is very rare.

Low turnout, narrow Leave win, only those that care will be bothered to vote and there's not enough Remainers who'll miss the European football to vote.

Plato_Says

Umm

THE European Court of Justice ruled yesterday that the European Union can lawfully suppress political criticism of its institutions and of leading figures, sweeping aside English Common Law and 50 years of European precedents on civil liberties.

The EU's top court found that the European Commission was entitled to sack Bernard Connolly, a British economist dismissed in 1995 for writing a critique of European monetary integration entitled The Rotten Heart of Europe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325398/Euro-court-outlaws-criticism-of-EU.html

foxinsoxuk

blackburn63 said:

Project Fear in full swing this morning, methinks the govt, who will have more data and info than anybody, are worried. It's noticeable however that the name calling on here from certain Remainers has waned.

Amongst the public I never hear the EU discussed after from by committed Leavers, which is very rare.

Low turnout, narrow Leave win, only those that care will be bothered to vote and there's not enough Remainers who'll miss the European football to vote.

Sounds like an echo of Sindy ref. Apparently No had No supporters at all if you believed the frothers.

I hear supporters of Remain talking fairly often, at work, at social gatherings, even down the pub watching the footy.

Jacks ARSE was pretty close to the pb NOJAM consensus. I would be more confident of the former than the latter in terms of past prediction. Probing the internals of Jacks ARSE is not for the fainthearted, but it does seem quite weighted by demographic breakdown.

kle4

Plato_Says said:

Umm

THE European Court of Justice ruled yesterday that the European Union can lawfully suppress political criticism of its institutions and of leading figures, sweeping aside English Common Law and 50 years of European precedents on civil liberties.

The EU's top court found that the European Commission was entitled to sack Bernard Connolly, a British economist dismissed in 1995 for writing a critique of European monetary integration entitled The Rotten Heart of Europe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325398/Euro-court-outlaws-criticism-of-EU.html
I really hope this is an instance of things not being as crazy as they seem, otherwise it's very worrying.

SouthamObserver

That Tata case is an interesting one. Apparently, the UK government has been blocking attempts by the EU to raise tariffs on Chinese steel.

https://twitter.com/faisalislam?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

RochdalePioneers

I'm chairing a campaign forum meeting tomorrow night and the key message is that there is a long long time to go before the referendum. The people who have already made their minds up won't change. The people who haven't made their minds up will probably do so in the closing weeks. Which leaves 10 weeks or so of shadow boxing.

I remain able to make a good case for both leave and remain and able to demolish arguments being made for both leave or remain - neither camp is convincing. Ultimately it's a complex issue and punters don't do complex. Whoever can distill this down into a simple message and communicate it effectively will win by persuading the undecided to (a) back their side and (b) go and vote.

I think the Leave camp's simple message is probably self-determination - you can't control your borders and set your laws and stay in the EU. For remain they're trying various "jobs" and "security" arguments which are nullified by leave making the same case in reverse. I've argued for "project terror" instead of project fear and think it could work - foreign investment and foreign manufacturing will all leave so that's your kids future knackered. But I wouldn't deploy that until the final fortnight. Otherwise I struggle with how Remain funds a simple cut through persuasive message. Which is why in my opinion Leave are winning this.

Richard_Tyndall

kle4 said:

I really hope this is an instance of things not being as crazy as they seem, otherwise it's very worrying.

It is 15 years ago and to be honest I have not seen much evidence of anyone being banned from criticising the EU in the intervening period. If they had I would have spent the last 15 years on the run.

SouthamObserver

kle4 said:

Plato_Says said:

Umm

THE European Court of Justice ruled yesterday that the European Union can lawfully suppress political criticism of its institutions and of leading figures, sweeping aside English Common Law and 50 years of European precedents on civil liberties.

The EU's top court found that the European Commission was entitled to sack Bernard Connolly, a British economist dismissed in 1995 for writing a critique of European monetary integration entitled The Rotten Heart of Europe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325398/Euro-court-outlaws-criticism-of-EU.html

I really hope this is an instance of things not being as crazy as they seem, otherwise it's very worrying.



It could just be that an Ambrose Evans-Pritchard report in the Daily Telegraph is not the most disinterested source of information on this case :-)

kle4

SouthamObserver said:

kle4 said:

Plato_Says said:

Umm

THE European Court of Justice ruled yesterday that the European Union can lawfully suppress political criticism of its institutions and of leading figures, sweeping aside English Common Law and 50 years of European precedents on civil liberties.

The EU's top court found that the European Commission was entitled to sack Bernard Connolly, a British economist dismissed in 1995 for writing a critique of European monetary integration entitled The Rotten Heart of Europe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325398/Euro-court-outlaws-criticism-of-EU.html

I really hope this is an instance of things not being as crazy as they seem, otherwise it's very worrying.

It could just be that an Ambrose Evans-Pritchard report in the Daily Telegraph is not the most disinterested source of information on this case :-)



Perish the thought.

Philip_Thompson

Plato_Says said:

Umm

THE European Court of Justice ruled yesterday that the European Union can lawfully suppress political criticism of its institutions and of leading figures, sweeping aside English Common Law and 50 years of European precedents on civil liberties.

The EU's top court found that the European Commission was entitled to sack Bernard Connolly, a British economist dismissed in 1995 for writing a critique of European monetary integration entitled The Rotten Heart of Europe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325398/Euro-court-outlaws-criticism-of-EU.html

There's a huge difference between outlawing speech and sacking someone who criticises you.

foxinsoxuk

DavidL said:

foxinsoxuk said:

DavidL said:

"In fact if we compare General Election turnout between constituencies, we find that turnout is not higher in more Eurosceptic areas – in fact it is slightly lower".

I really don't understand how this is relevant to the certainty to vote in the referendum. There is no comparator and if Leave supporters are more strongly motivated, and there seems some evidence for that, then they are more likely to vote in this referendum than they were in the general.

The motivation factors are on a different level but Sindy was an example of this. Poor run down areas, where turnout is traditionally very poor had much higher turnout than had ever been seen before. Many of these people were not even on the electoral register until shortly before Sindy, they were consistent non voters, and yet they turned out.

All of this makes the job of the Pollsters very difficult because there are no effective comparators but the idea that if we have 60% turnout for Brexit it will necessarily be the same dutiful ABs who bother to turn up in general and local elections seems to me to be a very uncertain base from which to work. A different approach, unfortunately subjective and relying on self assessment, would be to ask who cares enough to vote in the referendum. It might give a different answer.

Sindyref turnout was the highest in a very long time, but the lowest turnout areas were in Glsgow and Dundee, the only areas that broke for Yes. It looks to me that a rising tide floats all boats.

The people who turnout to vote are generally those people who always do.

But the people who always turn out and vote formed a much smaller percentage of those who voted than they usually do because there were many traditional non voters who were particularly motivated by that vote. I think that is what we will see here as well but how you measure an effect like that I have no idea.

If that were the case then we would have expected the highest turnout areas to be for Yes, but infact the opposite was true.

blackburn63

Plato_Says said:

The Tata issue is a hot potato for Remain, I'm expecting HMG to make nice noises and then do nothing much, but wait until after 23 June.

blackburn63 said:

Project Fear in full swing this morning, methinks the govt, who will have more data and info than anybody, are worried. It's noticeable however that the name calling on here from certain Remainers has waned.

Amongst the public I never hear the EU discussed after from by committed Leavers, which is very rare.

Low turnout, narrow Leave win, only those that care will be bothered to vote and there's not enough Remainers who'll miss the European football to vote.

Well quite, the irony is laughable. On the front pages today we have job fears if we Leave alongside 4000 job losses in South Wales.

It will be interesting to see how Tata workers vote

blackburn63

foxinsoxuk said:

blackburn63 said:

Project Fear in full swing this morning, methinks the govt, who will have more data and info than anybody, are worried. It's noticeable however that the name calling on here from certain Remainers has waned.

Amongst the public I never hear the EU discussed after from by committed Leavers, which is very rare.

Low turnout, narrow Leave win, only those that care will be bothered to vote and there's not enough Remainers who'll miss the European football to vote.

Sounds like an echo of Sindy ref. Apparently No had No supporters at all if you believed the frothers.

I hear supporters of Remain talking fairly often, at work, at social gatherings, even down the pub watching the footy.

Jacks ARSE was pretty close to the pb NOJAM consensus. I would be more confident of the former than the latter in terms of past prediction. Probing the internals of Jacks ARSE is not for the fainthearted, but it does seem quite weighted by demographic breakdown.

The game's up mate, no football fans ever use the word "footy". And if you're discussing the EU referendum whilst watching the football I imagine you have plenty of space to yourself.

Moses_

Will there be postal voting for this referendum? Looks like I shall be out of the country on the day of destiny.

RochdalePioneers

On Steel it's pretty simple. The government could have intervened to save Redcar as other EU nations did but instead chose not to saying "the EU won't let us". Now that the entire industry faces closure so that Oik's mayes in China can profit afterwards, suddenly the government have woken up to the idea that this isn't politically viable. They're going to have to bypass state aid rules and intervene if nothing else because not doing so strengthens the Leave argument that we aren't truly sovereign

AlastairMeeks

It seems we can add nationalisers and protectionists to the Leave cavalcade. Having abandoned early any idea of intellectual coherence, it seems - logically enough - as if they are going to revel in their muddle-headedness.

TOPPING

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm chairing a campaign forum meeting tomorrow night and the key message is that there is a long long time to go before the referendum. The people who have already made their minds up won't change. The people who haven't made their minds up will probably do so in the closing weeks. Which leaves 10 weeks or so of shadow boxing.

I remain able to make a good case for both leave and remain and able to demolish arguments being made for both leave or remain - neither camp is convincing. Ultimately it's a complex issue and punters don't do complex. Whoever can distill this down into a simple message and communicate it effectively will win by persuading the undecided to (a) back their side and (b) go and vote.

I think the Leave camp's simple message is probably self-determination - you can't control your borders and set your laws and stay in the EU. For remain they're trying various "jobs" and "security" arguments which are nullified by leave making the same case in reverse. I've argued for "project terror" instead of project fear and think it could work - foreign investment and foreign manufacturing will all leave so that's your kids future knackered. But I wouldn't deploy that until the final fortnight. Otherwise I struggle with how Remain funds a simple cut through persuasive message. Which is why in my opinion Leave are winning this.

Enjoy the meeting; sounds challenging.

As you say the greatest challenge is that punters don't do complex. There is one school of thought (I ascribe to it 49%) that says this doesn't matter because they will decide what they decide regardless of whether it is deemed optimal by one side or the other.

As for pithy one-liners (the next PB competition?), how about:

Leave: The right to manage our country, our laws, and our economy without interference.
Remain: Create and shape our future in a strong Europe engaging with the world.

kle4

AlastairMeeks said:

It seems we can add nationalisers and protectionists to the Leave cavalcade. Having abandoned early any idea of intellectual coherence, it seems - logically enough - as if they are going to revel in their muddle-headedness.

If the known alternative is unpalatable enough, muddle headedness need not be a deal breaker. Roll on project fear Mark II, anti Eu edition.

chestnut

Charles said:

The obvious thing, surely, would be to break down by age and by social class (i.e. how are AB 55+ going to vote as presumably they are the most likely to vote, whereas I am not sure whether DE 55+ will be as keen). Or do the sample sizes become too small to be meaningful / is the data not available in the tables?

Interesting that the phone effect as as much as a 7.5% range from the mid-point. But, if so, why did online favour (broadly) the leftish parties last time round? Was it really just a crappy sample that YouGov fixed in place?

Almost all polling favours/overstates left of centre thinking.

It is often considered the "polite" attitudinal response by respondents, and that follows through with face-to-face research. In the anonymity of the polling booth, however.

In Sindy and GE2015 polling, phone polls were less accurate than online polls at gauging the left/right spectrum, and certain pollsters are pretty conspicuous for their margins of inaccuracy.

My rule of thumb with all of them is to take their results, and then adjust for how wrong they normally are.

It worked reasonably well last May.

foxinsoxuk

blackburn63 said:

foxinsoxuk said:

blackburn63 said:

Project Fear in full swing this morning, methinks the govt, who will have more data and info than anybody, are worried. It's noticeable however that the name calling on here from certain Remainers has waned.

Amongst the public I never hear the EU discussed after from by committed Leavers, which is very rare.

Low turnout, narrow Leave win, only those that care will be bothered to vote and there's not enough Remainers who'll miss the European football to vote.

Sounds like an echo of Sindy ref. Apparently No had No supporters at all if you believed the frothers.

I hear supporters of Remain talking fairly often, at work, at social gatherings, even down the pub watching the footy.

Jacks ARSE was pretty close to the pb NOJAM consensus. I would be more confident of the former than the latter in terms of past prediction. Probing the internals of Jacks ARSE is not for the fainthearted, but it does seem quite weighted by demographic breakdown.

The game's up mate, no football fans ever use the word "footy". And if you're discussing the EU referendum whilst watching the football I imagine you have plenty of space to yourself.

Yeah. Leicester City are noted for empty stadiums and quiet crowds, especially this season!

You have to get to the pub early if trying to watch away games, difficult to get a view otherwise. People talk about many things while waiting for the games.

edmundintokyo

Moses_ said:

Will there be postal voting for this referendum? Looks like I shall be out of the country on the day of destiny.

Yes, you can apply for a postal vote. It'll be easier than normal because they already know what to print on the ballot papers so they can mail them out earlier.

Plato_Says

Target marketing made flesh, literally.

The DNA paternity testing kits used on the Jeremy Kyle show are flying off the shelves at a budget store - generating almost half a million pounds.

Until the deal with Home Bargains, DNA home testing kits with the ability to prove a range of biological relationships were only available from online websites. The kits are now available in 290 stores across the UK, priced at £4.99 and offering a £99 processing service.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-kyle-dna-testing-kits-7652499

Moses_

edmundintokyo said:

Moses_ said:

Will there be postal voting for this referendum? Looks like I shall be out of the country on the day of destiny.

Yes, you can apply for a postal vote. It'll be easier than normal because they already know what to print on the ballot papers so they can mail them out earlier.

Thanks

Plato_Says

Leavers are already saying that to engage with the world, we need Brexit.

Remain needs to counter the inward looking nature of its arguments.

TOPPING said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm chairing a campaign forum meeting tomorrow night and the key message is that there is a long long time to go before the referendum. The people who have already made their minds up won't change. The people who haven't made their minds up will probably do so in the closing weeks. Which leaves 10 weeks or so of shadow boxing.

I remain able to make a good case for both leave and remain and able to demolish arguments being made for both leave or remain - neither camp is convincing. Ultimately it's a complex issue and punters don't do complex. Whoever can distill this down into a simple message and communicate it effectively will win by persuading the undecided to (a) back their side and (b) go and vote.

I think the Leave camp's simple message is probably self-determination - you can't control your borders and set your laws and stay in the EU. For remain they're trying various "jobs" and "security" arguments which are nullified by leave making the same case in reverse. I've argued for "project terror" instead of project fear and think it could work - foreign investment and foreign manufacturing will all leave so that's your kids future knackered. But I wouldn't deploy that until the final fortnight. Otherwise I struggle with how Remain funds a simple cut through persuasive message. Which is why in my opinion Leave are winning this.

Enjoy the meeting; sounds challenging.

As you say the greatest challenge is that punters don't do complex. There is one school of thought (I ascribe to it 49%) that says this doesn't matter because they will decide what they decide regardless of whether it is deemed optimal by one side or the other.

As for pithy one-liners (the next PB competition?), how about:

Leave: The right to manage our country, our laws, and our economy without interference.
Remain: Create and shape our future in a strong Europe engaging with the world.

JosiasJessop

RochdalePioneers said:

On Steel it's pretty simple. The government could have intervened to save Redcar as other EU nations did but instead chose not to saying "the EU won't let us". Now that the entire industry faces closure so that Oik's mayes in China can profit afterwards, suddenly the government have woken up to the idea that this isn't politically viable. They're going to have to bypass state aid rules and intervene if nothing else because not doing so strengthens the Leave argument that we aren't truly sovereign

I'm not sure what the solution(s) to this steel problem is.

Firstly, is it really a problem? Personally I'd say yes: making steel could be seen as a vital national capability. But is that true, and if so, how much, and what kind of steel?

Secondly, what are the issues facing the national steel industry? After all, it has been contracting for years. energy prices? China dumping steel? Lack of investment? Poor productivity? Poor management?

Thirdly, how do the proposed solutions (e.g. nationalisation) go towards curing or itigating those problems?

I'd have loved the left to have screamed this much when Butterley shut down after two hundred years of brilliant specialist steelmaking and fabrication. But that happened under a Labour government, so they said nothing ...

chestnut

Plato_Says said:

I'm not sure that it's helpful to anyone for people to pick a side when they haven't decided.

Indeed.

If people wanted to answer, they would have.

Pushing people gathers unconvincing responses and will often drive respondents to say what they think they 'should' say.

Sean_F

Southam, Ipsos MORI had certain to vote at 82% in its last election poll, 15% above GE turnout.

In part, that's a comparison between chalk and cheese, as at least 10% of names on the electoral register are dead/moved/double counted.

foxinsoxuk

Plato_Says said:

Leavers are already saying that to engage with the world, we need Brexit.

Remain needs to counter the inward looking nature of its arguments.

TOPPING said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm chairing a campaign forum meeting tomorrow night and the key message is that there is a long long time to go before the referendum. The people who have already made their minds up won't change. The people who haven't made their minds up will probably do so in the closing weeks. Which leaves 10 weeks or so of shadow boxing.

I remain able to make a good case for both leave and remain and able to demolish arguments being made for both leave or remain - neither camp is convincing. Ultimately it's a complex issue and punters don't do complex. Whoever can distill this down into a simple message and communicate it effectively will win by persuading the undecided to (a) back their side and (b) go and vote.

I think the Leave camp's simple message is probably self-determination - you can't control your borders and set your laws and stay in the EU. For remain they're trying various "jobs" and "security" arguments which are nullified by leave making the same case in reverse. I've argued for "project terror" instead of project fear and think it could work - foreign investment and foreign manufacturing will all leave so that's your kids future knackered. But I wouldn't deploy that until the final fortnight. Otherwise I struggle with how Remain funds a simple cut through persuasive message. Which is why in my opinion Leave are winning this.

Enjoy the meeting; sounds challenging.

As you say the greatest challenge is that punters don't do complex. There is one school of thought (I ascribe to it 49%) that says this doesn't matter because they will decide what they decide regardless of whether it is deemed optimal by one side or the other.

As for pithy one-liners (the next PB competition?), how about:

Leave: The right to manage our country, our laws, and our economy without interference.
Remain: Create and shape our future in a strong Europe engaging with the world.

Nonsense. We can trade and communicate very well with the world while in the EU - as is quite obvious with the status quo. Leave is dominated by anti-immigration and xenophobic arguments.

TOPPING

Plato_Says said:

Leavers are already saying that to engage with the world, we need Brexit.

Remain needs to counter the inward looking nature of its arguments.

TOPPING said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm chairing a campaign forum meeting tomorrow night and the key message is that there is a long long time to go before the referendum. The people who have already made their minds up won't change. The people who haven't made their minds up will probably do so in the closing weeks. Which leaves 10 weeks or so of shadow boxing.

I remain able to make a good case for both leave and remain and able to demolish arguments being made for both leave or remain - neither camp is convincing. Ultimately it's a complex issue and punters don't do complex. Whoever can distill this down into a simple message and communicate it effectively will win by persuading the undecided to (a) back their side and (b) go and vote.

I think the Leave camp's simple message is probably self-determination - you can't control your borders and set your laws and stay in the EU. For remain they're trying various "jobs" and "security" arguments which are nullified by leave making the same case in reverse. I've argued for "project terror" instead of project fear and think it could work - foreign investment and foreign manufacturing will all leave so that's your kids future knackered. But I wouldn't deploy that until the final fortnight. Otherwise I struggle with how Remain funds a simple cut through persuasive message. Which is why in my opinion Leave are winning this.

Enjoy the meeting; sounds challenging.

As you say the greatest challenge is that punters don't do complex. There is one school of thought (I ascribe to it 49%) that says this doesn't matter because they will decide what they decide regardless of whether it is deemed optimal by one side or the other.

As for pithy one-liners (the next PB competition?), how about:

Leave: The right to manage our country, our laws, and our economy without interference.
Remain: Create and shape our future in a strong Europe engaging with the world.

Leavers seem to be saying we don't like having to follow EU rules, which we get a say in shaping; we would rather follow global rules or, more specifically, US rules, where we have no say.

chestnut

RochdalePioneers said:

On Steel it's pretty simple. The government could have intervened to save Redcar as other EU nations did but instead chose not to saying "the EU won't let us". Now that the entire industry faces closure so that Oik's mayes in China can profit afterwards, suddenly the government have woken up to the idea that this isn't politically viable. They're going to have to bypass state aid rules and intervene if nothing else because not doing so strengthens the Leave argument that we aren't truly sovereign

What is the EU tariff - and therefore, ours - on Chinese steel?
What is the United States - outside the EU's - tariff?

Whichever way they play this - their subservience to the EU becomes obvious.

matt

Richard_Tyndall said:

kle4 said:

I really hope this is an instance of things not being as crazy as they seem, otherwise it's very worrying.

It is 15 years ago and to be honest I have not seen much evidence of anyone being banned from criticising the EU in the intervening period. If they had I would have spent the last 15 years on the run.

On the (I suspect) deliberately limited reporting in The Telegraph, the facts suggest that he engaged in writing, publicly, that his employer was wrong. In any world that would be unwise. There's a speculative AEP follow-up. Is there any subject on which he's proved correct?

Plato_Says

Kamal Ahmed
S&P cuts eurozone growth projections to 1.5% 2016 (versus 1.8%) and to 1.6% in 2017. Eurozone economies "flying on one engine" - consumers

Pulpstar

AlastairMeeks said:

It seems we can add nationalisers and protectionists to the Leave cavalcade. Having abandoned early any idea of intellectual coherence, it seems - logically enough - as if they are going to revel in their muddle-headedness.

Are you sure ?

Looks to me from the Faisal Islam{Javid} excerpts that it is the EU looking for the "protectionist" measures.

Faisal Islam's work isn't convienent to any "leaver" campaigning near say Port Talbot, and no doubt the perception will be different to the reality, but it seems to be as close to the truth as far as I can tell right now.

RochdalePioneers

EU or no EU we need a build British buy British campaign. French police drive French cars. Their trains are French trains. It's absurd that we are happy to watch domestic producers die to save pennies in the short term. And it's the same with farming - we import food we can grow ourselves because it's slightly cheaper on a spot price when contracts are signed.

Other EU nations haven't done this. Why have we? In France there was a national scandal when Eurostar bought Siemens trains instead of Alstom. Here we seem giddy that Hitachi has opened a warehouse to screw together imported train components for a few years before shutting the place citing lack of orders.

Wanderer

Plato_Says said:

Leavers are already saying that to engage with the world, we need Brexit.

As a matter of interest, what on Earth do they mean by that? The planet we currently "engage with" is not the world?

foxinsoxuk

Plato_Says said:

Kamal Ahmed
S&P cuts eurozone growth projections to 1.5% 2016 (versus 1.8%) and to 1.6% in 2017. Eurozone economies "flying on one engine" - consumers

So the same as ours! Only we have not tackled the deficit as well as the EZ, so are boosting our consumers with additional govt spending.

chestnut

TOPPING said:

As for pithy one-liners (the next PB competition?), how about:

Leave: The right to manage our country, our laws, and our economy without interference.
Remain: Create and shape our future in a strong Europe engaging with the world.

Vote Leave for a Better Britain.

Plato_Says

I'm showing my age here, I still recall those M&S green carrier bags with Buy British on them.

RochdalePioneers said:

EU or no EU we need a build British buy British campaign. French police drive French cars. Their trains are French trains. It's absurd that we are happy to watch domestic producers die to save pennies in the short term. And it's the same with farming - we import food we can grow ourselves because it's slightly cheaper on a spot price when contracts are signed.

Other EU nations haven't done this. Why have we? In France there was a national scandal when Eurostar bought Siemens trains instead of Alstom. Here we seem giddy that Hitachi has opened a warehouse to screw together imported train components for a few years before shutting the place citing lack of orders.

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

The above graph is one of the reasons I have yet to budge from thinking we'll have a comfortable Remain win.

Plato_Says

I really liked Dan Hannan's analogy

Saying “I support the EU because I like Europe” is rather like saying “I support FIFA because I like football”.
#VoteLeave @Vote_Leave

chestnut said:

TOPPING said:

As for pithy one-liners (the next PB competition?), how about:

Leave: The right to manage our country, our laws, and our economy without interference.
Remain: Create and shape our future in a strong Europe engaging with the world.

Vote Leave for a Better Britain.

foxinsoxuk

Plato_Says said:

I'm showing my age here, I still recall those M&S green carrier bags with Buy British on them.

RochdalePioneers said:

EU or no EU we need a build British buy British campaign. French police drive French cars. Their trains are French trains. It's absurd that we are happy to watch domestic producers die to save pennies in the short term. And it's the same with farming - we import food we can grow ourselves because it's slightly cheaper on a spot price when contracts are signed.

Other EU nations haven't done this. Why have we? In France there was a national scandal when Eurostar bought Siemens trains instead of Alstom. Here we seem giddy that Hitachi has opened a warehouse to screw together imported train components for a few years before shutting the place citing lack of orders.

M and S clothes were very much made in Britain once. Not any more. They have always been frumpy, but now foreign and frumpy with poor quality. Not a winning formula.

OldKingCole

RochdalePioneers said:

EU or no EU we need a build British buy British campaign. French police drive French cars. Their trains are French trains. It's absurd that we are happy to watch domestic producers die to save pennies in the short term. And it's the same with farming - we import food we can grow ourselves because it's slightly cheaper on a spot price when contracts are signed.

Other EU nations haven't done this. Why have we? In France there was a national scandal when Eurostar bought Siemens trains instead of Alstom. Here we seem giddy that Hitachi has opened a warehouse to screw together imported train components for a few years before shutting the place citing lack of orders.

We are governed, and have been for around forty years, by people who know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

LewisDuckworth

Plato_Says said:

Just catching up on Trump vs Cruz.

Trump says he won't back Cruz as the nominee as he's not been treated fairly, Cruz is refusing to confirm that he'd still back Trump.

Kasich is backing off too. Sahil Kapur tweeted the whole thing, worth reading his timeline.

What a circus.

I recall when Bernstein-Woodward found out that Nixon/CREEP had been behind some dirty tricks at Eugene McCarthy (Dem nominee, 1972) public meetings. Seems to me that Donald Trump has been subjected to dirty tricks (including negative Ads) repeatedly in recent couple of months, with 80% of the MSM egging others on or joining in. Latest allegation of assault on Breitbart Reporter against top-Trump-guy looks quite ridiculous.

Scott_P

Plato_Says said:

I really liked Dan Hannan's analogy

Saying “I support the EU because I like Europe” is rather like saying “I support FIFA because I like football”.

It's a really, really, really bad analogy.

Would football be better without FIFA?

Would FIFA be better is we left it?

Scott_P

@TheEconomist: Post-Brexit Britain would probably end up with fewer and worse trade deals than it has now https://t.co/9ZZh04RDjh https://t.co/SeIzSMf27O

Charles

Scott_P said:

@rosschawkins: Fmr cabinet secretary Lord O'Donnell tells @BBCr4today UK wd need longer than 2 years to negotiate EU exit
https://t.co/eg07oxlIwE

If the 2 year period is impossible, then he screwed up in recommending we sign the Lisbon Treaty when he was Cabinet Secretary

Sean_F

There's no reason why "protectionists and nationalisers" shouldn't support Leave. Beyond supporting the UK's withdrawal from the EU, there's no reason why Leave supporters should agree on anything else. I'm starting to see the heterogeneous nature of Leave as a strength, not a weakness.

Plato_Says

The video doesn't seem to show anything much at all.

The Leftists are making a huge fuss and looking uglier every time. No wonder Trump's supporters are getting louder.

I don't bother with any UK commentary on him. It's almost all ill-informed nonsense.

LewisDuckworth said:

Plato_Says said:

Just catching up on Trump vs Cruz.

Trump says he won't back Cruz as the nominee as he's not been treated fairly, Cruz is refusing to confirm that he'd still back Trump.

Kasich is backing off too. Sahil Kapur tweeted the whole thing, worth reading his timeline.

What a circus.

I recall when Bernstein-Woodward found out that Nixon/CREEP had been behind some dirty tricks at Eugene McCarthy (Dem nominee, 1972) public meetings. Seems to me that Donald Trump has been subjected to dirty tricks (including negative Ads) repeatedly in recent couple of months, with 80% of the MSM egging others on or joining in. Latest allegation of assault on Breitbart Reporter against top-Trump-guy looks quite ridiculous.

Morris_Dancer

Meanwhile, in Australia:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-35922858

To be fair, this is less ridiculous than wanting to ban a 1920s or Oriental Express ball because of (allegedly) racism.

JosiasJessop

RochdalePioneers said:

EU or no EU we need a build British buy British campaign. French police drive French cars. Their trains are French trains. It's absurd that we are happy to watch domestic producers die to save pennies in the short term. And it's the same with farming - we import food we can grow ourselves because it's slightly cheaper on a spot price when contracts are signed.

Other EU nations haven't done this. Why have we? In France there was a national scandal when Eurostar bought Siemens trains instead of Alstom. Here we seem giddy that Hitachi has opened a warehouse to screw together imported train components for a few years before shutting the place citing lack of orders.

The problem with 'Buy British' campaigns is that it is increasingly unclear where something is made. The days of companies like Butterley (yes, them again), are limited. They managed the entire process: up until 1948 they owned coal mines, iron ore extraction, steel making and fabrication.

Nowadays where something is made can be difficult. Take the case you mentioned: the new Hitachi trains being 'made' in the new factory at (sp?)Ayton Newcliffe. For the first batch of trains, the bodyshells are coming in from Japan. The diesel engines for the bi-mode trains are from MTU of Germany. The pantographs are from the brilliant British company Brecknell Willis.

Are they British-made trains? And will they be when they finally start making bodyshells?

But you are being unfair on Hitachi: they have moved their global rail business from Japan to the UK. That is a real sign of confidence in us.

As I've said before on here, a chip designed for a British firm was manufactured in China, packaged in Austria, sent to America for testing, and then to Britain for sale. Yet the most valuable part - the IP - is British. If you buy the chip from them, not a single part was made in Britain. But where was it made?

Plato_Says

I quite agree.

Whilst it's not my cup of tea, the EU prevents Leftists from intervention on issues they feel strongly about.

Sean_F said:

There's no reason why "protectionists and nationalisers" shouldn't support Leave. Beyond supporting the UK's withdrawal from the EU, there's no reason why Leave supporters should agree on anything else. I'm starting to see the heterogeneous nature of Leave as a strength, not a weakness.

Charles

Plato_Says said:

Umm

THE European Court of Justice ruled yesterday that the European Union can lawfully suppress political criticism of its institutions and of leading figures, sweeping aside English Common Law and 50 years of European precedents on civil liberties.

The EU's top court found that the European Commission was entitled to sack Bernard Connolly, a British economist dismissed in 1995 for writing a critique of European monetary integration entitled The Rotten Heart of Europe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325398/Euro-court-outlaws-criticism-of-EU.html

20 years to get a result?

Justice delayed and all that

daodao

There is a significant potential for the UK govt to mishandle the steel crisis, which could adversely affect the EU ref and Senedd votes coming soon. Their reluctance to save Redcar due to EU rules on state subsidy is likely to be repeated again, but they will try to prevaricate for 3 months until the expected win is safely in the bag.

There is something wrong with the UK govt's approach to industry (possibly excessive business rates and energy taxes) when TATA feel that they should concentrate their European steel making in the Netherlands, not exactly a low cost country.

TOPPING

Scott_P said:

Plato_Says said:

I really liked Dan Hannan's analogy

Saying “I support the EU because I like Europe” is rather like saying “I support FIFA because I like football”.

It's a really, really, really bad analogy.

Would football be better without FIFA?

Would FIFA be better is we left it?

It's a great analogy.

For all its faults FIFA enables and facilitates football in its member states.

Prob not what @Plato meant, that said.

Charles

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm chairing a campaign forum meeting tomorrow night and the key message is that there is a long long time to go before the referendum. The people who have already made their minds up won't change. The people who haven't made their minds up will probably do so in the closing weeks. Which leaves 10 weeks or so of shadow boxing.

I remain able to make a good case for both leave and remain and able to demolish arguments being made for both leave or remain - neither camp is convincing. Ultimately it's a complex issue and punters don't do complex. Whoever can distill this down into a simple message and communicate it effectively will win by persuading the undecided to (a) back their side and (b) go and vote.

I think the Leave camp's simple message is probably self-determination - you can't control your borders and set your laws and stay in the EU. For remain they're trying various "jobs" and "security" arguments which are nullified by leave making the same case in reverse. I've argued for "project terror" instead of project fear and think it could work - foreign investment and foreign manufacturing will all leave so that's your kids future knackered. But I wouldn't deploy that until the final fortnight. Otherwise I struggle with how Remain funds a simple cut through persuasive message. Which is why in my opinion Leave are winning this.

I think the problem for "project terror" is that the ground has been salted by "project fear" so the impact will be much reduced.

It's also demonstrably untrue.

Casino_Royale

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm chairing a campaign forum meeting tomorrow night and the key message is that there is a long long time to go before the referendum. The people who have already made their minds up won't change. The people who haven't made their minds up will probably do so in the closing weeks. Which leaves 10 weeks or so of shadow boxing.

I remain able to make a good case for both leave and remain and able to demolish arguments being made for both leave or remain - neither camp is convincing. Ultimately it's a complex issue and punters don't do complex. Whoever can distill this down into a simple message and communicate it effectively will win by persuading the undecided to (a) back their side and (b) go and vote.

I think the Leave camp's simple message is probably self-determination - you can't control your borders and set your laws and stay in the EU. For remain they're trying various "jobs" and "security" arguments which are nullified by leave making the same case in reverse. I've argued for "project terror" instead of project fear and think it could work - foreign investment and foreign manufacturing will all leave so that's your kids future knackered. But I wouldn't deploy that until the final fortnight. Otherwise I struggle with how Remain funds a simple cut through persuasive message. Which is why in my opinion Leave are winning this.

I think Project Terror is precisely what we'll get in the final fortnight.

It's the only way the Remain campaign feel they can drive the apathetic but Remain inclined non-voters into the polling booth.

dugarbandier

Plato_Says said:

The video doesn't seem to show anything much at all.

The Leftists are making a huge fuss and looking uglier every time. No wonder Trump's supporters are getting louder.

presumably they just want to show physical contact between the parties. They presumably also have evidence of the bruises.

the alleged victim is hardly a leftist though.

And while Trump's supporters get louder they will look more misogynist

Plato_Says

I've no idea what Remain can possibly claim next, there's still 80 days to go.

Casino_Royale said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm chairing a campaign forum meeting tomorrow night and the key message is that there is a long long time to go before the referendum. The people who have already made their minds up won't change. The people who haven't made their minds up will probably do so in the closing weeks. Which leaves 10 weeks or so of shadow boxing.

I remain able to make a good case for both leave and remain and able to demolish arguments being made for both leave or remain - neither camp is convincing. Ultimately it's a complex issue and punters don't do complex. Whoever can distill this down into a simple message and communicate it effectively will win by persuading the undecided to (a) back their side and (b) go and vote.

I think the Leave camp's simple message is probably self-determination - you can't control your borders and set your laws and stay in the EU. For remain they're trying various "jobs" and "security" arguments which are nullified by leave making the same case in reverse. I've argued for "project terror" instead of project fear and think it could work - foreign investment and foreign manufacturing will all leave so that's your kids future knackered. But I wouldn't deploy that until the final fortnight. Otherwise I struggle with how Remain funds a simple cut through persuasive message. Which is why in my opinion Leave are winning this.

I think Project Terror is precisely what we'll get in the final fortnight.

It's the only way the Remain campaign feel they can drive the apathetic but Remain inclined non-voters into the polling booth.

tlg86

TOPPING said:

Scott_P said:

Plato_Says said:

I really liked Dan Hannan's analogy

Saying “I support the EU because I like Europe” is rather like saying “I support FIFA because I like football”.

It's a really, really, really bad analogy.

Would football be better without FIFA?

Would FIFA be better is we left it?

It's a great analogy.

For all its faults FIFA enables and facilitates football in its member states.

Prob not what @Plato meant, that said.

FIFA has made the EU look positively virtuous. The election of Infantino further confirmed that football politics is about pork. Not only did Infantino stand by as his boss inflated the Euros to 24 teams he himself won his election by promising to expand the World Cup to 40 teams. (Scotland still won't qualify ).

Cyclefree

Plato_Says said:

Umm

THE European Court of Justice ruled yesterday that the European Union can lawfully suppress political criticism of its institutions and of leading figures, sweeping aside English Common Law and 50 years of European precedents on civil liberties.

The EU's top court found that the European Commission was entitled to sack Bernard Connolly, a British economist dismissed in 1995 for writing a critique of European monetary integration entitled The Rotten Heart of Europe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325398/Euro-court-outlaws-criticism-of-EU.html

Important to understand whether this is based on employment law or on some wider principle. Most organisations will dismiss employees who breach confidentiality or who criticise their employers publicly. If it is based on a wider principle i.e. that the EU should be beyond criticism then that is wrong and very worrying indeed.

Charles

TOPPING said:

As for pithy one-liners (the next PB competition?), how about:

Leave: The right to manage our country, our laws, and our economy without interference.
Remain: Create and shape our future in a strong Europe engaging with the world.

I think that sums up the problem for Remain.

Leave's philosophy is that where co-operation with Europe and with the world is in the UK's interests we can do so.

Under Remain, we have no choice, even if we don't want to do something or don't agree or don't think it is the right priority

dugarbandier

TOPPING said:

Scott_P said:

Plato_Says said:

I really liked Dan Hannan's analogy

Saying “I support the EU because I like Europe” is rather like saying “I support FIFA because I like football”.

It's a really, really, really bad analogy.

Would football be better without FIFA?

Would FIFA be better is we left it?

It's a great analogy.

For all its faults FIFA enables and facilitates football in its member states.

Prob not what @Plato meant, that said.

I think you need some "extreme irony" markers for this post. or possibly an intervention

TOPPING

tlg86 said:

TOPPING said:

Scott_P said:

Plato_Says said:

I really liked Dan Hannan's analogy

Saying “I support the EU because I like Europe” is rather like saying “I support FIFA because I like football”.

It's a really, really, really bad analogy.

Would football be better without FIFA?

Would FIFA be better is we left it?

It's a great analogy.

For all its faults FIFA enables and facilitates football in its member states.

Prob not what @Plato meant, that said.

FIFA has made the EU look positively virtuous. The election of Infantino further confirmed that football politics is about pork. Not only did Infantino stand by as his boss inflated the Euros to 24 teams he himself won his election by promising to expand the World Cup to 40 teams. (Scotland still won't qualify ).

Yep. Many faults.

So let's leave FIFA and start our own World Cup.

Dan you are a star get the analogy on those BSE pizza leaflets.

rcs1000

Charles said:

Scott_P said:

@rosschawkins: Fmr cabinet secretary Lord O'Donnell tells @BBCr4today UK wd need longer than 2 years to negotiate EU exit
https://t.co/eg07oxlIwE

If the 2 year period is impossible, then he screwed up in recommending we sign the Lisbon Treaty when he was Cabinet Secretary

Part of the problem is likely to be us, mind.

"So, you've invoked Article 50, what kind of future relationship would you like with the EU?"

"Errrr... We'll get back to you on that."

It's entirely possible we'd want further discussions, and maybe even a new government, before we decided what we want.

Charles

RochdalePioneers said:

EU or no EU we need a build British buy British campaign. French police drive French cars. Their trains are French trains. It's absurd that we are happy to watch domestic producers die to save pennies in the short term. And it's the same with farming - we import food we can grow ourselves because it's slightly cheaper on a spot price when contracts are signed.

Other EU nations haven't done this. Why have we? In France there was a national scandal when Eurostar bought Siemens trains instead of Alstom. Here we seem giddy that Hitachi has opened a warehouse to screw together imported train components for a few years before shutting the place citing lack of orders.

Because we apply the rules on procurement rather than find ways around it

NickPalmer

I'd like to add to the important thread discussion, but others have said what I'd have said already. A big poll with adequate subsamples as Charles suggests seems the safest - otherwise we can only go by the trends within polling companies.

I have a bit of sympathy for Trump and his sidekick on the alleged battery - grabbing someone approaching the candidate by the arm is the sort of thing anyone might do in a crowded room with emotions running high. I'm surprised it's actually going to court.

The more significant thing is that it is increasingly apparent that Trump won't endorse another candidate and they won't endorse him. That has to be wonderful news for Hillary. If Trump is selected, I imagine his rivals will say they're going to vote GOP in everything from Senate to dog-catcher but they'll sit out the Presidential election. But it's also becoming clearer that unlikely allies like Cruz and Kasich are going to make common cause at the convention if they can stop Trump. Perhaps a simple Cruz-Kasich ticket might be possible even though Kasich has so far ruled it out.

Alanbrooke

JosiasJessop said:

RochdalePioneers said:

EU or no EU we need a build British buy British campaign. French police drive French cars. Their trains are French trains. It's absurd that we are happy to watch domestic producers die to save pennies in the short term. And it's the same with farming - we import food we can grow ourselves because it's slightly cheaper on a spot price when contracts are signed.

Other EU nations haven't done this. Why have we? In France there was a national scandal when Eurostar bought Siemens trains instead of Alstom. Here we seem giddy that Hitachi has opened a warehouse to screw together imported train components for a few years before shutting the place citing lack of orders.

The problem with 'Buy British' campaigns is that it is increasingly unclear where something is made. The days of companies like Butterley (yes, them again), are limited. They managed the entire process: up until 1948 they owned coal mines, iron ore extraction, steel making and fabrication.

Nowadays where something is made can be difficult. Take the case you mentioned: the new Hitachi trains being 'made' in the new factory at (sp?)Ayton Newcliffe. For the first batch of trains, the bodyshells are coming in from Japan. The diesel engines for the bi-mode trains are from MTU of Germany. The pantographs are from the brilliant British company Brecknell Willis.

Are they British-made trains? And will they be when they finally start making bodyshells?

But you are being unfair on Hitachi: they have moved their global rail business from Japan to the UK. That is a real sign of confidence in us.

As I've said before on here, a chip designed for a British firm was manufactured in China, packaged in Austria, sent to America for testing, and then to Britain for sale. Yet the most valuable part - the IP - is British. If you buy the chip from them, not a single part was made in Britain. But where was it made?

Yadda.

Do you think it's different for France and Germany ?

Yet they still keep their major industries going.

Mortimer

AlastairMeeks said:

It seems we can add nationalisers and protectionists to the Leave cavalcade. Having abandoned early any idea of intellectual coherence, it seems - logically enough - as if they are going to revel in their muddle-headedness.

Because the coherence of the Remain argument is clear for all to see, right? You can pillory nationalisation and protectionism all you like, but do you not worry about just how many Labour supporters the loss of our industrial base might provoke into voting Leave? I am not going to lose my job to immigrant workers or outsourcing. But for some it is a very real threat. The coalition behind remain is weakening by the day and you seem to just see it as an excuse to laugh at the perceived 'other side'.

Do you not worry about not having capacity to make steel in this country? Given that we tend to be involved in continental conflicts at least every 100 years, I'd say moving towards relying on imports for a basic commodity such as steel is foolish. And I think most would agree I am generally a free trader.

And if the govt have been actively working against raising steel tariffs as seems to be suggested down thread, there is a huge risk of govt action sounding like hypocrisy.

At the moment, I'm not sure I'd even vote for this govt in a by-election.

kle4

TOPPING said:

Scott_P said:

Plato_Says said:

I really liked Dan Hannan's analogy

Saying “I support the EU because I like Europe” is rather like saying “I support FIFA because I like football”.

It's a really, really, really bad analogy.

Would football be better without FIFA?

Would FIFA be better is we left it?

It's a great analogy.

For all its faults FIFA enables and facilitates football in its member states.

Prob not what @Plato meant, that said.

FIFA does nothing that could not be done without it, or even most charitably, done much much better.

For all its faults, there are some things the Eu does that cannot be done from without. Are they important? People will disagree, but it's at least reasonable in theory if not in practice, unlike Fifa.

However the analogy is a good one, as it is about falsely conflating things.

rcs1000

daodao said:

There is a significant potential for the UK govt to mishandle the steel crisis, which could adversely affect the EU ref and Senedd votes coming soon. Their reluctance to save Redcar due to EU rules on state subsidy is likely to be repeated again, but they will try to prevaricate for 3 months until the expected win is safely in the bag.

There is something wrong with the UK govt's approach to industry (possibly excessive business rates and energy taxes) when TATA feel that they should concentrate their European steel making in the Netherlands, not exactly a low cost country.

Although the Netherlands has an enormous current account surplus (bigger than Germany or Switzerland as a percentage of GDP), so presumably they are doing something right.

tlg86

TOPPING said:

tlg86 said:

TOPPING said:

Scott_P said:

Plato_Says said:

I really liked Dan Hannan's analogy

Saying “I support the EU because I like Europe” is rather like saying “I support FIFA because I like football”.

It's a really, really, really bad analogy.

Would football be better without FIFA?

Would FIFA be better is we left it?

It's a great analogy.

For all its faults FIFA enables and facilitates football in its member states.

Prob not what @Plato meant, that said.

FIFA has made the EU look positively virtuous. The election of Infantino further confirmed that football politics is about pork. Not only did Infantino stand by as his boss inflated the Euros to 24 teams he himself won his election by promising to expand the World Cup to 40 teams. (Scotland still won't qualify ).

Yep. Many faults.

So let's leave FIFA and start our own World Cup.

Dan you are a star get the analogy on those BSE pizza leaflets.

Leaving FIFA on our own would achieve very little. I think it's a shame that we even bothered bidding for the 2018 World Cup. I think we knew it was corrupt from the start and playing that friendly in Trinidad only demonstrated that we appreciated that there was a game to be played and that we were willing to play it.

Charles

Scott_P said:

Plato_Says said:

I really liked Dan Hannan's analogy

Saying “I support the EU because I like Europe” is rather like saying “I support FIFA because I like football”.

It's a really, really, really bad analogy.

Would football be better without FIFA?

Would FIFA be better is we left it?

Football quite possibly would be better without FIFA.

FIFA wouldn't be better without us - but we have tried to reform it and failed. Far better to breakaway and set up a fresh, better organisation than support the corrupt institution it has become.

You are falling into the "something must be done. this is something. it must be done" fallacy

TOPPING

Charles said:

TOPPING said:

As for pithy one-liners (the next PB competition?), how about:

Leave: The right to manage our country, our laws, and our economy without interference.
Remain: Create and shape our future in a strong Europe engaging with the world.

I think that sums up the problem for Remain.

Leave's philosophy is that where co-operation with Europe and with the world is in the UK's interests we can do so.

Under Remain, we have no choice, even if we don't want to do something or don't agree or don't think it is the right priority

Yes this does assume that some people don't fear being in the EU as much as some on this board.

JosiasJessop

Charles said:

TOPPING said:

As for pithy one-liners (the next PB competition?), how about:

Leave: The right to manage our country, our laws, and our economy without interference.
Remain: Create and shape our future in a strong Europe engaging with the world.

I think that sums up the problem for Remain.

Leave's philosophy is that where co-operation with Europe and with the world is in the UK's interests we can do so.

Under Remain, we have no choice, even if we don't want to do something or don't agree or don't think it is the right priority

"Leave's philosophy is that where co-operation with Europe and with the world is in the UK's interests we can do so."

The problem with that is that if the co-operation with Europe and the world is not in their interest, they have no reason to do so. Leavers act as though we will have the say on everything.

it should be: "Leave's philosophy is that where co-operation with Europe and with the world is in the UK's interests we may be able to do so, if it is in their interests as well."

we could easily end up with worse deals than we have at the moment.

Casino_Royale

Scott_P said:

Plato_Says said:

I really liked Dan Hannan's analogy

Saying “I support the EU because I like Europe” is rather like saying “I support FIFA because I like football”.

It's a really, really, really bad analogy.

Would football be better without FIFA?

Would FIFA be better is we left it?

It's a great analogy.

Your defensive, repetitive and spluttering reaction shows its hit the mark, and you're nervous about it.