@faisalislam: 13 Nobel scientists incl Higgs/graphene discoverers say Brexit puts UK science "in jeopardy" -& Leave claims 'naive' https://t.co/0l1BQjM6nE
And how much science funding is recycled through the EU blob?
Is that the same James Dyson who supported the UK joining the Euro, supports free movement of people and shifted all his manufacturing jobs to Malaysia?
Should LEAVE prevail on 23 June, it will be Labour voters wot won it for them. Reflecting Corbyn's decidedly lacklustre level of support for the party's official line as being for REMAIN, the rank and file of their supporters are so far clearly not convinced.
The LEAVE Tories, together with UKIP supporters are nowhere near enough to win it for LEAVE on their own, they need a mighty wodge of Labour voting LEAVERS to push them over the line.
The way the numbers work out could eventually prove to look something like this:
Conservative Leavers ..... 60% x 35% = 21.0% UKIP Leavers .................. 90% x 15% = 13.5% Labour Leavers ............... 45% x 30% = 13.5% Other Parties' Leavers ..... 15% x 20% = 3.0%
Total LEAVERS .................................... 51.0%
It's fascinating how cross-party the Leave campaign is - I'm sure I've seen posters here using whatever leaflets/signs are most appropriate for their area, irrespective of their own politics.
I'm pushing LabourLeave stuff quite hard. They've a really compelling BS free message. GrassRootsOut have some great nuggets too. VoteLeave are impressing me with video evidence/rapid rebuttals/big announcements.
I don't want to believe the polling - but the trend seems to be coming our way.
It's leave's vote to lose now. All the momentum is with them because (sadly but unsurprisingly) the single issue of the campaign is migration and remain have no answer. So far the campaign has traded increasingly ludicrous claim and counter claim with "facts" that patently aren't.
But a lot of people aren't going with their head, they are going with their gut. And that tells them they are unhappy with the status quo, aren't happy with where the country is going, and even if leaving the EU isn't a silver bullet cure all, it's a start. Or at the very least a scream of defiance against an establishment which for two long has offered (as Galloway put it) two cheeks of the same arse.
It'll be leave. It won't be close.
I think that across the Western world, there are a lot of people (from all social groups, but especially White, working class or lower middle class, men) who feel their numbers, status, and fortunes are on the slide, and want to kick the people in charge.
Will the same 'white, working class or lower middle class, men who feel their numbers, status and fortunes are on the slide, and want to kick the people in charge' that will vote Trump for President in the US?
Massive difference between Trump and voting Leave. But yes there will be a lot of overlap.
Not really when you read some of the rants suggesting that voting to leave the EU is being driven by a protest vote against the Establishment. One hell of a risky protest vote.
It's not just a protest vote, E.U migration has swamped many communities across England and driven down wages for the lower paid. It has had tangiable downsides. Immigration. That is it. It is enough to win it for LEAVE. IN ENGLAND.
Corbyn is naturally Eurosceptic. As are a significant number of party members. As are a lot of Labour voters. The PLP insisted on a remain position and mostly in or ed by the media the party has been campaigning on the street for remain. We've done extensive door knocking. And what it's shown is that whilst remain is solid in London and some urban centres it's demolished by Leave elsewhere.
So what do you do? Party establishment says remain, party voter base says leave. As with Cameron the party position is disconnected from party supporters. So the best thing we can do in my opinion is nothing (expressed by many at our recent CLP meeting) - the more we campaign for remain the more damage we do. That continuity New Labour are already lining up to blame losing the referendum on Corbyn further demonstrates who far from their voters these MPs are.
Corbyn's Euroscepticism is very different to Farage. Corbyn wants out but isn't bothered by migration or environmental policy. He wants tariffs and trade barriers as well as the ability to nationalise and tax the city.
If we have a post Brexit General Election it could be a very interesting manifesto. Who do you trust to spend our subs on the NHS? Nonsense of course, but as this campaign shows, when did that ever bother a political campaign?
@faisalislam: 13 Nobel scientists incl Higgs/graphene discoverers say Brexit puts UK science "in jeopardy" -& Leave claims 'naive' https://t.co/0l1BQjM6nE
And the establishment will be absolutely fine. The idea that the right wing Tories about to takeover will do anything to challenge the positions and wealth of those who control the country is far-fetched, to say the least.
Of course. The EU mandates privatisation and bankism. The people who want out also want privatisation and bankism just with more of the profits kept by them. A lot of people voting leave would be in for a nasty shock should we actually leave.
Which we won't. Because we vote to leave. The dispossessed and discontented across Europe all demand their own votes, the EU realises the status quo is untenable and a proper renegotiation happens. A revised EU with less migration and more national freedom "isn't what people rejected, we have to put this to a vote" and hey presto we stay.
But you have to negotiate change from a position of power. Cameron had no power pledging to campaign to remain to they gave nothing. Actually get up from the table and they have to actually give ground.
I think Cameron did have power and it wasn't necessary to threaten to walk out; the British public was making that threat for him so he wouldn't have had to lose personal faith with his EU colleagues: "The deal you are offering cannot be sold" should have been his line. His error was in trying to conclude everything within a year when he gave himself 30 months.
Cameron pretended to be something he wasn't to Tory MPs, members and voters generally for short term political gain. He will pay for that with a shattered reputation. But he'll get over it.
Do try to avoid any Game of Thrones spoilers, chaps.
[Still not got season 5 yet. I may be obnoxious and just wait for a full box set, though I've got series 1-4 individually. May try and work out what's more cost-effective, assuming I decide to keep getting them].
I see football fans from across Europe are taking the chance to sample the delights of the south of France at this time of year & fully embracing the cafe culture!!!!!
EU will be praying that England votes to leave after another 2 weeks of riots
For a little perspective, will anyone really be talking about politics today?
We have the Queen's Birthday, Birthday Honours, riots in Marseille and the small matter of England playing in rugby, cricket and football.
I'm trying to avoid Mohammed Ali's funeral. This is almost as bad as Michael Jackson Is Still Dead.
By the way, the James Dyson interview in the DT is brilliant. We need to find a few more people like him.
Superb isn't it? Trending no.2 on twitter (okay okay). I suspect people seeking a thoughtful well-reasoned argument to Leave will be tipped by it. For the rest of us it just adds a bigger tick, or cross, in the box.
Mind you, I would love to see how Cameron could respond to his arguments.
Mr. Observer, yes but if Remain are accepting that those who were wrong about the euro have errant judgement that's to the detriment of Remain far more than Leave.
I think it's more about currency markets than betting markets.Economic risk of Brexit has been presented as Project Fear and "scaremongering" but if you took no notice of flood warmings would you believe if the waves were coming over the sea-wall.Any realistic chance of Brexit winning is going to send the pound to the floor-vulture capitalists are just waiting to pounce as they did in the Greece ref..This will be the mini-shock before the real thing,a run on the pound and suddenly scaremongering it is not-it is a warning to take note of.
Your average punter is struggling to feed and clothe themselves, their last concern will be what the pound is against the dollar or Euro, only the rich establishment Tories and the vultures will be involved
Mr. Observer, yes but if Remain are accepting that those who were wrong about the euro have errant judgement that's to the detriment of Remain far more than Leave.
Possibly. My point is more to those on here who say that the views of anyone who backed the Euro should be discounted. Funnily enough, it doesn't apply to James Dyson - who also shat on British workers when he moved his manufacturing operation to Malaysia, of course.
It's leave's vote to lose now. All the momentum is with them because (sadly but unsurprisingly) the single issue of the campaign is migration and remain have no answer. So far the campaign has traded increasingly ludicrous claim and counter claim with "facts" that patently aren't.
But a lot of people aren't going with their head, they are going with their gut. And that tells them they are unhappy with the status quo, aren't happy with where the country is going, and even if leaving the EU isn't a silver bullet cure all, it's a start. Or at the very least a scream of defiance against an establishment which for two long has offered (as Galloway put it) two cheeks of the same arse.
It'll be leave. It won't be close.
I think that across the Western world, there are a lot of people (from all social groups, but especially White, working class or lower middle class, men) who feel their numbers, status, and fortunes are on the slide, and want to kick the people in charge.
@faisalislam: 13 Nobel scientists incl Higgs/graphene discoverers say Brexit puts UK science "in jeopardy" -& Leave claims 'naive' https://t.co/0l1BQjM6nE
@faisalislam: 13 Nobel scientists incl Higgs/graphene discoverers say Brexit puts UK science "in jeopardy" -& Leave claims 'naive' https://t.co/0l1BQjM6nE
We don't listen to experts who speak garbage.
FWIW I'm on the finance committee (one level below the governing council) for one of the UK's premier scientific universities in its field. Yes there are grants that come from the EU - but they aren't that large and they take months to pay. (The bulk of our funds come from Gates, Wellcome and HEFCE).
As with everything, it will need restructuring, but the money, the academic talent, the access to international conferences and forums, the ability to publish and engage will all still be there.
@faisalislam: 13 Nobel scientists incl Higgs/graphene discoverers say Brexit puts UK science "in jeopardy" -& Leave claims 'naive' https://t.co/0l1BQjM6nE
F*** Off Experts, we're voting leave!
Exactly a bunch of tossers concerned they won't get free money or jollies to play with their toys and come up with great reports on how breathing is bad for you
And the establishment will be absolutely fine. The idea that the right wing Tories about to takeover will do anything to challenge the positions and wealth of those who control the country is far-fetched, to say the least.
Of course. The EU mandates privatisation and bankism. The people who want out also want privatisation and bankism just with more of the profits kept by them. A lot of people voting leave would be in for a nasty shock should we actually leave.
Which we won't. Because we vote to leave. The dispossessed and discontented across Europe all demand their own votes, the EU realises the status quo is untenable and a proper renegotiation happens. A revised EU with less migration and more national freedom "isn't what people rejected, we have to put this to a vote" and hey presto we stay.
But you have to negotiate change from a position of power. Cameron had no power pledging to campaign to remain to they gave nothing. Actually get up from the table and they have to actually give ground.
I think Cameron did have power and it wasn't necessary to threaten to walk out; the British public was making that threat for him so he wouldn't have had to lose personal faith with his EU colleagues: "The deal you are offering cannot be sold" should have been his line. His error was in trying to conclude everything within a year when he gave himself 30 months.
Cameron pretended to be something he wasn't to Tory MPs, members and voters generally for short term political gain. He will pay for that with a shattered reputation. But he'll get over it.
Only in the same way that Blair has.
I don't think Cameron will be as bothered about his reputation as Blair is.
@EdConwaySky: Dyson’s vision of UK outside EU seems to involve more immigration from outside EU. Not quite official Leave position https://t.co/UTUrntfrTa
I agree. Corbyn will own Brexit almost as much as Cameron and Osborne. But he'll be far less concerned. And the party membership will not hold it against him.
Two important points here, also relating to the article from electiondata.
1. There is not actually a solution that we can in any honesty offer on immigration. Not only is free movement an indssoluble part of the free market, and we'll do people on low incomes (and everyone else) a real disservice if we leave that. But also it's primarily a pull issue. Immgrants come because employers want them. That's why we still have 50% of migration from non-EU countries. We could reduce that to zero if we wanted to - but we don't, because the NHS and numerous other employers would be ruined.
That's why the Leave campaign is fundamentally bullshit. If we withdraw, future governments might choose to have different immigrants - more Pakistanis and Chinese, fewer Poles and Bulgarians. But no government *in practice* (as opposed to rhetoric) has shown any sign of wanting to reduce overall immigration seriously, because they're conscious of the huge pull demand, and there's no sign that it will change. (In particular, anyone who thinks that Boris is seriously keen on reducing immigration is deluded.)
2. I really like Corbyn, as you know, and he has huge appeal to 25-30% of the population, typically the young. But he is not the man to mobilise the older WWC anti-immigation Labour/UKIP vote for Remain. Say he somehow persuaded the broadcasters to put him on four debates between now and polling day. Do you think Fred Bloggs in South Shields is going to get more Remain as a result?
Electiondata stops short of saying what he thinks should be done. There's a reason. What the disaffected voters want is not achievable. We can only win them over if we successfully lie to them, as the Tories have been doing for some time. It's both wrong and a mistake, because eventually they figure out they're being lied to, and go for more extreme groups who don't get into government and can therefore promise anything.
Two weeks of little Englanders rioting in Europe seems just like what Remain would like.
Smart timing by Cameron.
This is one of the very authentic faces of the English white working class. It's one of those that many of the more dewy-eyed Leavers on here like to pretend doesn't exist. Ditto for those members of the WWC in unions and working in the public sector.
Should LEAVE prevail on 23 June, it will be Labour voters wot won it for them. Reflecting Corbyn's decidedly lacklustre level of support for the party's official line as being for REMAIN, the rank and file of their supporters are so far clearly not convinced.
The LEAVE Tories, together with UKIP supporters are nowhere near enough to win it for LEAVE on their own, they need a mighty wodge of Labour voting LEAVERS to push them over the line.
The way the numbers work out could eventually prove to look something like this:
Conservative Leavers ..... 60% x 35% = 21.0% UKIP Leavers .................. 90% x 15% = 13.5% Labour Leavers ............... 45% x 30% = 13.5% Other Parties' Leavers ..... 15% x 20% = 3.0%
Total LEAVERS .................................... 51.0%
It's fascinating how cross-party the Leave campaign is - I'm sure I've seen posters here using whatever leaflets/signs are most appropriate for their area, irrespective of their own politics.
I'm pushing LabourLeave stuff quite hard. They've a really compelling BS free message. GrassRootsOut have some great nuggets too. VoteLeave are impressing me with video evidence/rapid rebuttals/big announcements.
I don't want to believe the polling - but the trend seems to be coming our way.
It is often said that Rupert Murdoch likes to support the winning side and that's certainly a logical stance for a newspaper proprietor to take, i.e. in not wishing to alienate one's readership. I suspect there's also a small, probably very small percentage of the electorate who want to back the winner. Even if this percentage is < 1%, this could prove crucial in what looks like a very close contest.
It's leave's vote to lose now. All the momentum is with them because (sadly but unsurprisingly) the single issue of the campaign is migration and remain have no answer. So far the campaign has traded increasingly ludicrous claim and counter claim with "facts" that patently aren't.
But a lot of people aren't going with their head, they are going with their gut. And that tells them they are unhappy with the status quo, aren't happy with where the country is going, and even if leaving the EU isn't a silver bullet cure all, it's a start. Or at the very least a scream of defiance against an establishment which for two long has offered (as Galloway put it) two cheeks of the same arse.
It'll be leave. It won't be close.
And the establishment will be absolutely fine. The idea that the right wing Tories about to takeover will do anything to challenge the positions and wealth of those who control the country is far-fetched, to say the least.
Will just be a different set of arses in control, looking after themselves and their establishment buddies. At least leave will give them all a poke in the eye.
I agree. Corbyn will own Brexit almost as much as Cameron and Osborne. But he'll be far less concerned. And the party membership will not hold it against him.
Two important points here, also relating to the article from electiondata.
1. There is not actually a solution that we can in any honesty offer on immigration. Not only is free movement an indssoluble part of the free market, and we'll do people on low incomes (and everyone else) a real disservice if we leave that. But also it's primarily a pull issue. Immgrants come because employers want them. That's why we still have 50% of migration from non-EU countries. We could reduce that to zero if we wanted to - but we don't, because the NHS and numerous other employers would be ruined.
That's why the Leave campaign is fundamentally bullshit. If we withdraw, future governments might choose to have different immigrants - more Pakistanis and Chinese, fewer Poles and Bulgarians. But no government *in practice* (as opposed to rhetoric) has shown any sign of wanting to reduce overall immigration seriously, because they're conscious of the huge pull demand, and there's no sign that it will change. (In particular, anyone who thinks that Boris is seriously keen on reducing immigration is deluded.)
2. I really like Corbyn, as you know, and he has huge appeal to 25-30% of the population, typically the young. But he is not the man to mobilise the older WWC anti-immigation Labour/UKIP vote for Remain. Say he somehow persuaded the broadcasters to put him on four debates between now and polling day. Do you think Fred Bloggs in South Shields is going to get more Remain as a result?
Electiondata stops short of saying what he thinks should be done. There's a reason. What the disaffected voters want is not achievable. We can only win them over if we successfully lie to them, as the Tories have been doing for some time. It's both wrong and a mistake, because eventually they figure out they're being lied to, and go for more extreme groups who don't get into government and can therefore promise anything.
We have enjoyed much higher rates of growth, with much lower levels of immigration, in the recent past.
Corbyn is naturally Eurosceptic. As are a significant number of party members. As are a lot of Labour voters. The PLP insisted on a remain position and mostly in or ed by the media the party has been campaigning on the street for remain. We've done extensive door knocking. And what it's shown is that whilst remain is solid in London and some urban centres it's demolished by Leave elsewhere.
So what do you do? Party establishment says remain, party voter base says leave. As with Cameron the party position is disconnected from party supporters. So the best thing we can do in my opinion is nothing (expressed by many at our recent CLP meeting) - the more we campaign for remain the more damage we do. That continuity New Labour are already lining up to blame losing the referendum on Corbyn further demonstrates who far from their voters these MPs are.
Funny isn't it? I don't think they realise how detested Tony Blair and his merry band of Metropolitans are. It's why Corbyn won but politicians are the last to get hubris.
So every time Tone shows up, Leave adds another dollop of support.
Yes, whoever thought Tony Blair and John Major metaphorically holding hands as they strolled round Londonderry dominanting an entire evenings news bulleteins was a good idea for remain?
Awful, awful, awful. I can see how some PR ingénue might think it was a clever idea to get two former PMs together, and use it as a vehicle to extend Project Fear...
The fact that one is largely despised, and their aim to conjure up the spectre of domestic terrorism - well, someone should've stopped it ever getting beyond a whiteboard brainstorm. It's akin to the EdStone. These are clever people - they know what they're messing with, and still carried on.
I've honestly no idea what's going on in their heads. The other was the slimy attack on Boris re getting a lift home. Who could possibly think implying he'd drunk drive or grope you was a smart idea? Is McBride advising them?
Two points, David. Turnout will be high. At least in London: people here, like my son, who are rigorously a-political ("the Government always gets in") are raising the subject with me (and he's got his half-Turkish beloved to register as well ).
Which leads neatly on to my other point: if REMAIN win on London, Scottish and non-white votes - which I think is the only way they can - will Middle England accept that result?
It's leave's vote to lose now. All the momentum is with them because (sadly but unsurprisingly) the single issue of the campaign is migration and remain have no answer. So far the campaign has traded increasingly ludicrous claim and counter claim with "facts" that patently aren't.
But a lot of people aren't going with their head, they are going with their gut. And that tells them they are unhappy with the status quo, aren't happy with where the country is going, and even if leaving the EU isn't a silver bullet cure all, it's a start. Or at the very least a scream of defiance against an establishment which for two long has offered (as Galloway put it) two cheeks of the same arse.
It'll be leave. It won't be close.
I think that across the Western world, there are a lot of people (from all social groups, but especially White, working class or lower middle class, men) who feel their numbers, status, and fortunes are on the slide, and want to kick the people in charge.
Will the same 'white, working class or lower middle class, men who feel their numbers, status and fortunes are on the slide, and want to kick the people in charge' that will vote Trump for President in the US?
Massive difference between Trump and voting Leave. But yes there will be a lot of overlap.
Not really when you read some of the rants suggesting that voting to leave the EU is being driven by a protest vote against the Establishment. One hell of a risky protest vote.
It's not just a protest vote, E.U migration has swamped many communities across England and driven down wages for the lower paid. It has had tangiable downsides. Immigration. That is it. It is enough to win it for LEAVE. IN ENGLAND.
Up in the highlands Fitalass only sees rich English immigrants coming in , spending cash and starting businesses and thinks it is all rosy in the garden and immigration is great.
I agree. Corbyn will own Brexit almost as much as Cameron and Osborne. But he'll be far less concerned. And the party membership will not hold it against him.
Two important points here, also relating to the article from electiondata.
1. There is not actually a solution that we can in any honesty offer on immigration. Not only is free movement an indssoluble part of the free market, and we'll do people on low incomes (and everyone else) a real disservice if we leave that. But also it's primarily a pull issue. Immgrants come because employers want them. That's why we still have 50% of migration from non-EU countries. We could reduce that to zero if we wanted to - but we don't, because the NHS and numerous other employers would be ruined.
That's why the Leave campaign is fundamentally bullshit. If we withdraw, future governments might choose to have different immigrants - more Pakistanis and Chinese, fewer Poles and Bulgarians. But no government *in practice* (as opposed to rhetoric) has shown any sign of wanting to reduce overall immigration seriously, because they're conscious of the huge pull demand, and there's no sign that it will change. (In particular, anyone who thinks that Boris is seriously keen on reducing immigration is deluded.)
2. I really like Corbyn, as you know, and he has huge appeal to 25-30% of the population, typically the young. But he is not the man to mobilise the older WWC anti-immigation Labour/UKIP vote for Remain. Say he somehow persuaded the broadcasters to put him on four debates between now and polling day. Do you think Fred Bloggs in South Shields is going to get more Remain as a result?
Electiondata stops short of saying what he thinks should be done. There's a reason. What the disaffected voters want is not achievable. We can only win them over if we successfully lie to them, as the Tories have been doing for some time. It's both wrong and a mistake, because eventually they figure out they're being lied to, and go for more extreme groups who don't get into government and can therefore promise anything.
Point 1 is why I am so worried about what happens when Leave win. The reduction in migration that people have voted for almost certainly won't happen for the reasons you note. Then what?
I agree. Corbyn will own Brexit almost as much as Cameron and Osborne. But he'll be far less concerned. And the party membership will not hold it against him.
Two important points here, also relating to the article from electiondata.
1. There is not actually a solution that we can in any honesty offer on immigration. Not only is free movement an indssoluble part of the free market, and we'll do people on low incomes (and everyone else) a real disservice if we leave that. But also it's primarily a pull issue. Immgrants come because employers want them. That's why we still have 50% of migration from non-EU countries. We could reduce that to zero if we wanted to - but we don't, because the NHS and numerous other employers would be ruined.
That's why the Leave campaign is fundamentally bullshit. If we withdraw, future governments might choose to have different immigrants - more Pakistanis and Chinese, fewer Poles and Bulgarians. But no government *in practice* (as opposed to rhetoric) has shown any sign of wanting to reduce overall immigration seriously, because they're conscious of the huge pull demand, and there's no sign that it will change. (In particular, anyone who thinks that Boris is seriously keen on reducing immigration is deluded.)
2. I really like Corbyn, as you know, and he has huge appeal to 25-30% of the population, typically the young. But he is not the man to mobilise the older WWC anti-immigation Labour/UKIP vote for Remain. Say he somehow persuaded the broadcasters to put him on four debates between now and polling day. Do you think Fred Bloggs in South Shields is going to get more Remain as a result?
Electiondata stops short of saying what he thinks should be done. There's a reason. What the disaffected voters want is not achievable. We can only win them over if we successfully lie to them, as the Tories have been doing for some time. It's both wrong and a mistake, because eventually they figure out they're being lied to, and go for more extreme groups who don't get into government and can therefore promise anything.
We have enjoyed much higher rates of growth, with much lower levels of immigration, in the recent past.
For a little perspective, will anyone really be talking about politics today?
We have the Queen's Birthday, Birthday Honours, riots in Marseille and the small matter of England playing in rugby, cricket and football.
I'm trying to avoid Mohammed Ali's funeral. This is almost as bad as Michael Jackson Is Still Dead.
By the way, the James Dyson interview in the DT is brilliant. We need to find a few more people like him.
Superb isn't it? Trending no.2 on twitter (okay okay). I suspect people seeking a thoughtful well-reasoned argument to Leave will be tipped by it. For the rest of us it just adds a bigger tick, or cross, in the box.
Mind you, I would love to see how Cameron could respond to his arguments.
Probably be very smug with his scripted retort that "Dyson, your products suck!!"
@juliamacfarlane: Remain camp point out Sir James Dyson had campaigned ardently for UK to join the euro, say "he was wrong then and he's wrong now"
Are Remain being that idiotic to play that card? They really are losing all semblance of cohesion....
I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.
@faisalislam: ..Vote Leave disagrees with Nobels says funding can be increased money they say saved from EU, & scientist immigration fast tracked..
Apart from the fact there is no saving, leave are arguing for MORE immigration
Yes, rather like replacing my Greek doctors and Portuguese nurses.
Why would they need to be replaced when they can get a visa?
My point is that we will still need them or their non EU equivalent. So some other squeeze on the migration figures.
277 000 non EU immigrants in 2015, despite our governments policies (188 000 net)
Nobody in Vote Leave has been suggesting we should have zero migrants. The only suggestion is that we should have some control over who those migrants are, like we do with the non-EU migrants.
@juliamacfarlane: Remain camp point out Sir James Dyson had campaigned ardently for UK to join the euro, say "he was wrong then and he's wrong now"
Is that the same one that moved all the jobs offshore to avoid paying tax etc and sells his products here at eye watering prices. Perfect Tory example of Remain supporter, I am rich and coining it in , vote remain you peasant losers, oh and buy my foreign made products.
PS: Before some smart arse comments , I am aware he is for leave at the moment, but good few days to go yet
Two points, David. Turnout will be high. At least in London: people here, like my son, who are rigorously a-political ("the Government always gets in") are raising the subject with me (and he's got his half-Turkish beloved to register as well ).
Which leads neatly on to my other point: if REMAIN win on London, Scottish and non-white votes - which I think is the only way they can - will Middle England accept that result?
If last nights poll is to be believed they will not even win in London.
It is probably over egging it but the Standard result showed that the any London remain victory is not likely to be wide enough to overturn leave elsewhere.
I agree. Corbyn will own Brexit almost as much as Cameron and Osborne. But he'll be far less concerned. And the party membership will not hold it against him.
Two important points here, also relating to the article from electiondata.
1. There is not actually a solution that we can in any honesty offer on immigration. Not only is free movement an indssoluble part of the free market, and we'll do people on low incomes (and everyone else) a real disservice if we leave that. But also it's primarily a pull issue. Immgrants come because employers want them. That's why we still have 50% of migration from non-EU countries. We could reduce that to zero if we wanted to - but we don't, because the NHS and numerous other employers would be ruined.
That's why the Leave campaign is fundamentally bullshit. If we withdraw, future governments might choose to have different immigrants - more Pakistanis and Chinese, fewer Poles and Bulgarians. But no government *in practice* (as opposed to rhetoric) has shown any sign of wanting to reduce overall immigration seriously, because they're conscious of the huge pull demand, and there's no sign that it will change. (In particular, anyone who thinks that Boris is seriously keen on reducing immigration is deluded.)
2. I really like Corbyn, as you know, and he has huge appeal to 25-30% of the population, typically the young. But he is not the man to mobilise the older WWC anti-immigation Labour/UKIP vote for Remain. Say he somehow persuaded the broadcasters to put him on four debates between now and polling day. Do you think Fred Bloggs in South Shields is going to get more Remain as a result?
Electiondata stops short of saying what he thinks should be done. There's a reason. What the disaffected voters want is not achievable. We can only win them over if we successfully lie to them, as the Tories have been doing for some time. It's both wrong and a mistake, because eventually they figure out they're being lied to, and go for more extreme groups who don't get into government and can therefore promise anything.
We have enjoyed much higher rates of growth, with much lower levels of immigration, in the recent past.
I agree. Corbyn will own Brexit almost as much as Cameron and Osborne. But he'll be far less concerned. And the party membership will not hold it against him.
Two important points here, also relating to the article from electiondata.
1. There is not actually a solution that we can in any honesty offer on immigration. Not only is free movement an indssoluble part of the free market, and we'll do people on low incomes (and everyone else) a real disservice if we leave that. But also it's primarily a pull issue. Immgrants come because employers want them. That's why we still have 50% of migration from non-EU countries. We could reduce that to zero if we wanted to - but we don't, because the NHS and numerous other employers would be ruined.
That's why the Leave campaign is fundamentally bullshit. If we withdraw, future governments might choose to have different immigrants - more Pakistanis and Chinese, fewer Poles and Bulgarians. But no government *in practice* (as opposed to rhetoric) has shown any sign of wanting to reduce overall immigration seriously, because they're conscious of the huge pull demand, and there's no sign that it will change. (In particular, anyone who thinks that Boris is seriously keen on reducing immigration is deluded.)
2. I really like Corbyn, as you know, and he has huge appeal to 25-30% of the population, typically the young. But he is not the man to mobilise the older WWC anti-immigation Labour/UKIP vote for Remain. Say he somehow persuaded the broadcasters to put him on four debates between now and polling day. Do you think Fred Bloggs in South Shields is going to get more Remain as a result?
Electiondata stops short of saying what he thinks should be done. There's a reason. What the disaffected voters want is not achievable. We can only win them over if we successfully lie to them, as the Tories have been doing for some time. It's both wrong and a mistake, because eventually they figure out they're being lied to, and go for more extreme groups who don't get into government and can therefore promise anything.
Point 1 is why I am so worried about what happens when Leave win. The reduction in migration that people have voted for almost certainly won't happen for the reasons you note. Then what?
I agree. Corbyn will own Brexit almost as much as Cameron and Osborne. But he'll be far less concerned. And the party membership will not hold it against him.
Two important points here, also relating to the article from electiondata.
1. There is not actually a solution that we can in any honesty offer on immigration. Not only is free movement an indssoluble part of the free market, and we'll do people on low incomes (and everyone else) a real disservice if we leave that. But also it's primarily a pull issue. Immgrants come because employers want them. That's why we still have 50% of migration from non-EU countries. We could reduce that to zero if we wanted to - but we don't, because the NHS and numerous other employers would be ruined.
That's why the Leave campaign is fundamentally bullshit. If we withdraw, future governments might choose to have different immigrants - more Pakistanis and Chinese, fewer Poles and Bulgarians. But no government *in practice* (as opposed to rhetoric) has shown any sign of wanting to reduce overall immigration seriously, because they're conscious of the huge pull demand, and there's no sign that it will change. (In particular, anyone who thinks that Boris is seriously keen on reducing immigration is deluded.)
2. I really like Corbyn, as you know, and he has huge appeal to 25-30% of the population, typically the young. But he is not the man to mobilise the older WWC anti-immigation Labour/UKIP vote for Remain. Say he somehow persuaded the broadcasters to put him on four debates between now and polling day. Do you think Fred Bloggs in South Shields is going to get more Remain as a result?
Electiondata stops short of saying what he thinks should be done. There's a reason. What the disaffected voters want is not achievable. We can only win them over if we successfully lie to them, as the Tories have been doing for some time. It's both wrong and a mistake, because eventually they figure out they're being lied to, and go for more extreme groups who don't get into government and can therefore promise anything.
Yep, I think that's fair. But there is a way to make a case. Calling people who worry about immigration racists - the Dianne Abbott and, I suspect, Jeremy Corbyn approach - is insulting and wrong. Frankly, I would be happy to prioritise EU immigration and be much stricter on non-EU immigration. The former is generally far more productive.
You accept Corbyn cannot deliver a Labour victory. Surely you must want to do something about that. The left needs to come up with a better, more credible choice. And quickly.
Two weeks of little Englanders rioting in Europe seems just like what Remain would like.
Smart timing by Cameron.
This is one of the very authentic faces of the English white working class. It's one of those that many of the more dewy-eyed Leavers on here like to pretend doesn't exist. Ditto for those members of the WWC in unions and working in the public sector.
Arthur Wellesley summed it up very nicely
I don't know what effect these men will have upon the enemy, but, by God, they frighten me
Should LEAVE prevail on 23 June, it will be Labour voters wot won it for them. Reflecting Corbyn's decidedly lacklustre level of support for the party's official line as being for REMAIN, the rank and file of their supporters are so far clearly not convinced.
The LEAVE Tories, together with UKIP supporters are nowhere near enough to win it for LEAVE on their own, they need a mighty wodge of Labour voting LEAVERS to push them over the line.
The way the numbers work out could eventually prove to look something like this:
Conservative Leavers ..... 60% x 35% = 21.0% UKIP Leavers .................. 90% x 15% = 13.5% Labour Leavers ............... 45% x 30% = 13.5% Other Parties' Leavers ..... 15% x 20% = 3.0%
Total LEAVERS .................................... 51.0%
It's fascinating how cross-party the Leave campaign is - I'm sure I've seen posters here using whatever leaflets/signs are most appropriate for their area, irrespective of their own politics.
I'm pushing LabourLeave stuff quite hard. They've a really compelling BS free message. GrassRootsOut have some great nuggets too. VoteLeave are impressing me with video evidence/rapid rebuttals/big announcements.
I don't want to believe the polling - but the trend seems to be coming our way.
It is often said that Rupert Murdoch likes to support the winning side and that's certainly a logical stance for a newspaper proprietor to take, i.e. in not wishing to alienate one's readership. I suspect there's also a small, probably very small percentage of the electorate who want to back the winner. Even if this percentage is < 1%, this could prove crucial in what looks like a very close contest.
My Dad has voted Leave because he wants Remain to win, but not by very much!
It's leave's vote to lose now. All the momentum is with them because (sadly but unsurprisingly) the single issue of the campaign is migration and remain have no answer. So far the campaign has traded increasingly ludicrous claim and counter claim with "facts" that patently aren't.
But a lot of people aren't going with their head, they are going with their gut. And that tells them they are unhappy with the status quo, aren't happy with where the country is going, and even if leaving the EU isn't a silver bullet cure all, it's a start. Or at the very least a scream of defiance against an establishment which for two long has offered (as Galloway put it) two cheeks of the same arse.
It'll be leave. It won't be close.
I'm increasingly in agreement with this. The question is how they will react when they discover they've voted for the 'continuity' Tories rather than the 'real' Tories. But still end up with Tories whose fundamental view of the world is free market neoliberalism (with added protection for their own interests, but not yours).
@faisalislam: ..Vote Leave disagrees with Nobels says funding can be increased money they say saved from EU, & scientist immigration fast tracked..
Apart from the fact there is no saving, leave are arguing for MORE immigration
Yes, rather like replacing my Greek doctors and Portuguese nurses.
Why would they need to be replaced when they can get a visa?
My point is that we will still need them or their non EU equivalent. So some other squeeze on the migration figures.
277 000 non EU immigrants in 2015, despite our governments policies (188 000 net)
Nobody in Vote Leave has been suggesting we should have zero migrants. The only suggestion is that we should have some control over who those migrants are, like we do with the non-EU migrants.
The clear implication is that there will be a drastic reduction. Indeed that is the centrepiece of the Leave campaign. There would be a hell of a backlash if it is not delivered. Do you really tbink otherwise?
Should LEAVE prevail on 23 June, it will be Labour voters wot won it for them. Reflecting Corbyn's decidedly lacklustre level of support for the party's official line as being for REMAIN, the rank and file of their supporters are so far clearly not convinced.
The LEAVE Tories, together with UKIP supporters are nowhere near enough to win it for LEAVE on their own, they need a mighty wodge of Labour voting LEAVERS to push them over the line.
The way the numbers work out could eventually prove to look something like this:
Conservative Leavers ..... 60% x 35% = 21.0% UKIP Leavers .................. 90% x 15% = 13.5% Labour Leavers ............... 45% x 30% = 13.5% Other Parties' Leavers ..... 15% x 20% = 3.0%
Total LEAVERS .................................... 51.0%
It's fascinating how cross-party the Leave campaign is - I'm sure I've seen posters here using whatever leaflets/signs are most appropriate for their area, irrespective of their own politics.
I'm pushing LabourLeave stuff quite hard. They've a really compelling BS free message. GrassRootsOut have some great nuggets too. VoteLeave are impressing me with video evidence/rapid rebuttals/big announcements.
I don't want to believe the polling - but the trend seems to be coming our way.
It is often said that Rupert Murdoch likes to support the winning side and that's certainly a logical stance for a newspaper proprietor to take, i.e. in not wishing to alienate one's readership. I suspect there's also a small, probably very small percentage of the electorate who want to back the winner. Even if this percentage is < 1%, this could prove crucial in what looks like a very close contest.
My Dad has voted Leave because he wants Remain to win, but not by very much!
Please, keep running with that. It is proving so successful...
We have already discussed that the big £350m "savings" lie may win the vote, but the fact remains people will be unhappy when they realise they were duped
@faisalislam: 13 Nobel scientists incl Higgs/graphene discoverers say Brexit puts UK science "in jeopardy" -& Leave claims 'naive' https://t.co/0l1BQjM6nE
We don't need no ejucashun.
You may be closer to the reality than your slightly flippant remark suggests. I'm trying to work out why there is such a class divide on this referendum. We know all the usual stuff around jobs etc but I wonder if the working classes are just much less likely to listen to 'experts', the sort of people who are symbolic of the education system that sneered at them.
Please, keep running with that. It is proving so successful...
We have already discussed that the big £350m "savings" lie may win the vote, but the fact remains people will be unhappy when they realise they were duped
Erm.... £10 billion is not 52x£350 million.
IT IS THE NET NUMBER YOU SAID WE SHOULD BE USING, YOU FUCKING NUMPTY!!!!
@EdConwaySky: Dyson’s vision of UK outside EU seems to involve more immigration from outside EU. Not quite official Leave position https://t.co/UTUrntfrTa
Fantastic, keep talking about people rather than address the arguments.
Dyson's article is saying that we should be able to employ the very highly skilled from anywhere in the world without having to wait half a year to get them a visa. I imagine the F1 teams and aerospace industry would agree with him wholeheartedly
We are talking about PhDs earning six figure salaries here, not car washers and Big Issue sellers.
@faisalislam: ..Vote Leave disagrees with Nobels says funding can be increased money they say saved from EU, & scientist immigration fast tracked..
Apart from the fact there is no saving, leave are arguing for MORE immigration
Yes, rather like replacing my Greek doctors and Portuguese nurses.
Why would they need to be replaced when they can get a visa?
My point is that we will still need them or their non EU equivalent. So some other squeeze on the migration figures.
277 000 non EU immigrants in 2015, despite our governments policies (188 000 net)
Nobody in Vote Leave has been suggesting we should have zero migrants. The only suggestion is that we should have some control over who those migrants are, like we do with the non-EU migrants.
The clear implication is that there will be a drastic reduction. Indeed that is the centrepiece of the Leave campaign. There would be a hell of a backlash if it is not delivered. Do you really tbink otherwise?
Yes I do. The Faragist campaign is for a drastic reduction, the Gove/Johnson/VoteLeave campaign have made no such claims.
In the interview in the Telegraph he points out that currency swings are the biggest impact on his European business...
He's going to get a hell of a fright if we Brexit then
No, because his European business is less than 20% of his sales, and he has calculated that the increase ease of trading with the rest of the world is more important that protecting a little rump in his backyard
Should LEAVE prevail on 23 June, it will be Labour voters wot won it for them. Reflecting Corbyn's decidedly lacklustre level of support for the party's official line as being for REMAIN, the rank and file of their supporters are so far clearly not convinced.
The LEAVE Tories, together with UKIP supporters are nowhere near enough to win it for LEAVE on their own, they need a mighty wodge of Labour voting LEAVERS to push them over the line.
The way the numbers work out could eventually prove to look something like this:
Conservative Leavers ..... 60% x 35% = 21.0% UKIP Leavers .................. 90% x 15% = 13.5% Labour Leavers ............... 45% x 30% = 13.5% Other Parties' Leavers ..... 15% x 20% = 3.0%
Total LEAVERS .................................... 51.0%
It's fascinating how cross-party the Leave campaign is - I'm sure I've seen posters here using whatever leaflets/signs are most appropriate for their area, irrespective of their own politics.
I'm pushing LabourLeave stuff quite hard. They've a really compelling BS free message. GrassRootsOut have some great nuggets too. VoteLeave are impressing me with video evidence/rapid rebuttals/big announcements.
I don't want to believe the polling - but the trend seems to be coming our way.
It is often said that Rupert Murdoch likes to support the winning side and that's certainly a logical stance for a newspaper proprietor to take, i.e. in not wishing to alienate one's readership. I suspect there's also a small, probably very small percentage of the electorate who want to back the winner. Even if this percentage is < 1%, this could prove crucial in what looks like a very close contest.
My Dad has voted Leave because he wants Remain to win, but not by very much!
Oh dear.
He's actually fine with leave as well
Given that Heath very nearly brought him into his government as a GOAT (my Dad decided he didn't want the publicity) that's quite a turn around!
I still can't believe you can get 12/5, this is incredibly close.
There must be a lot of very rich people backing remain.
That is what I suspected all along.
The Remain strategy was to carpet bomb leave during the long campaign so that people thought it was all over bar the shouting in the short campaign.
I'm convinced people who can afford it putting large sums on remain was part of this to help give a narrative of overwhelming odds in favour of Remain.
I still can't believe you can get 12/5, this is incredibly close.
There must be a lot of very rich people backing remain.
Which is madness, when you think rich people may be the ones who lose quit a lot in the financial short term in the event of brexit.
Betting on Leave would actually be a sensible financial hedge for them. I have no idea what is going on.
Its a strange form of groupthink - the unthinkable just can't happen, can it??? At the GE the polls correctly showed the Lib Dems well down in single figures yet the odds favoured a seat haul >25. In hinsight this was never going to happen. Ditto the SNP blowout in Scotland.
Should LEAVE prevail on 23 June, it will be Labour voters wot won it for them. Reflecting Corbyn's decidedly lacklustre level of support for the party's official line as being for REMAIN, the rank and file of their supporters are so far clearly not convinced.
The LEAVE Tories, together with UKIP supporters are nowhere near enough to win it for LEAVE on their own, they need a mighty wodge of Labour voting LEAVERS to push them over the line.
The way the numbers work out could eventually prove to look something like this:
Conservative Leavers ..... 60% x 35% = 21.0% UKIP Leavers .................. 90% x 15% = 13.5% Labour Leavers ............... 45% x 30% = 13.5% Other Parties' Leavers ..... 15% x 20% = 3.0%
Total LEAVERS .................................... 51.0%
It's fascinating how cross-party the Leave campaign is - I'm sure I've seen posters here using whatever leaflets/signs are most appropriate for their area, irrespective of their own politics.
I'm pushing LabourLeave stuff quite hard. They've a really compelling BS free message. GrassRootsOut have some great nuggets too. VoteLeave are impressing me with video evidence/rapid rebuttals/big announcements.
I don't want to believe the polling - but the trend seems to be coming our way.
It is often said that Rupert Murdoch likes to support the winning side and that's certainly a logical stance for a newspaper proprietor to take, i.e. in not wishing to alienate one's readership. I suspect there's also a small, probably very small percentage of the electorate who want to back the winner. Even if this percentage is < 1%, this could prove crucial in what looks like a very close contest.
My Dad has voted Leave because he wants Remain to win, but not by very much!
Oh dear.
He's actually fine with leave as well
Given that Heath very nearly brought him into his government as a GOAT (my Dad decided he didn't want the publicity) that's quite a turn around!
It's leave's vote to lose now. All the momentum is with them because (sadly but unsurprisingly) the single issue of the campaign is migration and remain have no answer. So far the campaign has traded increasingly ludicrous claim and counter claim with "facts" that patently aren't.
But a lot of people aren't going with their head, they are going with their gut. And that tells them they are unhappy with the status quo, aren't happy with where the country is going, and even if leaving the EU isn't a silver bullet cure all, it's a start. Or at the very least a scream of defiance against an establishment which for two long has offered (as Galloway put it) two cheeks of the same arse.
It'll be leave. It won't be close.
I'm increasingly in agreement with this. The question is how they will react when they discover they've voted for the 'continuity' Tories rather than the 'real' Tories. But still end up with Tories whose fundamental view of the world is free market neoliberalism (with added protection for their own interests, but not yours).
I agree. Corbyn will own Brexit almost as much as Cameron and Osborne. But he'll be far less concerned. And the party membership will not hold it against him.
Two important points here, also relating to the article from electiondata.
1. There is not actually a solution that we can in any honesty offer on immigration. Not only is free movement an indssoluble part of the free market, and we'll do people on low incomes (and everyone else) a real disservice if we leave that. But also it's primarily a pull issue. Immgrants come because employers want them. That's why we still have 50% of migration from non-EU countries. We could reduce that to zero if we wanted to - but we don't, because the NHS and numerous other employers would be ruined.
That's why the Leave campaign is fundamentally bullshit. If we withdraw, future governments might choose to have different immigrants - more Pakistanis and Chinese, fewer Poles and Bulgarians. But no government *in practice* (as opposed to rhetoric) has shown any sign of wanting to reduce overall immigration seriously, because they're conscious of the huge pull demand, and there's no sign that it will change. (In particular, anyone who thinks that Boris is seriously keen on reducing immigration is deluded.)
2. I really like Corbyn, as you know, and he has huge appeal to 25-30% of the population, typically the young. But he is not the man to mobilise the older WWC anti-immigation Labour/UKIP vote for Remain. Say he somehow persuaded the broadcasters to put him on four debates between now and polling day. Do you think Fred Bloggs in South Shields is going to get more Remain as a result?
Electiondata stops short of saying what he thinks should be done. There's a reason. What the disaffected voters want is not achievable. We can only win them over if we successfully lie to them, as the Tories have been doing for some time. It's both wrong and a mistake, because eventually they figure out they're being lied to, and go for more extreme groups who don't get into government and can therefore promise anything.
We have enjoyed much higher rates of growth, with much lower levels of immigration, in the recent past.
Demography isn't your subject, is it, Sean?
It's clearly not yours.
That's the kind of reply I expected from you. Do you even know what it is?
For the benefit of others: whilst immigration is indeed linked to economic activity, there is a stronger correlation with the need to replace in the workforce those Brits who didn't get born due to easily available contraception and legalised homosexuality - it's Levitt's argument on the drop in US crime rates in a different field of activity.
It may only be for one generation, however, or however long it takes the robots to arrive...
I still can't believe you can get 12/5, this is incredibly close.
There must be a lot of very rich people backing remain.
Which is madness, when you think rich people may be the ones who lose quit a lot in the financial short term in the event of brexit.
Betting on Leave would actually be a sensible financial hedge for them. I have no idea what is going on.
Its a strange form of groupthink - the unthinkable just can't happen, can it??? At the GE the polls correctly showed the Lib Dems well down in single figures yet the odds favoured a seat haul >25. In hinsight this was never going to happen. Ditto the SNP blowout in Scotland.
Yes I remember how a Senior member here got very cross with me when I suggested Laws would be toast in Yeovil several weeks before the 2015 election
I still can't believe you can get 12/5, this is incredibly close.
There must be a lot of very rich people backing remain.
That is what I suspected all along.
The Remain strategy was to carpet bomb leave during the long campaign so that people thought it was all over bar the shouting in the short campaign.
I'm convinced people who can afford it putting large sums on remain was part of this to help give a narrative of overwhelming odds in favour of Remain.
As far as a strategy it probably makes sense trying to create the feeling that remain are far ahead with Bookmakers.
I know many people who say "look where the money is, bookies always know".
Which is obviously BS, bookies tend to just try balance their books they aren't generally predictors. However many people think they do predict events.
I still can't believe you can get 12/5, this is incredibly close.
There must be a lot of very rich people backing remain.
That is what I suspected all along.
The Remain strategy was to carpet bomb leave during the long campaign so that people thought it was all over bar the shouting in the short campaign.
I'm convinced people who can afford it putting large sums on remain was part of this to help give a narrative of overwhelming odds in favour of Remain.
Looking at the whole Remain campaign - it's looking increasingly clear that they intended to annihilate Leave early - then smother the last two weeks with football et al.
Well, that's backfired. Now they're trailing or at best level-pegging and they've nothing left - not even EdM's other kitchen sink.
I agree. Corbyn will own Brexit almost as much as Cameron and Osborne. But he'll be far less concerned. And the party membership will not hold it against him.
Two important points here, also relating to the article from electiondata.
1. There is not actually a solution that we can in any honesty offer on immigration. Not only is free movement an indssoluble part of the free market, and we'll do people on low incomes (and everyone else) a real disservice if we leave that. But also it's primarily a pull issue. Immgrants come because employers want them. That's why we still have 50% of migration from non-EU countries. We could reduce that to zero if we wanted to - but we don't, because the NHS and numerous other employers would be ruined.
That's why the Leave campaign is fundamentally bullshit. If we withdraw, future governments might choose to have different immigrants - more Pakistanis and Chinese, fewer Poles and Bulgarians. But no government *in practice* (as opposed to rhetoric) has shown any sign of wanting to reduce overall immigration seriously, because they're conscious of the huge pull demand, and there's no sign that it will change. (In particular, anyone who thinks that Boris is seriously keen on reducing immigration is deluded.)
2. I really like Corbyn, as you know, and he has huge appeal to 25-30% of the population, typically the young. But he is not the man to mobilise the older WWC anti-immigation Labour/UKIP vote for Remain. Say he somehow persuaded the broadcasters to put him on four debates between now and polling day. Do you think Fred Bloggs in South Shields is going to get more Remain as a result?
Electiondata stops short of saying what he thinks should be done. There's a reason. What the disaffected voters want is not achievable. We can only win them over if we successfully lie to them, as the Tories have been doing for some time. It's both wrong and a mistake, because eventually they figure out they're being lied to, and go for more extreme groups who don't get into government and can therefore promise anything.
We have enjoyed much higher rates of growth, with much lower levels of immigration, in the recent past.
Demography isn't your subject, is it, Sean?
It's clearly not yours.
That's the kind of reply I expected from you. Do you even know what it is?
For the benefit of others: whilst immigration is indeed linked to economic activity, there is a stronger correlation with the need to replace in the workforce those Brits who didn't get born due to easily available contraception and legalised homosexuality - it's Levitt's argument on the drop in US crime rates in a different field of activity.
It may only be for one generation, however, or however long it takes the robots to arrive...
Not to mention abortion.
Cultures which practice contraception and abortion will inevitably be replaced with cultures that do not.
I agree. Corbyn will own Brexit almost as much as Cameron and Osborne. But he'll be far less concerned. And the party membership will not hold it against him.
Two important points here, also relating to the article from electiondata.
1. There is not actually a solution that we can in any honesty offer on immigration. Not only is free movement an indssoluble part of the free market, and we'll do people on low incomes (and everyone else) a real disservice if we leave that. But also it's primarily a pull issue. Immgrants come because employers want them. That's why we still have 50% of migration from non-EU countries. We could reduce that to zero if we wanted to - but we don't, because the NHS and numerous other employers would be ruined.
That's why the Leave campaign is fundamentally bullshit. If we withdraw, future governments might choose to have different immigrants - more Pakistanis and Chinese, fewer Poles and Bulgarians. But no government *in practice* (as opposed to rhetoric) has shown any sign of wanting to reduce overall immigration seriously, because they're conscious of the huge pull demand, and there's no sign that it will change. (In particular, anyone who thinks that Boris is seriously keen on reducing immigration is deluded.)
2. I really like Corbyn, as you know, and he has huge appeal to 25-30% of the population, typically the young. But he is not the man to mobilise the older WWC anti-immigation Labour/UKIP vote for Remain. Say he somehow persuaded the broadcasters to put him on four debates between now and polling day. Do you think Fred Bloggs in South Shields is going to get more Remain as a result?
Electiondata stops short of saying what he thinks should be done. There's a reason. What the disaffected voters want is not achievable. We can only win them over if we successfully lie to them, as the Tories have been doing for some time. It's both wrong and a mistake, because eventually they figure out they're being lied to, and go for more extreme groups who don't get into government and can therefore promise anything.
We have enjoyed much higher rates of growth, with much lower levels of immigration, in the recent past.
Demography isn't your subject, is it, Sean?
It's clearly not yours.
That's the kind of reply I expected from you. Do you even know what it is?
For the benefit of others: whilst immigration is indeed linked to economic activity, there is a stronger correlation with the need to replace in the workforce those Brits who didn't get born due to easily available contraception and legalised homosexuality - it's Levitt's argument on the drop in US crime rates in a different field of activity.
It may only be for one generation, however, or however long it takes the robots to arrive...
Not to mention abortion.
Cultures which practice contraception and abortion will inevitably be replaced with cultures that do not.
Yep, I think that's fair. But there is a way to make a case. Calling people who worry about immigration racists - the Dianne Abbott and, I suspect, Jeremy Corbyn approach - is insulting and wrong. Frankly, I would be happy to prioritise EU immigration and be much stricter on non-EU immigration. The former is generally far more productive.
You accept Corbyn cannot deliver a Labour victory. Surely you must want to do something about that. The left needs to come up with a better, more credible choice. And quickly.
Corbyn doesn't do abuse - I've never heard him call anyone a racist. But he and our hypothetical WWC South Shields voter don't naturally communicate, so he's not the man to mobilise that voter in this particular situation.
And, cough, you're putting words in my mouth again. I don't accept that Corbyn can't deliver a Labour victory. I accept that he'll find it difficult. I also think that any other Labour leader currently on offer would find it difficult, and often more difficult, since they wouldn't even have that 25-30% of enthusiasts. Can you suggest someone who has a coherent programme and a good chance of winning? If someone develops such a programme, I expect a real debate oul open up.
@faisalislam: ..Vote Leave disagrees with Nobels says funding can be increased money they say saved from EU, & scientist immigration fast tracked..
Apart from the fact there is no saving, leave are arguing for MORE immigration
Yes, rather like replacing my Greek doctors and Portuguese nurses.
Why would they need to be replaced when they can get a visa?
My point is that we will still need them or their non EU equivalent. So some other squeeze on the migration figures.
277 000 non EU immigrants in 2015, despite our governments policies (188 000 net)
Nobody in Vote Leave has been suggesting we should have zero migrants. The only suggestion is that we should have some control over who those migrants are, like we do with the non-EU migrants.
I get that. But if we're talking honestly about WWC Labour/UKIP Leavers, they aren't in general especially anti-Polish or anti-Bulgarian. If they had to choose, they'd probably rather have Poles and Bulgarians than migrants from less developed countries. But what worries them is the numbers, and there is no likelihood that any government is going to squeeze those, because we've organised our economy (low investment) and education system to depend on them.
It's leave's vote to lose now. All the momentum is with them because (sadly but unsurprisingly) the single issue of the campaign is migration and remain have no answer. So far the campaign has traded increasingly ludicrous claim and counter claim with "facts" that patently aren't.
But a lot of people aren't going with their head, they are going with their gut. And that tells them they are unhappy with the status quo, aren't happy with where the country is going, and even if leaving the EU isn't a silver bullet cure all, it's a start. Or at the very least a scream of defiance against an establishment which for two long has offered (as Galloway put it) two cheeks of the same arse.
It'll be leave. It won't be close.
I'm increasingly in agreement with this. The question is how they will react when they discover they've voted for the 'continuity' Tories rather than the 'real' Tories. But still end up with Tories whose fundamental view of the world is free market neoliberalism (with added protection for their own interests, but not yours).
They'll have a vote in the 2020 election.
Quite. The whole point is that it's for the British people to decide who governs them - and to be able to give the buggers a P45 at the ballot box if we don't like what they do.
Amusingly, the party that might benefit most from this independence would be a centrist liberal party, but the LDs inexplicably love the EU more then the rest of them!
@faisalislam: ..Vote Leave disagrees with Nobels says funding can be increased money they say saved from EU, & scientist immigration fast tracked..
Apart from the fact there is no saving, leave are arguing for MORE immigration
Yes, rather like replacing my Greek doctors and Portuguese nurses.
Why would they need to be replaced when they can get a visa?
My point is that we will still need them or their non EU equivalent. So some other squeeze on the migration figures.
277 000 non EU immigrants in 2015, despite our governments policies (188 000 net)
Nobody in Vote Leave has been suggesting we should have zero migrants. The only suggestion is that we should have some control over who those migrants are, like we do with the non-EU migrants.
The clear implication is that there will be a drastic reduction. Indeed that is the centrepiece of the Leave campaign. There would be a hell of a backlash if it is not delivered. Do you really tbink otherwise?
Yes I do. The Faragist campaign is for a drastic reduction, the Gove/Johnson/VoteLeave campaign have made no such claims.
The CDE Old Labour voters who are (apparently) going to win it for Leave will not be happy with levels anywhere near the 188 000 net non-EU figure for last year.
I am not sure that even crashing the economy would turn the tide. The GFC did not seem to do so.
The Corbynist approach of let them come, and build houses, schools and hospitals is viable though, apart from financially.
Comments
I'm pushing LabourLeave stuff quite hard. They've a really compelling BS free message. GrassRootsOut have some great nuggets too. VoteLeave are impressing me with video evidence/rapid rebuttals/big announcements.
I don't want to believe the polling - but the trend seems to be coming our way.
Apart from the fact there is no saving, leave are arguing for MORE immigration
If we have a post Brexit General Election it could be a very interesting manifesto. Who do you trust to spend our subs on the NHS? Nonsense of course, but as this campaign shows, when did that ever bother a political campaign?
https://twitter.com/philipoltermann/status/741516820067323904
It's fair.
It's honest.
It's democratic.
And therefore has nothing in common with the EU.
[Still not got season 5 yet. I may be obnoxious and just wait for a full box set, though I've got series 1-4 individually. May try and work out what's more cost-effective, assuming I decide to keep getting them].
They've been out & proud (to coin a phrase) for years.
FWIW I'm on the finance committee (one level below the governing council) for one of the UK's premier scientific universities in its field. Yes there are grants that come from the EU - but they aren't that large and they take months to pay. (The bulk of our funds come from Gates, Wellcome and HEFCE).
As with everything, it will need restructuring, but the money, the academic talent, the access to international conferences and forums, the ability to publish and engage will all still be there.
Smart timing by Cameron.
1. There is not actually a solution that we can in any honesty offer on immigration. Not only is free movement an indssoluble part of the free market, and we'll do people on low incomes (and everyone else) a real disservice if we leave that. But also it's primarily a pull issue. Immgrants come because employers want them. That's why we still have 50% of migration from non-EU countries. We could reduce that to zero if we wanted to - but we don't, because the NHS and numerous other employers would be ruined.
That's why the Leave campaign is fundamentally bullshit. If we withdraw, future governments might choose to have different immigrants - more Pakistanis and Chinese, fewer Poles and Bulgarians. But no government *in practice* (as opposed to rhetoric) has shown any sign of wanting to reduce overall immigration seriously, because they're conscious of the huge pull demand, and there's no sign that it will change. (In particular, anyone who thinks that Boris is seriously keen on reducing immigration is deluded.)
2. I really like Corbyn, as you know, and he has huge appeal to 25-30% of the population, typically the young. But he is not the man to mobilise the older WWC anti-immigation Labour/UKIP vote for Remain. Say he somehow persuaded the broadcasters to put him on four debates between now and polling day. Do you think Fred Bloggs in South Shields is going to get more Remain as a result?
Electiondata stops short of saying what he thinks should be done. There's a reason. What the disaffected voters want is not achievable. We can only win them over if we successfully lie to them, as the Tories have been doing for some time. It's both wrong and a mistake, because eventually they figure out they're being lied to, and go for more extreme groups who don't get into government and can therefore promise anything.
277 000 non EU immigrants in 2015, despite our governments policies (188 000 net)
I suspect there's also a small, probably very small percentage of the electorate who want to back the winner. Even if this percentage is < 1%, this could prove crucial in what looks like a very close contest.
Are Remain being that idiotic to play that card? They really are losing all semblance of cohesion....
The fact that one is largely despised, and their aim to conjure up the spectre of domestic terrorism - well, someone should've stopped it ever getting beyond a whiteboard brainstorm. It's akin to the EdStone. These are clever people - they know what they're messing with, and still carried on.
I've honestly no idea what's going on in their heads. The other was the slimy attack on Boris re getting a lift home. Who could possibly think implying he'd drunk drive or grope you was a smart idea? Is McBride advising them?
Which leads neatly on to my other point: if REMAIN win on London, Scottish and non-white votes - which I think is the only way they can - will Middle England accept that result?
It's our membership. It's not a saving if leaving causes recession.
It's like saying "I can save money this month if I cancel my Costco membership"
People will be up set when at the end the month the Treasury points out is has less money than it did before
PS: Before some smart arse comments , I am aware he is for leave at the moment, but good few days to go yet
It is probably over egging it but the Standard result showed that the any London remain victory is not likely to be wide enough to overturn leave elsewhere.
You accept Corbyn cannot deliver a Labour victory. Surely you must want to do something about that. The left needs to come up with a better, more credible choice. And quickly.
Arthur Wellesley summed it up very nicely
I don't know what effect these men will have upon the enemy, but, by God, they frighten me
Put down your prejudice long enough to read the thread Malcolm
If leaving allows us to grow faster, like leaving ERM did, then that 10 billion is a baseline immediately with future rewards still to come.
IT IS THE NET NUMBER YOU SAID WE SHOULD BE USING, YOU FUCKING NUMPTY!!!!
Dyson's article is saying that we should be able to employ the very highly skilled from anywhere in the world without having to wait half a year to get them a visa. I imagine the F1 teams and aerospace industry would agree with him wholeheartedly
We are talking about PhDs earning six figure salaries here, not car washers and Big Issue sellers.
There must be a lot of very rich people backing remain.
Which is madness, when you think rich people may be the ones who lose quit a lot in the financial short term in the event of brexit.
Betting on Leave would actually be a sensible financial hedge for them. I have no idea what is going on.
Given that Heath very nearly brought him into his government as a GOAT (my Dad decided he didn't want the publicity) that's quite a turn around!
Leave need to make the case that despite that it's worth it longterm.
The Remain strategy was to carpet bomb leave during the long campaign so that people thought it was all over bar the shouting in the short campaign.
I'm convinced people who can afford it putting large sums on remain was part of this to help give a narrative of overwhelming odds in favour of Remain.
I realise that life must be getting hard, now your smug circuits are blowing out one by one....
For the benefit of others: whilst immigration is indeed linked to economic activity, there is a stronger correlation with the need to replace in the workforce those Brits who didn't get born due to easily available contraception and legalised homosexuality - it's Levitt's argument on the drop in US crime rates in a different field of activity.
It may only be for one generation, however, or however long it takes the robots to arrive...
Go outside. Take a walk. You'll fell better.
I know many people who say "look where the money is, bookies always know".
Which is obviously BS, bookies tend to just try balance their books they aren't generally predictors. However many people think they do predict events.
Well, that's backfired. Now they're trailing or at best level-pegging and they've nothing left - not even EdM's other kitchen sink.
Cultures which practice contraception and abortion will inevitably be replaced with cultures that do not.
malc when they start wheeling out "prejudice", you know they're bricking it.
Prejudice is just code for" my are arguments are totally unconvincing so it must be your fault."
Slap it up him :-)
And, cough, you're putting words in my mouth again. I don't accept that Corbyn can't deliver a Labour victory. I accept that he'll find it difficult. I also think that any other Labour leader currently on offer would find it difficult, and often more difficult, since they wouldn't even have that 25-30% of enthusiasts. Can you suggest someone who has a coherent programme and a good chance of winning? If someone develops such a programme, I expect a real debate oul open up. I get that. But if we're talking honestly about WWC Labour/UKIP Leavers, they aren't in general especially anti-Polish or anti-Bulgarian. If they had to choose, they'd probably rather have Poles and Bulgarians than migrants from less developed countries. But what worries them is the numbers, and there is no likelihood that any government is going to squeeze those, because we've organised our economy (low investment) and education system to depend on them.
Amusingly, the party that might benefit most from this independence would be a centrist liberal party, but the LDs inexplicably love the EU more then the rest of them!
I am not sure that even crashing the economy would turn the tide. The GFC did not seem to do so.
The Corbynist approach of let them come, and build houses, schools and hospitals is viable though, apart from financially.