Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » POLL ALERT: Polling Matters / Opinium: Voters back ‘soft Brexi
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » POLL ALERT: Polling Matters / Opinium: Voters back ‘soft Brexit’ but reject second referendum – even if the economy worsens
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
https://twitter.com/nickdearden75/status/810117425719115777
Soft Brexit = making contributions but more money for schools'n'hospitals
Hard Brexit = no contributions but less mobey for s'n'h
I think you may have introduced some bias there
It's an interesting poll in that it suggests there is enough appetite for Euroref2 for the Lib Dems to make some gains out of it, without enough for it to be a winning proposition.
As an aside: how many of the more ardent Remainers want to stay in without a second referendum? Lots of them don't like referenda as a decision-making process and view it as axiomatic, or at least logical, that a parliament acting in the best interests of its electors would, or at least should, keep the UK in the EU "once the stark facts of Brexit become clear".
Closed lists are the spawn of Satan.
1. The soft Brexit suggested seems to involve remaining a part of the Customs Union. That would be an incredibly soft Brexit, barely even a Brexit at all.
2. The hard Brexit seems to take an extreme example where the world starts falling apart.
Even in the most likely hard Brexit scenarios, we would likely remain members of some EU administered bodies (like Erasmus). Even in the softest of Brexit scenarios we would likely regain control of trade relationships with third parties.
People's preferences for Soft/Hard Brexit may depend very much on their opinions of the likely economic consequences. There are some "hard" Leavers who believe that the UK will do better economically if it breaks more of its residual ties with the EU. Indeed, if this were not the case and "hard Leave" was purely about defending an abstract political position on sovereignty or a hardline view of immigration, then there'd be far fewer people on that end of the spectrum.
The question here can only be seen as people supporting Soft Brexit, in the sense that it states that Soft Brexit is the economically superior option. If you want to see what people really think, then you have to allow for the fact that the public disagree (whether you agree with their analysis or not) over whether Soft or Hard Brexit is more economically beneficial.
[For instance, it isn't beyond the pale of reason to think that cutting more ties with the EU, particularly the customs union, might allow the UK to focus on global trade deals in its own best interest. Nor to suggest that limiting migration to high-skilled work or particular shortage areas, might push the British economy into higher-value areas, pull us out of some of the economic "races to the bottom", and hence increase GDP per capita even if it reduces total GDP. The "per capita" bit matters more to living standards, including school'n'hospitals. This is, of course, an economic analysis that many leading economists utterly disagree with. But you can find a few, perfectly well-qualified economists who do have this line of thought and presumably a decent proportion of Leavers as a whole - clearly not all Leave voters believed they were voting for economic suicide, and many were keen to escape the EU to as large an extent as possible! So I don't think it's fair for an opinion poll to bake in a particular line on the possible economic consequences.]
Sheen will leave Silverman, his partner of two years, and family in Los Angeles and move to Port Talbot in south Wales to combat the wave of “demagogic, fascistic” politics he believes has engulfed the West in the past decade."
No idea where his politics lie (left/right/centre) but his approach to his family suggests he would have a lot in common with Mr Corbyn.
But I had no idea that matters in Wales were so bad.
(edited for grammar)
FAKE NEWS BELIEVERS 35
Unpresidential spelling.
https://twitter.com/lulu_lemew/status/810101262024933376
No doubt that is part of Mr Pedley's shock.
I think it's best to think of Brexit as a journey, and not as a switch which is suddenly thrown.
If - two years after Article 50 were triggered - we were suddenly, and unexpectedly, to drop to WTO terms with the EU (which would simultaneously mean that we dropped out of the 31 FTAs that the EU has with other countries), that would likely have serious short term consequences for the UK economy.
On the other hand, if after two years we were to go to a five year transitional deal, where we made some contributions, regained control of external trade, retained only the right of EU nationals to work in the UK, and kept passporting rights, then there would likely be negligible near term impacts on the UK. This would give us, and the EU, time to adjust and would allow us to negotiate a longer-term (more CETA-like) deal with the EU, and to forge new relationships with other countries. This is a path to hard Brexit, which would likely allow a fairly smooth adjustment process for both the UK and the EU.
Does anyone listen to these people anymore as they insult ordinary voters
Sarah Silverman is about to become single. To me, that's the real news.
https://twitter.com/jpodhoretz/status/810100007391137792
You’re certainly expanding the reach of Polling Matters with this Opinium poll commission.
What people voted for: 35%.
Fantasy land of unicorns, sovereignty and no bad things at all: 41%
I have heard of desperate efforts to get out of a relationship but the Port Talbot excuse is a first.
How many "just get on with it" and how many "we might lose next time" ?
Hard Brexit
The UK leaves all EU institutions, gaining full control over immigration, trade and legal system, and making no contributions to the EU budget. As a result criminals, layabouts and unskilled workers are able to be stopped from migrating to UK and the country has more money to invest in public services like housing, schools and hospitals
Soft Brexit
The UK remains in some EU institutions and continues to make some contributions to the EU budget and allows EU nationals the right to live and work in the UK. As a result criminals, layabouts and unskilled workers are able to migrate to the UK and the country has less money to invest in public services like housing, schools and hospitals.
Poll that one if you dare Pedley.
Add into the mix the very obvious splits that will result as we serve A50 and individual nation states and their business communities, staring at a big increases in unemployment in the states in the event of tariffs, you see the recipe for a serious rupture between the nation states, the commission and the Parliament.
I have no doubt that we are in a strong position to conclude a successful divorce not least because of the size of our economy and our military and security advantages which the EU will be unable to do without.
As we move into Christmas and 2017 I do believe those who voted remain need to accept we are leaving and make a positive contribution to the process rather than continually try to reverse the process, which simply will not happen
Well, you can cram Christmas full of walnuts or any other combination of nuts and dried fruit you like. Fed up with it already - the cards, gifts and the tedious office do. I wish I could escape and become a trainee hermit but Mrs Stodge won't let me.
On topic, yes, well. I think most people hear "second referendum" and assume it will be a re-run of the first which no one is advocating. The idea the people might get a say on the post-EU relationship might seem to some as strange as the condemned man having the choice between being shot, hanged or put in a sack and quartered in Trafalgar Square but it's that important and too important to be part of the warp and weft of a GE campaign.
As the ultimate anomaly - a hard Brexit LD - I'm fascinated by the meal chef Theresa and the Three Sous are going to prepare. I suspect it might look good but be fairly indigestible with some very odd ingredients.
Time will tell...
Need it be, though? Couldn't the top up go to the FPTP candidates from the topped up party who failed to get elected but who got either the highest number of votes or the highest percentage of the constituency vote in the GE race, rather than having a separate, party-brokered list?
I recall stories of Nixon making a similar mistake during the Watergate scandal - he was upset at the idea of someone trying to bring him down and meant to say it was a 'disgraceful precedent'.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA
I know 2016's been a bit hectic, but I've only been gone a few hours. Has the Fourth Reich really been founded in Wales?
Hiraeth.
https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/809861838489915392
2:24PM
dr_spyn said:
PB grammar Nazis know how to spell fascism.
Maybe some doubt about the POTUS elect tho'..
Unpresidential spelling.
That is a better and more topical riposte. +1 in absence of like button.
Here's an alternative wording, based on a different reading of the economic situation: "As a result, barriers to trade emerge in the short term between the UK and EU, causing a significant reduction in net imports to the UK, an improvement in the UK's balance of payments and a resurgence in UK based manufacturing, meaning the UK economy prospers and unemployment falls..... In the longer term, after the loss of EU exports to the UK prompts a change of direction, the EU reaches a trade deal with the UK largely on the UK's terms."
Too many chickens are being counted there!
Why don't the said leaders spend just a few minutes trying to work out the reasons why we voted why we did. Doesn't it occur to them that most fair-minded Brits must have very serious misgivings about the way the EU is run and the direction in which it is relentlessly heading?
I'm buggered if I know.
It is much easier to blame it on this, Fake News, the Russians, than to take a hard look at the situation and work out why people are rejecting the ruling elite preferred direction of travel. The EU leaders are exactly the same, they know best, the people are stupid, we need another vote because the idiots got it wrong, etc etc etc.
In a geographically based system of constituencies some votes will matter a lot more than some others. Now I struggle with the notion democracy should be a product of geography and in order for your vote to "count" you have to live in an area of like minded people. This perpetuates the echo chamber as more seats become "safe" for one side or the other.
I don't have an answer - a wholly proportional system would break the constituency link which is anathema to many. Systems whereby numbers of MPs are elected off a list means senior party members would no longer be constituency MPs - Theresa May would be No.1 on the Conservative list as an example to ensure her election. It's far from ideal.
All I have is the notion of two votes - a constituency vote and a party vote.
Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden.
All of them are childish, arrogant and rude, without exception, and only the UK is virtuous. Silly of me not to see it instantly. Of course it's the way they intend to behave, for pity's sake! Why would you think they would act differently? I've been saying this for years, including before the vote. The LEAVEr delusion that the UK could dictate its own terms and cherrypick what it wanted was simply that: a delusion. Even the article above is based on the assumption that we can decide on the deal, whether in detail or timescale. I have a horrible feeling that one of my best lines on this board ("when they've worked out what the deal is, they'll tell us") will turn out to be the plain unvarnished truth.
Not to mention, Mr. Putney referred to heads of government, not nations or electorates.
The only way to resolve it is to create a single federal state with massive fiscal transfers and free movement of people.
Good luck to them but I don't want the UK to be part of it.
What is the Universe trying to tell me?
[1] Yes, the real-life captain of the USS Zumwalt is called James Kirk. It worries me that I know this.
@viewcode is right. When the EU 27 have decided what the deal is, they will let us know. We can then decide to take it or leave it.
They would have fought on just like the SNP will do as attitudes and opinions change over time.Just because you are a fully paid up member of whatever the current leader of the conservative party espoused at anytime.You followed every word Cameron said now you follow with the same zeal the current robotic one dimensional PM
It doesn't mean that Brexit is getting any more popular.
How long it will take for the peoples of Europe to feel like a single body is outside my guessing, but once the fact of a single state has been accomplished, no doubt they'll settle down to it eventually.
Leavers who advertise their lack of faith in the ability of the Leave coalition to hold together in the face of continued argument about the merits of EU membership and demerits of leaving just undermine their own position.
Thanks for correcting the first name in my comment re Mr Sheen - it was a subconscious error.
As for Brexit, I agree with your comment "When they (the EU27) have worked out what the deal is, they'll tell us". If one leaves a club, one has no input into the terms for associate membership - it is by grace and favour, if at all. I don't expect any deal for the UK to remain in the Single Market will be at an acceptable price from the UK's perspective.
The UK is the sick man of Europe: it is the piggy that isn't in the Euro because its financial state was so bad (even compared to Italy) that it had to leave the ERM in 1992. The UK's financial position remains appalling when one looks at private as well as public debt. The deficits in overseas trade and services are dire and the UK is only being kept afloat by massive inflows of capital from unsavoury regimes elsewhere.
The UK will also be "out in the cold" from a defence perspective if the USA under Trump acts as an isolationist, the EU27 set up joint armed forces and NATO disintegrates - it is well past its sell-by date.
[edit: remove details from another post]
Hence the continued scorn and anger for "Remoaners", and the certifiable suspicion of our European neighbours (apparently they are all - ALL - ganging up on us!).
As Trump would say: sad!
I believe it's one of those terms that's been around for a while, but has just had a very large amount of bollocks attached to it very recently.
It is grimly ironic that those who seek to restore UK's sovereign democracy would be glad to do so via anti-democratic means.
But again, it points to a fear of the enemy within.
She is so devoid of people skills that I wonder how she got so far in politics. Between her and the three Brexiteers we have a hopless negotiating team. A poor position being led by a poor leader.
I'm not sure that's anti-democratic.