politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Four goods and a conclusion

First. Enjoy your trip to Amalfi.

edmundintokyo said:

The problem with this, especially (1) and (2), is that the Remain campaign is basically led by mainstream Tories, and mainstream Tories have spent the last 20 years pretending not to believe in them in the hope of getting an electoral advantage over Labour.

There is an issue around this, and that’s what’s clouded the debate. If one isn’t a Tory, it’s appeared to be “nothing to do with us” and we can get on with making the thing work. So different fromn the 1975 campaign.

Have a good holiday Cyclefree, hope you return restored to health and reinvigorated.

One thought though - the US is not a great example of a functioning federal state. For most of its first 150 years it was riven by violence, suffered from weak and divided central authority and constant bickering about who had the right to do what. The most famous example would be the Civil War, in which 210,000 died in the fighting and 420,000 died of disease - more than a quarter of all military age men in the South died.

It is not at all fanciful to foresee a similar catastrophe caused by the stresses and inequities of the euro, and if proportions of dead were similar, we would be talking about millions of casualties. So much for the ideals of federalism.

The point, as you rightly note, is that Europe needs reform. There is no way that will happen as long as the EU's governing class believe they can continue to impose their will regardless of the views of the European people, as they have up to now. Something dramatic needs to happen to jolt them out of their inadequacy and complacency.

The real irony is that the shock of Brexit might just provoke the EU into making the necessary reforms and saving itself, while if we stay in it is difficult to see it lasting much longer. Therefore there are not really any good outcomes that will suit everyone to this referendum.

Estobar said:

Here's a little anecdote. I once wrote a big feature for the Sunday Times and Rupert Murdoch pulled me in to meet his lawyers late on Saturday to clear it line by line. I was waiting on my own below when this flame of red descended the staircase. She stopped for some time and surveyed me with her take-you-to-bed eyes.

And that was the first time I met Rebekah Wade.

Are you sure they weren't F*** Off eyes? They are very similar!

Thanks cyclefree. Even if we do vote remain, I suspect the EU will view us with suspicion, and our influence will be diminished somewhat (can you imagine a UK EU president?)

RobD said:

Thanks cyclefree. Even if we do vote remain, I suspect the EU will view us with suspicion, and our influence will be diminished somewhat (can you imagine a UK EU president?)

I think that's down to the UK PM - if he "takes the fight to Europe" he may find allies among politicians facing similarly unhappy electorates. Never let a good crisis go to waste!

CarlottaVance said:

RobD said:

Thanks cyclefree. Even if we do vote remain, I suspect the EU will view us with suspicion, and our influence will be diminished somewhat (can you imagine a UK EU president?)

I think that's down to the UK PM - if he "takes the fight to Europe" he may find allies among politicians facing similarly unhappy electorates. Never let a good crisis go to waste!

Maybe the EU needs a president for the non-eurozone countries

All the new opinion polls reveal a very tight race.

A lot of postal ballots have already been cast.

That happened at a time when Leave was surging.

They may well decide the referendum.

I still believe Leave will win.

If you want to reduce immigration - and this is a major priority for many, if not most - then there is only one way to cast your ballot.

Good morning, everyone.

Hope you get some nice photos to share, Miss Cyclefree. Did you know the Colosseum is partially made of concrete? The port at Ostia is too (the Romans found out how to make concrete which set underwater).

Now, to dispute your points:
1) This was almost certainly true in the past. But we're not in the 1950s. The EU isn't about stopping war in Europe (and the Bosnians and Ukraine might say it's somewhere between useless and harmful in this regard in the modern world), it's about bypassing national democracies to drag power from the accountable politicians of states to the deliberately complex and opaque bureaucracy of Brussels.

The idea the EU = Western civilisation would come as news to the Roman Empire, I am sure.

2) I agree federalism is not inherently evil. But the ends do not justify the means of ignoring referendum results, being deceitful to electorates and throwing funding at supposedly independent groups which then conclude more EU is the answer to every evil. If a federal EU were a good thing, why not make an honest case for it? Could it be that the little people can't be trusted?

3) Some things do require international co-operation. Counter-terrorism is a good example. Our closest partner here is the US. The Five Eyes group is ourselves, the US, Canada, New Zealand and Australia.

The EU is totally unnecessary for international co-operation. People who pretend otherwise presumably also believe a wedding is a prerequisite for sex.

4) I agree. However, a market of 65m or so which acts in British interests is better for us making trading deals that advantage the UK than a market of 500m for which we are just 8% of the consideration. A deal which helps Italy, Spain and Poland but screws us would make sense for the EU. But not for us.

The message is clear: if you don’t want your communities swamped by brown people, vote to leave the EU. This is racism. And if you wish to argue it isn’t, then I’m going to believe you’re a racist.

Of course, Farage and his fellow travellers – Tory MPs Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, for example – maintain their campaign isn’t about race, it’s about “sovereignty”, it’s about “believing in Britain”, it’s about “taking back control”. But, even if those claims are correct – and I am unconvinced they are – the Leave campaign is, to a very large degree, a racist one.

If you are a Leave voter and offended by this, then please raise your concerns with Farage, Johnson, and Gove. Your desire to leave the EU may not be based on matters of race but the campaign which might yet deliver your dream is. You, whether willingly or not, are on the side of racists.

Read more: http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/euan-mccolm-i-want-my-country-back-from-nasty-nationalists-1-4158434#ixzz4C0JVfl8S

SouthamObserver said:

All the new opinion polls reveal a very tight race.

A lot of postal ballots have already been cast.

That happened at a time when Leave was surging.

They may well decide the referendum.

I still believe Leave will win.

If you want to reduce immigration - and this is a major priority for many, if not most - then there is only one way to cast your ballot.

If Leave win and Boris becomes PM then expect the immigration figures to stay much the same and expect Britain to get poorer. Expect the SNP to push for another Independence referendum.
Following that the Tories will become so unpopular that Corbyn will win in 2020.
Talk about unintended consequences.

Good to hear from you @JackW. All the best to you&family.

RobD said:

Icarus said:

RobD said:

Thanks cyclefree. Even if we do vote remain, I suspect the EU will view us with suspicion, and our influence will be diminished somewhat (can you imagine a UK EU president?)

But we are the EU - we helped shape it, our (elected) governments have shared in setting the rules that some people don't like.

A lot of people just don't get it.

Well our government hasn't agreed on all the rules, yet they get adopted anyway because of QMV.

We agreed to QMV so that we could get the things we wanted through!!

Moan -Yes. Flounce out in a huff No!

Scott_P said:

The message is clear: if you don’t want your communities swamped by brown people, vote to leave the EU. This is racism. And if you wish to argue it isn’t, then I’m going to believe you’re a racist.

Of course, Farage and his fellow travellers – Tory MPs Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, for example – maintain their campaign isn’t about race, it’s about “sovereignty”, it’s about “believing in Britain”, it’s about “taking back control”. But, even if those claims are correct – and I am unconvinced they are – the Leave campaign is, to a very large degree, a racist one.

If you are a Leave voter and offended by this, then please raise your concerns with Farage, Johnson, and Gove. Your desire to leave the EU may not be based on matters of race but the campaign which might yet deliver your dream is. You, whether willingly or not, are on the side of racists.

Read more: http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/euan-mccolm-i-want-my-country-back-from-nasty-nationalists-1-4158434#ixzz4C0JVfl8S

What rubbish. The whole point is that skilled and valuable brown people cant come in at the moment because unskilled and not required white people from eastern Europe can come in without let or hindrance

Betting Post
For those who missed it yesterday, here are my thoughts on motorsport in Azerbaijan:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/azerbaijan-pre-race-2016.html

Worth noting the last time I offered three tips they all failed...

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Scott_P said:

The message is clear: if you don’t want your communities swamped by brown people, vote to leave the EU. This is racism. And if you wish to argue it isn’t, then I’m going to believe you’re a racist.

Of course, Farage and his fellow travellers – Tory MPs Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, for example – maintain their campaign isn’t about race, it’s about “sovereignty”, it’s about “believing in Britain”, it’s about “taking back control”. But, even if those claims are correct – and I am unconvinced they are – the Leave campaign is, to a very large degree, a racist one.

If you are a Leave voter and offended by this, then please raise your concerns with Farage, Johnson, and Gove. Your desire to leave the EU may not be based on matters of race but the campaign which might yet deliver your dream is. You, whether willingly or not, are on the side of racists.

Read more: http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/euan-mccolm-i-want-my-country-back-from-nasty-nationalists-1-4158434#ixzz4C0JVfl8S

What rubbish. The whole point is that skilled and valuable brown people cant come in at the moment because unskilled and not required white people from eastern Europe can come in without let or hindrance

By that logic all the old and sick, of any skin colour or none, are neither valuable nor required. Can't you think before you post?.

Talk about damning with faint praise! This is a header written by LEAVER trying to look on the bright side after a defeat.

I can't see a single argument that would arouse the passions of someone wanting to be enthused by REMAINing in the EU.

Even the first Campaign Broadcast with little Sam got the blood pumping more than this. Sorry but a complete fail

Have a good holiday

JackW said:

Good Morning PBers.

Firstly many thanks for all the kind messages over the past weeks that have been passed onto me. I'm home now but a tad frail but uncommonly pleased to be in a position to be frail and not more deceased than one of Roger's political forecasts.

I'll be lurking for a few months (PB recuperative therapy I'm telling Mrs JackW and the quacks) so play nicely or the vacant Auchentennach dungeons will become available for miscreants and of course LibDems of any shade ....

Cheers for now.

Welcome back.

They do say that having a specific objective helps people recover & I had a feeling you weren't going to sit the referendum out...

Innocent_Abroad said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Scott_P said:

The message is clear: if you don’t want your communities swamped by brown people, vote to leave the EU. This is racism. And if you wish to argue it isn’t, then I’m going to believe you’re a racist.

Of course, Farage and his fellow travellers – Tory MPs Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, for example – maintain their campaign isn’t about race, it’s about “sovereignty”, it’s about “believing in Britain”, it’s about “taking back control”. But, even if those claims are correct – and I am unconvinced they are – the Leave campaign is, to a very large degree, a racist one.

If you are a Leave voter and offended by this, then please raise your concerns with Farage, Johnson, and Gove. Your desire to leave the EU may not be based on matters of race but the campaign which might yet deliver your dream is. You, whether willingly or not, are on the side of racists.

Read more: http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/euan-mccolm-i-want-my-country-back-from-nasty-nationalists-1-4158434#ixzz4C0JVfl8S

What rubbish. The whole point is that skilled and valuable brown people cant come in at the moment because unskilled and not required white people from eastern Europe can come in without let or hindrance

By that logic all the old and sick, of any skin colour or none, are neither valuable nor required. Can't you think before you post?.

Unfortunately national policy has to be based on what is in the national interest, not what individuals might think on a personal level.

Mr. Sandpit, I used a brilliant comparison, not a tawdry pun. How dare you compare my eloquent and elegant literary outpourings with the kitsch scribblings of Mr. Eagles?!

The Manors have a credible chance of points. However, they've only managed to score in one race, ever. I think it's a reasonable bet, but not something I'm backing personally.

Edited extra bit: the odds are/were 13 and 15 (Wehrlein shorter than Haryanto, which I'm not sure about). I'd want something more like 20-25.

logical_song said:

SouthamObserver said:

All the new opinion polls reveal a very tight race.

A lot of postal ballots have already been cast.

That happened at a time when Leave was surging.

They may well decide the referendum.

I still believe Leave will win.

If you want to reduce immigration - and this is a major priority for many, if not most - then there is only one way to cast your ballot.

If Leave win and Boris becomes PM then expect the immigration figures to stay much the same and expect Britain to get poorer. Expect the SNP to push for another Independence referendum.
Following that the Tories will become so unpopular that Corbyn will win in 2020.
Talk about unintended consequences.

If Leave do win and we have a recession - however small and however caused - the Leave politicians will become toast. Since they specifically denied Leave would cause a recession - ANY recession will be blamed on them.

And yes Labour may win the next GE -under John McDonnell or Corbyn...

A great post and had Remain tried to argue this it would have exposed the Leave campaign tactics which in turn would have had to change.

I think the EU *could* be a force for good. It just isn't at the moment. A European community of nations all friends and trading and cooperating is absolutely a positive. But Europe isn't the EU and I like many people support the idea of the former and not the realities of the latter. Its not expansion that's the concern - a big broad diverse trading area is better than a small and narrow one. Its just that the bigger it gets the more absurd ideas like a single currency or no Borders become

I'm an advocate for a federal UK and have been for 20 years. Its the only viable solution to give the composite nations (and possibly regions) their own identity and voice. But it has to be with consent. Its very very hard to make an argument for a European superstate that demonstrates the consent of the people of Europe in creating it.

Anyway, a positive case for Europe is what we in Labour have tried to make. It went down like a bucket of warm sick. Most people seem to have a negative view of Europe, I can't think where they might have gained such an impression....

Roger said:

Talk about damning with faint praise! This is a header written by LEAVER trying to look on the bright side after a defeat.

I can't see a single argument that would arouse the passions of someone wanting to be enthused by REMAINing in the EU.

Even the first Campaign Broadcast with little Sam got the blood pumping more than this. Sorry but a complete fail

Have a good holiday

Actually no it isn't. It was written because I wanted to try and set out what the positive case for the EU could be. It could have been longer. And I admit that I was tired when I wrote it. But I think it a good test to argue against yourself, to test your own arguments. I wasn't really trying to convince anyone. More trying to list out what the positives are because so few in the Remain camp had done so. I think there are also positives of free movement - but as I'd done a thread header on immigration didn't want to repeat myself.

I think the idea of the EU is a good one. The idea of finding a way to live together in peace is a noble one. But somewhere it has gone off the rails. That is a great pity. I don't think it too late for matters to change. Nothing is inevitable and nothing is set in stone. Events and all that.

In any case, I am sure we will be debating this again.

Thanks again for your headers, which I have enjoyed.

The sun is shining. In a few hours I will be in Arras. Life is good.

Amazingly Peter Hitchens hasn't been censored by the Mail on Sunday as he seemed to be before the 2015 election:

"The suggestion has been made that Mrs Cox died because of her views on the EU. The implication is that those with different views are in some way to blame for her death.
We should scornfully reject this insinuation. Nobody on any side in the EU debate wishes any opponent dead.

In this country, no cause is served by violence and no rational person believes that it is.

Political murder is not common here, and in modern times has usually been the calculated and vengeful work of Irish criminal terror gangs.

What is regrettably common is the random killing of innocent people by the mentally ill. Numbers vary and can be calculated in many different ways, but even The Guardian accepts that in 2010 there were 40 such killings across the UK, carried out by patients with mental-health problems.

In 2005, there were 92. In the decade 2001-2010 there were 738 by one calculation, or 1,216 by another.

People going about their daily business are pushed under trains, stabbed, kicked to death, even beheaded by unhinged assailants, who have suddenly and unpredictably become violent.
Many of these killers are known by the authorities to be ill but still allowed to walk the streets, because dozens of mental hospitals have been shut to save money.
Some of them have become ill following long-term use of cannabis, now decriminalised in all but name. A long-overdue reversal of these foolish policies would be a better cause than trying to take partisan advantage of a human tragedy.

Disturbed people do sometimes embrace the wilder political and religious creeds.

But it is their mental illness, not these barely understood ‘opinions’, that makes them capable of the dreadful act of killing – an act which separates them from the rest of humanity.

The alleged killer, Thomas Mair, is said by neighbours to have a history of mental illness. By his own account it seems likely that he has taken some sort of medication at some stage.
He is said by his family to have had no interest in politics. Let us leave Jo Cox’s family and friends to mourn. And let us all listen carefully to the evidence when it is, eventually, placed before the courts."

Scott_P said:

The message is clear: if you don’t want your communities swamped by brown people, vote to leave the EU. This is racism. And if you wish to argue it isn’t, then I’m going to believe you’re a racist.


Read more: http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/euan-mccolm-i-want-my-country-back-from-nasty-nationalists-1-4158434#ixzz4C0JVfl8S

I want my country back from those who want us to return to the days when it was okay to joke about “darkies” and “poofs”. I want my country back from those who conceal their hatred beneath a cloak cut from “legitimate concerns”.

I want my country back from anyone who feeds hatred.

We may look across the Atlantic with horror at the behaviour of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, but do we so lack self-awareness that we cannot see the ideology of hatred that has swept him to within touching distance of victory is the same ideology of hatred that had so well served the Brexit campaign?

CD13 said:

Edmund,

"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."

If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36389905

Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?

Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.

The claim that I'm disputing is that if these white, Christian Polish and Lithuanian immigrants weren't allowed in, the UK would allow lots more brown people to enter the country instead. My reading of British politics is that this suggestion is incorrect, as exemplified by the fact that Leave campaigning on fear of hypothetical brown people, rather than the actually existing white people who you mention.

Are you claiming that it's true? Do you think Brexit would result in British voters agreeing to let in lots more brown people?

Cameron does seem to be politicising the murder here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36569338

He's trying to make it Jo Cox Vs Nigel Farage. May work. May backfire.

Edited extra bit: hmm. I may have misread it. Not sure. These are the relevant excerpts:

"Mr Cameron said the EU vote was the "ultimate democracy" and represented what Labour MP Jo Cox, who was killed on Thursday in her West Yorkshire constituency, had stood for.

Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, Mr Cameron, who is campaigning for Remain, said Mrs Cox had "embodied Britain at her best - a country that is decent and compassionate"."

and

""Are we going to choose Nigel Farage's vision - one which takes Britain backwards; divides rather than unites; and questions the motives of anyone who takes a different view," Mr Cameron wrote."

JackW said:

Good Morning PBers.

Firstly many thanks for all the kind messages over the past weeks that have been passed onto me. I'm home now but a tad frail but uncommonly pleased to be in a position to be frail and not more deceased than one of Roger's political forecasts.

I'll be lurking for a few months (PB recuperative therapy I'm telling Mrs JackW and the quacks) so play nicely or the vacant Auchentennach dungeons will become available for miscreants and of course LibDems of any shade ....

Cheers for now.

Greetings and best wishes Jack! Sorely missing your ARSE4EU, but perhaps it could do with a rest so as to be fit for ARSE4US.

Morris_Dancer said:

Betting Post
For those who missed it yesterday, here are my thoughts on motorsport in Azerbaijan:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/azerbaijan-pre-race-2016.html

" I also expect many crashes"

No kidding. Its a preposterous circuit. Monza speeds, with longer on full throttle down the start finish straight than they had at Indianapolis. And at the end of that long 220mph run is a 90 left. If you get it wrong the choice is a hard barrier or a short stub end runoff where reversal onto the track is the only option. Indeed hard barriers or stubby runoff and reverse into traffic seems to be the pattern on a track hemmed in by a rather attractive city. How have they have passed a circuit as safe where the longest ever full throttle run is met with possible cars reversing at you into the braking zone?

Simple. MONEY. We have taken F1 to a place where the locals can't afford tickets to race around an unsafe absurd circuit (the uphill bit past the castle is insane) because the local dictator has a lot of money. Why are we following the Blessed Tony (for it is He) in taking money from a man who suppresses dissent and jails journalists? For a man as low as Bernie Ecclestone this is a new low.

I also expect many crashes. I pray that none of them are serious. The risk of some *bad* crashes is high. The last "European" GP on the Black Sea please.

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Hope you get some nice photos to share, Miss Cyclefree. Did you know the Colosseum is partially made of concrete? The port at Ostia is too (the Romans found out how to make concrete which set underwater).

Now, to dispute your points:
1) This was almost certainly true in the past. But we're not in the 1950s. The EU isn't about stopping war in Europe (and the Bosnians and Ukraine might say it's somewhere between useless and harmful in this regard in the modern world), it's about bypassing national democracies to drag power from the accountable politicians of states to the deliberately complex and opaque bureaucracy of Brussels.

The idea the EU = Western civilisation would come as news to the Roman Empire, I am sure.

2) I agree federalism is not inherently evil. But the ends do not justify the means of ignoring referendum results, being deceitful to electorates and throwing funding at supposedly independent groups which then conclude more EU is the answer to every evil. If a federal EU were a good thing, why not make an honest case for it? Could it be that the little people can't be trusted?

3) Some things do require international co-operation. Counter-terrorism is a good example. Our closest partner here is the US. The Five Eyes group is ourselves, the US, Canada, New Zealand and Australia.

The EU is totally unnecessary for international co-operation. People who pretend otherwise presumably also believe a wedding is a prerequisite for sex.

4) I agree. However, a market of 65m or so which acts in British interests is better for us making trading deals that advantage the UK than a market of 500m for which we are just 8% of the consideration. A deal which helps Italy, Spain and Poland but screws us would make sense for the EU. But not for us.

Mr Dancer: all fair points but I will leave others to debate them.

My daughter is studying Classical Civilisation at university so one of the purposes of this trip is for her to see some of the sites she has been studying and to instruct me in the finer points of the art/architecture and history. I am really looking forward to this, not just because she's so enthusiastic about the period but also because it's lovely having this opportunity to develop our relationship and for me to learn from her.

The area around Naples is fascinating and when I have more time free from work I intend to spend more time exploring.

My big dream was to explore all of the ancient Roman world i.e. Libya - Leptis Magna and Syria and Tunisia etc. But that bit will have to be postponed sine die, alas. Still plenty in Italy itself.

The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....

........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.

Edmund,

The point I'm making is that concern about "furriners" isn't restricted to brown-skinned people. I'd expect an invasion of cockneys or scousers would involve some of the same problems.

Don't assume everything is "racist". When it comes to hatred, I think the people screaming racist at every opportunity need few lessons in that.

Yes, there are real racists. But the Gordon Brown problem is a big issue. Mention the touchy subject and you get an automatic response. And it often said with real hatred.

I may yet be proven wrong, but trying to smear Leave with what this dripping wet leadership likes to think of Farage seems to be the wrong message for the working classes of this country who are pleased to hear someone share their concerns. Apart from a few notable exceptions, Field, Stuart and Skinner, Labour have become the party that is pro emoting, but anti governing and anti doing.

If I am right, we'll see huge Leave votes in Wales, the North and Midlands.

Innocent_Abroad said:

Charles said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Scott_P said:

The message is clear: if you don’t want your communities swamped by brown people, vote to leave the EU. This is racism. And if you wish to argue it isn’t, then I’m going to believe you’re a racist.

Of course, Farage and his fellow travellers – Tory MPs Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, for example – maintain their campaign isn’t about race, it’s about “sovereignty”, it’s about “believing in Britain”, it’s about “taking back control”. But, even if those claims are correct – and I am unconvinced they are – the Leave campaign is, to a very large degree, a racist one.

If you are a Leave voter and offended by this, then please raise your concerns with Farage, Johnson, and Gove. Your desire to leave the EU may not be based on matters of race but the campaign which might yet deliver your dream is. You, whether willingly or not, are on the side of racists.

Read more: http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/euan-mccolm-i-want-my-country-back-from-nasty-nationalists-1-4158434#ixzz4C0JVfl8S

What rubbish. The whole point is that skilled and valuable brown people cant come in at the moment because unskilled and not required white people from eastern Europe can come in without let or hindrance

By that logic all the old and sick, of any skin colour or none, are neither valuable nor required. Can't you think before you post?.

Unfortunately national policy has to be based on what is in the national interest, not what individuals might think on a personal level.

The national interest is greater than merely economic. Except to market traders, perhaps.

Yes, hence why we welcome asylum seekers etc but are less keen on economic migrants.

But I don't think it's in the national interest to accept all the world's old and sick, which is what would happen if you changed your criteria so that you don't discriminate against them (We may, of course, disagree on that)

BMG Online, 10-15 June.
Just noticed a tables link on the BMG site.

Online tables (Leave lead)
http://www.bmgresearch.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/CONFIDENTIAL-BMG-HERALD-EU-REFERENDUM-POLL-ONLINE-160616-V1.pdf

Online methodology
http://www.bmgresearch.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Cover-Page-BMG-Herald-Online-Poll-Methodology-Sheet-160616.pdf

Phone and online tables links at bottom of article linked to below.
http://www.bmgresearch.co.uk/bmgherald-final-eu-referendum-poll/

daodao said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Peter Hitchens stated today in the Mail on Sunday that: "The suggestion has been made that Mrs Cox died because of her views on the EU. The implication is that those with different views are in some way to blame for her death. We should scornfully reject this insinuation."

I have a high regard for Peter Hitchens, but sadly, the facts contradict this statement. The accused made clear his motives in court. The events of last Thursday will influence moderate undecided voters next Thursday. They won't want to be perceived as closet racists.

I expect a Remain win by >10%.

Given it is only members of the political class, the lefty journo class (and a handful on here) that think voting Leave suggests anything more than wanting to leave the EU, I suspect it will have no impact. Campaign fatigue was already setting in. I don't see any reason why Remain would win given how unpopular it was last week.

CD13 said:

Edmund,

The point I'm making is that concern about "furriners" isn't restricted to brown-skinned people. I'd expect an invasion of cockneys or scousers would involve some of the same problems.

Don't assume everything is "racist". When it comes to hatred, I think the people screaming racist at every opportunity need few lessons in that.

Yes, there are real racists. But the Gordon Brown problem is a big issue. Mention the touchy subject and you get an automatic response. And it often said with real hatred.

I didn't mention racism, and neither did I say concern about foreigners was restricted to brown-skinned people.

What I am saying is that British people don't want more immigrants in Britain, and they *particularly* don't want more brown, non-Christian immigrants. There are various reasons why this might be - for example Britain has had terrorism problems in the past, and people often bring up cultural issues here - and you can argue about how well grounded they are. But I think as a reading of British politics, it's obviously correct. Restricting EU immigration won't make British voters want to open up to more brown immigrants.

I note that you haven't actually said that you agree with the claim I'm disputing.

Estobar said:

For those of you betting on turnout and also those who think it may affect outcome there is heavy rain likely spreading from southern Britain in the morning to the north afternoon. A particularly heavy pulse looks to hit the north-east early evening.

Makes me think of the West Wing where Josh is freaking out over a rain storm on election night. That would be a great academic study to do

edmundintokyo said:

CD13 said:

Edmund,

"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."

If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36389905

Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?

Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.

The claim that I'm disputing is that if these white, Christian Polish and Lithuanian immigrants weren't allowed in, the UK would allow lots more brown people to enter the country instead. My reading of British politics is that this suggestion is incorrect, as exemplified by the fact that Leave campaigning on fear of hypothetical brown people, rather than the actually existing white people who you mention.

Are you claiming that it's true? Do you think Brexit would result in British voters agreeing to let in lots more brown people?

The concern about immigration is not about immigration per se, but two consequences: alienation/rapid change (the creation of new micro-communities within the country rather than integration) and economic competition for low skilled jobs.

If the balance of of immigration were to shift to high skilled techies - for example - who (I assume) would be more likely to integrate then, regardless of the colour of their skill, the concern about immigration for most would subside.

edmundintokyo said:

CD13 said:

Edmund,

"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."

If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36389905

Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?

Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.

The claim that I'm disputing is that if these white, Christian Polish and Lithuanian immigrants weren't allowed in, the UK would allow lots more brown people to enter the country instead. My reading of British politics is that this suggestion is incorrect, as exemplified by the fact that Leave campaigning on fear of hypothetical brown people, rather than the actually existing white people who you mention.

Are you claiming that it's true? Do you think Brexit would result in British voters agreeing to let in lots more brown people?

Considering the immigration figures for last year show total immigration figures of 288 000 Non-EU migrants last year (177 000 net), I find it hard to believe that the Leave campaigners will support more of this to replace our EU migration. I expect to see a squadron of the porcine air force in formation flying by my window first!

Morris_Dancer said:

""Are we going to choose Nigel Farage's vision - one which takes Britain backwards; divides rather than unites; and questions the motives of anyone who takes a different view," Mr Cameron wrote."

Irony claxon. 'Right-on' folk are completely smearing anyone who dares suggest Leave as Faragist racists. That is questioning the motives of anyone who takes a different view.

Morris_Dancer said:

Cameron does seem to be politicising the murder here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36569338

He's trying to make it Jo Cox Vs Nigel Farage. May work. May backfire.

Edited extra bit: hmm. I may have misread it. Not sure. These are the relevant excerpts:

"Mr Cameron said the EU vote was the "ultimate democracy" and represented what Labour MP Jo Cox, who was killed on Thursday in her West Yorkshire constituency, had stood for.

Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, Mr Cameron, who is campaigning for Remain, said Mrs Cox had "embodied Britain at her best - a country that is decent and compassionate"."

and

""Are we going to choose Nigel Farage's vision - one which takes Britain backwards; divides rather than unites; and questions the motives of anyone who takes a different view," Mr Cameron wrote."

Nakedly political and very odious.

eek said:

Mortimer said:

I may yet be proven wrong, but trying to smear Leave with what this dripping wet leadership likes to think of Farage seems to be the wrong message for the working classes of this country who are pleased to hear someone share their concerns. Apart from a few notable exceptions, Field, Stuart and Skinner, Labour have become the party that is pro emoting, but anti governing and anti doing.

If I am right, we'll see huge Leave votes in Wales, the North and Midlands.

+1. It's also interesting locally to see people arguing that Nissan and Hitachi workers will vote remain because their jobs depend on it. Forgetting that those companies are both Japanese.

The European companies who opened up factories in the North East (Siemens I'm looking at you) left at the first sign of an economic downturn to keep their Continental factories open...

It's reasons like that which make me think the size of the Leave vote was originally underestimated. Personally I haven't got a clue what the result will be and I doubt anyone else has....

I think both Nissan and Hitachi have put out public statements that the vote will not affect their UK operations.

Charles said:

edmundintokyo said:

CD13 said:

Edmund,

"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."

If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36389905

Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?

Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.

The claim that I'm disputing is that if these white, Christian Polish and Lithuanian immigrants weren't allowed in, the UK would allow lots more brown people to enter the country instead. My reading of British politics is that this suggestion is incorrect, as exemplified by the fact that Leave campaigning on fear of hypothetical brown people, rather than the actually existing white people who you mention.

Are you claiming that it's true? Do you think Brexit would result in British voters agreeing to let in lots more brown people?

The concern about immigration is not about immigration per se, but two consequences: alienation/rapid change (the creation of new micro-communities within the country rather than integration) and economic competition for low skilled jobs.

If the balance of of immigration were to shift to high skilled techies - for example - who (I assume) would be more likely to integrate then, regardless of the colour of their skill, the concern about immigration for most would subside.

I think there is no doubt that middle class migrants integrate better. East african asians in Leicester vs some other communities for example. In part it is attitude, and in part geographic dispersion.