No more than the council elections have demonstrated the opposite.

If you want a poll to demonstrate how desperate UK voters are to leave the EU, another referendum is clearly what's needed; but you and your ilk don't want that because polls show you losing that by 58/42.

LOL you really don't get remaining is no longer an option.

In your mind voters leaving the Tories and Labour for Remain parties is a demonstration of the public's desire for Brexit.

lolbitter

Absolutely but I'm struggling to see any big meaning. Local issues and obvious brexit objections (both in principle and 'fed up with it all') to Lab and Tory seem to be the totally expected stories.

Without the brext party running it's hard is tell much of interest. Ukip did too well for comfort but even their vote probably includes a fair few who think it's still farage's party rather than the even more extreme thing it's become.

Dwelling too much on the past is both enormously destructive socially/politically and over-rated in predictive value.

But I think the much bigger flaw in your point is that brexit is almost entirely a British affair and what the France/Germany wanted is really besides the point (it's only started to matter at all because the UK can't sort itself out). I do know a few people who cite General de Gaulle as the reason we must leave the EU but they are a small subset of a small subset of a subset.

No I see people voting for the Brexit party at of sheer frustration with the big two as a demonstration of the public's desire for Brexit.

Or do you think I'll turn out wrong and they'll get small numbers?

No, they'll get the votes of those with small brains.

I think the trouble with Jalfrezi's objection is that the people who have turned to remain parties are the harder line remainers so it's pretty meaningless in the scheme of learning anything about brexit support. Many leavers didn't have that option so we simply dont know how the Brexit party would have done for similar reasons

The problem with your post is that remaining is definitely still an option.

The bloodbath for the Conservatives is pretty incredible but Labour could've been hoovering up votes if they didn't have a 'convoluted' (I'm being polite here) Brexit policy. Not sure you can say Ukip are doing well, the opposite is the case as they're currently down 144 councillors and only have 31 for now.

So, there's this.



And this.



Plus this.



And both party leaders are claiming this as an endorsement of their one identifiable main policy, the one they share, which the voters have just given two fingers to. Strange days indeed.

It just remains to be seen how long Labour continue with Corbyn and his little cabal running the party. Will they continue to drag it down or will others finally see sense and do something about it? The true believers will never change their opinion of course.

Not sure the that the tories are doing all that badly compared to usual expectations and the brexit mess. labour suffers from the same brexit problems except I think you're mistaken if you think there's a good electoral policy on brexit for labour.

UKIP are down but still doing far too well for comfort given what they've become and that they've only contesting a few seats. It's becoming like the BNP getting those results although i hope that's partly down to what ukip where rather than they are now.

ITV political editor Robert Peston's thread is quite interesting.



https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1124349973963866113

Labour doesn't just have a Brexit problem, it has a Corbyn problem, because voters on the doorstep hate him. (Well, they would, because he's a posh-boy Islington Commie and IRA groupie.) He has the worst poll ratings of any opposition leader ever. Labour's standing in the Commons is misleading because we now know that in 2017 Remainers voted Labour in the false belief that it was a Remain party. As Jess Phillips MP has observed, they won't make that mistake again.

And even longtime Labour supporter John Harris of the Guardian has tweeted this:--

The Conservatives are definitely doing worse than expected. Their line last night was they could lose 1000 seats, that was to enable them to claim any losses they suffered weren't as bad as expected. They're currently at -1332.

As for Labour, it would help if they had a Brexit policy instead of the fudge they have that is pretending to be all things to all people. Set out a coherent position and stick to it come what may. Of course Corbyn wants Brexit but has to tip toe around that fact.

Yeah I agree it's worse than the tory spin but they make the usual mistake of massively over relying on past data. Absent brexit, 1000 seat loss is the sort of spin they would have hoped to beat and claim victory.

I don't agree with you at all on labour over brexit. Move in any direction and a large chunk of their electorate from rank & file to senior will be furious.

So....Labour facilitate the chaos that would be Brexit just so they don't lose some votes down the line. It's too big an issue for that sort of nonsense.

The point that you are missing is that the subject is Brexit, so put emphasis on the situation in the UK. The situation in other EU-countries is very similar.

I don't care how you want to call them as long as we are both talking about the same people - which we obviously do. There is an old rule in roman law: falsa demonstratio non nocet.

Modern immigration to Europe and the settlement of the Americas seem markedly different tbh. Pretty bamboozling that anyone would attempt to draw a comparison.

As far as I can work out the Polish didn't rock up brandishing weapons and looking to drive me off my land, they just opened a shop with tasty sausages and fixed my sink.

No the subject of the studies is "on populism and the public state of globalisation, including national samples in twenty-three countries spanning the world.". In this case we were looking at a specific question, 'Do the benefits of immigration outweigh the costs'. I've pointed out where you've gone wrong and others have also done the same.

The decent thing to do is to refer to them in the manner they themselves prefer.

I have to concede that to some extent but it's not as if Labour have a coherent position while pretending not to for electoral gain. The divisions over what to do are very real and quite possibly irresolvable at the moment.

Labour would also claim that it's because the issue is so big that they are putting the country first by trying to work with the tories to find a solution. Of course they cop a lot of flak for working with the tories as well.

You seem to believe that the key-message of this article is that Britan has slightly more citizens who believe in the benefits of migration than other countries, which is supposed to be a success of some sort.

Unfortunately I have bad news for you: That's also completly ridiculous for the very same reason. Britan has a higher percentage of citizens with migration background than many other european countries. If you allow these people to vote on the survey you automatically get higher if not the highest numbers.

Take all the current migrants that got UK-citizenship and add the 2nd generation children from Figure 1 in the following report who are old enough to vote.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulat...dandwales/2015

If you do that you should get around 25%.

Fact is: They had people voting in that survey who directly benefit from migration. Even funnier is that the number of pro-voters correlates exactly with the number of british citizens with migration background. According to this study it is possible that 100% of british citizen without migration background are against migration. It would be extreme, but it's possible. Don't tell this to anyone!

Sorry, but decency is not part of my repertoire.

When I think about it, you should even get more than 25% which means that it's possible that even british citizens with migration background voted against migration. That would be pure comedy!

We can see the same happening in Germany in the political spectrum. Former Bundeskanzler (and former NKWD-agent) Willy Brandt allowed workers from Turkey to apply for german citizenship in 1970. The idea was that muslims could vote for his SPD but would never vote for the christian party (CDU). Nowadays 25% of german citizens have migration background, but the SPD only got 19% of the votes in the last election. It's obvious that not all the migrants voted for the SPD and one may seriously ask the question if any germans without migration background voted for them at all. Ok, not all migrants in Germany are muslims.

Decency not being part of your repertoire is a pretty big fail in life, even worse when you seem quite proud of it. Logic and analysis aren't either given you're failure to look beyond one country in the study when looking at immigration.

Anyway, I have no interest in conintuing this with you which I've just been informed is something you're probably used to on this forum. Good day.

Wrong, you would love to continue, but you can't, because you realized that you don't have the slightest chance to win. Don't worry, it happens to the best.

In fact the Labour leadership do have a coherent position -- they want Brexit -- while pretending not to for electoral gain, because they know that near 80% of their voters and near 90% of their members oppose Brexit. They call it 'constructive ambiguity' and it is very much a deliberate policy, and it is Leninist doctrine: you use deception because the people don't know what's good for them. Only the 'vanguard', the Party leadership, get to say what goes.

Of course they're not putting the country first. Polling now shows the country is over 60% Remain. Meanwhile Barry Gardiner, Labour, tells a Tory Brexiter out loud, on the BBC, 'We are trying to bail you guys out.'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-pol...ries-on-brexit