There are two new voting intention polls out today – YouGov for the Times, and Ipsos MORI’s monthly political monitor in the Evening Standard.

Ipsos MORI‘s topline figures are CON 38%(nc), LAB 38%(nc), LDEM 10%(+1), UKIP 4%(nc). Fieldwork was between Friday and Tuesday (1st-5th), and changes are from MORI’s last poll back in December.

YouGov‘s topline figures are CON 41%(+2), LAB 34%(nc), LDEM 10(-1), UKIP 4%(-2). Fieldwork was on Sunday and Monday, and changes are from YouGov’s last poll in mid-January.

This does not, of course, offer us much insight on what is really happening. At the weekend a lot of attention was paid to a poll by Opinium showing a big shift towards the Conservatives and a 7 point Tory lead. Earlier in the week Opinium also published a previously unreleased poll conducted for the People’s Vote campaign the previous week, which showed a four point Tory lead, suggesting their Observer poll was more than just an isolated blip. Today’s polls do little to clatify matters – MORI show no change, with the parties still neck-and-neck. YouGov show the Tories moving to a seven point lead, the same as Opinium, but YouGov has typically shown larger Tory leads anyway of late so it doesn’t reflect quite as large a movement.

I know people look at polls hoping to find some firm evidence – the reality is they cannot always provide it. They are volatile, they have margins of error. Only time will tell for sure whether Labour’s support is dropping as events force them to take a clearer stance on Brexit, or whether we’re just reading too much into noise. As ever, the wisest advice I can give is to resist the natural temptation to assume that the polls you’d like to be accurate are the ones that are correct, and that the others must be wrong.

Ipsos MORI tables are up here, YouGov tables are here.


541 Responses to “Latest YouGov and Ipsos MORI voting intention polls”

1 7 8 9 10 11
  1. David Colby,
    “I don’t think there’ s another MP with a parliamentary pedigree like this:”

    Ok, a very geographic link. But a number of families have stayed persistently as MPs, albeit they were are not attached to one particular constituency. Maybe that just means they dont teribly care about their constituents.

  2. TOH

    @”What I find amazing is what appears to be your hatred of SE England, is it hatred or jealousy? Anyway it’s mystifying. ”

    Freudian perhaps Howard?

    Amusing though in its Pavlovian predictability.

  3. So-May tweaks the PD to include Corbyn’s CU.

    Brexit goes through with Labour votes.

    Juncker toasts them both in champaign from Dublin & Tusk dies laughing. Macron gives Barnier the Ordre national de la Légion d’honneur

    ……..when the GE comes & Cons & Labour are deserted by droves of their core supporters -who are we all supposed to vote for ?

  4. Brexit, the gift that keeps on giving

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2019/feb/11/uk-gdp-report-economy-growth-brexit-business-live

    Resolution, the thinktank, has a grim statistic — UK households are £1,500 worse off, on average, today than was expected before the 2016 EU referendum.

    That’s because growth has slowed, while the drop in the pound drove inflation up – eating into incomes.

    According to Resolution, the UK having experienced the sharpest income growth slowdown of any advanced economy.

    James Smith, Research Director at the Resolution Foundation, says:

    “Two and a half years since the UK voted to leave the European Union, the country’s post-Brexit position remains far from clear. There has been much discussion about the impact of this uncertainty on businesses, but not enough about its effect on household incomes.

    “The UK’s stark under-performance on income growth since 2016 – which has tailed off more than other advanced economies – has left UK households taking a £1,500 hit to their living standards.

    “As we approach ‘Brexit day’ on 29 March, politicians in all parties needs to recognise how much is at stake for family living standards and that how the country goes forward, not just where it is heading, matters for household incomes in the here and now.”

  5. @OLDNAT

    “Precisely no one voted for a hung parliament. The result of people voting in the way that they chose was a hung parliament – but that is a very different matter!”

    I’m breaking my long term lurkerhood to suggest that you are wrong (at least in what I read as the spirit of your wording).

    I did cast a vote for one of Labour/Tory (in a Labour/Tory marginal), but I did so (based on the polling) with the hope that my chosen party winning in my constituency would be part of denying the other party an overall majority, not because I wanted them to win an overall majority themselves.

    My desire was a hung parliament, though that wasn’t actually an option on the ballot paper in front of me.

  6. @ Colin

    An interesting article in politico, which reflects what was stated in the New York Times, and posted here a few days ago.

    Looking into the further detail, as well as causing an estimated 100,000 Job losses in Germany, there will be around 50,000 jobs lost in France, and perhaps more surprisingly 433,000 lost outside the EU, 59,000 of which would be in China.

  7. A grim set of GDP figures. Growth down to 0.2% in Q4 2018, significant contraction in manufacturing ( six month in a row it has contracted), and all sectors contracted in December.

  8. @ EOTW – “I am looking at you Trevor”

    I don’t have a view on badgers (or meerkats). It’s not that I don’t care, its just a case of time priorities. I “search” for my name to check replies but missed your comment. I’m not going to make-up an opinion on areas I haven’t had the time to look into. People are sick of experts, especially “experts” have no factual content and are lifted straight from the Remain biased press.

    I would highlight the Euro and Schengen as two very large “mistakes” that EU made. Eastward expansion another whopping great mistake IMHO but that’s more open to debate.

    @ COLIN – Farmers will adjust, the issue is they have no idea what they need to adjust to. “Brexit Fog” seems to be the colloquial term being used.

    A conversation about conservation is fine but it needs to be help in parallel to the immediate “assistance” and trade info that the agri-food sector needs. The current “discussion phase” is trying to cover every aspect, where as agri-food businesses urgently need a “stop-gap” at least. Even at “max-Green” the relative impact of environmental issues will not make major impact on business decisions. That’s not saying “Green” issues are not important, just that they should not be holding up the more urgent business clarity.

    It’s not just an economic matter, it’s clearly a political priority as well. The “Brexit Fog” allows various v.v.unlikely worst case scenarios to be “spun” into highly likely scenarios.

    Longer post on the bigger agri-food issues coming later.

    @ DANNY – Please refer to PETERW’s excellent wrap-up on the Nissan “story”, earlier this thread or own last thread.

  9. JAMES E

    Yep-can you believe that any politician anywhere in Europe will allow that to happen?

  10. TW

    @” the issue is they have no idea what they need to adjust to. “Brexit Fog” seems to be the colloquial term being used”

    So they are in the same position as every business in the country.

    I agree-it is quite unbelievable.

  11. “Yep-can you believe that any politician anywhere in Europe will allow that to happen?”

    Surely you mean “Britain” rather than “Europe” – it was the UK which voted for this, and our politicians who have led us t the present mess.

  12. “Yep-can you believe that any politician anywhere in Europe will allow that to happen?”

    Well they’re simply working on the same logic with the UK, the only difference being the same methods behind predictions like these are the ones also predicting far far worse damage to UK jobs and economy.

    Nothing’s really changed here, forecasts such as this have been kicking around from the start, no deal will damage everyone, but it will damage the UK the most and by some distance.

  13. @ OLDANT – I hope CCHQ are thinking about May local elections and aware of polling on “betrayal” of Brexit!

    CON are more “top-down” than LAB but they won’t be totally ignoring the views of constituents.

    LAB?? They are more “bottom-up” in theory but then Communism was supposed to be “member-led” and we’re seeing how artful Corbyn is at “interpreting” members views ;)

  14. COLIN

    “Amusing though in its Pavlovian predictability.”

    Indeed.

  15. @ Colin

    As well as the threat to jobs in Germany, a much bigger worry is the massive collapse in their insect population. It’s obviously not just Germany but I’m seriously worried about their environmental credentials. The EU to its credit has been trying to implement pan European changes but German industry constantly tries to thwart their attempts.

    Their headline policy of moving energy away from nuclear is to be commended but something else is seriously amiss and it’s mainly their huge industrial manufacturing. Wind power and solar gets them about 40% of their energy needs but they still have atmosphere clogging coal power stations with plenty of life left in them and co2 emissions have barely moved in the last decade.

    We have our own problems here but not on this scale, personally we’re going to buy our first electric car in the next few months. Jaguar is favourite right now but then I discover the I-pace is made in Austria at a factory that makes and designs lot of different models for different marques. That makes real sense so why can’t an entrepreneur do the same here? If I had the brass I would.

  16. EOTW

    Well actually the latest figures show that wages are growing again over and above inflation and have been since April. Brexit effect and UK unemployment is the lowest for 40 years?

    What would you rather have moderate wage growth or higher unemployment as they have in most of the rest of the EU, particularly youth unemployment?

  17. Bantams,

    The phase-out of nuclear is slowing down the German transfer away from coal: they don’t plan on being coal-free until 2038, but they’ll be nuclear-free by 2022. That’s good politics and bad environmentalism, given that coal is absurdly damaging both in terms of pollution and GW.

  18. Well it would probably be nice if our employment figures actually worked like most of the rest of the EU and didn’t include someone working the odd hour on a ZHC as ’employed’…

  19. @ COLIN – My longer post must have a naughty word in it!?!?

    Anyway we basically have 3 options for Agri-food:

    1/ France (Trump)
    2/ UK specific – details in longer post that didn’t make it
    3/ Singapore (UFT)

    The level of “fog” is different for each business in each sector of UK, for many it will be an irrelevance or tiny inconvenience. For others it will be more serious but for very few outside of Graun anecdotes will it be existential.

    The reason I make a fuss about agri-food (and very little else) is due to the huge EU trade deficit in that sector, the high levels of CET, the “urgency” aspect of agri-food and the fairly high proportion of farm revenue that comes via CAP payments – change will be dramatic for that sector and everyone who eats food (ie every voter in UK!)

    “micro-substitution” by consumer and some modest supply chain capacity increases will not offset the huge “macro substitution” that we will have to do – that is not Guardianis5ta hysteria it is one of the few genuine parts of “Project Fear”, sadly ignored by many Leave as the rest of “Project Fear” is such utter rubbish.

    There is only one country and/or one options that can realistically “help” if we have a last minute panic (ie we sign a bad deal with Trump and/or go UFT WTO) – both could have been avoided and still can but the later we leave it the more tempting those options become (which is exactly what 20ish CON MPs want but huge majority of MPs and voters would not)

  20. @Colin

    So-May tweaks the PD to include Corbyn’s CU.
    Brexit goes through with Labour votes.

    ……..when the GE comes & Cons & Labour are deserted by droves of their core supporters -who are we all supposed to vote for ?

    My guess is that your first line gives what is currently the most likely outcome. My labour MP giving her report on Brexit, described JC’s letter as ‘signalling the direction in which May had to move’. This seemed to me cover for saying that they were not expecting her to move all the way and would compromise provided she showed some movement. I also get the impression that loyalist labour MPs on the radio etc are more likely to mention how it is party policy to ‘honour the referendum’ if they can.

    Personally I regard the Labour position, even if it were reached in full, as a foolish compromise. We get no say but we veto the kind of ‘red in tooth and claw’ capitalism that would go with a full-bloodied American trade deal for which the no dealers yearn, and which, to be fair, seems to me the only possible way of making any economic sense out of Brexit. (Not that I actually think it makes any economic sense, except for those who are rich).

    That said, I would find the Labour compromise or something closer to it, infinitely better than no deal. And if it were accompanied by a chance to vote for that or remain, I would accept its legitimacy. (And actually it might well win such a referendum in a way which ‘no deal’ v remain would not).

    As to who gets my vote. As in most of the country it doesn’t matter, but if Caroline Lucas was standing I would definitely vote for her.

  21. COLIN

    Juncker toasts them both in champaign from Dublin & Tusk dies laughing. Macron gives Barnier the Ordre national de la Légion d’honneur

    This is what particularly horrifies me. The Labour position is to effectively reduce the UK to the status of an absolute economic colony of the EU, in a permanent customs union with no exit mechanism, and an obligation under international treaty to follow much EU legislation without so much as a confirming vote in the HoC, but with the downsides of limited market access and vulnerability to being frozen out of sectors, all for the sake of staying just on the remain side of the conservative party. It’s a worse outcome than almost any other, but a large proportion of parliament seems to be intent on pursuing it regardless.

    EOTW

    The Resolution Foundation deserves (yet another) prize for the wilful misuse of statistics there. The OBR forecasts weren’t exactly accounting for the global slowdown that appears to be happening at the moment. Certainly the UK’s year-on-year growth of 1.3% is better than that of Germany (1%) or France (0.9%). The real worry is the continuing drop in investment, but it remains reasonable to expect that to pick up should Parliament manage to get its act together and approve some sort of withdrawal agreement.

  22. Colin,

    You link to a german report on brexit suggested 100,000 jobs at risk in germany. however, the article also reports 430,000 jobs at risk outside the EU, which I guess must mean in the UK?

    They also suggest another 79,000 job at risk elsewhere inside the EU.

    This sounds about consistent with a piece someone posted I think from the NYtimes, which showed a map marking the effect on each country. This had germany hardest hit after Uk, and said Uk would be 5x harder hit. Roughly consistent.

    There is no indication these figures allow for the beneficial effects of jobs from the Uk reshoring to th EU.

    The Other Howard,
    “Well actually the latest figures show that wages are growing again over and above inflation and have been since April.”

    Ah Howard, would that be the ame pattern we have seen since 2008, where wages overall have risen, but the richer half (or less) of the workforce has had real rises, while the lower half has nonetheless had cuts?

    You realise what such a pattern means? it means the rich will keep importing luxury foreign goods and running up a deficit, while the poor just get poorer and more angry. It means the notional automatic trade rebalancing from a falling pound wont happen.

    Trevor,
    we are never going to get good trade deals if we leave the EU. We have no leverage to force anyone to give us good deals. Simples.

  23. Ashcroft, Brexit focus group write-up. A broad cross-section of “anecdotes” – hopefully he roughly weighted the group make-ups and the “anecdotes” but that is always the risk of qualitative v quantitative data.

    Some great comments from both sides, worth a read and a chuckle (and your home team as well as the opposition!)

    https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2019/02/its-not-the-apocalypse-calm-down-my-brexit-limbo-focus-groups/

  24. Colin (and others)

    Here is the paper referenced by politico (and many newspapers). I linked the site (rather than the pdf, but it is there).

    It’s worth reading it. Also note the caveats.

    https://www.iwh-halle.de/en/publications/detail/potential-international-employment-effects-of-a-hard-brexit-1/

  25. CHARLES/COLIN

    “That said, I would find the Labour compromise or something closer to it, infinitely better than no deal.”

    Except that it does not reflect leaving the EU in any meaningful way. Better no deal which honours are desire to leave the EU properly.

    That is the problem with all the so called deals except perhaps Canada +

  26. @CHARLES @COLIN

    I would like to Remain too, but don’t you give any weight to the fact that both LAB and CON promised in their manifestoes to implement Brexit?

    And, given the closeness of the referendum vote, surely the logical (and moral) outcome would be a soft Brexit, precisely what LAB are trying to achieve.

  27. DAVID COLBY

    There is a family connection between the Wedderburn abolitionist of slavery and the Wedderburn slaver.You can find it here.

    https://spartacus-educational.com/SLAwedderburn.htm

    Another connection here.

    https://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/mar/12/lord-wedderburn-of-charlton

    I had a reply to your earlier post about indentured servants but it disappeared. I’ll try again.

  28. Laszlo

    Interesting paper, thanks for the reference. Have had a quick skim will read properly later.

  29. Danny

    Re your post. I do not agree with your conclusions, quite the reverse in fact.

  30. @CHARLES @COLIN

    …forgot to mention an article in The Observer yesterday about a plan by some MPs to vote for May’s deal on the understanding that they would only do so in return for a referendum on May’s Deal or Remain!

    Could persuade some LAB MPs, but unlikely to pass IMHO because it would risk splitting the CON party.

  31. “but don’t you give any weight to the fact that both LAB and CON promised in their manifestoes to implement Brexit?”

    1) Even under PR, the idea that everyone voting for a collection of policies supports all of them absolute is daft. Under FPTP it’s utterly ludicrous, so no.

    2) Even given that, it is relevant both were at that point promising unicorns and cakes able to consumed twice. The tories leave was certainly a little more ‘hard’ than labours, but both were unbelievable.

    The problem with this, as it has been with with leaving from the start, is that people will read in their own desires and ignore the rest. Hence those on the far end of the leave spectrum will see the vote to leave as only applicable to the promises to end FoM, control of borders, independent trade deals, no ECJ etc, while those up the other end will point out the promises of all the benefits of the SM/CU etc.

    How much weight should be given to promises that are, in whole, undeliverable?

  32. “but both were unbelievable”

    Er, undeliverable was what I meant but that works also.

  33. DAVID COLBY

    PETER W

    This definition of slavery was not arrived at without much political bargaining to exclude forced labour and concubinage.

    (a) “Slavery” means, as defined in the Slavery Convention of 1926, the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised, and “slave” means a person in such condition or status;

    http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/instree/f3scas.htm

    According to the military historian, Jeremy Black, “Slavery, therefore, is a state with different meanings in particular contexts, but with a fundamental element of an absence of freedom.This last element puts a focus on the political dimension as well as the more customary economic one, and thus underlines the extent to which slavery is the collective experience of those who lack freedom as well as a personal one.”

    A contrast between the forms that slavery can take in the more “developed” world – the UK and the less developed – Niger – can be found at the links which I had better put up in a different post to avoid this post disappearing.

  34. Colin and others

    I don’t feel like going back to write the report, so a bit more on the study quoted in the politico, Die Welt, FAZ, and so on).

    So, the assumption of the working paper: as a result of a hard-Brexit the UK demand for foreign goods (services are rather indirect) drops by 25%.

    Methodology: using the world input-output tables (it uses roughly the same sectoral breakdown as the UK) looking at effects on output (ceteris paribus), and again ceteris paribus on employment.

    Then using distributional statistics (effectively a z-test, which is reasonable because of the equivalent of crossbreaks in polls) they estimate the primary (finished goods) and secondary (components) effects on various countries. China for example is also affected.

    For Germany they use regional and company level breakdowns again ceteris paribus on estimating the effects on both regions and industries. Note that there is no statistical testing for this.

    Outcome: proportionally Malta and Ireland would be hit the hardest. In magnitude Germany. But, for example, in the car industry it’s less than 1% of employment.

    The above is not for disputing the outcomes of the simulation, only to put it in proper contexts (unlike the newspaper articles – they have their own agenda). Hard Brexit would hurt everyone.

    Now back to report writing.

  35. Links are here

    http://www.irinnews.org/feature/2005/03/21/slavery-unbroken-chain

    https://www.economist.com/britain/2018/08/02/slave-labour-props-up-unexpected-parts-of-britains-economy

    I was interested to read the story of the daffodil pickers in Cornwall who protested to the police that they were not slaves. Recently, I met a man from Kent who was an agricultural worker.He came to the attention of a number of people.He was sheltering in a vennel from the rain, wind and cold using a couple of dirty, old blankets.He told me he had worked as an agricultural worker since he was 14 – I reckoned he was over 50. He was travelling north by train to pick daffodils and would travel back to England when that was done.He looked to be homeless and there would be a reason why he sheltered where he did rather than in the station.

  36. @DANNY @TOH

    Well Danny has a logical and coherent argument. TOH doesn’t agree (no facts or arguments supplied)…….tough call.

  37. To JamesB’s point above, we know from polling that around 35-40% of people polled think we should still Remain (despite the 2016 Referendum result) and around 55% would vote Remain in a re-run.

    Yet only 15% of voters voted for overtly pro-EU parties (none of whom promised to stay in regardless)

    So we either conclude that voters are massively confused (which is almost certainly true), and/or that many voters who want to Remain nevertheless voted for parties that promised to ‘respect the Referendum result’.

    That is no surprise, given there are at least three blocks of voters already identified by polling:
    – Remain Tories who fear Corbyn even more than Leaving
    – Remain Labour who genuinely think Labour is pro Remain (remember more than 20% of voters when tested think ‘No Deal’ = Remain!)
    – Remain Labour voters for whom opposing austerity is more important than Brexit

    To which I would add:
    – Remain Labour voters who deeply distrust the main UK-wide most pro-Remain party, the Lib Dems, after the Coalition years.

    So it seems to me that using ‘Labour and Tories committed to respect the Referendum’ as justification for continuing to Leave is no more meaningful than saying ‘Labour and Tories supported invading Iraq’ means that voters are still committed to the Iraq invasion…

  38. tobyebert

    “Well Danny has a logical and coherent argument. TOH doesn’t agree (no facts or arguments supplied)…….tough call.”

    Ah but ToH is patriotic
    (unclear whether he is actually a patriotic Russian, though. Certainly seems to share his political objectives with Putin)

  39. As ever and often pointed out here, a fact on it’s own is a lonely thing.

    You can’t only gauge the impact of something accurately if you only have the absolute number without the proportion.

    The figure of 100k job losses for Germany looks bad, but what does it represent in terms of overall German unemployment.

    The most recent figure I could find was for late 2018 at about 1.41m unemployed a rate of 3.4%.

    That means 0.1% equals about 40k or put another way, adding another 100k would take the unemployment rate up to about 3.75% which I think is slightly lower than ours….before Brexit!

    Peter.

  40. The other Howard,
    “Except that it does not reflect leaving the EU in any meaningful way. Better no deal which honours are desire to leave the EU properly.”

    Ah Howard, now you really are opening a can of worms.

    Both deal and no deal honour the letter of the referendum result because we leave the EU.

    If you are changing the question to honouring the spirit of the decision, then you also reopen the question of just what that is? I argue that the outcome which best honours the spirit of the decision – not to be controlled by the EU – ,…… is to be a member of the EU, which gives us that control.

    So the best way to honour the spirit of the referendum is to ignore the result of the referendum. And this has always been a fundamental difficulty with how to proceed.

  41. @JAMESB

    Well I agree our democracy is imperfect, but surely you would give some weight to the fact that Leave won the referendum?

  42. JAMES E

    No- I mean’t Europe.

  43. LAB split gossip

    After his “ad-lib” at party conf has Starmer learnt that “revenge is a dish best served cold”

    Top part should be obvious by now to everyone but scroll down to the PS bit in Peston’s latest:

    https://www.itv.com/news/2019-02-11/may-and-corbyn-are-probably-more-aligned-on-brexit-than-any-other-issue-but-that-doesnt-mean-a-deal-can-be-done/

    CON Leave know another good saying: “He who laughs last, laughs longest”

    Hold it together Blue team the red’s are about to blow!

  44. DANNY

    Would that be the ame pattern we have seen since 2008, where wages overall have risen, but the richer half (or less) of the workforce has had real rises, while the lower half has nonetheless had cuts?

    That’s the opposite of what’s happened, incomes have grown most at the lower end of the distribution in the last few years, and over the decade. This is a matter of straightforward fact, and you can easily confirm it with a little research. I’m going to credit you with ignorance rather than a deliberate intent to post Iies, but it would really be best if you refrained from stating your opinions and feelings as if they were statistical truth. Go and read some ONS reports.

  45. @Garj
    ‘This is what particularly horrifies me. The Labour position is to effectively reduce the UK to the status of an absolute economic colony of the EU, in a permanent customs union with no exit mechanism, and an obligation under international treaty to follow much EU legislation without so much as a confirming vote in the HoC, but with the downsides of limited market access and vulnerability to being frozen out of sectors, all for the sake of staying just on the remain side of the conservative party. It’s a worse outcome than almost any other, but a large proportion of parliament seems to be intent on pursuing it regardless.’

    Well I agree it is not a great outcome, especially compared to Remaining; but when e.g. Farage suggested we would end up with ‘something like Norway’ why didn’t the Leave campaign point out in 2016 that this was a [email protected] idea?

    It’s another manifestation of the Leave campaign’s desire to be as unspecific as possible, such that options which were offered by various Leave leaders to the electorate as desirable end-states in 2016 are now decried by the same people as fatally flawed…

  46. CHARLES

    @”Personally I regard the Labour position, even if it were reached in full, as a foolish compromise. ”

    I would call it a foolish capitulation.

    It is worse than Remaining.

    I can only conclude that it is intended as a party political elephant trap.

  47. CHARLES

    @”Personally I regard the Labour position, even if it were reached in full, as a foolish compromise. ”

    I would call it a foolish capitulation.

    It is worse than Remaining.

    I can only conclude that it is intended as a party political elephant trap.

  48. GARJ

    @”It’s a worse outcome than almost any other, but a large proportion of parliament seems to be intent on pursuing it regardless”

    Yep-it really is as though they think we are bound to obey the Referendum & leave the EU & it doesn’t really matter if the way we leave is stupid & disadvantageous-provided we do so, a jump off the cliff or voluntary neutering is what the people wanted.

  49. @ BFR – Good write-up.

    As CMJ posted it does look like one segment is starting to realise they were duped:

    “Remain Labour who genuinely think Labour is pro Remain”

    UKPR best example is DANNY. Within LAB front bench, perhaps Starmer is best example.

    The question is will these guys forgive and forget or does Corbynmania go the same way as Clegg.

    As you pointed out, polling shows CON Remain view Corbyn as a bigger risk than Brexit and I’ve posted the 2015-2017 “flow” info that shows many left back then.

    Few people took Corbyn serious in 2017 GE – it was largely an ABC protest vote. Next time anyone voting for Corbyn is voting for the genuine risk of him as PM, not just to flick the V at May and CON!

    @ DANNY – IMHO the current trade deal we have with EU is cr4p (perhaps ALEC could repost all my comments on the “woeful and widening EU trade deficit” and “Vorsprung Durch Cheating”).

    Beyond EU then their focus is promote German exports and protect French famers – so pretty cr4p for UK.

    I’m pretty sure the UK-Swiss trade deal is now public (old news from Jan for those paying attention). Chile, Israel are public. Lots of others are very close.

    If your having trouble the concept of time and which day it is then I suggest using this link as your browser home page:

    https://www.labourleave.org.uk/

    Fox is having to leave it very late but still has:

    46d 10h 37m

1 7 8 9 10 11