The position in the polls remains much the same as the last time I updated – the Conservatives still have a substantial lead, though one that varies from pollster to pollster due to methodological differences. The figures also remain somewhat artificial given we know that a major event with the potential to transform the political weather (either Brexit going ahead, or Brexit being delayed) is looming upon the horizon. Perhaps the more interesting question is, therefore, what impact is that likely to have on the polls? Or perhaps more to the point, can polls tell us *anything* useful about what impact it would have on the polls?

Most of the polling that has set foot in this rather difficult territory has attempted to shed some light on what will happen if Boris Johnson ends up seeking a delay to Brexit.

Several polls have asked who people would blame if Brexit ended up being delayed, and as a rule they’ve tended to show that people wouldn’t blame Boris Johnson or, at least, that he would not be widely blamed by Conservative supporters or Brexiteers – the voters he needs to keep hold of. YouGov found 39% of people think a delay would be Boris Johnson’s fault to a large or moderate extent, 46% think it would bear little or none of the fault. Among Leave voters only 18% thought Johnson would bear significant blame. A ComRes poll found 34% think Johnson would bear much responsibility for a delay, 33% some responsibility and 22% no responsibility at all. Among leave voters only 19% thought he would bear much responsibility, 35% some, 37% none.

However, polls that have asked how people would vote if there was an election after a further delay to Brexit have invariably shown the Conservative party losing support and the Brexit party gaining it (for example, this ComRes poll from last month). A naive reading of that might be these two approaches are contradictory (the ones asking about blame suggest most people wouldn’t blame Boris, the ones asking hypothetical voting intention imply he would pay a heavy cost) – in reality they don’t. Even if most of his supporters wouldn’t blame Boris Johnson for an extension, if 1 in 5 Tories voters blamed him enough to defect to the Brexit party it severely damage the Conservatives’ electoral hopes.

I would urge some degree of caution on both these approaches though. We are asking people to imagine a rather vague hypothetical situation. A delay in Brexit could cover all sorts of different scenarios. Maybe Boris Johnson will apply for an extension, maybe he’ll resign and someone else will. Maybe he’d have done it willingly, maybe he’d have been forced into it by the Courts. More recently it’s been floated that he could even end up seeking an technical extension in order to deliver a deal. People’s reactions may be extremely different depending on the different circumstances. For now these uncertainties should put a question mark over any polls asking hypothetical questions about how the public think they would react to a delay – if political circumstances become clearer in the next week then perhaps, just perhaps, we’ll be in a better position to do useful polling on the issue.

In the meantime we are left to speculate. The questions I ask myself when trying to predict what the impact on public opinion are these. Can I imagine Boris Johnson seeking an extension and it NOT damaging him? Well, in certain circumstances I suppose I can, yes. On the other hand, can I imagine Boris Johnson having to seek an extension and it NOT giving Nigel Farage a boost?


1,843 Responses to “How much damage would a delay do to Boris Johnson?”

1 2 3 4 5 37
  1. The problem with the option leave with a deal is that it is all things to all people.
    So for me I could be persuaded and I know of others, to leave with a deal that left us in the customs union and single market. Others if it left us in the single market or customs union. Others a Canada plus type deal.
    At the same time some Brexit supporters would say at least one of those options is not really leaving

    Any poll is necessarily flawed unless it actually specifies the leave option they are talking about

  2. @trevors – re your 11.31am.

    It’s utterly meaningless. You completely failed to address any of the issues. You just seem to be thrashing about, chucking out any old nonsense that spring to your fingertips. You have made no attempt to address the substantive questions.

    I think I know where you are coming from.

  3. Garj,
    “I suppose most of the polling that people have paid attention to since the referendum has been of the ‘right/wrong to leave’ type. There’s quite a big difference between that kind of question, which is about looking back at a decision with hindsight, and a question like the one Comres used which is about what should happen now.”

    Maybe, maybe not. Yougov asked the question both ways on one survey I remember, presumably to test exactly this question. The results were pretty similar. On the basis of that result I concluded it really made no difference within the standard margin of error which way you asked it, either looking back or now.

    Bantams,
    “Once and if Brexit is done, whichever way it happens, most likely a deal now, will be accepted by the vast majority of the 2 groups representing leave.”

    The risk is that once brexit is done it will be rejected by both groups of leavers because it fails to deliver any of the touted benefits and causes a recession.

    Alec,
    ” Whether it is this week or next month, it really does seem very clear that those who assumed there would be no deal were wrong. ”

    Why? There has always been a deal, ever since May agreed it. Nothing has beeen said recently which suggests there are any new ideas not previously gone over, or that any new deal now would be materially different to one previously agreeable in talks but rejected by British factions outwith the actual talks.

    It is true May several times came back with something she called a new deal, but it wasnt really.

    The Trevors,
    ” NI will be a great place to invest for sure.”

    The chances of NI subsidies surviving past a deal getting implemented are about as big as those of English farmers for continuing to receive subsidies on the scale the EU has delivered.

  4. The Trevors,
    “Can you provide ANY examples (ideally developed nations) from ANY point in time (more recent the better of course) where whacking up taxes generated higher GDP?”

    just curious, but can you provide any examples from developed nations in recent times where they whacked up taxes at all, except in times of national economic crisis where GDP was falling anyway?

    Didnt Reagan slash taxes only to see tax revenue plummet?

  5. @Trevs – Kalas et al (2018) found that corporate income taxes, VAT and social security contributions all have a positive impact on GDP, based on studies of Serbia and Croatia 2007 – 2016. The VAT element was statistically significant, and excise taxes had a negative effect.

    The EPI in 2013 did a comprehensive analysis of US corporate taxes and growth rates from 1947 and found that higher rates did not impede corporate growth and that lowering rates did not boost growth.

    The IMF found in 2018 that raising taxes by broadening the tax base had a neutral or positive effect, while raising taxes by hiking rates was more negative.

    Widlmalm (2001) found that consumption taxes had a net positive effect on GDP while Anderson et al (1968) did not find a clear negative link between taxes and growth rates.
    Arnold (2008) found that income taxes tend to depress GDP while consumption taxes, notably those on fixed wealth and property, aided growth.

    It’s a complex picture, with issues of the tax base, method of tax, type of tax, and the marginal rates all competing. A good tax system aids growth, a bad one hampers growth, some tax is absolutely essential and society wouldn’t survive without it, overtaxing isn’t a great move, and inefficient use of tax isn’t too smart either.

    There are dozens of other studies out there if you want to have a look for yourself. Not quite sure why you need us to look for you?

  6. @Trevs – “I ask this because most LoCs seem to be Remainers and Remain press and campaign seem to focus almost exclusively on “lost GDP”, etc.”

    I think you are wrong on this as well.

    The economic case is important, but a bigger issue is the loss of global influence that will accompany leaving the EU. That was one of the primary reasons we joined in the first place, and the arguments haven’t changed.

  7. @ CAMBRIDGECOL – Some info on F+GG

    From page3

    “It is home to 25,400 Jews, who constitute almost 10% of the
    entire Jewish population of England and Wales, and 21.1%
    of the constituency”

    https://www.jpr.org.uk/documents/JPR.Where_Jewish_votes_may_matter_most.Guide_to_2015_General_Election.pdf

    Certainly a seat with “seat specific” factors (and hence good to see a poll on it). However, not a very representative seat and more generally we already know LDEMs have a very specific “niche” vote that has limited geographic appeal beyond London and “rich” suburbs.

    Perhaps if Margaret Hodge is deselected by her CLP she can join LDEM and stand in Hendon?

    I hope these female LAB/xLAB MPs get a lot of “air time” in a GE so folks more generally see who the real na5ty party is.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/07/four-female-labour-mps-hit-with-deselection-threats

  8. trevor warne et al

    I wonder – do you really think Labour is the nasty party?

  9. @TW – “I ask this because most LoCs seem to be Remainers and Remain press and campaign seem to focus almost exclusively on “lost GDP”, etc.”

    To counter the £350 million a week and other claims of how much better off we would be?

  10. Tony Connelly @ RTE reporting

    Tony Connelly
    ?
    @tconnellyRTE

    BREAKING: two senior EU sources say the main stumbling block to a deal has been removed with the DUP accepting the latest proposals on consent… Optimism a deal can now be done…
    483
    1:21 PM – Oct 16, 2019

  11. Question – if Johnson brings a deal back to parliament at weekend and HoC votes it down…does the Benn Act come into play, or, since he did actually have a deal agreed, does No Deal become the default?

  12. Will be interesting if the deal does make it to a vote and the ERG support the DUP in voting against it, will those ERG MP’s lose the Conservative whip?
    To avoid charges of hypocrisy and simple fair play I would have thought they would have to lose the whip

  13. @ ALEC – Fortunately I’m bored today so reading some of the drivel.

    “I think you are wrong on this as well.”

    Wow, really?!?! Quelle surprise :-) :-) :-)

    PS I’m fine with raising VAT and other forms of “broadening the tax base” (eg “windfall” taxes on utility companies that have abnormal profits due to “monopoly” power) but why would i waste time discussing “if it CAN’T move tax it, if it CAN move don’t” with you?

    I’d also say that a “race to the bottom” on corporation taxes is BAD for the World as a whole but seems to work for the individual country (see RoI, most of E.Europe, US, etc). IMF on that:

    https://blogs.imf.org/2019/07/15/corporate-tax-rates-how-low-can-you-go/

    Hopefully once UK has left EU then EU will finally get tax harmonisation through – possibly the “price” for a multi-billion bail out of RoI?!? ;)

    PPS I’m happy to help any company that wishes to move from Dublin to Belfast – one set-up already and a few already considering it. Once you’ve invested in building a “cookie cutter” then each subsequent cookie is cheaper and easier to cut!

  14. Another interesting nugget:

    JC apparently saying MP’s who vote for the deal if it comes to the HoC on Saturday WON’T have the whip removed. If true, it says everything about his true allegiance on Brexit.

  15. okay looked it up – MPs have to avote for a deal otherwise Johnson must request an extension.

    If bunch Labour MPs vote the deal through there could be fury.

  16. Hmm,
    R4 discussing the border between Norway and Swededen. They apparently reckon they only catch 6% of smuggled goods. man saying ‘organised smuggling is a huge problem’

  17. On the DUP.

    There is a very good journalist in NI called Sam McBride – who has written a book on the RHI scandal that deserves a good audience. The DUP are not pleased about the book. You can find out about Sam and his book here:

    https://twitter.com/SJAMcBride/status/1163898105869111296

    A thread on their current situation:

    https://twitter.com/TomMcTague/status/1184391109029617664

  18. Bantams

    “JC apparently saying MP’s who vote for the deal if it comes to the HoC on Saturday WON’T have the whip removed. If true, it says everything about his true allegiance on Brexit.”

    No it doesn’t. It says everything about the non-authoritarian nature of the Labour Party.

  19. @ ALEC – OK so perhaps run the CER model[1] and analysis yourself with Frankstein1 (F1) and Frankstein2 (F2) or allow it to pick it’s own Frankstein using regression analysis and solving for minimum error.

    You’ll see F2 gives a slightly (0.1%) worse performance than F1 if you use the same time period (so why change it?[2]). If you change the time period as well then

    you can make the “results” better or worse – depending on the answer you’re looking for

    There are many sayings for the “data mining” approach:

    “If you mine the data then you’ll eventually find f00l’s gold”

    “If you’re data mining then don’t be surprised when the roof collapses”

    Fundamentally though it is ENTIRELY the wrong approach, a legacy of Blair!te ne0liberalism perhaps?

    You need to consider each economy individually – look at it’s strengths (and build on those) and it’s weaknesses (and deal with those).

    Ne0liberalism no longer works but obviously the dinosaurs still roam academia and the (gr0up)”think tanks” that seem to have missed the asteroid hitting Earth in 2007-8 (financial crash that exposed the failure of the 40yr+ system that started with Reagan+Thatcher but was mutated by excessive influence of “capital” and lobby groups)

    PS I should add to my earlier list of how you can boost GDP.
    1/ Natural resources (and high commodity price for what you happen to have). UK has wind power potential but not a lot else.
    2/ High net immigration (problematic)
    3/ Empire (yikes, no thanks – still need to “rightsize” what’s left IMO)

    Those also help explain some countries outperformance (or underperformance if it goes the other way) at various times in history but not really something we could or should want to “copy+paste” IMO.

    [1] Links provided earlier and they even give you the dataset they use (although you could also use IMF or OECD data as well, Eurostat is easy to use but they don’t cover non-Europe)

    [2] That is the SUBSTANTIVE issue. If you kill off the old Frankstein and put together a new one without a VERY good reason then you lose all credibility in your analysis (which was flawed to begin with). The change they made to their “weightings” from F1 to F2 was HUGE (new head, new heart but same legs)

  20. All the talk of billion to Northern Ireland to get the DUP onside (£350 million per week, perhaps?), and cries of ‘No Surrender’ still present in modern politics does produce a wry smile.

    Carrot and stick. Carrot and stick.

  21. Anthony Wells take on the Comres poll, put’s it better than I could

    https://twitter.com/anthonyjwells/status/1184393436037832706
    ‘For the record, the ComRes poll doing the rounds today is presented as Leave 50%, Remain 42%.

    This would be a very unusual result, as almost every poll that’s asked a straight Remain/Leave question since mid-2017 has round Remain ahead. See the links here

    The reason is that the ComRes poll was *actually* Deal 30%, No Deal 20%, Remain 42%, and the two leave options are added up.

    This is far less surprising, when polls split out different options like they they do often find the Leave options sum to more than the Remain ones.

    The reason is largely that some people who say they back leaving with a deal, will back remain if asked a straight remain/leave question.’

  22. PS Obvious one I missed, boost GDP by:

    4/ Creating an “enabling environment” that encourages innovation and investment

    That’s really just a mix of the original two approach (increase spending and cut taxes) but with a more “proactive” approach (eg Green QE).

    As i said back whenever that was, that is probably a bit too LoC for CON and once you admit you can use QE for other stuff then you open the door to renationalising everything so sadly that is why CON won’t be opening that door :(

    Feels a bit deja vue all over again today so I’ll try to get to polling.

  23. “I ask this because most LoCs seem to be Remainers and Remain press and campaign seem to focus almost exclusively on “lost GDP”, etc.”

    Good undistributed middle there.

  24. Some Twitter creativity and comments that caught my attention (regards DUP bung from Westminster to enable Brexit):

    “Yet apparently its the EU that are corrupt…”


    So Johnson has won
    The breakup of the UK
    His own dismissal
    #BrexitHaiku

    “The Cash My Father Wore…”

    :D

  25. @ Statgeek

    You’re right about Westminster likely bunging NI but if it’s to be believed the EU and Ireland are also in the frame here as part of the deal being discussed.

  26. @Trevs – aside from the gratuitous insults, I can pretty much agree with your 1.40pm post. I suspect we share a similar view on those topics.

    Your 2.06pm – it seems a bit repetitive, to be honest. We all know that model output depend on what data you put in. That really isn’t rocket science.

    The IFS are independent and are trying to look at what might have happened if we didn’t vote leave, and they have used a transparent approach with all their data input listed. Of course, if they did something different, the result would be different, but they’ve taken the most appropriate data – in their view – and come out with an analysis complete with uncertainty estimates and some obvious caveats, and sense checked this with actual data.

    It’s a pretty decent analysis, and nothing you’ve said comes remotely close to challenging their conclusions. Voting to leave has damaged our economy – as you yourself say. The IFS have attempted to quantify that damage. I don’t really see this as very controversial.

  27. Hilary Benn not denying that the remainers may try to take control of the order paper on Saturday and force a vote on a second referendum but then prevent any vote taking place on any deal that may have been agreed. Toxic if true!!

  28. @ EOTW – “To counter the £350 million a week”

    Which is of course much nearer to £400 million a week (gross unadjusted) which is very close to the £20.5bn that was approved by May+Hammond (and would be even higher if Saj gets his budget approved)

    I’m looking forward to seeing the Boris blimp flying during the GE campaign but you could you ask them to edit the 350 to 400 please ;)

  29. @ DANNY – I’m tempted to reply to your Reagan comment (a good and new one) but firstly could you help me out.

    Quite a while back you posted one of those “Frankenstein” analysis that showed UK was squidillions worse off due to Brexit and IIRC the weighting for US was 50%ish

    Could you be a luv and repost the link. I’m doing my best to “torture” the data so that it will “confess to anything” but even manipulating the dates, excluding “dodgy” countries on an ad hoc basis best I can get to is 40% weight for US

    It could be simply a case of “revisions” to data (a problem plaguing ONS right now) but if I know the answer I’m looking for then it is easier to “find” the question to ask the data set.

    PS Teaser quick answer (payment in advance). Reaganomics (1980s US) was pre “globalisation” so l4ffer curves were not yet “global”. if you provide the link requested then happy to explain in further detail BUT please note the “global l4ffer curve” hypothesis is not one any country will blatantly blag about and it certainty one IMF etc will not want to encourage (but looking at Real countries around the World then it clearly an approach that has been adopted successful for the individual country involved)

  30. @ALEC

    Whether it is this week or next month, it really does seem very clear that those who assumed there would be no deal were wrong

    My basis for no deal being most probable is two fold. Firstly pure incompetence of the executive attempting to game a win politically and secondly that it suits EU to have a no deal if they could not get the WA a per agreement with May.

    I have constantly said that in order to get a deal someones red lines need to be broken at this point whilst we keep being told there is a deal, Nothing has come up thus far. The reality is that we have only had progress when we can kick the can down the road. We cannot kick the can down the road either politically or technically so you are correct his is the best opportunity for a deal but you need a deal that can get through the commons and again I am not sure that there is a majority for it

    We keep announcing a deal before it has happened and the default is no deal. It has been announced as done at least three time in the last two weeks and off again.

    I have said what I would do if I was a leaver (throw the DUP under the bus and) put the NI only backstop to a NI electorate in a referendum

    without that I suspect we will have lots of stalling and oh is almost agreed.

    Even TREVOR WARNE collectives number crunching say that Boris will be short.

  31. @ALEC

    Whether it is this week or next month, it really does seem very clear that those who assumed there would be no deal were wrong

    My basis for no deal being most probable is two fold. Firstly pure incompetence of the executive attempting to game a win politically and secondly that it suits EU to have a no deal if they could not get the WA a per agreement with May.

    I have constantly said that in order to get a deal someones red lines need to be broken at this point whilst we keep being told there is a deal, Nothing has come up thus far. The reality is that we have only had progress when we can kick the can down the road. We cannot kick the can down the road either politically or technically so you are correct his is the best opportunity for a deal but you need a deal that can get through the commons and again I am not sure that there is a majority for it

    We keep announcing a deal before it has happened and the default is no deal. It has been announced as done at least three time in the last two weeks and off again.

    I have said what I would do if I was a leaver (throw the DUP under the bus and) put the NI only backstop to a NI electorate in a referendum

    without that I suspect we will have lots of stalling and oh is almost agreed.

    Even TREVOR WARNE collectives number crunching say that Boris will be short.

  32. According to Donald Tusk – the President of the EU Commission which is a group of European ministers heading different executive departments in the EU – “everything will be clear” at about midnight.

    So, not long to wait.

  33. DANNY

    Hmm,
    R4 discussing the border between Norway and Swededen. They apparently reckon they only catch 6% of smuggled goods. man saying ‘organised smuggling is a huge problem’

    The thing you have to ask first about smuggling is ‘why’? People will only smuggle goods if there is enough money to be made to make it worth the effort. Take away the profit margin and people just won’t do it.

    In Norway you pay about £1 in taxes on a pint of beer, in Sweden it’s more like 15p. On wine the figures are closer to £1.20 and £3.50. Further opportunity for the black market in alcohol is provided by the fact that you can only buy it in state controlled ‘Vinmonopolet’ which close at 6pm on weekdays, 3pm on Saturdays, and don’t open at all on Sundays.

    This is why almost everything smuggled across the Norway/Sweden border is alcohol and tobacco (which is subject to similar pricing differentials). Much of it is smuggled by ordinary Norwegians in search of cheaper booze, but there’s a lot of organised crime as well. NI has had its fair share of smuggling despite it and Eire being part of the same customs area, notably in the form of laundered fuel, which became such an issue that in the mid-2000s it accounted for something like half of the diesel in NI.

    If the UK and EU agree a comprehensive FTA then that will remove the incentive for smuggling most goods at a stroke. There will still be opportunity if we continue to levy different rates of excise on things like alcohol, tobacco, and fuel (or apply different rates of VAT to everything else), but that’s true regardless of whether we’re in the EU. The smuggling risk really only arises if the UK charges different tarriffs on certain goods from the CU, which might provide an opportunity for unscrupulous types to try to sneak them into the supply chain via NI. That kind of smuggling simply doesn’t happen across the Norway/Sweden border because it’s a lot of hassle and not very profitable, and you’d think it would be relatively managable via policing, but the EU doesn’t want to agree anything in NI which could even theoretically weaken SM protections so they’re demanding a watertight solution.

  34. NICKP

    @”I wonder – do you really think Labour is the nasty party?”

    Corbyn’s LP ?-Yes.

  35. Sorry – Tusk is the Council president. (Junker is the Commission president).

  36. BANTAMS

    @”Hilary Benn not denying that the remainers may try to take control of the order paper on Saturday and force a vote on a second referendum but then prevent any vote taking place on any deal that may have been agreed. Toxic if true!!”

    REmainers in HoC need to be aware that there may be a limit to the perceived credibility of their actions in Parliament.

  37. @STATGEEK

    I think someone else mentioned that a bung to the DUP in exchange for voting for the deal is unlikely to work because the DUP could vote for the deal and then find a subsequent CON budget (or Government) voted down.

  38. Carfrew
    ” I’m afraid I can’t support the Villa. PUSB”

    Sorry. No insult intended. I remembered there was another Villa fan on here, and when you made your post about Mercia I thought it must be you.

  39. NASTY PARTY

    Kind of ridiculous that LAB is being painted as the racist party when all the polling evidence (and history of CON govt policies) shows that CON supporters and MPs are far more likely to have racist attitudes than LAB ones.

    Most of the anti-Semitism ‘problem’ in the Labour Party has been talked up by fanatical pro-Israel MPs who balk at the fact that a Corbyn govt would recognise Palestine as a state. A good example is Margaret Hodge who was personally responsible for half of all the anti-Semitism complaints to the party – it turned out that nearly all were spurious.

  40. I worry about relying on Juries to decide cases when according to IPSOS Mori Boris Johnson is more generally truthful that Jeremy Corbyn!

    Tells Truth

    In General: BJ 22% JC 19% —– About Brexit BJ 23% JC 15%

    However perhaps I should be more sanguine as 48% think BJ doesn’t and 53% think JC doesn’t: we’re just a cynical bunch!
    :-)

  41. @PETE B

    It’s me! Up the Villa! I even won £60 on them going up.

  42. @ PTRP – “Even TREVOR WARNE collectives number crunching say that Boris will be short”

    Probably is not WILL. I don’t have a crystal ball. It will be very close.

    DUP are essential (for their 10+Hoey and the removal of the fig leaf that many Spartans hide behind) but it will also require some LAB.

    If you actually read my post you’ll also note I split out the 21+Rudd+Boles into two rough groups but since many of them were exMinisters/cabinet and many of them are “retiring” then lots of “maybes” in there (either due to lack of “track record” on voting or tricky to allocate between “couldn’t give a damn, f**k Boris (Greening) v honourable discharge (Soames)”

  43. The Trevors,
    “PS Obvious one I missed, boost GDP by:
    4/ Creating an “enabling environment” that encourages innovation and investment ”

    But how would we do that, Trevors, when intervention is anathema to British governments, especially conservative ones.

    “Quite a while back you posted one of those “Frankenstein” analysis that showed UK was squidillions worse off due to Brexit and IIRC the weighting for US was 50%ish”

    I dont even know what you are talking about, never mind find a link which might once have been topical but isnt now! Frankenstein seems to have crept into the debate recently, dont know why. Is a squidillion a flock of squid? Possibly marching up the beaches?

    Passtherockpleae,
    “We cannot kick the can down the road either politically or technically”

    Oh I think we can!

    Garj,
    “This is why almost everything smuggled across the Norway/Sweden border is alcohol and tobacco”

    The man said garlic is a big thing. You can make a handsome profit on a van load of garlic. I would point out that the smaller the marginal profit per item, the more serious big business in smuggling is where the profit is. But surely, we are talking about tariffs of 10% or more, which is quite a lot. You can bet the Irish will connive on all of it. (because they dont want brexit at all)

    “If the UK and EU agree a comprehensive FTA then that will remove the incentive for smuggling most goods at a stroke. ”

    But we havn’t have we? The point of the backstop was that if no deal is agreed which would make it superfluous, then the backstop will apply. Thats why it is a backstop, and indeed why EU and May argued it didnt matter, because it would eventually become irrelevant. No one should see it as a problem UNLESS they expect there will be no deal such as you suggest.

  44. @ COLIN – Indeed. From Ipsos Mori

    “..41% support another referendum with Remain on the ballot (44% oppose)”

    and to test LDEM “ceiling”:

    “30% support Brexit being cancelled without a referendum and 53% oppose”

    So for those that seem to think democracy should be conducted via opinion polls then NO new ref and NO to Revoke.

    of course voters are just like MPs so also say NO to No Deal, although that is getting closer (changes from Aug’19 in brackets)

    “40% (+3) support Britain leaving the EU with no deal being agreed and 43% (-3) oppose”

    One clear winner though:

    “44% (+1).. support an immediate General Election and 27% oppose (-5)”

    Sadly FTPA “logic” (sic) means no one wants a GE unless they can win it (2x fails at “Route1” and with so many MPs gripping onto their seats then I don’t think the maths is there for “Route2” either, although fingers crossed SNP make a break for it!?)

  45. @JiB

    I expect Labour to move the agenda on to the Future Arrangements ASAP, and use that as an excuse to avoid a General Election. The Tories will be caged by FTPA until 2021/22, even though Brexit will have been delivered!

    This may not be original (I don’t have the willpower to go back though all of TW’s old postings to see if he has already suggested it) but surely, once Brexit is delivered (if it is) then, if Labour continue to block an election, Boris can resign as PM and ask the Queen to send for Jeremy Corbyn. After the Labour Queen’s Speech is voted down he could then call a VoNC as would be his right as the new LOTO. We would then have 14 days before a General Election would have to be called.

  46. NASTY PARTY

    For those that are interested, a quarter of Brits describe themselves as racially prejudiced – quite shocking when you consider that there may be many undeclared ones too.

    CON supporters are roughly twice as likely to self-identify as racist than LAB supporters: http://natcen.ac.uk/news-media/press-releases/2017/september/new-report-uncovers-extent-of-racial-prejudice-in-britain/

  47. YG Wales tabs are out and they also split by “region” (although I don’t have that level of detail in my model some might find it useful – CHRIS IN CARDIFF??)

    Looking at the x-breaks then LAB “loyalty” is 53% with switchers as follows:

    LDEM:19%
    BXP: 11%
    PC: 9%
    Green: 5%
    CON: 3%

    CON loyalty higher at 67% with balance breaking roughly 2:1 BXP v Remain parties (ie 2x more to gain from removing BXP from the game than going after Remainers, even before you risk losing “loyal” CON)

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/m1aqst74bd/Results_WelshBarometer_October2019_w.pdf

  48. @ DANNY – “I dont even know what you are talking about, never mind find a link which might once have been topical but isnt now!’

    Your right of course. Not topical, old, debunked rubbish. I try to avoid reading ALEC’s drivel as well but he does tend to bang on and on and on about a single point sometimes and sadly I made the mistake of engaging with him y’day.

    Sadly since you can’t help then not much point me reading your drivel either. Back down to the core 3-5 folks (and odd occasional poster) for me.

  49. TW

    Thanks.

    I was thinking really of the “shy” Remainers who hide behind ( and promote) Ref2 as a lifebelt last chance to remain , I expect there are genuine democrats in the Ref2 group too-and I find it very hard to argue against Ref2 on those grounds.But I wonder what the balance really is ?

1 2 3 4 5 37