Saturday’s Times had the latest YouGov voting intention results, which were CON 40%(nc), LAB 42%(+1), LDEM 8%(nc).

It also had results from a poll asking about the media allegations about Jeremy Corbyn having met a Czech spy in the 1980s, which clearly illustrated why such things make very little difference.

To start with, most people pay very little attention to the day-to-day soap opera of politics. 40% of people said they had been completely unaware of the story until taking the survey, a further 31% said they had noticed it, but hadn’t really paid it any attention. That leaves less than a third who had actually taken it in. Obviously things that no one notices have no real impact, especially since those people who do watch political news stories will disproportionately be those who are interested in politics and have firm political allegiances.

Asked if they thought the allegations were true, the results were as you’d expect. A large majority of Labour voters thought that Jeremy Corbyn probably had a perfectly innocent meeting with someone he thought was a diplomat, and that he probably didn’t give any information to any Czech agents. The only people who believed it were Conservatives. This is typical of such allegations: people view them through the prism of their existing political allegiences. If it’s an allegation against a party you support, you are likely to view it with scepticism and give the politician concerned the benefit of the doubt, if it’s an allegation against a party you dislike then it will confirm all the negative things you thought already.

Finally, YouGov asked if the spy allegations and the way Jeremy Corbyn had responded to them had changed people’s opinions of Jeremy Corbyn at all. Only 8% of people said it had made them think more negatively about him (and they were mostly Tories to begin with). 6% said it made them think better of Corbyn (and they were mostly Labour voters to begin with). A hearty 64% said it made no difference at all.

Full results for the voting intention are here, and the Corbyn results are here.


1,679 Responses to “Why the Corbyn spy allegations made no difference to public opinion”

1 2 3 4 34
  1. NEIL J

    Precisely. Why is the press watchdog allowing this to happen?

  2. R HUCKLE
    “Labours new stance on a customs union with the EU is sensible and I think this is where Theresa May really wants to be. I am not convinced that May will be unhappy with losing votes in Parliament that mean she has to negotiate a customs agreement with the EU.”

    Agreed, the fun part will be seeing how she gets there, and how she sells lost votes in the HoC as a victory. She has had months of warning that Lab were heading to this position and has wasted every opportunity to nip round the back and beat them to it.

    It’s like watching two of the warships that took about six weeks apiece to get to the Falklands trying to play conkers, or (to use an analogy from the only sport I have ever understood) watching Eddie Charlton spend twenty five minutes lining up an easy red, trickling it at a snail’s pace towards the pocket, only to watch it’s momentum die about a half inch from its target, and then watch Cliff Thorburn doing exactly the same thing.

    If Ww2 had been conducted like this we’d still be fighting it now. Mind you, the Brexit Bunch behave as though we were, or at least as if they wished we were.

  3. Alex,
    “To me, this had the smell of a concerted big hit, with mutliple news organisations and Tory MPs – even the PM – piling in.”

    Yes. And therefore the question was why. It would appear the story only had legs until it could be investigated, so either the people who started it knew it would fizzle out for lack of facts, or were themselves misled. It is often said the quality of newspapers has fallen simply for lack of staff to investigate stories, and they are much more reliant on simply repeating what they have been given.

    If this was a tory plot (I cant see it as a labour plot), there must be some reason for it now. Presumably they see a crisis coming and felt distracting Corbyn would be useful. Either the EU WA itself, party ructions because of it, or a full blown election as a result.

    I see advanatage here for the ever vigilant Russian secret services, in adding more fuel to the divisions in British politics. An attack which strengthens the beliefs of both sides and therefore makes a concensus soution to Brexit that bit more impossible. Something which tends to slur politicians generally once again. An obvious observation, that the allegations stem from what at least once were Russian controlled sources.

    Re the survey, with such a large number of the least politically committed not even having heard the story, difficult to to be definitive on how ordinary voters reacted. Though looking at the figures, they only divide by lab/lib/con supporters and not the other/dont know/etc. So I might be jumping to conclusions that it is the most politically interested who are aware of the story.

  4. JRM and other extreme Brexiters like Nadine Dorries have been found to be making misleading statements about EU “protectiionism” and poor countries.

    https://twitter.com/GeorgePeretzQC?s=09

  5. Very funny “cake” cartoon in The Times featuring Boris & Corby :-)

  6. GARJ

    Here is a link to some of the UK and EU involvement with the WTO. There is likely to be a lot of work done and making trade deals may not be easy.

    https://tradebetablog.wordpress.com/2018/02/13/grandfathering-eu-ftas/

  7. @ SAM / PTRP – Sorry for any confusion. I did not mean EC/EU27 would react directly to Corbyn’s speech – I meant indirectly. Clearly moving Corbyn from his version of ‘cake’ to BINO would be easier than moving May’s version of cake to their preferred outcome. In the middle is continued procrastination from UK side which gives them the ability to dictate BINO as the only possible solution – which they do via c49 in the WA (ie NI border).

    I don’t see this as a partisan comment – Corbyn has strengthened EU’s hand, no two ways about it. May now has to get this over and dealt with. She has to have a challenging vote in HoC (eg NC5 in trade bill) to move on. EC will start dictating the outcome so if we (by which I mean UK parliament) wants a say in the Brexit we get we can’t keep kicking the can down the road.

    Amendments to Trade Bill with signatories here:
    https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2017-2019/0122/amend/trade_rm_rep_0223.1-7.html

    Leaks from EC’s Weds Treaty update suggest they have strengthened demands. Although I take everything I read in the press with a pinch of salt, hard to see why EC would not exploit this opportunity – if I was them I’d be doing exactly what they are doing.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/27/eu-position-on-irish-border-to-test-uk-cabinet-unity-on-brexit

  8. @ FROSTY – There are several amendments to Trade Bill. “A” Customs union is NC5. CON signatures:
    Soubs
    Morgan
    Wollaston
    Djanogly (since got cold feet)
    S.Hammond (also getting cold feet)
    Allen
    Lefroy
    Neill

    In other amendments some other names crop up: Clarke, Grieve, Sandbach. That seems to be the confusion between 8 and 11 CON rebel names.

    Maybe WB or a lawyer can help explain the difference between NC1 and NC5 – seem pretty similar to me.

    Not all amendments are voted on and amendments can be pulled, signatures can be persuaded, etc.

    However, I would agree a lot more CON MPs are probably pro-EU and their loyalty to May is largely due to seeing SMogg as much worse. The difficult decision for CON-Remain is:
    – CON would probably lose power in a new GE
    – Corbyn is not Blair
    – Corbyn’s Brexit policy is not Remain, his cake is BINO+ (Turkey+)

    Now if Umunna was LAB leader and/or LAB policy was to revoke+remain and/or polls had CON with a strong chance of winning a GE then they might well be more willing to take May (and what is perceived as her hostage takers) on.

    The real question is does anyone really see BINO+ as either:
    – possible (ie EU will allow cherry picking and UK influence on their trade deals – we can see Turkey as clear example that won’t happen)
    – anywhere near as good as Remain (for Remainers) or WTO (Plan B for Leavers).

    We need some much better polling questions. I’ve posted the YouGov live poll before that showed quite a strong preference for WTO over BINO. Of course n=643 polls in HoC are the most important but general electorate view useful as it might end up coming back to the electorate in a ref on terms or snap GE (low probability but possibe)

  9. When people like you, you can get away with things that would utterly damn those who are less well liked.

    Since the election transformed Corbyn into national treasure status, the many skeletons in his closet look like fun Halloween jokes.

    Yet, last year, even up to and including the local elections, he was a joke.

    He does, however, need someone whispering in his ear, “Remember, you are but a man.” Because all politicians lose their popularity – and his collapse may be as sudden as May’s when it comes.

  10. I saw Stephen Hammond on DP yesterday lunch-time, his feet seemed quite warm to me at that time. Has the political snow affected his circulation since then?

  11. @Trevor Warne:

    I agree with your analysis: it is only Corbyn keeping Brexit going, although not in the ostensible way of him supporting it, but because he deters Tory defections.

    It is probably impossible to fine tune the polling. You can get a majority for staying in the Single Market, which would swing the other way for questions about the EU legislating for us.

    “Do you want to stay in a Customs Union?” is very different when you add “even though the UK will get the burden and not the benefit of EU trade deals?” The real question you are embarking on a negotiation of uncertain destination – what is your priority? Do you start the negotiation with the idea of walking away or throwing in your hand if the EU refuses to budge?

    This is essentially the nature of voting for Brexit. And would have been the nature of a Scottish vote for independence, except the UK would actually have come to the negotiating table, so it would all have been much better for the Scots.

    In my view, the real question is which way public opinion breaks when the EU closes the net – which could be as early as tomorrow. Does it go for defiance? Or, as Remainers hope, will the public blame Leave for starting the venture with too much optimism.

    For my part, I think Brexit is dead in the water. A house divided on itself must fall – and most of the Commons have done everything they can to convince the EU that they can keep upping their demands and put off actual negotiations.

  12. SAM

    Oh, I don’t doubt that things like grandfathering over the EU’s trade deals could be very tricky, not least because the other countries involved might want to renegotiate. For my part I wouldn’t have a major issue with the Labour plan, I agree with the basic argument that the EU has more clout in trade discussions than we’ll manage on our own, but it’s even less realistic and more unacceptable to the EU than the Tory one. There’s no way they’ll allow us to continue to have a meaningful say in rule making (a veto) while not being a full member, nor will they allow us to remain in the CU and associated with the SM while doing away with things like freedom of movement and avoiding ongoing payments. A comprehensive free trade agreement in the Canadian or Ukranian style is much more achievable and realistic.

    Much as Barnier and pals make noise about not cherry-picking too, the WA highlights medicines, agriculture and food standards as areas where we’d need to have alignment to avoid issues in NI, and as far as I’m concerned it would be very sensible for the UK to sign up to the EU’s standards on all three. They could easily give us some sort of membership of the European Medicines Agency for example, much as the EEA countries have today, and it would be foolish for us to try to construct our own regulatory regime. It might mean accepting the ECJ’s jurisdiction in that area and carrying on with payments into its budget, but I’m no headbanger so I don’t see a problem with that. Sure, we’ll probably have some federalist saying ‘impossible’ at such a suggestion, but it really isn’t.

  13. When you’re talking about how splendid WTO rules will be instead of remaining in a single market for services, it might be worth ruminating on Sir Martin Donnelly’s words today and then contemplating this data:

    In 2015

    – The economic output of the service industries was worth £1.3 trillion, 80% of all UK economic output.

    – Manufacturing output was worth £162 billion, 10% of the total.

    – Construction output was worth £102 billion, 6% of the total.

    Employment by industry is broadly in-line with output. In 2014:

    • The service industries employed 23.8 million people, 85% of UK workers

    • Manufacturing employed 2.4 million people, 8% of the total

    • The construction industry employed 1.3 million people, 4% of the total

    Talking about how splendid it will be that we can kill our agriculture industry by importing cheap lamb is economically irrelevant unless you have a narrative of how you can replace the integrated single market that serves 85% of workers and 80% of economic output.

    This is the story that Brexiteers have utterly failed to even start writing.

  14. It was a mistake to use the word “spy” instead of “informer”.

  15. I don’t suppose the intervention from Sir Martin Donnelly, permanent secretary at Fox’s international trade department until last year, will set off any earthquakes, but his comments are pretty devastating and it’s hard to argue that he doesn’t know what he’s tallkng about.

    And he’s got a lively turn of phrase:

    “You’re giving up a three-course meal, the depth and intensity of our trade relationship across the European Union and partners now, for the promise of a packet of crisps in the future, if we manage to do trade deals in the future outside the EU which aren’t going to compensate for what we’re giving up.”

    And:

    “The challenge if we choose not to stay in the single market, is can we negotiate equal access in all those areas of services without agreeing to obey the same rules as everybody else?

    I’m afraid I think that’s not a negotiation, that is something for a fairy godmother. It’s not going to happen.”

  16. JOSEPH

    Corbyn is the UK’s version of Trump: populist, extremely divisive, makes a lot of unrealistic promises, attacks the press if they criticise or question him, and his supporters will forgive past misdeeds which really ought to have rendered him unfit for office.

  17. Commie informer, pls, and they should have mentioned Venezuela more. And cake…

  18. @Garj

    “makes a lot of unrealistic promises”

    ——–

    Lol, who made the u-turns in the GE last year?…

  19. GARJ

    @”Corbyn is the UK’s version of Trump: populist, extremely divisive, makes a lot of unrealistic promises, attacks the press if they criticise or question him,”

    I was thinking the same thing as I watched his rambling speech yesterday.

  20. @Garj

    “and his supporters will forgive past misdeeds which really ought to have rendered him unfit for office.”

    ——–

    Whose supporters forgive the u-turns and the comedy if their GE campaign?

  21. corbyn = trump
    corbyn = “an informer”

    give the partizan mud slinging a rest please.

  22. CARFREW

    Only goes to further prove my point. Trump’s opponents found him very difficult to deal with too.

    CHRIS RILEY

    Like COLIN says, there isn’t a single market in Europe for services. The areas where there really isn’t one are in the professional services, things like law and architecture where each nation has its own systems and qualifications. My suspicion is that those are the kinds of services we export most to the EU, so they may find that the situation is no worse for them than it is at present. Financial services is probably the big one that might be impacted as far as we’re concerned, so a lot will depend on what kind of deal on equivalence might be cooked up.

    On goods, where there very much is a single market, we’re the EU27’s second biggest market, after the US. This is the interesting thing – we export services into the EU which don’t particularly benefit from the SM, they export goods back to us which do. The equation isn’t quite as simple as them being half of our exports and us being a tenth or so of theirs.

  23. Colin,
    “CHRIS RILEY @” a single market for services,” It doesn’t exist.”

    I am not sure thats true. It might not formally exist, but the other provisions all make exchanging services far more natural when a free market exists in goods. It will suffer if trade in goods suffers, the question is how much. It is highly likely that the EU will impose barriers to services, so the opportunities for cross border trade will be reduced.

  24. @Garj

    “Only goes to further prove my point. Trump’s opponents found him very difficult to deal with too.”

    ——–

    That reply completely dodges what I said. You’re making no sense at all, criticising Corbyn for what your own side do.

  25. @Garj

    “Like COLIN says, there isn’t a single market in Europe for services. The areas where there really isn’t one are in the professional services, things like law and architecture where each nation has its own systems and qualifications. My suspicion is that those are the kinds of services we export most to the EU, so they may find that the situation is no worse for them than it is at present. Financial services is probably the big one that might be impacted as far as we’re concerned, so a lot will depend on what kind of deal on equivalence might be cooked up.”

    ——–

    Yes, exactly, in all that word salad, you cannot evade the point which is that if we leave the EU they might erect some barriers to services we don’t have now.

  26. What i think is interesting is the sudden change of tone from establishment voices wrt to Corbyn – with the CBI and the financial times bigging him up after the customs union announcement.
    Chuck in the fact that the EU would very likely prefer team corbyn to team May (and in the latter case I use the word “team” very loosely) – and you have a sense of some quite powerful forces reconciling themselves to a corbyn led government as being the least worst option.
    A similar process happened with blair in the mid 90s – you just sensed ground was shifting in the establishment consensus.

  27. I think that the “Double-O Corbyn” story actually helps him in the long run. The reason is that it’s such obvious nonsense that it will make the right-wing press seem less credible when they publish more legitimate criticisms of him.

  28. @Reggieside

    Business knows that alongside their EU concerns, the buying power of the young is getting trashed by poor wages and disposable income. On top of which because can’t afford to buy homes, with the extra stimulus they would normally provide in terms of white goods etc.

  29. @Reggieside:

    I think we are on the last lap of “the establishment” (in the broad sense) overturning the Brexit referendum.

    To suppose that they cannot deal with Corbyn similarly is optimistic. Labour MPs are behind Corbyn with the same sincerity as they voted for Article 50. They are just waiting for something to turn up.

    I think what Brexit shows is that you cannot do something truly revolutionary without capturing a reliable majority in the Commons. Corbyn will fall to that logic too. How long will it take for the same business voices that are allied to the EU in the Brexit debates to bring their weight to bear for a soft-Corbyn rather than a hard-Corbyn, and then it turns out that a soft-Corbyn means no-Corbyn?

    Anyway, Brexit might even fall by the end of the week, decent chance by the end of next month, and certainly by the Autumn. But its effect on UK politics will be chaotic.

  30. GARJ

    I agree entirely with the first paragraph of your reply to me. Ian Dunt’s analysis of the Corbyn speech to which I linked earlier (previous thread?) raises the possibility that Corbyn does not want a veto and may accept free movement subject to limitations that are currently allowed.

    As to your next paragraph I am unsure. I have read and forgotten a lot of information about Brexit. Sorry, but I am too lazy and busy to go and check what I now say. I suspect regulatory alignment is simply not enough to prevent border custom controls any more than a customs union. At Brexit the UK starts as a third country. Everything that applied before no longer applies. As OLDNAT said there will be rules of origin certification, there will be establishment checks (some waiving as a response to previous membership) and Border Inspection posts. There will be new VAT arrangements that affect cash flow.

  31. Carfew: “Business knows that alongside their EU concerns, the buying power of the young is getting trashed by poor wages and disposable income. On top of which because can’t afford to buy homes, with the extra stimulus they would normally provide in terms of white goods etc.”

    That would be the same business that prefers pre-trained migrant labour to keep down the wages of young and avoid training them?

    I think it is a long time since British business saw much beyond the immediate profit, and actually looked to their place in a wider national economic infrastructure. They are not Japanese in their outlook. They are not even German. They really don’t see much beyond the next dividend payout and the opportunity to cash out by selling their business to venture capital.

  32. @Joseph

    “That would be the same business that prefers pre-trained migrant labour to keep down the wages of young and avoid training them?”

    ——–

    No, it would be the business that sees profits getting challenged in the future as the demographics change.

    They can get away with trashing incomes in the shorter term, but the point is in the longer term that can lead to reduced profits.

  33. DANNY

    @” It might not formally exist, but the other provisions all make exchanging services far more natural when a free market exists in goods.”

    Nope.

    It does “formally exist”.with exceptions.

    But it doesn’t work in practice. Diversity of Service,& Professional Qualifications are still problematic . National barriers exist.

    https://financialobserver.eu/poland/the-single-market-is-difficult-for-services/

  34. CARFREW

    It’s not my own side, I’m usually a Lib Dem voter, I just disagree with them on Europe now, and May ran an incompetent campaign. That’s beside the point though. Corbyn is not similar to Trump because he shares policy positions with him, or because he’s as deplorable a human being, he’s similar to him because he uses the same populist campaign playbook.

    As for services, they might. I was only responding to CHRIS RILEY’s claim that the single market is for services and that it covers 80% of the UK’s economic output, which it isn’t and doesn’t. The sectoral analysis the government produced would make for interesting reading, if they had released it to the public.

  35. COLIN

    It was a mistake to use the word “spy” instead of “informer”.

    I haven’t read all the stories, but I doubt they used either. Lawyers would have been all over the articles to check that nothing was said about Corbyn that might give rise to a libel case and either accusation would be actionable (even ‘informant’ might be pushing it). As the witless Mr Bradley found out, just because it’s politics doesn’t mean you can say whatever you want.

    That said, one of the more amusing quirks about this whole episode is how both sides have spent a lot of time proclaiming the difference between ‘diplomat’ and ‘spy’. A diplomat being someone who goes to foreign countries to collect information for their government, while a spy collects information for their government in foreign countries[1]. Some spies may operate completely separate from diplomatic cover or may commit sabotage or something, but that’s not remotely what is happening here. Whether Corbyn ‘knew’ the ‘diplomat’ was a ‘spy’ is literally meaningless – there’s no real difference.

    [1] And it’s always been like this. Where would Tudor historians be without all those dispatches to Spain and Venice?

  36. @Garj

    “It’s not my own side, I’m usually a Lib Dem voter”

    ——

    Lol, like that makes all the difference. Did you not see how keen they were to adopt the Tory manifesto when in power?

    We know what you were trying to say about Corbyn, about “unrealistic promises” and stuff, the point is this also applies to other parties and, dear God, especially to the LDs! Still, you’re an LD and still traumatised by the scale of the betrayal so one expects the delusion…

  37. @Garj

    “As for services, they might. I was only responding to CHRIS RILEY’s claim that the single market is for services and that it covers 80% of the UK’s economic output, which it isn’t and doesn’t. The sectoral analysis the government produced would make for interesting reading, if they had released it to the public.”

    ———

    All this is still dodging the point, that they could erect barriers to services.

  38. ROGER MEXICO

    Some of us are old enough to remember all this :-

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/25/corbyn-czechoslovakian-spy-cold-war-long-shadow-labour-left

    To the young & the disinterested-its all dead history.

    What is relevant now , as some of those people prepare to enter Downing Street , or move into positions of influence & power around the Leader & in the key institutions of the Labour Party, is whether they still believe what they believed back then.

  39. @Garj

    “As for services, they might. I was only responding to CHRIS RILEY’s claim that the single market is for services and that it covers 80% of the UK’s economic output, which it isn’t and doesn’t.”

    To all intents and purposes there is an effective shared single market for services that Brexit will inevitably obstruct.

    Unless you have better figures than those placed into the Common Library here: researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06623/SN06623.pdf

    Then yes, services are 80% of the UK’s economic output.

    So, what’s the proposal to address that?

  40. @ JIM JAM – I suggest you rewatch S.Hammond on DP.
    https://twitter.com/daily_politics
    (use ‘edit’ ‘find’ ‘Hammond’ to get straight to his piece)

    Does that sound like someone willing to risk a Corbyn govt in order to get what he wants on Brexit?

    He has been pushing for a softer Brexit (EFTA seems to be what he wants which isn’t part of A/THE CU but he probably sees the TB as a route to soften May’s approach). He also represents Wimbledon which was 73% Remain. Would he back May in a de facto confidence vote given what might happen if she lost? I’m 90%+ certain.

    His clinching line is “to be persuaded”. May has to deliver on Friday and highlight why customs arrangements are better than a customs union. Should be very easy to highlight which is better – although both are clearly cake in the eyes of the EC.

    @ JOSEPH – IMHO Corbyn picked the wrong line of attack. He should have gone after peeling off CON rebels on SM not CU. Many of them (e.g. S.Hammond) would be OK with EFTA+ final deal. “A” CU is very easy to show as crazy (vassal state, rule taker, etc, etc).
    EFTA+ would have border issues relating to NI but so does Turkey+. For immigration CON have a wide open goal on non-EU numbers
    Many EU27 bend the rules on a whole host of EU issues from state aid to immigration, joining EFTA (which we helped create) with EC/EU27 agreement on some mild flexibility and patience on NI would give Corbyn a lot more opportunity to “bend the rules” than Turkey have.
    I’m very glad he took bait on “A” CU. We now need the likes of P.Hammond and Umunna to show how bad “A” CU would be – Fox, BoJo, etc all preaching to the converted. The marginal voters would more likely listen to P.Hammond and Umunna.

    IMHO if Corbyn had wanted to take #10 before Brexit was over he’d have found a better way of doing it (SM not CU). However, he can get away with saying “I’d have done it differently” unless CON capitalise on his tactical error and highlight how bad Corbyn’s judgement is and how unfit he would be as a leader. Subtle change of tact though – go after the policies, not the person this time ;)

  41. Re services:

    “The areas where there really isn’t one are in the professional services, things like law and architecture where each nation has its own systems and qualifications. My suspicion is that those are the kinds of services we export most to the EU, so they may find that the situation is no worse for them than it is at present.”

    It’s a work in progress regarding services certainly but being in the EU still makes it easier to move staff/work/money around and bid for work than it otherwise would be.

    Also harmonisation of standards is happening, e.g. the eurocodes standards for structural engineering. And was it one of those dastardly foreigners chairing that technical committee, imposing standards on the UK? No, it was a British engineer.

  42. Boris Johnson equates the Irish border issue with the Camden/Islington boundary and the congestion charge in London. That will be helpful in a delicate negotiation.

  43. GARJ / COLIN – would you agree if Corbyn wanted to make a ‘genuine’ dash for #10 he should be offering EFTA+ rather than Turkey+?

    I’m somewhat baffled why he picked such a daft element of Brexit as the CU in order to put “red” water between LAB and CON on Brexit?

    Does he not understand the important differences in EU’s ‘off the shelf’ deals or is he deliberately trying to weaken UK’s negotiating hand?

    IMHO May now needs to take a calculated gamble and unite her party and get on with it. See where ERG would visibly take some ‘egg on face’ via a red line smudge in order to show she is no hostage (several available options, my pref would be on immigration), sort out this CU nonsense once and for all (get likes of P.Hammond to argue the case and then win NC5 vote on Trade Bill) and then maybe EC/EU27 will take us seriously.

  44. CARFREW

    I’m a floating voter. I see some things I like in all the main three parties’ proposals (if you can call the Lib Dems a main party any more, and it’s not like anyone knows where they stand aside from stopping Brexit, but I digress…), and plenty of things I dislike too. All parties are guilty of going back on their promises, you’re not going to somehow catch me out by claiming that whoever I support is just as bad. You realise that by going on a mud-slinging ad hominem offensive as a reaction to criticism of Corbyn you’re just further proving my point about the Trump-ish nature of him and his supporters. If you think I’m wrong about Corbyn’s similarities to Trump then explain why in a reasoned manner.

    As for barriers to services, ‘might’ is the operative word. A lot of things ‘might’ happen. Let’s get some detail of what a trade agreement could look like and find out.

  45. @ HIRETON – could you explain how a Turkey deal (plucked from Barnier’s staircase of options) would fully solve the NI issue with completely invisible borders!

    Remainers generally accept everything from Indy so here’s a link to help ;)
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-queues-dover-border-travel-turkey-warning-chaos-a8079011.html

    What do you think of Corbyn’s new policy? As an arch-remainer I’ll suggest a scale of 1-10 with 10 being Remain on DC’s negotiated terms and 1 being WTO but pick whatever measure or phrases you want.

  46. Trevore,

    I think Lisa Nandy’s – ‘ he has to say that’ was telling.

  47. @Garj

    Pointing out partisan inconsistency is not mud-slinging. That’s just more delusion. Like if I point out that you’re not going to convince many that you’re not really a Tory if you keep having a pop at Corbyn for things other parties might do as much or more – like breaking promises – yet you keep giving those other parties a free pass.

    Even more amazingly you complain about Corbyn’s supporters giving him a free pass while you give others a free pass! Thanks for the invitation to defend Corbyn but I’m not interested in defending Corbyn. Is he populist as you claim?No doubt. But then so was tuition fees. I am just pointing out a need to be even-handed.

  48. @ Trevor Warne

    “IMHO May now needs to take a calculated gamble and unite her party and get on with it.”

    Not entirely sure what you want TM to do, but this comment reminds me of some advice I once heard on tackling finals:

    “Exams are easy. You just read the question, and write down the answer”

1 2 3 4 34