Peoples Vote/Second Referendum?

Thing is, half the people who voted to leave didn’t have a clue what exactly they were voting on? I know loads like this, partic old people. If you took over 65’s out of the equation the result would have been overwhelmingly to stay. Lots of people I know who voted to leave regret that now, there was very little info about, it was almost thrown on us and I’m afraid many people in the uk are clueless. A bit like the tw*t sky interviewed in Caerphilly centre the day after, he said he voted to leave what has the EU ever done for us in Caerphilly, the reporter then told him they funded the redevelopment of the town centre. He looked even more daft if possible and said oh I didn’t know that.
You realise May no doubt has all her posh friends lined up for nice trade deals don’t you? Some people are so nieve, why is she so desperate not to have another vote?

Those, like you, who voted remain thought they were voting for the status quo Bwhahahahaha
I don’t know one person who voted leave who’s now changed their mind, know a couple of remainers who have though.
Where did the EU get the money they so kindly “gave” to Caerphilly.........from the massive contributions the U.K. gives to them.
As for talking about posh friends, the politics of envy nothing more, the type of shite those with nothing to contribute to a debate come out with.

Um...bollox

The 37,718 people who voted for her in the 2017 General Election represented 64.8% of ALL the votes that were counted in the Maidenhead Constituency and as a result she was elected MP for that constituency.Now that statement is factual. There is absolutely NO WAY that the ballot sheets in that election mentioned voting for her to be Prime Minister of the UK, NO WAY. So your assertion that those 37,718 votes got her elected as UK Prime Minister is actually NON FACTUAL, FALSE or like the first day in school TOTAL WANK.

Wow!, please try to keep up.

You just made my point for me.

Those, like you, who voted remain thought they were voting for the status quo Bwhahahahaha
I don’t know one person who voted leave who’s now changed their mind, know a couple of remainers who have though.
Where did the EU get the money they so kindly “gave” to Caerphilly.........from the massive contributions the U.K. gives to them.
As for talking about posh friends, the politics of envy nothing more, the type of shite those with nothing to contribute to a debate come out with.

Um...bollox

Wales Online

A total of 14 more constituencies in Wales would vote Remain if there was a new Brexit referendum, pollsters have claimed.

KEY: Seat name: 2016 Remain vote -> 'Remain vote today' (percentage point change)

Swansea East: 38% -> 51% (13)
Rhondda: 39% -> 51% (12)
Merthyr Tydfil & Rhymney: 42% -> 51% (10)
Neath: 46% -> 54% (8)
Cynon Valley: 43% -> 50% (7)
Caerphilly: 45% -> 52% (7)
Llanelli: 45% -> 51% (6)
Vale of Clwyd: 44% -> 50% (6)
Ynys Mon: 49% -> 55% (6)
Carmarthen East & Dinefwr: 46% -> 50% (4)
Newport West: 47% -> 51% (4)
Aberconwy: 47% -> 50% (4)
Gower: 50% -> 53% (3)
Vale of Glamorgan: 48% -> 50% (2)

But Jock doesn't believe polling he prefers to ask his mates, or some bloke off the telly who has a voodoo poll on his website.

Those, like you, who voted remain thought they were voting for the status quo Bwhahahahaha
I don’t know one person who voted leave who’s now changed their mind, know a couple of remainers who have though.
Where did the EU get the money they so kindly “gave” to Caerphilly.........from the massive contributions the U.K. gives to them.
As for talking about posh friends, the politics of envy nothing more, the type of shite those with nothing to contribute to a debate come out with.

Um...bollox

Wales Online

A total of 14 more constituencies in Wales would vote Remain if there was a new Brexit referendum, pollsters have claimed.

KEY: Seat name: 2016 Remain vote -> 'Remain vote today' (percentage point change)

Swansea East: 38% -> 51% (13)
Rhondda: 39% -> 51% (12)
Merthyr Tydfil & Rhymney: 42% -> 51% (10)
Neath: 46% -> 54% (8)
Cynon Valley: 43% -> 50% (7)
Caerphilly: 45% -> 52% (7)
Llanelli: 45% -> 51% (6)
Vale of Clwyd: 44% -> 50% (6)
Ynys Mon: 49% -> 55% (6)
Carmarthen East & Dinefwr: 46% -> 50% (4)
Newport West: 47% -> 51% (4)
Aberconwy: 47% -> 50% (4)
Gower: 50% -> 53% (3)
Vale of Glamorgan: 48% -> 50% (2)

But Jock doesn't believe polling he prefers to ask his mates, or some bloke off the telly who has a voodoo poll on his website.

Perhaps there is a reason why Jock does not pay much attention to polling. Perhaps you would like to tell us what the polls said just prior to the last referendum, and then let us know if they were right or wrong. The 2015 election polls said too close to call and a hung parliament, how accurate was this? The 2017 general election polls were also inaccurate, and this is why so many of us have learnt to take them with a pinch of salt. I would not rely on polls being correct, any more than using information taken from Wikipedia as being Gospel.

The name Jock says it all, he's a tad challenged in the IQ dept. Ignore him, most do

#welshandeuropean

The Polls are so inaccurate Steve, they are unworthy of reference. However, there are a few sorry individuals with gullibility issues, who believe whatever they're told, or want to believe.

The Polls are so inaccurate Steve, they are unworthy of reference. However, there are a few sorry individuals with gullibility issues, who believe whatever they're told, or want to believe.

Particularly the poll he is referring to. It was a tiny national poll, and probably consisted of about 5 people in each of the areas quoted. Just as well call in a local pub, ask 3 people propping up the bar for their views, and then assume this will be reflected right across the nation the next time a vote is held. Like you say, some very gullible people around.

Those, like you, who voted remain thought they were voting for the status quo Bwhahahahaha
I don’t know one person who voted leave who’s now changed their mind, know a couple of remainers who have though.
Where did the EU get the money they so kindly “gave” to Caerphilly.........from the massive contributions the U.K. gives to them.
As for talking about posh friends, the politics of envy nothing more, the type of shite those with nothing to contribute to a debate come out with.

Um...bollox

Wales Online

A total of 14 more constituencies in Wales would vote Remain if there was a new Brexit referendum, pollsters have claimed.

KEY: Seat name: 2016 Remain vote -> 'Remain vote today' (percentage point change)

Swansea East: 38% -> 51% (13)
Rhondda: 39% -> 51% (12)
Merthyr Tydfil & Rhymney: 42% -> 51% (10)
Neath: 46% -> 54% (8)
Cynon Valley: 43% -> 50% (7)
Caerphilly: 45% -> 52% (7)
Llanelli: 45% -> 51% (6)
Vale of Clwyd: 44% -> 50% (6)
Ynys Mon: 49% -> 55% (6)
Carmarthen East & Dinefwr: 46% -> 50% (4)
Newport West: 47% -> 51% (4)
Aberconwy: 47% -> 50% (4)
Gower: 50% -> 53% (3)
Vale of Glamorgan: 48% -> 50% (2)

But Jock doesn't believe polling he prefers to ask his mates, or some bloke off the telly who has a voodoo poll on his website.

You keep believing the polls, you keep believing the bias nonsense from BBC, Ch4 and all the others who suck the BBC teat.

Particularly the poll he is referring to. It was a tiny national poll, and probably consisted of about 5 people in each of the areas quoted. Just as well call in a local pub, ask 3 people propping up the bar for their views, and then assume this will be reflected right across the nation the next time a vote is held. Like you say, some very gullible people around.

Q: How do you know when Steve Zodiac is lieing?
A: His mouth is open

Source: The Independendent - 2.6 million Leave voters have abandoned support for Brexit since referendum, major new study finds.

The new study was carried out by data analysis experts Focaldata for pro-EU campaign group Best for Britain. It was based on two YouGov polls that together surveyed more than 15,000 people.

Thing is, half the people who voted to leave didn’t have a clue what exactly they were voting on? I know loads like this, partic old people. If you took over 65’s out of the equation the result would have been overwhelmingly to stay. Lots of people I know who voted to leave regret that now, there was very little info about, it was almost thrown on us and I’m afraid many people in the uk are clueless. A bit like the tw*t sky interviewed in Caerphilly centre the day after, he said he voted to leave what has the EU ever done for us in Caerphilly, the reporter then told him they funded the redevelopment of the town centre. He looked even more daft if possible and said oh I didn’t know that.
You realise May no doubt has all her posh friends lined up for nice trade deals don’t you? Some people are so nieve, why is she so desperate not to have another vote?

Those, like you, who voted remain thought they were voting for the status quo Bwhahahahaha

As for talking about posh friends, the politics of envy nothing more, the type of shite those with nothing to contribute to a debate come out with.

Um...bollox

point proved.

The name Jock says it all, he's a tad challenged in the IQ dept. Ignore him, most do

#welshandeuropean

You seem to have an Issue with Scots. Did a clan spit roast your maw or your wife?

Particularly the poll he is referring to. It was a tiny national poll, and probably consisted of about 5 people in each of the areas quoted. Just as well call in a local pub, ask 3 people propping up the bar for their views, and then assume this will be reflected right across the nation the next time a vote is held. Like you say, some very gullible people around.

Q: How do you know when Steve Zodiac is lieing?
A: His mouth is open

Source: The Independendent - 2.6 million Leave voters have abandoned support for Brexit since referendum, major new study finds.

The new study was carried out by data analysis experts Focaldata for pro-EU campaign group Best for Britain. It was based on two YouGov polls that together surveyed more than 15,000 people.

Wow. 15,000 people nationwide. That's less than half the number of people who will be at the CCS today.

Wow. 15,000 people nationwide. That's less than half the number of people who will be at the CCS today.

an average uk opinion poll has a representative sample of about 1,000 people.

This is a VERY large sample for an opinion poll.

Steve you are out of your depth - give up.

Particularly the poll he is referring to. It was a tiny national poll, and probably consisted of about 5 people in each of the areas quoted. Just as well call in a local pub, ask 3 people propping up the bar for their views, and then assume this will be reflected right across the nation the next time a vote is held. Like you say, some very gullible people around.

Q: How do you know when Steve Zodiac is lieing?
A: His mouth is open

Source: The Independendent - 2.6 million Leave voters have abandoned support for Brexit since referendum, major new study finds.

The new study was carried out by data analysis experts Focaldata for pro-EU campaign group Best for Britain. It was based on two YouGov polls that together surveyed more than 15,000 people.

You realise I hope that was 15k people across the UK. Given the breakdown of the British population, that would mean just a couple of thousand in Wales being asked for their views. Wales would need at least 40,000 people to vote the other way, not the few hundred who would have had to change their minds to alter the figures that this poll suggests. If I was you I would ignore these polls, just as I ignored Martin Lewis'recent poll that had leave up 61% - 39%.

Wow. 15,000 people nationwide. That's less than half the number of people who will be at the CCS today.

an average uk opinion poll has a representative sample of about 1,000 people.

This is a VERY large sample for an opinion poll.

Steve you are out of your depth - give up.

I know you like copying info from various sources, so here is something I have copied from the very source you are using, the Wales Online article you included above.

And while the breakdown into individual seats may only be based on small samples in each individual area,

You realise I hope that was 15k people across the UK. Given the breakdown of the British population, that would mean just a couple of thousand in Wales being asked for their views.

All you are saying here is that you do not understand how polling and representative samples work.

source: ukpolling report

To understand polling we need to start with the sample. A common naive criticism of polls is that 1000 people cannot possibly represent the views of 60,000,000 people. George Gallup, the father of modern polling, used to reply to the point by saying that you don’t need to drink a whole bowl of soup to know if it is too salty – providing it is properly stirred a single spoonful will suffice.

Of course, if a sample of 1,000 people is drawn, say, entirely from people having dinner at the Carlton Club or drinking in a Working Man’s Club, it won’t be representative of the country as a whole. The key challenge for pollsters is to get a sample of people that is representative. A sample of 1000 people needs the same proportions of young and old people, rich and poor people, southern and northern people, right wing and left wing people as the country as a whole does.

The mathematics behind polling is actually very simple. If I have a bag with 10000 red balls and 10000 blue balls in it, then it’s clear that if I take 1 ball out of the bag there is a 50% chance that it will be red, a 50% chance that it will be blue. If I take 10 balls out the bag it’s most likely that they will be roughly 50/50 between red and blue balls – we might get 4 red, 6 blue or 7 red and 3 blue, but it is very unlikely indeed that we will get 10 blue balls. If I take out a hundred balls, it’s increasingly likely that it will be roughly equal between red and blue balls. Splits like 53-47, 45-55, 43-57 are perfectly possible, but a split of 10-90 is spectacularly unlikely.

The perfect way to obtain a sample for a poll is to obtain it randomly, with each person in the country having an equal chance of being selecting and taking part in the poll. This is uncontroversial, you shouldn’t ever find a pollster who disagrees. The problem is that it is so far divorced from reality as to be laughable.

If you are conducting a poll of voters, then you do at least have a list of all the people who could be in your poll – the electoral register. You can easily randomly pick 2000 people from it. The problem is contacting them, the electoral register doesn’t have phone numbers, let along email addresses – you would need to send a letter, or arrive on the doorstep of each one (some well funded academic or government studies actually do this). That would be a genuinely random sample… assuming you made contact with every last one, and every last one of them agreed to be interviewed.

Of course, they don’t (especially for a postal survey, which have notoriously rubbish response rates), and for a political poll in the media the cost and time committment would make this approach untenable anyway. Instead media polls use two alternate routes to getting representative samples: quasi-random sampling, and quota sampling.

You realise I hope that was 15k people across the UK. Given the breakdown of the British population, that would mean just a couple of thousand in Wales being asked for their views.

All you are saying here is that you do not understand how polling and representative samples work.

source: ukpolling report

To understand polling we need to start with the sample. A common naive criticism of polls is that 1000 people cannot possibly represent the views of 60,000,000 people. George Gallup, the father of modern polling, used to reply to the point by saying that you don’t need to drink a whole bowl of soup to know if it is too salty – providing it is properly stirred a single spoonful will suffice.

Of course, if a sample of 1,000 people is drawn, say, entirely from people having dinner at the Carlton Club or drinking in a Working Man’s Club, it won’t be representative of the country as a whole. The key challenge for pollsters is to get a sample of people that is representative. A sample of 1000 people needs the same proportions of young and old people, rich and poor people, southern and northern people, right wing and left wing people as the country as a whole does.

The mathematics behind polling is actually very simple. If I have a bag with 10000 red balls and 10000 blue balls in it, then it’s clear that if I take 1 ball out of the bag there is a 50% chance that it will be red, a 50% chance that it will be blue. If I take 10 balls out the bag it’s most likely that they will be roughly 50/50 between red and blue balls – we might get 4 red, 6 blue or 7 red and 3 blue, but it is very unlikely indeed that we will get 10 blue balls. If I take out a hundred balls, it’s increasingly likely that it will be roughly equal between red and blue balls. Splits like 53-47, 45-55, 43-57 are perfectly possible, but a split of 10-90 is spectacularly unlikely.

The perfect way to obtain a sample for a poll is to obtain it randomly, with each person in the country having an equal chance of being selecting and taking part in the poll. This is uncontroversial, you shouldn’t ever find a pollster who disagrees. The problem is that it is so far divorced from reality as to be laughable.

If you are conducting a poll of voters, then you do at least have a list of all the people who could be in your poll – the electoral register. You can easily randomly pick 2000 people from it. The problem is contacting them, the electoral register doesn’t have phone numbers, let along email addresses – you would need to send a letter, or arrive on the doorstep of each one (some well funded academic or government studies actually do this). That would be a genuinely random sample… assuming you made contact with every last one, and every last one of them agreed to be interviewed.

Of course, they don’t (especially for a postal survey, which have notoriously rubbish response rates), and for a political poll in the media the cost and time committment would make this approach untenable anyway. Instead media polls use two alternate routes to getting representative samples: quasi-random sampling, and quota sampling.

do you even read these copy and paste jobs..
it ends by saying media polls use 2 alternative samples..you don't explain them because its not in the copy and paste ..

Only a random sample of people who are inclined to respond to polls - a large percentage of the electorate dont want to be contacted. A fallability of them I'd say.

You realise I hope that was 15k people across the UK. Given the breakdown of the British population, that would mean just a couple of thousand in Wales being asked for their views.

All you are saying here is that you do not understand how polling and representative samples work.

source: ukpolling report

To understand polling we need to start with the sample. A common naive criticism of polls is that 1000 people cannot possibly represent the views of 60,000,000 people. George Gallup, the father of modern polling, used to reply to the point by saying that you don’t need to drink a whole bowl of soup to know if it is too salty – providing it is properly stirred a single spoonful will suffice.

Of course, if a sample of 1,000 people is drawn, say, entirely from people having dinner at the Carlton Club or drinking in a Working Man’s Club, it won’t be representative of the country as a whole. The key challenge for pollsters is to get a sample of people that is representative. A sample of 1000 people needs the same proportions of young and old people, rich and poor people, southern and northern people, right wing and left wing people as the country as a whole does.

The mathematics behind polling is actually very simple. If I have a bag with 10000 red balls and 10000 blue balls in it, then it’s clear that if I take 1 ball out of the bag there is a 50% chance that it will be red, a 50% chance that it will be blue. If I take 10 balls out the bag it’s most likely that they will be roughly 50/50 between red and blue balls – we might get 4 red, 6 blue or 7 red and 3 blue, but it is very unlikely indeed that we will get 10 blue balls. If I take out a hundred balls, it’s increasingly likely that it will be roughly equal between red and blue balls. Splits like 53-47, 45-55, 43-57 are perfectly possible, but a split of 10-90 is spectacularly unlikely.

The perfect way to obtain a sample for a poll is to obtain it randomly, with each person in the country having an equal chance of being selecting and taking part in the poll. This is uncontroversial, you shouldn’t ever find a pollster who disagrees. The problem is that it is so far divorced from reality as to be laughable.

If you are conducting a poll of voters, then you do at least have a list of all the people who could be in your poll – the electoral register. You can easily randomly pick 2000 people from it. The problem is contacting them, the electoral register doesn’t have phone numbers, let along email addresses – you would need to send a letter, or arrive on the doorstep of each one (some well funded academic or government studies actually do this). That would be a genuinely random sample… assuming you made contact with every last one, and every last one of them agreed to be interviewed.

Of course, they don’t (especially for a postal survey, which have notoriously rubbish response rates), and for a political poll in the media the cost and time committment would make this approach untenable anyway. Instead media polls use two alternate routes to getting representative samples: quasi-random sampling, and quota sampling.

You love to copy and paste, so here is me doing the same thing.


"an unscientific but extremely large online poll has shown 61% of people would back a No Deal Brexit over a second referendum.

Though many politicians and those in the mainstream media still attempt to claim there is little public support for leaving the EU with No Deal, the evidence increasingly shows the opposite.

Martin Lewis of MoneySavingExpert.com held a Facebook poll that saw a huge 185,000 people vote between a second referendum and a No Deal Brexit, with 61% backing No Deal".


Personally, I take that as seriously as the polls you quote, with a large pinch of salt. I would like you to address some of the points I previously mentioned about polls, as you place so much importance on them. The poll for the EU referendum said remain would win, the polls for the last general election were even further out predicting a nice majority for the Conservatives, the polls for the previous general election were also wrong, and going further afield the polls gave next to no chance of Trump becoming President. These points are not my personal opinion, these poll results were factual. I have no doubt that as you cannot dispute these facts, you will revert to type and just come back with some more name calling, which is the norm for someone who cannot argue with factual information regarding something that has already happened, rather than vague forecasts and future guesswork.

Why did a remain group chose two particular polls, combine the results and come out with a figure. Why not choose the far bigger poll conducted by Martin Lewis, and combine those results as well. Obviously would'nt suit their agenda, and in any event would be equally meaningless, as we now know recent polls have been completely pointless.

google Tony Benn..constitutional monarchy.

I really don't think I will

of course you havent..
you can not resist a google
bet that screwed your brain cell proper..

Source: The Independendent - 2.6 million Leave voters have abandoned support for Brexit since referendum, major new study finds.


bit selective with what you copied and pasted here mate...the study...carried out for the pro EU group best for Britain { no agenda there } was based on no more than 2 YouGov polls { 2 of hundreds carried out ,I wonder how randomly they chose those 2 polls }..

but getting back to the selective bit....the independent article goes on to say 970,000 have changed the other way.which of course takes us back to the poll figures pre the vote....which we know were not very accurate

the study mentions it

the independent mentions it.


Dave CaP omits it. beaut

do you even read these copy and paste jobs..
it ends by saying media polls use 2 alternative samples..you don't explain them because its not in the copy and paste ..

The link to the source is above it the text.

I assumed you were capable of clicking it. Apologies for overestimating your abilities.

"an unscientific but extremely large online poll has shown 61% of people would back a No Deal Brexit over a second referendum.
Though many politicians and those in the mainstream media still attempt to claim there is little public support for leaving the EU with No Deal, the evidence increasingly shows the opposite.
Martin Lewis of MoneySavingExpert.com held a Facebook poll that saw a huge 185,000 people vote between a second referendum and a No Deal Brexit, with 61% backing No Deal".

I have already explained that your poll is a voodoo poll and absolutely worthless, dishonest and Martin Lewis agrees with me - fake news.

Please try to keep up.

google Tony Benn..constitutional monarchy.

I really don't think I will

of course you havent..
you can not resist a google
bet that screwed your brain cell proper..

To be honest I saw what you wrote and thought "if that lazy idiot cannot even be bothered to post a reason for googling it then he can go fcuk himself"

Source: The Independendent - 2.6 million Leave voters have abandoned support for Brexit since referendum, major new study finds.
bit selective with what you copied and pasted here mate...

This is why I post the source of the information I post - it allows people to challenge it intelligently.

In your case, not so intelligently.

the study...carried out for the pro EU group best for Britain { no agenda there }

You are right they obviously have an agenda. That is why they paid for the poll.

YouGov conducted 2 poll and Focaldata produced a study based on the two. Both Independent reputable market research companies with clients across the political and commercial spectrum.[/quote]

but getting back to the selective bit....the independent article goes on to say 970,000 have changed the other way.which of course takes us back to the poll figures pre the vote....which we know were not very accurate

I am not sure what you are saying here - I am guessing you ran out of fingers?

In total, it concluded that 2.6 million Leave voters have switched their support to Remain, while 970,000 have moved the other way – a net gain for the pro-EU side of 1.6 million.

Guys, This is getting more and more like a teaching exercise for me. Can you please fact check your posts before you post them?

Pollsters told us remain would comfortably win the referendum. Just sayin.

Source: The Independendent - 2.6 million Leave voters have abandoned support for Brexit since referendum, major new study finds.
bit selective with what you copied and pasted here mate...

This is why I post the source of the information I post - it allows people to challenge it intelligently.

In your case, not so intelligently.

the study...carried out for the pro EU group best for Britain { no agenda there }

You are right they obviously have an agenda. That is why they paid for the poll.

YouGov conducted 2 poll and Focaldata produced a study based on the two. Both Independent reputable market research companies with clients across the political and commercial spectrum.

but getting back to the selective bit....the independent article goes on to say 970,000 have changed the other way.which of course takes us back to the poll figures pre the vote....which we know were not very accurate

I am not sure what you are saying here - I am guessing you ran out of fingers?

In total, it concluded that 2.6 million Leave voters have switched their support to Remain, while 970,000 have moved the other way – a net gain for the pro-EU side of 1.6 million.

Guys, This is getting more and more like a teaching exercise for me. Can you please fact check your posts before you post them?[/quote]

Dave, can you confirm that recent polls have been so far out, there have been various enquiries undertaken in an attempt to discover just how they have managed to be so wrong. Or are you now going to be the only person on the planet to deny that the polls were wrong as you place so much importance on them. Perhaps you need to google "why are polls often wrong" just in case you do not actually realise that they have been out in most of the last few big votes, both here and in the USA. Try to keep up with what actually happened, and your comments may be a little less laughable.

Pollsters told us remain would comfortably win the referendum. Just sayin.

Yes they can. Any individual poll 1000 sample has a margin of +-3% on top of that there are outliers which can be even further off.

Having said that their is sound statistical methodology to them and they are right more often than they are wrong.

Dave, can you confirm that recent polls have been so far out, there have been various enquiries undertaken in an attempt to discover just how they have managed to be so wrong.

Provide evidence for you assertions - I am not doing your work for you.

If you are starting with Brexit and Trump then check the facts - not all polls were way off and Hillary Clinton won the popular vote 48.5% to 46.4%.

Dave, can you confirm that recent polls have been so far out, there have been various enquiries undertaken in an attempt to discover just how they have managed to be so wrong.

Provide evidence for you assertions - I am not doing your work for you.

If you are starting with Brexit and Trump then check the facts - not all polls were way off and Hillary Clinton won the popular vote 48.5% to 46.4%.

The American vote was way off just a month or so before the elections. She had something like a 9 point lead in the polls, I was out there around that time and she was virtually guaranteed being the next president if the polls and experts were to be believed. We are three months from leaving the EU, and just like these USA polls, plenty of time for things to change, as they did during the last referendum when it became clear things were getting closer.

I checked my facts before I posted as my memory is not always up to scratch, but I have been careful to post factual details not opinions. This is why I have said numerous times that I have no idea what will happen if and when we leave the EU, unlike the "remainers" who apparently know exactly what will happen, just like they knew exactly what would happen in the event of a "leave" vote. Still waiting for Osbourne's emergency budget. Even the Chancellor could'nt get his predictions right, so what makes ordinary "remainers" think they are any more right than those who are in the "leave"camp.

Will let you carry on your debate uninterrupted now, neither of us know what is around the corner, and I have my doubts as to us ever finding out, but your point of view is more likely to be respected if you can avoid the personal insults. I always believe an argument is lost the minute a person is unable to debate without name calling etc.
,