Skip to main content

Brexit Britain: British Election Study Insights from the post-EU Referendum wave of the BES internet panel

The British Election Study Team
06/10/2016

We are pleased to release new British Election Study insights into the Brexit vote. In this blog we explore some of the deeper features of a nation divided by support for Leave or Remain. These divisions help us to understand the routes to Brexit and the context in which forthcoming Brexit negotiations, outcomes and effects will be judged. We also consider some of the potential consequences of the EU referendum for the British electorate. The data come from the newly released post-EU referendum data, wave 9 of the British Election Study Internet Panel, available for download here.

The relationship between support for Brexit and demographics are well documented. On average, Remain voters were likely to be younger, a graduate of a university, receiving a higher income and less likely to be white. There is a strong relationship between actual and potential UKIP support and support for Leave, and the geographic distribution of support for Leave and Remain – reflecting these differences – has been widely documented elsewhere. Before the official campaign, Leave voters cared most about immigration and Remain voters about the economy, and this changed little up to June 23rd.

But what about the more visceral differences in the UK electorate motivating, and revealed by, the votes for Leave and Remain on June 23rd 2016? In four respects – the lack of control people feel they have over their lives, the sense that things in Britain were better in the past, the degree to which people have ‘social capital’, and a distrust of experts – Brexit voters display a deeper sense of alienation, as revealed below.

Locus of control

‘Vote Leave, take control’ – the Leave campaign’s central slogan was ostensibly about restoring British control over laws and public policy. However our data suggests that this slogan may also have tapped into something more fundamental to some people’s lives. In psychology, ‘locus of control’ is the extent that people feel they are in control over what happens to them. People with an internal locus of control think they are themselves largely responsible for the things that happen to them, whilst those with an external locus of control tend to believe things are controlled by outside forces they cannot influence, such as other people, fate, or chance.

Recent research found that locus of control helps to explain anti-immigrant attitudes. Those with a strong internal locus of control feel that they are in control of their lives, so they will feel less threatened by the changes to society brought about by immigration. Those with an external locus of control are more likely to blame others – such as immigrants – for any misfortunes that befall them, or may potentially befall them.

In our surveys we measured locus of control by asking respondents how much they agreed with two questions – ‘Many times I feel that I have little influence over the things that happen to me’ and ‘When I make plans, I am almost certain that I can make them work’. Combining answers to these questions into a scale (where higher numbers mean higher internal locus of control) shows a clear relationship with vote choice in the EU referendum. The graph below shows the relationship between locus of control and Leave voting from a bivariate logistic regression model, measured by the predicted probability of voting Leave at different levels of locus of control. Those with an external locus of control were much more likely to vote Leave (and take control) than those with an internal locus of control.

referendum_locus_control

Nostalgia

From Nigel Farage likening the EU referendum to the Battle of Britain, to Daniel Hannan arguing that Britain’s future lay in closer ties with former Imperial possessions, the past was a constant presence in the build-up to the EU referendum. Before the referendum it was argued that Britain is increasingly divided between cosmopolitan areas and provincial backwaters. One of the defining features of those outside of cosmopolitan areas is a nostalgic view of Britain’s past and a desire to turn back the clock.

A sense of national decline was a defining feature of the divide between Leave and Remain voters. We asked our respondents how much they agreed or disagreed with the statement ‘things in Britain were better in the past’. As the chart below shows there is a very strong relationship between thinking that things in Britain have got worse and voting Leave. Fewer than 15% of those who strongly disagreed that things in Britain were better in the past voted to Leave the EU while nearly 80% of those who strongly agreed did so.

image2

Social Capital

Social capital is the resource that arises from interpersonal networks and the norms of trust and reciprocity that facilitate social interaction within them – the ‘glue’ which helps society function. Those with high social capital can draw on the people they know – family, friends, and community – for support in all aspects of life. High social capital has been linked with positive outcomes in a range of areas, from better government, higher levels of health and education, lower levels of crime, and even less tax evasion.

People with high social capital may be better able to adapt to changes in their personal situation and changes in their communities because they are able to draw on more extensive social networks. Previous research has shown that people with high social capital are more open to economic globalisation and more positive about immigration.

In the BES EU referendum panel we measure social capital in two ways. First, we use a ‘resource generator’ battery of questions which asks respondents whether they know certain types of people. Second, we ask about generalised social trust – whether ‘most people can be trusted’, or that ‘you can’t be too careful’.

Both of these measures show a very clear relationship with support for Brexit. The graph below illustrates the relationship between social capital as measured by the resource generator and the likelihood of voting Leave estimated by a nonparametric local polynomial regression. It shows a strong trend between social capital and Leave voting – those with the lowest levels of social capital are almost twice as likely to have voted Leave as those with the highest levels.

referendum_social_capital

Similarly, the generalised social trust question shows a clear division between those who say that most people can be trusted, amongst whom 40.1% voted Leave, and those who said you can’t be too careful, 63.6% of whom voted Leave.

However, while Leave voters are less likely to trust others, and less likely to have strong social capital as well, they are more likely to agree to the statement, “I’d rather put my trust in the wisdom of ordinary people than the opinions of experts”. Those who strongly agreed with this statement, which we asked during the daily official campaign, were much more likely to vote Leave. For low trust voters, the desire to reject the advice of experts and trust ‘ordinary people’ may help us understand, in part, why economic predictions seemed to have so little cut-through.

 image4

 Implications of the referendum vote?

The aftermath of the Scottish independence referendum saw a rapid realignment of the Scottish party system, with independence supporters flocking to the SNP. Before the EU referendum we speculated as to whether the EU referendum could have a similar effect. Although the polls suggest that no similar partisan realignment has taken place after the EU referendum, our data suggests that the Leave/Remain cleavage has the potential to play an important role in the future of British elections.

At the Scottish referendum the combination of a large number of independence supporting Labour voters and an explicitly unionist Labour party created a dilemma for independence voting Labour supporters. For most of the people facing this problem the dilemma was solved by dropping their Labour identity entirely and shifting support to the SNP.

Referendums have the potential to create political upheaval because they are often held on issues that cut across the usual political divisions. As the following figure shows, which shows EU referendum reported vote against 2015 General Election reported vote, every political party had supporters in favour of Leave and Remain; just to a different extent.

referendum_2015_vote

In the three waves of our EU referendum panel we asked a subset of our respondents whether they saw themselves as closer to the Leave or Remain campaign, followed by a series of questions designed to measure how strongly people identify with a social group, such as whether they usually say “we” instead of “they” when talking about the group or whether they have a lot in common with other Leave/Remain supporters. We then combine these questions into a four point scale, where one is the weakest level of identity and four the strongest.

The figure below shows how the average strength of identification with the Leave and Remain sides evolved over the referendum campaign (using local polynomial smoothed estimates) and how those identities changed in the immediate aftermaths of the result. At the beginning of the time series, Leave supporters tended to identify with the Leave campaign more strongly than Remainers. From the last month of the campaign onwards, however, the strength of Remain identity increased markedly. By the end of the campaign the two sides had almost equal strengths of identity. What is really striking is how these identities change in the immediate aftermath of the referendum – the strength of Leave identity drops slightly and the strength of Remain identity jumps dramatically.

image6

These data show that the EU referendum vote crystallised a political cleavage in much the same way as happened in the Scottish referendum. Unlike the Scottish referendum however, the EU referendum has not caused an immediate overhaul of the party system. With prominent Leave and Remain campaigners from across the political spectrum, the EU referendum may have created less of an immediate dilemma for party supporters.

We also measured levels of party identification using the same questions – the average strength of identification with a party is 2.3 – lower than the average level of identification with either Leave or Remain. The strength of these new identities suggests that – in the right circumstances – this new cleavage could yet disrupt British politics.

Regrets? We had a few

Finally, in considering the implications of the Brexit vote for the British electorate, we look at the extent of ‘Bregret’ (regretting a vote for Brexit) and whether it was sufficient in scale to matter.

We asked voters on both sides (whether they voted Leave or Remain) “do you have any regrets about the way you voted in the EU referendum?” The results in the table below show that, while there certainly are more people who regret their vote to Leave, the vast majority of both Leave and Remain voters did not regret the way they voted immediately after the referendum. It is also important to remember that it is easier to regret something if it actually ended up happening than if it didn’t. We therefore don’t know whether the newspapers would have been filled with stories of regretful Remain voters wishing they had taken the chance to leave Brussels forever if the vote had gone the other way.

Remain Leave
No 98% 90%
Yes 1% 6%
Don’t know 1% 4%

 

But is 6% a small amount of regret or a lot? One way to assess the amount of regret is to compare with how many people regretted how they voted in the General Election last year (when we asked an equivalent question). Overall, 4% of voters regretted how they voted in May 2015, the highest proportion being Liberal Democrats (8%) and Green voters (6%), perhaps because in the absence of a hung parliament these votes were deemed wasted. There was little evidence of a comparable winner’s regret, Conservative voters being less likely to regret than average (3%). Whilst the difference in regret of 6% to 1% would have been enough to swing the referendum outcome had people voted in the opposite way, the level of regret is consistent with what we saw at the general election.

The popular narrative about Bregret was that many Leave voters had not really expected to win and voted to Leave out of protest or just to give the political elite a bloody nose. We can look at this using our wave 8 (daily campaign) question “How likely do you think it is that the UK will vote to leave the EU?” with answers given from 0-100. The figure below shows that there is some truth in this interpretation. For Leave voters the chance of regret decreased from about one in ten for those that thought they were certain to lose, to about one in twenty five for those who expected to win. Overall, 8% of Leave voters who expected to lose regretted voting to Leave – 2% more than the overall figure for Leave voters. There was little evidence of any equivalent relationship for Remain voters except that those who felt certain to lose were a little more likely to regret voting to Remain. Perhaps they just regretted wasting their time.

image7

Before getting too carried away, however, we should not assume that most Leave voters actually expected to lose. Whilst those expecting to lose were more likely to regret their vote, they were also in a minority. The graph below clearly shows that both Remain and Leave voters generally expected that their side would win or that it was completely uncertain (as shown by the large spike at 50%). In fact, Leave voters were more likely to expect a Leave victory (64%) than Remain voters were to expect a Remain victory (62%).

expectations_brexit

Overall, the narrative of surprised and regretful Leave voters has some truth but only for a small minority of voters. It also has some truth in the surveys we fielded immediately after the referendum result, but we do not know – yet – whether these feelings of regret will disperse once the implications of Brexit become clearer, or whether they may eventually become accentuated.

  • Simon Gardner

    The lack of movement for Leave voters in light of financial developments since the vote is explained by the fact (clear on the ground) their vote was largely emotional-driven and not fact-driven.

    The emotion was racial hatred. It still is.

    • Steve Gwynne

      Since you seem to think that you have a spectacularly deep and insightful telepathic access into the minds of 17 million voters, I think you should publically present yourself as the new messenger of God.

      • retrogem

        It is called academic research. It is based on asking questions and collating the information. But I suspect you belong to that half of the population that does not like experts.

        • Steve Gwynne

          http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/2016/02/mind-gap

          The Economist predicted the result 4 months before the referendum. Control of immigration is not racial hatred but a pragmatic response to England being highest density country in England. 175000 a year eu migration requiring 400 houses to be built and completed each day of the year resulting in dwindling green belt and uk wildlife. Increased congestion and increased pollution and increased need for food imports.

          Xenophobia is largely a projection by left liberals in an attempt to win a illusionary moral argument in the same way economic doom mongering was an illusionary argument.

          • Jason

            I’ll assume you mean “in Europe”, and you’re wrong.

            Netherlands and Belgium, for example, have a higher population density than the UK (as do notorious urban hellholes Jersey and Guernsey). Comparing *England* to other countries is not comparing like-for-like; what is the population density of the densest bit of Germany or France?

          • Steve Gwynne

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2530125/This-worryingly-crowded-isle-England-officially-Europes-densely-packed-country.html

            Not sure if building housing estates on the Brecons, Snowdonia, Lake District, Scottish highlands is feasible.

          • Mary Ann

            People do build houses in these places.

          • Steve Gwynne

            A few here and there. Uncontrolled eu immigration requires around 85000 houses a year.

          • Trofim

            The population of England is circa 417 per km2. The only one of 51 states in the USA as crowded is New Jersey – comprising 0.23% of the USA. Oregon is slightly larger than the UK and has 3.8 million, that is 61 million fewer people than the UK. Low population density is part of the good life, certainly for the environment, and for people. Why do two thirds of the population of even the most crowded Scandinavian country – Denmark, with a density equivalent to around a third of that of England – have a second home on the coast or in a forest? Low density. More people is one of the last things this country needs, particularly at a rate equivalent to a new Birmingham every 3-4 years. Anything who thinks this is desirable, let alone tenable, is off their head. However, Scotland has an abundance of space. They can build the new cities there.

          • ohminus

            “The population of England is circa 417 per km2. ”

            A meaningless number, since the population is not distributed anywhere near uniformly. This is very well illustrated just by looking at Berkshire. On paper, Berkshire has a population density of 643/km². In reality, Bracknell Forest has over 1000 whereas West Berkshire has only 214/km²

            The population density you cite for England is massively skewed by Greater London, which has a population density of 5,223/km².

            “The only one of 51 states in the USA as crowded is New Jersey – comprising 0.23% of the USA. Oregon is slightly larger than the UK and has 3.8 million, that is 61 million fewer people than the UK. ”

            You love comparing apples and oranges. Incidentally, did you ever look at a map of Oregon or is that just some fancy name for you? Because if you had a clue of the place, you would know that plenty of it is not amenable to settling, being high mountains. That’s real mountains, not what Britain considers mountains.

            “. Why do two thirds of the population of even the most crowded Scandinavian country – Denmark, with a density equivalent to around a third of that of England – have a second home on the coast or in a forest? Low density.”

            Sure, it couldn’t possibly have anything to do with decades of more sustainable economic policy rather than simply taking money from across the country and pouring it into the CoL as the UK did, leaving infrastructure to rot or at the least underdeveloped and manufacturers being shut down or bought by foreign competitors.

            Northumberland has 52 people per km²
            Cambridgeshire has 238
            Cornwall, which voted Leave, has 150

            Except for Cambridgeshire (and that just barely), they also have a population density lower than that of Midlothian, further illustrating how using simple averages over heavily skewed populations is statistical garbage.

            The argument of overcrowding is plain and simply nonsense, just like the argument with immigration, given that many areas with lots of immigration voted Remain.

          • Derek Howard

            The highest votes to Remain were in over crowded London full of immigrants and the prime target for new immigration – in Southwark 73% and that was not the most. The highest votes for Leave were in less dense towns in the north and along the east coast, the worst being towns whose populations and prosperity have declined over recent decades and are now full of an aging demographic with relatively few immigrants. The vote was more about marginalisation and latent xenophobia than about real problems of housing or services being stressed by immigrants. There was no “overpopulation” aspect in reality, that is a canard put around as an excuse.

          • Steve Gwynne

            Depends on your definition of overcrowding. What is the measure to determine what is and isnt latent xenophobia. Is it feasible to have a country that is void of green infrastructure and is reliant on 100% food imports. At present the UK requires 40% food imports. I argue this needs to be decreasing not increasing. But it all depends on the value you put on self-reliance and living in a resilient country. You call this latent xenophobia. I call it commonsense and being pragmatic.

          • Steve Gwynne

            Depends on your definition of overcrowding. What is the measure. It is feasible to have a country that is void of green infrastructure and is reliant on 100% food imports. At present the UK requires 40% food imports. I argue this needs to be decreasing not increasing. But it all depends on the value you put on self-reliance and living in a resilient country.

          • ohminus

            “Depends on your definition of overcrowding.”

            No, the point that it has a very skewed population distribution doesn’t depend on that at all.

            “Is it feasible to have a country that is void of green infrastructure and is reliant on 100% food imports. ”

            Pure hyperbole devoid of any basis in fact. The Netherlands have a population density similar to the UK, yet are an exporter of agricultural goods (and have massive green)

            “At present the UK requires 40% food imports. I argue this needs to be decreasing not increasing. But it all depends on the value you put on self-reliance and living in a resilient country.”

            No, it depends on the value you put on doing your homework.

            How much food a nation imports not the least depends on what it wants to consume. Significant parts of food and drink imports of the UK are wine (0.74% of all imports, 14% of category “foodstuffs”) and chocolate (0.34% of total imports, 6.5% of foodstuffs). Among the category “vegetable products”, there’s a significant part of cut flowers, i.e. non-food. But also bananas and plantains, as well as coffee, both not precisely home-bred things. Among the animal products, the biggest slice goes to cheese.

            So, want to import less food, I’d suggest eating more British cheese rather than Irish or French and cutting down on the tropical fruits in favour of good old apples and pears and having a pint of ale rather than a glass of French wine. And maybe have some of those biscuits that May wants to run the UK economy on instead of imported chocolate. Wanting foreign delicacies while complaining about imported food is just testimony of the “having your cake and eating it, too” that’s the hallmark of Brexit proponents.

          • Steve Gwynne

            I noticed you did not respond to my deeper questions but instead resorted to the typical hollow rebuttals deployed by neo-liberal apologist remainers.

            You state 20% of food imports plus some unqualified quantity of cut flowers as food imports leaving a significant percentage unaddressed. Typical cognitive dissonance demonstrated by a Bremoaner.

            To say that Netherlands is not happy with the EU is another omission on your part despite its very liberal leanings. Similarly the Netherlands is not an island half covered with mountainous/fell regions and as such has the capacity for self-reliance.
            http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-04-08/netherlands-seen-by-lei-self-sufficient-in-food-without-imports

          • ohminus

            “I noticed you did not respond to my deeper questions but instead resorted to the typical hollow rebuttals deployed by neo-liberal apologist remainers.”

            I notice you resorted to the typical dismissal of expert opinion by Brexiteers because what must not be cannot be and if someone says you are raping and abusing statistics, then by sheer fact of your say-so, they are wrong and have not responded to your deeper question. Because by God’s Grace, you are right and any expert on the planet is wrong, and if you declare the world to be flat, then it IS flat.

            “You state 20% of food imports plus some unqualified quantity of cut flowers as food imports leaving a significant percentage unaddressed. Typical cognitive dissonance demonstrated by a Bremoaner.”

            Nope. Yours however, is the typical cluelessness and ignorance of a Brexiteer – too lazy to do your homework and research a topic yourself, too clueless to understand data and too dishonest to admit when you have been rebutted.

            “To say that Netherlands is not happy with the EU is another omission on your part despite its very liberal leanings. ”

            And yet more fraud from the incarnation of dishonesty. You are confusing the frothing of your fellow rabid nationalists with the population at large.

            https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/24/dutch-britain-quitting-eu-geert-wilders-netherlands

            In fact, more than half the Dutch consider themselves strong or moderate EU supporters, and more than half of them are even against holding any kind of referendum on the issue and if there was one, the support for staying in would be massive.
            http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2016/06/after-the-british-vote-to-leave-the-eu-how-about-a-nexit/

            ” Similarly the Netherlands is not an island half covered with mountainous/fell regions and as such has the capacity for self-reliance.”

            Right, because simply not having mountains will magically make stuff grow everywhere. It’s cute how you all of a sudden try to neglect the population density, which was your original argument. Weasel much?

            Incidentally, the Netherlands have massive expenses keeping their soil usable for agriculture, because plenty of it happens to be below sea level. But they don’t sit and wait for somebody else to solve their problems, nor do they blame the EU for aspects of nature, they pull up their sleeves and get to work. Of course, that’s insufferable for an heir of the British Empire who expects the world to crawl up his arse, finance his sloth and do all the hard work for him.

          • Steve Gwynne

            As Ive said density spread is meaningless if large cities need agricultural land to feed themselves, hence the relevance of the number of national parks. Consequently of course there will be differences in density. But of course your huge pompous ego is not going to see sense. You’d rather see everyone starve and have your fanatical liberal principles than admit ecological limits to human development within defined territories. Thank god the majority werent as witless as you. All you care about is ideology.

            And quoting the rapidly pro-eu Guardian is a joke.
            http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/657883/EU-referendum-Brexit-Holland-vote-Britain-leave-Brussels

            47% of the Dutch want a referendum.

          • ohminus

            “As Ive said density spread is meaningless if large cities need agricultural land to feed themselves, hence the relevance of the number of national parks. ”

            Come back once you’ve learned statistics 101.

            “But of course your huge pompous ego is not going to see sense.”

            That’s cute, coming from the guy who believes his pompous ego invalidates data analysis and statistics textbooks across the planet.

            “You’d rather see everyone starve and have your fanatical liberal principles than admit ecological limits to human development within defined territories. ”

            Hyperbole much? Coming from someone whose government actually advocated deliberately letting people drown, that’s rich. Not to mention it’s you who would love nothing more than see people starve, preferring to have food rot on the fields rather than having Eastern Europeans pick it.

            “And quoting the rapidly pro-eu Guardian is a joke.”

            No, what is a joke is quoting the Express, a sub-par rag that routinely makes stuff up as a counter against the respected Guardian, lying about my sources, and then demonstrating that you suck at maths.

            You truly have nothing to offer but dishonesty.

          • Steve Gwynne

            Grow up boy and take your neoliberal fascism with you. Hail Juncker.

          • ohminus

            Neoliberal fascism? You’re hilarious.
            Why don’t you grow up and go and get an education, dolt?

            Trivialize Nazism much? It’s hilarious when a Brownshirt wannabe accuses others of fascism. Come back when you don’t take your cues from the SA playbook.

          • Steve Gwynne

            Grow up boy. Maybe you’ll learn something when you cease to be a bigot. Hail Juncker!

          • ohminus

            Talking to yourself? You’re the bigot devoid of any meaningful education.

            And thanks for continuing to demonstrate your trivialization of Nazism. Kindly shove it, there are people who did not spend their school classes drinking their brain away believing they can leave it to Farage and Murdoch to fill the void.

          • Steve Gwynne

            Bye Bigot. Go back to your echo-chamber buddies. Maybe practice some ohms whilst you are there to chill out. Hail Juncker!

          • RobTM

            My question to you Sir, having clearly won the argument and been abused for it, you bother responding!

          • Steve Gwynne

            As far as Im aware a major proportion of my diet is British based. Coffee, tea and salt are the main exceptions. Mainly because Im mostly self-sufficient in vegetables and buy British milk, cream, cheese, veg oil and cakes.

          • ohminus

            Relevance? None. Thank you. You should learn that a big ego is not a strong argument. What you do is devoid of any relevance. What’s relevant is what the population does on aggregate. And that requires plenty of imports. Not for need of quantity, but for need of the specific items desired.

          • Landscape

            If that’s your argument then surely if we look at the UK a union of 4 countries as a whole then surely we should compare the population density with the EU as a whole?
            Which would still see the UK more than treble the population density of the EU as a whole

          • butch

            “Notorious urban hellholes like Jersey and Gurnsey”…. says a man that has no idea what he’s on about. Lol.

          • Mary Ann

            As England did not join the EU on its own you have to look at the whole of the UK, when it comes to population the UK is not even second or third. Scotland is still part of the UK and they want more migrants.

          • Steve Gwynne

            England still is part of the UK and as a country has a democratic right to be represented. The high density of England cannot be ignored as an issue by conflating England with other UK nations.

          • ohminus

            Ah, but you can conflate greater London with Northumberland? Cognitive dissonance much?

            Your entire argumentation is fundamentally dishonest.

          • Steve Gwynne

            Yours you mean unless your intention is to build housing estates all over national parks.

          • ohminus

            “Yours you mean unless your intention is to build housing estates all over national parks.”

            Nope, that would be yours, since you evidently seem that’s perfectly fine when talking about Scotland.

            We have yet to hear any admission on your part that your citation of English population density is grossly misleading and does not reflect the majority of English territory at all.

          • Steve Gwynne

            Nothing to admit. I said plain and clearly do you expect to build on national parks in order to take up the spare density as well as build on agricultural land. Of course with your infantile way of looking at things, London doesn’t need agricultural land to feed itself so uneven density doesn’t matter. Idiot!

          • ohminus

            Aside from insults, you have nothing to offer. But yeah, I can understand how someone who considers Nobel laureates abject idiots and academics as a result of their sheer position leftists would consider having a clue about statistics “infantile”.

          • Steve Gwynne

            Grow up boy and take your neoliberal fascism with you. Hail Juncker!

          • ohminus

            As I said, aside from insults, you have nothing to offer. I’m neither neoliberal nor a fascist. The latter fits far better to you, given your love reliance on political assassination, your love for hunting foreigners through the streets, your hatred against academics and your reliance on disinformation. It’s hilarious when scum like you calls people on the same side as Britain’s WW2 veterans “fascists”. It’s you who would feat neatly in an SA uniform. Your ideology is the spitting image of late 1920s fascism.

          • Steve Gwynne

            Byebye bigot. Hail Juncker!

          • ohminus

            QED

            Calling me “bigot” is rich.

          • RobTM

            Being called a bigot by such is really a compliment!

          • RobTM

            Their neo-fascism is clear, it goes like.. “Shuddup, shuddup!! We won the referendum stop moaning!” or “You’re talking down the £”. This to people who’s family life or jobs are threatened by the reckless change and who point this out. Then papers talk about dispatching people expressiving incovenient truths to the Tower of London, or as one misguided councillor did, create an e-petition to add EU advocacy as offence to the treason act.

            In their hearts they know the tide has turned, all those promises people heard, all the smooth statements are one by one being unravelled. Those sunny uplands, have turned out to be covered in ashes contaminated by nuclear fall out. Just dreaming up another fancy label, to dismiss criticism isn’t working any more

        • Trofim

          Academic research? Stating that 17 million people were motivated by racial hatred is based on academic research? How many samples did Simon Gardner take? Can we see his research methodology? Incidentally, the principle of a democracy is that the people themselves are the experts in what knowing what they want. Not good enough a principle for the EU, however. Ordering a population to retake a vote because the result was the wrong one was the stuff of dystopian novels such as Zamyatin or Voinovich – that is, until the EU actually put it into practice.

          • Mary Ann

            But if we have a second referendum nobody is going to make you vote. If there is a second vote it won’t be the EU making the decision, it will be British MPs who do not want to see their country suffer further damage.

          • Steve Gwynne

            And can we have a 3rd, 4th, 5th if it doesnt go the right way.

          • Steve Gwynne

            Their share prices more like it.

    • JulianTheSceptic

      Oh do grow up – only a minority cited immigration control as the main factor, with most opting for regaining sovereignty (aka control) as the main reason. Even then, it is the numbers and things like pressure on the NHS, not things like skin colour.

      I know quite a few ethnic minority people who voted Leave including my local corner shop owner. I also know some Remainers who use very racially offensive language, but felt obliged to support Labour policy etc.

      If you want a positive, non-racist blueprint for Brexit, have a look at Flexcit.

      • ohminus

        ” Even then, it is the numbers and things like pressure on the NHS, ”

        The pressure that has nothing to do with immigration and is in fact alleviated by it.

        But evidently, bringing the whole NHS down with a bang is the goal of plenty of Tories to begin with and the racist stooges are wilful puppets by driving the personnel out of the country even before any official status changes.

        “I know quite a few ethnic minority people who voted Leave including my local corner shop owner.”

        So? Areas who were basically kept alive by the EU also voted “leave”, in the naive belief that the same Westminster that ignored them for decades if not centuries would have a change of heart and now pick up the tab. The fact that someone voted “Leave” doesn’t mean it isn’t absurd and self-defeating for them. I guess your corner shop owner didn’t have his shop trashed by the mob yet. Doesn’t mean that won’t happen, or that he won’t be beaten up if the right(TM) people get their hands on him.

        • Steve Gwynne

          Migrant led growth requires migrants to service the migrants. This is the only reason why uk systems would collapse with no migrants. However when do you say no.

          Your binary leave/remain logic is pure and simply that, binary. EU support does not help everyone in a region.
          https://medium.com/@jakeybob/brexit-maps-d70caab7315e#.vldmkupgm

          • ohminus

            “Migrant led growth requires migrants to service the migrants. This is the only reason why uk systems would collapse with no migrants. However when do you say no.”

            You say no when the other side has nothing but bullshit to offer and has no sense of integrity ans responsibility. Such as claiming that the migrants would be serving migrants when the vast bulk of NHS services goes to natives.

            It is quite evident that you are completely devoid of any clue as to what the NHS does and what the cost and manpower drains are. All you know is that whatever is the problem, it’s someone else’s fault.

            “Your binary leave/remain logic is pure and simply that, binary. ”

            That’s cute, coming from the person frantically trying to fabricate reasons to justify the decision.

            “EU support does not help everyone in a region.”

            Goodness gracious, EU support is not a magic wand remedy for all the neglect by Westminster overnight! Who would have thunk?!

            Again you demonstrate your complete and utter lack of any sense of responsibility. Any problem is someone else’s fault and it’s someone else’s job to do something about it. And so you vote for Brexit, believing that sitting in your armchair will magically make everything better just by giving the scapegoats a finger…

          • Steve Gwynne

            Hehe. We really are now getting to the heart of your hollow rebuttals now. I came across a multidude of individuals like you during the referendum. No arguments just sweeping nonsense with no depth whatsoever. Exactly the reason why you lost the vote. If all you can muster is idiotic projections which Im sure relate to your own facile, self-important and opinionated way at looking at life then you always have the option of moving to your precious eu. Youve still got at least 2 years and to be honest good riddance if you do. You can become someone’s elses problem with all your whinging and whining.

          • ohminus

            That’s cute, coming from someone too lazy to do any kind of research whatsoever and simply parroting what the Express tells him to believe.
            The one with the sweeping nonsense and the projections here is you, I’m afraid. That is no better illustrated by your making stupid assumptions as to where I live. Research is for sissies, only idiots make their homework, you, of course, know all that’s worth knowing courtesy of the “Express”

            Have fun in the stone age, dolt. Time’s quickly running out for parasites like you who live off the intellectual work of others. You’ll have fun waiting a year or two for a doctor’s appointment – but then these idiots are all “experts”, too, so maybe try treating yourself when cancer finally gets you.

          • RobTM

            Buy a shed load of £ off me at €1.30 will you? I will gladly go and live somewhere sunnier, where the gutter press aren’t printing hateful lies on almost every front page. If you think post-Brexit Britain is going to be so great, put your money where your mouth is!

            I know a lot of intelligent IT workers who are all itching to take posts abroad, precisely because of narrowing horizons imposed by limited people, espousing arguments like yours.

            The scientists are going already, taking their budgets with them to. Drawbridge Britain is going to fail; you can’t have enlightened knowledge work, in an environment poisoned by people making poor arguments about lack of room, or foreigners taking “British jobs” when there’s almost full employment.

          • Steve Gwynne

            Its a free world. Changing circumstances and all that.

            Regaining independance and sovereignty over policies, laws and rules is my primary concern. Everything else is your projection.

          • RobTM

            Thought you wouldn’t show faith in the £
            Sovereignty will be signed away when after 5 years or so, trade deals are ratified. Very likely sooner, when the government can’t finance it’s borrowing requirement.

          • RobTM

            Actually there are more than 4mi Britains abroad, if many retirees return due to loss of health care benefits, or are repatriated in tit for tat measures, there is NO WAY the NHS can cope. Already pre-Brexit the government tax receipts are falling, the low value of £ adds costs to many budgets. This dwarfs, any effect not paying EU fees would have, even if the May government doesn’t buy special deals for bankers & car makers.

            Added to that, the NHS relies on foreign workers trained abroad, who do very stressful jobs and their reward for serving this state, has been having their futures made insecure.

          • Steve Gwynne

            Ifs… If 4 million eu workers came here suddenly, the Nhs wouldnt cope.

            The uk economy is still buoyant despite falling pound. Why because it stimulates uk exports. Hence more tax receipts. Leaving eu customs union will remove 12,000 eu imposed import tariffs hence cheaper prices.

            The Nhs relies on migrant labour in order to service migrant labour. Whilst Lithuania experiences a brain drain of 350,000 people a year.

            Uk is not going into recession, it is transforming to a post-eu future.

            If you wanted to capitalise on Brexit you should have either bought euros before or bought shares in uk exporters. Im not responsible for your personal finances.

          • RobTM

            Government tax receipts for September have fallen by £2bn, yet more money to borrow when interest is already costing £55bn/year.
            Your buoyant economy is hogwash, the reality is the fall in £ feeds through very fast to inflationary price rises; hence Unilever’s spat with Tesco. Share price rises simply reflect multi-nationals making profits in foreign stronger currencies.
            Companies have contingency plans developed, they are leaving. Universities are losing top people and also students who payed more for their courses.

          • Steve Gwynne

            https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=tource=web&rct=j&url=https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/539194/Jun16_Receipts_NS_Bulletin_Final.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwi-r_WJgvjPAhUKuBoKHVksBHIQFggpMAE&usg=AFQjCNE310s1EmIKHVmgmL5KBAV4up2OjQ&sig2=kNleH5sMgIEFMp7Ej-rDAw

            Tax receipts for 15/16 £517bn. £2bn not exactly a crisis. Lets see by end of financial year.

            Unilever were partly acting opportunistically. Marmite british made.

            Share prices feed into investor confidence and foreign direct investment. Multinational corps underlaid by millions of individual investors.

            Companies also investing in british based operations.

            Dont know about top people leaving. Link please.

            Policies to stop educational centres using themselves as fronts for entry into uk.

            Sovereignty remains with fta. The decision to continue or discontinue ftas remains with the people/parliament.

            Uk has a credit rating of A.

            I appreciate as an ardent remainer you wish to spin any news as pessimistic but this is just your take and not one shared by millions of others.

            Economic fluctuations occuring all the time. 2008 crash was much more destructive to the uk economy. Uk not heading for recession but growth. 5% unemployment. I look forward to uk based policies to counter CAP, eu imposed import tariffs etc etc.

            Polling high for Theresa May. A majority have confidence in her. It is your democratic right to disagree but this does not make your pessimism a self-fulfilling prophecy. Just means you are pessimistic, that is all.

          • RobTM

            So you don’t care about £2bn in a month. Odd because EU fees are far less than that, with much monies spent in the UK. 4x£350mi < £2bn

          • Steve Gwynne

            The true UK cost of membership fees of the European Union.
            Gross National Income charge (membership fee) 2015 = £12.9 Billion less £4.5 Billion (given back by EU) = £8.5 Billion Net.
            https://fullfact.org/economy/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million
            VAT value added tax paid to the E.U. by the UK for 2015 = £2.6 Billion
            (Vat contributions in the 2015 EU budget total £14 billion pounds UK pays 18.5% of this)
            https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/483344/EU_finances_2015_final_web_09122015.pdf
            Traditional own resources/custom duties paid for 2015 = £2.63 Billion
            (TOR in 2015 is €18.8 billion (£14.6 billion), UK pays 18.0 per cent)
            https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/483344/EU_finances_2015_final_web_09122015.pdf
            European Court of Auditors November 2014 stated Member States will in the future be required to contribute a further €326 billion for commitments made under previous Budgets) Estimated UK payment 2015 = £0.5 billion
            https://www.euractiv.com/section/eu-priorities-2020/news/court-of-auditors-warns-of-multi-billion-eu-budget-gap/
            EU budget surcharge: = £850 million pounds (after rebate deducted).
            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3237073/Cameron-Osborne-quietly-pay-1-7BILLION-bill-Brussels-dismisses-totally-unacceptable.html
            Greece bailout rescue fund: In 2010, Jean-Claude Juncker, current European Commissioner president, made a pledge to UK Prime minister David Cameron, to never again use the EFSM to bail out another Eurozone country, he lied.https://acelg.blogactiv.eu/2015/07/20/how-europes-least-controversial-rescue-fund-became-controversial/http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/bailout-fallout-juncker-lies-to-cameron.html Cost of bailout = £850 million.

            Total for 2015 = £16 Billion.

          • RobTM

            Not impressed, our tax receipts are set to fall by far more than your claimed total. We’ll see what the autumn statement brings, Liam Fox must already be rattled, as he’s pressuring the Chancellor

  • Richard Bentall

    Fascinating research – thanks.

  • Jonathan

    *** The Regret results are dynamite ***

    6% of Leave voters regretted their vote *** even shortly after the result was published***. Only 1% of Remain voters regretted their vote. If you adjust the actual votes, that means that even shortly after the results were announced, vote, Remain would have got 17,024,500 votes versus 16,527,500 for Leave (rounded to the nearest 100).

    (Method: Adjust the Leave vote by subtracting 6% and adding 1% of the Remain vote; adjust the Remain vote by subtracting 1% and adding 6% of the Leave vote).

    Moreover …. 4% of Leave voters were unsure whether they would change their vote versus only 1% of Remain voters

    Moreover …. the survey was done IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE REFERENDUM … It can safely be assumed that now – after £’s devaluation and after May’s ‘hard exit’ Conference speech and Sturgeon’s intention to publish a referendum bill within a week – a lot more Leave voters will be regretting their vote.

    **** If the referendum was held now, this suggests Remain would win — and this is even before most of the adverse economic impact of the vote has hit people. ****

    (Caveat: Confidence intervals apply to samples taken from populations)

    • grumpygrey

      It was confidently expected, by pollsters, that Remain would win. Hence the arrogance of Cameron, Osborne etc. that they didn’t have a plan should Leave win. It is that sort of arrogance that inspired many people to vote Leave.

      If people responded to BES in the same way they did to other pollsters then it could be likely that given another vote the number in favour of leaving could be higher. However, there will not be another referendum on the matter and it’s about time the Remoaners got over it and started to look positively to the future rather than gazing at their navels and snivelling. There are another 6.5 billion people in the world to trade with rather than the shrinking economy of the EU’s 500 million, soon to be 430 million.

      • ohminus

        “However, there will not be another referendum on the matter and it’s about time the Remoaners got over it and started to look positively to the future rather than gazing at their navels and snivelling. ”

        It’s about time lazy buggers like you understand that blaming others for the consequences of being a layabout will soon not work anymore and the planet isn’t a charity to subsidise wilful ignorance.

        ” There are another 6.5 billion people in the world to trade with rather than the shrinking economy of the EU’s 500 million, soon to be 430 million.”

        And of course they will all fall over themselves to crawl up the arse of the very people who shafted them for the last several hundred years?

        You’re hilarious. Aside from the fact that the UK has nowhere near the negotiating team to actually make agreements with those nations, it also has nowhere near the leverage to get anything close to as favourable as the status quo.

        Your belief that these people will be any more favourable to the UK having its cake and eating it, too, is hilarious in its naiveté. Totally aside from the fact that several businesses are already now packing their bags, you’ll have to sell off the rest of them to get anyone interested in trading with you. Then good luck when the next crisis hits.

        • grumpygrey

          Wow! That ruffled your feathers didn’t it.
          You seem to have made assumptions about me in your ‘answers’ to my post. You do know that if you assume it makes an ass out of you and me.
          BTW your strong experienced negotiators have achieved wonders with the free trade deal with Canada haven’t they. After 7 years the Canadians have walked away. Wallonia wasn’t it, not even a country.
          As far as the next crisis is concerned I think the EU have set themselves up for it. I’d rather be on the outside looking in than being on the inside trying to get out.

          • ohminus

            “You seem to have made assumptions about me in your ‘answers’ to my post. You do know that if you assume it makes an ass out of you and me.”

            That’s cute, coming from someone who believes that if he just keeps his fingers crossed, everything will be fine.

            “BTW your strong experienced negotiators have achieved wonders with the free trade deal with Canada haven’t they. After 7 years the Canadians have walked away. ”

            BTW, you whataboutism was never an argument, and it’s twice as idiotic when it shows you haven’t done your homework.

            “As far as the next crisis is concerned I think the EU have set themselves up for it. I’d rather be on the outside looking in than being on the inside trying to get out.”

            As it stands, the only one setting themselves up for a crisis is the UK. Have fun with an economy based on bisquits and jam, that’s going to run the NHS without any problem…

  • Bugsculptor

    The sad thing about one in ten leave voters regretting their vote is that it’s a larger portion than the majority of the leave campaign. If five percent of the U.K. voted remain instead of leave we would have had a 53% remain victory.

    • Mary Ann

      And Britain would now be a much better place to live in.

    • Steve Gwynne

      If that is true and it is considered objective to take a tiny possibly manipulated sample and then project that miniscule sample on to 17 million voters. I personally do not know a single Bregretter.

      • Tigger

        Then sadly you don’t get out much

        • Steve Gwynne

          Grow up boy and take your eu neoliberal fascism with you. Hail Juncker!!

          • Tigger

            Just the sort of response I would expect from an inept neanderthal. Obviously you don’t know a single Bregretter as you don’t know many people and with the attitude problem you display on here I can quite understand why. I am neither a neoliberal or a fascist. More things you have wrongly presumed because you have no real experience in the real World.

          • Steve Gwynne

            You come across as a bigot full stop. That is all I need to know. Hail Juncker!

          • Tigger

            “That’s all I need to know” ? Maybe your brain is incapable of dissecting the information and resolving the differences in order to calculate the percentage of truth in a statement. Whichever way I am not a bigot. I am just the average man on the street who can see people changing their minds left, right and center. Hardly surprising when people were lied to time and again by arseholes that appear not a lot different to yourself. You know the sort-. Pigheaded, racist brainless fuckers. When you can put together a real, researched and informed opinion on the subject I am available to discuss your failings.

          • Steve Gwynne

            You most certainly are a bigot. Obviously you have no clue what it means. Look up the definition and learn something about yourself. Bigotted prick!

          • Tigger

            If you actually had a REAL opinion then I may be considered a bigot. But because you do not have a clue what you are talking about then I cannot be accused of being intolerant of your opinion. Only of your mental capacity

          • Steve Gwynne

            Exactly what a bigot would say.

          • Tigger

            and you still can’t put a verifiable fact online. ? We all know why that is

          • Steve Gwynne
          • Tigger

            See. I said you couldn’t and you proved me right…. VERIFIABLE. Not guessing
            Polls are notoriously wrong. Tories to lose General Election – wrong. Remain to win the ADVISORY only referendum. – wrong.
            As for the falling pound, so far we have lost the equivalent of £10,000 PER PERSON in lost buying power since May declared she was a dictator and would circumvent the laws (British laws) by starting article 50. Which as we both know is illegal. Try harder. Lets have some real facts from you. Any turd can post a link without researching it

          • Pooh

            Tigger. There is an old saying – “Never argue with a fool – he will drag you down to his level and defeat you by experience”. A fool is incapable of understanding logic so you are bound to lose because you cannot demonstrate how ridiculous their argument is. Their first defence is usually to call you names as though that improves their argument. Give me strength!

            It’s best to let fools wallow in their own stupidity. They should remember the other saying namely “It’s better to stay silent, and be thought to be stupid; than to say something and prove you are an idiot”.

          • LondonDanny

            Your attitude is very unpleasant.

            We’ve lost 10k each in buying power? What utter tosh.

          • LondonDanny

            Can we please stop this appalling personal abuse and name calling? The article appears to conclude that the level of regret is not much different from a general election. I’d also suggest that it may just possibly be in the interest of Remain voters to tell a polling company that they voted Leave but now wish they hadn’t.

    • william.tobin

      And also, it mustn’t be forgotten that there were 5½ million people excluded from the referendum vote because Parliament considered them too young, too long abroad (like me), or too foreign to be consulted. If you think that these people should be enfranchised for all future voting, please consider signing my petition to Parliament:
      https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/166615

  • Matthew Hitchmough

    There is a very big problem with this research.. one the author tries to gloss over. You are asking individuals if they voted Leave or Remain in the belief that they will answer truthfully but how many Remain voters have claimed to have voted Leave and now regret it to skew the result? You have no way of verifying these people acted voted Leave so all these conclusions people are making are a joke.

  • Martin Housden

    In return for lower immigration 60 percent of voters were prepared to see the country worse off whereas only 30 percent were prepared to see themselves personally worse off. In other words everyone but me should pay for my bigotry. The important thing is to campaign to get the many non-bigoted Quitters to change their minds. A strong country is a welcoming country.

  • brimstone

    This forum has been really entertaining! I love the way they allow expletives and insults so one can get a more accurate impression of the posters.

    Seriously though, it’s great to read all the various opinions. I’m one of those peculiar individuals who believe there are two sides to every situation and an opposing opinion is very useful to put one’s own in perspective, and so worth listening to with an open mind and then accepting as having a valid point or dismissing as dogmatic rubbish, preferably politely.

    The article also was very informative. Yes, people could be lying but the article does try to address that issue by correlating with other data. You could say people might lie in any poll, so should all polls be dismissed as irrelevant? The article even points out the weaknesses in the poll and at no point does it insist it has the definitive answer, unlike some of the people posting here.

    Many Brexiters are concerned by the possible erosion of British values and culture by an influx of foreign elements but without any racial animosity. Foreigners simply have different (not necessarily inferior) values to us. However there is a case that foreign cultures enrich British society (I give you curry restaurants and Chinese takeaways). Stayers were concerned about the economic consequences of Brexit. Weighing all this up, I voted to stay. I’m hoping there will be a bright side to the result but so far we are only seeing the consequences. The coming months will tell, but it won’t surprise me if Brexit is abandoned as the downsides become more ‘in our faces’. And of course we still have the Parliamentary vote to contend with…….