to share with you the croudfund link for the new legal action to stop brexit

[MarieBurnham]

www.crowdjustice.org/case/brexit-for-the-100/

I've only given a tenner, but there are plenty of rich people (unless it's all stealth boasting about dipique candles) here, so we should be able to help.

It's currently at 18.507k and needs 70!

they might just have been the group most negatively affected by immigration, or that's how they felt

I think the feeling was 'being left behind' - and I can see that. Not sure if immigration was a big factor as places unaffected by immigration voted Leave.

But now,it's the people who feel left behind who are being appealed to. That's good - but what price will other people have to pay?

amispartacus

Statistics created by experts though.

Bit the statistics are based on separate polls. Bearing in mind the animosity re leave and the snobbishness, I wonder how many 'educated' people owned up to voting Leave? Btw I'm educated above degree level, am v middle class and voted leave . I wouldn't publicise that now though.

I wouldn't publicise that now though

Can't trust the polls? Honestly.....

I'm getting a bit lost with this thread as I thought some of the posters who are now going on about leave voters who are older, less educated, working class men as if that somehow makes their vote less valid, were talking about the need to heal the divisions in this country earlier

Not sure if immigration was a big factor as places unaffected by immigration voted Leave

It's been shown that the correlation is with the rate of change in immigration, not the amount.

I'm getting a bit lost with this thread as I thought some of the posters who are now going on about leave voters who are older, less educated, working class men as if that somehow makes their vote less valid, were talking about the need to heal the divisions in this country earlier

If that's with reference to me, I haven't said anything about a vote being 'less valid'. It's just that those are the type of people more likely to vote Leave. It does not make their vote less valid at all. But it does give reasons for 'being left behind' - and this is a group who may (as a class) feel left behind. Lots of reasons for that. Their vote is perfectly valid.

However, surely it should be possible to help this group of people without causing division in the country. You don't need to have a go at 'the educated, Liberal elite' - we should be working together. Something that has probably not happened as much as it should have and there are groups who have been left behind.

Actually it was me who said I wasn't suggesting that every Leave voter is white, male, over 50, uneducated, working-class, or that every white, male, over 50, uneducated, working-class voter voted Leave.

Sorry ami I was getting a bit prickly because of the Alf Garnett comments and got a bit mixed up who said what. I see you didn't say anything implying any votes are less valid than others.

I agree that bandying liberal elite around is not productive and honestly think that the differences between leave and remain voters has been over-stated all over the place. There are demographic differences but they are not as clear cut as often presented.

I do think there is a danger of overstating the left behind narrative. Clearly the leave vote was very high amongst people who have been "left behind". But is was also high amongst other people. Where I live over 70% voted leave, this is by no means a deprived area. It is prosperous and a lovely place to live, as are many places where the majority voted leave.

Obviously 'Alf Garnett' types were more likely to vote for Brexit than anybody else. That attitude sort of defines the 'Alf Garnett type'.

Many people have chosen to believe that the popularity of shows like Till Death Us Do Part and Love Thy Neighbour was because of the 'irony' of the attitudes.

Apparently it wasn't, it was the 'elite' sniggering at the cave-man attitudes of the 'low-grade' viewers.

The current narrative seems to be 'just about managing' - looking at those 'left behind'.

I do worry that this is all talk though - the policies for real redistribution of wealth, ensuring social mobility and a sharing of resources to help those struggling won't happen.

Older people are simply more likely to have had less formal education. I think it was 1975 before the school leaving age was raised to 16, and in the 1960s only a small percentage went to University. So there is a good chance that someone over 60 left school at 15 and did a limited amount of studying beyond that. They need to compare the educational attainment of Leave/Remain in younger age groups to counteract this and see whether there is a correlation.

hey need to compare the educational attainment of Leave/Remain in younger age groups to counteract this and see whether there is a correlation

Sure it's been done. I'm sure there's probably a PHd thesis on the statistics at the moment.

The relevance of Alf Garnett is that the kind of attitudes that he exemplified are coming back with a vengeance.

All this dismissing certain sections of society as 'liberal elite' is feeding into that. A modern-day Alf Garnett railing against the evils of liberalism is no longer a nasty, small-minded person. Apparently he's a virtuous champion of 'the people' against 'the elite'.

I've run regressions of the referendum vote as a function of education, income, age, gender, job characteristics, housing tenure, attitudes to risk, psychological profile, and other variables. Education is the single biggest determinant by far, even after controlling for age. Income is not significant. Being economically active (working full- or part-time, or unemployed but looking for work) are associated with voting Remain, being out of the labour force (retired, working age but not looking for work) associated with Leave. Same for housing tenure: having a mortgage or renting is associated with voting Remain, owning a house outright or renting from a housing association or council is associated with voting Leave (also after controlling for income, age, etc.). This is using data from the British Election Study, not a poll.

mismoon Yes all those,correlations are present but the important bit that often gets left out is how big is each correlation and therefore how much does it tell us about how different people voted.

Missmoon Where does the BES get its data? From the BES internet panel, which is, to quote from their website:

The BES internet panel data is collected by YouGov using an online sample of YouGov panel members.

They also say:

Note: data are not yet corrected for underestimation of the 2015 Conservative lead in the 2015 panel data.

So basically a poll, with all the inherent errors included, as well as known errors not 'corrected'.

No-one on here appears to see that many Lave voters, ie all those I know, voted to expand the UK's links with the world away from a white eurocentric view. Only by being out of the EU, can the UK properly engage with Africa, India, the US, Canada - ie the 5.5bn people not in the EU

The BES is much more robust that a standard opinion poll. It has a very sound methodology and is the best data source we have on voting and politics views in the U.K.. I posted the above in response to Peregrina who asked about the effect of education after controlling for age. Ignore if you're not interested!

"Note: data are not yet corrected for underestimation of the 2015 Conservative lead in the 2015 panel data"

I'm not using the panel, but the 2016 post referendum cross section.

WrongTrouser the effect for education is very large and statistically robust, as are the effects for working full-time (and part-time but more than 4 hours a week), psychological profiles especially openness (out of the Big 5), and owning a house outright vs. owning with a mortgage or renting privately. The effects for being unemployed and renting from the council / housing association are quite weak. Also, in case anyone is interested, those who voted Leave but have changed their minds since then (around 5-6% according to the data) are mostly young Leave voters (under 30), this surprised me.

mismoon I think it's like reporting of health risks. There needs to be some actual.numbers included. For example, yes there is a correlation with education. And it is one of the most significant. But nevertheless, 43% of people with a degree voted leave. It's fine to say there is a correlation, the problem is when this is exaggerated to imply that all university educated people voted remain - which is just not true. I know you are not saying this, but these correlations are often presented this way - as if a correlation means that most of one group voted one way and most of the other voted the other, rather than that, as is often the case, there is a difference but a large crossover between the two groups.

as if a correlation means that most of one group voted one way and most of the other voted the other

Oops- of course a correlation does exactly mean that mist of one group voted one way and most of the other group the other

The point I am trying to make is that the "most" can be 90% or 75% or 51% and these are very different scenarios.

Interesting point raised earlier, why is this relevant? Are we saying that only/mainly degree educated people voted the 'right' way therefore only those people should be allowed to vote?

43% of people with a degree voted leave.

Do you mean that of those that voted that had a degree, 43% voted leave? (Because that isn't what you said. )