Euro Parliament poll shows Labour must still honour Brexit referendum to win power

Clear Brexit trend in voting intention for European Parliament elections – especially among working-class voters

Results in a poll of voting intention for the likely European Parliament elections in May – which the UK will have to run if a Brexit deal has not been finalised – show a clear lead for Brexit-supporting parties overall and in key regions, suggesting that leave sentiment in many parts of England outside London and in Wales has hardened.

Overall, the standings in European Parliament voting intention in the poll, conducted by YouGov for The Times, are:

  • Brexit/UKIP 29%
  • Labour 24%
  • Tories 16%
  • Lib Dems 8%

In the 2017 general election, only two percent of voters back UKIP, so a twenty-nine percent poll for UKIP/Brexit represents a huge protest vote at the failure of the Tories to enact the referendum result.

Results in the north, Midlands and Wales and those among working-class ‘C2DE’ voters make the picture even clearer:

C2DE

  • UKIP/Brexit 37%
  • Labour 22%
  • Tories 16%
  • LibDem 6%

Even among middle-class voters, however, support for explicitly pro-Brexit parties stands at 41%.

Non-London

Midlands & Wales:

  • UKIP/Brexit 34%
  • Labour 23%
  • Tories 16%
  • LibDem 7%

North of England:

  • Labour 34%
  • UKIP/Brexit 31%
  • Tories 13%

SKWAWKBOX comment:

Labour’s leadership, following the party’s conference policy, tabled the option of a new referendum in Parliament – and it was decisively defeated, as it was when tabled separately.

But to those aware of working-class opinion, especially outside London, it’s always been clear that Labour had to see through Brexit or risk alienating huge tracts of its heartlands.

Labour’s current strong polling shows that the majority of its base understood that Jeremy Corbyn has played a difficult hand brilliantly. But if Labour wants to win power – as millions of suffering people in this country desperately need – it’s now time for the party to focus on delivering a Brexit that works as well as possible for everyone. Ultimately, that’s always been true.

Those who can’t see beyond a desire to ‘stop Brexit’ to the greater prize of a country governed by Labour for the many cannot be allowed to dictate the party’s agenda, tactics or message.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here for a monthly donation via GoCardless. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.

119 responses to “Euro Parliament poll shows Labour must still honour Brexit referendum to win power

  1. As others have said YouGov have their biases and tend to be an ‘outlier’.

    • Hypocrite. You normally rely on YouGov fortnightly polls for your bullshit propaganda, like 99.9% of people would vote remain, if allowed DTC. Now its all change because your reality was a load of metropolitan, neoliberal projection.

      • But that’s not really the case is it? If you check back through my posts you will find that I have tended to rely, wherever I can, on the results from academic surveys and the overall trends from polls . You will also note that I have frequently questioned SB’s reliance on YouGov polls that were commissioned by the DM and Express.
        The most significant finding of this poll if you can be bothered to read it is that there are awful lot of don’t knows.

        I wonder why nobody has quoted the last question in this poll
        In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the EU?
        Right to Leave 42%
        Wrong to Leave 47%

    • My apologies for interjecting, but can I just point out that way down the page I have linked to a number of articles about Julian Assange, including by John Pilger, Jonathan Cook and Craig Murray. And I have posted one or two others in the past few hours which I’m sure you will find of great interest.

      • Thanks – I’ve read several of them, I found the Assange evidence particularly interesting.

      • Yes, thanks Allan. My suspicion is that the situation with was probably not a set up, but was used as an opportunity by the authorities to then try to smear his name and get him sent to the USA.
        What is clear, and very well expressed by Jonathan Cook is that this has put investigative journalism at risk.

      • Allan, if you want to post a disproportionate amount of comments and links then set up your own site and do it there.

        We are not here to listen to you drone on all the time.

      • Er, IA, is anyone forcing you to read my posts? My advice to YOU would be to go forth and multiply. THAT should fix your problem!

        Steve and Simon (and whoever else is interested), please check out the Craig Murray article that I linked to in the comment I just posted at 7.01am, mainly for what he says right at the end.

  2. It would be a major error, politically, for Labour to re-nominate Remain MEPs and allow Blairite candidates to sabotage the unity, in terms of a clear message supporting the Exit vote, before the coming General election.
    Nothing would be easier than for the media to give enormous publicity to a Remain minority among candidates and ignore the clear message of the leadership, which is to respect democracy.
    The right wing would like nothing better than to replace the socialist labour party message with racist pseudo nationalism.
    The idea of automatically re-nominating the MEPs, many of them accomplices in the chicken coup, because there isn’t time to choose wisely is nonsense. Better to run no candidates at all than to give the Fifth Column another chance.

      • Ahh! So …. your allegiance is to Dell Boy Nige and his snake oil.

        Interesting.

      • @RH what’s our choices exactly if you want brexit to actually happen? Labour is going to shaft brexiters in it’s usual attempts to appease the middle class.

        So we are left with Tories (yuck) UKIP (now Tommy Robinson party) or Farage…

        There are no other options open, apart from staying at home, which risks remainers getting (re)elected and dropping more spanners.

        Time the middle class accepted their fate.

      • “Time the middle class accepted their fate”

        So you were taught politics by Mickey Mouse?

        The ‘middle classes’ comprise more than half the nation and are a crucial part of the Labour vote – formed largely from the working class of previous generations.

        Your ‘class analysis’ is that of a moron with head up the arse. Effete posing as watered-down Marxism without a grasp of even the basics.

    • Interesting that you refer to Remainers as Blairites and right wingers as if that supports your argument. Then you are followed by a post by Lundiel saying he agrees – and is going to vote for Farage.
      As I’ve posted before this isn’t a left/centre/right issue. And calling Remainers a fifth column (which was originally a reference to secret fascist sympathisers in Madrid) is a deep, needless and inaccurate insult

      • ” A deep, needless and inaccurate insult”

        Simon – You are inF.ably polite.

        It actually just the usual inane bollocks.

  3. The turn out is of course miniscule. In doing local election canvassing work in the working class areas in a Tory South of England outside London district over this last week, my observation is that there are so many more people declaring that they will not vote at all. My thoughts are that opinion polls are such a passive statement of opinion and so may result in such unpredictable outcomes that it is is not really even worth talking about.

  4. These figures a not credible and do not not correspond to own findings when doorstep campaigning in the North West. Every Labour voter and some who were unsure, wanted another vote

    More spin from Skwarwky. Just because a voter supports Labour, it doesn’t mean they support Brexit.

    • “Just because a voter supports Labour, it doesn’t mean they support Brexit.”

      The fact is the polls and academic surveys almost without exception indicate the opposite. They have consistently shown that both Labour members and voters support a second referendum and staying in the EU.

      All the polls and surveys also indicate that Conservative Party members are by far the strongest supporters of Brexit and are also the most vociferous opponents to a second referendum.

      • Religious belief is sooo much more becoming to last season’s political fashionistas!

        … and it short-circuits the boring things – like evidence.

    • Comfortable bourgeois voters are the least affected by Brexit or its delay as we will never leave the EU. ‘The System’ is not designed to allow us to leave; corporate money; power & influence will ensure that we Remain. No major political party endorses ‘Leave’ & gov’t owned PSB are working towards the goals of their masters. There is no organised campaign to Leave & still the question remains unanswered; why have we not left?……….but you know the answer!

  5. Who are “those who can’t see beyond a desire to stop Brexit,” Skwawkbox?
    Are they the evil twins of “those who can’t see beyond Brexit?”

    I think you’ll find Brexiteers more characteristic of obsessive shortsightedness than Remainers, if you’ll forgive the condescension… as I forgive those who condescend against me etc.

      • No. The main thing that characterizes Leavers is an old intractable English trait – unreal nostalgia about a past that never was transmuted into a dream of a fantasy future that will never be.

        It is a key thread linking Lexiteers with the 18th Century fantasies of Rees Mogg and the fake Churchillian rhetoric of Johnson – and the solid core of Tory Brexit voters, of course.

        Not a progressive vision – just an old black and white film.

      • RH, “unreal nostalgia about a past that never was” goes all the way back to pride in Empire fostered from way back then.
        Getting soldiers to massacre ‘natives’ who dare to want unreasonable things like self-determination or food is difficult – but made easier if the soldiers are brainwashed (as always) into hatred of the enemy.
        Pride in nation is just the other side of that coin.
        People are depressingly gullible.

      • ‘Gullibility’. Indeed – when you see the evidence of where Brexit comes from : the extreme right backed by the foreign-based propaganda press. And some believe that it foreshadows a New Jerusalem!

      • @RH

        Utter baloney!

        What unites most exit voters is having nothing.

        You cannot grasp what it’s like to work two jobs for nothing except keeping your head above the water.

        I, and millions like me, 1) voted out, because for once, it’s _OUR_ choice (and if we go under, so what? It’s _our_ choice) and 2) to stick it to the boss class!

      • Never voting labour again 2:25 pm

        My sincere thanks for so neatly summing up how inane your whole argument is.

      • Inane?!?!

        Someone like you comes straight out of St.Bliars pages. Sometime ago, you were Mondeo man. Later on, you became 3 series man (check out the car sales over the last couple of decades, the switch is clear). Now, you’re “Who is going to tell my dog he can’t go skiing” man…

        In the mean time, millions got left behind. My step kids won’t be able to go to uni, no matter how bright they are. They won’t own their own (modest) home either. They’ll definitely work three jobs (likely providing services for people such as yourself).

        And because I want something better (and not just for me either. What about those poor Vietnamese or Bangladeshi’s working for a dollar a day so you get Ralph Lauren or Hugo Boss clothes…), you dismiss me as inane…

        If my argument lacks sense, then justify your remain stance…After all, once democracy is gone, it won’t come back

      • Never voting labour again 3:13pm

        My thanks again for reinforcing my point.

      • Just to clarify, if you re-read my comment to you, above, you will see that it is your augment that I am dismissing as inane and not you as a person. I’ve no doubt your heart is in the right place no matter how misguided your ideas may be.

      • NVLA, why do you think that anyone who opposes you is a Blair supporter or wears designer clothes? I see your anger at your kids’ situation but insulting other posters on here does no one any good.

      • @SD

        Because that’s how it is. Anyone outside of these stereotypes is deluded.

        Let’s take EU spending as an example oft touted. For example, the railway station is “upgraded”

        A large corporation wins the tender (because small companies or groups aren’t allowed). The money then gets filtered to sub contractors, often from well outside the local area. No skills are offered, nor no training. Meanwhile, the town centre goes down the swanny, left to comprise of charity shops, phone shops, empty shops and bookies.

        The EU government gets (individually) in excess of €10k per month spent on them via lobbying. Why would they listen to the poor.

        Finally, can you tell me anything about Walter Hallstein and his background?

        TL:DR?

        https://youtu.be/Zzl4B3mrKQE

      • NVLA, not heard of him before so looked him up. Apparently there are false statements about him being a Nazi Party member. Is that why you mentioned him?

      • Never voting labour again

        Walter Hallstein – Well he appears to have been a man that was universally admired for his great intellect. Why do you ask about him, I wouldn’t really expect you to agree with his political philosophy but why pick him out in particular. If you have an issue perhaps it would be a little more constructive if you stopped trying to be cryptic and just stated clearly what your problem is

      • I don’t think Rodney Atkinson to be a purveyor of false information.

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_Atkinson

        https://youtu.be/7Nf5KeC4dAs

        Before you dismiss this, remind yourself of Mussolini’s definition of fascism, and ask yourself if things are different to his definition.

        But, to finish on Walter Hallstein, he was the first president of the EEC, something a remainer should know really. After all, it’s the EU that they believe in.

      • If SB felt the need to censor your comment because of the links you provided I will take that as indication that those sites were quite extreme which probably doesn’t say much for the veracity of their contents..

      • Comments with two or more links are moderated automatically by the website itself (sadly, I thought it was three).

        “Given the choice between changing ones mind and proving there’s no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof”
        John Kenneth Galbraith

  6. ” it’s always been clear that Labour had to see through Brexit or risk alienating huge tracts of its heartlands.”

    This has been long established as a myth – the ‘working class’ fallacy.

    *All* SEC groups of Labour supporters showed a majority for ‘Remain’, and the core of Brexit support is in the Tory heartlands.

    Leakage to UKIP has been essentially from the Tory vote.

    • As a P.S. : the main dangers to the Labour vote is leakage to the LibDems and Greens and consolidation of the SNP in Scotland.

      • What the f. has Blair got to do with it? Except that he shares crude and meaningless generalisations about ‘class’ – as if a class label was a signifier of virtue or had a guarantee of wisdom attached to it.

      • It is of course no coincidence that on the very same day Julian was arrested and dragged out of the embassey, that one of the women we have been fraudulently led to believe he raped, just happens – along with her solicitor or whatever – to resurrect the whole thing. It was ALL planned in advance so that those defending Julian – as with Diane Abbot and Jeremy Corbyn (and as the PTB knew that many on the left around the world WOULD) – can be castigated as being apologists for a rapist. And THAT is precisely what happened!

        https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8846940/diane-abbott-sparks-fury-defending-julian-assange/

      • In a John Pilger article from 2015 that I linked to in a post a couple of days ago, it says the following:

        Less than 24 hours later, the Stockholm Chief Prosecutor, Eva Finne, took over the investigation. She wasted no time in cancelling the arrest warrant, saying, “I don’t believe there is any reason to suspect that he has committed rape.” Four days later, she dismissed the rape investigation altogether, saying, “There is no suspicion of any crime whatsoever.” The file was closed.

        (Ends)

        So are we supposed to believe she looked into it all – ie the Stockholm Chief Prosecutor – and got it wrong somehow. THAT of course, is inconceiveble, but it goes without saying that the corrupt corporate media and the war-mongering fascist psychopaths who they serve don’t pass such information on to their readers and audiences.

        And what good timing for this to happen, just three weeks before the local council elections. Anyway, here’s an article which – to my mind – is just further evidence that it was all a set up AND that it happened NOW, so as to get some additional mileage out of it all by vilifying and condemning progressives who the PTB knew would defend Julian. And I should just point out that the State’s – the PTB – propaganda machine are dissembling the falsehood that Julian took refuge in the Ecuadorian embassey to escape from the charges of rape, whereas of course the actual reason, as they all know, is that he was afraid if he ended up in Sweden (on trumped up charges) he would end up being extradited to the US.

        Anyway, here’s a clip from the article:

        Ms Abbott defended the famous 47-year-old hacker and repeated the phrase “charges were never” brought against him three times during a radio interview this morning.

        Speaking on Radio 4’s Today programme, she said: “The allegations were made but the charges were never brought.

        “We all know what this is about. It’s not the rape charges.

        “It’s about the Wikileaks and all of that embarrassing information about the activities of the American military and security services that was made public.”

        https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8854345/julian-assange-sex-assault-victim-blasts-diane-abbott-for-downplaying-allegations-against-wikileaks-founder/

      • The charges that a Swedish prosecutor admitted has no one to make them…

    • A day or two ago – in another SB thread (I think it must have been the one about the so-called Integrity Initiative) – I was saying how the PTB and their propagandists in the corporate media dismiss and label free thinkers – critical thinkers – who see through their propaganda, as conspiracy theorists and usefull idiots etc, and it just occured to me earlier today that they CAN’T do that with Julian Assange and Wikileaks because he/they provide actual evidence of their war crimes etc and, as John Pilger and Jonathan Cook point out in their articles in effect, the reason they went after him – apart from their sadistic need to punish him – is so as to deter others from exposing them for what they do and what they are.

      Anyway, I also came across the following article yesterday from December 2010, which details how Julian met the two women (when he went to Sweden) and how he ended up having sexual encounters with them each of them, and I have no doubt whatsoever that the two woman were all part of the trap which had been set for him (or are we REALLY supposed to believe that he just happened to meet them, end up having sex with each of them, and then BOTH of them report him to the police AND, that in turn lead to all that’s happened since!):

      https://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden

      • I’ve just seen this in The Moon of Alabama. “Wikileaks’ publishing of the CIA’s hacking tools known as Vault 7” is behind the move on Assange. “In January 2017 a lawyer for Julian Assange tried to make a deal with the U.S. government. Assange would refrain from publishing some critical content of the Vault 7 files in exchange for limited immunity and safe passage to talk with U.S. officials. One issue to be talked about was the sourcing of the DNC files which Wikileaks published. U.S. officials in the anti-Trump camp claimed that Russia had hacked the DNC servers. Assange consistently said that Russia was not the source of the published files. He offered technical evidence to prove that. The Justice Department wanted a deal and made on offer to Assange. But intervention from then FBI director Comey sabotaged it:

        Multiple sources tell me the FBI’s counterintelligence team was aware and engaged in the Justice Department’s strategy but could not explain what motivated Comey to send a different message around the negotiations …
        With the deal seemingly in jeopardy Wikileaks published the CIA’s Vault 7 files of “Marble Framework” and “Grasshopper”. These CIA tools systematically changed its sniffing tools to make them look “Russian” or “Iranian” by inserting foreign language strings into their source code. The publication proved that the attribution of the DNC pilfering and other “hacks” to Russia was nonsense. The publishing of these files ended all negotiations:

        On April 7, 2017, Assange released documents with the specifics of some of the CIA malware used for cyber attacks. It had immediate impact: A furious U.S. government backed out of the negotiations, and then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo slammed WikiLeaks as a “hostile intelligence service.”

        https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/04/assange-vault-7.html#more

        “The thinking of government officials – current and former – that I’ve talked to is that shutting down WikiLeaks once and for all – or at least separating it from the mainstream media to make it less attractive as a recipient of U.S. government secrets, will at least be one step towards greater internal security.”

      • Of course, the Assange affair links to the implications of Brexit. This country currently has a choice – even if the Tories are unlikely to face down the US.

        Once out of the EU, the subservient UK will find it much harder to resist US demands.

    • I’m not sure where this post is gonna appear in the sequence of posts related to Julian Assange, but here it goes anyway.

      The following is from the Extradition request – which I just came across – under the heading ‘Chronology’ (and is refering to Julian):

      During his visit he had sexual intercourse with two women [AA and SW]. After AA and SW spoke to each other and realised that they had both had intercourse with the Appellant during the currency of his visit in circumstances where respectively they had or might have been or become unprotected against disease or pregnancy, SW wanted the Appellant to get tested for disease. On 20th August 2010 SW went to the police to seek advice. AA accompanied her for support. The police treated their visit as the filing of formal reports for rape of SW and molestation of AA.

      (Ends)

      Now I don’t know what the relationship of the two women was to each-other (and I am deeply sceptical about anything they said), but isn’t it an amazing coincidence that they just happened to speak to each-other (and realise – discover – that they had both had intercourse with Julian). Hmm. Anyway, it then goes on to say that “respectively” they had or might have been or become unprotected against desease or pregnancy (the latter indicating that neither of them was using any form of birth control), and that SW wanted Julian to get tested for disease. So then SW went to the police – not to make a complaint – but “to seek advice” AND AA “accompanied her for support”. In other words, AA obviously didn’t feel she had been violated in any way (by Julian), and was merely accompanying SW to the police station to support her. Hmm. Oh, and that led to the filing of formal reports for rape and molestation of SW and AA!

      Now if you’ve read Julian’s statement to the Swedish prosecutor (in 2016 if I remember correctly, and which I linked to on Craig Murray’s blog in another post somewhere on this page), you will have read that at the time he went to Sweden the US authorities were really ramping up their ‘case’ against Wikileaks, and Julian in particular (and had shut down bank accounts etc) and, as such, Julian was staying at safe-houses, and one of the two women (I can’t figure out which one is which just at this moment) offered to let him stay at her place precisely BECAUSE of the situation Julian was in, and, KNOWING that to be the case (and it seems unlikely that the other woman wasn’t aware of his predicament as well), decides to go to the police to seek advice (and the other one just happens to accompany her)! Hmm. I mean it would have been much more convenient for SW to have rung the police to ask for advice of course, but then her dear friend – who didn’t know (prior to this point) that Julian had already slept with her despite the fact that he was staying at her place! – couldn’t have accompanied her to the police station AND it all turned out the way it did. I mean if you have TWO women who have been violated then there is no question that he must be guilty! How very convenient.

      And then there was the bit about all the photos of Julian that one of them had – and I’m assuming it was SW for the moment (whoever it was that he stayed with) – and yet we’re supposed to believe that SHE had never at any point prior to Julian going to Sweden spoken to her dear friend about having a crush on Julian (and even if I’ve got them the wrong way round, the same would still apply). So a woman has a crush on a guy who she knows is keeping a low profile because Big Brother is moving in on him, and yet she just happens to go to the police – with her dear supportive friend – to seek advice. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it all sounds totally plausible doesn’t it!

      https://www.scribd.com/document/80912442/Agreed-Facts-Assange-Case

    • The whole affair was a set up from start to finish, including the reasons the Ecuadorian president revoked Julian’s asylum. In one article I read – and no doubt it was being said in other articles – it said that Julian abused his hospitality at the embassey (or words to that effect) and that he smeared walls with faeces and skateboarded around (and I think there was something else). I mean the very idea that someone who has been granted asylum by a country and is, as such, staying in their embassey, would do anything to jeopardise that status is just too absurd for words, and is obviously fabrication. But there’s also another side to their machinations which I wasn’t aware of, and which David McNiven linked to (in another SB thread) on wikileaks website (so I’m posting it again in case you missed it):

      https://defend.wikileaks.org/2019/04/03/ecuador-twists-embarrassing-ina-papers-into-pretext-to-oust-assange/

      • Correction: The article is on the ‘Defend Wikileaks’ website.

    • I just ended up reading FIVE articles about Julian Assange in The Guardian that have been published since his arrest on Thursday, one of them by Jess Phillips (and is just what you would expect from her), and one by Owen Jones (which is fairly reasonable), but not ONE of them has a Comments section.

      Anyway, one of them is about a guy who has been arrested in Ecuador for supposedly helping wikileaks/Julian Assange hack and circulate personal stuff about President Moreno and his family. It is of course a set up – ie that Julian Assange and wikileaks did it – so as to justify removing Julian’s asylum status. Earlier on I reposted a link to an article on the Defend Wikileaks website (that David McNiven posted in another thread) which shows conclusively and beyond any shadow of a doubt that Julian and wikileaks had nothing whatsoever to do with it….. as if HE/THEY would do such a thing under the circumstances, or circulate such trivial material anyway!

      And my point in mentioning it is that the Guardian article completely omits to mention any of the information given in the Defend Wikileaks article and, as such, just goes along with the propaganda lies and falsehoods cooked up by Moreno and his buddies, who were no doubt behind the ‘hack’:

      https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/apr/12/julian-assange-ecuador-arrests-man-with-alleged-links-to-wikileaks

      Here’s an extract from the wikipedia page on Julian Assange, and tells you ALL you need to know about THIS particular aspect of it all:

      On 21 July 2018, Glenn Greenwald reported that the Ecuadorian Foreign Ministry was finalising an agreement to release Assange into the custody of the British government. In a press conference the following week, President Lenín Moreno confirmed that he wanted Assange out of the embassy but also “for his life not to be in danger”. This prompted wide speculation that Moreno aimed to strengthen Ecuador’s relations with the United States and assist their extradition efforts.

      • And this also:

        On 16 October 2018, congressmen from the United States House Committee on Foreign Affairs wrote an open letter to Lenin Moreno which described Assange as a dangerous criminal and stated that progress between the US and Ecuador in the areas of economic co-operation, counternarcotics assistance and the return of a USAID mission to Ecuador depended on Assange being “handed over to the proper authorities”

        And then a bit further on it says:

        In December 2018, President Moreno reached an agreement to have Assange leave the embassy in what he called “near liberty”. According to a radio interview by Moreno, British sources told him that Assange would be free to live in the United Kingdom without extradition after serving a prison sentence of at most six months. The formal offer was less explicit, simply stating that he would not be extradited to a country with the death penalty. Assange’s lawyers declined citing a need for further protection.

        It’s well worth reading:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange#Presidency_of_Lenin_Moreno

      • Right, so now I know the names of the two women Julian had sex with when he was in Sweden. AA are the initials of Anna Ardin, and SW are the initials of Sofia Wilen. Craig Murray refers to them by name in the article I’ve linked to below. A lot of detail is missing from the article, and it will no doubt – like me – leave you asking questions. But can I first just say this: At one point during the last few days as I accumulated more and more information about what happened in Sweden regarding the two women, I couldn’t help but wonder what sort of age they were, but the overall impression I got was that they must be quite young and unsophisticated, for want of a better way of putting it. Well I still have no idea what sort of age Sophia Wilen was (and bare in mind that it was nine years ago), but in Craig’s article there’s a picture – a photo – of Anna Ardin, and I would hazard a guess that she is in her mid-late twenties.

        That said, I don’t know when the picture was taken, and all I DO know is that Craig originally wrote and posted the article in 2012. And just to confuse matters more, I also came across another website with Craig’s article that has a different picture of her on it in which she looks like she’s around forty. The reason I think it’s an important factor is because obviously there’s the world of difference between a woman in her late teens and a woman who is in her mid-late twenties or her thirties in respect of what happened. And now I come to think of it – and despite the fact that they are only referred to by their initials in the MSM – I haven’t come across a single article that has mentioned their age, and I have little doubt that many people would have been left sub-consciously thinking that they were quite young (and were, as such, seduced and taken advantage of by an older man).

        Anyway, what is weird – as you will see when you read the article – is that Julian is staying at Anna Ardin’s place and sleeping with her, and yet she discusses with Julian about him wanting/desiring to have sex with Sophia Wilen, and if I remember correctly, Anna Ardin is the one that had all the pictures of Julian – and ONLY Julian – on some platform or other (I’m pretty sure – but not 100% – that he mentions this particular aspect of it all in his statement to the Swedish prosecutor). And my point IS of course that it just doesn’t add up. But then again, a lot of things dont add up in all this! And what is particularly interesting is that they DIDN’T actually go to the police as such, but to a (female) friend of Anna Ardin’s who happened to be a police officer. And then there’s the way the criminal justice system deals with rape cases in Sweden, which is not only scary, but totally unbelievable as Craig, in effect, points out. And there’s a revelation at the end of the article, and I don’t think Craig would say it unless he knew it to be true.

        Anyway, this is one with the photo of Anna Ardin in which she looks about forty-ish:

        http://lena-mozya.com/2019/04/why-assanges-accuser-anna-ardin-is-almost-certainly-lying/

  7. Canvassing for Labour for local elections today and had a working class Militant Brexiteer but coming from a working class background myself I was able to explain Labour’s position and he shook my hand after initial hostility.
    He said Corbyn was a Marxist but I pointed out that even Marx said he wasn’t a Marxist but he was a brilliant analyist of capitalism.
    I wish this man could have read the chapter in Capital where Marx reports on the thousands of children per year who died in appalling conditions in Yorkshire mills, to realise that Marx was a friend of working people.
    We need to respect the referendum result, to try to get a customs union for tariff free trade (which eliminates need for Irish Backstop) have democratic control of labour and capital supply and trade unionise migrant workers plus bring back migrant adjustment funds for councils.
    Good day but drained! JC4PM!

    • And that would let in every EU negotiated trade deal by the back door is my fear. As we speak the EU is negotiating TTIP 2.0.

    • Thanks Bazza, good to see someone making their points positively and without feeling the need to denigrate others. JC4PM indeed.

    • The EU cannot swing to the left. Its neo-liberal, anti-egalitarian course is set by treaties, which cannot be reversed without the consent of 27 governments which regard Thatcherism as the preferred political course.
      The sooner that remainers wake up and realise that they are not dealing with the Common Market any more but the butchers of Greek and Irish democracy, amongst others, the sooner a real discussion of the EU can take place.
      Luckily the workers, who have seen popular living standards and basic humanity getting whittled away over several decades, understand whart Remain means: more of the same until there’s nowt left.

      • Bevin, according to the Irish Times of May 2018, 29% of Irish thought in 2013 they should leave the EU if Britain left – they claimed it was by May 2018 down to 11%.
        I take it they made a mistake with their sums?
        There seems to be a desire to leave the Euro in Greece but not the EU butchers for some inexplicable reason.

    • As opposed to the ritual slandering of all Leave voters as being “right wing”.

      Lazy, lazy, lazy. Your sneering contempt for the winning side has manifested in a Labour Party that will lose a General Election.

      Well done!

      • Loftkarlsson at 11:39 pm

        Is it wrong to point out the fact that the Leavers are supporting a right wing policy, as evidenced by the most vociferous of the Brexit supporters being Tory party members.

        The vast majority of Labour’s members and supporters voted to Remain, want a second referendum and still want to Remain in the EU.

        It may be difficult for you to accept that the wealth of evidence clearly and consistently shows you are a member of an ever decreasing minority in the Labour party. You can’t live in denial forever.

      • “Is it wrong to point out the fact that the Leavers are supporting a right wing policy, as evidenced by the most vociferous of the Brexit supporters being Tory party members.”

        It is not only wrong SteveH, it is a vile attempt to blacken any left wing criticism of the European neoliberal hegemony. And it your default answer to every comment from ‘lexiters’. And given, this blog is aimed at those wishing to elect a Corbyn government and not Conservative right wingers, your slurs are hurtful…..but you knew that.

      • lundiel : You really are are in denial. It’s really not a good look in making an argument.

        A *very large* majority of Labour voters and the Party itself opposed Brexit. Which is hardly surprising, given that only 37% of the electorate supported it in the first place.

        Facts don’t ‘blacken’ anyone – it’s the denial – a poor propaganda attempt – that undermines the case.

        It’s not about criticism of the neoliberal hegemony – we can all play that game; it’s about what you actually do about it, and chucking rattles out of the pram and then doing a Kevin (walking out and slamming the door) isn’t a credible policy when faced with the facts.

        If you think that Royston Vaisey’s corner shop is going to straddle the globe with unbeatable trade offers and a booming economy when it’s stuck in mid-Atlantic on a small leaking raft, you are essentially naive.

        … and yes, Loftkarlsson – of course Brexit is a right wing project aimed at scooping up more of the nation’s resources for the 1%. It’s really not a secret.

        ‘Sneering’ contempt’? – only for those who use the right-wing prattle of words like ‘betray’ or pretend that the second referendum produced no sustainable result or convincing argument … and then go on to deny a confirmatory vote. Do stop playing victim.

      • “If you think that Royston Vaisey’s corner shop is going to straddle the globe with unbeatable trade offers and a booming economy when it’s stuck in mid-Atlantic on a small leaking raft, you are essentially naive.”

        You really hate your own country don’t you? And your ‘analysis’ has no credibility. We’re still the sixth richest country in the world and we won’t drop any places without trade deals. London will still be the main financial capital after Wall Street, what makes it what it is has nothing to do with membership of the EU, it’s historical and global. You’ve got a nerve calling me naive, your understanding of economics is governed by your blind faith in the EU and a belief that there is an imaginary competition between two powers, the EU and the USA, when in fact they are hand in glove and we don’t need to ‘choose’ either of them, we can trade quite happily with both and tariffs won’t cripple us. The reality is, tariffs will motivate us to produce more ourselves. For instance, we currently get most of our fresh produce from the Netherlands of all places, there’s nothing stopping us building our own poly tunnels. People like you gate innovation or change, you should move to Brussels if you’re not already there.

      • And another thing, we pay about 17% over the odds for food just so we can keep farmers accustomed to their lifestyles. We’ve been promising to do something about the agricultural policy for 40 years yet nothing much has changed, sums up the EU and useless, toothless MEPs.

      • “You really hate your own country don’t you?”

        Quite the reverse.

        I simply resent the pathetic comic satire that the Leave mentality (even tho’ it represents only 1/3 of the population) has made of it.

        If you haven’t yet got the message that the actuality has presented in graphic colours about this country’s vulnerable economy, then I guess you never will.

        … which wouldn’t matter if the prospect wasn’t of damaging the poor and excluded even more (thus the right wing nature of the Brexit project). I note your scenario looks rto JRM and Jonn Redwood’s ‘financial services’ as a continuing, eternal bail-out for our limping economy!

        It’s one thing to bang on meaninglessly about a fictional notion of the ‘ working class’. It’s another to actually turn things around for the better.

    • And the overuse of the allegation of ‘betrayal’ is very dangerous and is going to poison our politics for a long time. Both Leavers and Remainers need to be wary of ‘victory’. They will then be getting the blame for everything which goes wrong, be it the collapse of UK car industry or the Italian economy going south. This sorry mess is not going to go away, whatever happens.

      • It is a betrayal. Demos Kratos. Democracy.

        If it was a general election where Labour won, and it wasn’t allowed, how would you describe that?

        The current situation allows the EUs favourite tactic of rerolling referenda until the right result arrives. Meanwhile, they continue onwards with their corporatist agenda, with absolutely no intention of change

      • I’ve just seen a Leaver whining about being called ‘a fascist’.

        Now, that’s an epithet I’ve never used. But, of course, the misuse of the term ‘The People’ and the accusation of ‘Betrayal’ *are* very much part of the fascist vocabulary of populism, even if I tend to politeness.

        As to ‘winning’. Only a dolt would think that ‘democracy’ equates simply to majoritarianism and the narrow difference seen in the referendum. Someone with that belief has nothing useful to say on the subject.

        … and the actuality is, of course, that the now discredited and outdated referendum produced no clear ‘result’ for Brexit. The vote was split (as subsequent events have illustrated), ans only 37% of the electorate voted for the barmy outcome that has been so avidly pursued.

        No … ‘democracy’ requires another vote.

  8. The vast majority support Labour Brexit that honours the vote 52/48 allows us to implement manifesto commitments and control immigration
    Which part of you do not have the numbers for a 2nd referendum do you not understand
    Hardcore extremists be they No Dealers or snowflake neverenders represent roughly 10% of the electorate,
    And how many would vote against the party in a GE
    Brexit is not a Labour party issue, most are sick of it, when we get chance to vote it will be the progressive party that cleans up
    Once causes of Brexit are addressed then we will look at rejoining a reformed Austerity free EU

  9. Doug Cowx, “Once causes of Brexit are addressed then we will look at rejoining a reformed Austerity free EU”.

    Who is going to perform a reformation of the EU for it to become Austerity free?

    The EU is economically, politically and socially organised and run on Neoliberal lines where the market dictates. How long will it take to turn this around and a new system,totally different and acceptable to the masses from Neoliberalism, be formulated ?

    Those who have voted to Remain, have voted in effect to maintain the Neoliberal System in its entirerity and ad infinitum.

    This is why people of the thinking left have voted for brexit and not because they are, as they have been tagged and depicted , as minor fascists.

    • “people of the thinking left have voted for brexit “. Now there’s an oxymoron!

      … and who used the term ‘minor fascists’? The victimhood stuff again.

      But certainly ‘ant-democratic’ if you oppose a proper confirmatory vote.

    • Neo liberalism, austerity, trickle down, monetarism you say tomato I say potato, disappeared up it’s own backside in 2007
      It’s only ‘the great experiment that is keeping the whole rotten structure vertical,
      In reality they have kicked one almighty crash down the road, making it a lot worse when it does come
      SELL SELL SELL
      no dealers and snowflake neverenders

  10. Farage will have alienated millions of middle and working class voters when the news sinks in that he’s taken Tory toff Rees Mogg’s plumb in mouth sister under his wing.

    This is massive, incomprehensible hubris and the death knell hopefully.

    • As was mentioned earlier ” never under estimate the stupidity of the British electorate ” .
      Or more correctly the power of the MSM and the Establishment to influence and control .But I am with you on death knell for Fartage .

  11. Richard Corbett MEP believes that the Labour Party will lose the votes of the young if the Labour Party does not back another referendum & is supported by Tom Watson…………..speaking as an old man, “nuff said”.

      • Isn’t that Watson bloke someone big in the Labour Party? A bit like that Alastair Campbell fella? Didn’t think that Failing idiot supports Labour?
        Slur by association, yes you can judge people by the quality of their friends? Perhaps that’s another cheap shot, but we could add Margaret Hodge & Upchucky…..all members of the Labour Party (OK Umunna never was). Anyone else?

      • The American lackey and war criminal Tony Blair wants the UK to remain in the EU. You are therefore a fellow traveller of war criminal racist apartheid supporters.

        Nuff said.

      • “Nuff said”

        We can only hope that you are true to your word.

  12. Slur by association. Problem is that Corbett is essentially correct. See the TSSA analysis.

      • Strange analogy.

        “We know you’re currently being rogered, but if you choose different, you’ll be rogered bigger”

        So, you’re saying we should accept the rogering?!?!

      • Never voting labour again

        The only thing strange here is what goes on inside your head.

      • Either debate my points, or put a sock in it “mate”

        When you’re using ad hominem attacks, you’ve lost…

      • Never voting labour again

        Precisely what point did you make that you consider to be worthy of serious debate?

      • Manuel Cortes’s summary about the idiocy of Brexit is very much to the point.

      • NVLA

        What on earth are you on about, do you know yourself?

  13. Nvla: “You cannot grasp what it’s like to work two jobs for nothing except keeping your head above the water.”

    You didn’t address it directly to me but I assume I’m included – but I’ve bounced around the bottom for a large part of my life – I’ve been blacklisted, unemployed & homeless so I don’t need to grasp what it’s like, I KNOW EXACTLY what it’s like.
    I also know that, on the balance of probability remaining in the EU is more likely to provide a better future for ordinary people like you and me.

    I won’t embarrass you by quoting the rest of your comment.

    • You won’t embarrass me. This is a very small corner of a very large playground, and I gave up being embarrassed by my actions a long time ago.

      And, who knows, you might actually teach me something worth learning…

      All I can take from your post is you’re a probability theorist. Carlsberg schooling?

      Maybe instead of talking about probability, why not try face the issues that brought on brexit (which the EU did nothing to change).

      What exactly is the point of membership of a club that takes your money and gives nothing in return to its citizens?

      • “You cannot grasp what it’s like to work two jobs for nothing except keeping your head above the water.”

        Why do you think that so many people are members of the Labour Party, when the logic of your generalisations is that anybody with a liveable, moderate income or a non-manual job is a natural ‘bourgeois’ Tory?

        Resentment and kicking the cat isn’t a revolutionary act – and that’s all that adherence to Brexit on those grounds is.

        FFS!

      • I’ve just noticed this little corker in reply to David McNiven :

        ” you’re a probability theorist”

        That the definition of sentient life Probability is the guiding principle of the universe – not something rich and strange.

        Probability *denial* laced with wishing is the sport of fantasists on Fuller’s Earth and Planet Zog.

        … and Brexiteers.

      • I’ll take certainty over probability.

        As for wishing? Seems like a waste of energy…

  14. “What exactly yada yada…” So what odds are you offering on which country or countries will join the rush to leave the EU (not the Euro) in the next 1 year, 2 years, 3 years etc.?
    You could really take all us dumb remainers to the cleaners, couldn’t you?
    Or are you saying the stupid 27 won’t leave because they’re all blind to your amazing insight too?

    “…blah blah EU did nothing to change).” You seem to be suggesting that the EU is evil incarnate – the Death Star of the Empire of the Neo’s – the root of all the troubles of the… what? Rest of the world? Greece? all the 27? Just the UK?
    Where exactly is the shining example of anti-neoliberal policy and socialist economics they should follow, and if there isn’t one – yet – what the actual fuck is your complaint?
    Blaming the EU for Thatcherism is laughable.
    The UK and the US broke the world – it wasn’t the EU.

    “Nothing in return” ffs. You just say the first thing that comes into your head, don’t you Tommy?

  15. “Where exactly is the shining example of anti-neoliberal policy [?]”

    Basically – it’s in La La Land.

    The idea of Brexit as a progressive movement for the real world – given its origins and links – is laughable if it was actually funny.

    The ire misdirected at the EU within a whole globe pivoting on neoliberal ideas is simply politically illiterate. The idea of a free-floating, impoverished UK dominating that globe with revolutionary ideas and no allies is beyond ludicrous.

    Remainers don’t worship the EU – they just recogniize that a shit idea grabbed from the extreme right’s thin air isn’t an alternative.

    • RH, very interesting link. It shows how vulnerable we are to a final wipeout in Scotland if we don’t have a clear remain position in a GE. Also very interesting as to how and why people are changing their minds on Brexit either for or against.

      • On Scotland : that crucial part of electoral strategy is too frequently overlooked. The ceding of votes to the SNP was a surrender that crucially affected Labour’s chances of winning a parliamentary majority.

        Currently, there is a consistent left Scottish vote that isn’t particularly enamoured of the SNP, and opposed Independence in the referendum, but despairs of Labour getting a coherent ‘Remain’ act together.

        Meanwhile certain Labour ‘supporters’ devote their waking hours chasing an illusional ‘sympathetic’ Kipper vote whilst the majority of the Labour vote actually wants clarity of opposition to Tory policy.

    • The data for this survey offers a fascinating insight into attitudes and motivations.

      • Very much so – a real revelation of how far Leaver myths are from electoral reality.

        I’d hate to inflict too much pain on the delusional – but the key findings are almost the polar opposite of their myths : e.g. – it’s the more financially secure that back a ‘No Deal’ scenario; that the Leave vote is very much a Tory preference; that 56% of Labour voters are middle class’, and critically, in terms of policy formation :

        “Labour has more to worry about in losing its middle class vote share than its working class vote share.”

        I almost feel sorry for the Lexiteers having their delusions stripped away in such a comprehensive fashion.

        Bout only ‘almost’.

      • Yes SteveH, it’s made me think through my ideas, especially about Scotland.

Leave a Reply to Allan Howard Cancel reply