bickster

Firstly, there's a reason why you can't find that data, multiple reasons actually but primarily because no polling company asks that question and they don't ask the question because it's irrelevant. For one, it's blindly obvious that if they kept asking the question to just people who voted in the referendum that remain would be in the lead by now even if no-one changed their mind, just because of demographics and the age imbalance of the voters i.e. old people have have dropped off this mortal coil and they were hugely leave. It was only about 12 months after the vote that dead people vs newly of age voters would have changed the outcome of the vote if the proportions remained constant, so it wouldn't be too much longer that this would have happened among just the cohort that voted. It should also be obvious that the relevant question is of the population now not back then Secondly, that article is 11 months old and I can't find a single poll in the intervening period that says any different. The last poll I can find where the question was "If there was another referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU, how would you vote?" and remain was ahead, was actually around the time of that article, every poll since then (all by Deltapoll as it happens) have been remain ahead and their most recent poll in February of this year has Remain on 48% Leave as low as 40%. There is a trend seemingly developing in this data but I'd say its too early to say for definite if that is the case. The other significant factor in the polls is the amount of people saying don't know, this is also reducing. The last poll having widest gap between remain and leave with also the least number of don't knows.

Daylight balanced bulbs aren't that expensive but it's still nonsense because the colour temperature of natural daylight varies widely (Sunny / cloudy, misty etc) and the the bulb will be constant. Short of turning your office space into a mini-TV Studio there is no solution to a non-problem

... and already the debate is about the standard of journalism and not what he actually said, which he's been able to do as a result of the poor journalism

He's wrong because the colour temperature of the now two competing light sources is completely different

Erm what is it called and what label. There’s a decent amount of stuff I don’t have on there to justify it’s purchase

Didn't Dave Clarke make all his money from buying the rights to loads of '60s music progs off the tellybox like Ready Steady Go for next to nothing He's massively wealthy but its largely off the back of other peoples work and not his own.

I’m not sure what point you are making

Because 48% voted remain, to stay in the EU, the status quo. They knew exactly what they were voting for. There is no other way to interpret that. It’s not my opinion, it’s the facts of the matter So when you said no-one knew what they voted for it is demonstrably wrong. The only people that didn’t know what they were voting for was a huge proportion of the 52% and it’s generally people in the 52% that say “no-one knew what they were voting for” because they equate themselves with “everyone”

Could actually be worse, could be Rees-Mogg. Definitely the pair of them top the repressed by Catholic Guilt homosexual in the closet league

I think you'll need to add some ketchup to this claim

I have Gove in the office Tory Date Rape Drug Sweepstake

Nothing that comes out of Street Helens should ever be considered normal

Not this again. 48% did know exactly what they were voting for Its absolutely incorrect to say that no-one knew

Cathal Coughlan of Microdisney / Fatima Mansions gone at 61. Very under rated talent, such a sad loss

Its defined as knowingly presenting false information. There should always have been a supplementary question. Can the Prime Minister tells if his answer was No there was No party or No he can't tell us.

That Labour question is badly worded "Can the Prime Minister tell the House of Commons if there was a party in 10 Downing Street on 13th November..." He answered. No. i.e. no he can't tell the House They'll have to do better than that (and there are many many many better examples of him lying to the House)

AKA Mathieu Berson syndrome

There's at least 6 non-Johnsons in that picture

Could be relevant...

Modern journalist using sloppy language I'd imagine She's probably only been covering the folder it's in with wallpaper for extra house points

She wasn't. This meeting is supposedly after the investigation had finished

Well, my thought on that was redactions maybe? Though there is a suggestion about the use of photographs but that may fall under the same general banner I guess

This meeting is after the report has been written though isn't it? I was under the impression that it was last month after even some of the initial fines had been handed out How did the idea that this meeting took place come out in the first place? (I genuinely don't know) One thing is for sure, the culture of lying from 10 Downing St hasn't changed and I think at this stage that is the most important thing to note here

Its also the classic move of the useless f***ers "Look at me... working" The more trivial the content, the more it veers toward a useless word removed that sent it. or Its actually used as a bullying tactic too (possibly both at the same time)

Already happens "I've just bought 17 different versions of the new Beach Boys re-release, just had to be done"