True, most polls suggest - and have done so for some time - that the balance of opinion might be tilted narrowly in favour of remaining a member of the EU. On average, this is by 53% to 47%.

This might be the state of the polls as of this morning, but it's a long way to polling day and Farage and Johnson have plenty of opportunity to stumble. Indeed in the last 24 hours Farage is flat on his face and trying to bring Johnson down with him and the election campaign hasn't started yet.

Also there are record numbers of young voters registering to vote as we speak and most of them will be voting for remain or Labour party's.

People are speculating that Farage would rather remain in the EU and still be the champion of Brexit. Than allow Johnson to leave and become the hero of Brexit and steal his thunder.

but the prevailing view is 'let's get on with it.' Hadn't you noticed the 13% (and rising) Tory lead in the polls?

This may be the case now, but if there is a split in the leave vote, then it's game over and I can hear the cracks spreading.

Johnson and Farage are Laurel and Hardy. Hardy says "and this is another fine mess you've got me into". While Laurel whimpering says "sorry", while pouring a bucket of water down Hardy's trousers. On the side of the bucket is a label saying shark infested waters.

As a UK citizen, I suggest a compromise solution to Brexit: be in AND out. — Chris Hughes

Why? Do you want to prolong the confusion and have everybody continue to be disappointed? — ssu

As I said, I mean: stay in, but be an outsider. Stay in keep the easy trading with our near neighbours (and to avoid the chlorinated chicken, etc) . Be an outsider to reflect the valid views of Eurosceptics.

This may be the case now, but if there is a split in the leave vote, then it's game over and I can hear the cracks spreading. — Punshhh

Farage is already getting desperate and having to put up candidates for every seat. No sign of the Tories wanting a pact. They will push hard with 'a vote for the Brexit party risks letting Corbyn in'. And we havent got to the fun part of examining Farage's policies yet..

I also notice many of the Tory left-leaning MPs are not standing. More evidence that Boris has won and recast the party just as Corbyn did after fighting off his challenger for the leadership in 2016 (I think). Perhaps there will be a leakage of the leftie Tory vote to the Lib Dems? I am still intrigued to see if their cancel-Brexit policy gamble pays off.

A lib-lab pact and/or coalition could heal the divided nation. Their joint policy could be just one item: a second referendum repeating the question: should we stay or should we go (on the basis of the deal agreed by parliament)? Ideally, all public campaigning and polling would be banned.

OK, the nation would still be divided. But the decision would be better informed and therefore more acceptable. Maybe.

The Liberals could demand a second policy: the enactment (with no referendum) of proportional representation. Future UK governments would then be coalitions with little or no ideology. The old divisions would fade away and harmony would reign.

OK, the nation would still be divided. But the decision would be better informed and therefore more acceptable. Maybe.

Yes, which is self evident, dispite all the leavers who keep banging on about the will of the people, saying it would be an affront to democracy, it wouldn't.

There is a big material difference between leaving and remaining which is not acknowledged in the commentary. If we leave half the population will be forced against their will to accept a long lasting and profound material change in circumstances. Whereas if we remain the half of the population who voted to leave will be forced against their will to have no material change in their circumstances.

This exposes the inadequacy of the referendum and that it was ill conceived. For such a large material change it should have required a super majority of 60%, or two thirds majority. Or stated that there would be a confirmatory referendum at the end of the process.

All the one nation Tory's are jumping ship now, Matthew Parris has announced his switching to the Lib Dems this morning.

I'd like to ask the Britons here the following questions?
How are the Lib Dems seen in the UK?

In the UK the Lib Dems are acknowledged as the third of the main party's. In a largely two party system, they are often trapped in the middle, meaning that they often have large swings in their number of seats depending on the mood in the country. Their policies are as centrist as they can be, they are often criticised for being in line with either conservative policies, or Labour, by the other side. But they do have a solid support in the middle ground, the woolly jumper, Saab driving brigade.

↪ssu
I'd like to ask the Britons here the following questions?
How are the Lib Dems seen in the UK?

In the UK the Lib Dems are acknowledged as the third of the main party's. In a largely two party system, they are often trapped in the middle, meaning that they often have large swings in their number of seats depending on the mood in the country. Their policies are as centrist as they can be, they are often criticised for being in line with either conservative policies, or Labour, by the other side. But they do have a solid support in the middle ground, the woolly jumper, Saab driving brigade. — Punshhh

The rather more negative view is that they are less centrist and more two-faced, able to have contradictory policies according to who they are speaking to, having the luxury of never having to implement and thus be judged on them. The ideal home for career politicians who are all talk and no trousers.

You have a point about the UK Liberal Democrats. Their coalition government with the Conservatives (2010-15) seriously damaged their liberal credentials.

(However, you're wrong, if I may say so, to say "all talk and no trousers". This a common but meaningless misspeak error, usually misspoken as "all mouth and no trousers". The correct phrase is "all mouth and trousers". This is analogous to "all smoke and mirrors". You wouldn't say, "all smoke and no mirrors". The error is due to people overexcitedly confusing the phrase with its racy sister-phrase, "all fur coat and no knickers".)

common but meaningless misspeak error, — Chris Hughes

All due respect to the grammar nazis but as a mere speaker of common-speak, so-to-speak, is it not the case that once a phrase gains common currency, does it not attain to meaning independent of its misbegotten origins? My concern is more that it is a sexist phrase. :wink:

I'm not a nazi of the grammatical or any other variety. I ask you to withdraw that remark.

A misspoken meaningless phrase doesn't acquire meaning due to frequent repetition.

I'm not a nazi of the grammatical or any other variety. I ask you to withdraw that remark. — Chris Hughes

A grammar nazi is no more a nazi than the mouth of a river is a mouth. However, remark withdrawn, oversensitive pedant.

Meaning is use.

Now back to the meaningless topic of "brexit".

Meaning is use.

No, it's not. Use a meaningless phrase a million times, it's still meaningless. This isn't pedantry - it's correction.

However, you're right - let's get back to Brexit...

The analysis of a pollster on Newsnight last night was that any Brexit Party success is more likely to hurt Labour than the Tories, so Farage's 'threat' to split the Tory vote by putting candidates in 500+ constituencies looks hollow already. Part of the reasoning was that tribal Labour voters who are also leavers are less likely to defect to the Tories than to the Brexit Party, which would be more a protest vote. This of course assumes they can understand and stomach Farage's 'clean break' Brexit more than the Tory negotiated deal. ('Clean break' as in having your leg bitten off by an aligator rather than removed in a long hospital process, that is)

The allegorical aligator being US corporations...

However, in the interests of harmony, Farage shouldn't be demonised. He should be acknowledged as representing the valid views of Eurosceptics. Some of his views are borderline racist, but he and his UKIP party achieved the referendum, which many people clearly wanted. The views of those who want a "clean-break" separation should be taken seriously by remainers. If remaining is achieved, our relationship with the EU must be re negotiated so as to unite the nation.

Farage shouldn't be demonised. He should be acknowledged as representing the valid views of Eurosceptics. — Chris Hughes

I don't think Farage any longer represents the majority of Eurosceptics. I read a poll saying 2/3 of Brexit Party members prefer the Tory govt deal to no deal. I think many of them only cling to him because they understand none of it and he seems a chap who stands up for their 'interests' (aka fears). I have never believed the referendum endorsed no deal and I don't think many others at the time did. Farage has now co-opted the term 'Brexit' to mean no deal - as he says any deal is now selling out. He deals in simplistic slogans. His arguments never hold water under inspection - which is why he never allows anyone to disect them. My point was that 'clean break' is the most absurd mis-representation of what leaving with no deal represents, chosen to hoodwink his followers. I think it's sad that our politics is descending to a populist battle of one-line slogans. Politicians have followed Farage's success and now believe the best way to win voters is not to inform them but to poke them emotionally, either inciting fear or blind optimism.

His masterstroke I have to admit was using the term 'project fear' during the referendum, for all the negative economic predictions Cameron was fighting him with. The irony was that the term should already have been coined to describe the demonising of immigrants, and the impending tidal wave of them coming to swamp us, which led to calls for the referendum in the first place!

My point is that in the interest of national unity, those who, like me, hope to remain must acknowledge the validity of the criticism of the EU made by those who wish to leave.

There's no future in the dichotomy.

In the 2015 general election UK premier David Cameron expected to need another coalition with the Liberal Democrats and he expected them to block his manifesto promise of an EU referendum. Having got an unexpected majority, he had to hold the referendum. Because he then expected Remain to win, his attempt to negotiate a better relationship with the EU was half-hearted and mainly fruitless. The binary choice of the referendum then split the nation. Whether we actually leave or not, it's now essential that the two sides try to meet each others' concerns. Shambolic duo Johnson and Cummings - and their super-rich backers - must be removed if that is to happen.

Farage emerged from an Enoch Powell fascism, apparently he used to goad left wing teachers and lecturers at his college and was described as a loud mouth and good at selling things. I expect he found fertile ground in estuarine right wing organisations in Essex. By the time he managed to become elected as an MEP he had found his ideological ground and as he was being paid to represent the UK in the European Parliament( he tried to be elected to the UK parliament, but failed). He started using the populist techniques he had learnt to good effect there. I dont know exactly why he targeted the EU, but presumably it was free movement that he didn't like, but realised that it would be deemed a racist attitude and so attached the EU for being undemocratic, apparently.

What he has been doing over the last few years is well known. But I don't think he has any other modus operandi. The techniques of populism he has developed is all he has. He is not a politician and now that he finds himself more and more in the political sphere he doesn't know what else to do other than more of the same. So what does he do, he knows that if he stops now he is finished and will be ridiculed and abused by large numbers of people, he has needed body guards for a while now.

So we have what he did last week, he comes out fighting and gunning for the Tory party. Like Trump all he can do is exploit populist memes until he gets to the top. Unfortunately he has come up against his nemesis in Johnson, a carnivorous Tory, with the whole Tory machine behind him, with numerous skilled political operators. It seems as though he has now hit a brick wall, by giving the ultimatum that the Tory party must drop its deal and go for no deal by 14th November.

What is he playing at, world domination?

However, in the interests of harmony, Farage shouldn't be demonised. He should be acknowledged as representing the valid views of Eurosceptics. Some of his views are borderline racist, but he and his UKIP party achieved the referendum, which many people clearly wanted. The views of those who want a "clean-break" separation should be taken seriously by remainers. If remaining is achieved, our relationship with the EU must be re negotiated so as to unite the nation.

Do you listen to James O Brian* he is the leading media pundit for remain. He points out that the majority of "leavers", have simply believed a few lies, which like Farages slogans, are easy to believe and propagate. That most of the Brexit party followers, (apart from the working class supporters in the north and east who often have valid concerns) are against immigration, again many of them will have believed lies and untruths about the realities of immigration.

So a proportion of "leavers" are actually mistaken, rather than having well thought through legitimate concerns. Indeed he would go further and point out that there aren't any legitimate concerns about the EU which necessitate leaving the EU. Every concern which has been put to him has been shown to be unwarranted, or more to do with the incompetence of the UK government, than the EU.

I'm not saying that the EU is perfect, or that our membership isn't problematic, but there are no valid reasons to leave which hold up to scrutiny, which to correct would require us to leave the EU. There are a few ideological political views or stances which can make a case for the UK being independent from the EU, but by no means are they a necessity, or required.

* James O Brian, LBC radio, 10.00 am - 1.00pm Monday to Friday.

O'Brien seems fair and well informed. However, proving leave arguments "wrong" only increases national disunity. The reason for remaining is that all alternatives are worse. As the father of Jim, who ran away from his nurse and was eaten by a lion in Hillaire Belloc's cautionary tale, advised his surviving children: Always keep a-hold of Nurse for fear of finding something worse.

Perhaps it's possible to argue that leaving is "something worse" without hostility and "othering".