Yet Team Leave keep telling us what all of the 52% voted for (no free movement, no single market, lower immigration) when it reality there would be a multitude of reasons from the very sensible to the idiotic.

I criticise its carful use of statistics. Very pleased to see the Guardians' spiral into oblivion continues, lets hope it hastens.

I had fish and chips yesterday and I wear glasses and I voted Brexit. Must be true.

Me too. I'm now gonna wear my specs every time I enter a fish and chip shop, just so people know I'm a Brexiter.

There told the Remainers it was true

Remainers don't speak for all the people in London either

What else is socially isolated meant to mean than a negative?

It's yet another not very subtle dig at leave voters. And quite ridiculous too.

Inner London has the highest proportion of people who live alone in the UK based on census data - and it also had the highest remain vote.

Living alone doesn't necessarily mean that you are "socially isolated" especially in London. In fact some of the most isolated people are married couples who never go outside of a very small social circle.

Not a surprise. Various studies in different countries have shown, for instance, that people who don't have regular contact with immigrants are far more likely to hold anti-immigrant views than those who do.

So how do immigrants who voted leave, fit into that then?

It's also the type of immigrant they have contact with. If you work and socialise with professionals from other countries then you don't see them as a threat just as friends and colleagues. In fact you have more in common with them than many British people who you would never invite around for dinner.

I work in a very international environment - around me are French, German, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, Danish, Australian, American and probably a few more I've forgotten. I can't recall speaking to anyone who was entitled to vote in the referendum who supported Leave.

Not a suprise that support for UKIP is highest in places where there are few immigrants. We know how overun with them Skegness and Clacton are...

It's not a race to the bottom.

We're talking about broad trends, not individual cases. There will always be exceptions, but the evidence is pretty clear regrading the role of immigration in the Brexit vote:

"81% of Leave voters regarded multiculturalism and 80% regarded immigration as 'forces for ill', compared to 19% and 20% of Remain voters respectively."

Source: https://theconversation.com/hard-evi...r-brexit-62138

So immigrants = race to the bottom? At least you're honest about your views.

Forewarned is forearmed,and all that

People who don't personally know immigrants are more likely to fear and/or resent them. It's that simple.

I'm sure you're right.
I think we should prepare for #cannibalism as well, as in: "I'm not saying every Leave voter murders and eats their neighbours, but you can be sure all the cannibals are Little Englander Brexiters."

It does make sense that socially isolated people are more likely to have voted Brexit. Being socially isolated, they will have been more oblivious to the fact that Brexit does not just concern United Kingdom but also other countries, most notably Ireland.

It was a specific response to that post. Not everywhere has to be multinational or multicultural. I have nothing against immigration where it is controlled. I have friends and colleagues from all parts of the world. What I don't want is the uncontrolled immmigration where anyone from the EU can just turn up.

In a carefully selected sample of one, a recent survey showed that remainiacs are more likely to be dellusional, self loathing people.

Surveys are infallable aren't they. They did so very well at predicting the recent results of U.K. referendums and U.S. elections, I am certain everyone has confidence in them.

What is it with this current obsession of trying to identify voters into groups after a result?
Does it coincide with the current obsession with identity politics itself?

I don't mind an analytical breakdown of demographics, it can be interesting statistically, but after these votes it's not really used as an intelligent analysis, it's about identifying what groups people belong to and then when they are identified as belonging to a certain group putting a negative spin on it. Just petty snobbery and bigotry really.

You can identify almost any sort of group and either create a positive spin on them or a negative one. It's almost always naturally assumed that voters who live in a city are for some reason better than those who don't.
Take for example the often repeated statistic that certain voters who voted for a certain candidate are more 'educated'. Therefore they made the better choice. It's fine to identify a statistic like this as long as you don't try to assume too much about that group as people.
I'm educated, I've been to university, and I can tell you now that most of my peers either knew jack shit about politics, or simply didn't care. Because you know, at that age people tend to divert their energy into other interests. Educated to what level? In what? How would obtaining a degree in various subjects educate anyone about politics unless they were a student of political science themselves?
There's also an emphasis placed on people being educated (assumed to be more intelligent) rather than considering the idea of those people congregating in a social environment where ideas and ideologies are possibly likely to tend to be more viral in the way that they are communicated and absorbed due to the social nature of universities and colleges.

It's an easy game to play. After an election or referendum result try to find out an identifying characteristic of a section of those voters who make up a significant number of the vote, then use that information to put a negative spin on that group to make it appear as if their vote was faulty or deficient.
You could do that with absolutely any set of voters to paint them in either a positive or a negative light.

Nobody is correct or incorrect, or right or wrong based on what type of group they belong to. What's more important are the thought processes behind the reasons why people form the opinions that they do.

Socially isolated voters in Scotland voted remain.. In fact every region in Scotland voted remain

It's merely a classification, you're the one reading all this negative stuff into it. Surely being socially isolated is only negative if you don't want to be socially isolated? People living in a village in the middle of nowhere and hardly leaving it might have actually chosen to do so.

It only becomes a bit of a problem for the rest of us when they're involved in making decisions which have an impact on people outside their little bubble.

I imagine an inherent distrust in the propaganda reported by English newspapers helped..