If they 'don't know' that means you multiply the total amount of 'for' votes by 17. I think. The maths seem similar to the previous ones.
Ive already told you.....you can’t claim the percentage of “don’t knows” for your side of the argument. That’s just being crafty. If you would have said.....the majority of those WHO EXPRESSED AN OPINION, were in support of the plan......I wouldn’t have had a problem. However you didn’t.....and I’m guessing why you didn’t is that you wanted to show the policy was more popular than it is. Luckily the posters on here like to know facts over fiction.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/poli...isis-rwanda-deportation-suella-braverman-poll Here's another. Maybe there should be a poll of polls.
When asked your source you said “YouGov”.....did you instead mean “right wing, sensationalist gutter rag” ?
****ing hell, he's had a mare lately....flunked geography and now making up numbers to suit himself...WTF
Sounds to me that based upon that pole, 27% don't give a **** about this policy, 26% oppose it, which means more than half of the pollsters don't give a **** what Starmer wants on this policy.
We asked 1600 pensioners from Boston named Ian what they thought of the Rwanda policy and a SHOCKING HUGE MAJORITY SUPPORT IT.
It was the Savanta poll (not YouGov) that I had in mind in my original post. That found that while 47 per cent of voters supported Rwanda, just 26 % said they were against. Here's the latest YouGov poll on illegals that finds 50% of those expressing an opinion would ban dinghy illegals from over settling in UK, with 36% against: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/03/06/9e23f/2 This is what Keir Starmer has to address at a GE, rather than a "no policy" approach on illegal immigration
The demographic breakdowns give me hope that we’re about ten years away from right wing bile being a small minority of opinion.
You're right, Col. Stainsey's turned into a typical WUM, which is disappointing. I think maybe there are other things going on in his life