Most places are not primarily immigrant, unless you believe that everybody that isn't voting Reform is an immigrant.
> You don't think since the Boris Wave there has been a surge in politicians taking anti-immigration positions?
That's not what we are arguing about. No question that the avg. level of opposition to immigration has gone up.
But interestingly again this is not actually correlated with how many immigrants are arriving, and the popularity of these politicians isn't actually correlated with how good they actually did on immigration.
Boris himself being in power while there was a lot of immigration but he remained popular with the base.
Because most people don't have any actual understanding of immigration issues or look at any kind of data.
>Boris himself being in power while there was a lot of immigration but he remained popular with the base.
He actively caused a large part of that migration of the boris wave with policies which were recommended against by at least 2 reports which they had requested and fellow front line politician such as suella.
This after running on a partially anti migration mandate.
He gets plenty of shit for it and lost popularity with anyone that cares about the matter.
>Because most people don't have any actual understanding of immigration issues or look at any kind of data.
By which metrics that they should all care about has it been doing well for people of the existing nations in europe?
I listed some examples of ones that aren't so great in an earlier comment in this comment tree.
> He gets plenty of shit for it and lost popularity with anyone that cares about the matter.
Maybe among well-informed people who closely follow immigration policy, but not necessarily among the broader Conservative base.
This illustrates my point: much of the political debate about immigration is driven by perceptions rather than actual policy outcomes. Johnson talked about restricting immigration, which was popular with his base, but many voters had little understanding of what his government was actually doing. Literally just anti-immigration vibes.
And the political scandals that ultimately brought him down were largely unrelated to immigration. And he would have been the best for the Tories to have a chance in the election.
> By which metrics that they should all care about has it been doing well for people of the existing nations in europe?
Nice attempt at shifting the goalposts while not so subtly implying that immigration is responsible for all these other issues.
That wasn't the argument. The argument was about whether anti-immigration sentiment and political support for anti-immigration politicians actually correlate with immigration levels and policy outcomes.
> I listed some examples of ones that aren't so great in an earlier comment in this comment tree.
You mean the racist rants based on completely made up stuff or serious misinterpretation of a few data-points while completely ignoring the much more important much more actual relevant issues?
> You don't think since the Boris Wave there has been a surge in politicians taking anti-immigration positions?
That's not what we are arguing about. No question that the avg. level of opposition to immigration has gone up.
But interestingly again this is not actually correlated with how many immigrants are arriving, and the popularity of these politicians isn't actually correlated with how good they actually did on immigration.
Boris himself being in power while there was a lot of immigration but he remained popular with the base.
Because most people don't have any actual understanding of immigration issues or look at any kind of data.