Sorry to be posting this late, but I was at the movies. Now, one last time. John, it was you, not I, who made the point that an issue could be determinative in an election. You did so when you made an election victory your test for whether popular opinion was angry about immigration. You reiterated that point when I made the argument that you now advance–namely that no single issue could determine an election. The examples you cited did not support the position you originally held but have now abandoned. And the minor slip you made–and everyone makes such slips–was interesting only because you cited an example that demonstrated the precise opposite of what you intended to prove. If the 59 per cent victory for Proposition 209 were proof that racial preferences could turn an election, then the 59 per cent victory for Proposition 187 must prove the same thing about immigration. And all of these acrobatics are forced on you because you are continue to deny a plain fact–that most voters are worried about immigration–even though that claim is not strictly necessary to your wider defense of large-scale immigration. Plainly, John, this IS the Oxford Union. [I was at London.]