Despite professed intentions to keep the Brexit debate civilised, the descent into name-calling has taken hold; a "descent beyond hyperbole into hysteria" is how one paper put it. Someone has even tried to prove – wrongly – that EU member states do worse in the Eurovision. Quod erat demonstrandum ...
And what is it with London mayors and Hitler? First Ken Livingstone argues that Hitler and Zionism shared ends. Now Boris Johnson, acknowledged "leader" of the Brexiters, claims that the EU, Hitler and Napoleon were all on the same march to a greater Europe. Standing in their way, the heroic figure of Boris "Churchill" Johnson?
Were one to suggest, by the same guilt-by-association logic, that Johnson and his ilk are also marching towards the same end of Brexit, in step with racists, xenophobes, little-Englanders and empire-nostalgics, the response would rightly be that’s “not cricket, old chap”. Not done.
"It would be naive to expect the battle over Britain's membership of the EU to be distinguished by nuance," the Guardian complains. Indeed, as those of us who have endured so many Euro-referendums would attest, even getting voters to address the question on the ballot is a real challenge.
The focus of the UK debate now hangs on the twin themes of the economy – growth and jobs, and the ease with which the UK could re-establish trade relationships – and immigration – with the unusual niche twist in the country’s Asian/black communities of complaints about EU discrimination against Commonwealth migrants. As if the Leave campaign would welcome mass Commonwealth migration as an alternative.
The economic case has substantially been won by the Remainers – to the point where several of Leave’s most prominent representatives have acknowledged that investment confidence, UK jobs and interest rates would probably take a hit in the short to medium term, “but it’s worth it”.
Voters may not be so sanguine and the Remain campaign has stepped up the economic message. The Treasury has estimated the long-term cost of leaving at £4,300 per family by 2030; three million jobs are said to be "linked" to UK/EU trade; Chancellor George Osborne says Britain could lose £200 billion a year in trade in 15 years and the same amount in foreign investment; the CBI has cut its growth forecast on the uncertainty alone, and the Bank of England has done likewise, warning of recession should the UK leave.
"The economic argument is beyond doubt. It's not a conspiracy, it's called a consensus," Osborne says. Leave campaigners can do little except complain that state institutions should keep out of the debate. No way, says Bank of England Governor Mark Carney. He would not being doing his job of assessing risk and would be failing the public if he did not flag dangers in advance.
The question is: are the voters listening?