The polling also seemed to suggest that remain would have a comfortable victory. What people are not doing is tracing the source of the statistics. They lead to pro-remain lobbyists. I don't know if the statistics are correct or not, but what I can tell you is that I see absolutely no mention of statistical methods in the various graphs reported in the media.

What I've learned: If I ever need a lobbyist, I'm hiring these guys - https://infacts.org/ (In case you are wonder, they are the source of all those wonderful graphs you've seen in the newspapers on the demographics of voters)

So I've heard something similar before...wouldn't showing remain winning make remain voters complacent and less likely to vote?

This is my point. Polls generated by lobbyists are constructed to influence people. If you have a poll and it doesn't say what you want, you bury it. Otherwise you use creative sampling techniques to generate the result you want.

This is fine because we can just ignore them just like we ignore studies by Apple showing the iOS is 10x better than Android. It's marketing. The problem is that lobbyists realise that they can simply write articles and hand them to journalists who will print them almost untouched. Sometimes newspapers will bypass the journalist outright and print this kind of propaganda directly if it aligns with their goals.

With this issue you can see this directly. Simply find the source of every graph on this topic printed in a newspaper and it will lead back to the web site I linked to without fail.

You are assuming those that didn't vote wanted to remain.

Not voting shows disengagement, indecision, or disdain. Anyone regretting not voting at the moment is likely reacting to the tone of the resultant hyperbole than any actual knowledge or opinion.