Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The Tories have Ratnered their brand – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited March 2023 in General
The Tories have Ratnered their brand – politicalbetting.com

This is grim reading for the Tories, and whilst Sunak does poll better than his party the trend is Sunak’s ratings are moving closer to the Tory Party’s ratings.

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • WillGWillG Posts: 1,915
    It is incredible how Remainers want to make everything about Brexit. The Tories romped home on a Brexit mandate in the last election. Their support cratered very obviously because of two things: (1) Boris breaking rules the rest of the country suffered under and (2) the disastrous Truss deficit budget. In addition, any party in power for 13 years is going to struggle. It is Tories dragging down the Brexit brand, not vice versa. The public reaction to migrant boats shows migration is still a latent inflammatory issue. I suspect it will be what ultimately undoes Starmer.

  • Good morning, everyone.

    The critical moment was when they went for Boris Johnson over Jeremy Hunt. It was a shot of drugs, a short term high with a substantial long term cost that was obvious from the outset.

    Football: surprised that of the two EPL bets it was Liverpool not to win rather than West Ham likewise that came off. Solid victory for the Hammers.

    F1: Aston Martin still looking to have improved significantly, likewise Alfa Romeo.
  • Cicero said:

    WillG said:

    It is incredible how Remainers want to make everything about Brexit. The Tories romped home on a Brexit mandate in the last election. Their support cratered very obviously because of two things: (1) Boris breaking rules the rest of the country suffered under and (2) the disastrous Truss deficit budget. In addition, any party in power for 13 years is going to struggle. It is Tories dragging down the Brexit brand, not vice versa. The public reaction to migrant boats shows migration is still a latent inflammatory issue. I suspect it will be what ultimately undoes Starmer.

    Suck it up Buttercup... You won, get over it.

    Unless Leavers (who are now almost entirely Tories) stop attacking the straw man of "Remainers" for the inevitable failures of Brexit, and start trying to create a new national consensus they will serve no future purpose except to be a terrible warning of the dangers of hubris and about as relevant to the future of this country as gas lighting and the poor house.

    Leavers have still not been able to create a national consensus, mostly because there is still no Leave consensus on what Brexit should be. Fantasies about "Singapore-on-Thames" run pretty hollow in Stoke-on-Trent. The hard yards on creating a viable, unifying national vision are not going to be put in by Rees Mogg´s butler either.

    The ERG and ancillary nutters still refuse any compromises with anything EU (like the NI protocol), even though that is self-evidently the right way forward, at least in the short-medium term and is becoming increasingly critical if we are going to save significant parts of of our economy from the wreck. It has been the abject failure of the nutters to offer any compromises that has shown the voters that a large number of Brexiters are fanatics pure and simple who have been prepared to destroy orderly government and large chunks of our constitution for their own narrow political ends. The failure to be straight about the economic costs and the chicanery about getting legislation through Parliament are also profoundly corrosive of public trust. Such obvious cheating offends the British sense of fair play very deeply.

    So, yeah, the Tories have Ratnered their brand. Thing is, that even if Sunak can do a few moderate and stabilizing things in the remainder of his time in office, all we will remember of the Tories is the absolute fiasco of the past three years. Overweening arrogance, invincible ignorance and abject incompetence, the result of Brexit fanatics refusing to engage with the British spirit of compromise and instead hectoring us about it being "for our own good".

    This country will chuck the Turnip Taliban and their BDSM Brexit onto the scrapheap of history at the first chance its gets. Whether the Tories ever recover is an open question. No one can now believe that Conservatives are moderates who defend us against extremists, when every day for the last few years extremist and divisive drivel has been their stock-in-trade.
    ...from the heart I think...
  • F1: amused by Aston Martin's drivers' odds on Ladbrokes.

    Alonso is 17. Stroll is 151.

    If you have a free bet, each way on one of them might well be worth a look.
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 2,115

    Mr. Cicero, just a note on compromise: May presented that thrice to the Commons with her deal. Labour's pro-EU MPs refused to compromise and back it. It would've passed had they done so.

    The intransigence was far from one way. See also Dominic Grieve, demanding a concession, getting it, then shrieking in the chamber it was too late and voting against the very thing he had sought.

    Or consider the multi-party promise of a referendum on Lisbon, only to be shamelessly reneged upon.

    The British spirit of compromise has not politically existed for quite some time when it comes to the EU.

    You move a Lisbon referendum, I raise you a disgraceful "Citizens of Nowhere" speech.

    However, instead of arguing about the past, we should agree that we need a national consensus for the future and try and work out what it could be.

    Thoughts?
  • Mr. Cicero, just a note on compromise: May presented that thrice to the Commons with her deal. Labour's pro-EU MPs refused to compromise and back it. It would've passed had they done so.

    The intransigence was far from one way. See also Dominic Grieve, demanding a concession, getting it, then shrieking in the chamber it was too late and voting against the very thing he had sought.

    Or consider the multi-party promise of a referendum on Lisbon, only to be shamelessly reneged upon.

    The British spirit of compromise has not politically existed for quite some time when it comes to the EU.

    Yes. And, also, the EU said the deal they're about to strike on NI was cakeism and impossible due to the need to 'protect the integrity of the single market'. Varadkar was lauded as the voice of common sense, despite being nothing more than little Sir Echo and showing no leadership at all; I remember a few of us calling both of these things out at the time and being pilloried for it.

    Everyone was intransigent about this and 2017-2019 really were terrible years where no-one covered themselves in glory.

    Posters on the other side should remind themselves that frustration and incandescence, from an electoral point of view, can absolutely work both ways on this issue.
  • Mr. Cicero, regardless of the details, one positive, if Sunak can get a deal, will hopefully be a more civil relationship between the UK and the EU and (though this will only happen to an extent given entrenched positions) within the UK regarding this matter.

    Those who are pro- and anti-EU are fine, but those who take it the nth degree are simply zealots who get in the way of a pragmatic and practical approach to politics, and the national interest.

    Multilateral or bilateral (you could view it either way between the UK and EU/EU member states) co-operation on areas of mutual interest would help foster good relations too, perhaps the most obvious being, once the war is finally done, economic development in Ukraine.

    That would be both a moral and self-interested good thing as it would help the country recover more rapidly while also drawing it into the general European (ie non-crazy Russian) economic sphere, also meaning greater prosperity over the long term for Ukraine.

    Shade sleepy so apologies if any/all of that is rambly, vague, or spelled badly.

    Importantly, my Napoli tip to win Serie A is looking very nice right now.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,571
    edited February 2023
    Wes Streeting and Jess Phillips under scrutiny over undisclosed directorships
    Labour peer admits ‘oversight’ after not including role with the Lionel Cooke Memorial Fund in register of interests

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/02/25/wes-streeting-jess-phillips-failed-register-investment-labour/ (£££)

    Small earthquake in Chile, and in any case these unpaid directorships of a fund that gives money to the Labour Party will be registered from Wednesday, 1st March, when the rules change to specify that unpaid directorships must be registered.

    Nonetheless, it does show a degree of carelessness and even complacency on the one hand, and increased scrutiny on the other. Cynics can't help wondering if the revelation was being held back for a more impactful time, until scooped by the rules change.

    The story also includes a list of new, significant Labour donors.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,537
    edited February 2023

    Mr. Cicero, just a note on compromise: May presented that thrice to the Commons with her deal. Labour's pro-EU MPs refused to compromise and back it. It would've passed had they done so.

    The intransigence was far from one way. See also Dominic Grieve, demanding a concession, getting it, then shrieking in the chamber it was too late and voting against the very thing he had sought.

    Or consider the multi-party promise of a referendum on Lisbon, only to be shamelessly reneged upon.

    The British spirit of compromise has not politically existed for quite some time when it comes to the EU.

    Yes. And, also, the EU said the deal they're about to strike on NI was cakeism and impossible due to the need to 'protect the integrity of the single market'. Varadkar was lauded as the voice of common sense, despite being nothing more than little Sir Echo and showing no leadership at all; I remember a few of us calling both of these things out at the time and being pilloried for it.

    Everyone was intransigent about this and 2017-2019 really were terrible years where no-one covered themselves in glory.

    Posters on the other side should remind themselves that frustration and incandescence, from an electoral point of view, can absolutely work both ways on this issue.
    Both the EU and the UK behaved pretty poorly during the divorce talks, and while I place more blame on them than us, I can't say that either of us were blameless.

    And that's why Sunak works. He's not May - who was simultaneously weak and desperate to demonstrate her new Leave credentials. Nor Johnson, who was happy to trash talk on Sunday the same people he'd sit down with on Monday. He's quiet and deliberative, and while he's a Leaver, he's doing it because he thinks Brexit is right for Britain, not because he thinks the EU is intrinsically evil.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 46,826

    Mr. Cicero, just a note on compromise: May presented that thrice to the Commons with her deal. Labour's pro-EU MPs refused to compromise and back it. It would've passed had they done so.

    The intransigence was far from one way. See also Dominic Grieve, demanding a concession, getting it, then shrieking in the chamber it was too late and voting against the very thing he had sought.

    Or consider the multi-party promise of a referendum on Lisbon, only to be shamelessly reneged upon.

    The British spirit of compromise has not politically existed for quite some time when it comes to the EU.

    May didn’t really compromise - and certainly didn’t pitch her offering as a compromise - except possibly over NI, which Johnson exploited ruthlessly only to double-cross the province when his turn came. It was obvious, as I said at the time, that May should have gone for ‘Norway for now’ as an initial compromise position, leaving open the options of a stricter Brexit as time and conditions allowed. But she didn’t have the political capital, perceived as a remainer, to go for the most sensible option, and the nutters behind her weren’t prepared to wait, worrying - probably correctly - that they’d struggle to gain support for their more drastic approaches. So they got the clown into number ten and held him to ransom.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,316
    Another Brexit thread. Oh frabjous day.

    (I've posted it on the right one this time, but truthfully it makes sense on the last thread too.)
  • Mr. B2, I'd dispute that Boris Johnson was held to ransom. His modus operandi is doing whatever is in his interest, unconstrained by national interest or any sense of political ideology or personal morality.
  • Mr. B2, I'd dispute that Boris Johnson was held to ransom. His modus operandi is doing whatever is in his interest, unconstrained by national interest or any sense of political ideology or personal morality.

    May's deal made sense to her. She saw Brexit as about controlling immigration, and her final plan was "control immigration whilst doing as little damage as possible to the economy".

    Johnson's deal made sense to him. He saw Brexit about bringing as many powers as possible to Westminster and f£#@ everyone and everything else.

    What does Sunak, deep down see Brexit as being about?
  • Total base (can’t find Panelbase tables which show what SNP voters think - which is of more import now, if not later):

    Scottish voters think the next First Minister should not prioritise independence and should drop gender recognition reforms entirely.



    https://twitter.com/DeanMThomson/status/1629556158238281728?s=20
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 46,826

    Mr. B2, I'd dispute that Boris Johnson was held to ransom. His modus operandi is doing whatever is in his interest, unconstrained by national interest or any sense of political ideology or personal morality.

    May's deal made sense to her. She saw Brexit as about controlling immigration, and her final plan was "control immigration whilst doing as little damage as possible to the economy".

    Johnson's deal made sense to him. He saw Brexit about bringing as many powers as possible to Westminster and f£#@ everyone and everything else.

    What does Sunak, deep down see Brexit as being about?
    Probably, helping his hedge fund millionaire friends - but that approach is less acceptable even that the above two.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 4,636
    I think it will be around 2031 when rejoin becomes an option. This is because it was about 15 years between Britain joining the EU and the start of a credible campaign to leave it.
    However a difference is that, when we were in the EU, there were a large number of obvious benefits, the government now have about 7 years to demonstrate some benefits of being outside the EU.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,911
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT - the point of the NI protocol deal isn't just to sort out intra UK trade & relations and restore power sharing in the province, important though both those things are, it's also to normalise relations with the EU and the USA as well.

    From that, lots of things follow - including more help to sort out small boats, and lifting the threat of a trade dispute, which should help investment and the economy.

    This is a big barnacle off Sunak's boat.

    This is spot on:

    Indeed, the last 12 months has been - in an a low key way - very good for EU-UK relations.

    Firstly, the UK's stalwart support for Ukraine has not gone unnoticed across the continent. Our ready willingness to share intelligence, and to be the first to commit to weapons has been enormously appreciated, especially from those who wished to act but who were constrained by history.

    Secondly, there's been an awful lot of positive behind the scenes energy stuff. In particular, incoming LNG cargoes have often been diverted in a surprisingly selfless way to try and ensure supplies remained ample across Europe. Indeed: I'd say there's probably been better coordination than when we were in the EU - and all thanks to the fact that Putin forced the EU, the UK and Norway to work together.

    Thirdly, Sunak is a *much* less divisive character across Europe. He doesn't raise hackles. While a Leaver, he's not spent his time demonising the EU. And that's meant that when he's gone in asking for things, people genuinely believe he's sincere in looking for a deal.

    My suspicion is that Sunak will be quite well regarded by history, but not by voters.
    I think that final line is about right.

    And its revealing of his electoral approach: he thinks he can recreate Major in '92, but if even allowed to get to the ballot box, he's going to go down like Major in '97...
  • Mr. B2, I'd dispute that Boris Johnson was held to ransom. His modus operandi is doing whatever is in his interest, unconstrained by national interest or any sense of political ideology or personal morality.

    May's deal made sense to her. She saw Brexit as about controlling immigration, and her final plan was "control immigration whilst doing as little damage as possible to the economy".

    Johnson's deal made sense to him. He saw Brexit about bringing as many powers as possible to Westminster and f£#@ everyone and everything else.

    What does Sunak, deep down see Brexit as being about?
    If you haven’t seen it, this is worth a read:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/chancellor-rishi-sunaks-mais-lecture-2022

    A year ago, never got much coverage for understandable reasons.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,911
    darkage said:

    I think it will be around 2031 when rejoin becomes an option. This is because it was about 15 years between Britain joining the EU and the start of a credible campaign to leave it.
    However a difference is that, when we were in the EU, there were a large number of obvious benefits, the government now have about 7 years to demonstrate some benefits of being outside the EU.

    In reality there needs to be some divergence before Labour get into power.

    Tarriff reform would be a great start. Making it cheaper for the consumer to buy food, for example. As would varying more VAT rates.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Mr. B2, I'd dispute that Boris Johnson was held to ransom. His modus operandi is doing whatever is in his interest, unconstrained by national interest or any sense of political ideology or personal morality.

    May's deal made sense to her. She saw Brexit as about controlling immigration, and her final plan was "control immigration whilst doing as little damage as possible to the economy".

    Johnson's deal made sense to him. He saw Brexit about bringing as many powers as possible to Westminster and f£#@ everyone and everything else.

    What does Sunak, deep down see Brexit as being about?
    At the moment? Sunak sees I as a means to save his precarious premiership. He’s looking for a clause 4 moment It’s telling that today’s headlines are as much if not more about Rishi as NI.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,537
    Mortimer said:

    darkage said:

    I think it will be around 2031 when rejoin becomes an option. This is because it was about 15 years between Britain joining the EU and the start of a credible campaign to leave it.
    However a difference is that, when we were in the EU, there were a large number of obvious benefits, the government now have about 7 years to demonstrate some benefits of being outside the EU.

    In reality there needs to be some divergence before Labour get into power.

    Tarriff reform would be a great start. Making it cheaper for the consumer to buy food, for example. As would varying more VAT rates.
    You sell one product.

    Please, for the love of God, let's not have many different VAT rates for different types of product.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,747
    edited February 2023
    Given the level of sleaze and corruption, I’m surprised how many still think favourably of the Conservatives. They are better regarded than the Lib Dems, still, suggesting the latter won’t be coming back in their former heartlands.

    Nor are Labour anything like as well-regarded as in the mid 90’s.

    I can’t see anything other than a Labour victory next time, but I doubt if it will be a landslide. I’d expect a lead (in terms of votes) in the region of 43/35%.
  • UPDATE: It turns out Panelbase also have net personal ratings for each candidate, and on those the gap between Ms Forbes and Mr Yousaf is much, much wider.

    Kate Forbes: +14
    Humza Yousaf: -16


    Regan reported as -3

    https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2023/02/kate-forbes-holds-clear-lead-in-yet.html?m=1

    I suspect there’s a lot of “Don’t knows” in there..
  • Mr. B2, I'd dispute that Boris Johnson was held to ransom. His modus operandi is doing whatever is in his interest, unconstrained by national interest or any sense of political ideology or personal morality.

    May's deal made sense to her. She saw Brexit as about controlling immigration, and her final plan was "control immigration whilst doing as little damage as possible to the economy".

    Johnson's deal made sense to him. He saw Brexit about bringing as many powers as possible to Westminster and f£#@ everyone and everything else.

    What does Sunak, deep down see Brexit as being about?
    If you haven’t seen it, this is worth a read:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/chancellor-rishi-sunaks-mais-lecture-2022

    A year ago, never got much coverage for understandable reasons.
    The irony is that, if this bit is his ambition,

    those enduring principles of free market economics: sound money, respect for the rule of law, protections for private property rights, openness and free trade, a stable relationship with allies, regulation that encourages competition and innovation

    he certainly dropped a bollock by backing Johnson, and it's not obvious that he hasn't dropped a bollock by backing Brexit. The single market isn't a perfect free market, but he may have made the mistake of letting the best be the enemy of the good.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,889
    edited February 2023

    UPDATE: It turns out Panelbase also have net personal ratings for each candidate, and on those the gap between Ms Forbes and Mr Yousaf is much, much wider.

    Kate Forbes: +14
    Humza Yousaf: -16


    Regan reported as -3

    https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2023/02/kate-forbes-holds-clear-lead-in-yet.html?m=1

    I suspect there’s a lot of “Don’t knows” in there..

    I think in the end they’ll go for Forbes. Regan and Yousaf are both patently not up to the job, and in the absence of others that just leaves Forbes.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Sean_F said:

    Given the level of sleaze and corruption, I’m surprised how many still think favourably of the Conservatives. They are better regarded than the Lib Dems, still, suggesting the latter won’t be coming back in their former heartlands.

    Nor are Labour anything like as well-regarded as in the mid 90’s.

    I can’t see anything other than a Labour victory next time, but I doubt if it will be a landslide. I’d expect a lead (in terms of votes) in the region of 43/35%.

    Politics is polarised. A mild form of the US disease. There are those who look at Trump and what he did and say yes. It’s the same here. Doesn’t make it good, or right, but it is happening. Some folk like Boris, because of who he is and the way he conducts himself.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,316
    edited February 2023

    UPDATE: It turns out Panelbase also have net personal ratings for each candidate, and on those the gap between Ms Forbes and Mr Yousaf is much, much wider.

    Kate Forbes: +14
    Humza Yousaf: -16


    Regan reported as -3

    https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2023/02/kate-forbes-holds-clear-lead-in-yet.html?m=1

    I suspect there’s a lot of “Don’t knows” in there..

    Does anyone else find it extraordinary that the SNP's hierarchy, whose brand of rampaging populism has scarcely been faulted in driving up the popularity of both the party and its defining issue in twenty years, appear to be seriously considering the incredibly useless (and as we can see from this, unpopular) Yousaf as their preferred candidate for the leadership?

    I mean - seriously?

    Either he's got hidden talents - in which case he's hiding them bloody well - or the party has lost its collective mind over transgender rights, or there is something waaaaay worse to come out about Forbes and Regan.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    ydoethur said:

    UPDATE: It turns out Panelbase also have net personal ratings for each candidate, and on those the gap between Ms Forbes and Mr Yousaf is much, much wider.

    Kate Forbes: +14
    Humza Yousaf: -16


    Regan reported as -3

    https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2023/02/kate-forbes-holds-clear-lead-in-yet.html?m=1

    I suspect there’s a lot of “Don’t knows” in there..

    Does anyone else find it extraordinary that the SNP's hierarchy, whose brand of rampaging populism has scarcely been faulted in driving up the popularity of both the party and its defining issue in twenty years, appear to be seriously considering the incredibly useless (and as we can see from this, unpopular) Yousaf as their preferred candidate for the leadership?

    I mean - seriously?

    Either he's got hidden talents - in which case he's hiding them bloody well - or the party has lost its collective mind over transgender rights, or there is something waaaaay worse to come out about Forbes and Regan.
    Social conservatism is the new rock and roll?
  • Stayed up late last night playing Scipio on Civ 2: Rise of Rome.

    For the first time, completed all the objectives. 96% rating: "Scipio the Strong".

    Carthage was actually one of the last cities I took. However, by that time I'd out-researched the Carthaginians so did it with musketeers, cannon and ironclads.

    Not sure wholly realistic but, still, a win is a win.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,442
    WillG said:

    The public reaction to migrant boats shows migration is still a latent inflammatory issue.

    The current migrant boat crisis is caused by Brexit. Starmer could fix it, if he wants to.
  • Sean_F said:

    Given the level of sleaze and corruption, I’m surprised how many still think favourably of the Conservatives. They are better regarded than the Lib Dems, still, suggesting the latter won’t be coming back in their former heartlands.

    Nor are Labour anything like as well-regarded as in the mid 90’s.

    I can’t see anything other than a Labour victory next time, but I doubt if it will be a landslide. I’d expect a lead (in terms of votes) in the region of 43/35%.

    I think both Labour and Tories lower.

    I'd say Labour 40% and Tories at 29-30%.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,316

    Stayed up late last night playing Scipio on Civ 2: Rise of Rome.

    For the first time, completed all the objectives. 96% rating: "Scipio the Strong".

    Carthage was actually one of the last cities I took. However, by that time I'd out-researched the Carthaginians so did it with musketeers, cannon and ironclads.

    Not sure wholly realistic but, still, a win is a win.

    It sounds like the Carthaginians went out with an unexpected bang.
  • IanB2 said:

    Mr. B2, I'd dispute that Boris Johnson was held to ransom. His modus operandi is doing whatever is in his interest, unconstrained by national interest or any sense of political ideology or personal morality.

    May's deal made sense to her. She saw Brexit as about controlling immigration, and her final plan was "control immigration whilst doing as little damage as possible to the economy".

    Johnson's deal made sense to him. He saw Brexit about bringing as many powers as possible to Westminster and f£#@ everyone and everything else.

    What does Sunak, deep down see Brexit as being about?
    Probably, helping his hedge fund millionaire friends - but that approach is less acceptable even that the above two.
    I was chatting to a US monetary policy maker last week who was still trying to understand the economic logic of Brexit. They said that it seemed like the UK had shot itself in the foot - I said it was either the foot or the face.
  • UPDATE: It turns out Panelbase also have net personal ratings for each candidate, and on those the gap between Ms Forbes and Mr Yousaf is much, much wider.

    Kate Forbes: +14
    Humza Yousaf: -16


    Regan reported as -3

    https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2023/02/kate-forbes-holds-clear-lead-in-yet.html?m=1

    I suspect there’s a lot of “Don’t knows” in there..

    I think in the end they’ll go for Forbes. Regan and Yousaf are both patently not up to the job, and in the absence of others that just leaves Forbes.
    Remember that’s total base, not SNP voters, let alone members, and it’s not unknown for party members to foist a dud on the rest of us….
  • rcs1000 said:

    FPT - the point of the NI protocol deal isn't just to sort out intra UK trade & relations and restore power sharing in the province, important though both those things are, it's also to normalise relations with the EU and the USA as well.

    From that, lots of things follow - including more help to sort out small boats, and lifting the threat of a trade dispute, which should help investment and the economy.

    This is a big barnacle off Sunak's boat.

    This is spot on:

    Indeed, the last 12 months has been - in an a low key way - very good for EU-UK relations.

    Firstly, the UK's stalwart support for Ukraine has not gone unnoticed across the continent. Our ready willingness to share intelligence, and to be the first to commit to weapons has been enormously appreciated, especially from those who wished to act but who were constrained by history.

    Secondly, there's been an awful lot of positive behind the scenes energy stuff. In particular, incoming LNG cargoes have often been diverted in a surprisingly selfless way to try and ensure supplies remained ample across Europe. Indeed: I'd say there's probably been better coordination than when we were in the EU - and all thanks to the fact that Putin forced the EU, the UK and Norway to work together.

    Thirdly, Sunak is a *much* less divisive character across Europe. He doesn't raise hackles. While a Leaver, he's not spent his time demonising the EU. And that's meant that when he's gone in asking for things, people genuinely believe he's sincere in looking for a deal.

    My suspicion is that Sunak will be quite well regarded by history, but not by voters.
    Yes, us Sunak fans get regularly lampooned on here for praising him, but he's good. Best PM since Cameron.

    One day many more will see this.
  • Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.
  • Scott_xP said:

    WillG said:

    The public reaction to migrant boats shows migration is still a latent inflammatory issue.

    The current migrant boat crisis is caused by Brexit. Starmer could fix it, if he wants to.
    Why and how?
  • F1: Germans seem unable to stay away. It might be that Vettel comes 'back' out of retirement to replace Stroll for the season opener.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/64772999
  • Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,442
    @fascinatorfun: 🇬🇧 Turnip King used to produce 30 mill turnips pa, but says business collapsed after the Tories came to power.
    Parr… https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1629588167920590850
  • ydoethur said:

    UPDATE: It turns out Panelbase also have net personal ratings for each candidate, and on those the gap between Ms Forbes and Mr Yousaf is much, much wider.

    Kate Forbes: +14
    Humza Yousaf: -16


    Regan reported as -3

    https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2023/02/kate-forbes-holds-clear-lead-in-yet.html?m=1

    I suspect there’s a lot of “Don’t knows” in there..

    Does anyone else find it extraordinary that the SNP's hierarchy, whose brand of rampaging populism has scarcely been faulted in driving up the popularity of both the party and its defining issue in twenty years, appear to be seriously considering the incredibly useless (and as we can see from this, unpopular) Yousaf as their preferred candidate for the leadership?

    I mean - seriously?

    Either he's got hidden talents - in which case he's hiding them bloody well - or the party has lost its collective mind over transgender rights, or there is something waaaaay worse to come out about Forbes and Regan.
    It’s Total Base vs SNP voters, let alone members. Yousaf is seen as “continuity Sturgeon” and seems to have the party machine behind him. How well that machine understands it’s members, let alone voters we shall shortly find out.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,316

    Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    Oddly, the only American I know well thinks the opposite. She hates the EU and thinks the British were mad to ever go into an organisation that is undemocratic, bureaucratic and breaks its own rules frequently, brazenly and with such impunity right extend its powers.

    What always intrigued me is that she's also the most liberal Democratic I've ever met as well. A Sanders admirer.

    Which only goes to show - the world's a complicated place.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,747

    Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    Very much a case of do as I say, not as I do.

    No American would ever dream of joining a EU-type organisation.
  • ydoethur said:

    Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    Oddly, the only American I know well thinks the opposite. She hates the EU and thinks the British were mad to ever go into an organisation that is undemocratic, bureaucratic and breaks its own rules frequently, brazenly and with such impunity right extend its powers.

    What always intrigued me is that she's also the most liberal Democratic I've ever met as well. A Sanders admirer.

    Which only goes to show - the world's a complicated place.
    Or that the Bernie crowd is as nuts as its Corbyn counterparts?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,442

    Scott_xP said:

    WillG said:

    The public reaction to migrant boats shows migration is still a latent inflammatory issue.

    The current migrant boat crisis is caused by Brexit. Starmer could fix it, if he wants to.
    Why and how?
    As EU members we could send them back

    @MrJonDePlume: Surely she should just stop in the first constituency she arrives in.

    Suella Braverman struggles to find safe seat for next election
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ea840abc-b480-11ed-abc9-a9456bea4494?shareToken=ff5741e65ea8ca672da9c914d8a354a7
  • ydoethur said:

    Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    Oddly, the only American I know well thinks the opposite. She hates the EU and thinks the British were mad to ever go into an organisation that is undemocratic, bureaucratic and breaks its own rules frequently, brazenly and with such impunity right extend its powers.

    What always intrigued me is that she's also the most liberal Democratic I've ever met as well. A Sanders admirer.

    Which only goes to show - the world's a complicated place.
    Isn't that just horseshoe politics? Equivalent of Lexiteers here.
  • Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    It did make economic sense for the people who voted for it:

    Wages for British workers will rise in the event of a Brexit, head of 'in' campaign, Lord Rose says

    Lord Rose, the head of the campaign to keep Britain in the European Union, suggests that wages of low skilled workers could rise in the event of a Brexit


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12181385/Wages-for-British-workers-will-rise-in-the-event-of-a-Brexit-head-of-in-campaign-says.html
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,316
    edited February 2023

    ydoethur said:

    UPDATE: It turns out Panelbase also have net personal ratings for each candidate, and on those the gap between Ms Forbes and Mr Yousaf is much, much wider.

    Kate Forbes: +14
    Humza Yousaf: -16


    Regan reported as -3

    https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2023/02/kate-forbes-holds-clear-lead-in-yet.html?m=1

    I suspect there’s a lot of “Don’t knows” in there..

    Does anyone else find it extraordinary that the SNP's hierarchy, whose brand of rampaging populism has scarcely been faulted in driving up the popularity of both the party and its defining issue in twenty years, appear to be seriously considering the incredibly useless (and as we can see from this, unpopular) Yousaf as their preferred candidate for the leadership?

    I mean - seriously?

    Either he's got hidden talents - in which case he's hiding them bloody well - or the party has lost its collective mind over transgender rights, or there is something waaaaay worse to come out about Forbes and Regan.
    It’s Total Base vs SNP voters, let alone members. Yousaf is seen as “continuity Sturgeon” and seems to have the party machine behind him. How well that machine understands it’s members, let alone voters we shall shortly find out.
    It's AV, right?

    Let's assume, for the moment, Yousaf is first or second on first preferences.

    I am wondering how transfer friendly he will be.

    He doesn't offer red meat on independence. He's out of step with the Scottish public on gender reform as Forbes is on gay marriage, so those might cancel each other out. He can't point to a track record of competent government. He isn't even particularly left wing, although admittedly he's well to the left of the other two.

    Why, if he is not somebody's first choice, would he be their second choice?

    So I would have said at the moment he's the clear outsider. If Regan is third you would imagine her votes would break for Forbes ahead of Yousaf and it seems unlikely anyone will hit 50% on first preferences.

    What puzzles me is why the SNP itself, until recently so surefooted in detecting and shaping public opinion, think otherwise. Either there is something here that we don't know about - which is eminently possible - or the meltdown they're in is far worse than it looks.

    Equally, this is going to be a complex election with a lot of moving parts and there's still the whole campaign to go yet.
  • UPDATE: It turns out Panelbase also have net personal ratings for each candidate, and on those the gap between Ms Forbes and Mr Yousaf is much, much wider.

    Kate Forbes: +14
    Humza Yousaf: -16


    Regan reported as -3

    https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2023/02/kate-forbes-holds-clear-lead-in-yet.html?m=1

    I suspect there’s a lot of “Don’t knows” in there..

    I think in the end they’ll go for Forbes. Regan and Yousaf are both patently not up to the job, and in the absence of others that just leaves Forbes.
    Remember that’s total base, not SNP voters, let alone members, and it’s not unknown for party members to foist a dud on the rest of us….
    ‘The rest of us’
  • Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    It did make economic sense for the people who voted for it:

    Wages for British workers will rise in the event of a Brexit, head of 'in' campaign, Lord Rose says

    Lord Rose, the head of the campaign to keep Britain in the European Union, suggests that wages of low skilled workers could rise in the event of a Brexit


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12181385/Wages-for-British-workers-will-rise-in-the-event-of-a-Brexit-head-of-in-campaign-says.html
    As they have.

    It's just that prices have risen faster, which was always a reasonable bet.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,316

    ydoethur said:

    Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    Oddly, the only American I know well thinks the opposite. She hates the EU and thinks the British were mad to ever go into an organisation that is undemocratic, bureaucratic and breaks its own rules frequently, brazenly and with such impunity right extend its powers.

    What always intrigued me is that she's also the most liberal Democratic I've ever met as well. A Sanders admirer.

    Which only goes to show - the world's a complicated place.
    Or that the Bernie crowd is as nuts as its Corbyn counterparts?
    One thing she definitely isn't is nuts.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,442
    ...
  • Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    It did make economic sense for the people who voted for it:

    Wages for British workers will rise in the event of a Brexit, head of 'in' campaign, Lord Rose says

    Lord Rose, the head of the campaign to keep Britain in the European Union, suggests that wages of low skilled workers could rise in the event of a Brexit


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12181385/Wages-for-British-workers-will-rise-in-the-event-of-a-Brexit-head-of-in-campaign-says.html
    Real wage growth is negative but whatevs.
  • Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT - the point of the NI protocol deal isn't just to sort out intra UK trade & relations and restore power sharing in the province, important though both those things are, it's also to normalise relations with the EU and the USA as well.

    From that, lots of things follow - including more help to sort out small boats, and lifting the threat of a trade dispute, which should help investment and the economy.

    This is a big barnacle off Sunak's boat.

    This is spot on:

    Indeed, the last 12 months has been - in an a low key way - very good for EU-UK relations.

    Firstly, the UK's stalwart support for Ukraine has not gone unnoticed across the continent. Our ready willingness to share intelligence, and to be the first to commit to weapons has been enormously appreciated, especially from those who wished to act but who were constrained by history.

    Secondly, there's been an awful lot of positive behind the scenes energy stuff. In particular, incoming LNG cargoes have often been diverted in a surprisingly selfless way to try and ensure supplies remained ample across Europe. Indeed: I'd say there's probably been better coordination than when we were in the EU - and all thanks to the fact that Putin forced the EU, the UK and Norway to work together.

    Thirdly, Sunak is a *much* less divisive character across Europe. He doesn't raise hackles. While a Leaver, he's not spent his time demonising the EU. And that's meant that when he's gone in asking for things, people genuinely believe he's sincere in looking for a deal.

    My suspicion is that Sunak will be quite well regarded by history, but not by voters.
    Yes, us Sunak fans get regularly lampooned on here for praising him, but he's good. Best PM since Cameron.

    One day many more will see this.
    Best PM since Cameron. You mean better than Truss, Johnson and May? 🤯
    Most voters, even those fed up with the Conservatives, would accept that. Part of the problem the Conservatives have is that their current voters don't necessarily agree.


  • TimSTimS Posts: 8,742
    Sean_F said:

    Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    Very much a case of do as I say, not as I do.

    No American would ever dream of joining a EU-type organisation.
    They’re in one right now, only more centralised: the USA.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,332
    The less the Tories talk about Brexit the better for them. Part of their problem is that the Eurosceptic die-hards who have spent their whole careers talking about the EU can't stop doing so even now Brexit is achieved. Rather than move on and start to use Brexit freedoms in small, incremental, practical ways to improve the lives of people, they are determined to keep picking at the scab with talk of rebellions over a protocol deal, or pushing for grandstanding such as with the blanket repeal bill of EU legacy law.

    We've talked about the parallels between Irish and Scottish independence recently, and in terms of how it took decades for Ireland to stop looking backwards and concentrate on how it was different to Britain, there are parallels now in that the obsession with Brexit means that it is impossible for Britain to do the normal politics that might bring improvements to the country. The question of reforming property taxation, for example, hasn't got a chance of happening because it isn't related to the EU at all.
  • ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    UPDATE: It turns out Panelbase also have net personal ratings for each candidate, and on those the gap between Ms Forbes and Mr Yousaf is much, much wider.

    Kate Forbes: +14
    Humza Yousaf: -16


    Regan reported as -3

    https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2023/02/kate-forbes-holds-clear-lead-in-yet.html?m=1

    I suspect there’s a lot of “Don’t knows” in there..

    Does anyone else find it extraordinary that the SNP's hierarchy, whose brand of rampaging populism has scarcely been faulted in driving up the popularity of both the party and its defining issue in twenty years, appear to be seriously considering the incredibly useless (and as we can see from this, unpopular) Yousaf as their preferred candidate for the leadership?

    I mean - seriously?

    Either he's got hidden talents - in which case he's hiding them bloody well - or the party has lost its collective mind over transgender rights, or there is something waaaaay worse to come out about Forbes and Regan.
    It’s Total Base vs SNP voters, let alone members. Yousaf is seen as “continuity Sturgeon” and seems to have the party machine behind him. How well that machine understands it’s members, let alone voters we shall shortly find out.
    It's AV, right?

    Let's assume, for the moment, Yousaf is first or second on first preferences.

    I am wondering how transfer friendly he will be.

    He doesn't offer red meat on independence. He's out of step with the Scottish public on gender reform as Forbes is on gay marriage, so those might cancel each other out. He can't point to a track record of competent government. He isn't even particularly left wing, although admittedly he's well to the left of the other two.

    Why, if he is not somebody's first choice, would he be their second choice?

    So I would have said at the moment he's the clear outsider. If Regan is third you would imagine her votes would break for Forbes ahead of Yousaf and it seems unlikely anyone will hit 50% on first preferences.

    What puzzles me is why the SNP itself, until recently so surefooted in detecting and shaping public opinion, think otherwise. Either there is something here that we don't know about - which is eminently possible - or the meltdown they're in is far worse than it looks.

    Equally, this is going to be a complex election with a lot of moving parts and there's still the whole campaign to go yet.
    Yes:

    https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/heres-how-snp-leadership-elections-work/

    It depends on which issue most motivates the members. “Independence or bust” is Regan’s pitch, and both she and Forbes are not in favour of the GRR bill as it currently stands. Forbes pitch is “competence” which is an act Yousaf would struggle with, so it depends on which issues are most important to members….
  • Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    It did make economic sense for the people who voted for it:

    Wages for British workers will rise in the event of a Brexit, head of 'in' campaign, Lord Rose says

    Lord Rose, the head of the campaign to keep Britain in the European Union, suggests that wages of low skilled workers could rise in the event of a Brexit


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12181385/Wages-for-British-workers-will-rise-in-the-event-of-a-Brexit-head-of-in-campaign-says.html
    Real wage growth is negative but whatevs.
    If only we’d listened to Remains warnings about COVID and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine!
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,869
    Cicero said:

    Mr. Cicero, just a note on compromise: May presented that thrice to the Commons with her deal. Labour's pro-EU MPs refused to compromise and back it. It would've passed had they done so.

    The intransigence was far from one way. See also Dominic Grieve, demanding a concession, getting it, then shrieking in the chamber it was too late and voting against the very thing he had sought.

    Or consider the multi-party promise of a referendum on Lisbon, only to be shamelessly reneged upon.

    The British spirit of compromise has not politically existed for quite some time when it comes to the EU.

    You move a Lisbon referendum, I raise you a disgraceful "Citizens of Nowhere" speech.

    However, instead of arguing about the past, we should agree that we need a national consensus for the future and try and work out what it could be.

    Thoughts?
    On the one hand I applaud the spirit that seeks out a “national consensus”.

    On the other, won’t it be great when everything that “Lord” David Frost stands for is very loudly and publicly repudiated?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,442

    Rather than move on and start to use Brexit freedoms in small, incremental, practical ways to improve the lives of people

    Rather than harness their unicorns to the yoke of the plough...
  • Incidentally, are we expecting any announcement on Sunak's potential NI deal today?
  • SNP Leadership Election Endorsements, state of play at 8pm on 25th of February. 3 candidates, meaning 106 endorsements available.

    Candidate: Backers (MSPs/MPs)

    Yousaf: 30 (20/10)
    Forbes: 9 (7/2)
    Regan: 1 (0/1)
    None Yet: 63 (32/31)
    None: 3 (2/1)


    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1629573709705953281?s=20
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 30,819

    Incidentally, are we expecting any announcement on Sunak's potential NI deal today?

    Who knows? It seems like Groundhog Week - we were expecting one last Sunday.

    I do hope Sunak does this though, somebody needs to face down the Brexit hardliners.
  • FPT - the point of the NI protocol deal isn't just to sort out intra UK trade & relations and restore power sharing in the province, important though both those things are, it's also to normalise relations with the EU and the USA as well.

    From that, lots of things follow - including more help to sort out small boats, and lifting the threat of a trade dispute, which should help investment and the economy.

    This is a big barnacle off Sunak's boat.

    All true - plus, it humiliates Johnson and Truss by demonstrating constructive dialogue is far more effective than performative confrontation. They will never forgive him but they look very yesterday today. This is a significant feather in Sunak’s cap - well done to him. He’s delivered a win for all non-loons. Some good news!

  • Anyway,
    Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT - the point of the NI protocol deal isn't just to sort out intra UK trade & relations and restore power sharing in the province, important though both those things are, it's also to normalise relations with the EU and the USA as well.

    From that, lots of things follow - including more help to sort out small boats, and lifting the threat of a trade dispute, which should help investment and the economy.

    This is a big barnacle off Sunak's boat.

    This is spot on:

    Indeed, the last 12 months has been - in an a low key way - very good for EU-UK relations.

    Firstly, the UK's stalwart support for Ukraine has not gone unnoticed across the continent. Our ready willingness to share intelligence, and to be the first to commit to weapons has been enormously appreciated, especially from those who wished to act but who were constrained by history.

    Secondly, there's been an awful lot of positive behind the scenes energy stuff. In particular, incoming LNG cargoes have often been diverted in a surprisingly selfless way to try and ensure supplies remained ample across Europe. Indeed: I'd say there's probably been better coordination than when we were in the EU - and all thanks to the fact that Putin forced the EU, the UK and Norway to work together.

    Thirdly, Sunak is a *much* less divisive character across Europe. He doesn't raise hackles. While a Leaver, he's not spent his time demonising the EU. And that's meant that when he's gone in asking for things, people genuinely believe he's sincere in looking for a deal.

    My suspicion is that Sunak will be quite well regarded by history, but not by voters.
    Yes, us Sunak fans get regularly lampooned on here for praising him, but he's good. Best PM since Cameron.

    One day many more will see this.
    Best PM since Cameron. You mean better than Truss, Johnson and May? 🤯
    Yes. He won't have time in office for a fair comparison to Cameron to be made but I was a fan of his too.

    That doesn't mean he wasn't better than PMs that came *before* Cameron as well, by the way.

    He easily beats Gordon Brown too.
  • Incidentally, are we expecting any announcement on Sunak's potential NI deal today?

    Monday.
  • Hitler parody of Putin's war, a year on (less satire and more serious than many).

    Ironically, at 3mins33s the line could be subtitled genuinely. Der Krieg ist verloren = the war is lost.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyFWKgdZFSE
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,332
    ydoethur said:

    UPDATE: It turns out Panelbase also have net personal ratings for each candidate, and on those the gap between Ms Forbes and Mr Yousaf is much, much wider.

    Kate Forbes: +14
    Humza Yousaf: -16


    Regan reported as -3

    https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2023/02/kate-forbes-holds-clear-lead-in-yet.html?m=1

    I suspect there’s a lot of “Don’t knows” in there..

    Does anyone else find it extraordinary that the SNP's hierarchy, whose brand of rampaging populism has scarcely been faulted in driving up the popularity of both the party and its defining issue in twenty years, appear to be seriously considering the incredibly useless (and as we can see from this, unpopular) Yousaf as their preferred candidate for the leadership?

    I mean - seriously?

    Either he's got hidden talents - in which case he's hiding them bloody well - or the party has lost its collective mind over transgender rights, or there is something waaaaay worse to come out about Forbes and Regan.
    In the limited number of discussions that I've seen, supporting transgender rights has been seen as the most important determinant of which candidate to support.

    This might look like they've lost their mind, but it's how I would react were there leadership candidates who I viewed as threatening gay or women's rights. It would be disqualifying. So they're left with only one candidate to consider before they get onto other questions like ability, independence strategy, economic policy, etc.
  • Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    It did make economic sense for the people who voted for it:

    Wages for British workers will rise in the event of a Brexit, head of 'in' campaign, Lord Rose says

    Lord Rose, the head of the campaign to keep Britain in the European Union, suggests that wages of low skilled workers could rise in the event of a Brexit


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12181385/Wages-for-British-workers-will-rise-in-the-event-of-a-Brexit-head-of-in-campaign-says.html
    Yes, pensioners have done very well since 2016!

  • who are more right ?

    LD to win more than 40 seats at next GE

    Ladbrokes evens
    Skybet 2/1
  • Incidentally, are we expecting any announcement on Sunak's potential NI deal today?

    Who knows? It seems like Groundhog Week - we were expecting one last Sunday.

    I do hope Sunak does this though, somebody needs to face down the Brexit hardliners.
    He will. He has no other choice. And good on him.

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 30,819
    edited February 2023

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT - the point of the NI protocol deal isn't just to sort out intra UK trade & relations and restore power sharing in the province, important though both those things are, it's also to normalise relations with the EU and the USA as well.

    From that, lots of things follow - including more help to sort out small boats, and lifting the threat of a trade dispute, which should help investment and the economy.

    This is a big barnacle off Sunak's boat.

    This is spot on:

    Indeed, the last 12 months has been - in an a low key way - very good for EU-UK relations.

    Firstly, the UK's stalwart support for Ukraine has not gone unnoticed across the continent. Our ready willingness to share intelligence, and to be the first to commit to weapons has been enormously appreciated, especially from those who wished to act but who were constrained by history.

    Secondly, there's been an awful lot of positive behind the scenes energy stuff. In particular, incoming LNG cargoes have often been diverted in a surprisingly selfless way to try and ensure supplies remained ample across Europe. Indeed: I'd say there's probably been better coordination than when we were in the EU - and all thanks to the fact that Putin forced the EU, the UK and Norway to work together.

    Thirdly, Sunak is a *much* less divisive character across Europe. He doesn't raise hackles. While a Leaver, he's not spent his time demonising the EU. And that's meant that when he's gone in asking for things, people genuinely believe he's sincere in looking for a deal.

    My suspicion is that Sunak will be quite well regarded by history, but not by voters.
    Yes, us Sunak fans get regularly lampooned on here for praising him, but he's good. Best PM since Cameron.

    One day many more will see this.
    Inclined to agree on this, provided he can negotiate the next few weeks. Quite a dangerous time for him politically.
  • Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    It did make economic sense for the people who voted for it:

    Wages for British workers will rise in the event of a Brexit, head of 'in' campaign, Lord Rose says

    Lord Rose, the head of the campaign to keep Britain in the European Union, suggests that wages of low skilled workers could rise in the event of a Brexit


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12181385/Wages-for-British-workers-will-rise-in-the-event-of-a-Brexit-head-of-in-campaign-says.html
    Yes, pensioners have done very well since 2016!

    To be fair, pensioners were the main backers of Brexit in 2016 (64-36), and the only age cohort who still back it now.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,747

    ydoethur said:

    UPDATE: It turns out Panelbase also have net personal ratings for each candidate, and on those the gap between Ms Forbes and Mr Yousaf is much, much wider.

    Kate Forbes: +14
    Humza Yousaf: -16


    Regan reported as -3

    https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2023/02/kate-forbes-holds-clear-lead-in-yet.html?m=1

    I suspect there’s a lot of “Don’t knows” in there..

    Does anyone else find it extraordinary that the SNP's hierarchy, whose brand of rampaging populism has scarcely been faulted in driving up the popularity of both the party and its defining issue in twenty years, appear to be seriously considering the incredibly useless (and as we can see from this, unpopular) Yousaf as their preferred candidate for the leadership?

    I mean - seriously?

    Either he's got hidden talents - in which case he's hiding them bloody well - or the party has lost its collective mind over transgender rights, or there is something waaaaay worse to come out about Forbes and Regan.
    In the limited number of discussions that I've seen, supporting transgender rights has been seen as the most important determinant of which candidate to support.

    This might look like they've lost their mind, but it's how I would react were there leadership candidates who I viewed as threatening gay or women's rights. It would be disqualifying. So they're left with only one candidate to consider before they get onto other questions like ability,
    independence strategy, economic policy, etc.
    But, Yousaf is a terribly poor candidate.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,577
    edited February 2023

    Mr. B2, I'd dispute that Boris Johnson was held to ransom. His modus operandi is doing whatever is in his interest, unconstrained by national interest or any sense of political ideology or personal morality.

    May's deal made sense to her. She saw Brexit as about controlling immigration, and her final plan was "control immigration whilst doing as little damage as possible to the economy".

    Johnson's deal made sense to him. He saw Brexit about bringing as many powers as possible to Westminster and f£#@ everyone and everything else.

    What does Sunak, deep down see Brexit as being about?
    If you haven’t seen it, this is worth a read:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/chancellor-rishi-sunaks-mais-lecture-2022

    A year ago, never got much coverage for understandable reasons.
    Possibly because two thirds of it is waffle.
    The only thing of any real interest in there is the focus on business investment (he wants to increase tax incentives), and the proposed increase in government R&D spending.

    I don’t have any issue with either of those things, but both as an analysis of the UK’s structural problems, and as a response to the challenge of Brexit, it’s pitifully thin stuff.

    The bits about education, I don’t really even believe, given the government’s record.

    To be fair, it’s more constructive than anything his immediate predecessors have ever said.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,039
    rcs1000 said:

    Mr. Cicero, just a note on compromise: May presented that thrice to the Commons with her deal. Labour's pro-EU MPs refused to compromise and back it. It would've passed had they done so.

    The intransigence was far from one way. See also Dominic Grieve, demanding a concession, getting it, then shrieking in the chamber it was too late and voting against the very thing he had sought.

    Or consider the multi-party promise of a referendum on Lisbon, only to be shamelessly reneged upon.

    The British spirit of compromise has not politically existed for quite some time when it comes to the EU.

    Yes. And, also, the EU said the deal they're about to strike on NI was cakeism and impossible due to the need to 'protect the integrity of the single market'. Varadkar was lauded as the voice of common sense, despite being nothing more than little Sir Echo and showing no leadership at all; I remember a few of us calling both of these things out at the time and being pilloried for it.

    Everyone was intransigent about this and 2017-2019 really were terrible years where no-one covered themselves in glory.

    Posters on the other side should remind themselves that frustration and incandescence, from an electoral point of view, can absolutely work both ways on this issue.
    Both the EU and the UK behaved pretty poorly during the divorce talks, and while I place more blame on them than us, I can't say that either of us were blameless.

    And that's why Sunak works. He's not May - who was simultaneously weak and desperate to demonstrate her new Leave credentials. Nor Johnson, who was happy to trash talk on Sunday the same people he'd sit down with on Monday. He's quiet and deliberative, and while he's a Leaver, he's doing it because he thinks Brexit is right for Britain, not because he thinks the EU is intrinsically evil.
    May all be true. Doesn't help him given the brand damages discussed, but if his deal is in fact a decent one he's done pretty well. Still lacks political judgement though.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,039

    who are more right ?

    LD to win more than 40 seats at next GE

    Ladbrokes evens
    Skybet 2/1

    Skybet.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 30,819

    Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    It did make economic sense for the people who voted for it:

    Wages for British workers will rise in the event of a Brexit, head of 'in' campaign, Lord Rose says

    Lord Rose, the head of the campaign to keep Britain in the European Union, suggests that wages of low skilled workers could rise in the event of a Brexit


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12181385/Wages-for-British-workers-will-rise-in-the-event-of-a-Brexit-head-of-in-campaign-says.html
    Yes, pensioners have done very well since 2016!

    To be fair, pensioners were the main backers of Brexit in 2016 (64-36), and the only age cohort who still back it now.
    That age cohort is now 71+ rather than 65+ of course.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 43,600

    Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    It did make economic sense for the people who voted for it:

    Wages for British workers will rise in the event of a Brexit, head of 'in' campaign, Lord Rose says

    Lord Rose, the head of the campaign to keep Britain in the European Union, suggests that wages of low skilled workers could rise in the event of a Brexit


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12181385/Wages-for-British-workers-will-rise-in-the-event-of-a-Brexit-head-of-in-campaign-says.html
    So why are those workers, many in areas full of vacancies, on strike because of real terms pay cuts?

    The problem of shrinking the economy is that there is less for everyone.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,039

    FPT - the point of the NI protocol deal isn't just to sort out intra UK trade & relations and restore power sharing in the province, important though both those things are, it's also to normalise relations with the EU and the USA as well.

    From that, lots of things follow - including more help to sort out small boats, and lifting the threat of a trade dispute, which should help investment and the economy.

    This is a big barnacle off Sunak's boat.

    All true - plus, it humiliates Johnson and Truss by demonstrating constructive dialogue is far more effective than performative confrontation. They will never forgive him but they look very yesterday today. This is a significant feather in Sunak’s cap - well done to him. He’s delivered a win for all non-loons. Some good news!

    They wont forgive him, and will take 50-100 MPs with them in that lack of forgiveness.

    Never forget they and, historically, voters want performative confrontation.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,577

    Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT - the point of the NI protocol deal isn't just to sort out intra UK trade & relations and restore power sharing in the province, important though both those things are, it's also to normalise relations with the EU and the USA as well.

    From that, lots of things follow - including more help to sort out small boats, and lifting the threat of a trade dispute, which should help investment and the economy.

    This is a big barnacle off Sunak's boat.

    This is spot on:

    Indeed, the last 12 months has been - in an a low key way - very good for EU-UK relations.

    Firstly, the UK's stalwart support for Ukraine has not gone unnoticed across the continent. Our ready willingness to share intelligence, and to be the first to commit to weapons has been enormously appreciated, especially from those who wished to act but who were constrained by history.

    Secondly, there's been an awful lot of positive behind the scenes energy stuff. In particular, incoming LNG cargoes have often been diverted in a surprisingly selfless way to try and ensure supplies remained ample across Europe. Indeed: I'd say there's probably been better coordination than when we were in the EU - and all thanks to the fact that Putin forced the EU, the UK and Norway to work together.

    Thirdly, Sunak is a *much* less divisive character across Europe. He doesn't raise hackles. While a Leaver, he's not spent his time demonising the EU. And that's meant that when he's gone in asking for things, people genuinely believe he's sincere in looking for a deal.

    My suspicion is that Sunak will be quite well regarded by history, but not by voters.
    Yes, us Sunak fans get regularly lampooned on here for praising him, but he's good. Best PM since Cameron.

    One day many more will see this.
    Best PM since Cameron. You mean better than Truss, Johnson and May? 🤯
    Most voters, even those fed up with the Conservatives, would accept that. Part of the problem the Conservatives have is that their current voters don't necessarily agree.


    What about the undecideds ?
    (Granted they tend to be less likely to vote.)
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,332
    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    UPDATE: It turns out Panelbase also have net personal ratings for each candidate, and on those the gap between Ms Forbes and Mr Yousaf is much, much wider.

    Kate Forbes: +14
    Humza Yousaf: -16


    Regan reported as -3

    https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2023/02/kate-forbes-holds-clear-lead-in-yet.html?m=1

    I suspect there’s a lot of “Don’t knows” in there..

    Does anyone else find it extraordinary that the SNP's hierarchy, whose brand of rampaging populism has scarcely been faulted in driving up the popularity of both the party and its defining issue in twenty years, appear to be seriously considering the incredibly useless (and as we can see from this, unpopular) Yousaf as their preferred candidate for the leadership?

    I mean - seriously?

    Either he's got hidden talents - in which case he's hiding them bloody well - or the party has lost its collective mind over transgender rights, or there is something waaaaay worse to come out about Forbes and Regan.
    In the limited number of discussions that I've seen, supporting transgender rights has been seen as the most important determinant of which candidate to support.

    This might look like they've lost their mind, but it's how I would react were there leadership candidates who I viewed as threatening gay or women's rights. It would be disqualifying. So they're left with only one candidate to consider before they get onto other questions like ability,
    independence strategy, economic policy, etc.
    But, Yousaf is a terribly poor candidate.
    Consider a hypothetical future Tory leadership contest where there are only three candidates, and two of them are vocal supporters of unilateral nuclear disarmament, while the third is Jacob Rees-Mogg.

    It really doesn't matter how low your opinion of JRM is. Regardless of the other qualities of the other two candidates, there's no way that most righties could contemplate supporting a candidate who would dispose of Britain's nuclear deterrent.

    That's essentially the situation for the SNP members who supported the GRR Bill.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,255

    Mr. Cicero, just a note on compromise: May presented that thrice to the Commons with her deal. Labour's pro-EU MPs refused to compromise and back it. It would've passed had they done so.

    The intransigence was far from one way. See also Dominic Grieve, demanding a concession, getting it, then shrieking in the chamber it was too late and voting against the very thing he had sought.

    Or consider the multi-party promise of a referendum on Lisbon, only to be shamelessly reneged upon.

    The British spirit of compromise has not politically existed for quite some time when it comes to the EU.

    Dear, oh Lord! That post Morris, follows the shameful gaslighting playbook of Brexiteer scoundrels. It was not the fault of Grieve and Starmer that we wound up with Johnson's "oven-ready" dog's breakfast. Mrs May's deal failed because it was a poor piece of work that was presented time and again without compromise. Whilst there was time for Mrs May to jettison her foolish red lines, calling the deal out and voting it down in a sovereign parliament was fair game. The mere fact that the shameless Johnson and Frost came up with something even worse does not absolve Mrs May's deal.

    So we are back to something similar to that presented by May only goes on to demonstrate what abject negotiators Johnson and Frost were.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,550
    Scott_xP said:

    Scott_xP said:

    WillG said:

    The public reaction to migrant boats shows migration is still a latent inflammatory issue.

    The current migrant boat crisis is caused by Brexit. Starmer could fix it, if he wants to.
    Why and how?
    As EU members we could send them back

    @MrJonDePlume: Surely she should just stop in the first constituency she arrives in.

    Suella Braverman struggles to find safe seat for next election
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ea840abc-b480-11ed-abc9-a9456bea4494?shareToken=ff5741e65ea8ca672da9c914d8a354a7
    From Italy onwards the game each country plays is to “deniably” encourage and get the migrants into any country that isn’t their own.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,039
    edited February 2023

    SNP Leadership Election Endorsements, state of play at 8pm on 25th of February. 3 candidates, meaning 106 endorsements available.

    Candidate: Backers (MSPs/MPs)

    Yousaf: 30 (20/10)
    Forbes: 9 (7/2)
    Regan: 1 (0/1)
    None Yet: 63 (32/31)
    None: 3 (2/1)


    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1629573709705953281?s=20

    Any movement on the members thoughts disagreeing with that endorsement state of play? A casual observer would be forgiven for thinking it's all over, but it doesn't feel so.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 43,600
    Sean_F said:

    Given the level of sleaze and corruption, I’m surprised how many still think favourably of the Conservatives. They are better regarded than the Lib Dems, still, suggesting the latter won’t be coming back in their former heartlands.

    Nor are Labour anything like as well-regarded as in the mid 90’s.

    I can’t see anything other than a Labour victory next time, but I doubt if it will be a landslide. I’d expect a lead (in terms of votes) in the region of 43/35%.

    I would interpret it differently.

    The number seeing the Tories favourably reflects their national polling.

    The numbers seeing Greens and LibDems positively considerably exceeds their national polling, giving potential upside to their voteshare in real elections, as we are likely to see in the May locals. It also shows considerable potential for tactical voting.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,577
    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. Boy, two things: the decision was made on political rather than economic grounds. And that economic argument was the strength of the EU case but it was made incredibly poorly during a campaign that was remarkable for having two terrible sides.

    They weren't trying to understand why it happened but how it could make sense from an economic POV, hence their confusion. The Americans think we're nuts.
    Very much a case of do as I say, not as I do.

    No American would ever dream of joining a EU-type organisation.
    They did, back in 1789. It's called the United States.
    And the MTG crew are Leavers.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,442

    So we are back to something similar to that presented by May only goes on to demonstrate what abject negotiators Johnson and Frost were.

    The only thing worse than BoZo as PM is Frost being treated as a serious commentator
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,039

    Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT - the point of the NI protocol deal isn't just to sort out intra UK trade & relations and restore power sharing in the province, important though both those things are, it's also to normalise relations with the EU and the USA as well.

    From that, lots of things follow - including more help to sort out small boats, and lifting the threat of a trade dispute, which should help investment and the economy.

    This is a big barnacle off Sunak's boat.

    This is spot on:

    Indeed, the last 12 months has been - in an a low key way - very good for EU-UK relations.

    Firstly, the UK's stalwart support for Ukraine has not gone unnoticed across the continent. Our ready willingness to share intelligence, and to be the first to commit to weapons has been enormously appreciated, especially from those who wished to act but who were constrained by history.

    Secondly, there's been an awful lot of positive behind the scenes energy stuff. In particular, incoming LNG cargoes have often been diverted in a surprisingly selfless way to try and ensure supplies remained ample across Europe. Indeed: I'd say there's probably been better coordination than when we were in the EU - and all thanks to the fact that Putin forced the EU, the UK and Norway to work together.

    Thirdly, Sunak is a *much* less divisive character across Europe. He doesn't raise hackles. While a Leaver, he's not spent his time demonising the EU. And that's meant that when he's gone in asking for things, people genuinely believe he's sincere in looking for a deal.

    My suspicion is that Sunak will be quite well regarded by history, but not by voters.
    Yes, us Sunak fans get regularly lampooned on here for praising him, but he's good. Best PM since Cameron.

    One day many more will see this.
    Best PM since Cameron. You mean better than Truss, Johnson and May? 🤯
    Most voters, even those fed up with the Conservatives, would accept that. Part of the problem the Conservatives have is that their current voters don't necessarily agree.


    MPs were right that the public were sick of Boris, but the members never were, and since their fortunes have gotten worse the MPs now have a lot of regret. I'd bet privately that rating is close to MP thoughts too.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,550
    @SamCoatesSky
    ERG chief Mark Francois says that unless EU law is expunged - no longer applies - in NI they won’t back the deal. “Scaling back”, as Raab suggested, isn’t enough

    Mark doesn’t seem top have grasped the fact Rishi can do this without a vote.

    But the sane thing for the Tory party would be for Rishi to hold a vote - bin all Tory MPs who voted against him and then run a minority government because none of those ERG members will be able to do a thing about it and will be clutching the hope that they get readmitted to the Tory party before an election is called.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 43,600

    who are more right ?

    LD to win more than 40 seats at next GE

    Ladbrokes evens
    Skybet 2/1

    I am a Lib Dem, and would say 5/1 is value, anything less I wouldn't touch. I would be happy with 20+ seats.
This discussion has been closed.