politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Boris the favourite as betting opens on who’ll lead the EU LEAVE campaign
As the referendum gets closer a key decision which could have huge impact on British politics in all sorts of ways is is who will lead the OUT campaign.
If George Osborne and Theresa May could reach an accommodation, Theresa May would be by some way the Conservatives' best choice in my view. She has a comforting mumsy feel and at a stroke it would put Labour in all sorts of trouble given the apparent women problems that Jeremy Corbyn has.
To make that work, Theresa May would need to accept that George Osborne could keep his current role and continue to roam quite freely. I don't think either of them trusts the other enough though.
If they can't work together then the Conservatives would do best to find someone else that George Osborne does trust who has front-of-House skills and make him or her leader.
I think that would be an ideal scenario for the Conservatives; although Osborne has shown to be on occasion fallible (the ominishambles in 2012; and now the tax-credits saga) so his judgement isn't always right. I think Theresa May by far does 'human' best out of all the front-bench Conservatives. She come across as down to earth, and has done a decent job in the Home Office. Many Conservatives on PB have spoken about the Tories making ground on the working classes. If they really want to do that, then May would be an ideal candidate. While Osborne clearly has a talent for the behind-the-scenes politics, he is also someone who feels impossible to identify with. A May led Conservative party is actually one I'd even consider voting for.
On Corbyn, I'm aware there was a bit of story regarding the lack of women in his shadow cabinet, but are his women troubles extending to not polling well with women or something? Labour are really going backwards, if that is the case. They've had an advantage with under 45 women for sometime now, and they would be silly to lose yet another demographic.
I agree that May and Osborne wouldn't really trust one another. I think Osborne, for a start would much prefer one of his acolytes to take the Conservative party leadership if he couldn't - so the likes of Javid, Hancock and even Perry would be pushed by him as opposed to May. I also think that May simply wouldn't be happy with merely being the face of the Osborne project in the way David Cameron, to all intents and purposes appears to be. I also think for any potential Tory party leader having a Conservative party dominated by Osborne acolytes does put them in a somewhat vulnerable position, especially if they don't have a comparable 'base' of supporters.
FTP @felix Well, those who doubted Osborne probably feel a bit embarrassed. Still, all political careers end in failure so it should be interesting to see what the gods come up with On May, no I genuinely believe she'd be a great candidate.
The UKs most popular political party leader 6/1 eh?
Of course the vain, glory hunting 'unpopular with people that don't like him' fool said yesterday he'd be delighted if Theresa May was the leader of the campaign
If Theresa May fronted the Leave campaign, I think she would almost certainly be the next Tory leader. She would be the biggest heavy weight on the side of the debate with the majority of Tory members. And she would be able to argue "We need to get immigration down, and once out the EU, I will do that". Her biggest black mark right now is immigration increasing on her watch, and it gives her the perfect rationale for why her reforms didn't work. Immediately she cuts through to Labour's working class base, on an issue where Corbyn will be on the wrong side of the debate.
Even as someone who is hawkish on immigration, I thought May's speech at conference came across as very cold. Boris' speech sounded wetter than a water balloon popped in a Lib Dem hall. Osborne or his apprentice Javid are the best choices for the Tories between the extremes of May and Boris.
The exception of course, is if Cameron genuinely performs a great repatriation, and then anyone that was part of those negotiations benefits. i.e. Mr Osborne.
I'll do my best to make a decision on EU membership with my head rather than heart. But nothing pushes me more instinctively towards Leave than people like antifrank and Richard_Nabavi constantly saying the other side of the debate lack sentience or howl at the moon. The way the pro-membership side loves to call their opponents imbecilic, when often the sceptics have been right, just reminds me how elitist and groupthink-focused the EU and its supporters are. An institution that will not treat criticisms with respect is one that is doomed to fail.
Wonder if Owen Patterson is also a runner perhaps at 66s or so ? Redwood at 100s ?
Not Redwood. The Leave side aren't that mad!
He does tend to advance very good arguments for the PoVs he argues on his diary: http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/. Maybe he'd have had a chance 50 years ago when substance mattered more than style
If a Tory heavyweight took the role on it would be a career defining move. Win and the sky is the limit, lose and it is pretty much game over. If the polls are close it would be a massive risk.
I find the idea of Theresa May as PM almost as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn getting the job. She seems to have no firm principles, guiding beliefs or charisma, she just "is"; a political Zelig. That she is among the favourites for the job gives the lie to the claim that the Tories have an abundance of talent at their disposal.
Wonder if Owen Patterson is also a runner perhaps at 66s or so ? Redwood at 100s ?
Not Redwood. The Leave side aren't that mad!
He does tend to advance very good arguments for the PoVs he argues on his diary: http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/. Maybe he'd have had a chance 50 years ago when substance mattered more than style
I have a lot of time for him, but he's definitely not the right choice to be the front man for the campaign.
Some thoughts on the market:
- It won't be a UKIP figure, because the undecideds the campaign needs to win over are Conservative and Labour voters
- It could be a non-frightening Labour figure like Kate Hoey, although she's probably not high-profile enough.
- A Conservative is more likely, especially one who can be seen to be above the fray of day-to-day politics.
I find the idea of Theresa May as PM almost as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn getting the job. She seems to have no firm principles, guiding beliefs or charisma, she just "is"; a political Zelig.
That's poppycock, actually (except perhaps the 'charisma' bit).
If a Tory heavyweight took the role on it would be a career defining move. Win and the sky is the limit, lose and it is pretty much game over. If the polls are close it would be a massive risk.
I find the idea of Theresa May as PM almost as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn getting the job. She seems to have no firm principles, guiding beliefs or charisma, she just "is"; a political Zelig. That she is among the favourites for the job gives the lie to the claim that the Tories have an abundance of talent at their disposal.
Firm principles, guiding beliefs nor charisma are necessary or desirable characteristics of a good PM.
I find the idea of Theresa May as PM almost as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn getting the job. She seems to have no firm principles, guiding beliefs or charisma, she just "is"; a political Zelig.
That's poppycock, actually (except perhaps the 'charisma' bit).
No, it's an opinion. May seems to sway in the wind, moving one way, then another. The only thing memorable about her is that she wears loud shoes now and again. And maybe that Nasty party speech.
I find the idea of Theresa May as PM almost as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn getting the job. She seems to have no firm principles, guiding beliefs or charisma, she just "is"; a political Zelig.
That's poppycock, actually (except perhaps the 'charisma' bit).
And the idea of Theresa May becoming PM.
On a separate note, someone was on the other day telling us that his firm's order book had collapsed and UK manufacturing is in big trouble. Well, we have this in today's Telegraph:
"The Markit/CIPS manufacturing PMI jumped to 55.5 in October, from an upwardly revised reading of 51.8 in September. This is above the 50 level that divides growth from contraction and much higher than economists' expectations for a slight dip to 51.3."
So it would seem that some firms are doing very well and others less so.
I find the idea of Theresa May as PM almost as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn getting the job. She seems to have no firm principles, guiding beliefs or charisma, she just "is"; a political Zelig.
That's poppycock, actually (except perhaps the 'charisma' bit).
And the idea of Theresa May becoming PM.
On a separate note, someone was on the other day telling us that his firm's order book had collapsed and UK manufacturing is in big trouble. Well, we have this in today's Telegraph:
"The Markit/CIPS manufacturing PMI jumped to 55.5 in October, from an upwardly revised reading of 51.8 in September. This is above the 50 level that divides growth from contraction and much higher than economists' expectations for a slight dip to 51.3."
So it would seem that some firms are doing very well and others less so.
It is the case, even in the same group I can reliably inform you
I suspect all the Tory front runners will be following the polling very closely and waiting for key 'negotiation' events before jumping. My own feeling is that so far Leave are getting all of the good publicity and yet the polling remains stubbornly for Remain. Unless the renegotiation is so bad that Cameron can barely defend it I think it's unlikely to change. Richard Tyndall on here is almost stupefyingly tedious with his anti-EU obsession and he seems to believe that leave cannot win. I admire his persistence and I think he is correct - about the likely result.
If a Tory heavyweight took the role on it would be a career defining move. Win and the sky is the limit, lose and it is pretty much game over.
I don't think that's the case. If the debate is acrimonious - as the Remain campaign is doing its best to make it - then it's likely the Tory faithful will want to put up a eurosceptic leader to fight their corner. It's only game over if most Tories vote to Remain.
It's a bit of a disaster for Remain supporters that polls are showing it neck-and-neck as the YouGov survey did about a week ago. Things were supposed to be much more clear cut in their favour at this stage. I'm probably going to vote to stay in but I'm hoping it's as close as hell so that the bureaucrats in Brussels don't take us for granted.
'I find the idea of Theresa May as PM almost as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn getting the job. She seems to have no firm principles, guiding beliefs or charisma, she just "is"; a political Zelig. That she is among the favourites for the job gives the lie to the claim that the Tories have an abundance of talent at their disposal.'
Translation
The last thing the Labour party (old or new) wants is another woman as Tory leader /Prime Minister,not to mention one that was Home Secretary for over 5 years, puts all those good old Labour boys that barely lasted a year in the job to shame.
Look at them crazy Kippers and their conspiracy theories. When they arn't complaining about the government covering up the existence of alien life, they are complaining that the EU is a corporatist racket. O wait:
The CBI – which describes itself as the ‘Voice of Business’ – has always taken an unquestioning pro-EU stance. Its leadership campaigned for the UK to join the euro and is now gearing up to help lead the campaign for the UK to stay in the EU.
Fiddling their figures to boost support for the EU
On the authority of a 2013 YouGov survey that it commissioned, the CBI has claimed that ‘8 out of 10 firms say UK must stay in EU’. But our research shows that this survey is likely to be highly misleading. YouGov has confirmed that the CBI did not supply them with ‘any business characteristics data’ or ‘any population data’ for the 2013 survey. This prevented the weighting of the data to reflect the characteristics of either the CBI’s membership or British businesses. This means that:
Just 39.5% of respondents to the survey were small or medium sized enterprises (SMEs). According to government figures for 2013, ‘99.9 per cent of private sector businesses are SMEs’.
Only 20.5% of respondents had fewer than 50 employees. According to government figures for 2013, 99.2% of British businesses had fewer than 50 employees.
The parallels with the CBI’s deeply flawed membership surveys during the euro campaign are striking. In the late 1990s, the CBI was one of the leading campaigners for the UK to join the euro.
Leaked minutes from the CBI Economic Affairs Committee in 1998 revealed that the CBI had ruled out ‘a completely random survey of businesses, which would be the ultimate gauge of firms’ attitudes to UK membership of EMU’, because ‘complication might arise if the outcome turned out to be less pro-EMU’ than the CBI’s own stance.
Wonder if Owen Patterson is also a runner perhaps at 66s or so ? Redwood at 100s ?
Not Redwood. The Leave side aren't that mad!
He does tend to advance very good arguments for the PoVs he argues on his diary: http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/. Maybe he'd have had a chance 50 years ago when substance mattered more than style
Style has always mattered. 50 years ago? The pb coffin-dodgers might remind you of Harold Wilson's fixed teeth, Gannex mac and pipe; how the white heat of the technological revolution was brought to bear against the grouse moors of Lord Home and the scandal-ridden Tories. Go back further and you'll find Churchill lighting a cigar whenever a photographer appeared.
David Coburn? I sometimes wonder if he an MEP simply because he's Scottish and gay, its hard to see what other credentials he has.
Well your lot picked him. UKIP ticking the diversity boxes were they ?
You might be nearer the truth than you imagined. "My lot" as you are within your rights to say, have certainly had their fair share of oddball candidates. Its a shame because the vast majority are decent people nobody ever gets to hear of.
It's a bit of a disaster for Remain supporters that polls are showing it neck-and-neck as the YouGov survey did about a week ago. Things were supposed to be much more clear cut in their favour at this stage. I'm probably going to vote to stay in but I'm hoping it's as close as hell so that the bureaucrats in Brussels don't take us for granted.
I'm probably going to vote to stay in but I'm hoping it's as close as hell so that the bureaucrats in Brussels don't take us for granted.
If it's IN then Brussels won't care; close or not they will treat us as if we want even more Europe.
Their attitude is fairly clear in all their decisions.
That market looks like Shadsy's bonus fund, over-round on the first five in a market where anyone could be a contender.
Cameron at 200/1 is a good value book-balancer - there must be a shorter chance than that, that the EU tell him to go screw himself, accept a million more migrants, pay a billion more into the EU budget and raise a blue flag with gold stars above Buckingham Palace!!
It's a bit of a disaster for Remain supporters that polls are showing it neck-and-neck as the YouGov survey did about a week ago. Things were supposed to be much more clear cut in their favour at this stage. I'm probably going to vote to stay in but I'm hoping it's as close as hell so that the bureaucrats in Brussels don't take us for granted.
If few stay in by 50.01% to 49.99% the EU will take it as a sign of acceptance of everything they stand for. After all, there is no way there would be another referendum allowed within a couple of decades at least so they can basically do what they want and ignore the views of the UK.
There is no status quo or British negotiation on offer. It is leave or accept whatever the EU wants of us.
I find the idea of Theresa May as PM almost as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn getting the job. She seems to have no firm principles, guiding beliefs or charisma, she just "is"; a political Zelig.
That's poppycock, actually (except perhaps the 'charisma' bit).
And the idea of Theresa May becoming PM.
On a separate note, someone was on the other day telling us that his firm's order book had collapsed and UK manufacturing is in big trouble. Well, we have this in today's Telegraph:
"The Markit/CIPS manufacturing PMI jumped to 55.5 in October, from an upwardly revised reading of 51.8 in September. This is above the 50 level that divides growth from contraction and much higher than economists' expectations for a slight dip to 51.3."
So it would seem that some firms are doing very well and others less so.
It is the case, even in the same group I can reliably inform you
What do you think is the dividing line between the two sections of the industry, Mr. Star? Is it the market that they are selling into or the things that they are making? If one section is doing very well and another, as evidenced by our correspondent on here, is failing there must be a reason, I wonder what it is.
I'm hoping it's as close as hell so that the bureaucrats in Brussels don't take us for granted.
Well that's a forlorn hope if ever there was one.
It will only when our exit looks possible as the poll gets closer will the great Eurocrats in the sky descend with Golden Elephants for the people of Britain.
Think Cameron/Clegg/Brown offering everything that Scotland craves apart from actual independence, only when it looked for a 30th of a second that Scotland was going to break the Union.
On-topic: there isn't a stand-out from that list. Boris is laughable given his previous claim we should vote No then stay in, May will not persuade swing voters, I think Dyson might have credibility but not sure he'd get it.
I'll do my best to make a decision on EU membership with my head rather than heart. But nothing pushes me more instinctively towards Leave than people like antifrank and Richard_Nabavi constantly saying the other side of the debate lack sentience or howl at the moon. The way the pro-membership side loves to call their opponents imbecilic, when often the sceptics have been right, just reminds me how elitist and groupthink-focused the EU and its supporters are. An institution that will not treat criticisms with respect is one that is doomed to fail.
Well said.
Whoever is running the Remain campaign needs to get the EU payroll to STFU until the referendum is over. It will only take a couple of stooges presented as impartial to drag the BBC into the mess too. They need Mandleson and quickly.
It's a bit of a disaster for Remain supporters that polls are showing it neck-and-neck as the YouGov survey did about a week ago. Things were supposed to be much more clear cut in their favour at this stage. I'm probably going to vote to stay in but I'm hoping it's as close as hell so that the bureaucrats in Brussels don't take us for granted.
If few stay in by 50.01% to 49.99% the EU will take it as a sign of acceptance of everything they stand for. After all, there is no way there would be another referendum allowed within a couple of decades at least so they can basically do what they want and ignore the views of the UK.
There is no status quo or British negotiation on offer. It is leave or accept whatever the EU wants of us.
That almost certainly will be the EU's response.
But why - if the result is close - would the reaction in Britain not be similar to that in Scotland, post-referendum? That too was meant to be once-in-a-generation decision, putting the matter to bed etc but it hasn't. I tend to the view that if the result is reasonably close, whatever the wishes of the EU and the political class here, the Pandora's box will have been opened and the UK's relationship with and role within the EU will continue to be an issue which will need addressing, even if the UK votes to remain.
I try to keep an open mind on decisions like this so I won't make my mind up until polling day having evaluated all the evidence in a hopefully scientific way, however pompous that sounds.
Who is going to decide who "leads" this campaign? Seems a silly bet to me, when there are no rules or processes in place. '
The rules are actually quite clear:
"Who will lead the official LEAVE campaign? Settled on lead debator in the first official debate."
Now I think that is a slightly different question.
Do the broadcasters ask the organisation to provide a spokes person or request the leader?
There are occasions where I could see, for example in a thoeretical world, Lord Lawson as leader, but not as the most effective in a debate, so they may want to put Boris or Kate Hoey up for the debate. Does this also mean the broadcasters are appointing the organistion that is the 'official' Leaver mouthpiece?
I'd rule out all ambitious Conservatives: "He who wields the dagger never wears the crown".
I'd rule out Nigel Farage unless it is intended that the Leave campaign is intended to boost UKIP's electoral chances rather than the other way around.
Leave need to persuade the public of two things: first, that they have a fairly clear idea what comes next if the public votes Leave or at the very least will be able to work out something sensible should the occasion arise; secondly, that they are not barking mad. So they need someone manifestly sensible. If I'm wrong about the ambitious Conservatives, Theresa May would fit the role better than Boris Johnson for this reason.
I'd prefer an experienced hasbeen politician to a businessman. Lord Lawson wouldn't be bad and nor would Michael Portillo. While both have an abundance of history to deal with, both have a perfectly sane persona. It would, however, be better to have an old-school Labour politician if at all possible - there isn't an obvious route to Leave without Labour voters coming on board in significant numbers. Kate Hoey isn't quite prominent enough. If Frank Field could be inveigled to do it, he would be better.
I'm not betting on this one. It seems far from clear that the choice is going to be made on a rational basis rather than to appease the clashing egos of the multifarious Leave campaigners.
Yes but he won't be presenting himself as an impartial observer. His job will be to make sure the right messages and messengers are out there.
At the moment it looks and sounds like the Remain campaign are the Establishment stitch-up, every word they say is driving more people toward Leave. I was willing to wait and see what the PM could come up with by way of negotiation, but the last few weeks have made me a firm Leave purely on the basis of the Remain campaign and the EU attitudes on Greece and migrants.
Any promises will not be legally binding. The EU is as trustworthy as Tony Blair.
And that's why, whatever promises are made, after a vote to Remain, there will continue to be grumbling by both sides, dragging of feet, furious rows etc and the UK will continue to be the recalcitrant member. Our long-term goals and fundamental interests are simply not aligned enough.
Better either to leave or to have an intelligent discussion about some sort of different membership within the EU for Britain rather than pretending that some sort of tinkering about this or that policy or changed wording will solve the fundamental issue, which is that our and our Continental neighbours' view of what the EU should be are too different to be reconciled within the existing structure.
I'll do my best to make a decision on EU membership with my head rather than heart. But nothing pushes me more instinctively towards Leave than people like antifrank and Richard_Nabavi constantly saying the other side of the debate lack sentience or howl at the moon. The way the pro-membership side loves to call their opponents imbecilic, when often the sceptics have been right, just reminds me how elitist and groupthink-focused the EU and its supporters are. An institution that will not treat criticisms with respect is one that is doomed to fail.
For many years academics around the world enthusiastically supported communism and the Soviet Union.
I'll do my best to make a decision on EU membership with my head rather than heart. But nothing pushes me more instinctively towards Leave than people like antifrank and Richard_Nabavi constantly saying the other side of the debate lack sentience or howl at the moon. The way the pro-membership side loves to call their opponents imbecilic, when often the sceptics have been right, just reminds me how elitist and groupthink-focused the EU and its supporters are. An institution that will not treat criticisms with respect is one that is doomed to fail.
Well said.
Whoever is running the Remain campaign needs to get the EU payroll to STFU until the referendum is over. It will only take a couple of stooges presented as impartial to drag the BBC into the mess too. They need Mandleson and quickly.
Well he is ex EU payroll, but then so is Nigel Farage after a fashion.
Mandelson is the top political strategist of this era, he's the only one who can make Osborne look crap in comparison.
'I find the idea of Theresa May as PM almost as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn getting the job. She seems to have no firm principles, guiding beliefs or charisma, she just "is"; a political Zelig. That she is among the favourites for the job gives the lie to the claim that the Tories have an abundance of talent at their disposal.'
Translation
The last thing the Labour party (old or new) wants is another woman as Tory leader /Prime Minister,not to mention one that was Home Secretary for over 5 years, puts all those good old Labour boys that barely lasted a year in the job to shame.
I can claim no great insights into Labour thinking, and whoever the Tories put up in 2020 will win the election if they are up against Corbyn, I just don't rate her. In my view, she is very unimpressive. What I found repellent about her speech this year at the Tory conference was that she was delivering it not out of conviction but because she thought it would boost her leadership credentials.
I'd rule out all ambitious Conservatives: "He who wields the dagger never wears the crown".
I'd rule out Nigel Farage unless it is intended that the Leave campaign is intended to boost UKIP's electoral chances rather than the other way around.
Leave need to persuade the public of two things: first, that they have a fairly clear idea what comes next if the public votes Leave or at the very least will be able to work out something sensible should the occasion arise; secondly, that they are not barking mad. So they need someone manifestly sensible. If I'm wrong about the ambitious Conservatives, Theresa May would fit the role better than Boris Johnson for this reason.
I'd prefer an experienced hasbeen politician to a businessman. Lord Lawson wouldn't be bad and nor would Michael Portillo. While both have an abundance of history to deal with, both have a perfectly sane persona. It would, however, be better to have an old-school Labour politician if at all possible - there isn't an obvious route to Leave without Labour voters coming on board in significant numbers. Kate Hoey isn't quite prominent enough. If Frank Field could be inveigled to do it, he would be better.
I'm not betting on this one. It seems far from clear that the choice is going to be made on a rational basis rather than to appease the clashing egos of the multifarious Leave campaigners.
I don't think he will do it but Portillo has the big advantage of being as famous for non political media work as for his politics...
I think he quite dislikes Cameron, perhaps jealous that he got the credit for , or more accurately the chance of, detoxifying the Tories, so maybe that would entice him
I'll do my best to make a decision on EU membership with my head rather than heart. But nothing pushes me more instinctively towards Leave than people like antifrank and Richard_Nabavi constantly saying the other side of the debate lack sentience or howl at the moon. The way the pro-membership side loves to call their opponents imbecilic, when often the sceptics have been right, just reminds me how elitist and groupthink-focused the EU and its supporters are. An institution that will not treat criticisms with respect is one that is doomed to fail.
Conversely, exposure to the batshit mental conspiracy theories and wild-eyed accusations of lying that the Leave campaign has started with pushes me instinctively towards Remain. I don't want to throw in my lot with nutters.
Then I encounter the arrogance, the remoteness, the bureaucratic Eurocracy and their take-it-or-leave-it attitude and I'm equally repelled by that.
I'll be doing the opposite of AndyJS. Rather than weighing the evidence, I'll be following my heart. It will probably be on the day itself that I'll make my decision. Right now, both campaigns are being run spectacularly badly.
Mandelson is a gift for the OUT campaign, he stands for everything the country dislikes: old labour loathe him as do the tories. So many on here are turning this into a personality contest, as if they're voting for Mandy or Farage to be their local MP.
As a committed OUTER I'm becoming more confident all the time, I foresee a very low turnout with most enthusiasm coming from those desperate to leave and give the establishment a kicking.
Hahaha - top Reply All failure - and something that will keep the story bubbling...
Unfortunately, the BPC’s Nick Moon accidentally pressed ‘reply all’ when he meant to send an internal email, meaning Cummings also received the less than flattering reply:
From: Moon, Nick (GfK) Date: Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 2:50 PM Subject: RE: Complaint to the British Polling Council To: Dominic Cummings, John Curtice Cc: Simon Atkinson
Bugger – at first glance the odious Cummings might be onto something.
Survey looks pretty dodgy but luckily we don’t need to rule on that. But my initial thought is that YouGov did not give as much info as they should have
I'll do my best to make a decision on EU membership with my head rather than heart. But nothing pushes me more instinctively towards Leave than people like antifrank and Richard_Nabavi constantly saying the other side of the debate lack sentience or howl at the moon. The way the pro-membership side loves to call their opponents imbecilic, when often the sceptics have been right, just reminds me how elitist and groupthink-focused the EU and its supporters are. An institution that will not treat criticisms with respect is one that is doomed to fail.
Conversely, exposure to the batshit mental conspiracy theories and wild-eyed accusations of lying that the Leave campaign has started with pushes me instinctively towards Remain. I don't want to throw in my lot with nutters.
Then I encounter the arrogance, the remoteness, the bureaucratic Eurocracy and their take-it-or-leave-it attitude and I'm equally repelled by that.
I'll be doing the opposite of AndyJS. Rather than weighing the evidence, I'll be following my heart. It will probably be on the day itself that I'll make my decision. Right now, both campaigns are being run spectacularly badly.
Just to confirm:
1. Norway pays the EU just as much as the UK per head? 2. Norway accepts three quarters of EU rules? 3. Norway has no influence and is a fax democracy?
If Theresa May fronted the Leave campaign, I think she would almost certainly be the next Tory leader.
Only if the Leave campaign won, though.
Theresa May will be shot as the nasty messenger and lose.
Having trawled through sludge and finally had to instant chat Ladbrokes to find it, I have had my £2.50 @ 50s on Dan Hannan.
He is sincere, sharp, confident, knowledgable, engaging.
Boris the Clown apart he is the one you would most want to go to the pub with.
Boris will trash his reputation as spokesman for cosmopolitan, metropolitan London (and much else) if he shows any little Englander tendencies. He can't afford too many guises if he really does want to be next leader/PM (which he won't be).
If Theresa May fronted the Leave campaign, I think she would almost certainly be the next Tory leader. She would be the biggest heavy weight on the side of the debate with the majority of Tory members. And she would be able to argue "We need to get immigration down, and once out the EU, I will do that". Her biggest black mark right now is immigration increasing on her watch, and it gives her the perfect rationale for why her reforms didn't work. Immediately she cuts through to Labour's working class base, on an issue where Corbyn will be on the wrong side of the debate.
I'm backing May quite heavily on Betfair for next Tory leader/PM.
I'd rule out all ambitious Conservatives: "He who wields the dagger never wears the crown".
I'd rule out Nigel Farage unless it is intended that the Leave campaign is intended to boost UKIP's electoral chances rather than the other way around.
Leave need to persuade the public of two things: first, that they have a fairly clear idea what comes next if the public votes Leave or at the very least will be able to work out something sensible should the occasion arise; secondly, that they are not barking mad. So they need someone manifestly sensible. If I'm wrong about the ambitious Conservatives, Theresa May would fit the role better than Boris Johnson for this reason.
I'd prefer an experienced hasbeen politician to a businessman. Lord Lawson wouldn't be bad and nor would Michael Portillo. While both have an abundance of history to deal with, both have a perfectly sane persona. It would, however, be better to have an old-school Labour politician if at all possible - there isn't an obvious route to Leave without Labour voters coming on board in significant numbers. Kate Hoey isn't quite prominent enough. If Frank Field could be inveigled to do it, he would be better.
I'm not betting on this one. It seems far from clear that the choice is going to be made on a rational basis rather than to appease the clashing egos of the multifarious Leave campaigners.
How can leave have a clear idea when it's a mixed pot of various groups which if left to their own divices would happily disagree on everything. All leave can do is disrupt the country and 'leave' the clearing up of the mess to someone else. The likely result of a leave would be negotiations about how to to leave with some EU body, leading who knows where. No one can tell and no one can know who or what political party would be involved,or whether any resulting agreement could get through parliament. The leading possibility however would be the EEA and thus various politicians and govts over the years effectively following the EU line as being the beat way to sustain our industrial and financial base. Norway's referendums voted not to join but Norwegian governments do their best to be defacto in the EU. I do not see the UK being much different, especially with a labour govt.
I've just watched the interview between Jess Philips and Philip Davies. We are only six months into this new Parliament and I'm already sick to death of this rude, cheeky, bad mannered, gobby woman.
Of course, the media are all over her, which just inflates her ego even more. She does nothing to enhance the role of women in politics, in my opinion.
If Theresa May fronted the Leave campaign, I think she would almost certainly be the next Tory leader. She would be the biggest heavy weight on the side of the debate with the majority of Tory members. And she would be able to argue "We need to get immigration down, and once out the EU, I will do that". Her biggest black mark right now is immigration increasing on her watch, and it gives her the perfect rationale for why her reforms didn't work. Immediately she cuts through to Labour's working class base, on an issue where Corbyn will be on the wrong side of the debate.
I'm backing May quite heavily on Betfair for next Tory leader/PM.
'Nothing to see here' chirped the amused undecideds
There really is nothing to see here. The CBI is a pro-EU organisation. Like many other organisations, it issues press releases based on dodgy polls. The Leave campaign is wasting its time - indeed making itself look silly - by trying to pretend that the CBI isn't really a pro-EU organisation.
Why are the Leave campaign so rattled that their only message is that everyone on the other side, and even independent observers such as the US, are lying or dishonest or EU stooges? I just don't get it; although I expect the Remain side to win easily, the current polling is close enough that the Leave side certainly don't need to be desperate.
I'd rule out all ambitious Conservatives: "He who wields the dagger never wears the crown".
I'd rule out Nigel Farage unless it is intended that the Leave campaign is intended to boost UKIP's electoral chances rather than the other way around.
Leave need to persuade the public of two things: first, that they have a fairly clear idea what comes next if the public votes Leave or at the very least will be able to work out something sensible should the occasion arise; secondly, that they are not barking mad. So they need someone manifestly sensible. If I'm wrong about the ambitious Conservatives, Theresa May would fit the role better than Boris Johnson for this reason.
I'd prefer an experienced hasbeen politician to a businessman. Lord Lawson wouldn't be bad and nor would Michael Portillo. While both have an abundance of history to deal with, both have a perfectly sane persona. It would, however, be better to have an old-school Labour politician if at all possible - there isn't an obvious route to Leave without Labour voters coming on board in significant numbers. Kate Hoey isn't quite prominent enough. If Frank Field could be inveigled to do it, he would be better.
I'm not betting on this one. It seems far from clear that the choice is going to be made on a rational basis rather than to appease the clashing egos of the multifarious Leave campaigners.
How can leave have a clear idea when it's a mixed pot of various groups which if left to their own divices would happily disagree on everything. All leave can do is disrupt the country and 'leave' the clearing up of the mess to someone else. The likely result of a leave would be negotiations about how to to leave with some EU body, leading who knows where. No one can tell and no one can know who or what political party would be involved,or whether any resulting agreement could get through parliament. The leading possibility however would be the EEA and thus various politicians and govts over the years effectively following the EU line as being the beat way to sustain our industrial and financial base. Norway's referendums voted not to join but Norwegian governments do their best to be defacto in the EU. I do not see the UK being much different, especially with a labour govt.
There will be a tory govt after the referendum, regardless of the outcome.
I'll do my best to make a decision on EU membership with my head rather than heart. But nothing pushes me more instinctively towards Leave than people like antifrank and Richard_Nabavi constantly saying the other side of the debate lack sentience or howl at the moon. The way the pro-membership side loves to call their opponents imbecilic, when often the sceptics have been right, just reminds me how elitist and groupthink-focused the EU and its supporters are. An institution that will not treat criticisms with respect is one that is doomed to fail.
Conversely, exposure to the batshit mental conspiracy theories and wild-eyed accusations of lying that the Leave campaign has started with pushes me instinctively towards Remain. I don't want to throw in my lot with nutters.
Then I encounter the arrogance, the remoteness, the bureaucratic Eurocracy and their take-it-or-leave-it attitude and I'm equally repelled by that.
I'll be doing the opposite of AndyJS. Rather than weighing the evidence, I'll be following my heart. It will probably be on the day itself that I'll make my decision. Right now, both campaigns are being run spectacularly badly.
Just to confirm:
1. Norway pays the EU just as much as the UK per head? 2. Norway accepts three quarters of EU rules? 3. Norway has no influence and is a fax democracy?
I have a day job so I have no interest in wasting endless time analysing Norwegian laws to determine their provenance, nor in poring over Norway's accounts. It's enough to know that Norway pays a lot of money to the EU and has to accept a lot of EU rules. It's all entirely irrelevant to my decision anyway. If it blows your skirt up, keep going. I'm sure you'll make the 100% committed Leavers 101% committed. I doubt, however, whether you'll change a single uncommitted vote.
Given that the Eurosceptic headbangers have spent years telling us that Britain has no influence in the EU, it's a bit rich for them to complain when the same simplification is used against them in a different context.
A Norwegian Prime Minister described Norway as a fax democracy. It is entirely reasonable for the Remain camp to pick up on this phrase. Whether you agree with it is a matter for debate.
But again, I don't regard Norway's circumstances as very relevant to Britain's.
'Nothing to see here' chirped the amused undecideds
There really is nothing to see here. The CBI is a pro-EU organisation. Like many other organisations, it issues press releases based on dodgy polls. The Leave campaign is wasting its time - indeed making itself look silly - by trying to pretend that the CBI isn't really a pro-EU organisation.
Why are the Leave campaign so rattled that their only message is that everyone on the other side, and even independent observers such as the US, are lying or dishonest or EU stooges? I just don't get it; although I expect the Remain side to win easily, the current polling is close enough that the Leave side certainly don't need to be desperate.
'Nothing to see here' chirped the amused undecideds
So the BPC refers to VoteLeave members in highly derogatory terms, and openly welcomes the fact they don't have to rule on something that proves them right? And people accuse the Leave side of having conspiracy theories...
Will the BBC report the controversy surrounding this distorted poll as widely as it published the original allegation? I somehow doubt it.
On-topic: there isn't a stand-out from that list. Boris is laughable given his previous claim we should vote No then stay in, May will not persuade swing voters, I think Dyson might have credibility but not sure he'd get it.
Since these days most people, especially people who use vaccum cleaners for a living, sing the virtues of Henrys and regard Dysons as rubbish, then I hardly see how Dyson would be a good choice. His production is mostly in Malaysia isn't it?
I'd rule out all ambitious Conservatives: "He who wields the dagger never wears the crown".
I'd rule out Nigel Farage unless it is intended that the Leave campaign is intended to boost UKIP's electoral chances rather than the other way around.
Leave need to persuade the public of two things: first, that they have a fairly clear idea what comes next if the public votes Leave or at the very least will be able to work out something sensible should the occasion arise; secondly, that they are not barking mad. So they need someone manifestly sensible. If I'm wrong about the ambitious Conservatives, Theresa May would fit the role better than Boris Johnson for this reason.
I'd prefer an experienced hasbeen politician to a businessman. Lord Lawson wouldn't be bad and nor would Michael Portillo. While both have an abundance of history to deal with, both have a perfectly sane persona. It would, however, be better to have an old-school Labour politician if at all possible - there isn't an obvious route to Leave without Labour voters coming on board in significant numbers. Kate Hoey isn't quite prominent enough. If Frank Field could be inveigled to do it, he would be better.
I'm not betting on this one. It seems far from clear that the choice is going to be made on a rational basis rather than to appease the clashing egos of the multifarious Leave campaigners.
How can leave have a clear idea when it's a mixed pot of various groups which if left to their own divices would happily disagree on everything. All leave can do is disrupt the country and 'leave' the clearing up of the mess to someone else. The likely result of a leave would be negotiations about how to to leave with some EU body, leading who knows where. No one can tell and no one can know who or what political party would be involved,or whether any resulting agreement could get through parliament. The leading possibility however would be the EEA and thus various politicians and govts over the years effectively following the EU line as being the beat way to sustain our industrial and financial base. Norway's referendums voted not to join but Norwegian governments do their best to be defacto in the EU. I do not see the UK being much different, especially with a labour govt.
Errr, you do know the mechanism for leaving the EU is set out in the Lisbon Treaty don't you? Whilst it is true that no one can know what the result of such negotiations would be who will be conducting them is firmly settled - it will be HMG.
I'll do my best to make a decision on EU membership with my head rather than heart. But nothing pushes me more instinctively towards Leave than people like antifrank and Richard_Nabavi constantly saying the other side of the debate lack sentience or howl at the moon. The way the pro-membership side loves to call their opponents imbecilic, when often the sceptics have been right, just reminds me how elitist and groupthink-focused the EU and its supporters are. An institution that will not treat criticisms with respect is one that is doomed to fail.
Conversely, exposure to the batshit mental conspiracy theories and wild-eyed accusations of lying that the Leave campaign has started with pushes me instinctively towards Remain. I don't want to throw in my lot with nutters.
Then I encounter the arrogance, the remoteness, the bureaucratic Eurocracy and their take-it-or-leave-it attitude and I'm equally repelled by that.
I'll be doing the opposite of AndyJS. Rather than weighing the evidence, I'll be following my heart. It will probably be on the day itself that I'll make my decision. Right now, both campaigns are being run spectacularly badly.
I feel much the same. It's one of those situations where most days I would like both sides to lose.......
'Nothing to see here' chirped the amused undecideds
There really is nothing to see here. The CBI is a pro-EU organisation. Like many other organisations, it issues press releases based on dodgy polls. The Leave campaign is wasting its time - indeed making itself look silly - by trying to pretend that the CBI isn't really a pro-EU organisation.
Why are the Leave campaign so rattled that their only message is that everyone on the other side, and even independent observers such as the US, are lying or dishonest or EU stooges? I just don't get it; although I expect the Remain side to win easily, the current polling is close enough that the Leave side certainly don't need to be desperate.
You don't have to be in the Leave column to believe we should have an honest debate, and to see the Remain side has been riddled with false claims.
I'll do my best to make a decision on EU membership with my head rather than heart. But nothing pushes me more instinctively towards Leave than people like antifrank and Richard_Nabavi constantly saying the other side of the debate lack sentience or howl at the moon. The way the pro-membership side loves to call their opponents imbecilic, when often the sceptics have been right, just reminds me how elitist and groupthink-focused the EU and its supporters are. An institution that will not treat criticisms with respect is one that is doomed to fail.
Conversely, exposure to the batshit mental conspiracy theories and wild-eyed accusations of lying that the Leave campaign has started with pushes me instinctively towards Remain. I don't want to throw in my lot with nutters.
Then I encounter the arrogance, the remoteness, the bureaucratic Eurocracy and their take-it-or-leave-it attitude and I'm equally repelled by that.
I'll be doing the opposite of AndyJS. Rather than weighing the evidence, I'll be following my heart. It will probably be on the day itself that I'll make my decision. Right now, both campaigns are being run spectacularly badly.
Just to confirm:
1. Norway pays the EU just as much as the UK per head? 2. Norway accepts three quarters of EU rules? 3. Norway has no influence and is a fax democracy?
I have a day job so I have no interest in wasting endless time analysing Norwegian laws to determine their provenance, nor in poring over Norway's accounts. It's enough to know that Norway pays a lot of money to the EU and has to accept a lot of EU rules. It's all entirely irrelevant to my decision anyway. If it blows your skirt up, keep going. I'm sure you'll make the 100% committed Leavers 101% committed. I doubt, however, whether you'll change a single uncommitted vote.
Given that the Eurosceptic headbangers have spent years telling us that Britain has no influence in the EU, it's a bit rich for them to complain when the same simplification is used against them in a different context.
A Norwegian Prime Minister described Norway as a fax democracy. It is entirely reasonable for the Remain camp to pick up on this phrase. Whether you agree with it is a matter for debate.
But again, I don't regard Norway's circumstances as very relevant to Britain's.
You just get more and more abusive with time, don't you?
If Theresa May fronted the Leave campaign, I think she would almost certainly be the next Tory leader. She would be the biggest heavy weight on the side of the debate with the majority of Tory members. And she would be able to argue "We need to get immigration down, and once out the EU, I will do that". Her biggest black mark right now is immigration increasing on her watch, and it gives her the perfect rationale for why her reforms didn't work. Immediately she cuts through to Labour's working class base, on an issue where Corbyn will be on the wrong side of the debate.
I'm backing May quite heavily on Betfair for next Tory leader/PM.
Comments
Forget his crapness in Thanet South, in 2010 he finished third in a two horse race in 2010.
I like May, but I wonder if Lord Lawson might be the one to back.
This referendum is going to be all about economic credibility, and who better than the successful Tory Chancellor of the 80s
On Corbyn, I'm aware there was a bit of story regarding the lack of women in his shadow cabinet, but are his women troubles extending to not polling well with women or something? Labour are really going backwards, if that is the case. They've had an advantage with under 45 women for sometime now, and they would be silly to lose yet another demographic.
I agree that May and Osborne wouldn't really trust one another. I think Osborne, for a start would much prefer one of his acolytes to take the Conservative party leadership if he couldn't - so the likes of Javid, Hancock and even Perry would be pushed by him as opposed to May. I also think that May simply wouldn't be happy with merely being the face of the Osborne project in the way David Cameron, to all intents and purposes appears to be. I also think for any potential Tory party leader having a Conservative party dominated by Osborne acolytes does put them in a somewhat vulnerable position, especially if they don't have a comparable 'base' of supporters.
FTP
@felix Well, those who doubted Osborne probably feel a bit embarrassed. Still, all political careers end in failure so it should be interesting to see what the gods come up with On May, no I genuinely believe she'd be a great candidate.
The Boris odds are derisory!
Of course the vain, glory hunting 'unpopular with people that don't like him' fool said yesterday he'd be delighted if Theresa May was the leader of the campaign
Boris' speech sounded wetter than a water balloon popped in a Lib Dem hall.
Osborne or his apprentice Javid are the best choices for the Tories between the extremes of May and Boris.
Wonder if Owen Patterson is also a runner perhaps at 66s or so ?
Redwood at 100s ?
Cash at 500 maybe
Spurs play later against a team managerless and bottom of the PL
Dare I hope....
I find the idea of Theresa May as PM almost as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn getting the job. She seems to have no firm principles, guiding beliefs or charisma, she just "is"; a political Zelig. That she is among the favourites for the job gives the lie to the claim that the Tories have an abundance of talent at their disposal.
Some thoughts on the market:
- It won't be a UKIP figure, because the undecideds the campaign needs to win over are Conservative and Labour voters
- It could be a non-frightening Labour figure like Kate Hoey, although she's probably not high-profile enough.
- A Conservative is more likely, especially one who can be seen to be above the fray of day-to-day politics.
On a separate note, someone was on the other day telling us that his firm's order book had collapsed and UK manufacturing is in big trouble. Well, we have this in today's Telegraph:
"The Markit/CIPS manufacturing PMI jumped to 55.5 in October, from an upwardly revised reading of 51.8 in September. This is above the 50 level that divides growth from contraction and much higher than economists' expectations for a slight dip to 51.3."
So it would seem that some firms are doing very well and others less so.
The percentage of UKIP in Scotland is rather lower than the percentage of gays (on some estimates), mind.
[Edit: dozy error corrected!]
'I find the idea of Theresa May as PM almost as ridiculous as Jeremy Corbyn getting the job. She seems to have no firm principles, guiding beliefs or charisma, she just "is"; a political Zelig. That she is among the favourites for the job gives the lie to the claim that the Tories have an abundance of talent at their disposal.'
Translation
The last thing the Labour party (old or new) wants is another woman as Tory leader /Prime Minister,not to mention one that was Home Secretary for over 5 years, puts all those good old Labour boys that barely lasted a year in the job to shame.
'
If it's IN then Brussels won't care; close or not they will treat us as if we want even more Europe.
Their attitude is fairly clear in all their decisions.
Cameron at 200/1 is a good value book-balancer - there must be a shorter chance than that, that the EU tell him to go screw himself, accept a million more migrants, pay a billion more into the EU budget and raise a blue flag with gold stars above Buckingham Palace!!
There is no status quo or British negotiation on offer. It is leave or accept whatever the EU wants of us.
"Who will lead the official LEAVE campaign? Settled on lead debator in the first official debate."
Well that's a forlorn hope if ever there was one.
Think Cameron/Clegg/Brown offering everything that Scotland craves apart from actual independence, only when it looked for a 30th of a second that Scotland was going to break the Union.
F1: my post-race rambling is up here:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/mexico-post-race-analysis.html
On-topic: there isn't a stand-out from that list. Boris is laughable given his previous claim we should vote No then stay in, May will not persuade swing voters, I think Dyson might have credibility but not sure he'd get it.
Whoever is running the Remain campaign needs to get the EU payroll to STFU until the referendum is over. It will only take a couple of stooges presented as impartial to drag the BBC into the mess too. They need Mandleson and quickly.
Err but he's on the EU payroll as well...
But why - if the result is close - would the reaction in Britain not be similar to that in Scotland, post-referendum? That too was meant to be once-in-a-generation decision, putting the matter to bed etc but it hasn't. I tend to the view that if the result is reasonably close, whatever the wishes of the EU and the political class here, the Pandora's box will have been opened and the UK's relationship with and role within the EU will continue to be an issue which will need addressing, even if the UK votes to remain.
Any promises will not be legally binding. The EU is as trustworthy as Tony Blair.
We're in with a good chance of this match now. He says, wondering out loud if he can re-arrange his diary so as to be free on Thursday afternoon...
Now I think that is a slightly different question.
Do the broadcasters ask the organisation to provide a spokes person or request the leader?
There are occasions where I could see, for example in a thoeretical world, Lord Lawson as leader, but not as the most effective in a debate, so they may want to put Boris or Kate Hoey up for the debate. Does this also mean the broadcasters are appointing the organistion that is the 'official' Leaver mouthpiece?
I'd rule out Nigel Farage unless it is intended that the Leave campaign is intended to boost UKIP's electoral chances rather than the other way around.
Leave need to persuade the public of two things: first, that they have a fairly clear idea what comes next if the public votes Leave or at the very least will be able to work out something sensible should the occasion arise; secondly, that they are not barking mad. So they need someone manifestly sensible. If I'm wrong about the ambitious Conservatives, Theresa May would fit the role better than Boris Johnson for this reason.
I'd prefer an experienced hasbeen politician to a businessman. Lord Lawson wouldn't be bad and nor would Michael Portillo. While both have an abundance of history to deal with, both have a perfectly sane persona. It would, however, be better to have an old-school Labour politician if at all possible - there isn't an obvious route to Leave without Labour voters coming on board in significant numbers. Kate Hoey isn't quite prominent enough. If Frank Field could be inveigled to do it, he would be better.
I'm not betting on this one. It seems far from clear that the choice is going to be made on a rational basis rather than to appease the clashing egos of the multifarious Leave campaigners.
At the moment it looks and sounds like the Remain campaign are the Establishment stitch-up, every word they say is driving more people toward Leave. I was willing to wait and see what the PM could come up with by way of negotiation, but the last few weeks have made me a firm Leave purely on the basis of the Remain campaign and the EU attitudes on Greece and migrants.
Better either to leave or to have an intelligent discussion about some sort of different membership within the EU for Britain rather than pretending that some sort of tinkering about this or that policy or changed wording will solve the fundamental issue, which is that our and our Continental neighbours' view of what the EU should be are too different to be reconciled within the existing structure.
Mandelson is the top political strategist of this era, he's the only one who can make Osborne look crap in comparison.
I think he quite dislikes Cameron, perhaps jealous that he got the credit for , or more accurately the chance of, detoxifying the Tories, so maybe that would entice him
Then I encounter the arrogance, the remoteness, the bureaucratic Eurocracy and their take-it-or-leave-it attitude and I'm equally repelled by that.
I'll be doing the opposite of AndyJS. Rather than weighing the evidence, I'll be following my heart. It will probably be on the day itself that I'll make my decision. Right now, both campaigns are being run spectacularly badly.
http://order-order.com/2015/11/02/british-polling-councils-accidental-email-to-odious-cummings/
As a committed OUTER I'm becoming more confident all the time, I foresee a very low turnout with most enthusiasm coming from those desperate to leave and give the establishment a kicking.
Unfortunately, the BPC’s Nick Moon accidentally pressed ‘reply all’ when he meant to send an internal email, meaning Cummings also received the less than flattering reply:
From: Moon, Nick (GfK)
Date: Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 2:50 PM
Subject: RE: Complaint to the British Polling Council
To: Dominic Cummings, John Curtice
Cc: Simon Atkinson
Bugger – at first glance the odious Cummings might be onto something.
Survey looks pretty dodgy but luckily we don’t need to rule on that. But my initial thought is that YouGov did not give as much info as they should have
nick
http://order-order.com/2015/11/02/british-polling-councils-accidental-email-to-odious-cummings/
Edit: curses, TSE. I should have just pasted the link
'Britain is less than 45 minutes away from an attack by the EU...'
1. Norway pays the EU just as much as the UK per head?
2. Norway accepts three quarters of EU rules?
3. Norway has no influence and is a fax democracy?
'Nothing to see here' chirped the amused undecideds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elrWVRcnpBY
Having trawled through sludge and finally had to instant chat Ladbrokes to find it, I have had my £2.50 @ 50s on Dan Hannan.
He is sincere, sharp, confident, knowledgable, engaging.
Boris the Clown apart he is the one you would most want to go to the pub with.
Boris will trash his reputation as spokesman for cosmopolitan, metropolitan London (and much else) if he shows any little Englander tendencies. He can't afford too many guises if he really does want to be next leader/PM (which he won't be).
Lord Lawson is the threat.
The likely result of a leave would be negotiations about how to to leave with some EU body, leading who knows where. No one can tell and no one can know who or what political party would be involved,or whether any resulting agreement could get through parliament. The leading possibility however would be the EEA and thus various politicians and govts over the years effectively following the EU line as being the beat way to sustain our industrial and financial base. Norway's referendums voted not to join but Norwegian governments do their best to be defacto in the EU. I do not see the UK being much different, especially with a labour govt.
https://twitter.com/AmbroseEP/status/661186116964515842
Nothing to see here... Clearly the research of an independent think tank...
Of course, the media are all over her, which just inflates her ego even more. She does nothing to enhance the role of women in politics, in my opinion.
Why are the Leave campaign so rattled that their only message is that everyone on the other side, and even independent observers such as the US, are lying or dishonest or EU stooges? I just don't get it; although I expect the Remain side to win easily, the current polling is close enough that the Leave side certainly don't need to be desperate.
Given that the Eurosceptic headbangers have spent years telling us that Britain has no influence in the EU, it's a bit rich for them to complain when the same simplification is used against them in a different context.
A Norwegian Prime Minister described Norway as a fax democracy. It is entirely reasonable for the Remain camp to pick up on this phrase. Whether you agree with it is a matter for debate.
But again, I don't regard Norway's circumstances as very relevant to Britain's.
Will the BBC report the controversy surrounding this distorted poll as widely as it published the original allegation? I somehow doubt it.