I think a key sentence in this article is near the end: "In the absence of events unfolding to favour Leave, it’s hard to see a route to victory for them".
Leave's best chance - perhaps it's only realistic chance - is that events, in the form of the migration crisis, do indeed unfold for it and that, plus strong background distaste for the EU, is enough to push it over 50% on a turnout of 60% or lower. However this seems a very plausible scenario to me.
On the other hand if it comes down to which campaign is more coherent, Leave is utterly screwed.
Btw it does make me pause for thought to see that people like Alastair, JackW and Peter from Putney are predicting a Remain walkover.
OK I'll be honest I didn't read the header, I saw the title and sighed. Meeks is perfectly entitled to his view but after weeks of being undecided he theatrically announced himself to be a Remainer (shock horror) for the simple reason that he doesn't like a few on the Leave side.
My view is that turnout will be very low and the side whose voters are most motivated will prevail. The best possible result for the country is OUT, it will finally send a message to our rotten, fetid establishment and it's obsequious toadies.
Lets just get out and to hell with the consequences, the people who sailed on the Mayflower weren't hoping to find Las Vegas, but they just KNEW it had to be better.
PB LEAVE supporters might consider writing a thread leader ??
My biggest misgiving about LEAVE is the total lack of direction their "campaign" has. Voters haven't the faintest idea what's on offer and "just get out and to hell with the consequences" isn't likely to drive doubters into your camp. Voters tend to be risk averse and your "Mayflower" option isn't too enticing.
Wait - didn't we hear that about the disgraceful, floundering Conservative 2015 GE campaign ?
Looks like macro level national campaigning isn't en vogue.
Not from me you didn't.
My default position is a conservative one - REMAIN ... although a lukewarm one. For LEAVE to convince me I have to be assured that there is something decidedly better on offer. Clear, concise and without undue risk matched by a team of leaders who know precisely the direction of travel and are able to enunciate their vision in a cogent fashion.
With the best will in the world, and even many PB LEAVE supporters concede, that hasn't been offered presently.
There is plenty of time for the situation to change but LEAVE haven't started well.
My only recent breakfast in bed ventures have been whilst being ministered by health care professionals, one of whom undoubtedly aided my recovery by wearing black stockings .... and not over her head !! ....
JackW is finally outed as Young Mister Grace....
My wife spent a 3 days in hospital just recently. The nurses all wore trousers. JW obviously went private.
Incidently she rang her GP at 5.25pm saw him at 5.50 and was admittedto hospital via phone at 6.05 and was being assessed in the Emergency Surgical Ward by 7.00. X-rayed about 9pm and found a bed by about 11pm. There seemed to be a steady little trickle of people before and after her.
Obviously I haven't bothered to read the actual detail of this thread - it's a bit too near to breakfast for too much eurofanatic vituperation, but the central thrust is undoubtedly true, the Leave campaign is a divided mess. Other than urge them to unite, there seems little that can be done. I think there's too much bitter resentment on the Leave.eu side, and too much control freakery on the Vote leave side. I think things may well rest with Boris. I think he's potentially the only one who can save the day.
If Vote Leave dominate and get the designation, and Leave.EU are sidelined, there will be "Leave splits" stories anyway because of the size of Farage's and Aaron Banks's ego, so the best thing for Vote Leave to do would be to just press on with their vision regardless.
I do genuinely wonder how the Electoral Commission can make a choice like this. There are two fundamentally different campaigns and the decision could have a major impact on the outcome of the vote. Surely it's better to split the money?
It's a strange situation. It can't make sense to have multiple Out campaigns, each pushing a different flavour of Britain-outside, because nothing in the referendum question allows any preference in respect of the future to be expressed. Effectively the question is an offer to step away from Europe and begin a discussion about what's best, so the only viable campaign is surely one that goes along the lines of "anything is better than the future that Europe has mapped out for us". Really any other content is meaningless because those involved in the campaign have little power to make commitments about what will happen.
I'm also increasingly coming to the view that there would need to be a GE called in the event of a leave vote. I'm not sure how it would play under the FTPA but unless Labour is back under the control of its more rightwing faction, you'd have thought that a combination of Labour and Tory outers would be enough to achieve the outcome.
Leave are a basket case right now. Losing a potentially winning hand.
For a shambles, LEAVE are doing remarkably well. But Farage's vanity project is REMAINs best weapon.
The picture I have of the LEAVE campaign is Gove Farage Grayling and Boris standing on the white cliffs of Dover reciting from Richard 2nd. With the caption "But Will it Fly"
This royal throne of kings, this scepter'd isle, This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars, This other Eden, demi-paradise, This fortress built by Nature for herself Against infection and the hand of war, This happy breed of men, this little world, This precious stone set in the silver sea, Which serves it in the office of a wall, Or as a moat defensive to a house, Against the envy of less happier lands, This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
.......and If I was running the Remain campaign I'd run it
The reality is that anything UKIP promises can be ignored. They won't be negotiating. Realpolitik will dictate the Brexit deal and realpolitik says we take what the EU offers us - basically EEA membership. No Tory government is going to sacrifice free movement of goods, services and cspital in order to achieve significant reductions in free movement of people - especially when so many Brits live or have second properties in other EU member statrs.
Btw it does make me pause for thought to see that people like Alastair, JackW and Peter from Putney are predicting a Remain walkover.
A Remain walkover, followed by a messy EU implosion would be an interesting future to contemplate. "How did we get it so wrong again".
The only good thing most of the time about being a eurosceptic is that at least we are largely right, but gloating at idiot euro-enthusiasts after the fact, once they have sold our country down the river for political expediency, party loyalty or short term gain is pretty small comfort.
I bet the offended-by-everything brigade wrung their hands over that
Rock's 90s suggestion that innocent gunshot deaths in drive-by shootings would disappear if shops started charging $5000 a bullet is still a great idea!
Obviously I haven't bothered to read the actual detail of this thread - it's a bit too near to breakfast for too much eurofanatic vituperation, but the central thrust is undoubtedly true, the Leave campaign is a divided mess. Other than urge them to unite, there seems little that can be done. I think there's too much bitter resentment on the Leave.eu side, and too much control freakery on the Vote leave side. I think things may well rest with Boris. I think he's potentially the only one who can save the day.
If Vote Leave dominate and get the designation, and Leave.EU are sidelined, there will be "Leave splits" stories anyway because of the size of Farage's and Aaron Banks's ego, so the best thing for Vote Leave to do would be to just press on with their vision regardless.
I do genuinely wonder how the Electoral Commission can make a choice like this. There are two fundamentally different campaigns and the decision could have a major impact on the outcome of the vote. Surely it's better to split the money?
It's a strange situation. It can't make sense to have multiple Out campaigns, each pushing a different flavour of Britain-outside, because nothing in the referendum question allows any preference in respect of the future to be expressed. Effectively the question is an offer to step away from Europe and begin a discussion about what's best, so the only viable campaign is surely one that goes along the lines of "anything is better than the future that Europe has mapped out for us". Really any other content is meaningless because those involved in the campaign have little power to make commitments about what will happen.
I'm also increasingly coming to the view that there would need to be a GE called in the event of a leave vote. I'm not sure how it would play under the FTPA but unless Labour is back under the control of its more rightwing faction, you'd have thought that a combination of Labour and Tory outers would be enough to achieve the outcome.
Who in the Cabinet supports the Fixed Term Parliament Act? Cameron, obviously, Anyone else?
OK I'll be honest I didn't read the header, I saw the title and sighed. Meeks is perfectly entitled to his view but after weeks of being undecided he theatrically announced himself to be a Remainer (shock horror) for the simple reason that he doesn't like a few on the Leave side.
My view is that turnout will be very low and the side whose voters are most motivated will prevail. The best possible result for the country is OUT, it will finally send a message to our rotten, fetid establishment and it's obsequious toadies.
Lets just get out and to hell with the consequences, the people who sailed on the Mayflower weren't hoping to find Las Vegas, but they just KNEW it had to be better.
PB LEAVE supporters might consider writing a thread leader ??
My biggest misgiving about LEAVE is the total lack of direction their "campaign" has. Voters haven't the faintest idea what's on offer and "just get out and to hell with the consequences" isn't likely to drive doubters into your camp. Voters tend to be risk averse and your "Mayflower" option isn't too enticing.
Wait - didn't we hear that about the disgraceful, floundering Conservative 2015 GE campaign ?
Looks like macro level national campaigning isn't en vogue.
Not from me you didn't.
My default position is a conservative one - REMAIN ... although a lukewarm one. For LEAVE to convince me I have to be assured that there is something decidedly better on offer. Clear, concise and without undue risk matched by a team of leaders who know precisely the direction of travel and are able to enunciate their vision in a cogent fashion.
With the best will in the world, and even many PB LEAVE supporters concede, that hasn't been offered presently.
There is plenty of time for the situation to change but LEAVE haven't started well.
Leave haven't started particularly well although I'd argue it's far from the disaster this rather prematurely self congratulatory Remain thread is making out. What is clear that Remain mainly in the persona of Cameron, his civil servants and advisers have commenced a preplanned ferocious assuault which undoubtedly has caught the Leave campaign by surprise. 16 weeks is a long campaign rather than a battle so I expect there's plenty of twists and turns to come.
I bet the offended-by-everything brigade wrung their hands over that
Rock's 90s suggestion that innocent gunshot deaths in drive-by shootings would disappear if shops started charging $5000 a bullet is still a great idea!
My default position is a conservative one - REMAIN ... although a lukewarm one. For LEAVE to convince me I have to be assured that there is something decidedly better on offer. Clear, concise and without undue risk matched by a team of leaders who know precisely the direction of travel and are able to enunciate their vision in a cogent fashion.
But this is the same tosh Mr Nabavi continually tries to push. Better than what ? The status quo isn't on offer.
Better than a QMV vote to allocate 100,000 migrants a year to the UK ? Better than a number of Eurozone rule changes that screw over the City ? Better than (in the nicest possibly way) being forced into the Euro over the next decade ? Better than having to bail out a staggering Eurozone economy (yes I know what they said, but if we are attached to it and push comes to shove, what are we going to do) Better than .... whatever 27 other countries with their own agenda decide to foist on us through QMV
There is no status quo, there is no certainty. I have no idea what leave needs to be better than do you ?
I had an interesting chat with my uncle recently, who was much involved with the Tories in the 1970s.
He explained to me that opposition to 'Thatcherite' policy changes was incredibly strong in the mid-1970s among leading Tories - especially of the posher sort.
These people were very risk averse and pessimistic, arguing that even if things like privatisation might be attractive in the abstract, they were far too risky to attempt with so many things that might go wrong - union trouble, unemployment, social unrest etc. etc.
Much better to stick broadly with the system we had that, yes, was dysfunctional but was preferable to some free market 'leap in the dark'.
A Remain walkover, followed by a messy EU implosion would be an interesting future to contemplate. "How did we get it so wrong again".
The only good thing most of the time about being a eurosceptic is that at least we are largely right, but gloating at idiot euro-enthusiasts after the fact, once they have sold our country down the river for political expediency, party loyalty or short term gain is pretty small comfort.
To be honest that's exactly what I am expecting - we vote remain and some time later the mess that is over a million economic migrants trying to get into the promised lands of Germany and the UK blows the EU apart.
There is a reason why the referendum is in June (I think all parties are hoping that the refugee disaster starts playing out from July onwards rather than May)...
Obviously I haven't bothered to read the actual detail of this thread - it's a bit too near to breakfast for too much eurofanatic vituperation, but the central thrust is undoubtedly true, the Leave campaign is a divided mess. Other than urge them to unite, there seems little that can be done. I think there's too much bitter resentment on the Leave.eu side, and too much control freakery on the Vote leave side. I think things may well rest with Boris. I think he's potentially the only one who can save the day.
If Vote Leave dominate and get the designation, and Leave.EU are sidelined, there will be "Leave splits" stories anyway because of the size of Farage's and Aaron Banks's ego, so the best thing for Vote Leave to do would be to just press on with their vision regardless.
I do genuinely wonder how the Electoral Commission can make a choice like this. There are two fundamentally different campaigns and the decision could have a major impact on the outcome of the vote. Surely it's better to split the money?
It's a strange situation. It can't make sense to have multiple Out campaigns, each pushing a different flavour of Britain-outside, because nothing in the referendum question allows any preference in respect of the future to be expressed. Effectively the question is an offer to step away from Europe and begin a discussion about what's best, so the only viable campaign is surely one that goes along the lines of "anything is better than the future that Europe has mapped out for us". Really any other content is meaningless because those involved in the campaign have little power to make commitments about what will happen.
I'm also increasingly coming to the view that there would need to be a GE called in the event of a leave vote. I'm not sure how it would play under the FTPA but unless Labour is back under the control of its more rightwing faction, you'd have thought that a combination of Labour and Tory outers would be enough to achieve the outcome.
But even with one campaign you still have the basic split between its followers and the argument about what to do afterwards. At one time Leave might have been happy with simply being in EFTA/EEA, but the Farage tendency have latched on to crude anti immigrants as a way to perpetuate their campaign and crude anti immigrant tendencies have latched on to UKIP. The EEA is no use to this bunch. Nowhere is this split more evident than with the UKIP-Carswell split.
Personally I want out come what may. but I'm aware that it's certainly a possibility that the EU will go into full panic mode if we do vote to leave.
So my question is this. If we vote to leave (we probably won't, but let's say we did), and the EU start offering all sorts of goodies, do those on the Remain side think we should ignore them and walk away? This was mentioned yesterday, but I suspect those arguing that out means out would quickly start telling us to "at least hear what they have to say."
I think that's what I'd say, yes. But my reading of the EU - and it's something I've generally been right about in recent years - is that they'll react like someone in a difficult marriage whose partner finally leaves. "No way are we going back to that."
What about the converse? If some of the EU countries decided to be awkward and to veto the sort of sensible free trade deal that Leave supporters generally think would be on offer, so we ended up with damaging tariffs - it only takes one bloody-minded government to sink it - would Remain supporters feel it had been worthwhile anyway?
I'm putting my next piece together, which will look at limited aspects of the practicalities of post-Leave negotiations.
Do please include redirecting the overseas aid budget towards the poorer EU countries. Phased in within 5 years half of it going direct to specific countries.
Leaving the starving and impoverished elsewhere to just starve, when Europe is one of the richest nations in the world? I thought Leave were more interested in the Commonwealth which covers half of Africa.
Starving? A few facts. Only a tiny amount of the overseas aid budget is spent on food for people in Africa. Top 6 countries for aid feature just two Ethiopia and Nigeria that are African. The top 4 types of aid spending are on 1. Health 2. Society 3. Education 4. Economy
It is just not going on starving Africans. One of the biggest programs in Africa was on educating 600,000 girls in Nigeria. Nigeria of course does have major oil revenues.
The reality is that anything UKIP promises can be ignored. They won't be negotiating. Realpolitik will dictate the Brexit deal and realpolitik says we take what the EU offers us - basically EEA membership. No Tory government is going to sacrifice free movement of goods, services and cspital in order to achieve significant reductions in free movement of people - especially when so many Brits live or have second properties in other EU member statrs.
The flip side of that is if Leave win and the government goes EEA in the face of the expectations of more than half their party, and the vast majority of other Leave voters, they are going to struggle to win the next election even with Corbyn, and will get utterly shafted if he stands down for someone maybe equally lefty but with no baggage.
The reality is that anything UKIP promises can be ignored. They won't be negotiating. Realpolitik will dictate the Brexit deal and realpolitik says we take what the EU offers us - basically EEA membership. No Tory government is going to sacrifice free movement of goods, services and cspital in order to achieve significant reductions in free movement of people - especially when so many Brits live or have second properties in other EU member statrs.
I agree that the Tory party under the control of its current funders isn't going to sacrifice anything in order to reduce free movement of labour, but there's got to be a question about whether it could hold on to power in the event of a Leave vote. As I think a thread over the weekend suggested, a separation of the "centrist" (i.e. pro-globalisation economically right-wing) factions of both the Tory and Labour parties from the "traditional" wings of those parties seems possible, leading to a GE potentially fought with the issue of free movement of people (or anti-immigration nationalism if you prefer) placed centre stage. I don't feel confident that the open borders argument wins that GE regardless of the purported economic upsides.
OK I'll be honest I didn't read the header, I saw the title and sighed. Meeks is perfectly entitled to his view but after weeks of being undecided he theatrically announced himself to be a Remainer (shock horror) for the simple reason that he doesn't like a few on the Leave side.
My view is that turnout will be very low and the side whose voters are most motivated will prevail. The best possible result for the country is OUT, it will finally send a message to our rotten, fetid establishment and it's obsequious toadies.
Lets just get out and to hell with the consequences, the people who sailed on the Mayflower weren't hoping to find Las Vegas, but they just KNEW it had to be better.
PB LEAVE supporters might consider writing a thread leader ??
My biggest misgiving about LEAVE is the total lack of direction their "campaign" has. Voters haven't the faintest idea what's on offer and "just get out and to hell with the consequences" isn't likely to drive doubters into your camp. Voters tend to be risk averse and your "Mayflower" option isn't too enticing.
Wait - didn't we hear that about the disgraceful, floundering Conservative 2015 GE campaign ?
Looks like macro level national campaigning isn't en vogue.
Not from me you didn't.
My default position is a conservative one - REMAIN ... although a lukewarm one. For LEAVE to convince me I have to be assured that there is something decidedly better on offer. Clear, concise and without undue risk matched by a team of leaders who know precisely the direction of travel and are able to enunciate their vision in a cogent fashion.
With the best will in the world, and even many PB LEAVE supporters concede, that hasn't been offered presently.
There is plenty of time for the situation to change but LEAVE haven't started well.
Fair enough Jack. Good to hear that you're still willing to be open minded about it.
Technically not advice, as I'm not regulated to give mortgage advice. All I did was point you in the direction of a couple of friendly brokers
On your insurance question: (a) not everyone can "scrape up" £50,000 towards the end of the term; and (b) the insurance company gets to keep the investment income in the meantime.
Generally speaking, self-insurance is always better if you can because it allows you to capture the insurer's profit margin and reduces near term cash outflows. As a thought, if you can afford £50K as self-insurance, have you run the pricing on £150K of life insurance rather than £200K?
Thanks, Charles. It's more about family Project Reassurance than anything else, but I've strayed off topic enough for here..
Interesting-ish article, Alistair. Quite frankly it is for the Leave campaign, whichever one, to articulate their vision of the future.
For me, were I leave (and I am not a million miles away) it would be the "Braveheart" - or as you describe it "Leave means sorting it out later" argument that would be most compelling. If we want to be independent, let's be independent.
We can sort out everything afterwards.
From a 'LEAVERS' marketing point of view that conflicts too much with the much vaunted being the 5th largest economy in the world.
To expect the public to make the mental leap from being one of the world's mighty powerhouses to BRAVEHEART the plucky go-it-alone warrior is way beyond the capability of even the shrewdest advertiser.
The Braveheart image is one of baring your arse and farting into the wind. Then ending up being betrayed hung drawn and quartered. God luck with that.
Really any other content is meaningless because those involved in the campaign have little power to make commitments about what will happen.
I don't think this is true any longer. Farage can't make such commitments but Gove and Boris can perfectly well say, "If Leave wins I will challenge David Cameron for the leadership of the Conservative Party and if I win I will pursue the following policy.. ." Conservative MPs could then declare their support for that step so that it would be quite clear to the public what to expect.
Leave are a basket case right now. Losing a potentially winning hand.
For a shambles, LEAVE are doing remarkably well. But Farage's vanity project is REMAINs best weapon.
The picture I have of the LEAVE campaign is Gove Farage Grayling and Boris standing on the white cliffs of Dover reciting from Richard 2nd. With the caption "But Will it Fly" This royal throne of kings, this scepter'd isle, This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars, This other Eden, demi-paradise, This fortress built by Nature for herself Against infection and the hand of war, This happy breed of men, this little world, This precious stone set in the silver sea, Which serves it in the office of a wall, Or as a moat defensive to a house, Against the envy of less happier lands, This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England, .......and If I was running the Remain campaign I'd run it
Roger, if it featured Boris reading it it would work for LEAVE. judging patriotism is not your forte Roger. (I bow to your Oscar judgements).
Alastair has a point, because the precise nature of Leave depends upon what we manage to negotiate in the event of a Brexit. And there are always going to be different priorities in that. Conversely, Remain have a deal on the table and can argue (incorrectly, IMHO) they are the status quo.
In terms of a strategy for Leave, they must neutralise both disadvantages. So I think:
(1) They must paint Remain as the riskier choice, that there is no "status quo" and that the deal is not guaranteed and offers no certainty of protection. They must also illustrate the multitude of paths the EU might take, further integration being most likely, with the likely impact on the British voter in terms of laws and £££ of each scenario
(2) They must articulate a framework of what their high-level priorities would be (a sort of, reverse Bloomberg speech, if you will) in the event of Brexit, without actually pinning themselves down to one precise "option". Because, if they do, Cameron/Osborne will pounce on it. Plus, in the event of Brexit, the negotiations are going to have to run several options simultaneously to get the best deal for the UK on a EFTA/single market-lite/bilateral deal.
However, Leave can list them, say Leave is a broad open-minded coalition, say how each would be better than what we have now, both for the UK and the EU, preferably with some international politicians from existing EFTA/EEA member states in their backpocket to provide a few helpful quotes, and dog-whistle that as the most credible solution.
Basically, they need to assure they have a plan, and a credible strategy, without getting pinned into a corner.
I think DavidL's approach comes closest to this.
Agreed but are LEAVE realistically going to make it clear that their post-Brexit option will have no effect on immigration? All hell would break loose at the Kipper end of the coalition.
They will dishonestly go into the referendum pretending that Brexit will stop immigration whilst being fully aware that they will very likely settle for an option that allows it to continue as is. All hell will then break loose later on but it will be too late.
I suppose they could keep everybody on board by saying there will be a second referendum to decide whether we join EFTA/EEA in the event of Brexit. It will be a hard sell but unless LEAVE can reconcile the anti-immigration and continued free trade voters they will be hung out to dry before June. They need a credible vision and fast.
Let's say that Leave made it all about immigration.
The country votes to leave. The government negotiates membership of the EEA.
That negates Leave's position, but it's not something that they can control.
But it is something the Government (presumably seeking re-election) would be aware of...and might figure in negotiation.....
This 'LEAVE' is whatever the government says it will be' is is an abdication of responsibility - if you believe in something, campaign for it - assuming you can agree on what 'it' is......
You may not have noticed, but UKIP and the Conservatives are different political parties?
They have different visions for the future.
There's a pretty strong argument for a general election post a Leave vote to seek guidance from the voters on the negotiation strategy, but I doubt that our politicians will go for that
You may not have noticed (since we're in condescending mode), but the Conservatives, Labour, Lib Dem, SNP and Green Parties also have different visions for the future - but that is not stopping them campaigning (if not side by side) on the same platform.
Which UKIP platform do you suggest I pay heed to, by the way?
Really any other content is meaningless because those involved in the campaign have little power to make commitments about what will happen.
I don't think this is true any longer. Farage can't make such commitments but Gove and Boris can perfectly well say, "If Leave wins I will challenge David Cameron for the leadership of the Conservative Party and if I win I will pursue the following policy.. ." Conservative MPs could then declare their support for that step so that it would be quite clear to the public what to expect.
I'm not sure why that would be a good idea. Winning any two-way vote has to be about building the largest possible coalition of people who agree on one or two things whilst holding lots of incompatible views. I can see why Remain would want Leave to focus on the narrowest possible faction, but not why Leave would want to play ball.
Technically not advice, as I'm not regulated to give mortgage advice. All I did was point you in the direction of a couple of friendly brokers
On your insurance question: (a) not everyone can "scrape up" £50,000 towards the end of the term; and (b) the insurance company gets to keep the investment income in the meantime.
Generally speaking, self-insurance is always better if you can because it allows you to capture the insurer's profit margin and reduces near term cash outflows. As a thought, if you can afford £50K as self-insurance, have you run the pricing on £150K of life insurance rather than £200K?
Thanks, Charles. It's more about family Project Reassurance than anything else, but I've strayed off topic enough for here..
Don't mortgages come with life insurance anyway? As I recall I had an endowment policy. I know you can get decreasing term insurance.
OK I'll be honest I didn't read the header, I saw the title and sighed. Meeks is perfectly entitled to his view but after weeks of being undecided he theatrically announced himself to be a Remainer (shock horror) for the simple reason that he doesn't like a few on the Leave side.
My view is that turnout will be very low and the side whose voters are most motivated will prevail. The best possible result for the country is OUT, it will finally send a message to our rotten, fetid establishment and it's obsequious toadies.
Lets just get out and to hell with the consequences, the people who sailed on the Mayflower weren't hoping to find Las Vegas, but they just KNEW it had to be better.
PB LEAVE supporters might consider writing a thread leader ??
My biggest misgiving about LEAVE is the total lack of direction their "campaign" has. Voters haven't the faintest idea what's on offer and "just get out and to hell with the consequences" isn't likely to drive doubters into your camp. Voters tend to be risk averse and your "Mayflower" option isn't too enticing.
Wait - didn't we hear that about the disgraceful, floundering Conservative 2015 GE campaign ?
Looks like macro level national campaigning isn't en vogue.
Not from me you didn't.
My default position is a conservative one - REMAIN ... although a lukewarm one. For LEAVE to convince me I have to be assured that there is something decidedly better on offer. Clear, concise and without undue risk matched by a team of leaders who know precisely the direction of travel and are able to enunciate their vision in a cogent fashion.
With the best will in the world, and even many PB LEAVE supporters concede, that hasn't been offered presently.
There is plenty of time for the situation to change but LEAVE haven't started well.
Leave haven't started particularly well although I'd argue it's far from the disaster this rather prematurely self congratulatory Remain thread is making out. What is clear that Remain mainly in the persona of Cameron, his civil servants and advisers have commenced a preplanned ferocious assuault which undoubtedly has caught the Leave campaign by surprise. 16 weeks is a long campaign rather than a battle so I expect there's plenty of twists and turns to come.
It is a shambles, but hardly anyone is paying attention yet. Things get interesting on April 1 when the lead LEAVE Campaign is appointed - if they don't get their act together pretty sharpish after that, then things could get unrecoverable.
What REMAIN need is a close poll near the Vote to scare their supporters into the polling booth....a bit like SINDYREF.....
Let's say that Leave made it all about immigration.
The country votes to leave. The government negotiates membership of the EEA.
That negates Leave's position, but it's not something that they can control.
But it is something the Government (presumably seeking re-election) would be aware of...and might figure in negotiation.....
This 'LEAVE' is whatever the government says it will be' is is an abdication of responsibility - if you believe in something, campaign for it - assuming you can agree on what 'it' is......
You may not have noticed, but UKIP and the Conservatives are different political parties?
They have different visions for the future.
There's a pretty strong argument for a general election post a Leave vote to seek guidance from the voters on the negotiation strategy, but I doubt that our politicians will go for that
You may not have noticed (since we're in condescending mode), but the Conservatives, Labour, Lib Dem, SNP and Green Parties also have different visions for the future - but that is not stopping them campaigning (if not side by side) on the same platform.
Which UKIP platform do you suggest I pay heed to, by the way?
Their Leader's or their MP's?
Ukip is the only party that that is 100% behind Leave. Muddy the water all you like.
Really any other content is meaningless because those involved in the campaign have little power to make commitments about what will happen.
I don't think this is true any longer. Farage can't make such commitments but Gove and Boris can perfectly well say, "If Leave wins I will challenge David Cameron for the leadership of the Conservative Party and if I win I will pursue the following policy.. ." Conservative MPs could then declare their support for that step so that it would be quite clear to the public what to expect.
I'm not sure why that would be a good idea. Winning any two-way vote has to be about building the largest possible coalition of people who agree on one or two things whilst holding lots of incompatible views. I can see why Remain would want Leave to focus on the narrowest possible faction, but not why Leave would want to play ball.
I didn't say it would be a good idea. It would, however, be possible and not "meaningless". Now that Leave is lead by credible Tory leadership candidates it really can spell out what it would do if it wins (obviously contingent on actually winning the leadership, but that seems very likely). If it doesn't that's because it prefers not to. But privately Gove and Boris (and IDS et al) must know what they intend to do.
Never fear, PBLeavers, Nicola (iReferendum lost) Sturgeon is standing shoulder to er! David Cameron's hip to advise him on how to remain in the Union (European) while wanting to leave the Union (of Kingdoms). How can you not win now?
As, and until, "Scotland's Future", the SNP Bible is updated, the cult members are a little confused, nay, dismayed by the Sainted Nicola's behaviour. Obviously it is all part of a cunning plan, held securely in the third draw down of the locked filing cabinet, in the disused cupboard at the back of the third basement which nobody visits due to being bricked in. But, in due process, when the time is right, it will be brought out in the last minute to great jubilation, exaltation, the singing of heavenly choirs and one or possibly two, sighs of relief as all is explained to the throng.
Personally I want out come what may. but I'm aware that it's certainly a possibility that the EU will go into full panic mode if we do vote to leave.
So my question is this. If we vote to leave (we probably won't, but let's say we did), and the EU start offering all sorts of goodies, do those on the Remain side think we should ignore them and walk away? This was mentioned yesterday, but I suspect those arguing that out means out would quickly start telling us to "at least hear what they have to say."
I think that's what I'd say, yes. But my reading of the EU - and it's something I've generally been right about in recent years - is that they'll react like someone in a difficult marriage whose partner finally leaves. "No way are we going back to that."
What about the converse? If some of the EU countries decided to be awkward and to veto the sort of sensible free trade deal that Leave supporters generally think would be on offer, so we ended up with damaging tariffs - it only takes one bloody-minded government to sink it - would Remain supporters feel it had been worthwhile anyway?
I'm putting my next piece together, which will look at limited aspects of the practicalities of post-Leave negotiations.
Do please include redirecting the overseas aid budget towards the poorer EU countries. Phased in within 5 years half of it going direct to specific countries.
Leaving the starving and impoverished elsewhere to just starve, when Europe is one of the richest nations in the world? I thought Leave were more interested in the Commonwealth which covers half of Africa.
Starving? A few facts. Only a tiny amount of the overseas aid budget is spent on food for people in Africa. Top 6 countries for aid feature just two Ethiopia and Nigeria that are African. The top 4 types of aid spending are on 1. Health 2. Society 3. Education 4. Economy
It is just not going on starving Africans. One of the biggest programs in Africa was on educating 600,000 girls in Nigeria. Nigeria of course does have major oil revenues.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him to fish and he can feed his famiy. And educating girls is about the best way known for raising overall life standards
Really any other content is meaningless because those involved in the campaign have little power to make commitments about what will happen.
I don't think this is true any longer. Farage can't make such commitments but Gove and Boris can perfectly well say, "If Leave wins I will challenge David Cameron for the leadership of the Conservative Party and if I win I will pursue the following policy.. ." Conservative MPs could then declare their support for that step so that it would be quite clear to the public what to expect.
I'm not sure why that would be a good idea. Winning any two-way vote has to be about building the largest possible coalition of people who agree on one or two things whilst holding lots of incompatible views. I can see why Remain would want Leave to focus on the narrowest possible faction, but not why Leave would want to play ball.
Well quite. Some Leave supporters I've spoken to are perfectly happy with the current situation for the time being. The most recent opinion poll albeit online showed a 4% Leave lead so maybe rightly they aren't too bothered just yet. Narrowing down the options too soon plays into Remains hands. It may be opinion will eventually coalesce around a tighter version of the snowflake option above but let's wat and see.
Project Fact. You can imagine the meeting where they came up with that. “Eureka! Next time Boris says you’re scaremongering, the public will think, ‘No, the PM deals only in fact. He must do. His campaign’s called Project Fact.’”
A mere 30 seconds later, Mr Cameron declared that to leave the EU would be “taking a gamble with people’s lives”.
If that’s Project Fact, I’d hate to see Project Melodrama.
'I can see why Remain would want Leave to focus on the narrowest possible faction, but not why Leave would want to play ball.'
Yes I'm always amused to read the helpful advice the Remain partisans/'undecided' have for how the Leave campaign should be conducting itself
I'm talking about what Leave *could* do, not what might be expedient for it. It is almost certainly the case that the next Prime Minister (in the event Leave wins) is currently campaigning for Leave. He (or she) could say "I will do X" and it would not be a meaningless unbankable commitment, as is often said.
Life is about chances and opportunities, not kicking your heels and wondering.
"Nobody ever lay on their deathbed wishing they had spent more time in the office EU"
Exactly, Leave are the fun lovers, the optimists, the wealth creators and adventurers.
Remain are the federalists, the corporatists obsessed with acronyms, buzzwords and state funded index linked pensions.
John Lennon said:
You may say I'm a dreamer but I'm not the only one.
We obviously meet different people because I would hardly characterise the leavers I've met as "fun loving" "optimists" or "adventurers" - grumpy oldies moaning about anything and everything has been more my experience.
I'm going to call Peak SNP at 60%, they seem to have got a tremendous number of "No" voters onside now, and I can't see them particularly growing from here.
I'm going to call Peak SNP at 60%, they seem to have got a tremendous number of "No" voters onside now, and I can't see them particularly growing from here.
My only recent breakfast in bed ventures have been whilst being ministered by health care professionals, one of whom undoubtedly aided my recovery by wearing black stockings .... and not over her head !! ....
JackW is finally outed as Young Mister Grace....
My wife spent a 3 days in hospital just recently. The nurses all wore trousers. JW obviously went private.
Incidently she rang her GP at 5.25pm saw him at 5.50 and was admittedto hospital via phone at 6.05 and was being assessed in the Emergency Surgical Ward by 7.00. X-rayed about 9pm and found a bed by about 11pm. There seemed to be a steady little trickle of people before and after her.
I'm going to call Peak SNP at 60%, they seem to have got a tremendous number of "No" voters onside now, and I can't see them particularly growing from here.
Of course 60% is plenty !
Calling "peak x" before its started to fall?? Is this a first on here?
The clueless no nothings only call 'peak' when it's on the way down..
Well done pulpstar, hopefully a new trend has begun
In terms of the devolved parliament there is logic in the Scottish electorate voting any which way but loose. But without the promise of a firm alliance with another party then voting SNP in a Westminster election seems a bit dim. But Scotland is safe voting for SNP if they wish because they always have to comfort blanket of the union, the shield of Westminster to protect them.
These people were very risk averse and pessimistic, arguing that even if things like privatisation might be attractive in the abstract, they were far too risky to attempt with so many things that might go wrong - union trouble, unemployment, social unrest etc. etc.
Much better to stick broadly with the system we had that, yes, was dysfunctional but was preferable to some free market 'leap in the dark'.
It all sounded very familiar.
Put aside the arguments for leave or remain the fact that we are lead by such a bunch of drippy pessimists who apparently have no faith in our country is a damn shame.
I'm going to call Peak SNP at 60%, they seem to have got a tremendous number of "No" voters onside now, and I can't see them particularly growing from here.
Of course 60% is plenty !
Calling "peak x" before its started to fall?? Is this a first on here?
The clueless no nothings only call 'peak' when it's on the way down..
Well done pulpstar, hopefully a new trend has begun
I called peak trump 24 hours before the Iowa caucus.
I'm going to call Peak SNP at 60%, they seem to have got a tremendous number of "No" voters onside now, and I can't see them particularly growing from here.
Of course 60% is plenty !
Calling "peak x" before its started to fall?? Is this a first on here?
The clueless no nothings only call 'peak' when it's on the way down..
Well done pulpstar, hopefully a new trend has begun
I called peak trump 24 hours before the Iowa caucus.
I was right.
Kind of.
I remember that. I thought you were right as well.
I'm going to call Peak SNP at 60%, they seem to have got a tremendous number of "No" voters onside now, and I can't see them particularly growing from here.
Of course 60% is plenty !
Calling "peak x" before its started to fall?? Is this a first on here?
The clueless no nothings only call 'peak' when it's on the way down..
Well done pulpstar, hopefully a new trend has begun
I called peak trump 24 hours before the Iowa caucus.
You know who I really worry about, the SNP candidates that aren't elected on the constituency.
That's going to ruin your self esteem (of course the SNP might well win every constituency)
True, but think of the poor sods from other parties who have to contest constituencies without a glimmer of hope. That fixed, rictus grin as you knock on your 1000th door...
Personally I want out come what may. but I'm aware that it's certainly a possibility that the EU will go into full panic mode if we do vote to leave.
So my question is this. If we vote to leave (we probably won't, but let's say we did), and the EU start offering all sorts of goodies, do those on the Remain side think we should ignore them and walk away? This was mentioned yesterday, but I suspect those arguing that out means out would quickly start telling us to "at least hear what they have to say."
What about the converse? If some of the EU countries decided to be awkward and to veto the sort of sensible free trade deal that Leave supporters generally think would be on offer, so we ended up with damaging tariffs - it only takes one bloody-minded government to sink it - would Remain supporters feel it had been worthwhile anyway?
I'm putting my next piece together, which will look at limited aspects of the practicalities of post-Leave negotiations.
Do please include redirecting the overseas aid budget towards the poorer EU countries. Phased in within 5 years half of it going direct to specific countries.
Leaving the starving and impoverished elsewhere to just starve, when Europe is one of the richest nations in the world? I thought Leave were more interested in the Commonwealth which covers half of Africa.
Starving? A few facts. Only a tiny amount of the overseas aid budget is spent on food for people in Africa. Top 6 countries for aid feature just two Ethiopia and Nigeria that are African. The top 4 types of aid spending are on 1. Health 2. Society 3. Education 4. Economy
It is just not going on starving Africans. One of the biggest programs in Africa was on educating 600,000 girls in Nigeria. Nigeria of course does have major oil revenues.
The general point being that Africa is in a far worse state than Europe. By all means nit pick about starving millions hyperbole if you want. The spending of money on educating girls on Nigeria is absolutely what we should be doing. I am all in favour in fact of us being quite selfish in the spending of our aid in that we should be also looking to improve our future geo political and trading position. Likewise the EU regional funds are going to improve the new entrants economies and thus improve the markets for our own goods and services. Eventually Eastern European immigrants will return and if we had any sense we would be using the current situation as a bridge to better relations in the future.
Applications to be the lead campaign have to be submitted by 31 March The designation decision will be made on the 14th April
The Remain side have a huge advantage in that they not only have the full force of Cameron and the establishment behind them, but also have a single campaign body so the designation will be a formality. That's obviously a great help both organisationally and in terms of fund-raising and message discipline.
Quite how the Leave side managed to get themselves into such a spectacular mess is a wonder to behold. It's not as though the referendum was sprung on them without notice. No coherent message, at least two (or is it three?) campaign groups at each other's throats, no agreement about even the broadest thrust of what they are campaigning for. It's only now - just weeks from the referendum - that they've even begun to consider what the Brexit process, let alone the destination, might look like. This is just extraordinary.
As usual, the messenger is being shot, but Alastair is not arguing in favour of Remain, he is arguing that the Leave side have made a dog's breakfast of their strategy, tactics and organisation. All the points Alastair makes are valid, and those betting on the referendum would be wise to heed them.
Of course, it might be true that fears over migration will trump these shortcomings, but, for that to happen, the Leave side also need to address the economic risks. I really can't see how they can do that now, starting from here. They should have started three years ago.
Put aside the arguments for leave or remain the fact that we are lead by such a bunch of drippy pessimists who apparently have no faith in our country is a damn shame.
It's not really pessimism, it's fighting on the turf on which you can win, or Project Fear as we now like to call it.
The grass roots leave motivation looks a bit like this:
Bloody hooman rights ("We all know the stories... about the illegal immigrant who cannot be deported because, and I am not making this up, he had a pet cat.") Straight bananas Pounds and ounces Unlimited foreigners coming here and taking our jobs General xenophobia
You don't win the argument by proclaiming your love for immigrants, kilograms, regularly-sized fruit and permanently depressed wages. You win it by predicting economic apocalypse.
You know who I really worry about, the SNP candidates that aren't elected on the constituency.
That's going to ruin your self esteem (of course the SNP might well win every constituency)
True, but think of the poor sods from other parties who have to contest constituencies without a glimmer of hope. That fixed, rictus grin as you knock on your 1000th door...
One of my friends, his father was a Tory candidate in Liverpool in the 80s. I'll ask him for tips on that front.
'Put aside the arguments for leave or remain the fact that we are lead by such a bunch of drippy pessimists who apparently have no faith in our country is a damn shame.'
There are plenty of frightened old men in the Remain camp for sure. But the people at the top are mostly concerned with their own interests. The EU offers the tantalising prospect of power over hundreds of millions.
Just look at how Blair was dazzled by it, and dreamt of becoming 'President of Europe'.
Let's say that Leave made it all about immigration.
The country votes to leave. The government negotiates membership of the EEA.
That negates Leave's position, but it's not something that they can control.
But it is something the Government (presumably seeking re-election) would be aware of...and might figure in negotiation.....
This 'LEAVE' is whatever the government says it will be' is is an abdication of responsibility - if you believe in something, campaign for it - assuming you can agree on what 'it' is......
You may not have noticed, but UKIP and the Conservatives are different political parties?
They have different visions for the future.
There's a pretty strong argument for a general election post a Leave vote to seek guidance from the voters on the negotiation strategy, but I doubt that our politicians will go for that
You may not have noticed (since we're in condescending mode), but the Conservatives, Labour, Lib Dem, SNP and Green Parties also have different visions for the future - but that is not stopping them campaigning (if not side by side) on the same platform.
Which UKIP platform do you suggest I pay heed to, by the way?
Their Leader's or their MP's?
Ukip is the only party that that is 100% behind Leave. Muddy the water all you like.
The reality is that anything UKIP promises can be ignored. They won't be negotiating. Realpolitik will dictate the Brexit deal and realpolitik says we take what the EU offers us - basically EEA membership. No Tory government is going to sacrifice free movement of goods, services and cspital in order to achieve significant reductions in free movement of people - especially when so many Brits live or have second properties in other EU member statrs.
I agree that the Tory party under the control of its current funders isn't going to sacrifice anything in order to reduce free movement of labour, but there's got to be a question about whether it could hold on to power in the event of a Leave vote. As I think a thread over the weekend suggested, a separation of the "centrist" (i.e. pro-globalisation economically right-wing) factions of both the Tory and Labour parties from the "traditional" wings of those parties seems possible, leading to a GE potentially fought with the issue of free movement of people (or anti-immigration nationalism if you prefer) placed centre stage. I don't feel confident that the open borders argument wins that GE regardless of the purported economic upsides.
I imagine most Tory MPs are fine with an EEA-style deal, too, so for a split to occur it would have to come from the grassroots up and it would need relatively popular champions. Chris Grayling, Piri Patel and Nigel Farage standing together is not a great look for centrist voters. That said, I would welcome a realignment with open arms - especially on the left!
'Put aside the arguments for leave or remain the fact that we are lead by such a bunch of drippy pessimists who apparently have no faith in our country is a damn shame.'
There are plenty of frightened old men in the Remain camp for sure. But the people at the top are mostly concerned with their own interests. The EU offers the tantalising prospect of power over hundreds of millions.
Just look at how Blair was dazzled by it, and dreamt of becoming 'President of Europe'.
And how the EU gave him absolutely nothing.
All that gold plating and Blair got nothing. If ever you wanted proof that the UK will be forever treated as an outsider it is that.
Obviously I haven't bothered to read the actual detail of this thread - it's a bit too near to breakfast for too much eurofanatic vituperation, but the central thrust is undoubtedly true, the Leave campaign is a divided mess. Other than urge them to unite, there seems little that can be done. I think there's too much bitter resentment on the Leave.eu side, and too much control freakery on the Vote leave side. I think things may well rest with Boris. I think he's potentially the only one who can save the day.
If Vote Leave dominate and get the designation, and Leave.EU are sidelined, there will be "Leave splits" stories anyway because of the size of Farage's and Aaron Banks's ego, so the best thing for Vote Leave to do would be to just press on with their vision regardless.
I do genuinely wonder how the Electoral Commission can make a choice like this. There are two fundamentally different campaigns and the decision could have a major impact on the outcome of the vote. Surely it's better to split the money?
They may not:
Under our statutory role we must make sure that the lead campaign groups adequately represent those campaigning for each outcome. We can designate a lead campaign group for both referendum outcomes or one outcome or we can decide not to designate a group for an outcome if they do not meet the statutory test.
emphasis added
That then has ramifications for both sides:
If a lead campaign group is appointed on only one side of the referendum then that campaigner does not receive the grant of up to £600,000 or the referendum campaigner broadcasts, the content in the Commission’s public awareness booklet or the link in the booklet to the campaigner’s website.
Applications to be the lead campaign have to be submitted by 31 March The designation decision will be made on the 14th April
The Remain side have a huge advantage in that they not only have the full force of Cameron and the establishment behind them, but also have a single campaign body so the designation will be a formality. That's obviously a great help both organisationally and in terms of fund-raising and message discipline.
Quite how the Leave side managed to get themselves into such a spectacular mess is a wonder to behold. It's not as though the referendum was sprung on them without notice. No coherent message, at least two (or is it three?) campaign groups at each other's throats, no agreement about even the broadest thrust of what they are campaigning for. It's only now - just weeks from the referendum - that they've even begun to consider what the Brexit process, let alone the destination, might look like. This is just extraordinary.
As usual, the messenger is being shot, but Alastair is not arguing in favour of Remain, he is arguing that the Leave side have made a dog's breakfast of their strategy, tactics and organisation. All the points Alastair makes are valid, and those betting on the referendum would be wise to heed them.
Of course, it might be true that fears over migration will trump these shortcomings, but, for that to happen, the Leave side also need to address the economic risks. I really can't see how they can do that now, starting from here. They should have started three years ago.
I'd love to know the process behind the designation of lead Leave slipping a fortnight. Good job I'm not a cynical person...
Let's say that Leave made it all about immigration.
The country votes to leave. The government negotiates membership of the EEA.
That negates Leave's position, but it's not something that they can control.
But it is something the Government (presumably seeking re-election) would be aware of...and might figure in negotiation.....
This 'LEAVE' is whatever the government says it will be' is is an abdication of responsibility - if you believe in something, campaign for it - assuming you can agree on what 'it' is......
You may not have noticed, but UKIP and the Conservatives are different political parties?
They have different visions for the future.
There's a pretty strong argument for a general election post a Leave vote to seek guidance from the voters on the negotiation strategy, but I doubt that our politicians will go for that
You may not have noticed (since we're in condescending mode), but the Conservatives, Labour, Lib Dem, SNP and Green Parties also have different visions for the future - but that is not stopping them campaigning (if not side by side) on the same platform.
Which UKIP platform do you suggest I pay heed to, by the way?
Their Leader's or their MP's?
Ukip is the only party that that is 100% behind Leave. Muddy the water all you like.
Yes, but which LEAVE?
The MP's LEAVE
or
The Leader's LEAVE?
Stop obsessing. Its irrelevant.
This is a referendum about getting a divorce, not selecting the next partner.
It well suits Remain to try and get Leave to focus on one thread and alienate the rest of their supporters but I am optimistic that even the current Leave campaign aren't that stupid.
But the attention is on the industrial heartland of Baden-Wuerttemberg, which votes on Sunday week. Here, remarkably, the Greens have neck and neck with the CDU (it's as though the Green Party were poised to beat the Tories in Birmingham), with their lead candidate much more popular. In crude terms the AfD seem poised to take 9% off the CDU, and the Greens 6% off the SPD. The media are covering this more as "Amazing Green advance" than "Disastrous CDU fall", but it certainly won't help Merkel.
Life is about chances and opportunities, not kicking your heels and wondering.
"Nobody ever lay on their deathbed wishing they had spent more time in the office EU"
Exactly, Leave are the fun lovers, the optimists, the wealth creators and adventurers.
Remain are the federalists, the corporatists obsessed with acronyms, buzzwords and state funded index linked pensions.
John Lennon said:
You may say I'm a dreamer but I'm not the only one.
In the company that I helped to found 13 years ago - and which has grown into a business that employs 25 people or so, with annual revenues well into seven figures - most folk are for Remain. They are concerned - as am I - about losing strategic freedoms we currently enjoy in Europe, which is our second biggest market. EEA membership would be OK, but sub-optimal. A drawn-out FTA negotiation would not be good.
Obviously I haven't bothered to read the actual detail of this thread - it's a bit too near to breakfast for too much eurofanatic vituperation, but the central thrust is undoubtedly true, the Leave campaign is a divided mess. Other than urge them to unite, there seems little that can be done. I think there's too much bitter resentment on the Leave.eu side, and too much control freakery on the Vote leave side. I think things may well rest with Boris. I think he's potentially the only one who can save the day.
If Vote Leave dominate and get the designation, and Leave.EU are sidelined, there will be "Leave splits" stories anyway because of the size of Farage's and Aaron Banks's ego, so the best thing for Vote Leave to do would be to just press on with their vision regardless.
I do genuinely wonder how the Electoral Commission can make a choice like this. There are two fundamentally different campaigns and the decision could have a major impact on the outcome of the vote. Surely it's better to split the money?
They may not:
Under our statutory role we must make sure that the lead campaign groups adequately represent those campaigning for each outcome. We can designate a lead campaign group for both referendum outcomes or one outcome or we can decide not to designate a group for an outcome if they do not meet the statutory test.
emphasis added
That then has ramifications for both sides:
If a lead campaign group is appointed on only one side of the referendum then that campaigner does not receive the grant of up to £600,000 or the referendum campaigner broadcasts, the content in the Commission’s public awareness booklet or the link in the booklet to the campaigner’s website.
Let's say that Leave made it all about immigration.
The country votes to leave. The government negotiates membership of the EEA.
That negates Leave's position, but it's not something that they can control.
But it is something the Government (presumably seeking re-election) would be aware of...and might figure in negotiation.....
This 'LEAVE' is whatever the government says it will be' is is an abdication of responsibility - if you believe in something, campaign for it - assuming you can agree on what 'it' is......
You may not have noticed, but UKIP and the Conservatives are different political parties?
They have different visions for the future.
There's a pretty strong argument for a general election post a Leave vote to seek guidance from the voters on the negotiation strategy, but I doubt that our politicians will go for that
You may not have noticed (since we're in condescending mode), but the Conservatives, Labour, Lib Dem, SNP and Green Parties also have different visions for the future - but that is not stopping them campaigning (if not side by side) on the same platform.
Which UKIP platform do you suggest I pay heed to, by the way?
Their Leader's or their MP's?
Ukip is the only party that that is 100% behind Leave. Muddy the water all you like.
I imagine most Tory MPs are fine with an EEA-style deal, too, so for a split to occur it would have to come from the grassroots up and it would need relatively popular champions. Chris Grayling, Piri Patel and Nigel Farage standing together is not a great look for centrist voters. That said, I would welcome a realignment with open arms - especially on the left!
Well, me too, though I'm not convinced we'd be on the same side of it
I think that fewer Tory MPs than you might imagine are signed up to a globalised liberal worldview rather than a more classic conservatism. At a guess it's 40-50% of the parliamentary party, along with maybe 70% of the parliamentary Labour party due to the strides Blair made in decoupling the PLP from the membership. Plenty of MPs for a "centrist" coalition, but not necessarily one that would survive an election given the disjoint between constituency parties' and MPs' views in both parties.
Comments
Leave's best chance - perhaps it's only realistic chance - is that events, in the form of the migration crisis, do indeed unfold for it and that, plus strong background distaste for the EU, is enough to push it over 50% on a turnout of 60% or lower. However this seems a very plausible scenario to me.
On the other hand if it comes down to which campaign is more coherent, Leave is utterly screwed.
Btw it does make me pause for thought to see that people like Alastair, JackW and Peter from Putney are predicting a Remain walkover.
My default position is a conservative one - REMAIN ... although a lukewarm one. For LEAVE to convince me I have to be assured that there is something decidedly better on offer. Clear, concise and without undue risk matched by a team of leaders who know precisely the direction of travel and are able to enunciate their vision in a cogent fashion.
With the best will in the world, and even many PB LEAVE supporters concede, that hasn't been offered presently.
There is plenty of time for the situation to change but LEAVE haven't started well.
@theousherwood: That was six times Sadiq Khan refused to say how much of an asset Jeremy Corbyn was to his campaign to be a Labour mayor of London.
Incidently she rang her GP at 5.25pm saw him at 5.50 and was admittedto hospital via phone at 6.05 and was being assessed in the Emergency Surgical Ward by 7.00. X-rayed about 9pm and found a bed by about 11pm. There seemed to be a steady little trickle of people before and after her.
I'm also increasingly coming to the view that there would need to be a GE called in the event of a leave vote. I'm not sure how it would play under the FTPA but unless Labour is back under the control of its more rightwing faction, you'd have thought that a combination of Labour and Tory outers would be enough to achieve the outcome.
This royal throne of kings, this scepter'd isle,
This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
This other Eden, demi-paradise,
This fortress built by Nature for herself
Against infection and the hand of war,
This happy breed of men, this little world,
This precious stone set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall,
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands,
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
.......and If I was running the Remain campaign I'd run it
The only good thing most of the time about being a eurosceptic is that at least we are largely right, but gloating at idiot euro-enthusiasts after the fact, once they have sold our country down the river for political expediency, party loyalty or short term gain is pretty small comfort.
I bet the offended-by-everything brigade wrung their hands over that
Rock's 90s suggestion that innocent gunshot deaths in drive-by shootings would disappear if shops started charging $5000 a bullet is still a great idea!
He's never been one for playing the victim.
Better than a QMV vote to allocate 100,000 migrants a year to the UK ?
Better than a number of Eurozone rule changes that screw over the City ?
Better than (in the nicest possibly way) being forced into the Euro over the next decade ?
Better than having to bail out a staggering Eurozone economy (yes I know what they said, but if we are attached to it and push comes to shove, what are we going to do)
Better than .... whatever 27 other countries with their own agenda decide to foist on us through QMV
There is no status quo, there is no certainty. I have no idea what leave needs to be better than do you ?
At least it appears to be written by someone with who speaks English, which is more than can be said for some threads
He explained to me that opposition to 'Thatcherite' policy changes was incredibly strong in the mid-1970s among leading Tories - especially of the posher sort.
These people were very risk averse and pessimistic, arguing that even if things like privatisation might be attractive in the abstract, they were far too risky to attempt with so many things that might go wrong - union trouble, unemployment, social unrest etc. etc.
Much better to stick broadly with the system we had that, yes, was dysfunctional but was preferable to some free market 'leap in the dark'.
It all sounded very familiar.
There is a reason why the referendum is in June (I think all parties are hoping that the refugee disaster starts playing out from July onwards rather than May)...
At one time Leave might have been happy with simply being in EFTA/EEA, but the Farage tendency have latched on to crude anti immigrants as a way to perpetuate their campaign and crude anti immigrant tendencies have latched on to UKIP. The EEA is no use to this bunch. Nowhere is this split more evident than with the UKIP-Carswell split.
The top 4 types of aid spending are on
1. Health 2. Society 3. Education 4. Economy
It is just not going on starving Africans. One of the biggest programs in Africa was on educating 600,000 girls in Nigeria. Nigeria of course does have major oil revenues.
When will your ARSE be articulating its thoughts?
Remain are the federalists, the corporatists obsessed with acronyms, buzzwords and state funded index linked pensions.
John Lennon said:
You may say I'm a dreamer but I'm not the only one.
God luck with that.
http://tinyurl.com/jof9gce
They will dishonestly go into the referendum pretending that Brexit will stop immigration whilst being fully aware that they will very likely settle for an option that allows it to continue as is. All hell will then break loose later on but it will be too late.
I suppose they could keep everybody on board by saying there will be a second referendum to decide whether we join EFTA/EEA in the event of Brexit. It will be a hard sell but unless LEAVE can reconcile the anti-immigration and continued free trade voters they will be hung out to dry before June. They need a credible vision and fast.
Which UKIP platform do you suggest I pay heed to, by the way?
Their Leader's or their MP's?
What REMAIN need is a close poll near the Vote to scare their supporters into the polling booth....a bit like SINDYREF.....
Constituency vote share: SNP 60% (+3), Lab 21% (0), Con 13% (-4), LD 4% (+1)
Regional vote share: SNP 55% (+3), Lab 21% (+2), Con 13% (-4), LD 4% (-2), Green 6% (0)
http://www.tnsglobal.co.uk/press-release/snp-still-dominant-despite-efforts-challenge-record
As, and until, "Scotland's Future", the SNP Bible is updated, the cult members are a little confused, nay, dismayed by the Sainted Nicola's behaviour. Obviously it is all part of a cunning plan, held securely in the third draw down of the locked filing cabinet, in the disused cupboard at the back of the third basement which nobody visits due to being bricked in. But, in due process, when the time is right, it will be brought out in the last minute to great jubilation, exaltation, the singing of heavenly choirs and one or possibly two, sighs of relief as all is explained to the throng.
Yes I'm always amused to read the helpful advice the Remain partisans/'undecided' have for how the Leave campaign should be conducting itself
Of course 60% is plenty !
The clueless no nothings only call 'peak' when it's on the way down..
Well done pulpstar, hopefully a new trend has begun
I was right.
Kind of.
That's going to ruin your self esteem (of course the SNP might well win every constituency)
Trump seems to be strengthening, will win most everything except perhaps Texas (Cruz), although that seems to be tightening.
Estimate of share of contested delegates, including those already decided.
Trump 55%
Cruz 23%
Rubio 14%
Carson 3%
Kasich 3%
Oths 1%
Paul Perrin
If you are handing out #BRexit leaflets in a high Street - these go like hot cakes... Get some from @betteroffout! https://t.co/zhkPgDNyVe
I didn't spot it though !
The spending of money on educating girls on Nigeria is absolutely what we should be doing. I am all in favour in fact of us being quite selfish in the spending of our aid in that we should be also looking to improve our future geo political and trading position.
Likewise the EU regional funds are going to improve the new entrants economies and thus improve the markets for our own goods and services. Eventually Eastern European immigrants will return and if we had any sense we would be using the current situation as a bridge to better relations in the future.
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/197773/EU-Campaigner-Update-6-February-2016.pdf
Applications to be the lead campaign have to be submitted by 31 March
The designation decision will be made on the 14th April
The Remain side have a huge advantage in that they not only have the full force of Cameron and the establishment behind them, but also have a single campaign body so the designation will be a formality. That's obviously a great help both organisationally and in terms of fund-raising and message discipline.
Quite how the Leave side managed to get themselves into such a spectacular mess is a wonder to behold. It's not as though the referendum was sprung on them without notice. No coherent message, at least two (or is it three?) campaign groups at each other's throats, no agreement about even the broadest thrust of what they are campaigning for. It's only now - just weeks from the referendum - that they've even begun to consider what the Brexit process, let alone the destination, might look like. This is just extraordinary.
As usual, the messenger is being shot, but Alastair is not arguing in favour of Remain, he is arguing that the Leave side have made a dog's breakfast of their strategy, tactics and organisation. All the points Alastair makes are valid, and those betting on the referendum would be wise to heed them.
Of course, it might be true that fears over migration will trump these shortcomings, but, for that to happen, the Leave side also need to address the economic risks. I really can't see how they can do that now, starting from here. They should have started three years ago.
The grass roots leave motivation looks a bit like this:
Bloody hooman rights ("We all know the stories... about the illegal immigrant who cannot be deported because, and I am not making this up, he had a pet cat.")
Straight bananas
Pounds and ounces
Unlimited foreigners coming here and taking our jobs
General xenophobia
You don't win the argument by proclaiming your love for immigrants, kilograms, regularly-sized fruit and permanently depressed wages. You win it by predicting economic apocalypse.
Making yourself the Remainian's star striker was always going 2 end in tears Dave. Credibility is everything #Brexit https://t.co/TqUVVWUuxG
There are plenty of frightened old men in the Remain camp for sure. But the people at the top are mostly concerned with their own interests. The EU offers the tantalising prospect of power over hundreds of millions.
Just look at how Blair was dazzled by it, and dreamt of becoming 'President of Europe'.
And how the EU gave him absolutely nothing.
The MP's LEAVE
or
The Leader's LEAVE?
They may not:
Under our statutory role we must make sure that the lead campaign groups adequately represent those campaigning for each outcome. We can designate a lead campaign group for both referendum outcomes or one outcome or we can decide not to designate a group for an outcome if they do not meet the statutory test.
emphasis added
That then has ramifications for both sides:
If a lead campaign group is appointed on only one side of the referendum then that campaigner does not receive the grant of up to £600,000 or the referendum campaigner broadcasts, the content in the Commission’s public awareness booklet or the link in the booklet to the campaigner’s website.
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/194594/Designation-process-for-the-EU-referendum.pdf
Alabama
American Samoa
Arkansas
Colorado
Georgia
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Texas
Vermont
Virginia
I'd be grateful btw.
This is a referendum about getting a divorce, not selecting the next partner.
It well suits Remain to try and get Leave to focus on one thread and alienate the rest of their supporters but I am optimistic that even the current Leave campaign aren't that stupid.
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/
But the attention is on the industrial heartland of Baden-Wuerttemberg, which votes on Sunday week. Here, remarkably, the Greens have neck and neck with the CDU (it's as though the Green Party were poised to beat the Tories in Birmingham), with their lead candidate much more popular. In crude terms the AfD seem poised to take 9% off the CDU, and the Greens 6% off the SPD. The media are covering this more as "Amazing Green advance" than "Disastrous CDU fall", but it certainly won't help Merkel.
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/landtage/baden-wuerttemberg.htm
Rubio should still pick up some delegates from the CD tier. A few...
The EU is too crap and divided to offer us another deal, so.....er.....let's stay in on the one they are offering.
Do you have it as a standard template you paste into
* higher spending limit
* the intriguing sounding "use of certain public rooms"
?
Which Leaver likewise encapsulates all those properties?
I think that fewer Tory MPs than you might imagine are signed up to a globalised liberal worldview rather than a more classic conservatism. At a guess it's 40-50% of the parliamentary party, along with maybe 70% of the parliamentary Labour party due to the strides Blair made in decoupling the PLP from the membership. Plenty of MPs for a "centrist" coalition, but not necessarily one that would survive an election given the disjoint between constituency parties' and MPs' views in both parties.