The BMA recommended it to Junior Doctors! Quite extraordinary.
It looks like junior health minister Alastair Burt has taken the rap and resigned.
One good outcome from this leadership election is that Jeremy Hunt will be removed from the Health Department.
I wouldn't have thought that now would be a good time for a new Health Sec. A change would be regarded as a victory by the JDs, probably rightly so as the only reason to change would be to implement a different policy, which almost certainly will mean conceding ground to what is clearly a pretty militant bunch if they're going to reject something that even their own union recommends.
The JDs are motivated by anti-government politics. Implement the new agreement without their consent.
Just been emailed this by a Labour Brexiteer - I wouldn't normally cite Frankie Boyle, but this paragraph was rather acute
One of the PLP’s main worries will be that Labour’s vote will crumble to Ukip under Corbyn, who won’t produce enough racist mugs and mouse mats to reassure everybody. And, to be fair, it must be galling to a party that invaded Iraq, rendered Libyans to be tortured by Gadaffi and detained asylum seekers with Dickensian cruelty to lose voters on the race issue.
I suspect that many relatively well-off remainers are actually pretty worried that their cosy set up is being threatened.
This is the most depressing aspect of why some people voted leave, the number who thought that, by doing so, they would stick it to 'the rich'. The thing is that it will affect the rich, the struggling, the poor and so on equally badly. The wealth gap they fulminate about will still be the same and, likely because of how unemployment and inflation tends to go, the less well off will actually be affected more,. Of course, the elite leavers won't care, they will be fine, such self harm from the great unwashed was just a means to an end.
Why do you think people voted leave out of spite?
And do you seriously really think even 4% of the population voted out of spite rather than what they thought was best for themselves...
Because they thought they would benefit and were told as such by the leave campaign, that's what all those undeliverable promises were about, that are now dismissed as barely even aspirations. If you look at US politics you can see that a carefully primed electorate will vote in very large numbers against their interest, ten percent or more.
That isn't voting out of spite. That's voting for self interest (albeit based on assertions that may not have been 100% accurate).
Spite would be voting for things that you know would harm you but would harm others more.. You'll need a better example than the one above to convenience me anyone voted out of spite..
@lindayueh: #Aviva suspended dealing on its £1.8bn UK property fund, <24 hours after #StandardLife due to high outflows #Brexit https://t.co/eCBDqlT2XI</p>
It's absolutely standard. We'll see more along these lines. Do we really insist that property funds carry out a fire-sale of their portfolios when investors want their money back? Having said that, this is why I minimise my exposure to property .
I suspect that many relatively well-off remainers are actually pretty worried that their cosy set up is being threatened.
This is the most depressing aspect of why some people voted leave, the number who thought that, by doing so, they would stick it to 'the rich'. The thing is that it will affect the rich, the struggling, the poor and so on equally badly. The wealth gap they fulminate about will still be the same and, likely because of how unemployment and inflation tends to go, the less well off will actually be affected more,. Of course, the elite leavers won't care, they will be fine, such self harm from the great unwashed was just a means to an end.
People largely voted leave because they believe there will be a better society for their children at the end of the initial turbulence, but no, they won't lose sleep over bankers' pensions diminishing and BTL landlords' 'assets' depreciating.
It's why Remain lost. They simply don't understand the lives most people live.
Without trying to frighten the financial life out of people, how much do you think Remain would have achieved in the vote? 25%?
If the UK economy tanked by 25% i.e. more than three times worse than the 2008 crash, we'd be back to 1996.
For most people, including pbers, the economy is entirely personal. I've felt poor when the country was prosperous, rich when its been struggling. Some people are highly geared and will sweat every time there's a hint of a rate rise. Others wouldn't care.
If we've learned one thing about the referendum campaign (and I do hope it's more than that), you can't talk macroeconomic indicators to poor people.
That is absolutely correct. But a lot of Leave voters are now expecting a lot more public spending, lower taxes and higher wages. That's what they were promised. Hopefully, that's what they will get.
Brexit leaders 'leaving the boat' - EU Commission boss Juncker
Quelle Surprise! Who bothers what he says anyway? He'll be out of a job anytime soon if Angel Merkel has her way .....pity she didn't listen to Cameron who strongly but alas unsuccessfully opposed his original appointment.
What makes me smile everyday since 24th June is that the Eurocrats have a diminishing relevance in our lives. Junker's massive hissy fit embodied everything that's wrong with the EU.
It's so liberating to finally be free.
He just lost the world's fifth largest economy out of his club during his watch.
Any other CEO who masterminded that would be out on his ear. The EU? Not even thought to be an option.
It is astonishing how far removed the EU is from commercial reality. It shows its core purpose not about trade at all, but about forming a united nation. By stealth. We have never had any suggestion that any arrangement we have entered into was subjugating our sovereignty to that of a European super-state. But all of a sudden, once we leave, we have our Establishment saying well, of course it's too difficult to leave, we're bound in too tightly. Well, your bluff has been called, your scheme turned upside down, your chips pissed on.
I wonder how much longer that claim to be the world's 5th largest economy will be valid.
I suspect in notional terms we no longer are.....
One more claim that will be going is the EU as the largest open economy.
Without the UK it falls definitively behind both USA and China, beyond the range of margnis of error.
I suspect that many relatively well-off remainers are actually pretty worried that their cosy set up is being threatened.
This is the most depressing aspect of why some people voted leave, the number who thought that, by doing so, they would stick it to 'the rich'. The thing is that it will affect the rich, the struggling, the poor and so on equally badly. The wealth gap they fulminate about will still be the same and, likely because of how unemployment and inflation tends to go, the less well off will actually be affected more,. Of course, the elite leavers won't care, they will be fine, such self harm from the great unwashed was just a means to an end.
Why do you think people voted leave out of spite?
And do you seriously really think even 4% of the population voted out of spite rather than what they thought was best for themselves...
Because they thought they would benefit and were told as such by the leave campaign, that's what all those undeliverable promises were about, that are now dismissed as barely even aspirations. If you look at US politics you can see that a carefully primed electorate will vote in very large numbers against their interest, ten percent or more.
That isn't voting out of spite. That's voting for self interest (albeit based on assertions that may not have been 100% accurate).
Spite would be voting for things that you know would harm you but would harm others more.. You'll need a better example than the one above to convenience me anyone voted out of spite..
That's not the meaning of spite, spite is purely to hurt someone else, the effect on the originator isn't part of the equation. Also, US voters would similarly not consider themselves as being harmed, despite the actual outcone.
I can't believe that so many of the vociferous PB remainers are still in denial! We are leaving the EU, get over it.
Were the result reversed the eurosceptics would never have rolled over. Indeed Farage himself said a tight result should trigger a second referendum.
No way The 48 will rollover while a uneasy coalition of non-voters, bitter xenophobic failures and rightwing frothers sets about wilfully destroying the country and the economy. Sorry to break it to you.
Bob, it's over mate, you need to move on. We're out of the EU. Real life isn't like life on PB.(or stop thrashing off and get on with making it work.
Easier said than done, of course.of a lot.
I agree entirely, but both sides of the debate are swimming in circles. The Guardian article today really seems to point to the failure of our political establishment to plan for the unthinkable. You can say that it's all Gove and Johnson's fault, and they undoubtedly have a huge part in it, but the Remain camp never really tried to bring all the disaffected on board. Even Cameron was worried that Remain was too "metropolitan elite", but by the time he realised it, it was too late. I think the truth is that the EU is deeply unpopular in this country and the immigration crisis has scared some people into pulling up the drawbridge. For me, it was never about immigration, although living and working where I do, I can understand the concerns. We needed a positive case for "some" of the EU, but not all of it. Remain couldn't make that argument, and Cameron's deal was nowhere near good enough. The sad truth of it is that it has been so badly handled on both sides that we might end up deep in the brown stuff, but we need to crack on.
I agree to a large extent. The Remain case was built on the argument that it will be worse out than in, which is not a great sell - especially when up against promises of higher public spending, lower taxes, much lower immigration and increased wages. I always expected Leave to win for that reason: in a campaign they were always going to have the best calling cards. The problem is that now they have to deliver the undeliverable.
If brexit goes titsup, *everybody* (excepting the hardcore tory remainiacs) is going to put the blame in just one place:
'Crispin Blunt, the Conservative MP who chairs the foreign affairs committee, told Oliver Letwin that it was a “dereliction of duty” for David Cameron not to make any contingency planning for a Brexit vote. There were only two possible outcomes from the referendum, he said. And, since Cameron said he was planning to remain as prime minister whatever the result, he should have planned for a leave vote, he said.'
Iain Martin, a Leave supporting journalist explains why neither campaign had a plan for Brexit Leave because they couldn't agree to anything and because any plan they did come up with would be so full of holes that opponents would pull it to shreds. Leave being very reasonable in the view of Mr Martin. Remain didn't have a plan for the Armageddon they were predicting should people be stupid enough to vote Leave, because that would be admitting the possibility of defeat. Grossly irresponsible and arrogant in Mr Martin's opinion.
I suspect that many relatively well-off remainers are actually pretty worried that their cosy set up is being threatened.
This is the most depressing aspect of why some people voted leave, the number who thought that, by doing so, they would stick it to 'the rich'. The thing is that it will affect the rich, the struggling, the poor and so on equally badly. The wealth gap they fulminate about will still be the same and, likely because of how unemployment and inflation tends to go, the less well off will actually be affected more,. Of course, the elite leavers won't care, they will be fine, such self harm from the great unwashed was just a means to an end.
Why do you think people voted leave out of spite?
And do you seriously really think even 4% of the population voted out of spite rather than what they thought was best for themselves...
Because they thought they would benefit and were told as such by the leave campaign, that's what all those undeliverable promises were about, that are now dismissed as barely even aspirations. If you look at US politics you can see that a carefully primed electorate will vote in very large numbers against their interest, ten percent or more.
That isn't voting out of spite. That's voting for self interest (albeit based on assertions that may not have been 100% accurate).
Spite would be voting for things that you know would harm you but would harm others more.. You'll need a better example than the one above to convenience me anyone voted out of spite..
That's not the meaning of spite, spite is purely to hurt someone else, the effect on the originator isn't part of the equation. Also, US voters would similarly not consider themselves as being harmed, despite the actual outcone.
But you are saying that people were voting out of spite for things that they thought would improve their lives. That isn't spite in any shape or form - that's self interest..
The polls would by then be showing REMAIN at about 65/35 (not least cause immigration would have largely ceased)
I doubt it'll move that far, although I could see it going 60/40.
I guess one thing that will help Re-remain a bit in the re-referendum if it's a couple of years away is that a lot of the 3 million EU citizens currently in the UK aren't going to wait around taking a chance on whether the UK gives them the rights they currently have. They're going to naturalize.
Leave because they couldn't agree to anything and because any plan they did come up with would be so full of holes that opponents would pull it to shreds. Leave being very reasonable in the view of Mr Martin. Remain didn't have a plan for the Armageddon they were predicting should people be stupid enough to vote Leave, because that would be admitting the possibility of defeat. Grossly irresponsible and arrogant in Mr Martin's opinion.
But those are entirely contradictory.
Which of the non-agreed and full of holes Leave options does he think remain should have planned for? And had they done so, it would have been not agreed and full of holes.
Iain is a fine journalist, but he is yet another Outer whining that Remainers will not fix their shit. It's tiresome.
@lindayueh: #Aviva suspended dealing on its £1.8bn UK property fund, <24 hours after #StandardLife due to high outflows #Brexit https://t.co/eCBDqlT2XI</p>
It is a bit scary. Brexiteers who say they aren't worried are either deluded or fanatical.
Someone downthread asked if LEAVERS would LEAVE at any price. Well, I voted LEAVE but think it's absurd to say there is no price which would be too onerous. If LEAVING means my older daughter's life prospects are harmed, then I will deeply regret my vote.
It's far too early to tell, but initial signs are a tad unnerving.
I also disagree with those downthread who say Brexit is Brexit. We're definitely out. No we're not.
Consider. We haven't triggered A50 and we are unlikely to do so until after the German election next year (doing it before then makes no sense, unless the markets force us).
By that point we *could* be in deep recession, with surging inflation and unemployment, a property price crash, investment collapsing, London seizing up, our deficit dragging us ever deeper into an ever darker abyss.
Nice.
The polls would by then be showing REMAIN at about 65/35 (not least cause immigration would have largely ceased), and my guess is any prime minister at that point would call a revote, and we'd end up staying.
Stop having kittens. Property is too illiquid to be traded in a normal fund as Standard Life and Avocado (among others) have been attempting to do. If investors want to pull their cash out tomorrow the sale of the property won't happen overnight. It's a stupid investment vehicle which has hopefully been banished to exile now that the weaknesses are there for everyone to see.
I can't believe that so many of the vociferous PB remainers are still in denial! We are leaving the EU, get over it.
Were the result reversed the eurosceptics would never have rolled over. Indeed Farage himself said a tight result should trigger a second referendum.
No way The 48 will rollover while a uneasy coalition of non-voters, bitter xenophobic failures and rightwing frothers sets about wilfully destroying the country and the economy. Sorry to break it to you.
Bob, it's over mate, you need to move on. We're out of the EU. Real life isn't like life on PB.(or stop thrashing off and get on with making it work.
Easier said than done, of course.of a lot.
I agree entirely, but both sides of the debate are swimming in circles. The Guardian article today really seems to point to the failure of our political establishment to plan for the unthinkable. You can say that it's all Gove and Johnson's fault, and they undoubtedly have a huge part in it, but the Remain camp never really tried to bring all the disaffected on board. Even Cameron was worried that Remain was too "metropolitan elite", but by the time he realised it, it was too late. I think the truth is that the EU is deeply unpopular in this country and the immigration crisis has scared some people into pulling up the drawbridge. For me, it was never about immigration, although living and working where I do, I can understand the concerns. We needed a positive case for "some" of the EU, but not all of it. Remain couldn't make that argument, and Cameron's deal was nowhere near good enough. The sad truth of it is that it has been so badly handled on both sides that we might end up deep in the brown stuff, but we need to crack on.
I agree to a large extent. The Remain case was built on the argument that it will be worse out than in, which is not a great sell - especially when up against promises of higher public spending, lower taxes, much lower immigration and increased wages. I always expected Leave to win for that reason: in a campaign they were always going to have the best calling cards. The problem is that now they have to deliver the undeliverable.
They won't deliver. They never had a plan and they don't have one now. Remainers will be the ones to pick up the pieces.
No Leadsom present at a party unity karaoke session after the 1922 hustings last night. All the other candidates were there and most other MPs. Anyone who thinks Leadsom can unite the party let alone the country needs their head examining.
I suspect that many relatively well-off remainers are actually pretty worried that their cosy set up is being threatened.
This is the most depressing aspect of why some people voted leave, the number who thought that, by doing so, they would stick it to 'the rich'. The thing is that it will affect the rich, the struggling, the poor and so on equally badly. The wealth gap they fulminate about will still be the same and, likely because of how unemployment and inflation tends to go, the less well off will actually be affected more,. Of course, the elite leavers won't care, they will be fine, such self harm from the great unwashed was just a means to an end.
Why do you think people voted leave out of spite?
And do you seriously really think even 4% of the population voted out of spite rather than what they thought was best for themselves...
Because they thought they would benefit and were told as such by the leave campaign, that's what all those undeliverable promises were about, that are now dismissed as barely even aspirations. If you look at US politics you can see that a carefully primed electorate will vote in very large numbers against their interest, ten percent or more.
That isn't voting out of spite. That's voting for self interest (albeit based on assertions that may not have been 100% accurate).
Spite would be voting for things that you know would harm you but would harm others more.. You'll need a better example than the one above to convenience me anyone voted out of spite..
That's not the meaning of spite, spite is purely to hurt someone else, the effect on the originator isn't part of the equation. Also, US voters would similarly not consider themselves as being harmed, despite the actual outcone.
But you are saying that people were voting out of spite for things that they thought would improve their lives. That isn't spite in any shape or form - that's self interest..
The two are not mutually exclusive,. Offer people a supposed win/win situation and of course they will vote for it.
I have to say that I find it hard to weep for people who have invested in property funds,
+1. I also find it hard to believe that this has anything to do with Brexit. I saw stories about these funds back in February...
There are plenty of post-referendum economic experts, many of whom are just thrashing around amidst the plethora of indicators.
The economy has been cooling for two years. Commercial property has been red flagged for, what, nine months at least? Yields have been dropping for a long time, but it's not a sector I follow.
However, there's clearly going to be no comforting people on here (I see we have Wobbly Sean today), and no one appears to read anything more demanding than Twitter, so I shall give up for the afternoon and go and tackle the back border.
@lindayueh: #Aviva suspended dealing on its £1.8bn UK property fund, <24 hours after #StandardLife due to high outflows #Brexit https://t.co/eCBDqlT2XI</p>
It is a bit scary. Brexiteers who say they aren't worried are either deluded or fanatical.
Someone downthread asked if LEAVERS would LEAVE at any price. Well, I voted LEAVE but think it's absurd to say there is no price which would be too onerous. If LEAVING means my older daughter's life prospects are harmed, then I will deeply regret my vote.
It's far too early to tell, but initial signs are a tad unnerving.
I also disagree with those downthread who say Brexit is Brexit. We're definitely out. No we're not.
Consider. We haven't triggered A50 and we are unlikely to do so until after the German election next year (doing it before then makes no sense, unless the markets force us).
By that point we *could* be in deep recession, with surging inflation and unemployment, a property price crash, investment collapsing, London seizing up, our deficit dragging us ever deeper into an ever darker abyss.
Nice.
The polls would by then be showing REMAIN at about 65/35 (not least cause immigration would have largely ceased), and my guess is any prime minister at that point would call a revote, and we'd end up staying.
You seem a little shell shocked. Post Brexitic Stress Disordered.
The BMA recommended it to Junior Doctors! Quite extraordinary.
It looks like junior health minister Alastair Burt has taken the rap and resigned.
One good outcome from this leadership election is that Jeremy Hunt will be removed from the Health Department.
I wouldn't have thought that now would be a good time for a new Health Sec. A change would be regarded as a victory by the JDs, probably rightly so as the only reason to change would be to implement a different policy, which almost certainly will mean conceding ground to what is clearly a pretty militant bunch if they're going to reject something that even their own union recommends.
The JDs are motivated by anti-government politics. Implement the new agreement without their consent.
I agree. Changing the Health Sec after this is all sorted might be a good idea - or might not, I've no particular beef with the job Hunt's doing. But to reshuffle him now risks the JDs thinking that they're winning and so reinforcing the militancy. It also risks a new Health Secretary offering further concessions in an attempt to demonstrate 'goodwill'.
I get what May is trying to achieve with her stance on EU nationals, to keep as much bargaining power as possible, in theory. But I think it's been played badly. It wasn't necessary to make the comment, and to be honest there is zero risk of us accepting EU nationals while brits get kicked out of european countries (and I say that as a brit immigrant in the EU), it just wouldn't happen. Brits in EU countries are not a problem for any other governments (even in Spain it's still a net positive for the economy), they have no interest in deporting us unless it's a tit-for-tat. The EU wouldn't do deportations if we didn't start it first.
So May made a mistake there, she put something on the table that was nowhere near the table. If she had said EU nationals can stay, brits abroad would have been safe too. She has in fact made our position less secure than it was previously.
I say that as someone still hoping May wins (although as a lefty remainer this is because she's the best chance of continuity EU-lite/EEA we have left)
The official Spanish stance is that Brits might have to leave Spain. We need an EU wide settlement which is why her stance makes sense.
Indeed. I can imagine those squealing about this would be squealing twice as loudly if we gave an unlimited right to residency and their wasn't reciprocity.
To see Leavers queuing up to demand we do this is falling in the extreme. This is the consequence of their advocacy.
I've never been a supporter of unilateral disarmament. I'm surprised to see so many sensible people advocate it.
Exactly.
It would be more like China's No First Use policy than unilateral disarmament.
@lindayueh: #Aviva suspended dealing on its £1.8bn UK property fund, <24 hours after #StandardLife due to high outflows #Brexit https://t.co/eCBDqlT2XI</p>
It is a bit scary. Brexiteers who say they aren't worried are either deluded or fanatical.
Someone downthread asked if LEAVERS would LEAVE at any price. Well, I voted LEAVE but think it's absurd to say there is no price which would be too onerous. If LEAVING means my older daughter's life prospects are harmed, then I will deeply regret my vote.
It's far too early to tell, but initial signs are a tad unnerving.
I also disagree with those downthread who say Brexit is Brexit. We're definitely out. No we're not.
Consider. We haven't triggered A50 and we are unlikely to do so until after the German election next year (doing it before then makes no sense, unless the markets force us).
By that point we *could* be in deep recession, with surging inflation and unemployment, a property price crash, investment collapsing, London seizing up, our deficit dragging us ever deeper into an ever darker abyss.
Nice.
The polls would by then be showing REMAIN at about 65/35 (not least cause immigration would have largely ceased), and my guess is any prime minister at that point would call a revote, and we'd end up staying.
You seem a little shell shocked. Post Brexitic Stress Disordered.
@lindayueh: #Aviva suspended dealing on its £1.8bn UK property fund, <24 hours after #StandardLife due to high outflows #Brexit https://t.co/eCBDqlT2XI</p>
It is a bit scary. Brexiteers who say they aren't worried are either deluded or fanatical.
Someone downthread asked if LEAVERS would LEAVE at any price. Well, I voted LEAVE but think it's absurd to say there is no price which would be too onerous. If LEAVING means my older daughter's life prospects are harmed, then I will deeply regret my vote.
It's far too early to tell, but initial signs are a tad unnerving.
I also disagree with those downthread who say Brexit is Brexit. We're definitely out. No we're not.
Consider. We haven't triggered A50 and we are unlikely to do so until after the German election next year (doing it before then makes no sense, unless the markets force us).
By that point we *could* be in deep recession, with surging inflation and unemployment, a property price crash, investment collapsing, London seizing up, our deficit dragging us ever deeper into an ever darker abyss.
Nice.
The polls would by then be showing REMAIN at about 65/35 (not least cause immigration would have largely ceased), and my guess is any prime minister at that point would call a revote, and we'd end up staying.
Yes that was me: I have repeatedly asked the fanatics on here what their threshold for throwing in their cards on Brexit would be. Most have found evermore elaborate ways to avoid answering the question.
So far I have had but one definitive response. This was from 'Wee Jonnie' who said 3 million on the dole would indeed be a price worth paying for Brexit. As distasteful as I found his answer I at least gave him credit for having the cojones to admit it.
I still think it will be May but Leadsom v Corbyn v Farron v Nuttall would be fascinating
It would be terrifying. I would vote for Farron – the only vaguely sensible option – in a heartbeat in such a scenario.
Who would lose, and then you could enjoy another couple of months of bitching and complaining about how the result wasn't fair and you were robbed and the Tories/Labour/UKIP were destroying your life/family/town/country/universe (delete according to prefered level of hyperbole at the time)
No Leadsom present at a party unity karaoke session after the 1922 hustings last night. All the other candidates were there and most other MPs. Anyone who thinks Leadsom can unite the party let alone the country needs their head examining.
Can you imagine Corbyn joining the PLP for a sing along?
Labour should be worried - the Tories are coming together (one step at a time).
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
@Jobabob The correct answer is that no matter what calamity befalls Britain in the coming years, Leavers will be unable to discern any causal connection between Brexit and it. So the question does not arise.
I can't believe that so many of the vociferous PB remainers are still in denial! We are leaving the EU, get over it.
No way The 48 will rollover while a uneasy coalition of non-voters, bitter xenophobic failures and rightwing frothers sets about wilfully destroying the country and the economy. Sorry to break it to you.
Bob, it's over mate, you need to move on. We're out of the EU. Real life isn't like life on PB.(or that there London, for that matter). For every tweet that you and Scott share showing that some poor mug put on the spot by a TV crew has had a Brepiphany, I'll show you whole swathes of normal punters who couldn't give a flying fuck what you or anyone else posts on here. It's happening, and we need all the major political parties to stop thrashing off and get on with making it work.
Easier said than done, of course. In the real world the likelihood is that demand will decrease, investments will be frozen and government income will fall. That means public spending cuts and it means tax increases. That's what making it work will look like. And my guess is that at that stage normal punters are going to care a hell of a lot.
I agree entirely, but both sides of the debate are swimming in circles. The Guardian article today really seems to point to the failure of our political establishment to plan for the unthinkable. You can say that it's all Gove and Johnson's fault, and they undoubtedly have a huge part in it, but the Remain camp never really tried to bring all the disaffected on board. Even Cameron was worried that Remain was too "metropolitan elite", but by the time he realised it, it was too late. I think the truth is that the EU is deeply unpopular in this country and the immigration crisis has scared some people into pulling up SNIP The sad truth of it is that it has been so badly handled on both sides that we might end up deep in the brown stuff, but we need to crack on.
He called us - his own voters - Little Englanders.
He did this very late in the campaign. We noticed. And won't forgive him either.
He got that right – the Little Englanders bit.
There you go again, Bob. That attitude, right there, is why the country may well be on it's arse very soon.
Why? Isolationism and xenophobia are attitudes to be exposed, not defended.
@Jobabob The correct answer is that no matter what calamity befalls Britain in the coming years, Leavers will be unable to discern any causal connection between Brexit and it. So the question does not arise.
And in the long run, it's doubtful we'll ever know. Unless the EU hits either boom or bust.
@Jobabob The correct answer is that no matter what calamity befalls Britain in the coming years, Leavers will be unable to discern any causal connection between Brexit and it. So the question does not arise.
I still think it will be May but Leadsom v Corbyn v Farron v Nuttall would be fascinating
It would be terrifying. I would vote for Farron – the only vaguely sensible option – in a heartbeat in such a scenario.
Who would lose, and then you could enjoy another couple of months of bitching and complaining about how the result wasn't fair and you were robbed and the Tories/Labour/UKIP were destroying your life/family/town/country/universe (delete according to prefered level of hyperbole at the time)
@lindayueh: #Aviva suspended dealing on its £1.8bn UK property fund, <24 hours after #StandardLife due to high outflows #Brexit https://t.co/eCBDqlT2XI</p>
It is a bit scary. Brexiteers who say they aren't worried are either deluded or fanatical.
Someone downthread asked if LEAVERS would LEAVE at any price. Well, I voted LEAVE but think it's absurd to say there is no price which would be too onerous. If LEAVING means my older daughter's life prospects are harmed, then I will deeply regret my vote.
It's far too early to tell, but initial signs are a tad unnerving.
I also disagree with those downthread who say Brexit is Brexit. We're definitely out. No we're not.
Consider. We haven't triggered A50 and we are unlikely to do so until after the German election next year (doing it before then makes no sense, unless the markets force us).
By that point we *could* be in deep recession, with surging inflation and unemployment, a property price crash, investment collapsing, London seizing up, our deficit dragging us ever deeper into an ever darker abyss.
Nice.
The polls would by then be showing REMAIN at about 65/35 (not least cause immigration would have largely ceased), and my guess is any prime minister at that point would call a revote, and we'd end up staying.
Yes that was me: I have repeatedly asked the fanatics on here what their threshold for throwing in their cards on Brexit would be. Most have found evermore elaborate ways to avoid answering the question.
So far I have had but one definitive response. This was from 'Wee Jonnie' who said 3 million on the dole would indeed be a price worth paying for Brexit. As distasteful as I found his answer I at least gave him credit for having the cojones to admit it.
PSA:
The reason you gain few responses is that you're not a very useful or interesting interlocutor.
You seem to want to pose as the critical adult, rolling your eyes at what the nasty electorate hath wrought.
Southam, gloomy as he is, will at least have a conversation. Ditto Topping and several others.
You're just another Jeremiah pronouncing Brexit an utter disaster, twelve days after the vote. It's dull.
I can't believe that so many of the vociferous PB remainers are still in denial! We are leaving the EU, get over it.
No way The 48 will rollover while a uneasy coalition of non-voters, bitter xenophobic failures and rightwing frothers sets about wilfully destroying the country and the economy. Sorry to break it to you.
Bob, it's over mate, you need to move on. We're out of the EU. Real life isn't like life on PB.(or that there London, for that matter). For every tweet that you and Scott share showing that some poor mug put on the spot by a TV crew has had a Brepiphany, I'll show you whole swathes of normal punters who couldn't give a flying fuck what you or anyone else posts on here. It's happening, and we need all the major political parties to stop thrashing off and get on with making it work.
Easier said than done, of course. In the real world the likelihood is that demand will decrease, investments will be frozen and government income will fall. That means public spending cuts and it means tax increases. That's what making it work will look like. And my guess is that at that stage normal punters are going to care a hell of a lot.
I agree entirely, but both sides of the debate are swimming in circles. The Guardian article today really seems to point to the failure of our political establishment to plan for the unthinkable. You can say that it's all Gove and Johnson's fault, and they undoubtedly have a huge part in it, but the Remain camp never really tried to bring all the disaffected on board. Even Cameron was worried that Remain was too "metropolitan elite", but by the time he realised it, it was too late. I think the truth is that the EU is deeply unpopular in this country and the immigration crisis has scared some people into pulling up SNIP The sad truth of it is that it has been so badly handled on both sides that we might end up deep in the brown stuff, but we need to crack on.
He called us - his own voters - Little Englanders.
He did this very late in the campaign. We noticed. And won't forgive him either.
He got that right – the Little Englanders bit.
There you go again, Bob. That attitude, right there, is why the country may well be on it's arse very soon.
Why? Isolationism and xenophobia are attitudes to be exposed, not defended.
No point now, the vote has happened. Time to move on.
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
Dear fucking God a world where dinosaur Bill Cash isn't wheeled out to remind us of the bad old days but one wherein he is a relevant participant in today's politics.
No Leadsom present at a party unity karaoke session after the 1922 hustings last night. All the other candidates were there and most other MPs. Anyone who thinks Leadsom can unite the party let alone the country needs their head examining.
Can you imagine Corbyn joining the PLP for a sing along?
Labour should be worried - the Tories are coming together (one step at a time).
The more I step back the more Leadsom begins to look like the Tory Corbyn. Thankfully we won't have a situation where UKIP entryists sign up on mass to vote for her if she makes the ballot.
I'm really beginning to hope that MPs block her from making the final two. Previously jt was just a vague, well it would be nice, but I'm really worried that she will stoke up a bunch if anti-immigration rhetoric and push May into unfavourable positions on immigration in order to win over the membership.
@lindayueh: #Aviva suspended dealing on its £1.8bn UK property fund, <24 hours after #StandardLife due to high outflows #Brexit https://t.co/eCBDqlT2XI</p>
It is a bit scary. Brexiteers who say they aren't worried are either deluded or fanatical.
Someone downthread asked if LEAVERS would LEAVE at any price. Well, I voted LEAVE but think it's absurd to say there is no price which would be too onerous. If LEAVING means my older daughter's life prospects are harmed, then I will deeply regret my vote.
It's far too early to tell, but initial signs are a tad unnerving.
I also disagree with those downthread who say Brexit is Brexit. We're definitely out. No we're not.
Consider. We haven't triggered A50 and we are unlikely to do so until after the German election next year (doing it before then makes no sense, unless the markets force us).
By that point we *could* be in deep recession, with surging inflation and unemployment, a property price crash, investment collapsing, London seizing up, our deficit dragging us ever deeper into an ever darker abyss.
Nice.
The polls would by then be showing REMAIN at about 65/35 (not least cause immigration would have largely ceased), and my guess is any prime minister at that point would call a revote, and we'd end up staying.
You seem a little shell shocked. Post Brexitic Stress Disordered.
Man up Sean for gods sake
I'm entirely manned up, and not really THAT wobbly.
I'm just pointing out possible political futures. Which is what this site is about. And one of the futurities - just one, but nonetheless entirely possible - is that the entire economy has a heart attack, and we all get the shakes and decide we'd quite like to STAY after all.
I get that, but what does "Stay" look like now? The status quo doesn't seem possible- or palatable to many. Does it mean further integration? Joining the Euro? An EU army? Surely if we decide we're better off in, the EU will want us to fully sign up, not the half arsed status we had before. Could that be sold on the Leaver region's doorstep?
I can't believe that so many of the vociferous PB remainers are still in denial! We are leaving the EU, get over it.
No way The 48 will rollover while a uneasy coalition of non-voters, bitter xenophobic failures and rightwing frothers sets about wilfully destroying the country and the economy. Sorry to break it to you.
Bob, it's over mate, you need to move on. We're out of the EU. Real life isn't like life on PB.(or that there London, for that matter). SNIP
SNIP
SNIPEven Cameron was worried that Remain was too "metropolitan elite", but by the time he realised it, it was too late. I think the truth is that the EU is deeply unpopular in this country and the immigration crisis has scared some people into pulling up SNIP The sad truth of it is that it has been so badly handled on both sides that we might end up deep in the brown stuff, but we need to crack on.
He called us - his own voters - Little Englanders.
He did this very late in the campaign. We noticed. And won't forgive him either.
He got that right – the Little Englanders bit.
There you go again, Bob. That attitude, right there, is why the country may well be on it's arse very soon.
Why? Isolationism and xenophobia are attitudes to be exposed, not defended.
No point now, the vote has happened. Time to move on.
No. To be clear for the hard of reading: The 48 are not going to roll over while an uneasy coalition of bitter wealth-hating failures, xenophobic myopic Little Englanders and rabid rightwing nutjobs set about destroying our country and economy. We are going to place every possible barrier in your path and make it as hard as possible for you to take a single step towards your fanatical dream.
I'm really beginning to hope that MPs block her from making the final two. Previously jt was just a vague, well it would be nice, but I'm really worried that she will stoke up a bunch if anti-immigration rhetoric and push May into unfavourable positions on immigration in order to win over the membership.
Unfavourable to the city EEA/EFTA libertarians with comfortable lives, to the north working class, not so much.
I can't believe that so many of the vociferous PB remainers are still in denial! We are leaving the EU, get over it.
No way The 48 will rollover while a uneasy coalition of non-voters, bitter xenophobic failures and rightwing frothers sets about wilfully destroying the country and the economy. Sorry to break it to you.
Bob, it's over mate, you need to move on. We're out of the EU. Real life isn't like life on PB.(or that there London, for that matter). For every tweet that you and Scott share showing that some poor mug put on the spot by a TV crew has had a Brepiphany, I'll show you whole swathes of normal punters who couldn't give a flying fuck what you or anyone else posts on here. It's happening, and we need all the major political parties to stop thrashing off and get on with making it work.
Easier said than done, of course. In the real world the likelihood is that demand will decrease, investments will be frozen and government income will fall. That means public spending cuts and it means tax increases. That's what making it work will look like. And my guess is that at that stage normal punters are going to care a hell of a lot.
I agree entirely, but both sides of the debate are swimming in circles. The Guardian article today really seems to point to the failure of our political establishment to plan for the unthinkable. You can say that it's all Gove and Johnson's fault, and they undoubtedly have a huge part in it, but the Remain camp never really tried to bring all the disaffected on board. Even Cameron was worried that Remain was too "metropolitan elite", but by the time he realised it, it was too late. I think the truth is that the EU is deeply unpopular in this country and the immigration crisis has scared some people into pulling up SNIP The sad truth of it is that it has been so badly handled on both sides that we might end up deep in the brown stuff, but we need to crack on.
He called us - his own voters - Little Englanders.
He did this very late in the campaign. We noticed. And won't forgive him either.
He got that right – the Little Englanders bit.
There you go again, Bob. That attitude, right there, is why the country may well be on it's arse very soon.
Why? Isolationism and xenophobia are attitudes to be exposed, not defended.
So you genuinely believe there are 17 million xenophobic racists in the country after June 23rd?
I'm really beginning to hope that MPs block her from making the final two. Previously jt was just a vague, well it would be nice, but I'm really worried that she will stoke up a bunch if anti-immigration rhetoric and push May into unfavourable positions on immigration in order to win over the membership.
Unfavourable to the city EEA/EFTA libertarians with comfortable lives, to the north working class, not so much.
Oh well, pandering to Little Englander attitudes is not wise.
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's a tricky one there are pros and cons to each strategy. I think probably the better one is to be so dominant in the MPs that you either force everyone to capitulate or at least give the members severe pause for thought in terms of thinking about not confirming you etc
I can't believe that so many of the vociferous PB remainers are still in denial! We are leaving the EU, get over it.
No way The 48 will rollover while a uneasy coalition of non-voters, bitter xenophobic failures and rightwing frothers sets about wilfully destroying the country and the economy. Sorry to break it to you.
Bob, it's over mate, you need to move on. We're out of the EU. Real life isn't like life on PB.(or that there London, for that matter). SNIP
SNIP
SNIPEven Cameron was worried that Remain was too "metropolitan elite", but by the time he realised it, it was too late. I think the truth is that the EU is deeply unpopular in this country and the immigration crisis has scared some people into pulling up SNIP The sad truth of it is that it has been so badly handled on both sides that we might end up deep in the brown stuff, but we need to crack on.
He called us - his own voters - Little Englanders.
He did this very late in the campaign. We noticed. And won't forgive him either.
He got that right – the Little Englanders bit.
There you go again, Bob. That attitude, right there, is why the country may well be on it's arse very soon.
Why? Isolationism and xenophobia are attitudes to be exposed, not defended.
No point now, the vote has happened. Time to move on.
No. To be clear for the hard of reading: The 48 are not going to roll over while an uneasy coalition of bitter wealth-hating failures, xenophobic myopic Little Englanders and rabid rightwing nutjobs set about destroying our country and economy. We are going to place every possible barrier in your path and make it as hard as possible for you to take a single step towards your fanatical dream.
Get used to it, captain.
You dreaming, the attention span of the 90% of the population who are not that interested in politics is about to expire. 2-3% will fight the good fight, 45% will get bored in a few more days, certainly by the time the Tory leadership election is resolved, and get on with their lives. Only the terminally pissed off like you will care, and you are welcome to continue wailing in the wilderness if it makes you happy.
I'm really beginning to hope that MPs block her from making the final two. Previously jt was just a vague, well it would be nice, but I'm really worried that she will stoke up a bunch if anti-immigration rhetoric and push May into unfavourable positions on immigration in order to win over the membership.
Unfavourable to the city EEA/EFTA libertarians with comfortable lives, to the north working class, not so much.
Unfavourable to the nation because a tanking economy and rising unemployment helps no one. We can solve the problem of mass immigration by fixing the benefits system. I'm a supply side reformer, clearly UKIP is becoming statist and believes that we can solve it by edict. Just remember that Australia had net migration of 250,000 last year that would be over half a million in the UK if we used their system. Be careful what you wish for.
I can't believe that so many of the vociferous PB remainers are still in denial! We are leaving the EU, get over it.
No way The 48 will rollover while a uneasy coalition of non-voters, bitter xenophobic failures and rightwing frothers sets about wilfully destroying the country and the economy. Sorry to break it to you.
Bob, it's over mate, you need to move on. We're out of the EU. Real life isn't like life on PB.(or that there London, for that matter). SNIP
SNIP
SNIPEven Cameron was worried that Remain was too "metropolitan elite", but by the time he realised it, it was too late. I think the truth is that the EU is deeply unpopular in this country and the immigration crisis has scared some people into pulling up SNIP The sad truth of it is that it has been so badly handled on both sides that we might end up deep in the brown stuff, but we need to crack on.
He called us - his own voters - Little Englanders.
He did this very late in the campaign. We noticed. And won't forgive him either.
He got that right – the Little Englanders bit.
There you go again, Bob. That attitude, right there, is why the country may well be on it's arse very soon.
Why? Isolationism and xenophobia are attitudes to be exposed, not defended.
No point now, the vote has happened. Time to move on.
No. To be clear for the hard of reading: The 48 are not going to roll over while an uneasy coalition of bitter wealth-hating failures, xenophobic myopic Little Englanders and rabid rightwing nutjobs set about destroying our country and economy. We are going to place every possible barrier in your path and make it as hard as possible for you to take a single step towards your fanatical dream.
Get used to it, captain.
You dreaming, the attention span of the 90% of the population who are not that interested in politics is about to expire. 2-3% will fight the good fight, 45% will get bored in a few more days, certainly by the time the Tory leadership election is resolved, and get on with their lives. Only the terminally pissed off like you will care, and you are welcome to continue wailing in the wilderness if it makes you happy.
I'm really beginning to hope that MPs block her from making the final two. Previously jt was just a vague, well it would be nice, but I'm really worried that she will stoke up a bunch if anti-immigration rhetoric and push May into unfavourable positions on immigration in order to win over the membership.
Unfavourable to the city EEA/EFTA libertarians with comfortable lives, to the north working class, not so much.
Oh well, pandering to Little Englander attitudes is not wise.
Some people call it democracy, a bit old fashioned I know where there is Twitter to follow instead.
@lindayueh: #Aviva suspended dealing on its £1.8bn UK property fund, <24 hours after #StandardLife due to high outflows #Brexit https://t.co/eCBDqlT2XI</p>
It is a bit scary. Brexiteers who say they aren't worried are either deluded or fanatical.
Someone downthread asked if LEAVERS would LEAVE at any price. Well, I voted LEAVE but think it's absurd to say there is no price which would be too onerous. If LEAVING means my older daughter's life prospects are harmed, then I will deeply regret my vote.
It's far too early to tell, but initial signs are a tad unnerving.
I also disagree with those downthread who say Brexit is Brexit. We're definitely out. No we're not.
Consider. We haven't triggered A50 and we are unlikely to do so until after the German election next year (doing it before then makes no sense, unless the markets force us).
By that point we *could* be in deep recession, with surging inflation and unemployment, a property price crash, investment collapsing, London seizing up, our deficit dragging us ever deeper into an ever darker abyss.
Nice.
The polls would by then be showing REMAIN at about 65/35 (not least cause immigration would have largely ceased), and my guess is any prime minister at that point would call a revote, and we'd end up staying.
You seem a little shell shocked. Post Brexitic Stress Disordered.
Man up Sean for gods sake
I'm entirely manned up, and not really THAT wobbly.
I'm just pointing out possible political futures. Which is what this site is about. And one of the futurities - just one, but nonetheless entirely possible - is that the entire economy has a heart attack, and we all get the shakes and decide we'd quite like to STAY after all.
"When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" http://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/07/22/keynes-change-mind/ If it becomes obvious that a mistake has been made would it be reasonable to say to the electorate, "Sorry you, well 52% of you, have made you bed we will all have to lay in it."
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's not high risk - she'll still win by absolutely miles anyway.
Without tacticals, the final round will be about:
May 210 Leadsom 70 Gove 50
Making it the following instead will not change perceptions to any discernable degree:
May 180 Gove 80 Leadsom 70
She simply cannot risk going up against Leadsom. Con members have chosen IDS before (and Lab members Corbyn). This is what party members are like I'm afraid.
If brexit goes titsup, *everybody* (excepting the hardcore tory remainiacs) is going to put the blame in just one place:
'Crispin Blunt, the Conservative MP who chairs the foreign affairs committee, told Oliver Letwin that it was a “dereliction of duty” for David Cameron not to make any contingency planning for a Brexit vote. There were only two possible outcomes from the referendum, he said. And, since Cameron said he was planning to remain as prime minister whatever the result, he should have planned for a leave vote, he said.'
Iain Martin, a Leave supporting journalist explains why neither campaign had a plan for Brexit Leave because they couldn't agree to anything and because any plan they did come up with would be so full of holes that opponents would pull it to shreds. Leave being very reasonable in the view of Mr Martin. Remain didn't have a plan for the Armageddon they were predicting should people be stupid enough to vote Leave, because that would be admitting the possibility of defeat. Grossly irresponsible and arrogant in Mr Martin's opinion.
I'm really beginning to hope that MPs block her from making the final two. Previously jt was just a vague, well it would be nice, but I'm really worried that she will stoke up a bunch if anti-immigration rhetoric and push May into unfavourable positions on immigration in order to win over the membership.
Unfavourable to the city EEA/EFTA libertarians with comfortable lives, to the north working class, not so much.
Unfavourable to the nation because a tanming economy and rising unemployment helps no one. We can solve the problem of mass immigration by fixing the benefits system. I'm a supply side reformer, clearly UKIP is becoming statist and believes that we can solve it by edict. Just remember that Australia had net migration of 250,000 last year that would be over half a million in the UK if we used their system. Be careful what you wish for.
I'm just not sure when adopting an approach that commands wide support (EEA, coupled with further action on pull factors) became undemocratic. Of course there is a section of the public that won't agree with it, but as long as the British economy comes out of its current weak section, provides them homes and jobs, then their anger won't spill into the streets.
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's a tricky one there are pros and cons to each strategy. I think probably the better one is to be so dominant in the MPs that you either force everyone to capitulate or at least give the members severe pause for thought in terms of thinking about not confirming you etc
I think the correct strategy is for May to go with overwhelming victory and get over 2/3rds of MPs (That means it doesn't go to members right ? )
We've seen what getting 'cute' can do with voting (See Corbyn)
Nope. Not all Leavers are racists – but all racists are Leavers.
Not even a little true. The last BSA survey had 77% wanting to reduce immigration, 56% by a lot, both those number are bigger than the percentage of people voting leave. If you stopped talking people would only think you a fool.
It's about making the best of a bad situation and choosing from various poor options. The fact we voted for the bad situation and that the best option is the only one to be rejected so far, doesn't change things. Those that sold us the pup seem to be out of the picture with the possible exception of Ms Leadsom. So the rest of us will have to sort things out as well as we can.
It's time to embrace the new reality, folks, and get on with our lives.
I can't believe that so many of the vociferous PB remainers are still in denial! We are leaving the EU, get over it.
No way The 48 will rollover while a uneasy coalition of non-voters, bitter xenophobic failures and rightwing frothers sets about wilfully destroying the country and the economy. Sorry to break it to you.
Bob, it's over mate, you need to move on. We're out of the EU. Real life isn't like life on PB.(or that there London, for that matter). SNIP
SNIP
SNIPEven Cameron was worried that Remain was too "metropolitan elite", but by the time he realised it, it was too late. I think the truth is that the EU is deeply unpopular in this country and the immigration crisis has scared some people into pulling up SNIP The sad truth of it is that it has been so badly handled on both sides that we might end up deep in the brown stuff, but we need to crack on.
He called us - his own voters - Little Englanders.
He did this very late in the campaign. We noticed. And won't forgive him either.
He got that right – the Little Englanders bit.
There you go again, Bob. That attitude, right there, is why the country may well be on it's arse very soon.
Why? Isolationism and xenophobia are attitudes to be exposed, not defended.
No point now, the vote has happened. Time to move on.
No. To be clear for the hard of reading: The 48 are not going to roll over while an uneasy coalition of bitter wealth-hating failures, xenophobic myopic Little Englanders and rabid rightwing nutjobs set about destroying our country and economy. We are going to place every possible barrier in your path and make it as hard as possible for you to take a single step towards your fanatical dream.
Get used to it, captain.
You dreaming, the attention span of the 90% of the population who are not that interested in politics is about to expire. 2-3% will fight the good fight, 45% will get bored in a few more days, certainly by the time the Tory leadership election is resolved, and get on with their lives. Only the terminally pissed off like you will care, and you are welcome to continue wailing in the wilderness if it makes you happy.
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's not high risk - she'll still win by absolutely miles anyway.
Without tacticals, the final round will be about:
May 210 Leadsom 70 Gove 50
Making it the following instead will not change perceptions to any discernable degree:
May 180 Gove 80 Leadsom 70
She simply cannot risk going up against Leadsom. Con members have chosen IDS before (and Lab members Corbyn). This is what party members are like I'm afraid.
It is high risk, previous ballots have seen much lower votes for particular candidates than the number of MPs publically backing them.
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's a tricky one there are pros and cons to each strategy. I think probably the better one is to be so dominant in the MPs that you either force everyone to capitulate or at least give the members severe pause for thought in terms of thinking about not confirming you etc
I agree - if May wins by a mile with MPs, the membership will pay heed. We don't even need to look at history to see what happend if the Parliamentary Party don't support the Leader it's happening right before our eyes. May should be aiming for more than 50% on the final ballot.
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's a tricky one there are pros and cons to each strategy. I think probably the better one is to be so dominant in the MPs that you either force everyone to capitulate or at least give the members severe pause for thought in terms of thinking about not confirming you etc
I think the correct strategy is for May to go with overwhelming victory and get over 2/3rds of MPs (That means it doesn't go to members right ? )
We've seen what getting 'cute' can do with voting (See Corbyn)
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's not high risk - she'll still win by absolutely miles anyway.
Without tacticals, the final round will be about:
May 210 Leadsom 70 Gove 50
Making it the following instead will not change perceptions to any discernable degree:
May 180 Gove 80 Leadsom 70
She simply cannot risk going up against Leadsom. Con members have chosen IDS before (and Lab members Corbyn). This is what party members are like I'm afraid.
It is high risk, previous ballots have seen much lower votes for particular candidates than the number of MPs publically backing them.
Without perfect information, it is high risk.
I think its a mistake to assume it's a cakewalk against Gove.
I'm really beginning to hope that MPs block her from making the final two. Previously jt was just a vague, well it would be nice, but I'm really worried that she will stoke up a bunch if anti-immigration rhetoric and push May into unfavourable positions on immigration in order to win over the membership.
Unfavourable to the city EEA/EFTA libertarians with comfortable lives, to the north working class, not so much.
Unfavourable to the nation because a tanking economy and rising unemployment helps no one. We can solve the problem of mass immigration by fixing the benefits system. I'm a supply side reformer, clearly UKIP is becoming statist and believes that we can solve it by edict. Just remember that Australia had net migration of 250,000 last year that would be over half a million in the UK if we used their system. Be careful what you wish for.
Somewhat misleading. The Australian net migration figure was what they wanted it to be. The whole point of the points system (for those who want it) is that you can adjust how many people come in by adjusting the points required and tailoring it to your economy's needs. If the UK wanted to have far lower immigration than Australia that wouldn't stop them using the Aussie system. They would just use it in a different way.
I'm really beginning to hope that MPs block her from making the final two. Previously jt was just a vague, well it would be nice, but I'm really worried that she will stoke up a bunch if anti-immigration rhetoric and push May into unfavourable positions on immigration in order to win over the membership.
Unfavourable to the city EEA/EFTA libertarians with comfortable lives, to the north working class, not so much.
Unfavourable to the nation because a tanking economy and rising unemployment helps no one. We can solve the problem of mass immigration by fixing the benefits system. I'm a supply side reformer, clearly UKIP is becoming statist and believes that we can solve it by edict. Just remember that Australia had net migration of 250,000 last year that would be over half a million in the UK if we used their system. Be careful what you wish for.
I have no preference for any number personally. I don't particularly feel the need for capping immigration. However, Immigration should be in the control of the elected representatives of the British people, including critically our ability to throw out undesirables.
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's a tricky one there are pros and cons to each strategy. I think probably the better one is to be so dominant in the MPs that you either force everyone to capitulate or at least give the members severe pause for thought in terms of thinking about not confirming you etc
I think the correct strategy is for May to go with overwhelming victory and get over 2/3rds of MPs (That means it doesn't go to members right ? )
We've seen what getting 'cute' can do with voting (See Corbyn)
I'm really beginning to hope that MPs block her from making the final two. Previously jt was just a vague, well it would be nice, but I'm really worried that she will stoke up a bunch if anti-immigration rhetoric and push May into unfavourable positions on immigration in order to win over the membership.
Unfavourable to the city EEA/EFTA libertarians with comfortable lives, to the north working class, not so much.
Oh well, pandering to Little Englander attitudes is not wise.
Some people call it democracy, a bit old fashioned I know where there is Twitter to follow instead.
Yes and 16m people voted to stay in the EU while millions of the 17m are willing to compromise on free movement to stay in the single market and loads more aren't bothered by it.
Let's take it to a second vote. Single market vs fully out. What will you say then if fully out loses (which it would, and badly) should the 60% completely and utterly override the 40%? Or should there be a compromise and should we try and seek reforms to free movement anyway?
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's a tricky one there are pros and cons to each strategy. I think probably the better one is to be so dominant in the MPs that you either force everyone to capitulate or at least give the members severe pause for thought in terms of thinking about not confirming you etc
I think the correct strategy is for May to go with overwhelming victory and get over 2/3rds of MPs (That means it doesn't go to members right ? )
We've seen what getting 'cute' can do with voting (See Corbyn)
It doesn't matter how many votes the winner gets with MPs, if there's still a second candidate standing it goes to the members.
She simply cannot risk going up against Leadsom. Con members have chosen IDS before (and Lab members Corbyn). This is what party members are like I'm afraid.
Perish the thought that all those people that pay their party subscriptions, and pound the streets for hours for nothing on behalf of the party should get a fair vote for their choice of leader, what ever next!
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's a tricky one there are pros and cons to each strategy. I think probably the better one is to be so dominant in the MPs that you either force everyone to capitulate or at least give the members severe pause for thought in terms of thinking about not confirming you etc
I think the correct strategy is for May to go with overwhelming victory and get over 2/3rds of MPs (That means it doesn't go to members right ? )
We've seen what getting 'cute' can do with voting (See Corbyn)
I think if she racks up such a dominant performance then even if there is a members ballot the runner up will be on for a hiding. I suspect if she manages to get above 200 today then the contest could be all but over.
@lindayueh: #Aviva suspended dealing on its £1.8bn UK property fund, <24 hours after #StandardLife due to high outflows #Brexit https://t.co/eCBDqlT2XI</p>
It is a bit scary. Brexiteers who say they aren't worried are either deluded or fanatical.
Someone downthread asked if LEAVERS would LEAVE at any price. Well, I voted LEAVE but think it's absurd to say there is no price which would be too onerous. If LEAVING means my older daughter's life prospects are harmed, then I will deeply regret my vote.
It's far too early to tell, but initial signs are a tad unnerving.
I also disagree with those downthread who say Brexit is Brexit. We're definitely out. No we're not.
Consider. We haven't triggered A50 and we are unlikely to do so until after the German election next year (doing it before then makes no sense, unless the markets force us).
By that point we *could* be in deep recession, with surging inflation and unemployment, a property price crash, investment collapsing, London seizing up, our deficit dragging us ever deeper into an ever darker abyss.
Nice.
The polls would by then be showing REMAIN at about 65/35 (not least cause immigration would have largely ceased), and my guess is any prime minister at that point would call a revote, and we'd end up staying.
You seem a little shell shocked. Post Brexitic Stress Disordered.
Man up Sean for gods sake
I'm entirely manned up, and not really THAT wobbly.
I'm just pointing out possible political futures. Which is what this site is about. And one of the futurities - just one, but nonetheless entirely possible - is that the entire economy has a heart attack, and we all get the shakes and decide we'd quite like to STAY after all.
"When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" http://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/07/22/keynes-change-mind/ If it becomes obvious that a mistake has been made would it be reasonable to say to the electorate, "Sorry you, well 52% of you, have made you bed we will all have to lay in it."
It is impossible to know a mistake has been made. Any pains now are transitionary pains due to changing from one system to another.
To abort halfway would be the height of irresponsibility. It would be like saying that labour pains during childbirth are a reason that having a child is a bad idea so lets have an abortion instead.
@DavidRoe92: If MPs overwhelmingly go for May and Leadsom is picked by members, Tories could face a problem after she's exposed similar to Labour's now
I'm really beginning to hope that MPs block her from making the final two. Previously jt was just a vague, well it would be nice, but I'm really worried that she will stoke up a bunch if anti-immigration rhetoric and push May into unfavourable positions on immigration in order to win over the membership.
Unfavourable to the city EEA/EFTA libertarians with comfortable lives, to the north working class, not so much.
Oh well, pandering to Little Englander attitudes is not wise.
Some people call it democracy, a bit old fashioned I know where there is Twitter to follow instead.
Yes and 16m people voted to stay in the EU while millions of the 17m are willing to compromise on free movement to stay in the single market and loads more aren't bothered by it.
Let's take it to a second vote. Single market vs fully out. What will you say then if fully out loses (which it would, and badly) should the 60% completely and utterly override the 40%? Or should there be a compromise and should we try and seek reforms to free movement anyway?
Since Project Bullshit has been widely discredited, and bearing in mind the BSA results on immigration I think that might be brave on your part.
@DavidRoe92: If MPs overwhelmingly go for May and Leadsom is picked by members, Tories could face a problem after she's exposed similar to Labour's now
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's not high risk - she'll still win by absolutely miles anyway.
Without tacticals, the final round will be about:
May 210 Leadsom 70 Gove 50
Making it the following instead will not change perceptions to any discernable degree:
May 180 Gove 80 Leadsom 70
She simply cannot risk going up against Leadsom. Con members have chosen IDS before (and Lab members Corbyn). This is what party members are like I'm afraid.
It is high risk, previous ballots have seen much lower votes for particular candidates than the number of MPs publically backing them.
Without perfect information, it is high risk.
Sorry, but I don't agree. The margin for error is colossal - way, way, way higher than the number who would be voting tactically.
Going up against Leadsom is a massively higher risk.
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's a tricky one there are pros and cons to each strategy. I think probably the better one is to be so dominant in the MPs that you either force everyone to capitulate or at least give the members severe pause for thought in terms of thinking about not confirming you etc
I agree - if May wins by a mile with MPs, the membership will pay heed. We don't even need to look at history to see what happend if the Parliamentary Party don't support the Leader it's happening right before our eyes. May should be aiming for more than 50% on the final ballot.
Think she'll be at or above that on the first. She needs 165 and has c130 pledges.
I'm really beginning to hope that MPs block her from making the final two. Previously jt was just a vague, well it would be nice, but I'm really worried that she will stoke up a bunch if anti-immigration rhetoric and push May into unfavourable positions on immigration in order to win over the membership.
Unfavourable to the city EEA/EFTA libertarians with comfortable lives, to the north working class, not so much.
Unfavourable to the nation because a tanming economy and rising unemployment helps no one. We can solve the problem of mass immigration by fixing the benefits system. I'm a supply side reformer, clearly UKIP is becoming statist and believes that we can solve it by edict. Just remember that Australia had net migration of 250,000 last year that would be over half a million in the UK if we used their system. Be careful what you wish for.
I'm just not sure when adopting an approach that commands wide support (EEA, coupled with further action on pull factors) became undemocratic. Of course there is a section of the public that won't agree with it, but as long as the British economy comes out of its current weak section, provides them homes and jobs, then their anger won't spill into the streets.
Which is why once that solution js negotiated and ready to implement, we'll need a second vote. One which I think would be won 60/40. Once all the people who voted Leave on the basis of sovereignty are not an issue and want to maintain economic ties, the EEA side only needs to swing 3% of the public to win, it's not going to be difficult.
Two party heavyweights are recorded by Sky giving unguarded views on Tory leadership candidates, calling one "bloody difficult". - http://news.sky.com/
Rather tame, I thought shits, bloody shits and back stabbing bastards was more the thing.
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's a tricky one there are pros and cons to each strategy. I think probably the better one is to be so dominant in the MPs that you either force everyone to capitulate or at least give the members severe pause for thought in terms of thinking about not confirming you etc
I think the correct strategy is for May to go with overwhelming victory and get over 2/3rds of MPs (That means it doesn't go to members right ? )
We've seen what getting 'cute' can do with voting (See Corbyn)
I'm pretty certain there's a vote anyway.
Goes to the members no matter what.
Pop Quiz: May gets 200+ MPs in the final round, the other two barely half her score between them. Whoever comes second is offered to pick the job they want if they concede - in order to get a functioning Government as soon as possible. Or they can go to the members, get thrashed and be offered no Cabinet position. What are you going to do, Andrea?
I think the correct strategy is for May to go with overwhelming victory and get over 2/3rds of MPs (That means it doesn't go to members right ? )
That wouldn't stop it going to members, AFAIK, unless the second-placed candidate decided of her own volition to concede.
Indeed - May could get 90% and it would still go to the members.
Worth remembering that back in 2005 Davis considered dropping out and Fox said that if he did then he (having finished 3rd) should go on the ballot to members instead (and I believe legal action was discussed).
I can't believe that so many of the vociferous PB remainers are still in denial! We are leaving the EU, get over it.
No way The 48 will rollover while a uneasy coalition of non-voters, bitter xenophobic failures and rightwing frothers sets about wilfully destroying the country and the economy. Sorry to break it to you.
Bob, it's over mate, you need to move on. We're out of the EU. Real life isn't like life on PB.(or that there London, for that matter). For every tweet that you and Scott share showing that some poor mug put on the spot by a TV crew has had a Brepiphany, I'll show you whole swathes of normal punters who couldn't give a flying fuck what you or anyone else posts on here. It's happening, and we need all the major political parties to stop thrashing off and get on with making it work.
Easier said than done, of course. In the real world the likelihood is that demand will decrease, investments will be frozen and government income will fall. That means public spending cuts and it means tax increases. That's what making it work will look like. And my guess is that at that stage normal punters are going to care a hell of a lot.
I agree entirely, but both sides of the debate are swimming in circles. The Guardian article today really seems to point to the failure of our p.
He called us - his own voters - Little Englanders.
He did this very late in the campaign. We noticed. And won't forgive him either.
He got that right – the Little Englanders bit.
There you go again, Bob. That attitude, right there, is why the country may well be on it's arse very soon.
Why? Isolationism and xenophobia are attitudes to be exposed, not defended.
So you genuinely believe there are 17 million xenophobic racists in the country after June 23rd?
The BNP got just short of a million votes in the 2009 Euro elections, I'd consider that a baseline but likely to be higher, if nowhere near seventeen million.
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's a tricky one there are pros and cons to each strategy. I think probably the better one is to be so dominant in the MPs that you either force everyone to capitulate or at least give the members severe pause for thought in terms of thinking about not confirming you etc
I think the correct strategy is for May to go with overwhelming victory and get over 2/3rds of MPs (That means it doesn't go to members right ? )
We've seen what getting 'cute' can do with voting (See Corbyn)
I'm pretty certain there's a vote anyway.
Goes to the members no matter what.
Pop Quiz: May gets 200+ MPs in the final round, the other two barely half her score between them. Whoever comes second is offered to pick the job they want if they concede - in order to get a functioning Government as soon as possible. Or they can go to the members, get thrashed and be offered no Cabinet position. What are you going to do, Andrea?
Two party heavyweights are recorded by Sky giving unguarded views on Tory leadership candidates, calling one "bloody difficult". - http://news.sky.com/
Rather tame, I thought shits, bloody shits and back stabbing bastards was more the thing.
I don't have a problem with any potential leader being bloody difficult. They need to be from time to time.
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's a tricky one there are pros and cons to each strategy. I think probably the better one is to be so dominant in the MPs that you either force everyone to capitulate or at least give the members severe pause for thought in terms of thinking about not confirming you etc
I think the correct strategy is for May to go with overwhelming victory and get over 2/3rds of MPs (That means it doesn't go to members right ? )
We've seen what getting 'cute' can do with voting (See Corbyn)
I'm pretty certain there's a vote anyway.
Goes to the members no matter what.
Pop Quiz: May gets 200+ MPs in the final round, the other two barely half her score between them. Whoever comes second is offered to pick the job they want if they concede - in order to get a functioning Government as soon as possible. Or they can go to the members, get thrashed and be offered no Cabinet position. What are you going to do, Andrea?
Believe I could win; never underestimate the size of a politician's ego.
Also never underestimate the power of any electorate to make a bad decision; I'll try and think of a specific example.....
Leadsom's level of support amongst Con MPs is pretty similar to Corbyn's amongst Lab MPs. 42 MPs is just under 13% of the parliamentary party.
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
It's a high risk strategy.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
It's a tricky one there are pros and cons to each strategy. I think probably the better one is to be so dominant in the MPs that you either force everyone to capitulate or at least give the members severe pause for thought in terms of thinking about not confirming you etc
I agree - if May wins by a mile with MPs, the membership will pay heed. We don't even need to look at history to see what happend if the Parliamentary Party don't support the Leader it's happening right before our eyes. May should be aiming for more than 50% on the final ballot.
Think she'll be at or above that on the first. She needs 165 and has c130 pledges.
Pledges do not mean votes. IIRC Mike pointed out Davis' support in 2005 was half his number of pledges.
I can't believe that so many of the vociferous PB remainers are still in denial! We are leaving the EU, get over it.
No way The 48 will rollover while a uneasy coalition of non-voters, bitter xenophobic failures and rightwing frothers sets about wilfully destroying the country and the economy. Sorry to break it to you.
Bob, it's over mate, you need to move on. We're out of the EU. Real life isn't like life on PB.(or that there London, for that matter). For every tweet that you and Scott share showing that some poor mug put on the spot by a TV crew has had a Brepiphany, I'll show you whole swathes of normal punters who couldn't give a flying fuck what you or anyone else posts on here. It's happening, and we need all the major political parties to stop thrashing off and get on with making it work.
Easier said than done, of course. In the real world the likelihood is that demand will decrease, investments will be frozen and government income will fall. That means public spending cuts and it means tax increases. That's what making it work will look like. And my guess is that at that stage normal punters are going to care a hell of a lot.
I agree entirely, but both sides of the debate are swimming in circles. The Guardian article today really seems to point to the failure of our p.
He called us - his own voters - Little Englanders.
He did this very late in the campaign. We noticed. And won't forgive him either.
He got that right – the Little Englanders bit.
There you go again, Bob. That attitude, right there, is why the country may well be on it's arse very soon.
Why? Isolationism and xenophobia are attitudes to be exposed, not defended.
So you genuinely believe there are 17 million xenophobic racists in the country after June 23rd?
The BNP got just short of a million votes in the 2009 Euro elections, I'd consider that a baseline but likely to be higher, if nowhere near seventeen million.
Comments
One of the PLP’s main worries will be that Labour’s vote will crumble to Ukip under Corbyn, who won’t produce enough racist mugs and mouse mats to reassure everybody. And, to be fair, it must be galling to a party that invaded Iraq, rendered Libyans to be tortured by Gadaffi and detained asylum seekers with Dickensian cruelty to lose voters on the race issue.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/05/tory-leadership-election-x-factor-choosing-antichrist-brexit-frankie-boyle
Spite would be voting for things that you know would harm you but would harm others more.. You'll need a better example than the one above to convenience me anyone voted out of spite..
Without the UK it falls definitively behind both USA and China, beyond the range of margnis of error.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)
TM 76 - 13 SC
TM 72 - 21 MG
TM 63 - 31 AL
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/dgak27s1eh/TimesResults_160704_ConservativeMembers.pdf
I guess one thing that will help Re-remain a bit in the re-referendum if it's a couple of years away is that a lot of the 3 million EU citizens currently in the UK aren't going to wait around taking a chance on whether the UK gives them the rights they currently have. They're going to naturalize.
Which of the non-agreed and full of holes Leave options does he think remain should have planned for? And had they done so, it would have been not agreed and full of holes.
Iain is a fine journalist, but he is yet another Outer whining that Remainers will not fix their shit. It's tiresome.
PS I should have said former Remainers.
No Leadsom present at a party unity karaoke session after the 1922 hustings last night. All the other candidates were there and most other MPs. Anyone who thinks Leadsom can unite the party let alone the country needs their head examining.
The economy has been cooling for two years. Commercial property has been red flagged for, what, nine months at least? Yields have been dropping for a long time, but it's not a sector I follow.
However, there's clearly going to be no comforting people on here (I see we have Wobbly Sean today), and no one appears to read anything more demanding than Twitter, so I shall give up for the afternoon and go and tackle the back border.
So far I have had but one definitive response. This was from 'Wee Jonnie' who said 3 million on the dole would indeed be a price worth paying for Brexit. As distasteful as I found his answer I at least gave him credit for having the cojones to admit it.
May is the Unity (and Reality) candidate.
Leadsom is the UKIP (and fantasy) candidate.
Labour should be worried - the Tories are coming together (one step at a time).
OK, the above declarations only add up to 233 so there are another 97 undeclared. But most of those are likely May as well.
Looks like 25 May supporters should vote Gove in Round 1 - that should get Gove ahead of Leadsom. Then they can assess the situation when they get the result and top-up a few more in subsequent rounds if necessary.
But it's worth getting Gove ahead of Leadsom in Round 1 to make the whole thing less obvious.
https://medium.com/@SeanBlanda/the-other-side-is-not-dumb-2670c1294063#.dx7mmdaw0
The reason you gain few responses is that you're not a very useful or interesting interlocutor.
You seem to want to pose as the critical adult, rolling your eyes at what the nasty electorate hath wrought.
Southam, gloomy as he is, will at least have a conversation. Ditto Topping and several others.
You're just another Jeremiah pronouncing Brexit an utter disaster, twelve days after the vote. It's dull.
Better surely to just blow the other candidates out the water on the first ballot and win 2/3rds or more on the last ballot.
I'm really beginning to hope that MPs block her from making the final two. Previously jt was just a vague, well it would be nice, but I'm really worried that she will stoke up a bunch if anti-immigration rhetoric and push May into unfavourable positions on immigration in order to win over the membership.
Get used to it, captain.
Nope. Not all Leavers are racists – but all racists are Leavers.
http://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/07/22/keynes-change-mind/
If it becomes obvious that a mistake has been made would it be reasonable to say to the electorate, "Sorry you, well 52% of you, have made you bed we will all have to lay in it."
Without tacticals, the final round will be about:
May 210
Leadsom 70
Gove 50
Making it the following instead will not change perceptions to any discernable degree:
May 180
Gove 80
Leadsom 70
She simply cannot risk going up against Leadsom. Con members have chosen IDS before (and Lab members Corbyn). This is what party members are like I'm afraid.
How would you classify
@rcs1000
@Charles
@MaxPB
On your scale?
With power comes responsibility
REMAIN=guilty.
The sentence will be executed later..
We've seen what getting 'cute' can do with voting (See Corbyn)
It's time to embrace the new reality, folks, and get on with our lives.
Without perfect information, it is high risk.
"The strange death of liberal politics
The world is changing in ways the British left cannot comprehend."
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/07/strange-death-liberal-politics
However, I do agree with the thrust of your point.
Let's take it to a second vote. Single market vs fully out. What will you say then if fully out loses (which it would, and badly) should the 60% completely and utterly override the 40%? Or should there be a compromise and should we try and seek reforms to free movement anyway?
Yes, I can see why you keep repeating your meme endlessly - it does feel good...
To abort halfway would be the height of irresponsibility. It would be like saying that labour pains during childbirth are a reason that having a child is a bad idea so lets have an abortion instead.
No shit
Going up against Leadsom is a massively higher risk.
Rather tame, I thought shits, bloody shits and back stabbing bastards was more the thing.
Worth remembering that back in 2005 Davis considered dropping out and Fox said that if he did then he (having finished 3rd) should go on the ballot to members instead (and I believe legal action was discussed).
Also never underestimate the power of any electorate to make a bad decision; I'll try and think of a specific example.....