I wonder if the Leavers are underplaying this victory for Open Europe a mite too much? Tory Remainia is wealthy, powerful – and angry. The Leavers are starting to look like ideologues without a care for the economy. Much can change in a year. This is just the beginning.
Great victory for Open last night. Bravo.
Glad to see you back Bobajob. Spent your Trump winnings yet?
Cheers sir. Yes, I have lavished them some new clothing for Lady Ajob. I very nearly sloshed some more on Olney last night but didn't think I could possibly win another longshot bet this year. More fool me. Looking forward to 2017, bizarrely.
Hope all good in your world.
Very nice, I hope she enjoys her new clothes!
The world is a strange place, but my little corner is looking up. Just completed the purchase of my Zurich house and sold my Shepherds Bush place for a pretty huge profit a couple of weeks back.
Good for you. I remember you deliberating when you were buying it. Glad you took the plunge sir.
Yeah, looking back it was one of the best decisions of my life, it forced me to change my career (where I'm much happier) and I made a huge amount of money on the sale.
So Farron is deeming this result as "the fight back of the 48%".
I'm amazed politicians haven't yet grasped that results in London are rarely indicative of the wider country.
I'm sure they have grasped that. But they need to inspire the troops as they work on the rest.
Quite right. Plus the Red BNP brigade bizarrely quite like Corbyn (or some of them do) so Labour Leave seats up north are still safe-ish and would never vote Tory in any case.
QT last night was revealing. Lots of anti-immigrant sentiment in an area where – guess what – there are very few immigrants. 96% of Wakefielders are white. Only 2.5% were born outside the UK. So what are they so scared of? This fear of an non-present outsider is common to many Labour Leave places.
Interestingly, the ward with by far the highest ethnic minority count is also the one that most reliably votes Conservative (although to be fair, I'd guess that it's also the one with the highest ABC1 count).
Notably, Wakefield-Labour-so-white has no non-white councillors nor, in my time in the district, has it fielded a non-white candidate. By contrast, the Tory Group leader is of subcontinental descent (probably Pakistani, perhaps Indian muslim - I don't know: I've never bothered to ask him).
The question Tim Farron wasn't asked this morning (because it wasn't relevant) is who do the Lib Dems support in a hung parliament. For any third party - but particularly one positioning themselves as 'centrist' - that is a question they must always be ready to answer. For those seats in SW London and the wider SE, how does he choose between Corbyn, who would go down like a bucket of cold sick with those voters, and May, upon whom he's directing all his firepower?
They've never answered it before, and I don't think they'll start. The practical answer most likely depends on the parliamentary arithmetic; The chances that they'll have kingmaker power are quite small. In the unlikely event that they do have kingmaker power, they'll want to keep their options open and negotiate the best deal they can.
Clegg answered it before 2010 i.e. 'we're prepared to talk to both but the party with most votes gets first chance'. That clearly indicated a willingness to support either Brown or Cameron. Farron will need to answer whether he would be prepared - given an acceptable policy deal to his party - to (1) put Corbyn in No 10; (2) keep May in No 10. Those are the only options as things stand.
No, Clegg answered it with a masterpiece of vagueness, namely that he made a commitment to talk to the parties. In practice it seemed like for a deal with Lab to be on the cards they'd have to get rid of Brown, but in any case they didn't have the numbers.
The vagueness was surely necessary. If you're not willing to talk to one side then in a hung parliament situation you're already in a form of alliance with the other, and while it was provably so that More of the LDs preferred a deal with labour, though the numbers in the end made that difficult, they woukd have lost votes ruling out working the Tories, i fir one voted LD and was very annoyed by the commentariat declaring the LDs had betrayed my vote by going into cialition.
. I doubt the situation will arise again anytime soon, but could they be so vague again, given last time, onkybtheyd say they'd be much stricter on what they'd give up for a deal? Woukd they explicitly say they'd prefer labour, but it depends on what they are offered as to what would be best for the country?
I think that's's right. My instinct was, and always has been, to prefer a LD/Lab coalition, but it was a bit like Feb 74; whoever had or hadn't WON the election it was pretty damn clear who had lost! And that was :Labour.
Elsewhere, more good news for LibDems and bad news for UKIP
Britain Elects @britainelects 9h9 hours ago Liberal Democrat GAIN Southbourne (Chichester) from Conservative. Britain Elects @britainelects 9h9 hours ago Southbourne (Chichester) result: LDEM: 57.7% (+15.8) CON: 25.8% (-32.3) UKIP: 11.8% (+11.8) LAB: 4.7% (+4.7)
Britain Elects @britainelects 9h9 hours ago Conservative GAIN Ferndown (Dorset) from UKIP.
I am very looking forward to my set if locals next may, in similar leafy shires and small towns. A county Brexit vote in Wiltshire dead in line with national, UKIP with many votes but only one seat and the LDs gaining seats despite losing votes in 2013, who knows how things will be. A Tory largest party, sure, but by how much?
So Farron is deeming this result as "the fight back of the 48%".
I'm amazed politicians haven't yet grasped that results in London are rarely indicative of the wider country.
I'm sure they have grasped that. But they need to inspire the troops as they work on the rest.
Quite right. Plus the Red BNP brigade bizarrely quite like Corbyn (or some of them do) so Labour Leave seats up north are still safe-ish and would never vote Tory in any case.
QT last night was revealing. Lots of anti-immigrant sentiment in an area where – guess what – there are very few immigrants. 96% of Wakefielders are white. Only 2.5% were born outside the UK. So what are they so scared of? This fear of an non-present outsider is common to many Labour Leave places.
You do realise that Wakefield borders Bradford don't you? They know what "enrichment" means.
But fine if the Labour activists identify more with the denizens of Richmond Park what is the point of Labour?
That is serious trolling. And also serious confirmation bias. Thing is that virtually all the Brits that Verhofstadht will talk to (apart from DeExEU) will be Remainers reinforcing the EU view that Brexit is stupid/disastrous and the narrow victory Leave achieved was by deception.
That is going to heavily influence the EU negotiating strategy because they won't think we're serious, and will want to offer an awful deal with an escape route back to staying as a member with David Cameron's deal perhaps thrown in again as a sweetener.
Which tells me this has the potential to go quite wrong.
Agree with that.
The EU's response to our vote does not fill me with confidence. There seems to be no acknowledgement that the product they're selling is undesirable to many people.
That's a shame for them, as I doubt it's saleable in the long term to populations of some other EU countries.
They need to start listening.
Agreed. The conclusion I reached that the EU could not and would not listen to democratic votes for reform was one of my key reasons for leaving. The pull was the long-term economic opportunities i saw for an independent UK as well as the political renewal.
I am frustrated that the debate got so out-of-hand (and I didn't exactly help at times) but I don't think I could have brought myself to vote to Remain in this organisation under any circumstances, even if it were overwhelmingly in my immediate economic interests.
Fair enough. But people need to understand there's an equivalent group who support staying in the EU because it's the right thing to do. It sounds like David L's daughter is in this group. The assumption that Remainers are more reluctant than Leavers is a false one, I think. They're still pretty angry with Brexit. (Personally I am motivated by what's in the country's interest LOL and don't really take an ideological position one way or the other)
Mr Verhofstadt's comments are inappropriate for an elected official of an organisation that still contains Britain but they don't actually matter. They can only offend us but we're leaving anyway. Nobody else cares. The EU can hardly trash the negotiations and the relationship when it we've already done it ourselves.
He makes the comment as one of Europe's leading liberals - he has visited LibDem conference several times and spoken at least once. They are party politicians in Europe, too, entitled to cheer their own side on in other countries, just as we all do.
Well done to the Lib Dems. I think some people are getting a little bit carried with a LD revival though. There are very few of their target seats which were so strongly for remain. The seats I think they could win with a strongly anti-Brexit message are:
Twickenham (c maj - 2,000; 69% remain) Kingston (c maj - 2,800; 62% remain) Cheltenham (c maj - 6,500; 56% remain) Bath (c maj - 3,800; 58% remain in BANES (probably higher in Bath city)) Winchester (c maj - 17,000; 59% remain in the district (probably higher in Winchester city)) OXWAB (c maj - 9,500; 72% Oxford; 57% Vale of White Horse) Lewes (c maj - 1,100; 52% remain) Cheadle (c maj - 6,500; Stockport borough 53% remain but likely higher here as Stockport town probably voted to leave) Hazel Grove (c maj - 6,600; as above) St Albans (c maj -12,700 over Lab, 15,300 over LD; 63% remain) Cambridge (Lab maj -599; 74% remain)
I would also expect the LDs to get close in S Cambs and Guildford
However, on the other side of the ledger a strongly anti-Brexit message could cost them 2 seats:
Carshalton (LD maj 1,500; Sutton 54% leave) North Norfolk (LD maj 4,000; 59% leave)
I can also see the LDs losing ground in a number of other target seats such as Eastbourne, Torbay, Burnley, Yeovil, Portsmouth S and North Devon, which all voted strongly for leave
Agree with a lot of what you say. The difficulty comes in deciding what portion of the Leave vote was:
a. soft Brexit b. hard Brexit c. protest vote.
The Remain vote is simple to understand, stick with the status quo, the Leave vote is less easy to fathom.
That said... I do think there's a danger that, as someone here wrote 'the centre cannot hold'. There's a wide spectrum of possible outcomes, many of which are entirely reasonable, but which may be deemed unacceptable by eurofederalists or backbench headbangers.
Excepting departing the customs union, I'm pretty flexible about what could work.
As an aside, there was an interesting BBC piece on the news last night about Ivory Coast and chocolate exports, though it did fail to point out we can only negotiate our own deal if we leave the customs union.
The only chocolate I remember seeing on sale in Africa generally came from Romania, the Romanians having apparently solved the problem of it melting before anyone bought it by putting hardly any chocolate into it in the first place.
So why doesn't British chocolate manage it? Very difficult taking chocolate presents to our (half) Thai grandchildren.
Utterly OT: two bad things happened in XCOM 2 yesterday. Firstly, I got a whole squad wiped out (playing on Ironman, so none of this reloading nonsense). Secondly, even worse, the character limits meant I couldn't give Julius Caesar the nickname "Queen of Bithynia".
That said... I do think there's a danger that, as someone here wrote 'the centre cannot hold'. There's a wide spectrum of possible outcomes, many of which are entirely reasonable, but which may be deemed unacceptable by eurofederalists or backbench headbangers.
Excepting departing the customs union, I'm pretty flexible about what could work.
As an aside, there was an interesting BBC piece on the news last night about Ivory Coast and chocolate exports, though it did fail to point out we can only negotiate our own deal if we leave the customs union.
The only chocolate I remember seeing on sale in Africa generally came from Romania, the Romanians having apparently solved the problem of it melting before anyone bought it by putting hardly any chocolate into it in the first place.
So why doesn't British chocolate manage it? Very difficult taking chocolate presents to our (half) Thai grandchildren.
The vege-fat stuff that Cadbury pretends is chocolate melts even faster than the proper stuff, I guess?
Mr. Divvie, no. Because bitterness would be fostered by ignoring a democratic vote, not respecting it).
But what if, and I don't think it will happen for many reasons, there was a second vote and remain won? You'd have a democratic vote to respect,more up to date, but implementing it would spark much bitterness, not least from those wanting a best of 3. Bitterness will foster where places are very closely divided, democratic vote or not, even more so in places which disagree with the demos itself - e.g. Scots seeking independence.
"QT last night was revealing. Lots of anti-immigrant sentiment in an area where – guess what – there are very few immigrants. 96% of Wakefielders are white. Only 2.5% were born outside the UK. So what are they so scared of? This fear of an non-present outsider is common to many Labour Leave places."
RU Serious?
(a) that's not true. Only 92.7% of Wakefield is white British (do white Europeans not count as immigrants?), as of 2011 census, presumably by now less. The local prison (High Security, full of hardcases) is only 78% white British.
(b) Neighbouring Dewsbury was the birthplace of the 7/7 bombings, numerous ISIS jihadis, has a shariah court, etc. ,etc. Dewsbury has lots of immigrants.
Are the inhabitants of Wakefield supposed to assume that immigration is great and wonderful even when the evidence on their doorstep is that it's not? Or do they need to wait till it's actually in their own town, before they form a conclusion, rather than the one they visit regularly?
Mr. P, aren't most Lib Dem potential seats held by the blues, though? A Lib Dem revival might make things trickier for Labour but if the yellows took, say, 30 seats wouldn't the vast majority be at the expense of the Conservatives?
Congrats to the Lib Dems and commiserations to Zac. When he boxed himself in he probably didn't foresee the potential confluence of Heathrow & Brexit; he has plenty of time to reflect on that now.
Next week's by-election will not get anything like the same amount of coverage, though it will likely elect, by a bigger margin, someone fully signed up to "Brexit means Brexit" and all that that entails.
Clearly the media and commentariat are more interested in Richmond because it's dramatic & accessible (literally and metaphorically). There's more to write and speculate about. But they're two constituencies of the same size, on different ends of our great cleavage. The increased importance given to one is a superb illustration of why Leave won in the first place.
If we could get rid of the utterly useless Corbyn and his band on idiot followers, Olney's victory could be the start of a very wise realignment. Labour members were campaigning for the Liberals yesterday – the utterly pathetic Corbyn has no control over the sensible wing of his party.
So Open vs Closed:
Open gets the brightest and best of Britain, from the Cameroons to the old Tory Left to the Blairites to the Orange Bookers to the Greens to the Brownites to the Beveridge Group, the City, big business and the TUC.
Closed gets the Red BNP knuckledraggers (Speedy, Sandy and their acolytes), the actual BNP, the Far Left, Ukip and the three clowns of the apocalypse.
Bring on the good fight.
"Red BNP knuckledraggers" - never been described as that before.
How is that £350m a week for the NHS that you promised the natives working out for you?
The Tory government is refusing to implement the will of the people.
Mr. P, aren't most Lib Dem potential seats held by the blues, though? A Lib Dem revival might make things trickier for Labour but if the yellows took, say, 30 seats wouldn't the vast majority be at the expense of the Conservatives?
Yes, almost entirely. Not an existential threat to the Tories - though they will hate what they see as 'job done' becoming undone - but given their small majority it raises the hurdle by requiring them to take yet more seats from Labour.
The irony is that UKIP started out being seen as a threat to the Tories and potential help to Labour, might end up having precisely the opposite impact. If it survives.
Mr. kle4, asking the electorate for their view and only respecting it when it agrees with the political establishment isn't democracy.
Had Remain won, I would have accepted that meant we were staying in, at least until our relationship with the EU changed substantially beyond the 'deal' Cameron had.
Utterly OT: two bad things happened in XCOM 2 yesterday. Firstly, I got a whole squad wiped out (playing on Ironman, so none of this reloading nonsense). Secondly, even worse, the character limits meant I couldn't give Julius Caesar the nickname "Queen of Bithynia".
Surely a mod to increase the character limit I hope.
Well done to the Lib Dems. I think some people are getting a little bit carried with a LD revival though. There are very few of their target seats which were so strongly for remain. The seats I think they could win with a strongly anti-Brexit message are:
Twickenham etc
Thanks for the analysis. But you do need to factor in something for 1st time incumbency uplift. I suggest add at least 2,000 to the winner in 2015.
Well done to the Lib Dems. I think some people are getting a little bit carried with a LD revival though. There are very few of their target seats which were so strongly for remain. The seats I think they could win with a strongly anti-Brexit message are:
Twickenham (c maj - 2,000; 69% remain) Kingston (c maj - 2,800; 62% remain) Cheltenham (c maj - 6,500; 56% remain) Bath (c maj - 3,800; 58% remain in BANES (probably higher in Bath city)) Winchester (c maj - 17,000; 59% remain in the district (probably higher in Winchester city)) OXWAB (c maj - 9,500; 72% Oxford; 57% Vale of White Horse) Lewes (c maj - 1,100; 52% remain) Cheadle (c maj - 6,500; Stockport borough 53% remain but likely higher here as Stockport town probably voted to leave) Hazel Grove (c maj - 6,600; as above) St Albans (c maj -12,700 over Lab, 15,300 over LD; 63% remain) Cambridge (Lab maj -599; 74% remain)
I would also expect the LDs to get close in S Cambs and Guildford
However, on the other side of the ledger a strongly anti-Brexit message could cost them 2 seats:
Carshalton (LD maj 1,500; Sutton 54% leave) North Norfolk (LD maj 4,000; 59% leave)
I can also see the LDs losing ground in a number of other target seats such as Eastbourne, Torbay, Burnley, Yeovil, Portsmouth S and North Devon, which all voted strongly for leave
Agree with a lot of what you say. The difficulty comes in deciding what portion of the Leave vote was:
a. soft Brexit b. hard Brexit c. protest vote.
The Remain vote is simple to understand, stick with the status quo, the Leave vote is less easy to fathom.
Indeed, though if the LDs look like potential winners again, they at least open themselves up for 'I'll vote for them as they've got the best chance against the one I hate' votes, which they seemed to miss last time.
Well done to the Lib Dems. I think some people are getting a little bit carried with a LD revival though. There are very few of their target seats which were so strongly for remain. The seats I think they could win with a strongly anti-Brexit message are:
Twickenham (c maj - 2,000; 69% remain) Kingston (c maj - 2,800; 62% remain) Cheltenham (c maj - 6,500; 56% remain) Bath (c maj - 3,800; 58% remain in BANES (probably higher in Bath city)) Winchester (c maj - 17,000; 59% remain in the district (probably higher in Winchester city)) OXWAB (c maj - 9,500; 72% Oxford; 57% Vale of White Horse) Lewes (c maj - 1,100; 52% remain) Cheadle (c maj - 6,500; Stockport borough 53% remain but likely higher here as Stockport town probably voted to leave) Hazel Grove (c maj - 6,600; as above) St Albans (c maj -12,700 over Lab, 15,300 over LD; 63% remain) Cambridge (Lab maj -599; 74% remain)
I would also expect the LDs to get close in S Cambs and Guildford
However, on the other side of the ledger a strongly anti-Brexit message could cost them 2 seats:
Carshalton (LD maj 1,500; Sutton 54% leave) North Norfolk (LD maj 4,000; 59% leave)
I can also see the LDs losing ground in a number of other target seats such as Eastbourne, Torbay, Burnley, Yeovil, Portsmouth S and North Devon, which all voted strongly for leave
Agree with a lot of what you say. The difficulty comes in deciding what portion of the Leave vote was:
a. soft Brexit b. hard Brexit c. protest vote.
The Remain vote is simple to understand, stick with the status quo, the Leave vote is less easy to fathom.
The leave vote was a vote to Leave the European Union.
"QT last night was revealing. Lots of anti-immigrant sentiment in an area where – guess what – there are very few immigrants. 96% of Wakefielders are white. Only 2.5% were born outside the UK. So what are they so scared of? This fear of an non-present outsider is common to many Labour Leave places."
RU Serious?
(a) that's not true. Only 92.7% of Wakefield is white British (do white Europeans not count as immigrants?), as of 2011 census, presumably by now less. The local prison (High Security, full of hardcases) is only 78% white British.
(b) Neighbouring Dewsbury was the birthplace of the 7/7 bombings, numerous ISIS jihadis, has a shariah court, etc. ,etc. Dewsbury has lots of immigrants.
Are the inhabitants of Wakefield supposed to assume that immigration is great and wonderful even when the evidence on their doorstep is that it's not? Or do they need to wait till it's actually in their own town, before they form a conclusion, rather than the one they visit regularly?
The statistic was carefully cited - and goes to the heart of a lot of the confusion around immigration, which too many people confuse with ethnicity (hence all the British Asians being told to 'go home' after the referendum). Our large Asian populations in London and South Yorkshire have been here long enough to have children, and start having grandchildren, that are British born. If the difference in average family size persists, the ethnic mix of many of our cities will continue to change even if immigration was banned entirely tomorrow. This is evident if you visit east London schools and see the difference between the ethnic mix of the local schools and the mix of adults within the communities in which they are located.
Well done to the Lib Dems. I think some people are getting a little bit carried with a LD revival though. There are very few of their target seats which were so strongly for remain. The seats I think they could win with a strongly anti-Brexit message are:
Twickenham (c maj - 2,000; 69% remain) Kingston (c maj - 2,800; 62% remain) Cheltenham (c maj - 6,500; 56% remain) Bath (c maj - 3,800; 58% remain in BANES (probably higher in Bath city)) Winchester (c maj - 17,000; 59% remain in the district (probably higher in Winchester city)) OXWAB (c maj - 9,500; 72% Oxford; 57% Vale of White Horse) Lewes (c maj - 1,100; 52% remain) Cheadle (c maj - 6,500; Stockport borough 53% remain but likely higher here as Stockport town probably voted to leave) Hazel Grove (c maj - 6,600; as above) St Albans (c maj -12,700 over Lab, 15,300 over LD; 63% remain) Cambridge (Lab maj -599; 74% remain)
I would also expect the LDs to get close in S Cambs and Guildford
However, on the other side of the ledger a strongly anti-Brexit message could cost them 2 seats:
Carshalton (LD maj 1,500; Sutton 54% leave) North Norfolk (LD maj 4,000; 59% leave)
I can also see the LDs losing ground in a number of other target seats such as Eastbourne, Torbay, Burnley, Yeovil, Portsmouth S and North Devon, which all voted strongly for leave
Agree with a lot of what you say. The difficulty comes in deciding what portion of the Leave vote was:
a. soft Brexit b. hard Brexit c. protest vote.
The Remain vote is simple to understand, stick with the status quo, the Leave vote is less easy to fathom.
The leave vote was a vote to Leave the European Union.
Lots of motivations there, churlish to pretend otherwise.
Mr. kle4, asking the electorate for their view and only respecting it when it agrees with the political establishment isn't democracy.
Had Remain won, I would have accepted that meant we were staying in, at least until our relationship with the EU changed substantially beyond the 'deal' Cameron had.
Why do you think the only way to 'respect' the view of the people is to slavishly follow the opinion of 52% of them, after they'd been lied to by a Leave campaign that wasn't prepared to win?
Already the wheels are falling off with Johnson and Davis trying to reassure everyone that nothing will change, despite our 'control'. Meanwhile Fox's only job seems to be making the tea. I'm fairly optimistic at this point that the ultimate outcome will be that Brexit will be destroyed as an idea, along with the careers of everyone who advocated it.
Well done to the Lib Dems. I think some people are getting a little bit carried with a LD revival though. There are very few of their target seats which were so strongly for remain. The seats I think they could win with a strongly anti-Brexit message are:
Twickenham (c maj - 2,000; 69% remain) Kingston (c maj - 2,800; 62% remain) Cheltenham (c maj - 6,500; 56% remain) Bath (c maj - 3,800; 58% remain in BANES (probably higher in Bath city)) Winchester (c maj - 17,000; 59% remain in the district (probably higher in Winchester city)) OXWAB (c maj - 9,500; 72% Oxford; 57% Vale of White Horse) Lewes (c maj - 1,100; 52% remain) Cheadle (c maj - 6,500; Stockport borough 53% remain but likely higher here as Stockport town probably voted to leave) Hazel Grove (c maj - 6,600; as above) St Albans (c maj -12,700 over Lab, 15,300 over LD; 63% remain) Cambridge (Lab maj -599; 74% remain)
I would also expect the LDs to get close in S Cambs and Guildford
However, on the other side of the ledger a strongly anti-Brexit message could cost them 2 seats:
Carshalton (LD maj 1,500; Sutton 54% leave) North Norfolk (LD maj 4,000; 59% leave)
I can also see the LDs losing ground in a number of other target seats such as Eastbourne, Torbay, Burnley, Yeovil, Portsmouth S and North Devon, which all voted strongly for leave
Agree with a lot of what you say. The difficulty comes in deciding what portion of the Leave vote was:
a. soft Brexit b. hard Brexit c. protest vote.
The Remain vote is simple to understand, stick with the status quo, the Leave vote is less easy to fathom.
The leave vote was a vote to Leave the European Union.
Lots of motivations there, churlish to pretend otherwise.
Not Churlish. The mandate of the vote was very clear.
Of course, people might have different reasons for wanting to Leave.
Well done to the Lib Dems. I think some people are getting a little bit carried with a LD revival though. There are very few of their target seats which were so strongly for remain. The seats I think they could win with a strongly anti-Brexit message are:
Twickenham (c maj - 2,000; 69% remain) Kingston (c maj - 2,800; 62% remain) Cheltenham (c maj - 6,500; 56% remain) Bath (c maj - 3,800; 58% remain in BANES (probably higher in Bath city)) Winchester (c maj - 17,000; 59% remain in the district (probably higher in Winchester city)) OXWAB (c maj - 9,500; 72% Oxford; 57% Vale of White Horse) Lewes (c maj - 1,100; 52% remain) Cheadle (c maj - 6,500; Stockport borough 53% remain but likely higher here as Stockport town probably voted to leave) Hazel Grove (c maj - 6,600; as above) St Albans (c maj -12,700 over Lab, 15,300 over LD; 63% remain) Cambridge (Lab maj -599; 74% remain)
I would also expect the LDs to get close in S Cambs and Guildford
However, on the other side of the ledger a strongly anti-Brexit message could cost them 2 seats:
Carshalton (LD maj 1,500; Sutton 54% leave) North Norfolk (LD maj 4,000; 59% leave)
I can also see the LDs losing ground in a number of other target seats such as Eastbourne, Torbay, Burnley, Yeovil, Portsmouth S and North Devon, which all voted strongly for leave
Agree with a lot of what you say. The difficulty comes in deciding what portion of the Leave vote was:
a. soft Brexit b. hard Brexit c. protest vote.
The Remain vote is simple to understand, stick with the status quo, the Leave vote is less easy to fathom.
The leave vote was a vote to Leave the European Union.
Lots of motivations there, churlish to pretend otherwise.
But ultimately the vote was to leave the EU. Beyond that it could be anything.
Mr. P, aren't most Lib Dem potential seats held by the blues, though? A Lib Dem revival might make things trickier for Labour but if the yellows took, say, 30 seats wouldn't the vast majority be at the expense of the Conservatives?
My guess as to LibDem seats in 2020, would be (and assuming 600 seats):
Gains: Two or three seats in SW London (of Richmond, Twickenham, Kingston, Sutton & Cheam) Maybe one or two of the Remain leaning market towns of the SE. NE Fife Edinburgh West Cambridge
Holds: Orkney & Shetland the new Sheffield seat (50/50) Carshalton The Welsh seat North Norfolk Westomoreland
And Leeds and Southport will be difficult holds that they'll only manage if there is a major LibDem resurgence
I stick with my 10-14 seats on a 12-14% national vote share.
But also winners of the by-election are the backers of a third runway at Heathrow since the voters of Richmond have not made that their first priority.
Without Zac's publicity, the irony is that the campaign against the additional runway is now somewhat diminished. Also ironic if Mr Sarah Olney gets work from planning the Heathrow expansion.
Mr. kle4, asking the electorate for their view and only respecting it when it agrees with the political establishment isn't democracy.
Had Remain won, I would have accepted that meant we were staying in, at least until our relationship with the EU changed substantially beyond the 'deal' Cameron had.
I woukd have accepted it too, but you've rather skirted the point that a democratic vote lost but you didn't think it should be called is still a democratic vote lost. If remain won a second referendum, and for what it's worth i think leave would win a second vote, and it was a free and fair vote, it would be just as valid as the first, and so woukd a third. It's one reason there should perhaps be a rule about no rerun in X years unless y million people sign a petition or something , say 10 million. Because legally it seems we coukd hold the same vote over and over, and the first one held is no more binding than the others. To play devils advocate off your words, in such a scenario the remainers woukd claim the situation had changed substantially, not least as the public view changed. What if the eu turned round and offered a new deal(not happening)? By your own logic, it being a substantial chan ge from what we debated before, how coukd we refuse a second ref?
Last night I resigned my membership of Labour (I joined to vote in the leadership election). The first I saw of the Lib Dem candidate was her acceptance speech. Probably the best I've heard. She expressed in very few words what many of us are feeling.
Perhaps this ugly xenophobic nightmare might be showing it's first cracks. I hope so
Well done to the Lib Dems. I think some people are getting a little bit carried with a LD revival though. There are very few of their target seats which were so strongly for remain. The seats I think they could win with a strongly anti-Brexit message are:
Twickenham (c maj - 2,000; 69% remain) Kingston (c maj - 2,800; 62% remain) Cheltenham (c maj - 6,500; 56% remain) Bath (c maj - 3,800; 58% remain in BANES (probably higher in Bath city)) Winchester (c maj - 17,000; 59% remain in the district (probably higher in Winchester city)) OXWAB (c maj - 9,500; 72% Oxford; 57% Vale of White Horse) Lewes (c maj - 1,100; 52% remain) Cheadle (c maj - 6,500; Stockport borough 53% remain but likely higher here as Stockport town probably voted to leave) Hazel Grove (c maj - 6,600; as above) St Albans (c maj -12,700 over Lab, 15,300 over LD; 63% remain) Cambridge (Lab maj -599; 74% remain)
I would also expect the LDs to get close in S Cambs and Guildford
However, on the other side of the ledger a strongly anti-Brexit message could cost them 2 seats:
Carshalton (LD maj 1,500; Sutton 54% leave) North Norfolk (LD maj 4,000; 59% leave)
I can also see the LDs losing ground in a number of other target seats such as Eastbourne, Torbay, Burnley, Yeovil, Portsmouth S and North Devon, which all voted strongly for leave
Agree with a lot of what you say. The difficulty comes in deciding what portion of the Leave vote was:
a. soft Brexit b. hard Brexit c. protest vote.
The Remain vote is simple to understand, stick with the status quo, the Leave vote is less easy to fathom.
The leave vote was a vote to Leave the European Union.
Obviously, but I suspect that there was a significant protest vote and it didn't specify the details leaving open a number of options ranging from soft to hard Brexit (to use the commonly accepted shorthand).
Well done to the Lib Dems. I think some people are getting a little bit carried with a LD revival though. There are very few of their target seats which were so strongly for remain. The seats I think they could win with a strongly anti-Brexit message are:
Twickenham (c maj - 2,000; 69% remain) Kingston (c maj - 2,800; 62% remain) Cheltenham (c maj - 6,500; 56% remain) Bath (c maj - 3,800; 58% remain in BANES (probably higher in Bath city)) Winchester (c maj - 17,000; 59% remain in the district (probably higher in Winchester city)) OXWAB (c maj - 9,500; 72% Oxford; 57% Vale of White Horse) Lewes (c maj - 1,100; 52% remain) Cheadle (c maj - 6,500; Stockport borough 53% remain but likely higher here as Stockport town probably voted to leave) Hazel Grove (c maj - 6,600; as above) St Albans (c maj -12,700 over Lab, 15,300 over LD; 63% remain) Cambridge (Lab maj -599; 74% remain)
I would also expect the LDs to get close in S Cambs and Guildford
However, on the other side of the ledger a strongly anti-Brexit message could cost them 2 seats:
Carshalton (LD maj 1,500; Sutton 54% leave) North Norfolk (LD maj 4,000; 59% leave)
I can also see the LDs losing ground in a number of other target seats such as Eastbourne, Torbay, Burnley, Yeovil, Portsmouth S and North Devon, which all voted strongly for leave
Agree with a lot of what you say. The difficulty comes in deciding what portion of the Leave vote was:
a. soft Brexit b. hard Brexit c. protest vote.
The Remain vote is simple to understand, stick with the status quo, the Leave vote is less easy to fathom.
The leave vote was a vote to Leave the European Union.
Lots of motivations there, churlish to pretend otherwise.
Boy does Cameron have a lot to answer for. Only a handful of years ago only a small minority of the population was remotely interested in the EU or getting out of it (I forget the exact figures from the social surveys, maybe 20% tops?). Now everything is seen through the prism of Remain or Leave. The country is totally divided. Ten minutes watching QT last night makes clear how angry and irrational both sides are becoming over this - an issue that few really cared about until Cameron opened pandora's box.
Meanwhile, the number one issue facing Britain goes totally ignored. How on earth are we going to deal with an ageing population and the horrendous social care costs this is going to demand in next thirty years?
Mr. P, aren't most Lib Dem potential seats held by the blues, though? A Lib Dem revival might make things trickier for Labour but if the yellows took, say, 30 seats wouldn't the vast majority be at the expense of the Conservatives?
My guess as to LibDem seats in 2020, would be (and assuming 600 seats):
Gains: Two or three seats in SW London (of Richmond, Twickenham, Kingston, Sutton & Cheam) Maybe one or two of the Remain leaning market towns of the SE. NE Fife Edinburgh West Cambridge
Holds: Orkney & Shetland the new Sheffield seat (50/50) Carshalton The Welsh seat North Norfolk Westomoreland
And Leeds and Southport will be difficult holds that they'll only manage if there is a major LibDem resurgence
I stick with my 10-14 seats on a 12-14% national vote share.
Very timid, Mr rcs? I saw somewhere that the same swing (treating ZG as the Tory he was) would make the LibDems the largest party. DYOR.
Well done to the Lib Dems. I think some people are getting a little bit carried with a LD revival though. There are very few of their target seats which were so strongly for remain. The seats I think they could win with a strongly anti-Brexit message are:
Twickenham (c maj - 2,000; 69% remain) Kingston (c maj - 2,800; 62% remain)
etc.
Ian Warren has a good list of similar seats. Some of which the LDs are nowhere in (e.g. Wimbledon). Remember them, they might yet be 100/1 winners.
Last night I resigned my membership of Labour (I joined to vote in the leadership election). The first I saw of the Lib Dem candidate was her acceptance speach. Probably the best I've heard. She expressed in very few words what many of us are feeling.
Perhaps this ugly xenophobic nightmare might be showing it's first crack. I hope so
On the very few words point, maybe it was because it was so late and she was tired, but given politician propensity for waffling, i appreciated how succinct her answers to Neil were, even i don't agree with her.
Mr. P, aren't most Lib Dem potential seats held by the blues, though? A Lib Dem revival might make things trickier for Labour but if the yellows took, say, 30 seats wouldn't the vast majority be at the expense of the Conservatives?
My guess as to LibDem seats in 2020, would be (and assuming 600 seats):
Gains: Two or three seats in SW London (of Richmond, Twickenham, Kingston, Sutton & Cheam) Maybe one or two of the Remain leaning market towns of the SE. NE Fife Edinburgh West Cambridge
Holds: Orkney & Shetland the new Sheffield seat (50/50) Carshalton The Welsh seat North Norfolk Westomoreland
And Leeds and Southport will be difficult holds that they'll only manage if there is a major LibDem resurgence
I stick with my 10-14 seats on a 12-14% national vote share.
1. They won't retake Cambridge (no sign of a revival in local elections)
2. The Welsh seat (Ceredigion) will become more vulnerable to Plaid Cymru if the boundary changes go through.
The boundary changes may not go through, but I would suspect that Plaid Cymru are delighted with the changes (which are pretty generous to them) and bribe-able.
It would be churlish not to be pleased for the LibDems, as they have endured continuous electoral grief since 2010.
But, I'd go for < 10 seats in 2020. I don't see them recovering quickly in many of their former strongholds.
Btw Tim Farron's point on this morning's R4 is an important one - this is not just about remainers, but about 'soft' leave voters who still want to be protected from the ultras and to see the Gvt deliver what they would see as a more sensible outcome.
So Farron is deeming this result as "the fight back of the 48%".
I'm amazed politicians haven't yet grasped that results in London are rarely indicative of the wider country.
I'm sure they have grasped that. But they need to inspire the troops as they work on the rest.
Quite right. Plus the Red BNP brigade bizarrely quite like Corbyn (or some of them do) so Labour Leave seats up north are still safe-ish and would never vote Tory in any case.
QT last night was revealing. Lots of anti-immigrant sentiment in an area where – guess what – there are very few immigrants. 96% of Wakefielders are white. Only 2.5% were born outside the UK. So what are they so scared of? This fear of an non-present outsider is common to many Labour Leave places.
Interestingly, the ward with by far the highest ethnic minority count is also the one that most reliably votes Conservative (although to be fair, I'd guess that it's also the one with the highest ABC1 count).
Notably, Wakefield-Labour-so-white has no non-white councillors nor, in my time in the district, has it fielded a non-white candidate. By contrast, the Tory Group leader is of subcontinental descent (probably Pakistani, perhaps Indian muslim - I don't know: I've never bothered to ask him).
Yes, it's Red BNP nativist country. The Tories are clearly the cosmopolitan party up there. But these old divisions will cease to be meaningful in the coming years.
Left vs Right is dead. The new divide is between Open and Closed.
"QT last night was revealing. Lots of anti-immigrant sentiment in an area where – guess what – there are very few immigrants. 96% of Wakefielders are white. Only 2.5% were born outside the UK. So what are they so scared of? This fear of an non-present outsider is common to many Labour Leave places."
RU Serious?
(a) that's not true. Only 92.7% of Wakefield is white British
The problem with planning a 2020 strategy on being the party of remain is that in 2020 it may turn into the party of rejoin. A potential pool of 48% of the electorate would suddely become more like 15-20%, with competition from Labour and the Greens. Only if there is an election before we leave would a 48% strategy work, and judging by last night I don't see the Tories going for an election at least until Brexit is irreversible.
Boy does Cameron have a lot to answer for. Only a handful of years ago only a small minority of the population was remotely interested in the EU or getting out of it (I forget the exact figures from the social surveys, maybe 20% tops?). Now everything is seen through the prism of Remain or Leave. The country is totally divided. Ten minutes watching QT last night makes clear how angry and irrational both sides are becoming over this - an issue that few really cared about until Cameron opened pandora's box.
Meanwhile, the number one issue facing Britain goes totally ignored. How on earth are we going to deal with an ageing population and the horrendous social care costs this is going to demand in next thirty years?
This is why in the end there can only be one outcome. If Europe isn't going away we will have to learn to embrace it or risk destroying the country.
More and more people will come to the conclusion, not only that we're better off in, but that we're better off never again thinking otherwise. This moment is Euroscepticism's last hurrah before it's carried off to its political grave.
The Remain vote is simple to understand, stick with the status quo, the Leave vote is less easy to fathom.
I'm not buying that. There were many different components of the Remain vote, too. Broadly: those nervous of change in general; those convinced change was too much of an economic risk; those who saw a specific threat to their own way of life; those who are fully signed up to More Europe.
Which is why some of them accept the result and are happy to move on, and some don't.
Yes, they all voted for the status quo, but any analysis that starts with a 48% bloc and seeks to add on to that is fundamentally flawed.
So Farron is deeming this result as "the fight back of the 48%".
I'm amazed politicians haven't yet grasped that results in London are rarely indicative of the wider country.
I'm sure they have grasped that. But they need to inspire the troops as they work on the rest.
Quite right. Plus the Red BNP brigade bizarrely quite like Corbyn (or some of them do) so Labour Leave seats up north are still safe-ish and would never vote Tory in any case.
QT last night was revealing. Lots of anti-immigrant sentiment in an area where – guess what – there are very few immigrants. 96% of Wakefielders are white. Only 2.5% were born outside the UK. So what are they so scared of? This fear of an non-present outsider is common to many Labour Leave places.
Interestingly, the ward with by far the highest ethnic minority count is also the one that most reliably votes Conservative (although to be fair, I'd guess that it's also the one with the highest ABC1 count).
Notably, Wakefield-Labour-so-white has no non-white councillors nor, in my time in the district, has it fielded a non-white candidate. By contrast, the Tory Group leader is of subcontinental descent (probably Pakistani, perhaps Indian muslim - I don't know: I've never bothered to ask him).
Yes, it's Red BNP nativist country. The Tories are clearly the cosmopolitan party up there. But these old divisions will cease to be meaningful in the coming years.
Left vs Right is dead. The new divide is between Open and Closed.
It's the same in London - Havering is very white whilst next door Redbridge is very mixed, yet the UKIP presence (and a similar attitude amongst the Tories and various independents) is much more marked in the former, even comparing areas of each with lower levels of ethnic population.
Well done to the Lib Dems. I think some people are getting a little bit carried with a LD revival though. There are very few of their target seats which were so strongly for remain. The seats I think they could win with a strongly anti-Brexit message are:
Twickenham (c maj - 2,000; 69% remain) Kingston (c maj - 2,800; 62% remain) Cheltenham (c maj - 6,500; 56% remain) Bath (c maj - 3,800; 58% remain in BANES (probably higher in Bath city)) Winchester (c maj - 17,000; 59% remain 15,300 over LD; 63% remain) Cambridge (Lab maj -599; 74% remain)
I would also expect the LDs to get close in S Cambs and Guildford
However, on the other side of the ledger a strongly anti-Brexit message could cost them 2 seats:
Carshalton (LD maj 1,500; Sutton 54% leave) North Norfolk (LD maj 4,000; 59% leave)
I can also see the LDs losing ground in a number of other target seats such as Eastbourne, Torbay, Burnley, Yeovil, Portsmouth S and North Devon, which all voted strongly for leave
Agree with a lot of what you say. The difficulty comes in deciding what portion of the Leave vote was:
a. softhe status quo, the Leave vote is less easy to fathom.
The leave vote was a vote to Leave the European Union.
Lots of motivations there, churlish to pretend otherwise.
Boy does Cameron have a lot to answer for. Only a handful of years ago only a small minority of the population was remotely interested in the EU or getting out of it (I forget the exact figures from the social surveys, maybe 20% tops?). Now everything is seen through the prism of Remain or Leave. The country is totally divided. Ten minutes watching QT last night makes clear how angry and irrational both sides are becoming over this - an issue that few really cared about until Cameron opened pandora's box.
Meanwhile, the number one issue facing Britain goes totally ignored. How on earth are we going to deal with an ageing population and the horrendous social care costs this is going to demand in next thirty years?
Cameron brought forward the eu issue because far from being one few cared about, it turns out UKIP were right and lots of people did but had been ignored. If they didn't, a majority would not gave voted to leave, with a high turnout. That he made the wrong call, whether he had a choice, those are matters of opinion, but he did not create Pandora's box. It was fit to burst open without his touch, and turns out was a majority and probably shouldn't haveeen stuffed in the box getting angry for so long.
Boy does Cameron have a lot to answer for. Only a handful of years ago only a small minority of the population was remotely interested in the EU or getting out of it (I forget the exact figures from the social surveys, maybe 20% tops?). Now everything is seen through the prism of Remain or Leave. The country is totally divided. Ten minutes watching QT last night makes clear how angry and irrational both sides are becoming over this - an issue that few really cared about until Cameron opened pandora's box.
Meanwhile, the number one issue facing Britain goes totally ignored. How on earth are we going to deal with an ageing population and the horrendous social care costs this is going to demand in next thirty years?
This is why in the end there can only be one outcome. If Europe isn't going away we will have to learn to embrace it or risk destroying the country.
More and more people will come to the conclusion, not only that we're better off in, but that we're better off never again thinking otherwise. This moment is Euroscepticism's last hurrah before it's carried off to its political grave.
My younger daughter has recently announced that she has switched her loyalty from the Tories to the Lib Dems. She was a great fan of Cameron but has little time for May and finds Farron normal and likeable (something I was teasing her about only at tea time yesterday). Clearly she was ahead of the trend.
For the Tories this is a risk. Cameron and Osborne built their majority on the back of the bodies of their erstwhile coalition partners. They did so by repositioning the Tories as a centre party with a liberal social agenda and it played very well in Lib Dem seats.
In contrast May is much more of a traditional Conservative. This has allowed her to pick up some of the support that Cameron had lost to UKIP boosting her standing in the polls to remarkable levels. But are the Tories in danger of swopping the votes they needed to win a majority for ever larger majorities in already safe seats? I think they are and that this result, albeit helped by Zac's stupidity, is a good example of that.
I may not be following my daughter yet but I am massively less enthusiastic about May than I was about Cameron and Osborne. If it wasn't for Ruth...
If that is what's happening (a Con-LD swing, offset by a UKIP-Con one), it'd depend on the numbers but my gut instinct is that it'd see some losses to LDs in SW England and SW London, offset by gains from Labour in Mids, NW and Yorks. But with the majority so slim, which factor would be bigger is critical and would obviously depend on the numbers.
Push comes to shove with posters of Jeremy Corbyn in Alex Salmond's breast pocket.
No - every Tory poster will be him in front of that sports car coupled with some of his choicer statements attached.
It will be brutal, and much wailed over, and talked about endlessly by Corbyn's fellow metropolitan elites in the media with no brain cells to run together (e.g. Milne) with long faces.
And it will be effective, and fair, and most of all very funny to watch.
I'm not so sure.
I'm aware of focus groups conducted that where the voters just flat out refused to believe some of Corbyn and McDonnell's more choice words.
'Nobody would say that' or 'Must have been taken out of context'
Corbyn would probably repeat his comments - or at least try to justify them - if he were given the right prompt in a TV interview or the leaders' debates.
Boy does Cameron have a lot to answer for. Only a handful of years ago only a small minority of the population was remotely interested in the EU or getting out of it (I forget the exact figures from the social surveys, maybe 20% tops?). Now everything is seen through the prism of Remain or Leave. The country is totally divided. Ten minutes watching QT last night makes clear how angry and irrational both sides are becoming over this - an issue that few really cared about until Cameron opened pandora's box.
Meanwhile, the number one issue facing Britain goes totally ignored. How on earth are we going to deal with an ageing population and the horrendous social care costs this is going to demand in next thirty years?
This is why in the end there can only be one outcome. If Europe isn't going away we will have to learn to embrace it or risk destroying the country.
More and more people will come to the conclusion, not only that we're better off in, but that we're better off never again thinking otherwise. This moment is Euroscepticism's last hurrah before it's carried off to its political grave.
Brave words, Minister.
Speedy declared "Brexit is dead" last night. So effectively we're all just waiting for the last rites.
Btw Tim Farron's point on this morning's R4 is an important one - this is not just about remainers, but about 'soft' leave voters who still want to be protected from the ultras and to see the Gvt deliver what they would see as a more sensible outcome.
He'd be better widening that out to soft centre rights who want to be protected from Tory headbangers too (of whom May seems to have converted into).
The problem with planning a 2020 strategy on being the party of remain is that in 2020 it may turn into the party of rejoin. A potential pool of 48% of the electorate would suddely become more like 15-20%, with competition from Labour and the Greens. Only if there is an election before we leave would a 48% strategy work, and judging by last night I don't see the Tories going for an election at least until Brexit is irreversible.
Although from the Lib Dem perspective - 20% is still markedly better than the 8% (or so) they are currently on...
The problem with planning a 2020 strategy on being the party of remain is that in 2020 it may turn into the party of rejoin. A potential pool of 48% of the electorate would suddely become more like 15-20%, with competition from Labour and the Greens. Only if there is an election before we leave would a 48% strategy work, and judging by last night I don't see the Tories going for an election at least until Brexit is irreversible.
This assumes it's all done and dusted by 2020, which is by no means a forgone conclusion. But I think at that point they retreat to rejoin specific things, like the Single Market.
Well done to the Lib Dems. I think some people are getting a little bit carried with a LD revival though. There are very few of their target seats which were so strongly for remain. The seats I think they could win with a strongly anti-Brexit message are:
Twickenham (c maj - 2,000; 69% remain) Kingston (c maj - 2,800; 62% remain) Cheltenham (c maj - 6,500; 56% remain) Bath (c maj - 3,800; 58% remain in BANES (probably higher in Bath city)) Winchester (c maj - 17,000; 59% remain in the district (probably higher in Winchester city)) OXWAB (c maj - 9,500; 72% Oxford; 57% Vale of White Horse) Lewes (c maj - 1,100; 52% remain) Cheadle (c maj - 6,500; Stockport borough 53% remain but likely higher here as Stockport town probably voted to leave) Hazel Grove (c maj - 6,600; as above) St Albans (c maj -12,700 over Lab, 15,300 over LD; 63% remain) Cambridge (Lab maj -599; 74% remain)
I would also expect the LDs to get close in S Cambs and Guildford
However, on the other side of the ledger a strongly anti-Brexit message could cost them 2 seats:
Carshalton (LD maj 1,500; Sutton 54% leave) North Norfolk (LD maj 4,000; 59% leave)
I can also see the LDs losing ground in a number of other target seats such as Eastbourne, Torbay, Burnley, Yeovil, Portsmouth S and North Devon, which all voted strongly for leave
Agree with a lot of what you say. The difficulty comes in deciding what portion of the Leave vote was:
a. soft Brexit b. hard Brexit c. protest vote.
The Remain vote is simple to understand, stick with the status quo, the Leave vote is less easy to fathom.
The leave vote was a vote to Leave the European Union.
Lots of motivations there, churlish to pretend otherwise.
Not Churlish. The mandate of the vote was very clear.
Of course, people might have different reasons for wanting to Leave.
Important to recognise that in how the government proceeds. Certainly no mandate for any flavour of Brexit beyond one that raises £350M for the NHS.
Btw Tim Farron's point on this morning's R4 is an important one - this is not just about remainers, but about 'soft' leave voters who still want to be protected from the ultras and to see the Gvt deliver what they would see as a more sensible outcome.
That depends, if the LDs push they seek opportunities for remaining, some soft leavers will feel hard leave is better than that and the risk, if small, of remaining us nor worth voting ld. We did vote leave after all. But soft leavers do need a push within government to have a chance.
Boy does Cameron have a lot to answer for. Only a handful of years ago only a small minority of the population was remotely interested in the EU or getting out of it (I forget the exact figures from the social surveys, maybe 20% tops?). Now everything is seen through the prism of Remain or Leave. The country is totally divided. Ten minutes watching QT last night makes clear how angry and irrational both sides are becoming over this - an issue that few really cared about until Cameron opened pandora's box.
Meanwhile, the number one issue facing Britain goes totally ignored. How on earth are we going to deal with an ageing population and the horrendous social care costs this is going to demand in next thirty years?
This is why in the end there can only be one outcome. If Europe isn't going away we will have to learn to embrace it or risk destroying the country.
More and more people will come to the conclusion, not only that we're better off in, but that we're better off never again thinking otherwise. This moment is Euroscepticism's last hurrah before it's carried off to its political grave.
Brave words, Minister.
Speedy declared "Brexit is dead" last night. So effectively we're all just waiting for the last rites.
He may be right, but only because the French are going to blow the whole EU project up in April/May next year. We'll have nothing to leave by 2018.
Well done to the Lib Dems. I think some people are getting a little bit carried with a LD revival though. There are very few of their target seats which were so strongly for remain. The seats I think they could win with a strongly anti-Brexit message are:
Twickenham (c maj - 2,000; 69% remain) Kingston (c maj - 2,800; 62% remain) Cheltenham (c maj - 6,500; 56% remain) Bath (c maj - 3,800; 58% remain in BANES (probably higher in Bath city)) Winchester (c maj - 17,000; 59% remain in the district (probably higher in Winchester city)) OXWAB (c maj - 9,500; 72% Oxford; 57% Vale of White Horse) Lewes (c maj - 1,100; 52% remain) Cheadle (c maj - 6,500; Stockport borough 53% remain but likely higher here as Stockport town probably voted to leave) Hazel Grove (c maj - 6,600; as above) St Albans (c maj -12,700 over Lab, 15,300 over LD; 63% remain) Cambridge (Lab maj -599; 74% remain)
I would also expect the LDs to get close in S Cambs and Guildford
However, on the other side of the ledger a strongly anti-Brexit message could cost them 2 seats:
Carshalton (LD maj 1,500; Sutton 54% leave) North Norfolk (LD maj 4,000; 59% leave)
I can also see the LDs losing ground in a number of other target seats such as Eastbourne, Torbay, Burnley, Yeovil, Portsmouth S and North Devon, which all voted strongly for leave
Agree with a lot of what you say. The difficulty comes in deciding what portion of the Leave vote was:
a. soft Brexit b. hard Brexit c. protest vote.
The Remain vote is simple to understand, stick with the status quo, the Leave vote is less easy to fathom.
The leave vote was a vote to Leave the European Union.
Lots of motivations there, churlish to pretend otherwise.
Not Churlish. The mandate of the vote was very clear.
Of course, people might have different reasons for wanting to Leave.
Important to recognise that in how the government proceeds. Certainly no mandate for any flavour of Brexit beyond one that raises £350M for the NHS.
No mandate for any particular favour if Brexit, the form didn't let us select options. Prominence in the campaign gives an INdication toward more money for the NHS and severely reduced immigration over single market access, but nothing that could be called a mandate.
Very interesting result - congrats to all LibDems here.
It'll be interesting to see what sort of polling bump this gives the LibDems. Normally it doesn't dramatically change the landscape but it should certasinly nicrease the potential for tactical voting wins, and maybe that "progressive alliance" thing is starting to happen without the blessing of the leaderships.
One point worth stressing is that it shows the limited patience that voters have for MPs resigning their seats to make a point. They get credit for it for a few days, but then people start to think whether they really still want them. It also illustrates that, as with referendums, the people who call elections on issue X can't be sure people won't vote on issue Y - a lesson that Renzi is about to learn, I think.
Boy does Cameron have a lot to answer for. Only a handful of years ago only a small minority of the population was remotely interested in the EU or getting out of it (I forget the exact figures from the social surveys, maybe 20% tops?). Now everything is seen through the prism of Remain or Leave. The country is totally divided. Ten minutes watching QT last night makes clear how angry and irrational both sides are becoming over this - an issue that few really cared about until Cameron opened pandora's box.
Meanwhile, the number one issue facing Britain goes totally ignored. How on earth are we going to deal with an ageing population and the horrendous social care costs this is going to demand in next thirty years?
This is why in the end there can only be one outcome. If Europe isn't going away we will have to learn to embrace it or risk destroying the country.
More and more people will come to the conclusion, not only that we're better off in, but that we're better off never again thinking otherwise. This moment is Euroscepticism's last hurrah before it's carried off to its political grave.
Brave words, Minister.
Speedy declared "Brexit is dead" last night. So effectively we're all just waiting for the last rites.
He may be right, but only because the French are going to blow the whole EU project up in April/May next year. We'll have nothing to leave by 2018.
An when the apocalypse fails to happen, and then the Germans reelect Merkel?
I'm afraid waiting for the EU to blow itself up isn't a Brexit strategy. It's here to stay.
Btw Tim Farron's point on this morning's R4 is an important one - this is not just about remainers, but about 'soft' leave voters who still want to be protected from the ultras and to see the Gvt deliver what they would see as a more sensible outcome.
He'd be better widening that out to soft centre rights who want to be protected from Tory headbangers too (of whom May seems to have converted into).
Surely mostly (or st least many of) the same people?
Boy does Cameron have a lot to answer for. Only a handful of years ago only a small minority of the population was remotely interested in the EU or getting out of it (I forget the exact figures from the social surveys, maybe 20% tops?). Now everything is seen through the prism of Remain or Leave. The country is totally divided. Ten minutes watching QT last night makes clear how angry and irrational both sides are becoming over this - an issue that few really cared about until Cameron opened pandora's box.
Meanwhile, the number one issue facing Britain goes totally ignored. How on earth are we going to deal with an ageing population and the horrendous social care costs this is going to demand in next thirty years?
This is why in the end there can only be one outcome. If Europe isn't going away we will have to learn to embrace it or risk destroying the country.
More and more people will come to the conclusion, not only that we're better off in, but that we're better off never again thinking otherwise. This moment is Euroscepticism's last hurrah before it's carried off to its political grave.
I voted Remain but I think the country will tear itself apart if the majority feel their vote is simply ignored. We're out of the EU for a generation at least.
Where May is going wrong is that with such a close vote she should be trying to re-unite the country and lead a national conversation about where we are going in the medium term. Instead she is hiding in a bunker and making up stupid sound bites.
It was a mistake for May to postpone Article 50 till spring, it left the referendum wound to fester.
If the Tories move to Remain to keep those votes from going LD they will lose the Leave votes to UKIP.
If they move to Leave to keep those votes from going UKIP they lose the Remain votes to the LD.
It's a lose-lose situation that will worsen the longer the issue remains unresolved. Cameron was right, Article 50 should have been triggered immediately.
Boy does Cameron have a lot to answer for. Only a handful of years ago only a small minority of the population was remotely interested in the EU or getting out of it (I forget the exact figures from the social surveys, maybe 20% tops?). Now everything is seen through the prism of Remain or Leave. The country is totally divided. Ten minutes watching QT last night makes clear how angry and irrational both sides are becoming over this - an issue that few really cared about until Cameron opened pandora's box.
Meanwhile, the number one issue facing Britain goes totally ignored. How on earth are we going to deal with an ageing population and the horrendous social care costs this is going to demand in next thirty years?
This is why in the end there can only be one outcome. If Europe isn't going away we will have to learn to embrace it or risk destroying the country.
More and more people will come to the conclusion, not only that we're better off in, but that we're better off never again thinking otherwise. This moment is Euroscepticism's last hurrah before it's carried off to its political grave.
Brave words, Minister.
Speedy declared "Brexit is dead" last night. So effectively we're all just waiting for the last rites.
That prediction makes me believe my Article 50 to be triggered in 2016 will be a winner now.
By what process? The Supreme Court is unlikely to rule that May can use the Royal Prerogative, and may even say that as currently constituted, the Scottish Parliament will need to consent to Article 50. Whichever way you look at it we will have bitterly fought constitutional battles before we even get to the point of starting negotiations to leave.
It was a mistake for May to postpone Article 50 till spring, it left the referendum wound to fester.
If the Tories move to Remain to keep those votes from going LD they will lose the Leave votes to UKIP.
If they move to Leave to keep those votes from going UKIP they lose the Remain votes to the LD.
It's a lose-lose situation that will worsen the longer the issue remains unresolved. Cameron was right, Article 50 should have been triggered immediately.
I do t know yet if it was a mistake to delay, but being specific on the date was a mistake, as there coukd in theory at least be good reasons to continue to delay, but she picked an arbitrary date and will look a fool if she misses it. Though it is so far off as a deadline that's hard to envisage,
By what process? The Supreme Court is unlikely to rule that May can use the Royal Prerogative, and may even say that as currently constituted, the Scottish Parliament will need to consent to Article 50. Whichever way you look at it we will have bitterly fought constitutional battles before we even get to the point of starting negotiations to leave.
Given the eu wants us gone now, I wouldn't be surprised if they act like cocks to encourage our MPs and peers not to get ideas of not triggering, not that I think the MPs woukd refuse,
I do t know yet if it was a mistake to delay, but being specific on the date was a mistake, as there coukd in theory at least be good reasons to continue to delay, but she picked an arbitrary date and will look a fool if she misses it. Though it is so far off as a deadline that's hard to envisage,
The choice of date is brilliant for destroying the momentum for Leave. First she'll need to delay because of a rear-guard parliamentary process, then the following month Le Pen will get crushed in the French election. Then we'll be too close to the German election to pull the trigger. Brexit is going nowhere.
By what process? The Supreme Court is unlikely to rule that May can use the Royal Prerogative, and may even say that as currently constituted, the Scottish Parliament will need to consent to Article 50. Whichever way you look at it we will have bitterly fought constitutional battles before we even get to the point of starting negotiations to leave.
Given the eu wants us gone now, I wouldn't be surprised if they act like cocks to encourage our MPs and peers not to get ideas of not triggering, not that I think the MPs woukd refuse,
It was a mistake for May to postpone Article 50 till spring, it left the referendum wound to fester.
If the Tories move to Remain to keep those votes from going LD they will lose the Leave votes to UKIP.
If they move to Leave to keep those votes from going UKIP they lose the Remain votes to the LD.
It's a lose-lose situation that will worsen the longer the issue remains unresolved. Cameron was right, Article 50 should have been triggered immediately.
It is right to delay the trigger until the government has consulted with businesses and can come up with a negotiating stance.
By what process? The Supreme Court is unlikely to rule that May can use the Royal Prerogative, and may even say that as currently constituted, the Scottish Parliament will need to consent to Article 50. Whichever way you look at it we will have bitterly fought constitutional battles before we even get to the point of starting negotiations to leave.
By the process that people voted for it.
The vote happened and we can't pretend it didn't. If the EU was to undergo a sudden conversion and announce they had taken on board the UK critique then I'd be delighted and there would be a case for constructive negotiations and a re-run of the referendum.
If that doesn't happen and the UK crawled back to the EU, it would be a national humiliation and more importantly a sign that people's votes didn't matter.
But also winners of the by-election are the backers of a third runway at Heathrow since the voters of Richmond have not made that their first priority.
Without Zac's publicity, the irony is that the campaign against the additional runway is now somewhat diminished. Also ironic if Mr Sarah Olney gets work from planning the Heathrow expansion.
A win win in that household?
I hope Sarah works with Zac on campaigning against the third runway. I'm sure he can help with his experience on the matter and the time he now has available. This is a serious suggestion.
Predictable and completely OTT reaction from the liberals, considering this is a by election, but congrats to her anyway. This is what I love about our system - you can kick out an MP overnight. It's brutal, it's efficient, and it works. Zac has ended his political career in ignominy, and I don't think many people, including Tories, will shed many tears for him.
It was a mistake for May to postpone Article 50 till spring, it left the referendum wound to fester.
If the Tories move to Remain to keep those votes from going LD they will lose the Leave votes to UKIP.
If they move to Leave to keep those votes from going UKIP they lose the Remain votes to the LD.
It's a lose-lose situation that will worsen the longer the issue remains unresolved. Cameron was right, Article 50 should have been triggered immediately.
Increasingly hard to disagree with this. The no mans land we are currently occupying is proving extremely divisive, not just of parties but of the country.
As many others have pointed out it is also distracting us from the real question on which there is room for any number of proper debates: what kind of a Brexit do we actually want? How much do we want to continue to co-operate with the EU from outside? Once the article 50 notice is served we can move on to discuss and negotiate on these very important issues. At the moment we are still arguing about the result and it is doing no one any good.
Well done to the Lib Dems. I think some people are getting a little bit carried with a LD revival though. There are very few of their target seats which were so strongly for remain. The seats I think they could win with a strongly anti-Brexit message are:
Twickenham (c maj - 2,000; 69% remain) Kingston (c maj - 2,800; 62% remain) Cheltenham (c maj - 6,500; 56% remain) Bath (c maj - 3,800; 58% remain in BANES (probably higher in Bath city)) Winchester (c maj - 17,000; 59% remain in the district (probably higher in Winchester city)) OXWAB (c maj - 9,500; 72% Oxford; 57% Vale of White Horse) Lewes (c maj - 1,100; 52% remain) Cheadle (c maj - 6,500; Stockport borough 53% remain but likely higher here as Stockport town probably voted to leave) Hazel Grove (c maj - 6,600; as above) St Albans (c maj -12,700 over Lab, 15,300 over LD; 63% remain) Cambridge (Lab maj -599; 74% remain)
I would also expect the LDs to get close in S Cambs and Guildford
However, on the other side of the ledger a strongly anti-Brexit message could cost them 2 seats:
Carshalton (LD maj 1,500; Sutton 54% leave) North Norfolk (LD maj 4,000; 59% leave)
I can also see the LDs losing ground in a number of other target seats such as Eastbourne, Torbay, Burnley, Yeovil, Portsmouth S and North Devon, which all voted strongly for leave
Agree with a lot of what you say. The difficulty comes in deciding what portion of the Leave vote was:
a. soft Brexit b. hard Brexit c. protest vote.
The Remain vote is simple to understand, stick with the status quo, the Leave vote is less easy to fathom.
The leave vote was a vote to Leave the European Union.
Lots of motivations there, churlish to pretend otherwise.
Not Churlish. The mandate of the vote was very clear.
Of course, people might have different reasons for wanting to Leave.
Important to recognise that in how the government proceeds. Certainly no mandate for any flavour of Brexit beyond one that raises £350M for the NHS.
Given all the recent Westminster and Local by-election results I have also been convinced that the opinion polls are wrong yet again.
This is what I believe is the true situation:
CON 38 LAB 30 LD 13 UKIP 7
The Tories should experience a 10 point swing in the S.E and London to the LD (20 point swings in By-elections), but they should be getting at least a 5 point swing from UKIP nationally.
Cornwall is not an area that I envision LD gains as it was a Leave area.
Last night I resigned my membership of Labour (I joined to vote in the leadership election). The first I saw of the Lib Dem candidate was her acceptance speech. Probably the best I've heard. She expressed in very few words what many of us are feeling.
Perhaps this ugly xenophobic nightmare might be showing it's first cracks. I hope so
Last night I resigned my membership of Labour (I joined to vote in the leadership election). The first I saw of the Lib Dem candidate was her acceptance speech. Probably the best I've heard. She expressed in very few words what many of us are feeling.
Perhaps this ugly xenophobic nightmare might be showing it's first cracks. I hope so
That's a bit harsh. She's only just been elected.
Yes, rightwing posters' constant reference to Olney's appearance over the past few days has been telling.
* many "natural Tory voters" have contempt for "Europeans" but they feel uneasy about voting the same way as the dirty oiks, even if that way is "far right"
* the Labour party is practically finished: "we love immigration" disgusts their own "natural voters", and talking to people in the tone of a social worker isn't going to change that
* both the Lib Dems and UKIP have a lot going their way, but a bit of a spit and polish is probably required in both cases
If Europe isn't going away we will have to learn to embrace it or risk destroying the country.
More and more people will come to the conclusion, not only that we're better off in, but that we're better off never again thinking otherwise. This moment is Euroscepticism's last hurrah before it's carried off to its political grave.
I voted Remain but I think the country will tear itself apart if the majority feel their vote is simply ignored. We're out of the EU for a generation at least.
"Europe" is not the EU, and it's unlikely the EU will exist for another generation. It seems to be losing its US support and about to splinter.
Hands up anyone who thinks the EU will survive the next Lehman's event. Hands up if you think it will survive an event that's ten times as big as Lehman's. It certainly can't survive France leaving.
What will the structured framework for cooperation in Europe look like, post-EU? There will have to be something. Sooner or later someone will come up with a plan and it could be popular.
Russia will be the external big friend, but will the core be France and Germany or will it be France, Germany and Britain?
Where May is going wrong is that with such a close vote she should be trying to re-unite the country and lead a national conversation about where we are going in the medium term. Instead she is hiding in a bunker and making up stupid sound bites.
Agreed that bunker is the word. She is completely incompetent. She won't last long. She can't lead either the Tory party or the country. When was the last time that a twit who'd been filed in the Home Office for years could?
As many others have pointed out it is also distracting us from the real question on which there is room for any number of proper debates: what kind of a Brexit do we actually want? How much do we want to continue to co-operate with the EU from outside?
Others will be asking what kind of co-operation is desirable post-EU, and how can influence be brought to bear to determine the lines on which the EU cracks and to hasten its demise.
Preventing a French-German friendship that excludes Britain has been a constant in British foreign policy for the last zillion years and is unlikely not to be in the period to come.
Boy does Cameron have a lot to answer for. Only a handful of years ago only a small minority of the population was remotely interested in the EU or getting out of it (I forget the exact figures from the social surveys, maybe 20% tops?). Now everything is seen through the prism of Remain or Leave. The country is totally divided. Ten minutes watching QT last night makes clear how angry and irrational both sides are becoming over this - an issue that few really cared about until Cameron opened pandora's box.
Meanwhile, the number one issue facing Britain goes totally ignored. How on earth are we going to deal with an ageing population and the horrendous social care costs this is going to demand in next thirty years?
This is why in the end there can only be one outcome. If Europe isn't going away we will have to learn to embrace it or risk destroying the country.
More and more people will come to the conclusion, not only that we're better off in, but that we're better off never again thinking otherwise. This moment is Euroscepticism's last hurrah before it's carried off to its political grave.
Really? We joined in 1973, there was a referendum two years later with a large majority in favour of remaining in the EU. 43 years later that large majority in favour of the EU has been turned into a majority in favour of leaving the EU.
If 43 years experience of the EU leads to this result, why would you think that this is Euroscepticism's last hurrah?
"QT last night was revealing. Lots of anti-immigrant sentiment in an area where – guess what – there are very few immigrants. 96% of Wakefielders are white. Only 2.5% were born outside the UK. So what are they so scared of? This fear of an non-present outsider is common to many Labour Leave places."
RU Serious?
(a) that's not true. Only 92.7% of Wakefield is white British (do white Europeans not count as immigrants?), as of 2011 census, presumably by now less. The local prison (High Security, full of hardcases) is only 78% white British.
(b) Neighbouring Dewsbury was the birthplace of the 7/7 bombings, numerous ISIS jihadis, has a shariah court, etc. ,etc. Dewsbury has lots of immigrants.
Are the inhabitants of Wakefield supposed to assume that immigration is great and wonderful even when the evidence on their doorstep is that it's not? Or do they need to wait till it's actually in their own town, before they form a conclusion, rather than the one they visit regularly?
The statistic was carefully cited - and goes to the heart of a lot of the confusion around immigration, which too many people confuse with ethnicity (hence all the British Asians being told to 'go home' after the referendum). Our large Asian populations in London and South Yorkshire have been here long enough to have children, and start having grandchildren, that are British born. If the difference in average family size persists, the ethnic mix of many of our cities will continue to change even if immigration was banned entirely tomorrow. This is evident if you visit east London schools and see the difference between the ethnic mix of the local schools and the mix of adults within the communities in which they are located.
That may well all be true but that doesn't mean that people may not feel that the immigration which led to these changes was imposed on them without their consent and that, consequently, they don't want any more of it. Or they want less of it.
Comments
Notably, Wakefield-Labour-so-white has no non-white councillors nor, in my time in the district, has it fielded a non-white candidate. By contrast, the Tory Group leader is of subcontinental descent (probably Pakistani, perhaps Indian muslim - I don't know: I've never bothered to ask him).
But fine if the Labour activists identify more with the denizens of Richmond Park what is the point of Labour?
Keep going LDs.
Step into the breach.
a. soft Brexit
b. hard Brexit
c. protest vote.
The Remain vote is simple to understand, stick with the status quo, the Leave vote is less easy to fathom.
RU Serious?
(a) that's not true. Only 92.7% of Wakefield is white British (do white Europeans not count as immigrants?), as of 2011 census, presumably by now less. The local prison (High Security, full of hardcases) is only 78% white British.
(b) Neighbouring Dewsbury was the birthplace of the 7/7 bombings, numerous ISIS jihadis, has a shariah court, etc. ,etc. Dewsbury has lots of immigrants.
Are the inhabitants of Wakefield supposed to assume that immigration is great and wonderful even when the evidence on their doorstep is that it's not? Or do they need to wait till it's actually in their own town, before they form a conclusion, rather than the one they visit regularly?
Next week's by-election will not get anything like the same amount of coverage, though it will likely elect, by a bigger margin, someone fully signed up to "Brexit means Brexit" and all that that entails.
Clearly the media and commentariat are more interested in Richmond because it's dramatic & accessible (literally and metaphorically). There's more to write and speculate about. But they're two constituencies of the same size, on different ends of our great cleavage. The increased importance given to one is a superb illustration of why Leave won in the first place.
Oh, and we haven't left yet.
The irony is that UKIP started out being seen as a threat to the Tories and potential help to Labour, might end up having precisely the opposite impact. If it survives.
Had Remain won, I would have accepted that meant we were staying in, at least until our relationship with the EU changed substantially beyond the 'deal' Cameron had.
Already the wheels are falling off with Johnson and Davis trying to reassure everyone that nothing will change, despite our 'control'. Meanwhile Fox's only job seems to be making the tea. I'm fairly optimistic at this point that the ultimate outcome will be that Brexit will be destroyed as an idea, along with the careers of everyone who advocated it.
Of course, people might have different reasons for wanting to Leave.
Gains:
Two or three seats in SW London (of Richmond, Twickenham, Kingston, Sutton & Cheam)
Maybe one or two of the Remain leaning market towns of the SE.
NE Fife
Edinburgh West
Cambridge
Holds:
Orkney & Shetland
the new Sheffield seat (50/50)
Carshalton
The Welsh seat
North Norfolk
Westomoreland
And Leeds and Southport will be difficult holds that they'll only manage if there is a major LibDem resurgence
I stick with my 10-14 seats on a 12-14% national vote share.
But also winners of the by-election are the backers of a third runway at Heathrow since the voters of Richmond have not made that their first priority.
Without Zac's publicity, the irony is that the campaign against the additional runway is now somewhat diminished. Also ironic if Mr Sarah Olney gets work from planning the Heathrow expansion.
A win win in that household?
Perhaps this ugly xenophobic nightmare might be showing it's first cracks. I hope so
Meanwhile, the number one issue facing Britain goes totally ignored. How on earth are we going to deal with an ageing population and the horrendous social care costs this is going to demand in next thirty years?
http://election-data.co.uk/richmond-park
2. The Welsh seat (Ceredigion) will become more vulnerable to Plaid Cymru if the boundary changes go through.
The boundary changes may not go through, but I would suspect that Plaid Cymru are delighted with the changes (which are pretty generous to them) and bribe-able.
It would be churlish not to be pleased for the LibDems, as they have endured continuous electoral grief since 2010.
But, I'd go for < 10 seats in 2020. I don't see them recovering quickly in many of their former strongholds.
Left vs Right is dead. The new divide is between Open and Closed.
10:48AM
Congrats to the Lib Dems on their win.
Let's just leave it at that.
'We're being swamped!!'
More and more people will come to the conclusion, not only that we're better off in, but that we're better off never again thinking otherwise. This moment is Euroscepticism's last hurrah before it's carried off to its political grave.
Which is why some of them accept the result and are happy to move on, and some don't.
Yes, they all voted for the status quo, but any analysis that starts with a 48% bloc and seeks to add on to that is fundamentally flawed.
Far too up himself and being a Tory was a flag of convenience.
It'll be interesting to see what sort of polling bump this gives the LibDems. Normally it doesn't dramatically change the landscape but it should certasinly nicrease the potential for tactical voting wins, and maybe that "progressive alliance" thing is starting to happen without the blessing of the leaderships.
One point worth stressing is that it shows the limited patience that voters have for MPs resigning their seats to make a point. They get credit for it for a few days, but then people start to think whether they really still want them. It also illustrates that, as with referendums, the people who call elections on issue X can't be sure people won't vote on issue Y - a lesson that Renzi is about to learn, I think.
I'm afraid waiting for the EU to blow itself up isn't a Brexit strategy. It's here to stay.
Samuel
Nick Clegg, Tim Farron, Norman Lamb, Alistair Carmichael, Greg Mulholland, Tom Brake, John Pugh, Mark Williams, Sarah Olney
Where May is going wrong is that with such a close vote she should be trying to re-unite the country and lead a national conversation about where we are going in the medium term. Instead she is hiding in a bunker and making up stupid sound bites.
If the Tories move to Remain to keep those votes from going LD they will lose the Leave votes to UKIP.
If they move to Leave to keep those votes from going UKIP they lose the Remain votes to the LD.
It's a lose-lose situation that will worsen the longer the issue remains unresolved.
Cameron was right, Article 50 should have been triggered immediately.
https://twitter.com/GuyVerhofstadt/status/804603869061926912
NEW THREAD
Mr. Glenn, and Western Civilisation has also yet to collapse. Both campaigns were dreadful and stuffed with lies. The electorate chose Leave.
Mr. kle4 (2), isn't Mark Williams a snooker player?
The vote happened and we can't pretend it didn't. If the EU was to undergo a sudden conversion and announce they had taken on board the UK critique then I'd be delighted and there would be a case for constructive negotiations and a re-run of the referendum.
If that doesn't happen and the UK crawled back to the EU, it would be a national humiliation and more importantly a sign that people's votes didn't matter.
As many others have pointed out it is also distracting us from the real question on which there is room for any number of proper debates: what kind of a Brexit do we actually want? How much do we want to continue to co-operate with the EU from outside? Once the article 50 notice is served we can move on to discuss and negotiate on these very important issues. At the moment we are still arguing about the result and it is doing no one any good.
This is what I believe is the true situation:
CON 38
LAB 30
LD 13
UKIP 7
The Tories should experience a 10 point swing in the S.E and London to the LD (20 point swings in By-elections), but they should be getting at least a 5 point swing from UKIP nationally.
Cornwall is not an area that I envision LD gains as it was a Leave area.
* many "natural Tory voters" have contempt for "Europeans" but they feel uneasy about voting the same way as the dirty oiks, even if that way is "far right"
* the Labour party is practically finished: "we love immigration" disgusts their own "natural voters", and talking to people in the tone of a social worker isn't going to change that
* both the Lib Dems and UKIP have a lot going their way, but a bit of a spit and polish is probably required in both cases "Europe" is not the EU, and it's unlikely the EU will exist for another generation. It seems to be losing its US support and about to splinter.
Hands up anyone who thinks the EU will survive the next Lehman's event. Hands up if you think it will survive an event that's ten times as big as Lehman's. It certainly can't survive France leaving.
What will the structured framework for cooperation in Europe look like, post-EU? There will have to be something. Sooner or later someone will come up with a plan and it could be popular.
Russia will be the external big friend, but will the core be France and Germany or will it be France, Germany and Britain? Agreed that bunker is the word. She is completely incompetent. She won't last long. She can't lead either the Tory party or the country. When was the last time that a twit who'd been filed in the Home Office for years could?
Frit.
Preventing a French-German friendship that excludes Britain has been a constant in British foreign policy for the last zillion years and is unlikely not to be in the period to come.
If 43 years experience of the EU leads to this result, why would you think that this is Euroscepticism's last hurrah?