politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betting on Labour polling under 20% at the next general electi

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betting on Labour polling under 20% at the next general election

Ladbrokes have a market up on Labour’s share of the vote at the next general election, which could be less than a couple of months away according to press reports this morning. I think the value is backing sub 20% and here’s why (short answer = Jeremy Corbyn.)

Read the full story here

Sandpit

First like the Tories!

edmundintokyo

If my memory of swingback is correct there wasn't much for Con when Blair was popular and their leaders were shit. If the Tories do a very personal campaign against Corbyn I think the faithful will rally round, so 20% to 25% yes, under 20% no.

TheWhiteRabbit

edmundintokyo said:

If my memory of swingback is correct there wasn't much for Con when Blair was popular and their leaders were shit. If the Tories do a very personal campaign against Corbyn I think the faithful will rally round, so 20% to 25% yes, under 20% no.

A normally conceived swingback favours the incumbent, i.e. it should have helped Major in 97 and Blair in 2001 and 2005.

Stark_Dawning

'Whilst there was much to criticise Michael Foot on the policy front, no one could credibly question his patriotism, an atribute Jeremy Corbyn lacks, this could get very messy for Labour.'

Foot's patriotism was certainly questioned. That's what the donkey jacket at the Cenotaph was all about.

isam

My rough calculations make this 27.5% as Ladbrokes Labour midpoint

Are there markets for the other parties?

TheWhiteRabbit

I think to push Labour below 25% there needs to be a strong LD (or other third party) performance, a viable alternative for those that would never vote Tory/UKIP.

Sandpit

25% is looking like the new Labour ceiling, and as we saw in two recent by-elections it's quite possible their vote might collapse completely where they don't currently hold seats.

Given that a rout seems more likely than a recovery, if Corbyn stays in place, then the 10/1 and 5/2 are the value in this market.

MaxPB

Both 10/1 shots are value IMO. The under 20% one because of Corbyn, the 35-40% one in case they dump Corbyn, Theresa is winning against Corbyn, she might not against moderate Labour.

Morris_Dancer

Good afternoon, everyone.

FPT: Mr. Mark, I recommend Kingdom Asunder, by Thaddeus White.

[I'm a shade off-colour, but I think that's what you were getting at. If you're after classical recommendations just let me know and I'll have a furkle around for them].

Morris_Dancer

On-topic: I partly disagree. Corbyn's loathed but Labour has historically been very strong as a brand. A lot of grumpy leftwingers will stay go red (may depend if Farron can dissipate the vestigial red distrust of the yellows).

Value, quite possibly. But I still think it's unlikely, even if Corbyn's there.

GIN1138

TM needs to go for it in the Spring. They'll never have a better chance to destroy Labour.

Monksfield

Very little chance of Labour going under 20% in my view. Although Corbyn's apathetic leadership combined with the deafening silence of most of the MPs is taking them in that direction.

isam

Interesting vote share match bets would be Lab vs Libs, Libs vs Kips and the 3 ball Lab, Lib, Kip.

Sandpit

GIN1138 said:

TM needs to go for it in the Spring. They'll never have a better chance to destroy Labour.

The planets are certainly aligning in favour of an early election.

Mrs May's thinking is that she doesn't want to be distracted from Brexit, with the small majority and boundary changes coming, but against that she must know she's looking at a 1983-style result if she goes to the country in the spring.

Sean_F

SeanT said:

edmundintokyo said:

If my memory of swingback is correct there wasn't much for Con when Blair was popular and their leaders were shit. If the Tories do a very personal campaign against Corbyn I think the faithful will rally round, so 20% to 25% yes, under 20% no.

I agree with TSE, under 20% is unlikely, but not 11/1. More like 8/1, even 5/1.

FPT, unless you're rich, I can't see the appeal of living in London at all. It's nice to go up to the West End for the day, but the quality of life for a professional person in most provincial cities and towns is far higher.

paulbarker

As of now I would predict a Labour share around 20% in 2020. A snap Election is still unlikely because it would require lots of Labour MPs voting to end their own career. May can certainly try to call an Election but if she tries & fails thens she is toast.
The big elephant in the womb is whether The Libdems can overtake Labour in time to change the question in voters minds. If crossover was in 2018 then voters might have enough time to adjust to the new reality.

OldKingCole

Stark_Dawning said:

'Whilst there was much to criticise Michael Foot on the policy front, no one could credibly question his patriotism, an atribute Jeremy Corbyn lacks, this could get very messy for Labour.'

Foot's patriotism was certainly questioned. That's what the donkey jacket at the Cenotaph was all about.

Foot was much, and very unfairly mailigned. Two quotes from Wikipedia

a) At the outbreak of the Second World War, Foot volunteered for military service, but was rejected because of his chronic asthma.

b)actually he wore a type of duffel coat)[ at the wreath-laying ceremony at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Day in November 1981, for which he was likened to an "out-of-work navvy" by a fellow Labour MP.[ Foot did not make it generally known that the Queen Mother had described it as a "sensible coat for a day like this", which could be considered a slight or a compliment depending on whether irony was intended.

Morris_Dancer

Could be an interesting question for a survey, though...

AlastairMeeks

I'd have thought that this is essentially a bet on whether Labour split.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Meeks, still time for that, but prevaricating is closing that window, even though the next election is (probably) some time off.

Richard_Tyndall

OldKingCole said:

Stark_Dawning said:

'Whilst there was much to criticise Michael Foot on the policy front, no one could credibly question his patriotism, an atribute Jeremy Corbyn lacks, this could get very messy for Labour.'

Foot's patriotism was certainly questioned. That's what the donkey jacket at the Cenotaph was all about.

Foot was much, and very unfairly mailigned. Two quotes from Wikipedia

a) At the outbreak of the Second World War, Foot volunteered for military service, but was rejected because of his chronic asthma.

b)actually he wore a type of duffel coat)[ at the wreath-laying ceremony at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Day in November 1981, for which he was likened to an "out-of-work navvy" by a fellow Labour MP.[ Foot did not make it generally known that the Queen Mother had described it as a "sensible coat for a day like this", which could be considered a slight or a compliment depending on whether irony was intended.

It was nice that the Telegraph - certainly not a natural ally of Foot - took the time to put the record straight on the coat issue.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/7361078/Michael-Foot-and-the-donkey-jacket-that-wasnt.html

JosiasJessop

Waaaayyy off-topic:

A week or so ago I mentioned a ship that for into some trouble off Dover. They were very, very lucky:
http://worldmaritimenews.com/archives/207355/maib-kicks-off-investigation-of-saga-sky-collision/

On another thread it was commented on that the electricity interconnector to France was not running at full capacity. That might be the case for some time: it appears that whilst it was trying to anchor itself, the ship damaged four of the eight cables forming the link.

Ooopps.

Worse, it looks as though it might cause some supply problems in France as they were expecting to import power this winter as some of their nukes are down.

justin124

FPT
Decrepit JohnL said

' Sorry, yes they are now but it used to be £5,000 to the PM's £10,000 (and backbenchers weren't paid at all). I should have been clearer.'

Backbenchers have been paid since before World War1.

Luckyguy1983

FPT

old_labour said:

Crikey!

PM lines up IDS to replace Boris: Theresa May set to invite former work and pensions secretary back to Cabinet after his passionate 'hard' Brexit speech

Iain Duncan Smith is being lined up for a return to the Cabinet
He is 'first in line' for promotion if one of the 'three Brexiteers' leaves
These are Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, David Davis and Liam Fox

I think it's more likely that she'd promote Davis to Foreign Sec, and make IDS Brexiter in cheif, perhaps in an an amalgamated department.

Boris could be DCMS.

justin124

If polls stay like this Labour is highly unlikely to agree to an election.

IanB2

I think some of us are underestimating the extent to which UKIP is on the way out. A bunch of key people have left already, the man who pays for most of it has effectively already announced his departure early next year, and the man who made it all happen will surely follow. With Brexit (almost) secured, UKIP is retreating toward the core vote for a right-wing nationalist party, which history suggests is small.

The 'existential threat' to Labour's heartlands that some saw in UKIP has, IMO, now gone away. Therefore my money would be on 20-25% in terms of vote but with 100+ seats.

The more interesting question is what impact Banks might make if/when he launches a Cinque-Stelle style 'people's movement' in a few months' time...?

brokenwheel

justin124 said:

If polls stay like this Labour is highly unlikely to agree to an election.

I'm sure Corbyn will be happy to make a bunch of capitalist running dogs unemployed.

justin124

IanB2 said:

I think some of us are underestimating the extent to which UKIP is on the way out. A bunch of key people have left already, the man who pays for most of it has effectively already announced his departure early next year, and the man who made it all happen will surely follow. With Brexit (almost) secured, UKIP is retreating toward the core vote for a right-wing nationalist party, which history suggests is small.

The 'existential threat' to Labour's heartlands that some saw in UKIP has, IMO, now gone away. Therefore my money would be on 20-25% in terms of vote but with 100+ seats.

The more interesting question is what impact Banks might make if/when he launches a Cinque-Stelle style 'people's movement' in a few months' time...?

Re- UKIP I agree.Poor result though Sleaford was for Labour , I actually think it was worse for UKIP in terms of expectations. To come second with 13.5% and a 2% drop in vote share was derisory.
If there were to be an early election I would still expect Labour to end up on circa 200 seats.That is certainly what most of the polls have been indicating.
Other than an article in the Sunday Mail where have rumours of an early election come from?

IanB2

p.s. Also with UKIP - their sole MP Carswell is barely on the ship, and their other source of funding, from all their MEPs, is now time-limited.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. T, Nigel Farage and Keanu Reeves are the same age.

JosiasJessop

Off-topic:

Iran signs deal $16 billion for 80 aircraft with Boeing.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38280724

It'll be interesting to see how Trump reacts to this.

Theuniondivvie

Richard_Tyndall said:

OldKingCole said:

Stark_Dawning said:

'Whilst there was much to criticise Michael Foot on the policy front, no one could credibly question his patriotism, an atribute Jeremy Corbyn lacks, this could get very messy for Labour.'

Foot's patriotism was certainly questioned. That's what the donkey jacket at the Cenotaph was all about.

Foot was much, and very unfairly mailigned. Two quotes from Wikipedia

a) At the outbreak of the Second World War, Foot volunteered for military service, but was rejected because of his chronic asthma.

b)actually he wore a type of duffel coat)[ at the wreath-laying ceremony at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Day in November 1981, for which he was likened to an "out-of-work navvy" by a fellow Labour MP.[ Foot did not make it generally known that the Queen Mother had described it as a "sensible coat for a day like this", which could be considered a slight or a compliment depending on whether irony was intended.

It was nice that the Telegraph - certainly not a natural ally of Foot - took the time to put the record straight on the coat issue.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/7361078/Michael-Foot-and-the-donkey-jacket-that-wasnt.html

I fear the current incarnation of the Telegraph would be on the side of the attackers rather than a principled defender.

HYUFD

SeanT said:

IanB2 said:

I think some of us are underestimating the extent to which UKIP is on the way out. A bunch of key people have left already, the man who pays for most of it has effectively already announced his departure early next year, and the man who made it all happen will surely follow. With Brexit (almost) secured, UKIP is retreating toward the core vote for a right-wing nationalist party, which history suggests is small.

The 'existential threat' to Labour's heartlands that some saw in UKIP has, IMO, now gone away. Therefore my money would be on 20-25% in terms of vote but with 100+ seats.

The more interesting question is what impact Banks might make if/when he launches a Cinque-Stelle style 'people's movement' in a few months' time...?

But UKIP - and Farage - could and will come storming back if there is a very soft Brexit, or - unlikely as it is - a successful attempt to actually stop Brexit.

That Telegraph interview with Farage yesterday portrayed a man who is easily bored. After a couple of years hanging around Trump's court doing not much he might be eager to return to the UK scene, revitalising the party. And he's just 52 (younger than me!).

Alex Salmond did exactly the same for the SNP. And might do it again, you never know.

Most likely May does 'grey' Brexit, ie a job offer to come here and some budget contributions to keep limited single market access, so UKIP will still be able to claim she did not go far enough.

I can see a result at the next election something like Tory 33% Labour 26% UKIP 18% LD 12%

IanB2

SeanT said:

IanB2 said:

I think some of us are underestimating the extent to which UKIP is on the way out. A bunch of key people have left already, the man who pays for most of it has effectively already announced his departure early next year, and the man who made it all happen will surely follow. With Brexit (almost) secured, UKIP is retreating toward the core vote for a right-wing nationalist party, which history suggests is small.

The 'existential threat' to Labour's heartlands that some saw in UKIP has, IMO, now gone away. Therefore my money would be on 20-25% in terms of vote but with 100+ seats.

The more interesting question is what impact Banks might make if/when he launches a Cinque-Stelle style 'people's movement' in a few months' time...?

But UKIP - and Farage - could and will come storming back if there is a very soft Brexit, or - unlikely as it is - a successful attempt to actually stop Brexit.

That Telegraph interview with Farage yesterday portrayed a man who is easily bored. After a couple of years hanging around Trump's court doing not much he might be eager to return to the UK scene, revitalising the party. And he's just 52 (younger than me!).

Alex Salmond did exactly the same for the SNP. And might do it again, you never know.

He may not be as over the hill as you, but if he returns it will be with Banks and his new movement, not UKIP, which I feel is now sinking without prospect of rescue.

IanB2

HYUFD said:

SeanT said:

IanB2 said:

I think some of us are underestimating the extent to which UKIP is on the way out. A bunch of key people have left already, the man who pays for most of it has effectively already announced his departure early next year, and the man who made it all happen will surely follow. With Brexit (almost) secured, UKIP is retreating toward the core vote for a right-wing nationalist party, which history suggests is small.

The 'existential threat' to Labour's heartlands that some saw in UKIP has, IMO, now gone away. Therefore my money would be on 20-25% in terms of vote but with 100+ seats.

The more interesting question is what impact Banks might make if/when he launches a Cinque-Stelle style 'people's movement' in a few months' time...?

But UKIP - and Farage - could and will come storming back if there is a very soft Brexit, or - unlikely as it is - a successful attempt to actually stop Brexit.

That Telegraph interview with Farage yesterday portrayed a man who is easily bored. After a couple of years hanging around Trump's court doing not much he might be eager to return to the UK scene, revitalising the party. And he's just 52 (younger than me!).

Alex Salmond did exactly the same for the SNP. And might do it again, you never know.

Most likely May does 'grey' Brexit, ie a job offer to come here and some budget contributions to keep limited single market access, so UKIP will still be able to claim she did not go far enough.

I can see a result at the next election something like Tory 33% Labour 26% UKIP 18% LD 12%

Tory 39%, Lab 24%, UKIP 9%, LibDem 19%

Innocent_Abroad

Theuniondivvie said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

OldKingCole said:

Stark_Dawning said:

'Whilst there was much to criticise Michael Foot on the policy front, no one could credibly question his patriotism, an atribute Jeremy Corbyn lacks, this could get very messy for Labour.'

Foot's patriotism was certainly questioned. That's what the donkey jacket at the Cenotaph was all about.

Foot was much, and very unfairly mailigned. Two quotes from Wikipedia

a) At the outbreak of the Second World War, Foot volunteered for military service, but was rejected because of his chronic asthma.

b)actually he wore a type of duffel coat)[ at the wreath-laying ceremony at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Day in November 1981, for which he was likened to an "out-of-work navvy" by a fellow Labour MP.[ Foot did not make it generally known that the Queen Mother had described it as a "sensible coat for a day like this", which could be considered a slight or a compliment depending on whether irony was intended.

It was nice that the Telegraph - certainly not a natural ally of Foot - took the time to put the record straight on the coat issue.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/7361078/Michael-Foot-and-the-donkey-jacket-that-wasnt.html

I fear the current incarnation of the Telegraph would be on the side of the attackers rather than a principled defender.

With Breitbart joining Murdoch, the Mail and the Telegraph, there is every likelihood of a loud demand for Corbyn's arrest and trial for High Treason.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. HYUFD, be surprised if UKIP got that high.

Scott_P

Afternoon all.

Catching up on the the previous thread, I see not a single Brexiteer was able to answer the question posed this morning. A couple tried and spectacularly missed the point, so I'll give them another go.

In our "representative democracy", who represents those not eligible to vote?

Nobody tried to argue that with a Tory majority, those who voted Labour are not represented in Parliament, but people seem quite happy to claim that if MPs try and represent those who voted to remain they are TRAITORS!

Who represents children in Parliament? Who represents prisoners?

Morris_Dancer

Mr. P, what's the relevance of that question?

Those eligible to vote decide the composition of Parliament, and the result of a referendum.

A Parliament has 650 (perhaps 600, soon) MPs, but a referendum has only two possible outcomes. One has a spectrum of opinions, the other a binary result.

williamglenn

JosiasJessop said:

Off-topic:

Iran signs deal $16 billion for 80 aircraft with Boeing.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38280724

It'll be interesting to see how Trump reacts to this.

"I'm going to get my Air Force One, and Iran is going to pay for that plane?"

Scott_P

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. P, what's the relevance of that question?

What's the answer? Are they represented or not, and if so, by whom?

williamglenn

SeanT said:

That Telegraph interview with Farage yesterday portrayed a man who is easily bored. After a couple of years hanging around Trump's court doing not much he might be eager to return to the UK scene, revitalising the party. And he's just 52 (younger than me!).

Farage won't last 2 years in Trump's court. He can be of no further use to the Donald and will find himself and his views ignored by Trump.

He's also physically transforming at a rapid pace. I doubt he could hack the pace of a front-line politics job even if he wanted to do it.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. P, what's the relevance?

Who speaks for the glint in the milkman's eye? Who represents the recently deceased?

Asking questions doesn't make a point unless there's a point to be made. We had a referendum on whether to leave or not, and voted to leave. So we're leaving. That's how democracy works.

IanB2

IanB2 said:

HYUFD said:

SeanT said:

IanB2 said:

I think some of us are underestimating the extent to which UKIP is on the way out. A bunch of key people have left already, the man who pays for most of it has effectively already announced his departure early next year, and the man who made it all happen will surely follow. With Brexit (almost) secured, UKIP is retreating toward the core vote for a right-wing nationalist party, which history suggests is small.

The 'existential threat' to Labour's heartlands that some saw in UKIP has, IMO, now gone away. Therefore my money would be on 20-25% in terms of vote but with 100+ seats.

The more interesting question is what impact Banks might make if/when he launches a Cinque-Stelle style 'people's movement' in a few months' time...?

But UKIP - and Farage - could and will come storming back if there is a very soft Brexit, or - unlikely as it is - a successful attempt to actually stop Brexit.

That Telegraph interview with Farage yesterday portrayed a man who is easily bored. After a couple of years hanging around Trump's court doing not much he might be eager to return to the UK scene, revitalising the party. And he's just 52 (younger than me!).

Alex Salmond did exactly the same for the SNP. And might do it again, you never know.

Most likely May does 'grey' Brexit, ie a job offer to come here and some budget contributions to keep limited single market access, so UKIP will still be able to claim she did not go far enough.

I can see a result at the next election something like Tory 33% Labour 26% UKIP 18% LD 12%

Tory 39%, Lab 24%, UKIP 9%, LibDem 19%

Running my prediction through a seat calculator on the new boundaries, it produces Tory 337, Lab 168, LibD 22, Others 73. This seems entirely plausible to me - and a repeat of the 1983 scenario where Labour gets far more seats for its vote share than do the LibDems.

HYUFD

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. HYUFD, be surprised if UKIP got that high.

Unless May introduces a points system on immigration and ends all contributions to the EU, which she is unlikely to do, there will probably be a direct transfer of about 3-4% from Tory to UKIP of those who voted Tory in 2015 to get the referendum and then voted Leave. Add in 1-2% switching from Labour to UKIP and UKIP get to 18%

Scott_P

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. P, what's the relevance?

Who speaks for the glint in the milkman's eye? Who represents the recently deceased?

I am not asking about imaginary people. I am asking about real people, alive today.

Are they represented, in our "representative democracy" or not?

If so, by whom?

Cyclefree

Stark_Dawning said:

'Whilst there was much to criticise Michael Foot on the policy front, no one could credibly question his patriotism, an atribute Jeremy Corbyn lacks, this could get very messy for Labour.'

Foot's patriotism was certainly questioned. That's what the donkey jacket at the Cenotaph was all about.

The difference between Foot and Corbyn is that Foot recognised the need to fight fascists. Corbyn allies with them.

Off topic: nice to see @iSam here again. Welcome back!

logical_song

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. P, what's the relevance?

Who speaks for the glint in the milkman's eye? Who represents the recently deceased?

Asking questions doesn't make a point unless there's a point to be made. We had a referendum on whether to leave or not, and voted to leave. So we're leaving. That's how democracy works.

Nobody has answered the question as to what Leave means, e.g single market or not? Whatever your answer is, it's just an opinion. That sort of detail wasn't asked.

Stark_Dawning

OldKingCole said:

Stark_Dawning said:

'Whilst there was much to criticise Michael Foot on the policy front, no one could credibly question his patriotism, an atribute Jeremy Corbyn lacks, this could get very messy for Labour.'

Foot's patriotism was certainly questioned. That's what the donkey jacket at the Cenotaph was all about.

Foot was much, and very unfairly mailigned. Two quotes from Wikipedia

a) At the outbreak of the Second World War, Foot volunteered for military service, but was rejected because of his chronic asthma.

b)actually he wore a type of duffel coat)[ at the wreath-laying ceremony at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Day in November 1981, for which he was likened to an "out-of-work navvy" by a fellow Labour MP.[ Foot did not make it generally known that the Queen Mother had described it as a "sensible coat for a day like this", which could be considered a slight or a compliment depending on whether irony was intended.

OldKingCole said:

Stark_Dawning said:

'Whilst there was much to criticise Michael Foot on the policy front, no one could credibly question his patriotism, an atribute Jeremy Corbyn lacks, this could get very messy for Labour.'

Foot's patriotism was certainly questioned. That's what the donkey jacket at the Cenotaph was all about.

Foot was much, and very unfairly mailigned. Two quotes from Wikipedia

a) At the outbreak of the Second World War, Foot volunteered for military service, but was rejected because of his chronic asthma.

b)actually he wore a type of duffel coat)[ at the wreath-laying ceremony at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Day in November 1981, for which he was likened to an "out-of-work navvy" by a fellow Labour MP.[ Foot did not make it generally known that the Queen Mother had described it as a "sensible coat for a day like this", which could be considered a slight or a compliment depending on whether irony was intended.

Oh yes. Many of the criticisms were cynical and exaggerated; and the donkey-jacket thing was an urban legend. Nevertheless, the idea that Foot was widely viewed as some kind of shining patriot is absurd. What he was widely viewed as was a bumbling, pro-Soviet, unilateralist danger.

HYUFD

IanB2 said:

HYUFD said:

SeanT said:

IanB2 said:

I think some of us are underestimating the extent to which UKIP is on the way out. A bunch of key people have left already, the man who pays for most of it has effectively already announced his departure early next year, and the man who made it all happen will surely follow. With Brexit (almost) secured, UKIP is retreating toward the core vote for a right-wing nationalist party, which history suggests is small.

The 'existential threat' to Labour's heartlands that some saw in UKIP has, IMO, now gone away. Therefore my money would be on 20-25% in terms of vote but with 100+ seats.

The more interesting question is what impact Banks might make if/when he launches a Cinque-Stelle style 'people's movement' in a few months' time...?

But UKIP - and Farage - could and will come storming back if there is a very soft Brexit, or - unlikely as it is - a successful attempt to actually stop Brexit.

That Telegraph interview with Farage yesterday portrayed a man who is easily bored. After a couple of years hanging around Trump's court doing not much he might be eager to return to the UK scene, revitalising the party. And he's just 52 (younger than me!).

Alex Salmond did exactly the same for the SNP. And might do it again, you never know.

Most likely May does 'grey' Brexit, ie a job offer to come here and some budget contributions to keep limited single market access, so UKIP will still be able to claim she did not go far enough.

I can see a result at the next election something like Tory 33% Labour 26% UKIP 18% LD 12%

Tory 39%, Lab 24%, UKIP 9%, LibDem 19%

There will be higher Tory-UKIP switches than that and while there may be some Labour to LD switchers and maybe a few Tory to LD switchers I don't see the LDs getting that high or UKIP being that low unless it is full, hard Brexit ie no single market membership, no budget contributions to the EU at all and a points system for EU migrants

williamglenn

Returning to the Farage question, how do you think he will react when Trump heaps gushing praise on Angela Merkel after their first meeting, as is almost inevitably going to happen?

logical_song

IanB2 said:

p.s. Also with UKIP - their sole MP Carswell is barely on the ship, and their other source of funding, from all their MEPs, is now time-limited.

How can UKIP MEPs justify drawing their pay and allowances now anyway?

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Song, I agree. There's a broad spectrum of possible outcomes that I think could be accepted. The only area I have a nailed down view is that having the EU determine our external trade arrangements is not acceptable.

isam

logical_song said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. P, what's the relevance?

Who speaks for the glint in the milkman's eye? Who represents the recently deceased?

Asking questions doesn't make a point unless there's a point to be made. We had a referendum on whether to leave or not, and voted to leave. So we're leaving. That's how democracy works.

Nobody has answered the question as to what Leave means, e.g single market or not? Whatever your answer is, it's just an opinion. That sort of detail wasn't asked.

It means whatever the government of the day thinks it means.

rural_voter

JosiasJessop said:

Waaaayyy off-topic:

A week or so ago I mentioned a ship that for into some trouble off Dover. They were very, very lucky:
http://worldmaritimenews.com/archives/207355/maib-kicks-off-investigation-of-saga-sky-collision/

On another thread it was commented on that the electricity interconnector to France was not running at full capacity. That might be the case for some time: it appears that whilst it was trying to anchor itself, the ship damaged four of the eight cables forming the link.

Ooopps.

Worse, it looks as though it might cause some supply problems in France as they were expecting to import power this winter as some of their nukes are down.

It's not only France that could have a problem. The UK normally imports 2 GW from France via the cable. It may now export 2 GW if their prices are higher than our prices, giving a difference of 4 GW in a UK peak demand of about 60 GW.

If another 2010 winter arrives, it might be very hard to maintain supply without buggering up manufacturing industry, i.e. by asking factories to switch things off for several hours. A simpler alternative would be to order domestic consumers to turn up their gas central heating and turn off their electric fan heaters - the gas network has less problem meeting very high peak demands on cold days. But this is deemed to be 'interference in individual lifestyles'.

isam

Cyclefree said:

Stark_Dawning said:

'Whilst there was much to criticise Michael Foot on the policy front, no one could credibly question his patriotism, an atribute Jeremy Corbyn lacks, this could get very messy for Labour.'

Foot's patriotism was certainly questioned. That's what the donkey jacket at the Cenotaph was all about.

The difference between Foot and Corbyn is that Foot recognised the need to fight fascists. Corbyn allies with them.

Off topic: nice to see @iSam here again. Welcome back!

Innocent_Abroad

Scott_P said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. P, what's the relevance?

Who speaks for the glint in the milkman's eye? Who represents the recently deceased?

I am not asking about imaginary people. I am asking about real people, alive today.

Are they represented, in our "representative democracy" or not?

If so, by whom?

Has no one explained to you, Scott, that Morris Dancer, Seans Fear & Thomas and a few others whose names just now escape me are always right about everything? The rest of us are just scum...

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Abroad, can't quite recall denouncing everyone who disagrees/disagreed with me as scum, to be honest.

IanB2

HYUFD said:

IanB2 said:

HYUFD said:

SeanT said:

IanB2 said:

I think some of us are underestimating the extent to which UKIP is on the way out. A bunch of key people have left already, the man who pays for most of it has effectively already announced his departure early next year, and the man who made it all happen will surely follow. With Brexit (almost) secured, UKIP is retreating toward the core vote for a right-wing nationalist party, which history suggests is small.

The 'existential threat' to Labour's heartlands that some saw in UKIP has, IMO, now gone away. Therefore my money would be on 20-25% in terms of vote but with 100+ seats.

The more interesting question is what impact Banks might make if/when he launches a Cinque-Stelle style 'people's movement' in a few months' time...?

But UKIP - and Farage - could and will come storming back if there is a very soft Brexit, or - unlikely as it is - a successful attempt to actually stop Brexit.

That Telegraph interview with Farage yesterday portrayed a man who is easily bored. After a couple of years hanging around Trump's court doing not much he might be eager to return to the UK scene, revitalising the party. And he's just 52 (younger than me!).

Alex Salmond did exactly the same for the SNP. And might do it again, you never know.

Most likely May does 'grey' Brexit, ie a job offer to come here and some budget contributions to keep limited single market access, so UKIP will still be able to claim she did not go far enough.

I can see a result at the next election something like Tory 33% Labour 26% UKIP 18% LD 12%

Tory 39%, Lab 24%, UKIP 9%, LibDem 19%

There will be higher Tory-UKIP switches than that and while there may be some Labour to LD switchers and maybe a few Tory to LD switchers I don't see the LDs getting that high or UKIP being that low unless it is full, hard Brexit ie no single market membership, no budget contributions to the EU at all and a points system for EU migrants

Thanks for the feedback; nevertheless I am filing away my prediction and placing my bets accordingly...

Stark_Dawning

williamglenn said:

Returning to the Farage question, how do you think he will react when Trump heaps gushing praise on Angela Merkel after their first meeting, as is almost inevitably going to happen?

He'll keep his mouth shut: all those lucrative Fox News appearances are predicated on his being the enthusiastic 'British take' on the Trump phenomenon. Any cooling on Trump and he will have outlived his usefulness.

Richard_Tyndall

Scott_P said:

Afternoon all.

Catching up on the the previous thread, I see not a single Brexiteer was able to answer the question posed this morning. A couple tried and spectacularly missed the point, so I'll give them another go.

In our "representative democracy", who represents those not eligible to vote?

Nobody tried to argue that with a Tory majority, those who voted Labour are not represented in Parliament, but people seem quite happy to claim that if MPs try and represent those who voted to remain they are TRAITORS!

Who represents children in Parliament? Who represents prisoners?

MPs are elected to represent all their constituents whether they can vote or not and whether they voted for them or not. They take guidance from the electorate on how they should do that and of course if they don't generally act as their electorate wants they run the risk of losing their seat at the next election. But they are not supposed to say that they will not do anything for or take into account the well being of any individual constituent either because they did not vote for them or were too young to vote at all (or as in your example in prison).

In terms of the referendum on a question with only two responses and no room for compromise (it is either Remain or Leave) then the MP would be wise to take into account the views of the majority of their constituents or risk being voted out. But again they are their as representatives not delegates so can, if they so desire, take that chance and vote against the majority. As they have indicated they would do on matters such as the Death Penalty.

DecrepitJohnL

justin124 said:

FPT
Decrepit JohnL said

' Sorry, yes they are now but it used to be £5,000 to the PM's £10,000 (and backbenchers weren't paid at all). I should have been clearer.'

Backbenchers have been paid since before World War1.

Yes; I'd thought it came in between the wars.

AnneJGP

Scott_P said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. P, what's the relevance?

Who speaks for the glint in the milkman's eye? Who represents the recently deceased?

I am not asking about imaginary people. I am asking about real people, alive today.

Are they represented, in our "representative democracy" or not?

If so, by whom?

If I might interject, surely minors are represented by their parents or guardians?

Good afternoon, everyone.

RochdalePioneers

Regarding an early election and suicidal Labour MPs. It won't be the ones in seats at risk pulling the trigger, it'll be the Islington Massiv.

Corbyn has already come out supporting an early election. He and his acolytes - Diane "shudder" Abbot, John McMao, Emily Sneerberry etc - are in safe metropolitan seats immune to the nuking that will happen in the provinces. It'll be the PLP on the receiving end of UKIP warheads, and the pillocks who think its a Koresh-style leadership cult will be cheering it on as "what they deserve" for being "Blairite Tories".

As CLP Secretary I had a new (old) member on the phone earlier. Are we pro or anti Jeremy? As if that's the issue. We're pro the leader whomever it is. But JC (Peace be Upon Him) is the only issue they want to talk about. A good nuking of the PLP will suit them fine. Only then can we rebuild the party in His image and abolish capitalism...

CD13

Mr P,

"Are they represented, in our "representative democracy" or not?"

Do you mean, as Mr Divvie implied earlier, foetuses? I suppose you're complaining about there being no strong anti-abortion party?

Or is it the under ten's who have the longest life-span remaining in the future world? No, there isn't a children's party as such.

There is a party representing the resentful Remainers - that's the Liberals.

GeoffM

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. P, what's the relevance?

Who speaks for the glint in the milkman's eye? Who represents the recently deceased?

Asking questions doesn't make a point unless there's a point to be made. We had a referendum on whether to leave or not, and voted to leave. So we're leaving. That's how democracy works.

You are correct - Scott'n'Paste has no point to make.
As soon as you reach that level of enlightenment it makes ignoring the drivel he posts much easier.

Moses_

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. P, what's the relevance?

Who speaks for the glint in the milkman's eye? Who represents the recently deceased?

Asking questions doesn't make a point unless there's a point to be made. We had a referendum on whether to leave or not, and voted to leave. So we're leaving. That's how democracy works.

It will be the precise same type of people who represented me during the 1975 referendum.

That referendum that because of my age I only just missed the opportunity to vote and had to accept whatever outcome there was. If these people represented my interests at that time then these same sort of people do so equally now as well as for all others than for one reason or another do not or could not vote this time.

No doubt this will now be argued as joining will be said to be totally different to leaving and the normal arguments that we have heard over and over again will resume on PB .......

GeoffM

Morris_Dancer said:

Good afternoon, everyone.

FPT: Mr. Mark, I recommend Kingdom Asunder, by Thaddeus White.

[I'm a shade off-colour, but I think that's what you were getting at. If you're after classical recommendations just let me know and I'll have a furkle around for them].

I too would like to see the classical recommendations, please.

Also perhaps a wish list from yourself as I would like to buy you a ebook. I've enjoyed all of your written works and I feel them massively underpriced. Perhaps an additional token of appreciation would be a way for me/us to make up the perceived difference.

Richard_Tyndall

GeoffM said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. P, what's the relevance?

Who speaks for the glint in the milkman's eye? Who represents the recently deceased?

Asking questions doesn't make a point unless there's a point to be made. We had a referendum on whether to leave or not, and voted to leave. So we're leaving. That's how democracy works.

You are correct - Scott'n'Paste has no point to make.
As soon as you reach that level of enlightenment it makes ignoring the drivel he posts much easier.

Whilst it may not be specifically related to the referendum, I think Scott's point is extremely well made. MPs are not sent to Parliament to do our bidding. They are sent to represent us as they see best. Obviously if there is a real clash of opinions between the electorate and the MP then an MP may well find his or her principles leading to their ejection. But the basic position should not be changed that an MP is not a delegate.

Of course the man who outlined this principle found himself turfed out on his ear by the electorate of Bristol when he put it into practice but again that does not mean the principle is wrong.

The problem for me nowadays is that with the all pervasive party system the MPs are more often than not representing their party or themselves as they see best rather than their electorate.

williamglenn

Stark_Dawning said:

williamglenn said:

Returning to the Farage question, how do you think he will react when Trump heaps gushing praise on Angela Merkel after their first meeting, as is almost inevitably going to happen?

He'll keep his mouth shut: all those lucrative Fox News appearances are predicated on his being the enthusiastic 'British take' on the Trump phenomenon. Any cooling on Trump and he will have outlived his usefulness.

I sympathise with Trump having to put up with low grade people using him as a vehicle for their own self-promotion.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. M, must admit I'm shockingly ignorant of wishlists and the like. On classical recommendations, here are two posts I prepared earlier:
http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/classical-history-for-beginners.html

http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/classical-history-for-intermediates.html

Morris_Dancer

Miss JGP, good evening.

Mr. Moses, quite.

RobD

Scott_P said:

Afternoon all.

Catching up on the the previous thread, I see not a single Brexiteer was able to answer the question posed this morning. A couple tried and spectacularly missed the point, so I'll give them another go.

In our "representative democracy", who represents those not eligible to vote?

Nobody tried to argue that with a Tory majority, those who voted Labour are not represented in Parliament, but people seem quite happy to claim that if MPs try and represent those who voted to remain they are TRAITORS!

Who represents children in Parliament? Who represents prisoners?

Yet more people voted to leave, so while they do represent everyone in their constituencies, they should enact the decision made in the referendum.

As for people who can't vote, while they are represented, they are not legally entitled to have a say in the matter. For people who just don't vote, that's their own fault.

Philip_Thompson

Scott_P said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. P, what's the relevance?

Who speaks for the glint in the milkman's eye? Who represents the recently deceased?

I am not asking about imaginary people. I am asking about real people, alive today.

Are they represented, in our "representative democracy" or not?

If so, by whom?

By their MP. In our representative democracy everyone is represented by one local MP regardless of whether they voted or not. Regardless of what party they voted for if they did vote. Regardless of whether they were eligible to vote or not. There is one MP to represent the entire constituency including those not eligible to vote.

Sandpit

Richard_Tyndall said:

GeoffM said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. P, what's the relevance?

Who speaks for the glint in the milkman's eye? Who represents the recently deceased?

Asking questions doesn't make a point unless there's a point to be made. We had a referendum on whether to leave or not, and voted to leave. So we're leaving. That's how democracy works.

You are correct - Scott'n'Paste has no point to make.
As soon as you reach that level of enlightenment it makes ignoring the drivel he posts much easier.

Whilst it may not be specifically related to the referendum, I think Scott's point is extremely well made. MPs are not sent to Parliament to do our bidding. They are sent to represent us as they see best. Obviously if there is a real clash of opinions between the electorate and the MP then an MP may well find his or her principles leading to their ejection. But the basic position should not be changed that an MP is not a delegate.

Of course the man who outlined this principle found himself turfed out on his ear by the electorate of Bristol when he put it into practice but again that does not mean the principle is wrong.

The problem for me nowadays is that with the all pervasive party system the MPs are more often than not representing their party or themselves as they see best rather than their electorate.

Well said Richard.

It is indeed a shame that Parliamentary whipping now occurs for the vast majority of votes.

AnneJGP

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss JGP, good evening.

Mr. Moses, quite.

I never know when afternoon turns into evening.

That's odd, because I have 100% certainty that night turns into morning at 0330.

Blue_rog

AnneJGP said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss JGP, good evening.

Mr. Moses, quite.

I never know when afternoon turns into evening.

That's odd, because I have 100% certainty that night turns into morning at 0330.

I always thought afternoon changes to evening at 6pm

justin124

IanB2 said:

HYUFD said:

SeanT said:

IanB2 said:

.

Most likely May does 'grey' Brexit, ie a job offer to come here and some budget contributions to keep limited single market access, so UKIP will still be able to claim she did not go far enough.

I can see a result at the next election something like Tory 33% Labour 26% UKIP 18% LD 12%

Tory 39%, Lab 24%, UKIP 9%, LibDem 19%

IanB2 said:

HYUFD said:

SeanT said:

But UKIP - and Farage - could and will come storming back if there is a very soft Brexit, or - unlikely as it is - a successful attempt to actually stop Brexit.

That Telegraph interview with Farage yesterday portrayed a man who is easily bored. After a couple of years hanging around Trump's court doing not much he might be eager to return to the UK scene, revitalising the party. And he's just 52 (younger than me!).

Alex Salmond did exactly the same for the SNP. And might do it again, you never know.

Most likely May does 'grey' Brexit, ie a job offer to come here and some budget contributions to keep limited single market access, so UKIP will still be able to claim she did not go far enough.

I can see a result at the next election something like Tory 33% Labour 26% UKIP 18% LD 12%

Tory 39%, Lab 24%, UKIP 9%, LibDem 19%

LibDems far too high - Labour will be circa 30%

RochdalePioneers said:

Regarding an early election and suicidal Labour MPs. It won't be the ones in seats at risk pulling the trigger, it'll be the Islington Massiv.

Corbyn has already come out supporting an early election. He and his acolytes - Diane "shudder" Abbot, John McMao, Emily Sneerberry etc - are in safe metropolitan seats immune to the nuking that will happen in the provinces. It'll be the PLP on the receiving end of UKIP warheads, and the pillocks who think its a Koresh-style leadership cult will be cheering it on as "what they deserve" for being "Blairite Tories".

As CLP Secretary I had a new (old) member on the phone earlier. Are we pro or anti Jeremy? As if that's the issue. We're pro the leader whomever it is. But JC (Peace be Upon Him) is the only issue they want to talk about. A good nuking of the PLP will suit them fine. Only then can we rebuild the party in His image and abolish capitalism...

Of course if Theresa May can change her mind about an early election Corbyn is entitled to do likewise!

Dadge

FPT Having BoJo as foreign secretary is one of the few things harming her electoral prospects so I don't think May should care about any possible reasons for keeping him in the post. Anyway, he's also holed his own chances of leading the Tory Party below the waterline and I can't see him being a threat to her or anyone else for the foreseeable future.

GeoffM

Richard_Tyndall said:

GeoffM said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. P, what's the relevance?

Who speaks for the glint in the milkman's eye? Who represents the recently deceased?

Asking questions doesn't make a point unless there's a point to be made. We had a referendum on whether to leave or not, and voted to leave. So we're leaving. That's how democracy works.

You are correct - Scott'n'Paste has no point to make.
As soon as you reach that level of enlightenment it makes ignoring the drivel he posts much easier.

Whilst it may not be specifically related to the referendum, I think Scott's point is extremely well made. MPs are not sent to Parliament to do our bidding. They are sent to represent us as they see best. Obviously if there is a real clash of opinions between the electorate and the MP then an MP may well find his or her principles leading to their ejection. But the basic position should not be changed that an MP is not a delegate.

Of course the man who outlined this principle found himself turfed out on his ear by the electorate of Bristol when he put it into practice but again that does not mean the principle is wrong.

The problem for me nowadays is that with the all pervasive party system the MPs are more often than not representing their party or themselves as they see best rather than their electorate.

Ah, is that the point Scott is making?
I couldn't see it myself. Cheers. Very helpful.

Morris_Dancer

Miss JGP, I always take 5pm as the time of change from afternoon to evening.

kle4

Higher than 9% chance of Labour polling under 20%? Not seeing it, even under Corbyn, given the pitfalls that might arise for the Tories. 5% maybe.

kle4

Scott_P said:

Afternoon all.

Catching up on the the previous thread, I see not a single Brexiteer was able to answer the question posed this morning. A couple tried and spectacularly missed the point

Untrue, you've just decided to claim the point was missed because you clearly won't accept any answer.

Richard_Tyndall said:

Whilst it may not be specifically related to the referendum, I think Scott's point is extremely well made. MPs are not sent to Parliament to do our bidding. They are sent to represent us as they see best. Obviously if there is a real clash of opinions between the electorate and the MP then an MP may well find his or her principles leading to their ejection. But the basic position should not be changed that an MP is not a delegate.

That point is perfectly acceptable, and one I've defended multiple times - if it was the one he was making he did f*ck awful job explaining it through the sneer.

Sean_F

Richard_Tyndall said:

Scott_P said:

Afternoon all.

Catching up on the the previous thread, I see not a single Brexiteer was able to answer the question posed this morning. A couple tried and spectacularly missed the point, so I'll give them another go.

In our "representative democracy", who represents those not eligible to vote?

Nobody tried to argue that with a Tory majority, those who voted Labour are not represented in Parliament, but people seem quite happy to claim that if MPs try and represent those who voted to remain they are TRAITORS!

Who represents children in Parliament? Who represents prisoners?

MPs are elected to represent all their constituents whether they can vote or not and whether they voted for them or not. They take guidance from the electorate on how they should do that and of course if they don't generally act as their electorate wants they run the risk of losing their seat at the next election. But they are not supposed to say that they will not do anything for or take into account the well being of any individual constituent either because they did not vote for them or were too young to vote at all (or as in your example in prison).

In terms of the referendum on a question with only two responses and no room for compromise (it is either Remain or Leave) then the MP would be wise to take into account the views of the majority of their constituents or risk being voted out. But again they are their as representatives not delegates so can, if they so desire, take that chance and vote against the majority. As they have indicated they would do on matters such as the Death Penalty.

That was correct in Burke's time. But, mostly, we're no longer voting for Independents, who decide issues on their merits.

And, if MP's decide that an issue must be decided by the voters as a whole, in a referendum, they are morally obliged to abide by the outcome.

Essexit

Evening / afternoon everyone.

The 5/2 on 20-25% looks like value, but I'll be putting a few quid on <20% too, to cover the possibility of a split or other meltdown.

williamglenn

Sean_F said:

And, if MP's decide that an issue must be decided by the voters as a whole, in a referendum, they are morally obliged to abide by the outcome.

The outcome being a divided country and a Leave faction with no clear plan. In those circumstance they are morally obliged to proceed with extreme caution and to take their time for all options to be explored, including a second referendum.

Moses_

Innocent_Abroad said:

Scott_P said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. P, what's the relevance?

Who speaks for the glint in the milkman's eye? Who represents the recently deceased?

I am not asking about imaginary people. I am asking about real people, alive today.

Are they represented, in our "representative democracy" or not?

If so, by whom?

Has no one explained to you, Scott, that Morris Dancer, Seans Fear & Thomas and a few others whose names just now escape me are always right about everything? The rest of us are just scum...

Mr innocent you are probably correct, though scrum seems a very gentle term in the circumstances and I have never observed Mr Dancer of all people resort to this.

That abuse you refer to of course is in comparison to the unadulterated furrious vitriol and tirade of abuse poured out consistently for the last 6 months by Tyson, Roger, Meeks and even yourself on occasions against anyone who dares to take any opposing democratic view to theirs.

Glass houses my friend....glass houses.

Theuniondivvie

Sean_F said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Scott_P said:

Afternoon all.

Catching up on the the previous thread, I see not a single Brexiteer was able to answer the question posed this morning. A couple tried and spectacularly missed the point, so I'll give them another go.

In our "representative democracy", who represents those not eligible to vote?

Nobody tried to argue that with a Tory majority, those who voted Labour are not represented in Parliament, but people seem quite happy to claim that if MPs try and represent those who voted to remain they are TRAITORS!

Who represents children in Parliament? Who represents prisoners?

MPs are elected to represent all their constituents whether they can vote or not and whether they voted for them or not. They take guidance from the electorate on how they should do that and of course if they don't generally act as their electorate wants they run the risk of losing their seat at the next election. But they are not supposed to say that they will not do anything for or take into account the well being of any individual constituent either because they did not vote for them or were too young to vote at all (or as in your example in prison).

In terms of the referendum on a question with only two responses and no room for compromise (it is either Remain or Leave) then the MP would be wise to take into account the views of the majority of their constituents or risk being voted out. But again they are their as representatives not delegates so can, if they so desire, take that chance and vote against the majority. As they have indicated they would do on matters such as the Death Penalty.

That was correct in Burke's time. But, mostly, we're no longer voting for Independents, who decide issues on their merits.

I'd imagine almost all of our progenitors wouldn't have been permitted to vote for anyone at all at that point, so swings and roundabouts.

Sean_F

kle4 said:

Scott_P said:

Afternoon all.

Catching up on the the previous thread, I see not a single Brexiteer was able to answer the question posed this morning. A couple tried and spectacularly missed the point

Untrue, you've just decided to claim the point was missed because you clearly won't accept any answer.

Richard_Tyndall said:

Whilst it may not be specifically related to the referendum, I think Scott's point is extremely well made. MPs are not sent to Parliament to do our bidding. They are sent to represent us as they see best. Obviously if there is a real clash of opinions between the electorate and the MP then an MP may well find his or her principles leading to their ejection. But the basic position should not be changed that an MP is not a delegate.

That point is perfectly acceptable, and one I've defended multiple times - if it was the one he was making he did f*ck awful job explaining it through the sneer.

He's bewildered that anyone could reject his beloved EU.

Sean_F

williamglenn said:

Sean_F said:

And, if MP's decide that an issue must be decided by the voters as a whole, in a referendum, they are morally obliged to abide by the outcome.

The outcome being a divided country and a Leave faction with no clear plan. In those circumstance they are morally obliged to proceed with extreme caution and to take their time for all options to be explored, including a second referendum.

The country is divided at every general election. It doesn't mean the winners can't implement their policy.

ThreeQuidder

Blue_rog said:

AnneJGP said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss JGP, good evening.

Mr. Moses, quite.

I never know when afternoon turns into evening.

That's odd, because I have 100% certainty that night turns into morning at 0330.

I always thought afternoon changes to evening at 6pm

I think afternoon turns to evening at the point one normally finishes work. For me, that's 6pm.

williamglenn

Sean_F said:

williamglenn said:

Sean_F said:

And, if MP's decide that an issue must be decided by the voters as a whole, in a referendum, they are morally obliged to abide by the outcome.

The outcome being a divided country and a Leave faction with no clear plan. In those circumstance they are morally obliged to proceed with extreme caution and to take their time for all options to be explored, including a second referendum.

The country is divided at every general election. It doesn't mean the winners can't implement their policy.

If they can get support for their policy in parliament.

Is there a majority in parliament for leaving the single market? Probably not. Are they mandated by the referendum to do it anyway? Absolutely not.

Sean_F said:

He's bewildered that anyone could reject his beloved EU.

Do you understand why anyone could support it?

david_kendrick1

Scott P wonders who represents children, and those who did not vote. An odd question. He is either dim, which he will deny, or he is trying to be provocative. If anybody has problem with the govt, and he has run out of alternative processes, he goes through his MP.

If there is a big issue of the day, and a constituent knows that his MP holds a different POV, what are his options? He can either try to change his MP's mind, or contact another local political animal. Straightforward so far?

But we all know that this isn't the point. Some people are so wedded to the supremacy of the idea of a federal Europe that they can't see any other position. Clean Brexit is an anathema to this (tiny) sub-set of the population.

I've no interest in trying to change these minds. There is one point which I forlornly hope they will accept. Had there not been the 'black swan' event of Jo Cox's political assassination a week before polling day, Leave would have won by 12% not 4% (authority: Anthony Wells).

A 12% win would have led to a much more positive discussion now.

Moses_

Sean_F said:

williamglenn said:

Sean_F said:

And, if MP's decide that an issue must be decided by the voters as a whole, in a referendum, they are morally obliged to abide by the outcome.

The outcome being a divided country and a Leave faction with no clear plan. In those circumstance they are morally obliged to proceed with extreme caution and to take their time for all options to be explored, including a second referendum.

The country is divided at every general election. It doesn't mean the winners can't implement their policy.

Indeed and neither do the opposition then get the General election rerun simply because they lost in the first one.

AnneJGP

ThreeQuidder said:

Blue_rog said:

AnneJGP said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss JGP, good evening.

Mr. Moses, quite.

I never know when afternoon turns into evening.

That's odd, because I have 100% certainty that night turns into morning at 0330.

I always thought afternoon changes to evening at 6pm

I think afternoon turns to evening at the point one normally finishes work. For me, that's 6pm.

Indeed, that's a very convenient marker, but isn't so obvious for shift workers. It was the time spent working nights as a youngster that made me so certain where night turns into morning.

dixiedean

Seems a lot of people on here are remarkably prescient about what will happen in 2020. If anyone in May 2015 said we'd have May PM, Corbyn LOTO and Trump POTUS by now then I might be convinced. I feel 2020 is a lot of events away.

felix

williamglenn said:

Sean_F said:

And, if MP's decide that an issue must be decided by the voters as a whole, in a referendum, they are morally obliged to abide by the outcome.

The outcome being a divided country and a Leave faction with no clear plan. In those circumstance they are morally obliged to proceed with extreme caution and to take their time for all options to be explored, including a second referendum.

I voted remain but I think that a second referendum would be nonsensical. Are you pretending the same if the result had been reversed - of course not. Democracy is not perfect but it is preferable to the alternative and the job now is to seek to make Brexit work for us all ... and stop being a prat!

IanB2

dixiedean said:

Seems a lot of people on here are remarkably prescient about what will happen in 2020. If anyone in May 2015 said we'd have May PM, Corbyn LOTO and Trump POTUS by now then I might be convinced. I feel 2020 is a lot of events away.

I think it'll be 2019. But it's a fair point.

williamglenn

felix said:

williamglenn said:

Sean_F said:

And, if MP's decide that an issue must be decided by the voters as a whole, in a referendum, they are morally obliged to abide by the outcome.

The outcome being a divided country and a Leave faction with no clear plan. In those circumstance they are morally obliged to proceed with extreme caution and to take their time for all options to be explored, including a second referendum.

I voted remain but I think that a second referendum would be nonsensical. Are you pretending the same if the result had been reversed - of course not. Democracy is not perfect but it is preferable to the alternative and the job now is to seek to make Brexit work for us all ... and stop being a prat!

Leaving the EU is a long and complex process, not a single decision. Proceeding to a destination outside the EU without any further opportunity for the people to express a democratic view about the unfolding situation would be a constitutional outrage. If that makes me a prat then I make no apology for that.

Scott_P

Evening all

Some much more considered responses this time round. Thank you Richard

On the vexed question of afternoon/evening, Dr Sheldon Cooper has the answer.

It's prevening