When it comes to elections, voters don't have that much choice. Labour are so far to the left with a bonkers leader with a terrible backstory that they are unelectable. The LD's.. I nor anyone else(IMHO) have any idea what any of their policies are bar being very pro EU, which is running against the BREXIT vote. and otherwise are the natural protest vote. UKIP's bolt is shot.. What's left? Minor parties, abstain or vote for the party of the centre.. its not rocket science.
I wonder if we are headed for an Irish-style distribution of power, with one large centrist party (Tories/FF) against lots of smaller parties, united only by their dislike of the large party.
I don't see how that works with FPTP. One party on 40% vs four parties on 15% each would result in an absolutely huge majority.
That depends on the extent and efficiency of the national 'deal'. On UNS, then yes, a 40-15-15-15-5-5-5 split would give the Tories an immense majority. If, however, there was extremely efficient vote-swapping everywhere then the 'Progressives' (for want of a better term) would be the ones in government as the multitude of minor parties on 15 or below nationally coalesced into scores of 50s and 60s locally. But the former is far more likely.
It will never happen, people will get sick of the TorySNP right wing soak the poor and enrich the already rich.
Fixed it for you.....
Only a myopic right wing junta Tory could try to say the SNP are right wing, you will have much more wailing and gnashing of teeth as your chums remain friendless in Scotland going forward.
Nah - Labour will put Ruth into power in 2021.
(I don't actually expect that, though I wouldn't entirely rule it out, both on the natural dynamics of politics and on Scottish Labour's seeming capacity to continually choose the most self-destructive course for itself - though I suspect there's a little part of you that would secretly relish Labour being put in a position where it had to choose between propping up the SNP and sticking the Tories in power. In reality, I think the Lib Dems will flip to support the SNP before Labour and that come 2021, the Lib Dems might have a few more seats than they do now.)
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
As King of Tonga I am going to invade Fiji.
Oh but wait. I am not King of Tonga.
Plus it was the right decision and of benefit to the country. So what's the complaint? Surely you're not one of these types that would prefer to win an argumentative point at the expense of the country?
Cameron said he would stay on as King of Tonga if he lost the referendum but instead he resigned.
So another lie.
Surely we don't have to explain the realities of campaigning and political activity (or "politics" for short) on this of all sites.
@NickPalmer - what do you define as the left? Does Lisa Nandy count? How about Clive Lewis? Keir Starmer, maybe? Do you think it is feasible to have a Labour leader seeking power through Parliament who enjoys the positive support of, say, 10 MPs?
If the Labour left is serious about power then it, too, must compromise a little. To any serious person the left is not just that part of the PLP that actively supports Jeremy Corbyn.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
Given that that is clearly not what it meant you are a self-confessed complete imbecile of the highest order.
So if you say to your kids "You can rightly expect that if we are all still alive on Christmas Day you will get the presents on your list"... then you leave home on Christmas morning before they wake up, that wouldn't be telling a lie?
Oh the lengths people will go to not to concede defeat. It used to be something to be ashamed of, being a bad sport.
A revealing analogy. Do you take the British people for small children believing in Father Christmas?
Stick to the oeuvre of Enoch Powell. You might even learn a thing or two about lying.
If it's only Jezza and his small band of followers keeping Lab from making a serious challenge I believe his hold is weaker than perhaps is imagined.
Apols can't remember who made an excellent post yesterday pointing out that it is at the moment of least expectation of change, of a catalyst for change least envisaged, that change often happens.
Meanwhile locally Cons take the Lab effort for granted at their peril.
Surely its not the size of his band of brothers (and sisters) that provides his security, its his complete dominance amongst the voters in the voluntary party and his army of leftie clicktivists.
True but at some point sanity will break out, and sensible leadership candidates will be placed in front of them.
What will they do? Not sure. Head off back to apathy or protest or some such.
Big issue will be finding a sensible candidate, they have NONE at present so will need to be new blood.
At this point I think sensible = non-bonkers. Surely Lab has at least a couple of those.
I do not see any about Topping , can you name anyone that has a clue , has suggested anything remotely sensible , has a backbone , principles , etc.
So we must look to a known unknown. Someone from some kind of public institution, think tank, etc who will emerge. Time is tight I grant you.
Sadiq. Getting him back into parliament pre-2020 is the problem there. (Though I stand by my view that he remains good value as Next Labour Leader, if you work on the contingency that there's no change before the next GE, in which he contests a seat).
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
As King of Tonga I am going to invade Fiji.
Oh but wait. I am not King of Tonga.
Plus it was the right decision and of benefit to the country. So what's the complaint? Surely you're not one of these types that would prefer to win an argumentative point at the expense of the country?
Cameron said he would stay on as King of Tonga if he lost the referendum but instead he resigned.
So another lie.
Surely we don't have to explain the realities of campaigning and political activity (or "politics" for short) on this of all sites.
You are correct - that the political reality is that politicians deliberately lie.
@NickPalmer - what do you define as the left? Does Lisa Nandy count? How about Clive Lewis? Keir Starmer, maybe? Do you think it is feasible to have a Labour leader seeking power through Parliament who enjoys the positive support of, say, 10 MPs?
If the Labour left is serious about power then it, too, must compromise a little. To any serious person the left is not just that part of the PLP that actively supports Jeremy Corbyn.
I disagree. It's not about being a bit more like the other people. It's about changing the focus of the debate.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
As King of Tonga I am going to invade Fiji.
Oh but wait. I am not King of Tonga.
Plus it was the right decision and of benefit to the country. So what's the complaint? Surely you're not one of these types that would prefer to win an argumentative point at the expense of the country?
Cameron said he would stay on as King of Tonga if he lost the referendum but instead he resigned.
So another lie.
Surely we don't have to explain the realities of campaigning and political activity (or "politics" for short) on this of all sites.
You are correct - that the political reality is that politicians deliberately lie.
Most politicians don't lie. Outright lies are rare because they usually get found out and they are devastating for credibility when they are. Cameron presumably did in this case because (1) if Remain won, his 'promises' on what he'd do if it were Leave would never be called on, and (2) if Leave won, his credibility would be shot anyway.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
As King of Tonga I am going to invade Fiji.
Oh but wait. I am not King of Tonga.
Plus it was the right decision and of benefit to the country. So what's the complaint? Surely you're not one of these types that would prefer to win an argumentative point at the expense of the country?
Cameron said he would stay on as King of Tonga if he lost the referendum but instead he resigned.
So another lie.
Surely we don't have to explain the realities of campaigning and political activity (or "politics" for short) on this of all sites.
You are correct - that the political reality is that politicians deliberately lie.
As was much discussed at the time, he had no option other than to say what he did.
@NickPalmer - what do you define as the left? Does Lisa Nandy count? How about Clive Lewis? Keir Starmer, maybe? Do you think it is feasible to have a Labour leader seeking power through Parliament who enjoys the positive support of, say, 10 MPs?
If the Labour left is serious about power then it, too, must compromise a little. To any serious person the left is not just that part of the PLP that actively supports Jeremy Corbyn.
Do you think it unreasonable that before standing down Corbyn would want to at least ensure that a candidate supportive of him is on the ballot?
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
As King of Tonga I am going to invade Fiji.
Oh but wait. I am not King of Tonga.
Plus it was the right decision and of benefit to the country. So what's the complaint? Surely you're not one of these types that would prefer to win an argumentative point at the expense of the country?
Cameron said he would stay on as King of Tonga if he lost the referendum but instead he resigned.
So another lie.
Surely we don't have to explain the realities of campaigning and political activity (or "politics" for short) on this of all sites.
You are correct - that the political reality is that politicians deliberately lie.
Most politicians don't lie. Outright lies are rare because they usually get found out and they are devastating for credibility when they are. Cameron presumably did in this case because (1) if Remain won, his 'promises' on what he'd do if it were Leave would never be called on, and (2) if Leave won, his credibility would be shot anyway.
If Leave won he would demonstrably have failed. Failed politicians must either be sacked or resign. He resigned. He also avoided creating a parallel campaign to get him out beforehand.
Do you think it unreasonable that before standing down Corbyn would want to at least ensure that a candidate supportive of him is on the ballot?
Depends what "unreasonable" means...
Corbyn is destroying Labour. Candidates supportive of him are destroying Labour.
It's unreasonable for Corbyn to cling to office while destroying Labour. In that sense it would be unreasonable of him to demand a candidate that will continue his destruction.
@DecrepitJohnL - The left has won most of the policy argument inside Labour, that is a Corbyn achievement. The party is well to the left of where someone like me would want it, but I accept that. The problem Labour has is that its policies are utterly irrelevant: no-one is listening to anything it says because of who its leader is. Corbyn brings too much baggage and seems utterly alien to most voters, and has absolutely no interest in engaging beyond his comfort zone. He and the people who surround him guarantee that Labour will not get a hearing. It is incumbent on the left to find a better leader. The idea that anyone inside the PLP who opposed Corbyn's leadership is a Red Tory and a Blairite is ridiculous.
That's why the centre-right is mistaken to oppose making it easier to ensure a left-wing candidate can contest a future election. If it appears that the PLP will block any left-wing candidate (and vague assurances are not enough - I am not especially cynical about politicians but vagueness is not an option here), then Corbyn will think it his duty to stay on, regardless of personal comfort or wishes. For him even to consider stepping down at some point, it needs to be clear that it's possible for the left to compete for the succession.
Agreed.
How would you suggest this happens though? NEC lowers number of required nominations? Important that long term consequences of whatever solution is found are thought through!
Absolutely massive manufacturing PMI. 56.1 vs 53.4 expected, extremely positive data all around. New orders up, overseas demand up, an increase in the work backlog, an increase in employment, price pressures easing slightly.
It follows excellent Eurozone ones yesterday.
Things improving in both Europe and here increases the likelihood of a velvet divorce. We are in a slightly stronger position, and they won't want to spoil the fact that the PMIs are (finally) pointing to a 2%+ GDP growth rate, for the first time in a decade.
Still think that we are going to be looking at 1% growth in real terms this year? We may be very close to that in Q1. There is a surprising amount of momentum in the UK economy coming into the year. Better growth in the EZ will undoubtedly help.
If the EZ is growing with, presumably our general trade helping this along, and we make life for our traders harder, who does that hurt more?
From Walter Russell Mead: The past 25 years of world politics have rested on a series of polite fictions, agreed-upon conventions and hypocritical pretenses: That we had a policy to end the North Korean nuclear drive (ditto for Iran); That Europe was becoming a great posthistorical power based on the mighty engine of the euro; That the two-state solution was just a settlement freeze away; That international institutions and civil society were replacing national governments at the center of world politics; That immigration was a no-brainer; That the progress toward free trade was inexorable; That democracy was irresistibly on the march; and so on. Americans and Europeans believed that the world would look more and more like we wanted it to without us doing any heavy lifting.
Those are all very comforting ideas, but sadly none of them are true. In the next few years we are going to have to face some less pleasant choices based on hard truths rather than comfy illusions.
Yup! The Brexit voters got it. Trump voters too. Lefties not so much. You need to deal with the world the way it is - not the way you'd like it to be. But isn't.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
As King of Tonga I am going to invade Fiji.
Oh but wait. I am not King of Tonga.
Plus it was the right decision and of benefit to the country. So what's the complaint? Surely you're not one of these types that would prefer to win an argumentative point at the expense of the country?
Cameron said he would stay on as King of Tonga if he lost the referendum but instead he resigned.
So another lie.
Surely we don't have to explain the realities of campaigning and political activity (or "politics" for short) on this of all sites.
You are correct - that the political reality is that politicians deliberately lie.
Most politicians don't lie. Outright lies are rare because they usually get found out and they are devastating for credibility when they are. Cameron presumably did in this case because (1) if Remain won, his 'promises' on what he'd do if it were Leave would never be called on, and (2) if Leave won, his credibility would be shot anyway.
If Leave won he would demonstrably have failed. Failed politicians must either be sacked or resign. He resigned. He also avoided creating a parallel campaign to get him out beforehand.
He didn't have to say what he did about when A50 would be triggered though. He could have said much the same as May has on that.
When it comes to elections, voters don't have that much choice. Labour are so far to the left with a bonkers leader with a terrible backstory that they are unelectable. The LD's.. I nor anyone else(IMHO) have any idea what any of their policies are bar being very pro EU, which is running against the BREXIT vote. and otherwise are the natural protest vote. UKIP's bolt is shot.. What's left? Minor parties, abstain or vote for the party of the centre.. its not rocket science.
I wonder if we are headed for an Irish-style distribution of power, with one large centrist party (Tories/FF) against lots of smaller parties, united only by their dislike of the large party.
I don't see how that works with FPTP. One party on 40% vs four parties on 15% each would result in an absolutely huge majority.
That depends on the extent and efficiency of the national 'deal'. On UNS, then yes, a 40-15-15-15-5-5-5 split would give the Tories an immense majority. If, however, there was extremely efficient vote-swapping everywhere then the 'Progressives' (for want of a better term) would be the ones in government as the multitude of minor parties on 15 or below nationally coalesced into scores of 50s and 60s locally. But the former is far more likely.
It will never happen, people will get sick of the TorySNP right wing soak the poor and enrich the already rich.
Fixed it for you.....
Only a myopic right wing junta Tory could try to say the SNP are right wing
Either that, or the Labour Shadow Scottish Secretary:
He accused the SNP of turning the Scottish Parliament into a ``conveyor belt to pass on Tory cuts to the Scottish people'', adding: ``Rather than reintroduce the 50p rate for the richest few, the SNP has chosen once again to cut the local authority budgets that pay for our schools, care services and hospitals.''
If it's only Jezza and his small band of followers keeping Lab from making a serious challenge I believe his hold is weaker than perhaps is imagined.
Apols can't remember who made an excellent post yesterday pointing out that it is at the moment of least expectation of change, of a catalyst for change least envisaged, that change often happens.
Meanwhile locally Cons take the Lab effort for granted at their peril.
Surely its not the size of his band of brothers (and sisters) that provides his security, its his complete dominance amongst the voters in the voluntary party and his army of leftie clicktivists.
True but at some point sanity will break out, and sensible leadership candidates will be placed in front of them.
What will they do? Not sure. Head off back to apathy or protest or some such.
Very interesting - I agree that the Tories would be silly to soft pedal in Copeland. Out of interest, if the by election never happened - because it was a general election - would the bets on Copeland be settled on the result of the seat?
Do you think it unreasonable that before standing down Corbyn would want to at least ensure that a candidate supportive of him is on the ballot?
Depends what "unreasonable" means...
Corbyn is destroying Labour. Candidates supportive of him are destroying Labour.
It's unreasonable for Corbyn to cling to office while destroying Labour. In that sense it would be unreasonable of him to demand a candidate that will continue his destruction.
It would be human nature though.
If Corbyn wanted to pick his successor... I think that's unreasonable. If he tried to manipulate the rules to exclude candidates he didn't want... That's also unreasonable.
But wanting to ensure that members can vote for someone from his wing of the party... as a condition of him standing down.... especally when we know many labour MPs are not beneath breakingthe rules to force people off the ballot... that doesn't seem very unreasonable to me.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quoteomething
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
As King of Tonga I am going to invade Fiji.
Oh but wait. I am not King of Tonga.
Plus it was the right decision and of benefit to the country. So what's the complaint? Surely you're not one of these types that would prefer to win an argumentative point at the expense of the country?
Cameron said he would stay on as King of Tonga if he lost the referendum but instead he resigned.
So another lie.
Surely we don't have to explain the realities of campaigning and political activity (or "politics" for short) on this of all sites.
You are correct - that the political reality is that politicians deliberately lie.
Most politicians don't lie. Outright lies are rare because they usually get found out and they are devastating for credibility when they are. Cameron presumably did in this case because (1) if Remain won, his 'promises' on what he'd do if it were Leave would never be called on, and (2) if Leave won, his credibility would be shot anyway.
If Leave won he would demonstrably have failed. Failed politicians must either be sacked or resign. He resigned. He also avoided creating a parallel campaign to get him out beforehand.
He didn't have to say what he did about when A50 would be triggered though. He could have said much the same as May has on that.
I'm not writing the official biography but it's possible the view was that to have suggested any delay in triggering A50 might have been seen as an attempt to prepare to ignore an adverse result.
@DecrepitJohnL - The left has won most of the policy argument inside Labour, that is a Corbyn achievement. The party is well to the left of where someone like me would want it, but I accept that. The problem Labour has is that its policies are utterly irrelevant: no-one is listening to anything it says because of who its leader is. Corbyn brings too much baggage and seems utterly alien to most voters, and has absolutely no interest in engaging beyond his comfort zone. He and the people who surround him guarantee that Labour will not get a hearing. It is incumbent on the left to find a better leader. The idea that anyone inside the PLP who opposed Corbyn's leadership is a Red Tory and a Blairite is ridiculous.
That's why the centre-right is mistaken to oppose making it easier to ensure a left-wing candidate can contest a future election. If it appears that the PLP will block any left-wing candidate (and vague assurances are not enough - I am not especially cynical about politicians but vagueness is not an option here), then Corbyn will think it his duty to stay on, regardless of personal comfort or wishes. For him even to consider stepping down at some point, it needs to be clear that it's possible for the left to compete for the succession.
The 15% rule is there for a reason though, one that Corbyn is amply demonstrating.
Labour is extremely fortunate that there isn't another party ready and able to fill the gap that it's creating, and that the encroachment onto its territory is coming from various parties, none of which is a threat to displacing it on the centre-left (other than the SNP within Scotland). All the same, it can't rely on that continuing indefinitely. As has happened in Scotland, and as happened in Britain in 1916-24, when these switches occur, they can occur in the space of only a few years.
He didn't have to say what he did about when A50 would be triggered though. He could have said much the same as May has on that.
Again, one of those areas where I suspect Cameron was very badly advised by the Remain campaign. They must have assumed that the inevitable, immediate, automatic declaring of Article 50 would just be too scary for those (like Boris?) who really wanted to have another round of renegotiation after a Leave vote. But no, there was only to be The Cameron Renegotiation - anything else was a heresy.
It was also stupid, because in the event of Leave winning, Cameron was already on the way out the door of Downing Street, and all the pens to sign the Article 50 declaration were already in the removals van...
Very interesting - I agree that the Tories would be silly to soft pedal in Copeland. Out of interest, if the by election never happened - because it was a general election - would the bets on Copeland be settled on the result of the seat?
Bets would be voided.
The markets say it is for the Copeland by-election.
From Walter Russell Mead: The past 25 years of world politics have rested on a series of polite fictions, agreed-upon conventions and hypocritical pretenses: That we had a policy to end the North Korean nuclear drive (ditto for Iran); That Europe was becoming a great posthistorical power based on the mighty engine of the euro; That the two-state solution was just a settlement freeze away; That international institutions and civil society were replacing national governments at the center of world politics; That immigration was a no-brainer; That the progress toward free trade was inexorable; That democracy was irresistibly on the march; and so on. Americans and Europeans believed that the world would look more and more like we wanted it to without us doing any heavy lifting.
Those are all very comforting ideas, but sadly none of them are true. In the next few years we are going to have to face some less pleasant choices based on hard truths rather than comfy illusions.
Yup! The Brexit voters got it. Trump voters too. Lefties not so much. You need to deal with the world the way it is - not the way you'd like it to be. But isn't.
I'm very doubtful of whether that many Brexit voters or Trump voters 'got it'; they've just swallowed a different set of illusions. America will not be made great again off the back of a trade war with China and a wall along its southern border.
When it comes to elections, voters don't have that much choice. Labour are so far to the left with a bonkers leader with a terrible backstory that they are unelectable. The LD's.. I nor anyone else(IMHO) have any idea what any of their policies are bar being very pro EU, which is running against the BREXIT vote. and otherwise are the natural protest vote. UKIP's bolt is shot.. What's left? Minor parties, abstain or vote for the party of the centre.. its not rocket science.
I wonder if we are headed for an Irish-style distribution of power, with one large centrist party (Tories/FF) against lots of smaller parties, united only by their dislike of the large party.
I don't see how that works with FPTP. One party on 40% vs four parties on 15% each would result in an absolutely huge majority.
That depends on the extent and efficiency of the national 'deal'. On UNS, then yes, a 40-15-15-15-5-5-5 split would give the Tories an immense majority. If, however, there was extremely efficient vote-swapping everywhere then the 'Progressives' (for want of a better term) would be the ones in government as the multitude of minor parties on 15 or below nationally coalesced into scores of 50s and 60s locally. But the former is far more likely.
It will never happen, people will get sick of the TorySNP right wing soak the poor and enrich the already rich.
Fixed it for you.....
Only a myopic right wing junta Tory could try to say the SNP are right wing, you will have much more wailing and gnashing of teeth as your chums remain friendless in Scotland going forward.
Nah - Labour will put Ruth into power in 2021.
(I don't actually expect that, though I wouldn't entirely rule it out, both on the natural dynamics of politics and on Scottish Labour's seeming capacity to continually choose the most self-destructive course for itself - though I suspect there's a little part of you that would secretly relish Labour being put in a position where it had to choose between propping up the SNP and sticking the Tories in power. In reality, I think the Lib Dems will flip to support the SNP before Labour and that come 2021, the Lib Dems might have a few more seats than they do now.)
David, I would happily take any bet that the Tories will not b ethe Scottish Governemnt in 2021, I cannot believe anyone in the country would be willing to wager on it but if someone was so inclined it would be free money. I doubt I will live to see a Tory Scotland.
@DecrepitJohnL - The left has won most of the policy argument inside Labour, that is a Corbyn achievement. The party is well to the left of where someone like me would want it, but I accept that. The problem Labour has is that its policies are utterly irrelevant: no-one is listening to anything it says because of who its leader is. Corbyn brings too much baggage and seems utterly alien to most voters, and has absolutely no interest in engaging beyond his comfort zone. He and the people who surround him guarantee that Labour will not get a hearing. It is incumbent on the left to find a better leader. The idea that anyone inside the PLP who opposed Corbyn's leadership is a Red Tory and a Blairite is ridiculous.
That's why the centre-right is mistaken to oppose making it easier to ensure a left-wing candidate can contest a future election. If it appears that the PLP will block any left-wing candidate (and vague assurances are not enough - I am not especially cynical about politicians but vagueness is not an option here), then Corbyn will think it his duty to stay on, regardless of personal comfort or wishes. For him even to consider stepping down at some point, it needs to be clear that it's possible for the left to compete for the succession.
Agreed.
How would you suggest this happens though? NEC lowers number of required nominations? Important that long term consequences of whatever solution is found are thought through!
Maybe they could make a deal enforceable by something more technical? For example, what if you said nomination letters could be sent in advance of a challenge, and you could state that your nomination couldn't be withdrawn? Then Corbyn agrees to go if one of X, Y and Z get enough nominations, the MPs send in their nomination letters and he goes.
Changing the nomination threshold seems like a sledgehammer to crack a nut; I get the short-term tactical situation here but it's hard to believe the left think their interests are best served by a succession of leaders who 80% of their colleagues think are shit.
He didn't have to say what he did about when A50 would be triggered though. He could have said much the same as May has on that.
Again, one of those areas where I suspect Cameron was very badly advised by the Remain campaign. They must have assumed that the inevitable, immediate, automatic declaring of Article 50 would just be too scary for those (like Boris?) who really wanted to have another round of renegotiation after a Leave vote. But no, there was only to be The Cameron Renegotiation - anything else was a heresy.
It was also stupid, because in the event of Leave winning, Cameron was already on the way out the door of Downing Street, and all the pens to sign the Article 50 declaration were already in the removals van...
While I agree the fear factor must have been a factor, at the same time I don't see what else he could have said.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
As King of Tonga I am going to invade Fiji.
Oh but wait. I am not King of Tonga.
Plus it was the right decision and of benefit to the country. So what's the complaint? Surely you're not one of these types that would prefer to win an argumentative point at the expense of the country?
Cameron said he would stay on as King of Tonga if he lost the referendum but instead he resigned.
So another lie.
Surely we don't have to explain the realities of campaigning and political activity (or "politics" for short) on this of all sites.
You are correct - that the political reality is that politicians deliberately lie.
Most politicians don't lie. Outright lies are rare because they usually get found out and they are devastating for credibility when they are. Cameron presumably did in this case because (1) if Remain won, his 'promises' on what he'd do if it were Leave would never be called on, and (2) if Leave won, his credibility would be shot anyway.
That's the point though - posters like William Glenn and Topping think it's really clever when politicians utterly convince the public they will do something and leave enough wiggle room to get out later. But you, I, and the dogs in the street know that the intent was to deceive. People are bored of it.
When it comes to elections, voters don't have that much choice. Labour are so far to the left with a bonkers leader with a terrible backstory that they are unelectable. The LD's.. I nor anyone else(IMHO) have any idea what any of their policies are bar being very pro EU, which is running against the BREXIT vote. and otherwise are the natural protest vote. UKIP's bolt is shot.. What's left? Minor parties, abstain or vote for the party of the centre.. its not rocket science.
I wonder if we are headed for an Irish-style distribution of power, with one large centrist party (Tories/FF) against lots of smaller parties, united only by their dislike of the large party.
I don't see how that works with FPTP. One party on 40% vs four parties on 15% each would result in an absolutely huge majority.
That depends on the extent and efficiency of the national 'deal'. On UNS, then yes, a 40-15-15-15-5-5-5 split would give the Tories an immense majority. If, however, there was extremely efficient vote-swapping everywhere then the 'Progressives' (for want of a better term) would be the ones in government as the multitude of minor parties on 15 or below nationally coalesced into scores of 50s and 60s locally. But the former is far more likely.
It will never happen, people will get sick of the TorySNP right wing soak the poor and enrich the already rich.
Fixed it for you.....
Only a myopic right wing junta Tory could try to say the SNP are right wing
Either that, or the Labour Shadow Scottish Secretary:
He accused the SNP of turning the Scottish Parliament into a ``conveyor belt to pass on Tory cuts to the Scottish people'', adding: ``Rather than reintroduce the 50p rate for the richest few, the SNP has chosen once again to cut the local authority budgets that pay for our schools, care services and hospitals.''
Ha Ha Ha , you could not make it up , you quote teh one Labour Lackey left at Westminster , a moronic half witted baboon. labour had 13 years to do something and all they managed was to wreck the country and leave a litany of disaster. Desperate days for teh Tory/labour coalition in Scotland, a bumbling fool apeice at Westminster and a rag tag bunch of mainly list losers in Holyrood is all they can muster. I wll give you your brass neck though.
From Walter Russell Mead: The past 25 years of world politics have rested on a series of polite fictions, agreed-upon conventions and hypocritical pretenses: That we had a policy to end the North Korean nuclear drive (ditto for Iran); That Europe was becoming a great posthistorical power based on the mighty engine of the euro; That the two-state solution was just a settlement freeze away; That international institutions and civil society were replacing national governments at the center of world politics; That immigration was a no-brainer; That the progress toward free trade was inexorable; That democracy was irresistibly on the march; and so on. Americans and Europeans believed that the world would look more and more like we wanted it to without us doing any heavy lifting.
Those are all very comforting ideas, but sadly none of them are true. In the next few years we are going to have to face some less pleasant choices based on hard truths rather than comfy illusions.
Yup! The Brexit voters got it. Trump voters too. Lefties not so much. You need to deal with the world the way it is - not the way you'd like it to be. But isn't.
The point is that the Left wants a better world; the Right just wants to get the best for them out of what it is now.
@isam - the Tories leading the Remain and Leave campaigns told many, many lies during the referendum campaign.
They did, but we only seem to hear the £350m one... which, although unlikely to be carried out, couldn't have yet even if it were to, as we haven't left yet.
Whereas the quote I linked to from Cameron, speaking in the House of Commons, has turned out to be an outright lie. The lack of stick he has taken for that is quite something
Is it a lie to say that the British people would expect it to start straight away, or in fact the truth?
"would rightly expect" is the quote, and yes, if you are in charge of the country and you say what he said, then immediately leaving of your own volition without doing it can be considered a lie.
You would have to be a complete imbecile of the highest order not to understand that to mean "I as PM will invoke A50 immediately should we vote Leave". What would you understand it to mean?
As King of Tonga I am going to invade Fiji.
Oh but wait. I am not King of Tonga.
Plus it was the right decision and of benefit to the country. So what's the complaint? Surely you're not one of these types that would prefer to win an argumentative point at the expense of the country?
Cameron said he would stay on as King of Tonga if he lost the referendum but instead he resigned.
So another lie.
Surely we don't have to explain the realities of campaigning and political activity (or "politics" for short) on this of all sites.
You are correct - that the political reality is that politicians deliberately lie.
Most politicians don't lie. Outright lies are rare because they usually get found out and they are devastating for credibility when they are. Cameron presumably did in this case because (1) if Remain won, his 'promises' on what he'd do if it were Leave would never be called on, and (2) if Leave won, his credibility would be shot anyway.
That's the point though - posters like William Glenn and Topping think it's really clever when politicians utterly convince the public they will do something and leave enough wiggle room to get out later. But you, I, and the dogs in the street know that the intent was to deceive. People are bored of it.
I don't think it's clever I just identify it for what it is.
I am surprised that this is a surprise to contributors to this site.
When it comes to elections, voters don't have that much choice. Labour are so far to the left with a bonkers leader with a terrible backstory that they are unelectable. The LD's.. I nor anyone else(IMHO) have any idea what any of their policies are bar being very pro EU, which is running against the BREXIT vote. and otherwise are the natural protest vote. UKIP's bolt is shot.. What's left? Minor parties, abstain or vote for the party of the centre.. its not rocket science.
I wonder if we are headed for an Irish-style distribution of power, with one large centrist party (Tories/FF) against lots of smaller parties, united only by their dislike of the large party.
I don't see how that works with FPTP. One party on 40% vs four parties on 15% each would result in an absolutely huge majority.
That depends on the extent and efficiency of the national 'deal'. On UNS, then yes, a 40-15-15-15-5-5-5 split would give the Tories an immense majority. If, however, there was extremely efficient vote-swapping everywhere then the 'Progressives' (for want of a better term) would be the ones in government as the multitude of minor parties on 15 or below nationally coalesced into scores of 50s and 60s locally. But the former is far more likely.
It will never happen, people will get sick of the TorySNP right wing soak the poor and enrich the already rich.
Fixed it for you.....
Only a myopic right wing junta Tory could try to say the SNP are right wing
Either that, or the Labour Shadow Scottish Secretary:
He accused the SNP of turning the Scottish Parliament into a ``conveyor belt to pass on Tory cuts to the Scottish people'', adding: ``Rather than reintroduce the 50p rate for the richest few, the SNP has chosen once again to cut the local authority budgets that pay for our schools, care services and hospitals.''
Victory is not the ultimate success since if they are ready to die for their success then that shows their effort for their party and it may bring success though they are weak. I like you expression of views and ideas about them and it is such a inspirational work. I am writer in best essay writing service reviews and truly inspired from this.
Comments
(I don't actually expect that, though I wouldn't entirely rule it out, both on the natural dynamics of politics and on Scottish Labour's seeming capacity to continually choose the most self-destructive course for itself - though I suspect there's a little part of you that would secretly relish Labour being put in a position where it had to choose between propping up the SNP and sticking the Tories in power. In reality, I think the Lib Dems will flip to support the SNP before Labour and that come 2021, the Lib Dems might have a few more seats than they do now.)
If the Labour left is serious about power then it, too, must compromise a little. To any serious person the left is not just that part of the PLP that actively supports Jeremy Corbyn.
http://www.totalpolitics.com/articles/opinion/david-herdson-tories-should-not-try-be-too-canny-copeland
Lovely weather we've been having isn't ir?
Corbyn is destroying Labour. Candidates supportive of him are destroying Labour.
It's unreasonable for Corbyn to cling to office while destroying Labour. In that sense it would be unreasonable of him to demand a candidate that will continue his destruction.
It would be human nature though.
How would you suggest this happens though? NEC lowers number of required nominations?
Important that long term consequences of whatever solution is found are thought through!
The past 25 years of world politics have rested on a series of polite fictions, agreed-upon conventions and hypocritical pretenses: That we had a policy to end the North Korean nuclear drive (ditto for Iran); That Europe was becoming a great posthistorical power based on the mighty engine of the euro; That the two-state solution was just a settlement freeze away; That international institutions and civil society were replacing national governments at the center of world politics; That immigration was a no-brainer; That the progress toward free trade was inexorable; That democracy was irresistibly on the march; and so on. Americans and Europeans believed that the world would look more and more like we wanted it to without us doing any heavy lifting.
Those are all very comforting ideas, but sadly none of them are true. In the next few years we are going to have to face some less pleasant choices based on hard truths rather than comfy illusions.
Yup! The Brexit voters got it. Trump voters too. Lefties not so much. You need to deal with the world the way it is - not the way you'd like it to be. But isn't.
He accused the SNP of turning the Scottish Parliament into a ``conveyor belt to pass on Tory cuts to the Scottish people'', adding: ``Rather than reintroduce the 50p rate for the richest few, the SNP has chosen once again to cut the local authority budgets that pay for our schools, care services and hospitals.''
http://www.clyde2.com/scottish-news/scots-to-lose-2-billion-in-tax-breaks-and-social-security-cuts-by-2021/
But wanting to ensure that members can vote for someone from his wing of the party... as a condition of him standing down.... especally when we know many labour MPs are not beneath breakingthe rules to force people off the ballot... that doesn't seem very unreasonable to me.
Labour is extremely fortunate that there isn't another party ready and able to fill the gap that it's creating, and that the encroachment onto its territory is coming from various parties, none of which is a threat to displacing it on the centre-left (other than the SNP within Scotland). All the same, it can't rely on that continuing indefinitely. As has happened in Scotland, and as happened in Britain in 1916-24, when these switches occur, they can occur in the space of only a few years.
It was also stupid, because in the event of Leave winning, Cameron was already on the way out the door of Downing Street, and all the pens to sign the Article 50 declaration were already in the removals van...
The markets say it is for the Copeland by-election.
NEW THREAD
Changing the nomination threshold seems like a sledgehammer to crack a nut; I get the short-term tactical situation here but it's hard to believe the left think their interests are best served by a succession of leaders who 80% of their colleagues think are shit.
I am surprised that this is a surprise to contributors to this site.
I've just come across one of the stories of their history - a lovely little tale.
https://www.childrensmercy.org/help-our-kids/piggy-bank-history/
Belfast Telegraph
Video: Hilarious moment 'pickpocket' realises he's been caught on #CCTV https://t.co/UA1WCspaSD https://t.co/SNc8VRM6fx