You say exactly what I meant, but you put it much more eloquently than I could! I can't see a vote of confidence being called by the Tories if there were any chance of Corbyn becoming PM, even if it were only for a few weeks during the campaign.
Much more straightforward to enter a one line bill calling the next election. "notwithstanding the FTPA(2011) the next General Election will happen on 2nd July 2017", goes through the Commons on a straight majority and dare the Lords to impede the ultimate expression of democracy. If they do impede it add it as a clause on the end of the next Finance Act
The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.
Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
I said might.
But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
Dagenham?
UKIP too far behind there. Hartlepool might be the one seat UKIP could win vs Labour. But not with Nuttall.
If Farage ran for the seat he might just make it there.
...and not too far in front of the Conservatives in Dag and Rainham either actually
Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though
Agree. Same message.
Well its not is it?
I have plenty of experience of meeting UKIP people at events and I never heard any racism at all. I doubt people who went to BNP meetings could say the same. It's people like you trying to conflate peoples feelings of isolation and despair with race hate that cause the problems in society
They are both anti-immigrant. The rest is details.
I doubt your experience met with any reasoned sovereignty argument.
I could be wrong about your experiences of course.
You are just being needlessly provocative. The BNP believe that people that are not white are inferior to white people, there is no one I have met in UKIP and nothing I have seen from UKIP that would infer they believed that, and that difference is not "just detail" it is pivotal.
@LadPolitics: How about we scrap general elections and just have a rolling schedule of 3 "by-elections" every Thursday?
I've pushed for that for some time, albeit I'd like an added twist. The three seats that come up are completely random. So no MP knows if he's in power for a few months, or ten years.
Best of all, it would create an enormous number of betting opportunities.
And it would improve the governance of the country enormously, although that's a fringe benefit.
The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.
Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
I said might.
But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
Dagenham?
UKIP too far behind there. Hartlepool might be the one seat UKIP could win vs Labour. But not with Nuttall.
If Farage ran for the seat he might just make it there.
...and not too far in front of the Conservatives in Dag and Rainham either actually
Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though
Agree. Same message.
Well its not is it?
I have plenty of experience of meeting UKIP people at events and I never heard any racism at all. I doubt people who went to BNP meetings could say the same. It's people like you trying to conflate peoples feelings of isolation and despair with race hate that cause the problems in society
They are both anti-immigrant. The rest is details.
I doubt your experience met with any reasoned sovereignty argument.
I could be wrong about your experiences of course.
You are just being needlessly provocative. The BNP believe that people that are not white are inferior to white people, there is no one I have met in UKIP and nothing I have seen from UKIP that would infer they believed that, and that difference is not "just detail" it is pivotal.
Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though
I think the overwhelming likelihood is that UKIP will become a fringe party rather like the BNP used to be in electoral terms, i.e. persist as a receptacle for 'Sod 'em all' votes, getting a small but not derisory percentage in a number of seats, epecially in run-down areas. (I'm not, of course, saying they'll be like the BNP in terms of unpleasantness).
More likely they'll revive after the Prime Minister BETRAYS BRITAIN by compromising with foreigners in the negotiations.
I doubt it, TBH. It's too fragmented a message.
Fragmentation can work in your favour under FPTP. If it's a fishing constituency it'll be British Fish For British Fisherman. If it's manufacturing it'll be unfair tariffs. Etc Etc.
That's quite interesting. It does suggest that trade union support for Corbyn is not absolute, but dependent upon him showing that he can somehow turn this dire situation around (not that he will). But if that is typical it also shows that his support base is, for the moment, still intact.
Take that, together with the frankly delusional reaction to the results were seeing from the nailed on Corbynites, and everything still suggests that Corbyn still needs to be given a bit more rope - Autumn 2018, with the potential for a new leader to have much the same effect as the successor to Thatcher had on the Tory vote from 1990 to 1992. Nick Palmer is the sort of person that might be used as a barometer - i.e. a Labour member capable of changing their mind who needs to see the light before a challenge stands more than a remote chance. He hasn't, yet, from what I can glean.
Yep - 2018 has always looked the likely time to me. That said, the Copeland result confirms the opinion poll ratings. If the same thing happens at the May council elections, it could just be that things get brought forward. And, of course, if there is a miracle and McCluskey loses the Unite leadership, then it is game over.
I think Nick will be a Corbyn supporter until the day after Corbyn is no longer leader; at which point he will say that he was always the wrong man for the job :-)
There is an outside chance that an Autumn 2017 challenge following very poor shire and metropolitan mayoral results could depose Corbyn. But there is a huge risk that Corbyn would hang on and the chances of him going before 2020 would then be further diminished. I see no point in risking an early challenge.
I just hope there's not another Hilary Benn itching to railroad the PLP into another premature battle. Let's hope that the PLP acts like Kutuzov and plays the long game.
The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.
Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
I said might.
But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
Dagenham?
UKIP too far behind there. Hartlepool might be the one seat UKIP could win vs Labour. But not with Nuttall.
If Farage ran for the seat he might just make it there.
...and not too far in front of the Conservatives in Dag and Rainham either actually
Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though
Agree. Same message.
Well its not is it?
I have plenty of experience of meeting UKIP people at events and I never heard any racism at all. I doubt people who went to BNP meetings could say the same. It's people like you trying to conflate peoples feelings of isolation and despair with race hate that cause the problems in society
They are both anti-immigrant. The rest is details.
I doubt your experience met with any reasoned sovereignty argument.
I could be wrong about your experiences of course.
You are just being needlessly provocative. The BNP believe that people that are not white are inferior to white people, there is no one I have met in UKIP and nothing I have seen from UKIP that would infer they believed that, and that difference is not "just detail" it is pivotal.
Don't fall off the pin while you're dancing.
If it makes you feel good about yourself to call everyone racist , don't let me stop you having fun, but to infer that the BNP and UKIP share the same anti immigrant view is completely crazy, and pointing out the significant difference is not dancing on the head of a pin, it is correcting your falsehoods
It has got to the stage now where tv shows are made about the danger of white wash views like yours to society
Mrs May would resign as Prime Minister, but remain as leader of the Conservative Party. The Queen would ask Mrs May (as leader of the largest party in the Commons) if she had the confidence of the House of Commons, and she would say she did not. The Queen would then ask Mr Corbyn, who would likely say that he did not. (Although it would be entertaining if he said he did, and then failed to get his Queen's speech passed.)
But after Mrs May tells HM that the Commons has no confidence in her, she will have to resign as PM, HM will ask her who to call next. Who does she tell the Queen to call?
The FTPA was written to scupper the Conservatives walking away from the 2010-15 coalition, and that job it did very well. It can't deal with the current situation, where an incoming PM has a massive bounce in the polls, a small Commons majority and some serious business to do - from which an increased public mandate would go down very well.
I say she should try and get 2/3 of the Commons to vote for an election, but if she doesn't get it then carry on watching the party opposite implode, hopefully with a few more by-election wins or defections along the way.
The PM can't *tell* HM who to call; it's at the monarch's discretion. The outgoing PM can offer advice but this isn't the formal 'advice' she's obliged to follow; more like soundings to an informed observer.
However, who the queen would call in such circumstances would be interesting. She'd be placed in a difficult position. On the one hand, precedent on a lost confidence motion suggests she should call the LotO; on the other, the Tories still have a majority and precedent there is that she should in the first instance see whether an alternative Tory could command a majority (which they couldn't). If Corbyn accepted the commission, he'd become PM at least for a short time. Would he too be obliged to resign / be dismissed if (when) he failed to achieve a vote of confidence or would he be allowed to continue as PM through the election campaign? If not, a return of May would be the only option - but that too would be controversial given her refusal to serve under any other circumstance.
If May did want an early dissolution, going for a Commons motion would be the best bet, particularly if she can hang it off the back of the Lords doing something controversial over A50.
Who would actually make the 'real' call in the circumstances as to who to err call. I know formally it is the Queen, but which palace official or civil servant makes the real decision ?
Ultimately, it'd be the Queen herself. she might well take advice from the Lord Chamberlain, the Speaker, constitutional experts, party grandees and others but in the final event, it is and would be her call.
Charterlands (South Hams) result: LDEM: 46.1% (+46.1) CON: 39.3% (-25.0) LAB: 10.7% (+10.7) GRN: 3.9% (-15.6) No Ind unlike previous. LIB DEM gain from CON
Barton (Kettering) result: LDEM: 57.0% (+57.0) CON: 29.8% (-19.3) UKIP: 9.4% (-14.1) GRN: 3.7% (-3.5) No Labour unlike previous. LIB DEM gain from CON
Epping Forest Chigwell Village CON 76.0% (+13.6) LDEM 24.0% (+20.5) CON hold
You say exactly what I meant, but you put it much more eloquently than I could! I can't see a vote of confidence being called by the Tories if there were any chance of Corbyn becoming PM, even if it were only for a few weeks during the campaign.
Much more straightforward to enter a one line bill calling the next election. "notwithstanding the FTPA(2011) the next General Election will happen on 2nd July 2017", goes through the Commons on a straight majority and dare the Lords to impede the ultimate expression of democracy. If they do impede it add it as a clause on the end of the next Finance Act
LOL, but someone would be able to tie that up in judicial review for months. It would be easy to argue that the bill is unconstitutional as it's a deliberate attempt to circumvent checks and balances placed on the Executive by the legislature (to use a bit of American terminology). It's quite likely the Speaker would refuse to allow such a bill to be brought forward at all.
It's not possible to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act by a simple vote in the Commons. It would require primary legislation through both Houses of the (Sovereign) Parliament. The problem would be in the Lords, it's quite possible the Parliament Act would be needed to get it through.
The alternative provision is for 2/3 +1 of the total elected Commons to vote for a motion that Parliament be dissolved and an election held. This requires 434 votes in favour.
It's not 2/3+1; it's 2/3rds. 2/3+1 would be 435, as 2/3rds of 650 is 433.3 and the '+1' raises that to 433.3: to achieve that requires 435.
I dislike this 'n%+1' terminology as it's nearly always wrong. The correct formulation is 'more than 50%'.
More than 2/3, I'm with you. Will get another coffee, or maybe it's beer o'clock?
Sorry. I'm in a pedantic mood. Too little sleep this week (though my thanks to my baby for waking me just in time for the Copeland result last night).
The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.
Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
I said might.
But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
All the time a serious longterm party of government looks like it is offering the same policies as UKIP on BrExit, UKIP is dead in the water, they just need to stay on life support until the inevitable dirty little compromises and backsliding start, and then start pointing and shouting. Its started already:
That might well mean lots of visas, but then again it might well not, when it firms up a bit the Kippers will start opening purple water from the Tories and their electoral fortunes will revive to some extent.
Very true Immigration is UkIp way back once the deals and compromises start to be put into place.However without their MEPs from PR euro elections it is hard to see how they exist with FPTP in any major form.They could also rebrand as English Independence and Welsh Independence and fight for a federal system of government to differentiate them from May taking their old Brexit clothes.
More likely they'll revive after the Prime Minister BETRAYS BRITAIN by compromising with foreigners in the negotiations.
It would not surprise me in the slightest, but it is not a message that is popular around here. Just like pointing out that Brexit has not happened yet and we are still fully paid-up members of the EU, thus no real economic fallout yet...
I have decided just to sit on the sidelines and watch the s**t hit the political fan over the next few months
That's quite interesting. It does suggest that trade union support for Corbyn is not absolute, but dependent upon him showing that he can somehow turn this dire situation around (not that he will). But if that is typical it also shows that his support base is, for the moment, still intact.
Take that, together with the frankly delusional reaction to the results were seeing from the nailed on Corbynites, and everything still suggests that Corbyn still needs to be given a bit more rope - Autumn 2018, with the potential for a new leader to have much the same effect as the successor to Thatcher had on the Tory vote from 1990 to 1992. Nick Palmer is the sort of person that might be used as a barometer - i.e. a Labour member capable of changing their mind who needs to see the light before a challenge stands more than a remote chance. He hasn't, yet, from what I can glean.
Yep - 2018 has always looked the likely time to me. That said, the Copeland result confirms the opinion poll ratings. If the same thing happens at the May council elections, it could just be that things get brought forward. And, of course, if there is a miracle and McCluskey loses the Unite leadership, then it is game over.
I think Nick will be a Corbyn supporter until the day after Corbyn is no longer leader; at which point he will say that he was always the wrong man for the job :-)
There is an outside chance that an Autumn 2017 challenge following very poor shire and metropolitan mayoral results could depose Corbyn. But there is a huge risk that Corbyn would hang on and the chances of him going before 2020 would then be further diminished. I see no point in risking an early challenge.
I just hope there's not another Hilary Benn itching to railroad the PLP into another premature battle. Let's hope that the PLP acts like Kutuzov and plays the long game.
No challenges. The Hard Left have to own the up-coming slaughter utterly.
It's not possible to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act by a simple vote in the Commons. It would require primary legislation through both Houses of the (Sovereign) Parliament. The problem would be in the Lords, it's quite possible the Parliament Act would be needed to get it through.
The alternative provision is for 2/3 +1 of the total elected Commons to vote for a motion that Parliament be dissolved and an election held. This requires 434 votes in favour.
What about the Conservative MPs voting down their own government on a No Confidence motion? As Labour would not be able to get a confidence motion passed, then after two weeks the Queen would have to call elections.
But surely the PM has to resign after a vote of no confidence in her government?
I'm not sure that holds any longer, the FTPA arguably changed the meaning of a VoNC, from a means to change the PM to a means to hold an early election.
Charterlands (South Hams) result: LDEM: 46.1% (+46.1) CON: 39.3% (-25.0) LAB: 10.7% (+10.7) GRN: 3.9% (-15.6) No Ind unlike previous. LIB DEM gain from CON
Barton (Kettering) result: LDEM: 57.0% (+57.0) CON: 29.8% (-19.3) UKIP: 9.4% (-14.1) GRN: 3.7% (-3.5) No Labour unlike previous. LIB DEM gain from CON
Epping Forest Chigwell Village CON 76.0% (+13.6) LDEM 24.0% (+20.5) CON hold
Auchentennach Fine Pies thanks local by-election voters .... constituency by-election voters less so ....
The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.
Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
I said might.
But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
Dagenham?
UKIP too far behind there. Hartlepool might be the one seat UKIP could win vs Labour. But not with Nuttall.
If Farage ran for the seat he might just make it there.
...and not too far in front of the Conservatives in Dag and Rainham either actually
Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though
Agree. Same message.
Well its not is it?
I have plenty of experience of meeting UKIP people at events and I never heard any racism at all. I doubt people who went to BNP meetings could say the same. It's people like you trying to conflate peoples feelings of isolation and despair with race hate that cause the problems in society
They are both anti-immigrant. The rest is details.
I doubt your experience met with any reasoned sovereignty argument.
I could be wrong about your experiences of course.
You are just being needlessly provocative. Thed that, and that difference is not "just detail" it is pivotal.
Don't fall off the pin while you're dancing.
If it makes you feel good about yourself to call everyone racist , don't let me stop you having fun, but to infer that the BNP and UKIP share the same anti immigrant view is completely crazy, and pointing out the significant difference is not dancing on the head of a pin, it is correcting your falsehoods
It has got to the stage now where tv shows are made about the danger of white wash views like yours to society
Both are anti-immigration.
The BNP because it doesn't believe non-ethnic white Europeans can be British. UKIP is anti-immigration because.. because.. Well I don't know why.
More likely they'll revive after the Prime Minister BETRAYS BRITAIN by compromising with foreigners in the negotiations.
It would not surprise me in the slightest, but it is not a message that is popular around here. Just like pointing out that Brexit has not happened yet and we are still fully paid-up members of the EU, thus no real economic fallout yet...
I have decided just to sit on the sidelines and watch the s**t hit the political fan over the next few months
Popcorn on order.......
on a non-political point:
popcorn is rubbish though, isn't it? Wouldn't we all be better off with a decent whiskey and some cheese and biscuits?
But after Mrs May tells HM that the Commons has no confidence in her, she will have to resign as PM, HM will ask her who to call next. Who does she tell the Queen to call?
Wrong. She remains as PM until someone who does have the confidence of the House can be found. If there is no such person, she remains as PM and an election is held.
But does that still hold under the FTPA? There is a period of two weeks during which a new PM can be found and a motion of confidence passed. Can the Tories all really just do nothing for a fortnight without Corbyn getting a look in, yet leaving Mrs May as PM?
One thing for sure is that HM won't want to get herself involved in the mess, if at all possible.
Another thing that could happen here would be that some audacious *Tory* steps up and offers to try to form a government...
But after Mrs May tells HM that the Commons has no confidence in her, she will have to resign as PM, HM will ask her who to call next. Who does she tell the Queen to call?
Wrong. She remains as PM until someone who does have the confidence of the House can be found. If there is no such person, she remains as PM and an election is held.
But does that still hold under the FTPA? There is a period of two weeks during which a new PM can be found and a motion of confidence passed. Can the Tories all really just do nothing for a fortnight without Corbyn getting a look in, yet leaving Mrs May as PM?
One thing for sure is that HM won't want to get herself involved in the mess, if at all possible.
Another thing that could happen here would be that some audacious *Tory* steps up and offers to try to form a government...
More likely they'll revive after the Prime Minister BETRAYS BRITAIN by compromising with foreigners in the negotiations.
It would not surprise me in the slightest, but it is not a message that is popular around here. Just like pointing out that Brexit has not happened yet and we are still fully paid-up members of the EU, thus no real economic fallout yet...
I have decided just to sit on the sidelines and watch the s**t hit the political fan over the next few months
Popcorn on order.......
on a non-political point:
popcorn is rubbish though, isn't it? Wouldn't we all be better off with a decent whiskey and some cheese and biscuits?
I agree about the popcorn but it is de rigeur around here
For me, chicken satay kebabs and a glass of chilled white wine
You say exactly what I meant, but you put it much more eloquently than I could! I can't see a vote of confidence being called by the Tories if there were any chance of Corbyn becoming PM, even if it were only for a few weeks during the campaign.
Much more straightforward to enter a one line bill calling the next election. "notwithstanding the FTPA(2011) the next General Election will happen on 2nd July 2017", goes through the Commons on a straight majority and dare the Lords to impede the ultimate expression of democracy. If they do impede it add it as a clause on the end of the next Finance Act
LOL, but someone would be able to tie that up in judicial review for months. It would be easy to argue that the bill is unconstitutional as it's a deliberate attempt to circumvent checks and balances placed on the Executive by the legislature (to use a bit of American terminology). It's quite likely the Speaker would refuse to allow such a bill to be brought forward at all.
The circumvention would be being permitted by the legislature in passing the single line act. This is what consitutional expert Robert Hazell thinks:
But the Government needn’t get into this, he says.
“It could be literally a one clause bill saying ‘notwithstanding the Fixed Term Parliament’s Act 2011 the next election shall be held on x date’,” he explains. The FTPA would remain in place, but be bypassed.
Thus, Britain’s doctrine of parliamentary supremacy saves the day for the Government. As with a self-no confidence vote, this might look underhand, but it would be completely within the rules
"For a governing party to gain a constituency from the sitting opposition at a time when the country is in crisis over Brexit and the NHS is being decimated is..."
Yes, UKIP must now disband, if only for its own sense of pride. It was never really a proper political party. It served as this strange pseudo-party to which hard-right Tories could threaten to defect, or indeed 'defect', in order to terrify Dave into promising an EU referendum. (Witness how many of its 'defectors' are returning to the Tory fold now the project has been completed.) In that sense I feel a sorry for Nuttall and the other committed UKIP supporters - they genuinely seemed to think they were involved in something authentic.
That's quite interesting. It does suggest that trade union support for Corbyn is not absolute, but dependent upon him showing that he can somehow turn this dire situation around (not that he will). But if that is typical it also shows that his support base is, for the moment, still intact.
Take that, together with the frankly delusional reaction to the results were seeing from the nailed on Corbynites, and everything still suggests that Corbyn still needs to be given a bit more rope - Autumn 2018, with the potential for a new leader to have much the same effect as the successor to Thatcher had on the Tory vote from 1990 to 1992. Nick Palmer is the sort of person that might be used as a barometer - i.e. a Labour member capable of changing their mind who needs to see the light before a challenge stands more than a remote chance. He hasn't, yet, from what I can glean.
... Let's hope that the PLP acts like Kutuzov and plays the long game.
Whilst I see what your getting at I am not sure Kutuzov is a happy analogy. Did not his long game consist of largely ceding ground (of which he had lots) to his opponents whilst running a scorched earth policy. Labour don't seem to have that much political ground to concede, burning their bridges behind them is probably not sensible and sure as heck there is no General Winter riding to their rescue.
Yes, UKIP must now disband, if only for its own sense of pride. It was never really a proper political party. It served as this strange pseudo-party to which hard-right Tories could threaten to defect, or indeed 'defect', in order to terrify Dave into promising an EU referendum. (Witness how many of its 'defectors' are returning to the Tory fold now the project has been completed.) In that sense I feel a sorry for Nuttall and the other committed UKIP supporters - they genuinely seemed to think they were involved in something authentic.
It achieved it's goal. We are leaving the EU, the Tories listen to people outside the metropolis, Labour are unelectable, and the LDs are back to being cosy nothingness.
But after Mrs May tells HM that the Commons has no confidence in her, she will have to resign as PM, HM will ask her who to call next. Who does she tell the Queen to call?
Wrong. She remains as PM until someone who does have the confidence of the House can be found. If there is no such person, she remains as PM and an election is held.
But does that still hold under the FTPA? There is a period of two weeks during which a new PM can be found and a motion of confidence passed. Can the Tories all really just do nothing for a fortnight without Corbyn getting a look in, yet leaving Mrs May as PM?
One thing for sure is that HM won't want to get herself involved in the mess, if at all possible.
Another thing that could happen here would be that some audacious *Tory* steps up and offers to try to form a government...
Yes, UKIP must now disband, if only for its own sense of pride. It was never really a proper political party. It served as this strange pseudo-party to which hard-right Tories could threaten to defect, or indeed 'defect', in order to terrify Dave into promising an EU referendum. (Witness how many of its 'defectors' are returning to the Tory fold now the project has been completed.) In that sense I feel a sorry for Nuttall and the other committed UKIP supporters - they genuinely seemed to think they were involved in something authentic.
Nah, May is going to be rowing hard for a new moderate position, albeit dressed up as hard BrExit, over the next year and the kippers will be right back in business.
It's not possible to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act by a simple vote in the Commons. It would require primary legislation through both Houses of the (Sovereign) Parliament. The problem would be in the Lords, it's quite possible the Parliament Act would be needed to get it through.
The alternative provision is for 2/3 +1 of the total elected Commons to vote for a motion that Parliament be dissolved and an election held. This requires 434 votes in favour.
It's not 2/3+1; it's 2/3rds. 2/3+1 would be 435, as 2/3rds of 650 is 433.3 and the '+1' raises that to 433.3: to achieve that requires 435.
I dislike this 'n%+1' terminology as it's nearly always wrong. The correct formulation is 'more than 50%'.
More than 2/3, I'm with you. Will get another coffee, or maybe it's beer o'clock?
Sorry. I'm in a pedantic mood. Too little sleep this week (though my thanks to my baby for waking me just in time for the Copeland result last night).
Ha, no worries, at least you got to see the result. I had one too many after the theatre last night and slept through it all - despite the four hour time difference!
You say exactly what I meant, but you put it much more eloquently than I could! I can't see a vote of confidence being called by the Tories if there were any chance of Corbyn becoming PM, even if it were only for a few weeks during the campaign.
Much more straightforward to enter a one line bill calling the next election. "notwithstanding the FTPA(2011) the next General Election will happen on 2nd July 2017", goes through the Commons on a straight majority and dare the Lords to impede the ultimate expression of democracy. If they do impede it add it as a clause on the end of the next Finance Act
LOL, but someone would be able to tie that up in judicial review for months. It would be easy to argue that the bill is unconstitutional as it's a deliberate attempt to circumvent checks and balances placed on the Executive by the legislature (to use a bit of American terminology). It's quite likely the Speaker would refuse to allow such a bill to be brought forward at all.
The circumvention would be being permitted by the legislature in passing the single line act. This is what consitutional expert Robert Hazell thinks:
But the Government needn’t get into this, he says.
“It could be literally a one clause bill saying ‘notwithstanding the Fixed Term Parliament’s Act 2011 the next election shall be held on x date’,” he explains. The FTPA would remain in place, but be bypassed.
Thus, Britain’s doctrine of parliamentary supremacy saves the day for the Government. As with a self-no confidence vote, this might look underhand, but it would be completely within the rules
Finally, what I've been saying for years has made it into the public discussion...!
LOL, but someone would be able to tie that up in judicial review for months. It would be easy to argue that the bill is unconstitutional as it's a deliberate attempt to circumvent checks and balances placed on the Executive by the legislature (to use a bit of American terminology). It's quite likely the Speaker would refuse to allow such a bill to be brought forward at all.
The circumvention would be being permitted by the legislature in passing the single line act. This is what consitutional expert Robert Hazell thinks:
But the Government needn’t get into this, he says.
“It could be literally a one clause bill saying ‘notwithstanding the Fixed Term Parliament’s Act 2011 the next election shall be held on x date’,” he explains. The FTPA would remain in place, but be bypassed.
Thus, Britain’s doctrine of parliamentary supremacy saves the day for the Government. As with a self-no confidence vote, this might look underhand, but it would be completely within the rules
Hmm, I think there would be plenty more constitutional experts who would rule that approach out of order. Many of whom have seats in the Lords.
The key to UKIPs future or lack of it is the withdrawal of the UK from the EU. It is highly likely, though not certain, that this will have been achieved by 2020. If that is the case we will be left with a fringe group moaning about whether the trade deal we sign with the EU "gives too much away" or whether there is some technical loss of sovereignty by our agreements to co-operate on security, extradition etc etc. I find it vanishingly unlikely that more than 5% of the population will have any interest in such matters and even fewer of them will be inclined to vote on it.
So the real question is what happens to UKIPs 4m 2015 votes. Some will undoubtedly go to DNV because UKIP has reached parts of the populace that other parties choose to ignore. Some will no doubt go on to the next NOTA which might, bizarrely, once again be the Lib Dems. But what Copeland and indeed the comments of @Isam on here show is that a significant part are likely to favour the Conservatives. Stoke is as significant as Copeland in that respect, arguably more so, because there is a large UKIP vote to squeeze which will put Labour under considerable pressure.
We are seeing some of this in the current polling but I am not sure it is all in yet. I expect over this Parliament, provided the government delivers Brexit, the UKIP share to diminish and the Tory share to rise even higher than it is now. The consequences for Labour of this consolidation of the rightish vote are likely to be profound. Labour are in a perilous position but are still going around with their thumbs in their ears denying reality.
Yes, UKIP must now disband, if only for its own sense of pride. It was never really a proper political party. It served as this strange pseudo-party to which hard-right Tories could threaten to defect, or indeed 'defect', in order to terrify Dave into promising an EU referendum. (Witness how many of its 'defectors' are returning to the Tory fold now the project has been completed.) In that sense I feel a sorry for Nuttall and the other committed UKIP supporters - they genuinely seemed to think they were involved in something authentic.
It achieved it's goal. We are leaving the EU, the Tories listen to people outside the metropolis, Labour are unelectable, and the LDs are back to being cosy nothingness.
Just like the old days!
But if you strip away the tribal party stuff, and the rhetoric aimed at the faithful what difference has it made?
Labour left office 7 years ago and for a centrist Blairite sort of voter I am struggling to think of any change that has horrified me - have we rolled back devolution, reintroduced fox-hunting or an hereditary HoL, returned to Section 28 on LGBT rights, done away with the minimum wage?
If you see politics in football terms then if you follow Blue City rather than Red United then you can cheer and hoot at the opposition but what practical difference has there been - even the Tory mantra of sound finances has gone out the window as deficits continue and the National Debt rises inexorably.
Well, well - so much for the European Arrest Warrant. A French trader charged by the SFO in relation to the rigging of Euribor (like Libor) cannot, according to the French courts, be extradited even under the EAW because what he did happened on French territory and wasn't outlawed when it happened.
Interesting for two reasons: odd to suggest that conspiracy to commit fraud was not illegal in France in 2005. And it sends out a very poor signal re the French authorities' willingness to police their financial system.
Yes, UKIP must now disband, if only for its own sense of pride. It was never really a proper political party. It served as this strange pseudo-party to which hard-right Tories could threaten to defect, or indeed 'defect', in order to terrify Dave into promising an EU referendum. (Witness how many of its 'defectors' are returning to the Tory fold now the project has been completed.) In that sense I feel a sorry for Nuttall and the other committed UKIP supporters - they genuinely seemed to think they were involved in something authentic.
Nuttall was also a Tory.
An economically left, socially conservative party could definitely cause Labour all kinds of problems, but UKIP is not that party and never will be. Labour is going to be the official opposition for years to come and that means that, at some stage in the future, it will become the government again.
A different voting system would change all that (it's hard to believe that either the Tories or UKIP would not have won Stoke with either AV or STV, for example), but that will not happen.
The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.
Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
I said might.
But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
All the time a serious longterm party of government looks like it is offering the same policies as UKIP on BrExit, UKIP is dead in the water, they just need to stay on life support until the inevitable dirty little compromises and backsliding start, and then start pointing and shouting. Its started already:
That might well mean lots of visas, but then again it might well not, when it firms up a bit the Kippers will start opening purple water from the Tories and their electoral fortunes will revive to some extent.
Very true Immigration is UkIp way back once the deals and compromises start to be put into place.However without their MEPs from PR euro elections it is hard to see how they exist with FPTP in any major form.They could also rebrand as English Independence and Welsh Independence and fight for a federal system of government to differentiate them from May taking their old Brexit clothes.
That would be a smart move, and might even attract people who UKIP don't currently appeal to. Let's hope they don't think of it.
LOL, but someone would be able to tie that up in judicial review for months. It would be easy to argue that the bill is unconstitutional as it's a deliberate attempt to circumvent checks and balances placed on the Executive by the legislature (to use a bit of American terminology). It's quite likely the Speaker would refuse to allow such a bill to be brought forward at all.
The circumvention would be being permitted by the legislature in passing the single line act. This is what consitutional expert Robert Hazell thinks:
But the Government needn’t get into this, he says.
“It could be literally a one clause bill saying ‘notwithstanding the Fixed Term Parliament’s Act 2011 the next election shall be held on x date’,” he explains. The FTPA would remain in place, but be bypassed.
Thus, Britain’s doctrine of parliamentary supremacy saves the day for the Government. As with a self-no confidence vote, this might look underhand, but it would be completely within the rules
Hmm, I think there would be plenty more constitutional experts who would rule that approach out of order. Many of whom have seats in the Lords.
House of Lords votes down a bill passed by the Commons calling for a General Election, nope, cant see any danger of a constitutional crisis there at all
Just run my first ever half-marathon. The furthest I've ever run before is nine miles a few weeks ago, and I set out to do 5.5 miles this morning. Once there I felt good, so thought I'd continue to 10k. Felt good after that, so thought I'd try to beat my best distance. At nine miles, thought that I might as well get to ten.
Then I 'accidentally' headed in a loop away from home, so it was 13.2 miles by the time I got back.
Woohoo!
2 hours 31 minutes, so a very slow time. But I'm very, very happy. Not bad for someone who was told he'd never walk properly again! (I treat that particular surgeon with a certain amount of contempt).
I can really recommend couch-to-5k programs for people who think they cannot run. They break you into it very slowly, in such a way that you barely get very out of breath. What's more, they can make it fun.
Yes, UKIP must now disband, if only for its own sense of pride. It was never really a proper political party. It served as this strange pseudo-party to which hard-right Tories could threaten to defect, or indeed 'defect', in order to terrify Dave into promising an EU referendum. (Witness how many of its 'defectors' are returning to the Tory fold now the project has been completed.) In that sense I feel a sorry for Nuttall and the other committed UKIP supporters - they genuinely seemed to think they were involved in something authentic.
It achieved it's goal. We are leaving the EU, the Tories listen to people outside the metropolis, Labour are unelectable, and the LDs are back to being cosy nothingness.
Just like the old days!
But if you strip away the tribal party stuff, and the rhetoric aimed at the faithful what difference has it made?
Labour left office 7 years ago and for a centrist Blairite sort of voter I am struggling to think of any change that has horrified me - have we rolled back devolution, reintroduced fox-hunting or an hereditary HoL, returned to Section 28 on LGBT rights, done away with the minimum wage?
If you see politics in football terms then if you follow Blue City rather than Red United then you can cheer and hoot at the opposition but what practical difference has there been - even the Tory mantra of sound finances has gone out the window as deficits continue and the National Debt rises inexorably.
Well I quite obviously don't see politics in football terms as I have voted for three different parties this decade! We are leaving the EU, that is the difference UKIP made, and the one that concerned me most, so I am quite happy too.
More likely they'll revive after the Prime Minister BETRAYS BRITAIN by compromising with foreigners in the negotiations.
It would not surprise me in the slightest, but it is not a message that is popular around here. Just like pointing out that Brexit has not happened yet and we are still fully paid-up members of the EU, thus no real economic fallout yet...
I have decided just to sit on the sidelines and watch the s**t hit the political fan over the next few months
Popcorn on order.......
on a non-political point:
popcorn is rubbish though, isn't it? Wouldn't we all be better off with a decent whiskey and some cheese and biscuits?
It's lost its crunch these days. Always taste past its sell by date.
Afternoon Ms Cyclefree – if the photo is on the net, just cut'n'paste the URL location and embed. If it is a photo on your PC, you’ll need to upload to a social media site.
That's quite interesting. It does suggest that trade union support for Corbyn is not absolute, but dependent upon him showing that he can somehow turn this dire situation around (not that he will). But if that is typical it also shows that his support base is, for the moment, still intact.
Take that, together with the frankly delusional reaction to the results were seeing from the nailed on Corbynites, and everything still suggests that Corbyn still needs to be given a bit more rope - Autumn 2018, with the potential for a new leader to have much the same effect as the successor to Thatcher had on the Tory vote from 1990 to 1992. Nick Palmer is the sort of person that might be used as a barometer - i.e. a Labour member capable of changing their mind who needs to see the light before a challenge stands more than a remote chance. He hasn't, yet, from what I can glean.
Yep - 2018 has always looked the likely time to me. That said, the Copeland result confirms the opinion poll ratings. If the same thing happens at the May council elections, it could just be that things get brought forward. And, of course, if there is a miracle and McCluskey loses the Unite leadership, then it is game over.
I think Nick will be a Corbyn supporter until the day after Corbyn is no longer leader; at which point he will say that he was always the wrong man for the job :-)
Labour need a miracle. Fact is today there are two equally matched Labour parties at each others throats and irreconcilable.
I would say a split is virtually inevitable. The question is what split.
The PLP should not challenge Corbyn formally – yet, but consider breaking away in the Commons, with Nandy as leader. The trick will be to turn him into even more of an irrelevance than he already is.
Easiest way for a nontechnical person is to use the 'image' function in the edit box, which creates the appropriate HTML tags. It's the third icon from the right at the top of the box.
Paste a link to the image in the comment, post as usual, then press edit, highlight the link and press the image button, then save the comment and refresh.
Note that the link has to be an internet link, you can't post an image directly from your own computer.
The 7/2 on Leicester to qualify (past Sevilla) looks value.
They are 2-1 down going into their home leg.
I've taken it.
DYOR
I think I once read a statistic that if the first leg of a European tie was won 2-1 by the home side, it was about 50:50 as to who would qualify. So in that respect those odds do look quite good, but I think Sevilla will score at least once in the second leg.
for the < img and the / > lose the gaps between the < and img and / and the >. I have to leave them in for you to see or else your browser thinks it is a link
Afternoon Ms Cyclefree – if the photo is on the net, just cut'n'paste the URL location and embed. If it is a photo on your PC, you’ll need to upload to a social media site.
Ah OK thanks. Am not on social media so you will all have to do without the sight of Mrs May campaigning amongst an enthusiastic crowd in the main (the only) square in Millom, a place even more remote than Whitehaven and right at the bottom of the Copeland constituency.
Whatever you may think of her, the fact that she is willing to make this sort of effort speaks well of her.
Now, all she has to do is stop those bloody pylons being plastered all across the Whicham valley.........
More likely they'll revive after the Prime Minister BETRAYS BRITAIN by compromising with foreigners in the negotiations.
It would not surprise me in the slightest, but it is not a message that is popular around here. Just like pointing out that Brexit has not happened yet and we are still fully paid-up members of the EU, thus no real economic fallout yet...
I have decided just to sit on the sidelines and watch the s**t hit the political fan over the next few months
Popcorn on order.......
on a non-political point:
popcorn is rubbish though, isn't it? Wouldn't we all be better off with a decent whiskey and some cheese and biscuits?
It's lost its crunch these days. Always taste past its sell by date.
Are you making the mistake of buying it ready prepped? Much of the fun is in popping it which creates a kind of gunfight at the ok corral sound effect.
Afternoon Ms Cyclefree – if the photo is on the net, just cut'n'paste the URL location and embed. If it is a photo on your PC, you’ll need to upload to a social media site.
Ah OK thanks. Am not on social media so you will all have to do without the sight of Mrs May campaigning amongst an enthusiastic crowd in the main (the only) square in Millom, a place even more remote than Whitehaven and right at the bottom of the Copeland constituency.
Whatever you may think of her, the fact that she is willing to make this sort of effort speaks well of her.
Now, all she has to do is stop those bloody pylons being plastered all across the Whicham valley.........
Are you making the mistake of buying it ready prepped? Much of the fun is in popping it which creates a kind of gunfight at the ok corral sound effect.
Sounds fun, as long as you don't have to eat it afterwards.
So the majority of people in Stoke who, we are told, feel isolated, who feel that politicians don't reflect their views who are left behind did what all like-minded souls do in that situation - stayed at home and didn't bother to vote.
Surely, with the choice of candidate in this by-election ranging from left-wing Labour, liberal pro-European, UKIP through to the party of Government, they could have found something to justify a trip to the polling station. I would suggest that the problems that lie behind the reason they feel forgotten lies not with politics as a whole.
Like so much in today's society we just have to accept that a significant number of people simply use their status as the forgotten as a crutch - blaming their own apathy on a convenient scapegoat.
Afternoon Ms Cyclefree – if the photo is on the net, just cut'n'paste the URL location and embed. If it is a photo on your PC, you’ll need to upload to a social media site.
Ah OK thanks. Am not on social media so you will all have to do without the sight of Mrs May campaigning amongst an enthusiastic crowd in the main (the only) square in Millom, a place even more remote than Whitehaven and right at the bottom of the Copeland constituency.
Whatever you may think of her, the fact that she is willing to make this sort of effort speaks well of her.
Now, all she has to do is stop those bloody pylons being plastered all across the Whicham valley.........
Email it to me and I'll upload it on here.
I use http://imgur.com/ for pics on here, easy to use, public, anonymous.
Yes, UKIP must now disband, if only for its own sense of pride. It was never really a proper political party. It served as this strange pseudo-party to which hard-right Tories could threaten to defect, or indeed 'defect', in order to terrify Dave into promising an EU referendum. (Witness how many of its 'defectors' are returning to the Tory fold now the project has been completed.) In that sense I feel a sorry for Nuttall and the other committed UKIP supporters - they genuinely seemed to think they were involved in something authentic.
It achieved it's goal. We are leaving the EU, the Tories listen to people outside the metropolis, Labour are unelectable, and the LDs are back to being cosy nothingness.
Just like the old days!
But if you strip away the tribal party stuff, and the rhetoric aimed at the faithful what difference has it made?
Labour left office 7 years ago and for a centrist Blairite sort of voter I am struggling to think of any change that has horrified me - have we rolled back devolution, reintroduced fox-hunting or an hereditary HoL, returned to Section 28 on LGBT rights, done away with the minimum wage?
If you see politics in football terms then if you follow Blue City rather than Red United then you can cheer and hoot at the opposition but what practical difference has there been - even the Tory mantra of sound finances has gone out the window as deficits continue and the National Debt rises inexorably.
Well I quite obviously don't see politics in football terms as I have voted for three different parties this decade! We are leaving the EU, that is the difference UKIP made, and the one that concerned me most, so I am quite happy too.
I wasn't talking about UKIP I was responding to your comment that "Labour are unelectable, and the LDs are back to being cosy nothingness, Just like the old days!" My point is what practical difference is that making?
But if you want to discuss UKIP fine, my take is that in 5 years time people will realise that their "Big Idea" (only idea) was as flawed, as incompetent and as simplistic as their party. The only thing that might save Brexit from being a disaster is that it is not UKIP that has responsibility for delivering it.
Well, well - so much for the European Arrest Warrant. A French trader charged by the SFO in relation to the rigging of Euribor (like Libor) cannot, according to the French courts, be extradited even under the EAW because what he did happened on French territory and wasn't outlawed when it happened.
Interesting for two reasons: odd to suggest that conspiracy to commit fraud was not illegal in France in 2005. And it sends out a very poor signal re the French authorities' willingness to police their financial system.
Also an interesting question of where what he did had effect. So if he was trading in London registered bonds, even from Paris, did that not have effect here? I would have thought so.
ESMA are very quickly going to look pretty ridiculous if they seek to exclude London from the regulation of financial trading across the Continent. The pressure to accept UK regulation as equivalent (effectively allowing the Single Passport) can only be helped by idiocies like this.
Yes, UKIP must now disband, if only for its own sense of pride. It was never really a proper political party. It served as this strange pseudo-party to which hard-right Tories could threaten to defect, or indeed 'defect', in order to terrify Dave into promising an EU referendum. (Witness how many of its 'defectors' are returning to the Tory fold now the project has been completed.) In that sense I feel a sorry for Nuttall and the other committed UKIP supporters - they genuinely seemed to think they were involved in something authentic.
It achieved it's goal. We are leaving the EU, the Tories listen to people outside the metropolis, Labour are unelectable, and the LDs are back to being cosy nothingness.
Just like the old days!
But if you strip away the tribal party stuff, and the rhetoric aimed at the faithful what difference has it made?
Labour left office 7 years ago and for a centrist Blairite sort of voter I am struggling to think of any change that has horrified me - have we rolled back devolution, reintroduced fox-hunting or an hereditary HoL, returned to Section 28 on LGBT rights, done away with the minimum wage?
If you see politics in football terms then if you follow Blue City rather than Red United then you can cheer and hoot at the opposition but what practical difference has there been - even the Tory mantra of sound finances has gone out the window as deficits continue and the National Debt rises inexorably.
Well I quite obviously don't see politics in football terms as I have voted for three different parties this decade! We are leaving the EU, that is the difference UKIP made, and the one that concerned me most, so I am quite happy too.
I wasn't talking about UKIP I was responding to your comment that "Labour are unelectable, and the LDs are back to being cosy nothingness, Just like the old days!" My point is what practical difference is that making?
But if you want to discuss UKIP fine, my take is that in 5 years time people will realise that their "Big Idea" (only idea) was as flawed, as incompetent and as simplistic as their party. The only thing that might save Brexit from being a disaster is that it is not UKIP that has responsibility for delivering it.
I was making a joke that UKIP have got what they wanted... winding the clock back to the old days
Comments
Not sure about Copeland.
Best of all, it would create an enormous number of betting opportunities.
And it would improve the governance of the country enormously, although that's a fringe benefit.
I just hope there's not another Hilary Benn itching to railroad the PLP into another premature battle. Let's hope that the PLP acts like Kutuzov and plays the long game.
It has got to the stage now where tv shows are made about the danger of white wash views like yours to society
Meanwhile, back at the ranch
Charterlands (South Hams) result:
LDEM: 46.1% (+46.1)
CON: 39.3% (-25.0)
LAB: 10.7% (+10.7)
GRN: 3.9% (-15.6)
No Ind unlike previous.
LIB DEM gain from CON
Barton (Kettering) result:
LDEM: 57.0% (+57.0)
CON: 29.8% (-19.3)
UKIP: 9.4% (-14.1)
GRN: 3.7% (-3.5)
No Labour unlike previous.
LIB DEM gain from CON
Epping Forest
Chigwell Village
CON 76.0% (+13.6)
LDEM 24.0% (+20.5)
CON hold
I have decided just to sit on the sidelines and watch the s**t hit the political fan over the next few months
Popcorn on order.......
Lab should have been 7-4 at most in Copeland perhaps ?
& 1-4 in Stoke.
So 3-1 was a good bet I think.
Unions may take matters into hand however.
The BNP because it doesn't believe non-ethnic white Europeans can be British. UKIP is anti-immigration because.. because.. Well I don't know why.
popcorn is rubbish though, isn't it? Wouldn't we all be better off with a decent whiskey and some cheese and biscuits?
"On Whitehaven marina, opinion among traditional Labour voters is united on one issue: Jeremy Corbyn."
For me, chicken satay kebabs and a glass of chilled white wine
or ...
dark chocolate orange with a creamy cappuccino.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/early-general-election-can-theresa-may-actually-call-one-a7132846.html
But the Government needn’t get into this, he says.
“It could be literally a one clause bill saying ‘notwithstanding the Fixed Term Parliament’s Act 2011 the next election shall be held on x date’,” he explains. The FTPA would remain in place, but be bypassed.
Thus, Britain’s doctrine of parliamentary supremacy saves the day for the Government. As with a self-no confidence vote, this might look underhand, but it would be completely within the rules
"For a governing party to gain a constituency from the sitting opposition at a time when the country is in crisis over Brexit and the NHS is being decimated is..."
..."evidently worrying."
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-copeland-defeat-by-election-stoke-ukip-tory-conservative-victory-problem-a7597141.html
The level of delusion on display in Momentum etc is breathtaking.
Edit: It was 2012 - and he's been corrected by none other than Lucy Powell!
Just like the old days!
https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/835107834882834432
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/39075183
https://twitter.com/Pulpstar/status/835110666113536000
You'd have to have a heart etc etc...
"There have been a few strange decisions in 16/17 - Brexit, Trump and Ranieri."
So the real question is what happens to UKIPs 4m 2015 votes. Some will undoubtedly go to DNV because UKIP has reached parts of the populace that other parties choose to ignore. Some will no doubt go on to the next NOTA which might, bizarrely, once again be the Lib Dems. But what Copeland and indeed the comments of @Isam on here show is that a significant part are likely to favour the Conservatives. Stoke is as significant as Copeland in that respect, arguably more so, because there is a large UKIP vote to squeeze which will put Labour under considerable pressure.
We are seeing some of this in the current polling but I am not sure it is all in yet. I expect over this Parliament, provided the government delivers Brexit, the UKIP share to diminish and the Tory share to rise even higher than it is now. The consequences for Labour of this consolidation of the rightish vote are likely to be profound. Labour are in a perilous position but are still going around with their thumbs in their ears denying reality.
Labour left office 7 years ago and for a centrist Blairite sort of voter I am struggling to think of any change that has horrified me - have we rolled back devolution, reintroduced fox-hunting or an hereditary HoL, returned to Section 28 on LGBT rights, done away with the minimum wage?
If you see politics in football terms then if you follow Blue City rather than Red United then you can cheer and hoot at the opposition but what practical difference has there been - even the Tory mantra of sound finances has gone out the window as deficits continue and the National Debt rises inexorably.
Adding in a 4 point further swing "back", as someone suggested overnight, gives 226 or 234...
Interesting for two reasons: odd to suggest that conspiracy to commit fraud was not illegal in France in 2005. And it sends out a very poor signal re the French authorities' willingness to police their financial system.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLcwhgrxTWs
An economically left, socially conservative party could definitely cause Labour all kinds of problems, but UKIP is not that party and never will be. Labour is going to be the official opposition for years to come and that means that, at some stage in the future, it will become the government again.
A different voting system would change all that (it's hard to believe that either the Tories or UKIP would not have won Stoke with either AV or STV, for example), but that will not happen.
Con 42%
Lab 27%
Lib 13%
UKIP 9%
Which is pretty near what the opinion polls are saying.
Just run my first ever half-marathon. The furthest I've ever run before is nine miles a few weeks ago, and I set out to do 5.5 miles this morning. Once there I felt good, so thought I'd continue to 10k. Felt good after that, so thought I'd try to beat my best distance. At nine miles, thought that I might as well get to ten.
Then I 'accidentally' headed in a loop away from home, so it was 13.2 miles by the time I got back.
Woohoo!
2 hours 31 minutes, so a very slow time. But I'm very, very happy. Not bad for someone who was told he'd never walk properly again! (I treat that particular surgeon with a certain amount of contempt).
I can really recommend couch-to-5k programs for people who think they cannot run. They break you into it very slowly, in such a way that you barely get very out of breath. What's more, they can make it fun.
The 7/2 on Leicester to qualify (past Sevilla) looks value.
They are 2-1 down going into their home leg.
I've taken it.
DYOR
Paste a link to the image in the comment, post as usual, then press edit, highlight the link and press the image button, then save the comment and refresh.
Note that the link has to be an internet link, you can't post an image directly from your own computer.
(Although it does amuse me that the donations were 52%/48% in Leave's favour)
< img src="the full http://address.com" / >
for the < img and the / > lose the gaps between the < and img and / and the >. I have to leave them in for you to see or else your browser thinks it is a link
so
< img src="https://www.w3schools.com/css/trolltunga.jpg" / >
and close up the gaps at the extreme ends only
Whatever you may think of her, the fact that she is willing to make this sort of effort speaks well of her.
Now, all she has to do is stop those bloody pylons being plastered all across the Whicham valley.........
Surely, with the choice of candidate in this by-election ranging from left-wing Labour, liberal pro-European, UKIP through to the party of Government, they could have found something to justify a trip to the polling station. I would suggest that the problems that lie behind the reason they feel forgotten lies not with politics as a whole.
Like so much in today's society we just have to accept that a significant number of people simply use their status as the forgotten as a crutch - blaming their own apathy on a convenient scapegoat.
But if you want to discuss UKIP fine, my take is that in 5 years time people will realise that their "Big Idea" (only idea) was as flawed, as incompetent and as simplistic as their party. The only thing that might save Brexit from being a disaster is that it is not UKIP that has responsibility for delivering it.
ESMA are very quickly going to look pretty ridiculous if they seek to exclude London from the regulation of financial trading across the Continent. The pressure to accept UK regulation as equivalent (effectively allowing the Single Passport) can only be helped by idiocies like this.