It really does look like the Brexit negotiations will come down to May standing on the cliff edge and daring the EU to push her over. So far every leader who's tried that has ultimately backed down. Could May be the first to win at this game?
How many EU leaders who didn't have the begging bowl out have lost?
We do have the begging bowl out. If we don't get a deal, we get booted over the cliff edge with all the economic disruption that entails.
The 'cliff edge'? We were supposed to go over that on 24 June 2016 but didn't.
What's more, the design of the A50 process and notice period effectively eliminates any potential cliff edge.
Nicola Sturgeon still talking about a Progressive Alliance. Has anyone consulted Corbyn on whether he agrees with the idea?
He rightly said no. A progressive alliance with SNP would destroy their chances in England more so than they already are. A Green/LD alliance makes sense, and maybe those two unofficially with Labour in certain seats, but the SNP are too toxic in England for it.
Being someone who would have preferred a softer variant of Brexit, the soft brexiters as a whole have been rather trusting, all statements to the contrary, that May will go for that eventually.
If that is so, it will be u-turning, as I cannot see her telling hard brexiters they can go hang during the campaign.
If I was attempting to negotiate the softest, fluffiest Brexit I could envisage, I would be giving every indication that I was after -or would at least be content with - hard-as-nails Brexit. This is where Cameron was an utter fuckwit.TMay HAS to be seen to be going for hard Brexit.
Mind you, if I was after hard-as-nails Brexit, I would also be giving the indication that I was after hard-as-nails Brexit. We can conclude that TMay is not an idiot, at least in this respect. But we can't draw any conclusions about what Brexit we will end up with.
My assessment: I don't think Theresa May sees politics as a game, or jolly good sport, as Osborne, in particular, did. She has a clear idea of what she wants. When she says something, she means it, and she follows through.
But I think we are still conditioned by Osborne's time at the helm, as the chief strategist of the previous administration, which was a previous administration even though it's the same party.
That doesn't mean May isn't ruthless, or not prone to play politics, or won't adjust her objectives to fit reflect changing economic and realpolitik realities.
But her politics is politics with a purpose.
You can claim many things for May, but 'when she says something, she means it' is certainly not one of them.
When the facts change people change their minds. Groups were forming inside and outside the Tory Party whose objectives were to limit May's options. On her walking holiday in Wales recently (with her husband who is probably a useful sounding board) she had time to think it over outside the day to day preoccupations of Westminster.
FWIW Spreadex has a mid-spread value of 83.3 seat Tory Majority (after coping with their enormous 11.2 seat spread between their buy and sell prices which will surely put off all but the bravest from even considering playing this market).
Rounding this up to an even 84 seat majority, this implies the Tories winning 367 seats (i.e. 325 + 42) which looks about right to me, possibly a tad on the high side.
Do they have a seat spread market up? I can only see a binary market on most seats & overall majority (not seat numbers).
It's basically a tradeable fixed odds bet, with a big overround. Betfair trading is likely to offer cheaper trading costs for most non-PC punters.
The 300 or so seats the Tories hold with a majority of at least a couple of thousand votes are going to be very boring on election night with these sorts of polling numbers.
It really does look like the Brexit negotiations will come down to May standing on the cliff edge and daring the EU to push her over. So far every leader who's tried that has ultimately backed down. Could May be the first to win at this game?
How many EU leaders who didn't have the begging bowl out have lost?
We do have the begging bowl out. If we don't get a deal, we get booted over the cliff edge with all the economic disruption that entails.
The 'cliff edge'? We were supposed to go over that on 24 June 2016 but didn't.
What's more, the design of the A50 process and notice period effectively eliminates any potential cliff edge.
At a certain point you have to put away the campaigning slogans. 24 June 2016 was just the result of a vote - nothing changed in the real world. On 30 March 2019, in the absence of an exit deal or a transition deal, real things will change in the real world and they will be felt by real people. That is a whole different ball game.
Yes, the process is designed to avoid any problems, but if the two sides can't come to terms, problems there will be.
Re the Electoral Calculus figures, if Con ended on 418 (which seems pretty improbable to me but let's run with it), that'd give the Tories just over 2/3rds of MPs: sufficient (just) to be able to call the following election at a time of their choosing, assuming no defections / by-election losses.
At GE2015, I knew it was coming, so I took a three month sabbatical from work to concentrate on canvassing and working on PB.
This time, no sabbatical, just taken June 8th and 9th off from work.
Could it possibly be on account of having lost your mojo in terms of supporting the Tories, which has been all too evident for some time? Maybe you need a complete break from politics for a few months to rethink which direction you're going to follow in future.
Being someone who would have preferred a softer variant of Brexit, the soft brexiters as a whole have been rather trusting, all statements to the contrary, that May will go for that eventually.
If that is so, it will be u-turning, as I cannot see her telling hard brexiters they can go hang during the campaign.
If I was attempting to negotiate the softest, fluffiest Brexit I could envisage, I would be giving every indication that I was after -or would at least be content with - hard-as-nails Brexit. This is where Cameron was an utter fuckwit.TMay HAS to be seen to be going for hard Brexit.
Mind you, if I was after hard-as-nails Brexit, I would also be giving the indication that I was after hard-as-nails Brexit. We can conclude that TMay is not an idiot, at least in this respect. But we can't draw any conclusions about what Brexit we will end up with.
My assessment: I don't think Theresa May sees politics as a game, or jolly good sport, as Osborne, in particular, did. She has a clear idea of what she wants. When she says something, she means it, and she follows through.
But I think we are still conditioned by Osborne's time at the helm, as the chief strategist of the previous administration, which was a previous administration even though it's the same party.
That doesn't mean May isn't ruthless, or not prone to play politics, or won't adjust her objectives to fit reflect changing economic and realpolitik realities.
But her politics is politics with a purpose.
You can claim many things for May, but 'when she says something, she means it' is certainly not one of them.
When the facts change people change their minds.
I'm not sure what facts changed recently, but that is a reasonable position - however it is incompatible with saying something like 'when she says something she means it, and she follows through'. She didn't follow through.
A friend who lives in Oxford West this evening got a hand delivered personally addressed colour printed letter from his LibDem candidate through the door. Now that is impressive work given the surprise of yesterday's announcement.
A friend who lives in Oxford West this evening got a hand delivered personally addressed colour printed letter from his LibDem candidate through the door. Now that is impressive work given the surprise of yesterday's announcement.
In Abingdon there was a yellow diamond up today. (From last election I assume)
As one of those in that age bracket we can broadly be split into two blocks: those that one a stable economic future with a decent economy, seeing as the LDs aren't promising to reverse Brexit, we'll probably vote Blue, with some LDs. Then there are the left-wing sort, almost all of which are very strongly pro-EU, and therefore won't vote Labour, but will vote Green and LD (with a few Labour).
The people who have traditionally voted Labour have largely left for UKIP, and the few that haven't will be less than enamoured with the whole actively supporting terrorists shtick that the Lab senior command had going on.
I agree that the less successful BAME vote as well as the unionised hardcore and champagne socialists will still vote for Labour, but I'm not convinced that there's enough of them. Unless you agree with all three of Labour's views on Brexit, the economy and foreign affairs then there is a party that better matches you (Green, Con, LD respectively).
Furthermore the election campaign will give the Lib Dems a lot more coverage in the public consciousness than they've had over the past year as well as the imminent vote sharpening people's mind. I reckon that we could see the two meeting at around 18%, while the Tories cross over 50%.
The polling evidence thus far suggests that Labour (though not Corbyn) is holding up well with the youngest voters, and isn't actually doing at all badly with the under 40s as a whole. It's when you get past that point that its support really begins to nosedive. Amongst pensioners, Labour's situation is nothing short of catastrophic.
This is something of a problem when the median age of all voters must be somewhere not far short of 50, and the older half of the electorate is substantially more likely to vote.
Anyway, I suppose it's not inconceivable that you may turn out to be right about the Lib Dem revival, but I just don't see it at this stage. They have had the entire period since the EU referendum to champion the cause of Remain, with the field basically to themselves in England, and have still only put on about 2-3% in the polls relative to their 2015 GE showing. Farron is the uncharismatic leader of what is a minor party in Parliamentary terms, and liable to be marginalised during the campaign as the focus is concentrated on May, Corbyn and Sturgeon. There is no particular reason to suppose that the Tory vote will start to flake, and all of the crestfallen, hard line Continuity Remain vote has probably leached away from Lab to LD already.
Labour are guaranteed the silver medal in this particular race. Certainly, when the seats are tallied they should be miles ahead of both the SNP and Lib Dems - but even further behind the Tories.
A friend who lives in Oxford West this evening got a hand delivered personally addressed colour printed letter from his LibDem candidate through the door. Now that is impressive work given the surprise of yesterday's announcement.
Layla Moran has been confirmed today as the LD candidate for the seat again. Has to be one of their top 20 targets.
Being someone who would have preferred a softer variant of Brexit, the soft brexiters as a whole have been rather trusting, all statements to the contrary, that May will go for that eventually.
If that is so, it will be u-turning, as I cannot see her telling hard brexiters they can go hang during the campaign.
If I was attempting to negotiate the softest, fluffiest Brexit I could envisage, I would be giving every indication that I was after -or would at least be content with - hard-as-nails Brexit. This is where Cameron was an utter fuckwit.TMay HAS to be seen to be going for hard Brexit.
Mind you, if I was after hard-as-nails Brexit, I would also be giving the indication that I was after hard-as-nails Brexit. We can conclude that TMay is not an idiot, at least in this respect. But we can't draw any conclusions about what Brexit we will end up with.
My assessment: I don't think Theresa May sees politics as a game, or jolly good sport, as Osborne, in particular, did. She has a clear idea of what she wants. When she says something, she means it, and she follows through.
But I think we are still conditioned by Osborne's time at the helm, as the chief strategist of the previous administration, which was a previous administration even though it's the same party.
That doesn't mean May isn't ruthless, or not prone to play politics, or won't adjust her objectives to fit reflect changing economic and realpolitik realities.
But her politics is politics with a purpose.
You can claim many things for May, but 'when she says something, she means it' is certainly not one of them.
I think that's unfair. She has a right to change her mind. That doesn't mean she didn't mean what she said before she said something else.
Re the Electoral Calculus figures, if Con ended on 418 (which seems pretty improbable to me but let's run with it), that'd give the Tories just over 2/3rds of MPs: sufficient (just) to be able to call the following election at a time of their choosing, assuming no defections / by-election losses.
Doesn't. The number would remain 434 in the new parliament.
A friend who lives in Oxford West this evening got a hand delivered personally addressed colour printed letter from his LibDem candidate through the door. Now that is impressive work given the surprise of yesterday's announcement.
In Abingdon there was a yellow diamond up today. (From last election I assume)
Being someone who would have preferred a softer variant of Brexit, the soft brexiters as a whole have been rather trusting, all statements to the contrary, that May will go for that eventually.
If that is so, it will be u-turning, as I cannot see her telling hard brexiters they can go hang during the campaign.
If I was attempting to negotiate the softest, fluffiest Brexit I could envisage, I would be giving every indication that I was after -or would at least be content with - hard-as-nails Brexit. This is where Cameron was an utter fuckwit.TMay HAS to be seen to be going for hard Brexit.
Mind you, if I was after hard-as-nails Brexit, I would also be giving the indication that I was after hard-as-nails Brexit. We can conclude that TMay is not an idiot, at least in this respect. But we can't draw any conclusions about what Brexit we will end up with.
I think we can - there's a difference between presenting as being happy with hard as nails brexit, and promising, cast iron promising, that we will get a hard brexit.
The whole depiction of hard and soft Brexit is a nonsense.
The variations that are possible, and indeed likely, are manifold.
Has anyone tried to describe Soft-ish Remain yet, or is that what Dave tried and failed to sell us?
It may be difficult to define where soft and hard begins, people will disagree, but seeking single market access and so on would be on the softer end of the scale, and leaving with no deal whatsoever at the hard end - continuity remainers want a deal as good as we had in the EU, which is impossible, and hardcore brexiters insist only their version of brexit, the hardest possible, is real, which is nonsense. Some elements May seeks might be softish, but it is quite clear she is going for a pretty damn hard brexit.
It doesn't seem that way to me.
I think she expects to land us somewhere between Canada and Norway in terms of trade and FoM.
A friend who lives in Oxford West this evening got a hand delivered personally addressed colour printed letter from his LibDem candidate through the door. Now that is impressive work given the surprise of yesterday's announcement.
When I lived in Oxford West, I was inundated with mounds & mounds of literature from the LibDems.
They woke me up at 5.00 am one election morning posting gallons of the stuff through my letterbox.
Being someone who would have preferred a softer variant of Brexit, the soft brexiters as a whole have been rather trusting, all statements to the contrary, that May will go for that eventually.
If that is so, it will be u-turning, as I cannot see her telling hard brexiters they can go hang during the campaign.
If I was attempting to negotiate the softest, fluffiest Brexit I could envisage, I would be giving every indication that I was after -or would at least be content with - hard-as-nails Brexit. This is where Cameron was an utter fuckwit.TMay HAS to be seen to be going for hard Brexit.
Mind you, if I was after hard-as-nails Brexit, I would also be giving the indication that I was after hard-as-nails Brexit. We can conclude that TMay is not an idiot, at least in this respect. But we can't draw any conclusions about what Brexit we will end up with.
My assessment: I don't think Theresa May sees politics as a game, or jolly good sport, as Osborne, in particular, did. She has a clear idea of what she wants. When she says something, she means it, and she follows through.
But I think we are still conditioned by Osborne's time at the helm, as the chief strategist of the previous administration, which was a previous administration even though it's the same party.
That doesn't mean May isn't ruthless, or not prone to play politics, or won't adjust her objectives to fit reflect changing economic and realpolitik realities.
But her politics is politics with a purpose.
You can claim many things for May, but 'when she says something, she means it' is certainly not one of them.
I think that's unfair. She has a right to change her mind. That doesn't mean she didn't mean what she said before she said something else.
No, but when people are using 'she said it, therefore it will happen because she means it' as an argument, as happened a lot with the GE talk, then it is relevant to point out. I'm glad she's flexible, but the 'she said it and she means what she says' argument is predicated on the assumption we should assume, therefore, she is not going to be flexible.
As one of those in that age bracket we can broadly be split into two blocks: those that one a stable economic future with a decent economy, seeing as the LDs aren't promising to reverse Brexit, we'll probably vote Blue, with some LDs. Then there are the left-wing sort, almost all of which are very strongly pro-EU, and therefore won't vote Labour, but will vote Green and LD (with a few Labour). ........ ......... Furthermore the election campaign will give the Lib Dems a lot more coverage in the public consciousness than they've had over the past year as well as the imminent vote sharpening people's mind. I reckon that we could see the two meeting at around 18%, while the Tories cross over 50%.
The polling evidence thus far suggests that Labour (though not Corbyn) is holding up well with the youngest voters, and isn't actually doing at all badly with the under 40s as a whole. It's when you get past that point that its support really begins to nosedive. Amongst pensioners, Labour's situation is nothing short of catastrophic.
This is something of a problem when the median age of all voters must be somewhere not far short of 50, and the older half of the electorate is substantially more likely to vote.
Anyway, I suppose it's not inconceivable that you may turn out to be right about the Lib Dem revival, but I just don't see it at this stage. They have had the entire period since the EU referendum to champion the cause of Remain, with the field basically to themselves in England, and have still only put on about 2-3% in the polls relative to their 2015 GE showing. Farron is the uncharismatic leader of what is a minor party in Parliamentary terms, and liable to be marginalised during the campaign as the focus is concentrated on May, Corbyn and Sturgeon. There is no particular reason to suppose that the Tory vote will start to flake, and all of the crestfallen, hard line Continuity Remain vote has probably leached away from Lab to LD already.
Labour are guaranteed the silver medal in this particular race. Certainly, when the seats are tallied they should be miles ahead of both the SNP and Lib Dems - but even further behind the Tories.
Those older voters are the same people who enthusiastically supported Harold Wilson in the 60s and 70s. Maybe an obvious point but I find it interesting. If Labour had the modern day equivalent of Wilson in charge they might suddenly do a lot better with that age group.
At GE2015, I knew it was coming, so I took a three month sabbatical from work to concentrate on canvassing and working on PB.
This time, no sabbatical, just taken June 8th and 9th off from work.
Could it possibly be on account of having lost your mojo in terms of supporting the Tories, which has been all too evident for some time? Maybe you need a complete break from politics for a few months to rethink which direction you're going to follow in future.
Nah, it's just holding down three jobs, being a lone parent all tiring things.
Britain has long misread the German attitude to Brexit, with many Tories wrongly assuming that Angela Merkel’s government will be driven by economic self-interest to ensure Britain gets a good deal.
The reality is that the German view is strikingly hardline and Theresa May’s decision to call a snap election in June will not change that.
Being someone who would have preferred a softer variant of Brexit, the soft brexiters as a whole have been rather trusting, all statements to the contrary, that May will go for that eventually.
If that is so, it will be u-turning, as I cannot see her telling hard brexiters they can go hang during the campaign.
If I was attempting to negotiate the softest, fluffiest Brexit I could envisage, I would be giving every indication that I was after -or would at least be content with - hard-as-nails Brexit. This is where Cameron was an utter fuckwit.TMay HAS to be seen to be going for hard Brexit.
Mind you, if I was after hard-as-nails Brexit, I would also be giving the indication that I was after hard-as-nails Brexit. We can conclude that TMay is not an idiot, at least in this respect. But we can't draw any conclusions about what Brexit we will end up with.
My assessment: I don't think Theresa May sees politics as a game, or jolly good sport, as Osborne, in particular, did. She has a clear idea of what she wants. When she says something, she means it, and she follows through.
But I think we are still conditioned by Osborne's time at the helm, as the chief strategist of the previous administration, which was a previous administration even though it's the same party.
That doesn't mean May isn't ruthless, or not prone to play politics, or won't adjust her objectives to fit reflect changing economic and realpolitik realities.
But her politics is politics with a purpose.
You can claim many things for May, but 'when she says something, she means it' is certainly not one of them.
When the facts change people change their minds. Groups were forming inside and outside the Tory Party whose objectives were to limit May's options. On her walking holiday in Wales recently (with her husband who is probably a useful sounding board) she had time to think it over outside the day to day preoccupations of Westminster.
Come off it, you are seriously buying that bull? At best that was the moment she ultimately decided to do it, but she has been considering it for weeks.
Re the Electoral Calculus figures, if Con ended on 418 (which seems pretty improbable to me but let's run with it), that'd give the Tories just over 2/3rds of MPs: sufficient (just) to be able to call the following election at a time of their choosing, assuming no defections / by-election losses.
Sufficient also to split into two parties, and have one run a minority Government and the other be the Opposition.
The people who have traditionally voted Labour have largely left for UKIP, and the few that haven't will be less than enamoured (snip).
I agree that the less successful BAME vote as well as the unionised hardcore and champagne socialists will still vote for Labour, but I'm not convinced that there's enough of them. Unless you agree with all three of Labour's views on Brexit, the economy and foreign affairs then there is a party that better matches you (Green, Con, LD respectively).
Furthermore the election campaign will give the Lib Dems a lot more coverage in the public consciousness than they've had over the past year as well as the imminent vote sharpening people's mind. I reckon that we could see the two meeting at around 18%, while the Tories cross over 50%.
The polling evidence thus far suggests that Labour (though not Corbyn) is holding up well with the youngest voters, and isn't actually doing at all badly with the under 40s as a whole. It's when you get past that point that its support really begins to nosedive. Amongst pensioners, Labour's situation is nothing short of catastrophic.
This is something of a problem when the median age of all voters must be somewhere not far short of 50, and the older half of the electorate is substantially more likely to vote.
Anyway, I suppose it's not inconceivable that you may turn out to be right about the Lib Dem revival, but I just don't see it at this stage. They have had the entire period since the EU referendum to champion the cause of Remain, with the field basically to themselves in England, and have still only put on about 2-3% in the polls relative to their 2015 GE showing. Farron is the uncharismatic leader of what is a minor party in Parliamentary terms, and liable to be marginalised during the campaign as the focus is concentrated on May, Corbyn and Sturgeon. There is no particular reason to suppose that the Tory vote will start to flake, and all of the crestfallen, hard line Continuity Remain vote has probably leached away from Lab to LD already.
Labour are guaranteed the silver medal in this particular race. Certainly, when the seats are tallied they should be miles ahead of both the SNP and Lib Dems - but even further behind the Tories.
Except that, from the outset at least, this is clearly the "Brexit Election" (as billed by the PM), and Labour has nothing relevant or interesting to say. The debate requires the LibDem side of the argument and, since their position is reasonably clear (certainly as clear as May's) and they are united, they'll get a lot more airtime than they've been accustomed to. Particularly if/once the poll ratings start to climb and especially if the locals exceed expectations.
Britain has long misread the German attitude to Brexit, with many Tories wrongly assuming that Angela Merkel’s government will be driven by economic self-interest to ensure Britain gets a good deal.
The reality is that the German view is strikingly hardline and Theresa May’s decision to call a snap election in June will not change that.
Good thing the EU, and those within it like Germany, never misreads attitudes, like ours for example.
Being someone who would have preferred a softer variant of Brexit, the soft brexiters as a whole have been rather trusting, all statements to the contrary, that May will go for that eventually.
If that is so, it will be u-turning, as I cannot see her telling hard brexiters they can go hang during the campaign.
If I was attempting to negotiate the softest, fluffiest Brexit I could envisage, I would be giving every indication that I was after -or would at least be content with - hard-as-nails Brexit. This is where Cameron was an utter fuckwit.TMay HAS to be seen to be going for hard Brexit.
Mind you, if I was after hard-as-nails Brexit, I would also be giving the indication that I was after hard-as-nails Brexit. We can conclude that TMay is not an idiot, at least in this respect. But we can't draw any conclusions about what Brexit we will end up with.
My assessment: I don't think Theresa May sees politics as a game, or jolly good sport, as Osborne, in particular, did. She has a clear idea of what she wants. When she says something, she means it, and she follows through.
But I think we are still conditioned by Osborne's time at the helm, as the chief strategist of the previous administration, which was a previous administration even though it's the same party.
That doesn't mean May isn't ruthless, or not prone to play politics, or won't adjust her objectives to fit reflect changing economic and realpolitik realities.
But her politics is politics with a purpose.
You can claim many things for May, but 'when she says something, she means it' is certainly not one of them.
I think that's unfair. She has a right to change her mind. That doesn't mean she didn't mean what she said before she said something else.
She has the integrity of Michael Gove. She turns like a twisty turny thing.
I'm no political Nostradamus but I did assume Mrs May would call an election this year. Any sane politician would, given the circumstances. Previous pledges are irrelevant.
Labour would certainly have done so, and they know it, so their protestations are silly.
If you give the opposition an own goal, you can only blame yourself.
How can the opposition damage her? Accuse her of being a politician? Hardly. Accuse her of being incompetent? Well, they would say that, wouldn't they? Their only hope is to present a bright and different future. But to do that, they'd have to be believable. Therein lies Labour's problem and there's no easy solution.
Britain has long misread the German attitude to Brexit, with many Tories wrongly assuming that Angela Merkel’s government will be driven by economic self-interest to ensure Britain gets a good deal.
The reality is that the German view is strikingly hardline and Theresa May’s decision to call a snap election in June will not change that.
Good thing the EU, and those within it like Germany, never misreads attitudes, like ours for example.
And what are we going to do about it? The EU is the immovable object of European affairs. If we don't like it, it's our problem.
A friend who lives in Oxford West this evening got a hand delivered personally addressed colour printed letter from his LibDem candidate through the door. Now that is impressive work given the surprise of yesterday's announcement.
When I lived in Oxford West, I was inundated with mounds & mounds of literature from the LibDems.
They woke me up at 5.00 am one election morning posting gallons of the stuff through my letterbox.
Does anyone know how to stop it?
There is no way to stop it, it's deeply embedded in party DNA.
If your local party is so unsuccessful they collapse entirely it might cut down a bit, but don't bet on it.
FWIW Spreadex has a mid-spread value of 83.3 seat Tory Majority (after coping with their enormous 11.2 seat spread between their buy and sell prices which will surely put off all but the bravest from even considering playing this market).
Rounding this up to an even 84 seat majority, this implies the Tories winning 367 seats (i.e. 325 + 42) which looks about right to me, possibly a tad on the high side.
Do they have a seat spread market up? I can only see a binary market on most seats & overall majority (not seat numbers).
It's basically a tradeable fixed odds bet, with a big overround. Betfair trading is likely to offer cheaper trading costs for most non-PC punters.
I' ve just checked back and although the spread has changed, I believe I may have misread this as being an outright Tory majority numerical market, whereas it's actually a binary market. Sorry folks, please disregard.
Being someone who would have preferred a softer variant of Brexit, the soft brexiters as a whole have been rather trusting, all statements to the contrary, that May will go for that eventually.
If that is so, it will be u-turning, as I cannot see her telling hard brexiters they can go hang during the campaign.
If I was attempting to negotiate the softest, fluffiest Brexit I could envisage, I would be giving every indication that I was after -or would at least be content with - hard-as-nails Brexit. This is where Cameron was an utter fuckwit.TMay HAS to be seen to be going for hard Brexit.
Mind you, if I was after hard-as-nails Brexit, I would also be giving the indication that I was after hard-as-nails Brexit. We can conclude that TMay is not an idiot, at least in this respect. But we can't draw any conclusions about what Brexit we will end up with.
My assessment: I don't think Theresa May sees politics as a game, or jolly good sport, as Osborne, in particular, did. She has a clear idea of what she wants. When she says something, she means it, and she follows through.
But I think we are still conditioned by Osborne's time at the helm, as the chief strategist of the previous administration, which was a previous administration even though it's the same party.
That doesn't mean May isn't ruthless, or not prone to play politics, or won't adjust her objectives to fit reflect changing economic and realpolitik realities.
But her politics is politics with a purpose.
You can claim many things for May, but 'when she says something, she means it' is certainly not one of them.
I think that's unfair. She has a right to change her mind. That doesn't mean she didn't mean what she said before she said something else.
What sort of longevity should we expect from her 'something else'? #mayfly
It really does look like the Brexit negotiations will come down to May standing on the cliff edge and daring the EU to push her over. So far every leader who's tried that has ultimately backed down. Could May be the first to win at this game?
How many EU leaders who didn't have the begging bowl out have lost?
We do have the begging bowl out. If we don't get a deal, we get booted over the cliff edge with all the economic disruption that entails.
The 'cliff edge'? We were supposed to go over that on 24 June 2016 but didn't.
What's more, the design of the A50 process and notice period effectively eliminates any potential cliff edge.
At a certain point you have to put away the campaigning slogans. 24 June 2016 was just the result of a vote - nothing changed in the real world. On 30 March 2019, in the absence of an exit deal or a transition deal, real things will change in the real world and they will be felt by real people. That is a whole different ball game.
Yes, the process is designed to avoid any problems, but if the two sides can't come to terms, problems there will be.
Any business that does not foresee and plan for the potential change signalled almost three years in advance only has itself to blame.
Most of the molehills being described as mountains will have been satisfactorily resolved by then anyway.
Britain has long misread the German attitude to Brexit, with many Tories wrongly assuming that Angela Merkel’s government will be driven by economic self-interest to ensure Britain gets a good deal.
The reality is that the German view is strikingly hardline and Theresa May’s decision to call a snap election in June will not change that.
Good thing the EU, and those within it like Germany, never misreads attitudes, like ours for example.
And what are we going to do about it? The EU is the immovable object of European affairs. If we don't like it, it's our problem.
Us leaving has caused problems for them, even if you are right it causes more for us. The point was we've heard for years how we don't understand Europe, and the reverse is also true, and their and your response is to demand obeisance to their view. It's arrogant, entitled, and even if they prevail due to inertia, it makes things more problematic than they need to be because they are no more interested in listening to others than anyone else, and so I dislike the impression given that we are the only ones at fault for misunderstandings.
Being someone who would have preferred a softer variant of Brexit, the soft brexiters as a whole have been rather trusting, all statements to the contrary, that May will go for that eventually.
If that is so, it will be u-turning, as I cannot see her telling hard brexiters they can go hang during the campaign.
If I was attempting to negotiate the softest, fluffiest Brexit I could envisage, I would be giving every indication that I was after -or would at least be content with - hard-as-nails Brexit. This is where Cameron was an utter fuckwit.TMay HAS to be seen to be going for hard Brexit.
Mind you, if I was after hard-as-nails Brexit, I would also be giving the indication that I was after hard-as-nails Brexit. We can conclude that TMay is not an idiot, at least in this respect. But we can't draw any conclusions about what Brexit we will end up with.
My assessment: I don't think Theresa May sees politics as a game, or jolly good sport, as Osborne, in particular, did. She has a clear idea of what she wants. When she says something, she means it, and she follows through.
But I think we are still conditioned by Osborne's time at the helm, as the chief strategist of the previous administration, which was a previous administration even though it's the same party.
That doesn't mean May isn't ruthless, or not prone to play politics, or won't adjust her objectives to fit reflect changing economic and realpolitik realities.
But her politics is politics with a purpose.
You can claim many things for May, but 'when she says something, she means it' is certainly not one of them.
I think that's unfair. She has a right to change her mind. That doesn't mean she didn't mean what she said before she said something else.
She has the integrity of Michael Gove. She turns like a twisty turny thing.
But a PM with stonking polling and facing the worst opposition leader ever.
Being someone who would have preferred a softer variant of Brexit, the soft brexiters as a whole have been rather trusting, all statements to the contrary, that May will go for that eventually.
If that is so, it will be u-turning, as I cannot see her telling hard brexiters they can go hang during the campaign.
If I was attempting to negotiate the softest, fluffiest Brexit I could envisage, I would be giving every indication that I was after -or would at least be content with - hard-as-nails Brexit. This is where Cameron was an utter fuckwit.TMay HAS to be seen to be going for hard Brexit.
Mind you, if I was after hard-as-nails Brexit, I would also be giving the indication that I was after hard-as-nails Brexit. We can conclude that TMay is not an idiot, at least in this respect. But we can't draw any conclusions about what Brexit we will end up with.
My assessment: I don't think Theresa May sees politics as a game, or jolly good sport, as Osborne, in particular, did. She has a clear idea of what she wants. When she says something, she means it, and she follows through.
But I think we are still conditioned by Osborne's time at the helm, as the chief strategist of the previous administration, which was a previous administration even though it's the same party.
That doesn't mean May isn't ruthless, or not prone to play politics, or won't adjust her objectives to fit reflect changing economic and realpolitik realities.
But her politics is politics with a purpose.
You can claim many things for May, but 'when she says something, she means it' is certainly not one of them.
I think that's unfair. She has a right to change her mind. That doesn't mean she didn't mean what she said before she said something else.
She has the integrity of Michael Gove. She turns like a twisty turny thing.
Consistency is overrated. Corbyn is consistent and much good it's done him.
Something to bear in mind when betting, the polls could be right or they could be wrong and sometimes in the recent past they have been very wrong at this point before a GE. (1997 and 2001 especially)
Britain has long misread the German attitude to Brexit, with many Tories wrongly assuming that Angela Merkel’s government will be driven by economic self-interest to ensure Britain gets a good deal.
The reality is that the German view is strikingly hardline and Theresa May’s decision to call a snap election in June will not change that.
Good thing the EU, and those within it like Germany, never misreads attitudes, like ours for example.
And what are we going to do about it? The EU is the immovable object of European affairs. If we don't like it, it's our problem.
The EU is a half-hearted empire which has recently lost its crown jewel. Dustbin-bound.
It appears a number of celebs on twitter are most unhappy at Tim farron.
Mainly David Walliams who is a Labour supporter, Farron was just being consistent with his views as an evangelical Christian
The way the Tories have all been on this today conveniently forgetting that not only did Farron support equal marriage but that 124 Tories did not has been hysterical. Anyone would think they were frit at the number of new members - including me - the LDs have gained in the last 2 days.
Something to bear in mind when betting, the polls could be right or they could be wrong and sometimes in the recent past they have been very wrong at this point before a GE. (1997 and 2001 especially)
After his woeful performance in 2010 I am not sure he is in a position to comment.
It appears a number of celebs on twitter are most unhappy at Tim farron.
Mainly David Walliams who is a Labour supporter, Farron was just being consistent with his views as an evangelical Christian
The way the Tories have all been on this today conveniently forgetting that not only did Farron support equal marriage but that 124 Tories did not has been hysterical. Anyone would think they were frit at the number of new members - including me - the LDs have gained in the last 2 days.
Seizing upon uncertainty over Farron's position I am sure has nothing to do with the LDs getting new members and getting frit about it - they are quite happy with their position, its avoiding overconfidence and pitfalls that is an issue (debates being a pitfall to get frit about)
Britain has long misread the German attitude to Brexit, with many Tories wrongly assuming that Angela Merkel’s government will be driven by economic self-interest to ensure Britain gets a good deal.
The reality is that the German view is strikingly hardline and Theresa May’s decision to call a snap election in June will not change that.
Good thing the EU, and those within it like Germany, never misreads attitudes, like ours for example.
And what are we going to do about it? The EU is the immovable object of European affairs. If we don't like it, it's our problem.
The EU is a half-hearted empire which has recently lost its crown jewel. Dustbin-bound.
EU without U.K. will be like Arsenal without Sanchez next season. Germany is Wenger - good 15 years ago but unable to adapt to the modern age.
A candidate for this year's Portillo/Balls Moment could be Angus Robertson losing his Moray seat to the Tories. SNP majority was only 2,875 last year at the Holyrood election. (Boundaries very similar to the Westminster constituency). The district was also the most pro-Brexit in Scotland with Remain winning by just 122 votes.
Britain has long misread the German attitude to Brexit, with many Tories wrongly assuming that Angela Merkel’s government will be driven by economic self-interest to ensure Britain gets a good deal.
The reality is that the German view is strikingly hardline and Theresa May’s decision to call a snap election in June will not change that.
A candidate for this year's Portillo/Balls Moment could be Angus Robertson losing his Moray seat to the Tories. SNP majority was only 2,875 last year at the Holyrood election. (Boundaries very similar to the Westminster constituency).
Re the Electoral Calculus figures, if Con ended on 418 (which seems pretty improbable to me but let's run with it), that'd give the Tories just over 2/3rds of MPs: sufficient (just) to be able to call the following election at a time of their choosing, assuming no defections / by-election losses.
Sufficient also to split into two parties, and have one run a minority Government and the other be the Opposition.
I view a split in the Conservative Party is one of the potential end points in a process of realignment, should the Labour Party slump into terminal decline and the Tories reach a position of total dominance. One would be somewhat surprised were it to happen as soon as the next Parliament, mind...
A candidate for this year's Portillo/Balls Moment could be Angus Robertson losing his Moray seat to the Tories. SNP majority was only 2,875 last year at the Holyrood election. (Boundaries very similar to the Westminster constituency). The district was also the most pro-Brexit in Scotland with Remain winning by just 122 votes.
It really does look like the Brexit negotiations will come down to May standing on the cliff edge and daring the EU to push her over. So far every leader who's tried that has ultimately backed down. Could May be the first to win at this game?
Do you want to give me that £1000 now? Might save you a bit, if the £ tanks, as you surely expect, during the now-inevitable-Brexit in 2019
My lifeline might be that May can now string it out as she won't have a 2020 election to worry about. Still a lot can change once the revolving door of the negotiations begins...
Except that, from the outset at least, this is clearly the "Brexit Election" (as billed by the PM), and Labour has nothing relevant or interesting to say. The debate requires the LibDem side of the argument and, since their position is reasonably clear (certainly as clear as May's) and they are united, they'll get a lot more airtime than they've been accustomed to. Particularly if/once the poll ratings start to climb and especially if the locals exceed expectations.
Brexit is, of course, a central theme of the election; however, Corbyn commands a vastly larger Parliamentary party and there is no realistic prospect of it being eclipsed by the Liberal Democrats on June 8th, however badly it does.
You may have a point about the local elections, but only - I would suggest - if the Liberal Democrats do really spectacularly well. The locals will generate headlines to be sure, but as a guide to the performance of the parties in a subsequent General Election they are demonstrably unreliable.
A friend who lives in Oxford West this evening got a hand delivered personally addressed colour printed letter from his LibDem candidate through the door. Now that is impressive work given the surprise of yesterday's announcement.
When I lived in Oxford West, I was inundated with mounds & mounds of literature from the LibDems.
They woke me up at 5.00 am one election morning posting gallons of the stuff through my letterbox.
Does anyone know how to stop it?
The only idea that comes to mind is moving to Oxford East!. Although the way things are going, the LibDems may be pitching up there soon.
More seriously, most parties target mailings at supporters and floaters, and save time and money by not mailing known definites from other parties. So you may be able to influence things by what you tell the next canvasser who calls.
"The BBC is ‘evil’ and will take every opportunity it can to to prevent Jeremy Corbyn becoming prime minister, the Labour leader’s brother has said.
In an astonishing outburst, Piers Corbyn accused the corporation of a series of cover ups to protect the Establishment - that included making attacks on his brother - but insisted Labour could still win a ‘reasonable’ majority.
Mr Corbyn, 70, who is two years older than his brother, also claimed the pollsters were getting it wrong by failing to detect ‘shy Corbynistas’."
Except that, from the outset at least, this is clearly the "Brexit Election" (as billed by the PM), and Labour has nothing relevant or interesting to say. The debate requires the LibDem side of the argument and, since their position is reasonably clear (certainly as clear as May's) and they are united, they'll get a lot more airtime than they've been accustomed to. Particularly if/once the poll ratings start to climb and especially if the locals exceed expectations.
Brexit is, of course, a central theme of the election; however, Corbyn commands a vastly larger Parliamentary party and there is no realistic prospect of it being eclipsed by the Liberal Democrats on June 8th, however badly it does.
You may have a point about the local elections, but only - I would suggest - if the Liberal Democrats do really spectacularly well. The locals will generate headlines to be sure, but as a guide to the performance of the parties in a subsequent General Election they are demonstrably unreliable.
Mrs T always thought they were useful enough to be worth waiting for.
It really does look like the Brexit negotiations will come down to May standing on the cliff edge and daring the EU to push her over. So far every leader who's tried that has ultimately backed down. Could May be the first to win at this game?
Do you want to give me that £1000 now? Might save you a bit, if the £ tanks, as you surely expect, during the now-inevitable-Brexit in 2019
My lifeline might be that May can now string it out as she won't have a 2020 election to worry about. Still a lot can change once the revolving door of the negotiations begins...
I bet we'll be leaving in stages, so your bet may come down to whatever small print you agreed.
"The BBC is ‘evil’ and will take every opportunity it can to to prevent Jeremy Corbyn becoming prime minister, the Labour leader’s brother has said.
In an astonishing outburst, Piers Corbyn accused the corporation of a series of cover ups to protect the Establishment - that included making attacks on his brother - but insisted Labour could still win a ‘reasonable’ majority.
Mr Corbyn, 70, who is two years older than his brother, also claimed the pollsters were getting it wrong by failing to detect ‘shy Corbynistas’."
In 1983 Labour gained 10 seats despite getting trounced by a 144 seat Tory majority. They included Crewe&Nantwich, B'ham Erdington, Glasgow Cathcart, Liverpool Broadgreen. But it's possible the new boundary calculations back then were a bit rubbish.
A friend who lives in Oxford West this evening got a hand delivered personally addressed colour printed letter from his LibDem candidate through the door. Now that is impressive work given the surprise of yesterday's announcement.
When I lived in Oxford West, I was inundated with mounds & mounds of literature from the LibDems.
They woke me up at 5.00 am one election morning posting gallons of the stuff through my letterbox.
Does anyone know how to stop it?
The only idea that comes to mind is moving to Oxford East!. Although the way things are going, the LibDems may be pitching up there soon.
More seriously, most parties target mailings at supporters and floaters, and save time and money by not mailing known definites from other parties. So you may be able to influence things by what you tell the next canvasser who calls.
I no longer live in Oxford West. I did a long time ago. 2002 in Jericho to be precise.
I voted LibDem in Local elections in those distant days, which is why I got inundated with gallons of literature.
The 2002 candidate in Jericho was an M.Smithson. He lost.
"The BBC is ‘evil’ and will take every opportunity it can to to prevent Jeremy Corbyn becoming prime minister, the Labour leader’s brother has said.
In an astonishing outburst, Piers Corbyn accused the corporation of a series of cover ups to protect the Establishment - that included making attacks on his brother - but insisted Labour could still win a ‘reasonable’ majority.
Mr Corbyn, 70, who is two years older than his brother, also claimed the pollsters were getting it wrong by failing to detect ‘shy Corbynistas’."
There may well be a "shy labour" vote (although I'm not so sure about a "shy corbynista" vote) - punters/pollsters definitely need to consider that angle.
In 1983 Labour gained 10 seats despite getting trounced by a 144 seat Tory majority. They included Crewe&Nantwich, B'ham Erdington, Glasgow Cathcart, Liverpool Broadgreen. But it's possible the new boundary calculations back then were a bit rubbish.
And it was the final stage of the slow Tory disappearance from the northern cities, as the middle classes moved out.
There is demographic change working in Labour's favour in much of outer London (hence the above average swings in seats like Ilford North last time). But it's not quick enough to stem the outflow of votes indicated by the polls.
In 1983 Labour gained 10 seats despite getting trounced by a 144 seat Tory majority. They included Crewe&Nantwich, B'ham Erdington, Glasgow Cathcart, Liverpool Broadgreen. But it's possible the new boundary calculations back then were a bit rubbish.
Didn't Cathcart go down in 1979? Or did boundary changes notionally flip it back? It was Teddy Taylor's seat no?
A friend who lives in Oxford West this evening got a hand delivered personally addressed colour printed letter from his LibDem candidate through the door. Now that is impressive work given the surprise of yesterday's announcement.
When I lived in Oxford West, I was inundated with mounds & mounds of literature from the LibDems.
They woke me up at 5.00 am one election morning posting gallons of the stuff through my letterbox.
Does anyone know how to stop it?
The only idea that comes to mind is moving to Oxford East!. Although the way things are going, the LibDems may be pitching up there soon.
More seriously, most parties target mailings at supporters and floaters, and save time and money by not mailing known definites from other parties. So you may be able to influence things by what you tell the next canvasser who calls.
I no longer live in Oxford West. I did a long time ago. 2002 in Jericho to be precise.
I voted LibDem in Local elections in those distant days, which is why I got inundated with gallons of literature.
The 2002 candidate in Jericho was an M.Smithson. He lost.
A friend who lives in Oxford West this evening got a hand delivered personally addressed colour printed letter from his LibDem candidate through the door. Now that is impressive work given the surprise of yesterday's announcement.
When I lived in Oxford West, I was inundated with mounds & mounds of literature from the LibDems.
They woke me up at 5.00 am one election morning posting gallons of the stuff through my letterbox.
Does anyone know how to stop it?
A shotgun works , loaded with rock salt ,they eventually get the message
A friend who lives in Oxford West this evening got a hand delivered personally addressed colour printed letter from his LibDem candidate through the door. Now that is impressive work given the surprise of yesterday's announcement.
When I lived in Oxford West, I was inundated with mounds & mounds of literature from the LibDems.
They woke me up at 5.00 am one election morning posting gallons of the stuff through my letterbox.
Does anyone know how to stop it?
A shotgun works , loaded with rock salt ,they eventually get the message
Good luck with that at 5am on polling day.
At least there are hardly any milk bottles around nowadays. Kicking them by accident when trying to deliver the early morning polling day run was always the worst. Particularly if you had already made the delivery.
Comments
What's more, the design of the A50 process and notice period effectively eliminates any potential cliff edge.
It's basically a tradeable fixed odds bet, with a big overround. Betfair trading is likely to offer cheaper trading costs for most non-PC punters.
Yes, the process is designed to avoid any problems, but if the two sides can't come to terms, problems there will be.
This is something of a problem when the median age of all voters must be somewhere not far short of 50, and the older half of the electorate is substantially more likely to vote.
Anyway, I suppose it's not inconceivable that you may turn out to be right about the Lib Dem revival, but I just don't see it at this stage. They have had the entire period since the EU referendum to champion the cause of Remain, with the field basically to themselves in England, and have still only put on about 2-3% in the polls relative to their 2015 GE showing. Farron is the uncharismatic leader of what is a minor party in Parliamentary terms, and liable to be marginalised during the campaign as the focus is concentrated on May, Corbyn and Sturgeon. There is no particular reason to suppose that the Tory vote will start to flake, and all of the crestfallen, hard line Continuity Remain vote has probably leached away from Lab to LD already.
Labour are guaranteed the silver medal in this particular race. Certainly, when the seats are tallied they should be miles ahead of both the SNP and Lib Dems - but even further behind the Tories.
I think she expects to land us somewhere between Canada and Norway in terms of trade and FoM.
They woke me up at 5.00 am one election morning posting gallons of the stuff through my letterbox.
Does anyone know how to stop it?
I've still got my mojo for betting and tipping.
Britain has long misread the German attitude to Brexit, with many Tories wrongly assuming that Angela Merkel’s government will be driven by economic self-interest to ensure Britain gets a good deal.
The reality is that the German view is strikingly hardline and Theresa May’s decision to call a snap election in June will not change that.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/snooker/39644265
Labour would certainly have done so, and they know it, so their protestations are silly.
If you give the opposition an own goal, you can only blame yourself.
How can the opposition damage her? Accuse her of being a politician? Hardly. Accuse her of being incompetent? Well, they would say that, wouldn't they? Their only hope is to present a bright and different future. But to do that, they'd have to be believable. Therein lies Labour's problem and there's no easy solution.
If your local party is so unsuccessful they collapse entirely it might cut down a bit, but don't bet on it.
If it's a low turnout they might be a higher than usual % of ballots. Advantage Tories?
Sorry folks, please disregard.
https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/854831184873959424
#mayfly
Most of the molehills being described as mountains will have been satisfactorily resolved by then anyway.
I like Bob Marshall-Andrews, he beat Mark Reckless in the 2005 GE
It may happen somewhere odd eg, Brighton Pavilion on a 4 way split vote.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brighton_Pavilion_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
I'm not sure Lab will bother campaigning there, though.
She'd be daft not to call an Election.
Basically they are nowhere near as accurate as they are in the US.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-u-k-snap-election-is-riskier-than-it-seems/
Something to bear in mind when betting, the polls could be right or they could be wrong and sometimes in the recent past they have been very wrong at this point before a GE. (1997 and 2001 especially)
Any odds on the fish finger guy contesting anti-poof Farron's seat ?
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/moray/956135/video-moray-votes-stay-eu-122-votes/
Jobcentre Plus beckons.
Theresa May 54% (+4)
Jeremy Corbyn 15 (+1)
Changes since last week
You may have a point about the local elections, but only - I would suggest - if the Liberal Democrats do really spectacularly well. The locals will generate headlines to be sure, but as a guide to the performance of the parties in a subsequent General Election they are demonstrably unreliable.
More seriously, most parties target mailings at supporters and floaters, and save time and money by not mailing known definites from other parties. So you may be able to influence things by what you tell the next canvasser who calls.
In an astonishing outburst, Piers Corbyn accused the corporation of a series of cover ups to protect the Establishment - that included making attacks on his brother - but insisted Labour could still win a ‘reasonable’ majority.
Mr Corbyn, 70, who is two years older than his brother, also claimed the pollsters were getting it wrong by failing to detect ‘shy Corbynistas’."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/19/jeremy-corbyns-brother-brands-bbc-evil-criticising-labour-leader/
7/1 LDs ?
I voted LibDem in Local elections in those distant days, which is why I got inundated with gallons of literature.
The 2002 candidate in Jericho was an M.Smithson. He lost.
There is demographic change working in Labour's favour in much of outer London (hence the above average swings in seats like Ilford North last time). But it's not quick enough to stem the outflow of votes indicated by the polls.
Also wasn't he involved in a punch up with a fellow Labour MP?
Fuck me PP are 10/1 10-19... that's big isn't it?
Lads are 7/1 Lib Dems 40-49
I think Labour will experience the political equivalent of this phenomenon over the next 6 weeks.
At least there are hardly any milk bottles around nowadays. Kicking them by accident when trying to deliver the early morning polling day run was always the worst. Particularly if you had already made the delivery.