politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Those thinking the leave EU vote was wrong take biggest lead yet in YouGov’s Brexit Tracker
After more than a ear of producing results showing that voters were split almost down the middle over Brexit the latest YouGov tracker now has those saying it was wrong leading by 5 points
For Brexiteers the news this week that the negotiations are deadlocked, the parliamentary legislation is stalled and the IMF has downgraded the British economy is only confirmation that Brexit isn’t being carried out with sufficient zeal.
So now come the denunciations and the show trials. This week’s enemy within is Chancellor Philip Hammond, whose behaviour, according to the former Chancellor and arch-Brexiteer Nigel Lawson, is “very close to sabotage”.
Mr Hammond’s “crime” is that he is insufficiently enthusiastic about the progress of the revolution. The fact that British business and the rest of the world regard him as one of the grown-ups in the Government grappling with the true challenges of Brexit only confirms their paranoia that he’s a fifth columnist.
7% of Leave voters now think they were wrong, according to this poll. Which sounds moderately impressive, until you look at the other end of the chart, and discover that 5% of Remain voters now think we were right to leave.
Before everyone gets too carried away, the margin was 47:42 "right" earlier in the year. One to watch rather than one to reach conclusions about just yet.
So as many Tory voters back Brexit as Labour voters oppose it and more Tories back Brexit than Labour voters oppose it if you just look at June 2017 voters (due to some Tory movement to UKIP since).
Main opposition to Brexit still coming from LDs and Remain still cannot get to 50% let alone over it
7% of Leave voters now think they were wrong. Which sounds moderately impressive, until you look at the other end of the chart, and discover that 5% of Remain voters now think we were right to leave.
I suspect this is just noise TBH.
One in seven Leave voters are up for grabs, one in nine Remain voters too. That still leaves a lot of certainty out there. It's striking how fixed people are in their conclusions on this subject.
One in seven Leave voters are up for grabs, one in nine Remain voters too. That still leaves a lot of certainty out there. It's striking how fixed people are in their conclusions on this subject.
Before everyone gets too carried away, the margin was 47:42 "right" earlier in the year. One to watch rather than one to reach conclusions about just yet.
I have noticed this before on other surveys (eg Ashcroft on Scottish Independence). The after the effect survey figures imply a higher percentage voted Remain than actually did. You would expect the polling company to weight according to actual results.
Before everyone gets too carried away, the margin was 47:42 "right" earlier in the year. One to watch rather than one to reach conclusions about just yet.
I have noticed this before on other surveys (eg Ashcroft on Scottish Independence). The after the effect survey figures imply a higher percentage voted Remain than actually did. You would expect the polling company to weight according to actual results.
There could be legitimate reasons for this, however, including possibly false recall. In the light of a perceived bad out-turn respondents might might be more willing to own up to a Remain vote than a Leave one and the other weighting supports this. I am curious to understand why the Remain/Leave percentage doesn't match the actual results.
Before everyone gets too carried away, the margin was 47:42 "right" earlier in the year. One to watch rather than one to reach conclusions about just yet.
I have noticed this before on other surveys (eg Ashcroft on Scottish Independence). The after the effect survey figures imply a higher percentage voted Remain than actually did. You would expect the polling company to weight according to actual results.
Based on their demographics Leave voters are disproportionately likely to die, so you'd expect the percentage of people who voted Remain to increase. However, you could imagine that there could well be a counter-balancing migration effect where people who voted Remain are more likely to leave.
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
I am sure Vince Cable will welcome George to the LD parliamentary candidates list, Osborne's son campaigned for Cable at the last general election anyway
As TSE says, it’s hard to get excited about anything less than a good double-digit lead to match the hardcore Brexiters double-digit gesture in the direction of reality. While this could be the start of a sharp move following on from increasing dissatisfaction with the government’s non-handling of negotiations it doesn’t seem that likely.
I guess the interesting point here is what happens as the government is seen as handling the negotiations badly: does it play out as decreased Tory support, increased support for removing May, or increased conviction that we shouldn’t leave. Obviously there will be an element of all three but it would be interesting to see whether any correlation can be observed.
I am sure Vince Cable will welcome George to the LD parliamentary candidates list, Osborne's son campaigned for Cable at the last general election anyway
By that logic Clement Attlee is a Tory because his grandson became a Tory peer.
Before everyone gets too carried away, the margin was 47:42 "right" earlier in the year. One to watch rather than one to reach conclusions about just yet.
I'm not sure you are right there.
This is the table of all YouGov post referendum polling and I cannot see the numbers you suggest.
Wrong has never been above 45% before. Right has never been at 42% before.
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
They can keep Brexit, they just have to keep free movement of goods and people as well.
The downside to this combination is that everyone of all political persuasions would hate it, but if you can't remove the rock and you can't get out of the hard place...
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
Before everyone gets too carried away, the margin was 47:42 "right" earlier in the year. One to watch rather than one to reach conclusions about just yet.
I'm not sure you are right there.
This is the table of all YouGov post referendum polling and I cannot see the numbers you suggest.
Wrong has never been above 45% before. Right has never been at 42% before.
I am sure Vince Cable will welcome George to the LD parliamentary candidates list, Osborne's son campaigned for Cable at the last general election anyway
By that logic Clement Attlee is a Tory because his grandson became a Tory peer.
Or an SDPer because his son joined the SDP
Clement Attlee did not push through Tory policies, Osborne was in a coalition government with the LDs, backed Remain like the LDs and opposes more grammar schools like the LDs.
Osborne is certainly closer ideologically now to Cable than to May and Boris on most issues
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
She has also said that Brexit will happen, so it seems that she can believe three impossible things before as well as after breakfast.
Before everyone gets too carried away, the margin was 47:42 "right" earlier in the year. One to watch rather than one to reach conclusions about just yet.
I'm not sure you are right there.
This is the table of all YouGov post referendum polling and I cannot see the numbers you suggest.
Wrong has never been above 45% before. Right has never been at 42% before.
Agree there is a small but real trend from Right to Wrong. What I am not sure is how accurate the absolute percentages are. Did it go from neutral to somewhat negative (the headline figures) or from quite positive to neutral (the implied figures adjusting for actual referendum vote).
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
This shift seems to be despite YouGov making an effort to include more 2016 Leave voters in their sample. Earlier polls are weighted much more towards Leave in order to correct the sample bias.
E.g. compare March - Unweighted: Leave 816, Remain 936
Clement Attlee did not push through Tory policies, Osborne was in a coalition government with the LDs, backed Remain like the LDs and opposes more grammar schools like the LDs.
Osborne is certainly closer ideologically now to Cable than to May and Boris on most issues
I was thinking about Clem Attlee this morning. To my knowledge, Corbyn is the first Labour leader since Attlee to represent a London constituency.
The Conservatives had Heath, Thatcher and IDS all of whom represented London constituencies. WSC had constituencies on the edge of London but not actually in London.
This shift seems to be despite YouGov making an effort to include more 2016 Leave voters in their sample. Earlier polls are weighted much more towards Leave in order to correct the sample bias.
E.g. compare March - Unweighted: Leave 816, Remain 936
So SNP still down 10% on 2015 and only up 3% on 2017, not much for Sturgeon to crow about
Lol, another desperate busted flusher. Ruth & her acolytes must be disappointed after 'winning' the election in Scotland to now be in third place on 23%; not much to crow about for someone who loves a good crow.
This shift seems to be despite YouGov making an effort to include more 2016 Leave voters in their sample. Earlier polls are weighted much more towards Leave in order to correct the sample bias.
E.g. compare March - Unweighted: Leave 816, Remain 936
Unless we get a Labour minority government at the next general election dependent on the LDs for confidence and supply this polling is all hypothetical as that is the only circumstance we may get a second referendum on Brexit or at least we stay in the single market and customs union in the short term
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
I am sure Vince Cable will welcome George to the LD parliamentary candidates list, Osborne's son campaigned for Cable at the last general election anyway
By that logic Clement Attlee is a Tory because his grandson became a Tory peer.
Or an SDPer because his son joined the SDP
Clement Attlee did not push through Tory policies, Osborne was in a coalition government with the LDs, backed Remain like the LDs and opposes more grammar schools like the LDs.
Osborne is certainly closer ideologically now to Cable than to May and Boris on most issues
Before everyone gets too carried away, the margin was 47:42 "right" earlier in the year. One to watch rather than one to reach conclusions about just yet.
I'm not sure you are right there.
This is the table of all YouGov post referendum polling and I cannot see the numbers you suggest.
Wrong has never been above 45% before. Right has never been at 42% before.
Clement Attlee did not push through Tory policies, Osborne was in a coalition government with the LDs, backed Remain like the LDs and opposes more grammar schools like the LDs.
Osborne is certainly closer ideologically now to Cable than to May and Boris on most issues
I was thinking about Clem Attlee this morning. To my knowledge, Corbyn is the first Labour leader since Attlee to represent a London constituency.
The Conservatives had Heath, Thatcher and IDS all of whom represented London constituencies. WSC had constituencies on the edge of London but not actually in London.
It looks like the Unionist anti-SNP tactical block is unwinding. I am guessing because the SNP is seen as less of a threat than because they have come to terms with it (but that's a guess). Equally it looks like a chunk of SNP support is willing to vote Labour at the UK level. Fair play to Davidson, she cleverly played the tactical vote just at the moment when the target for that tactical vote was buckling.
Clement Attlee did not push through Tory policies, Osborne was in a coalition government with the LDs, backed Remain like the LDs and opposes more grammar schools like the LDs.
Osborne is certainly closer ideologically now to Cable than to May and Boris on most issues
I was thinking about Clem Attlee this morning. To my knowledge, Corbyn is the first Labour leader since Attlee to represent a London constituency.
Unless you count Harman's time as acting leader then yes, you are correct.
Gaitskell - Leeds, Wilson - Liverpool, Callagahan - Cardiff, Foot - Ebbw Vale, Kinnock - welsh seat whose name escapes me, Smith - Glasgow, Blair - Sedgefield, Brown - Kirkaldy, Miliband - Doncaster.
So SNP still down 10% on 2015 and only up 3% on 2017, not much for Sturgeon to crow about
Lol, another desperate busted flusher. Ruth & her acolytes must be disappointed after 'winning' the election in Scotland to now be in third place on 23%; not much to crow about for someone who loves a good crow.
The main aim at the last general election was to get the SNP under 45% and losing seats, achieved and still achieved on this poll. The Tories won their largest number of Scottish seats since 1992 and even on this poll are polling higher in Scotland than they have since then
It is hilarious Nats are 'celebrating' 40%, 5% less than Yes got in 2014, given before June they were expecting a clear mandate for indyref2 not losing almost half their seats
Clement Attlee did not push through Tory policies, Osborne was in a coalition government with the LDs, backed Remain like the LDs and opposes more grammar schools like the LDs.
Osborne is certainly closer ideologically now to Cable than to May and Boris on most issues
I was thinking about Clem Attlee this morning. To my knowledge, Corbyn is the first Labour leader since Attlee to represent a London constituency.
Unless you count Harman's time as acting leader then yes, you are correct.
Gaitskell - Leeds, Wilson - Liverpool, Callagahan - Cardiff, Foot - Ebbw Vale, Kinnock - welsh seat whose name escapes me, Smith - Glasgow, Blair - Sedgefield, Brown - Kirkaldy, Miliband - Doncaster.
It’s fine to talk about it creating uncertainty, provided that the only uncertainty is about whether the new trading opportunities offered by Brexit are “monumental” or merely “massive”.
Clement Attlee did not push through Tory policies, Osborne was in a coalition government with the LDs, backed Remain like the LDs and opposes more grammar schools like the LDs.
Osborne is certainly closer ideologically now to Cable than to May and Boris on most issues
I was thinking about Clem Attlee this morning. To my knowledge, Corbyn is the first Labour leader since Attlee to represent a London constituency.
Unless you count Harman's time as acting leader then yes, you are correct.
Gaitskell - Leeds, Wilson - Liverpool, Callagahan - Cardiff, Foot - Ebbw Vale, Kinnock - welsh seat whose name escapes me, Smith - Glasgow, Blair - Sedgefield, Brown - Kirkaldy, Miliband - Doncaster.
It’s fine to talk about it creating uncertainty, provided that the only uncertainty is about whether the new trading opportunities offered by Brexit are “monumental” or merely “massive”.
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
Clement Attlee did not push through Tory policies, Osborne was in a coalition government with the LDs, backed Remain like the LDs and opposes more grammar schools like the LDs.
Osborne is certainly closer ideologically now to Cable than to May and Boris on most issues
I was thinking about Clem Attlee this morning. To my knowledge, Corbyn is the first Labour leader since Attlee to represent a London constituency.
Unless you count Harman's time as acting leader then yes, you are correct.
Gaitskell - Leeds, Wilson - Liverpool, Callagahan - Cardiff, Foot - Ebbw Vale, Kinnock - welsh seat whose name escapes me, Smith - Glasgow, Blair - Sedgefield, Brown - Kirkaldy, Miliband - Doncaster.
I am sure Vince Cable will welcome George to the LD parliamentary candidates list, Osborne's son campaigned for Cable at the last general election anyway
By that logic Clement Attlee is a Tory because his grandson became a Tory peer.
Or an SDPer because his son joined the SDP
Clement Attlee did not push through Tory policies, Osborne was in a coalition government with the LDs, backed Remain like the LDs and opposes more grammar schools like the LDs.
Osborne is certainly closer ideologically now to Cable than to May and Boris on most issues
Before everyone gets too carried away, the margin was 47:42 "right" earlier in the year. One to watch rather than one to reach conclusions about just yet.
I'm not sure you are right there.
This is the table of all YouGov post referendum polling and I cannot see the numbers you suggest.
Wrong has never been above 45% before. Right has never been at 42% before.
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
Seems fitting as we approach the 100th birthday of Eire.
One big problem with that - Eire don't want Northern Ireland, and in recent decades never have, despite their official position to the contrary.
If the Republic had been genuinely enthusiastic to reunify with the north the Brits would have been happy to give it to them from the early 70s onwards.
Clement Attlee did not push through Tory policies, Osborne was in a coalition government with the LDs, backed Remain like the LDs and opposes more grammar schools like the LDs.
Osborne is certainly closer ideologically now to Cable than to May and Boris on most issues
I was thinking about Clem Attlee this morning. To my knowledge, Corbyn is the first Labour leader since Attlee to represent a London constituency.
Unless you count Harman's time as acting leader then yes, you are correct.
Gaitskell - Leeds, Wilson - Liverpool, Callagahan - Cardiff, Foot - Ebbw Vale, Kinnock - welsh seat whose name escapes me, Smith - Glasgow, Blair - Sedgefield, Brown - Kirkaldy, Miliband - Doncaster.
Kinnock was Bedwellty
later Islwyn.
EDIT: He beat plenty of future Tory MPs there, it seems:
Paul Marland 1970 Tim Yeo 1974F Peter Brooke 1974O Robert Walter 1979 Peter Bone 1992
Some well-known Leave supporters are quite unhinged. So much is unremarkable. What is quite remarkable is that Leave supporters who aspire to moderate status feel no need to dissociate themselves from such crazed views.
Clement Attlee did not push through Tory policies, Osborne was in a coalition government with the LDs, backed Remain like the LDs and opposes more grammar schools like the LDs.
Osborne is certainly closer ideologically now to Cable than to May and Boris on most issues
I was thinking about Clem Attlee this morning. To my knowledge, Corbyn is the first Labour leader since Attlee to represent a London constituency.
Unless you count Harman's time as acting leader then yes, you are correct.
Gaitskell - Leeds, Wilson - Liverpool, Callagahan - Cardiff, Foot - Ebbw Vale, Kinnock - welsh seat whose name escapes me, Smith - Glasgow, Blair - Sedgefield, Brown - Kirkaldy, Miliband - Doncaster.
Kinnock was Bedwellty
...which became Islwyn. Sorry TSE.
Yah, according to the FOAK it was Islwyn when he became leader.
Clement Attlee did not push through Tory policies, Osborne was in a coalition government with the LDs, backed Remain like the LDs and opposes more grammar schools like the LDs.
Osborne is certainly closer ideologically now to Cable than to May and Boris on most issues
I was thinking about Clem Attlee this morning. To my knowledge, Corbyn is the first Labour leader since Attlee to represent a London constituency.
Unless you count Harman's time as acting leader then yes, you are correct.
Gaitskell - Leeds, Wilson - Liverpool, Callagahan - Cardiff, Foot - Ebbw Vale, Kinnock - welsh seat whose name escapes me, Smith - Glasgow, Blair - Sedgefield, Brown - Kirkaldy, Miliband - Doncaster.
There's only so much fire he can draw before people start wondering why May hasn't got rid of him. And then presumably that leads to getting rid of her.
On topic - this is just the impact of bad press on Brexit, or normal statistical noise.
If the predicted economic damage comes - then that will move opinions much more obviously. But it may be too late then.
I do think it would be wise for someone to be working on a 'get back into the EU strategy' just in case public opinion shifts quickly.
Given all the trouble we have caused by our blundering attempt to leave I very much doubt the EU would have us back in the short term. We'd be left to stew for a few years to make sure we were sufficiently chastened never to attempt to leave again.
Some well-known Leave supporters are quite unhinged. So much is unremarkable. What is quite remarkable is that Leave supporters who aspire to moderate status feel no need to dissociate themselves from such crazed views.
Yup, it wasn't so damaging for the country, I'd be laughing at those Leavers who think Brexit would be easy were it not for Philip Hammond.
John Redwood out did himself on the twatbadger stakes yesterday.
Some well-known Leave supporters are quite unhinged. So much is unremarkable. What is quite remarkable is that Leave supporters who aspire to moderate status feel no need to dissociate themselves from such crazed views.
I don't think the moderates want to pour fuel on the fire.
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
Seems fitting as we approach the 100th birthday of Eire.
I would go with that.
Malvinas to Argentina too
I can understand (maybe) NI, but no one in the Falklands wants to be ruled by Argentina.
Few in Hong Kong wanted to be ruled by China.
Check out what Foreign Office minister Nicholas Ridley - that raving Corbynite anti-imperialist - said to Falkland Islanders not long before the invasion....basically we can't afford to defend you so accept Argentina having shared sovereignty and make the best of it.
Some well-known Leave supporters are quite unhinged. So much is unremarkable. What is quite remarkable is that Leave supporters who aspire to moderate status feel no need to dissociate themselves from such crazed views.
I don't think the moderates want to pour fuel on the fire.
That's the point. Their instinct is to back up the loonies, not to protect the sane.
Clement Attlee did not push through Tory policies, Osborne was in a coalition government with the LDs, backed Remain like the LDs and opposes more grammar schools like the LDs.
Osborne is certainly closer ideologically now to Cable than to May and Boris on most issues
I was thinking about Clem Attlee this morning. To my knowledge, Corbyn is the first Labour leader since Attlee to represent a London constituency.
Unless you count Harman's time as acting leader then yes, you are correct.
Gaitskell - Leeds, Wilson - Liverpool, Callagahan - Cardiff, Foot - Ebbw Vale, Kinnock - welsh seat whose name escapes me, Smith - Glasgow, Blair - Sedgefield, Brown - Kirkaldy, Miliband - Doncaster.
Kinnock was Bedwellty
Was that the night of Sheffield
Very f*****ing Bed Wetty
Strangely the word play you allude to is why I remembered Bedwellty and not Islwyn.
It is a full blown Scottish poll, not a subsample.
Baxtering that, plus using my GB EMA (exponential moving average) for all parties gives:
In Scotland, 8 SNP gains (5 from Con and 3 from LD incl Jo Swinson)
In GB, Con lose 37 (incl Amber Rudd and Zac Godsmith), Lab gain 31, LD lose net 1, PC lose 1, SNP gain 8.
Overall, Labour 33 short of a majority. (SNP on 43 and LDs on 11)
Not sure Baxtering in Scotland is a great idea. Labour are within touching distance of the SNP in well over a dozen seats, so small shifts in votes could produce pretty spectacular results. With that in mind, what we might also be seeing is what used to happen - shifts from Tory to SNP to stop Labour. All very intriguing.
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
Seems fitting as we approach the 100th birthday of Eire.
I would go with that.
Malvinas to Argentina too
I can understand (maybe) NI, but no one in the Falklands wants to be ruled by Argentina.
Few in Hong Kong wanted to be ruled by China.
Check out what Foreign Office minister Nicholas Ridley - that raving Corbynite anti-imperialist - said to Falkland Islanders not long before the invasion....basically we can't afford to defend you so make friends with the Argentinians and make the best of it.
But there was only a finite lease on Kowloon, and the island wasn't any near to sufficient enough to survive an inevitable blockade by the Chinese.
On topic - this is just the impact of bad press on Brexit, or normal statistical noise.
If the predicted economic damage comes - then that will move opinions much more obviously. But it may be too late then.
I do think it would be wise for someone to be working on a 'get back into the EU strategy' just in case public opinion shifts quickly.
Given all the trouble we have caused by our blundering attempt to leave I very much doubt the EU would have us back in the short term. We'd be left to stew for a few years to make sure we were sufficiently chastened never to attempt to leave again.
Why wouldn't they want us back?
I don't really buy this us causing lots of trouble argument, Brexit isn't even that big a political issue in EU countries as far as I can see.
If we get a transition deal which takes away our voting rights but leaves everything else the same (my rough understanding of what TM proposed), then it will still be much easier to stay in at the end of the transition than to leave.
Some well-known Leave supporters are quite unhinged. So much is unremarkable. What is quite remarkable is that Leave supporters who aspire to moderate status feel no need to dissociate themselves from such crazed views.
I don't think the moderates want to pour fuel on the fire.
That's the point. Their instinct is to back up the loonies, not to protect the sane.
Some well-known Leave supporters are quite unhinged. So much is unremarkable. What is quite remarkable is that Leave supporters who aspire to moderate status feel no need to dissociate themselves from such crazed views.
I don't think the moderates want to pour fuel on the fire.
That's the point. Their instinct is to back up the loonies, not to protect the sane.
I'm not sure that is the case within Government.
Then they need to start standing up for what they believe in, not letting the loonies win by default.
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
Seems fitting as we approach the 100th birthday of Eire.
I would go with that.
Malvinas to Argentina too
I can understand (maybe) NI, but no one in the Falklands wants to be ruled by Argentina.
Few in Hong Kong wanted to be ruled by China.
Check out what Foreign Office minister Nicholas Ridley - that raving Corbynite anti-imperialist - said to Falkland Islanders not long before the invasion....basically we can't afford to defend you so accept Argentina having shared sovereignty and make the best of it.
We could beat Argentina if necessary to defend the Falklands, we were unlikely to beat China to defend Hong Kong
Some well-known Leave supporters are quite unhinged. So much is unremarkable. What is quite remarkable is that Leave supporters who aspire to moderate status feel no need to dissociate themselves from such crazed views.
I don't think the moderates want to pour fuel on the fire.
That's the point. Their instinct is to back up the loonies, not to protect the sane.
I'm not sure that is the case within Government.
I increasingly think the senior members of the cabinet have a pact.
They know that as long as they stick together, the government can't be blown apart by the backbenchers. Boris just has to throw out some red meat from time to time in the form of some meaningless rhetoric to keep the more rabid Leavers happy, meanwhile they get on with quietly kicking Brexit into the long grass.
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
Seems fitting as we approach the 100th birthday of Eire.
I would go with that.
Malvinas to Argentina too
I can understand (maybe) NI, but no one in the Falklands wants to be ruled by Argentina.
Few in Hong Kong wanted to be ruled by China.
Check out what Foreign Office minister Nicholas Ridley - that raving Corbynite anti-imperialist - said to Falkland Islanders not long before the invasion....basically we can't afford to defend you so accept Argentina having shared sovereignty and make the best of it.
We could beat Argentina if necessary to defend the Falklands, we were unlikely to beat China to defend Hong Kong
It is a full blown Scottish poll, not a subsample.
Baxtering that, plus using my GB EMA (exponential moving average) for all parties gives:
In Scotland, 8 SNP gains (5 from Con and 3 from LD incl Jo Swinson)
In GB, Con lose 37 (incl Amber Rudd and Zac Godsmith), Lab gain 31, LD lose net 1, PC lose, SNP gain 8.
Overall, Labour 33 short of a majority. (SNP on 43 and LDs on 11)
So the Tories can dust down the 2015 posters and put Corbyn in Sturgeon's pocket instead!
Ha ha! I don't think that would work as well in the new circumstances. Perhaps a poster of Arlene Foster with Theresa May in her pocket?
Foster is at least a Unionist and if the Tories get a small majority next time as they did in 2015 English voters can avoid having either Sturgeon or Foster holding the purse strings
Following on from my previous at the end of the previous thread, I've done a very crude crunching of the numbers for the Wards in Boris Johnson's constituency. Boris has eight Wards and 24 Councillors which in 2014 split 23 Con and 1 Lab.
Putting in a 6% notional swing from Con to Lab, Labour win 8 seats leaving the split 14-9. The Conservatives currently run Hillingdon 42-23 so with no other changes that would make it 34-31 but I've not looked at the Wards in Nick Hurd's constituency that are in Hillingdon so it's possible there might be enough movement there for Lab to pick up a couple of extra seats.
In Boris's seat of Uxbridge & South Ruislip, I estimate Brunel, Hillingdon East and South Ruislip would become split Wards (2 Con, 1 Lab) while Labour would win both the remaining Uxbridge South seats (they already hold one) and all three in Yiewsley. This is quick and dirty number crunching with no end of caveats, assumptions and misconceptions.
It is a full blown Scottish poll, not a subsample.
Baxtering that, plus using my GB EMA (exponential moving average) for all parties gives:
In Scotland, 8 SNP gains (5 from Con and 3 from LD incl Jo Swinson)
In GB, Con lose 37 (incl Amber Rudd and Zac Godsmith), Lab gain 31, LD lose net 1, PC lose 1, SNP gain 8.
Overall, Labour 33 short of a majority. (SNP on 43 and LDs on 11)
Not sure Baxtering in Scotland is a great idea. Labour are within touching distance of the SNP in well over a dozen seats, so small shifts in votes could produce pretty spectacular results. With that in mind, what we might also be seeing is what used to happen - shifts from Tory to SNP to stop Labour. All very intriguing.
Long way to go yet. Life is full of surprises.
If Tory tactical voting SNP to stop Labour succeeded in say ten seats, then labour would be 43 short of a majority and the SNP would be on 53. It doesn't change the high level picture much.
The idea that allowing the Chancellor to be attacked because he points out, quite reasonably, the issues involved is some sort of worthwhile tactical manoeuvre is strange, to say the least.
All it is doing is undermining the government and the country. It is also getting us nowhere in terms of an outcome which works for the majority.
That is not what the guidelines actually say: they say that "Systematic reviews of cohort and case-control studies show a 'J'-shaped relationship between alcohol consumption and cardiovascular risk of mortality and morbidity. However, there are social considerations, individual factors and likely unmeasured covariates that act as confounding variables in these studies." - in essence, correlation is very strong but causation is up for grabs. They do *not* say that light drinking "increases the risk".
“A J-Shaped Relationship”
So a glass or two is okay, but if you’re opening your third bottle of the evening then maybe that’s too much medicine?
Not only is is a glass or two OK, it actually seems to be, if anything, slightly beneficial. It is hilarious watching the logical somersaults of the health killjoys who seem to desperate to find a way to prove that their own figures mean the opposite of what they actually mean.
But why Chilean?
Probably a Chilean doctor. I understand that French doctors recommend Nuits St George.
if you are on MAOI antidepressants, there is the weirdly specific instruction that you must not drink Chianti with them. Which is why we know that Gordon was on them.
I've never suffered from depression, and certainly have never been on meds, but I have experienced the odd seriously bad night after overindulging (Stilton, rather than Chianti - where there are perhaps confounding factors...)
On topic - this is just the impact of bad press on Brexit, or normal statistical noise.
If the predicted economic damage comes - then that will move opinions much more obviously. But it may be too late then.
I do think it would be wise for someone to be working on a 'get back into the EU strategy' just in case public opinion shifts quickly.
Given all the trouble we have caused by our blundering attempt to leave I very much doubt the EU would have us back in the short term. We'd be left to stew for a few years to make sure we were sufficiently chastened never to attempt to leave again.
Why wouldn't they want us back?
I don't really buy this us causing lots of trouble argument, Brexit isn't even that big a political issue in EU countries as far as I can see.
If we get a transition deal which takes away our voting rights but leaves everything else the same (my rough understanding of what TM proposed), then it will still be much easier to stay in at the end of the transition than to leave.
Exactly. And that will be in 4 years time. A lot will have happened. Think bag to how different the Cameron/Clegg/Miliband world of 2013 looks to today. I'd think going straight back in after the transitional period is pretty likely.
On topic - this is just the impact of bad press on Brexit, or normal statistical noise.
If the predicted economic damage comes - then that will move opinions much more obviously. But it may be too late then.
I do think it would be wise for someone to be working on a 'get back into the EU strategy' just in case public opinion shifts quickly.
Given all the trouble we have caused by our blundering attempt to leave I very much doubt the EU would have us back in the short term. We'd be left to stew for a few years to make sure we were sufficiently chastened never to attempt to leave again.
Why wouldn't they want us back?
I don't really buy this us causing lots of trouble argument, Brexit isn't even that big a political issue in EU countries as far as I can see.
If we get a transition deal which takes away our voting rights but leaves everything else the same (my rough understanding of what TM proposed), then it will still be much easier to stay in at the end of the transition than to leave.
I was thinking of a "no deal" scenario. If we get a BINO transition deal then I agree we could easily slip back into full membership but given the state of the Tory Party's negotiations with itself, not to mention the EU, and the short time available I think the chances of a transition are rapidly diminishing. As we were told (by Tusk i think?) right at the beginning of the process, it's a choice between hard Brexit and no Brexit.
On topic - this is just the impact of bad press on Brexit, or normal statistical noise.
If the predicted economic damage comes - then that will move opinions much more obviously. But it may be too late then.
I do think it would be wise for someone to be working on a 'get back into the EU strategy' just in case public opinion shifts quickly.
Given all the trouble we have caused by our blundering attempt to leave I very much doubt the EU would have us back in the short term. We'd be left to stew for a few years to make sure we were sufficiently chastened never to attempt to leave again.
Why wouldn't they want us back?
I don't really buy this us causing lots of trouble argument, Brexit isn't even that big a political issue in EU countries as far as I can see.
If we get a transition deal which takes away our voting rights but leaves everything else the same (my rough understanding of what TM proposed), then it will still be much easier to stay in at the end of the transition than to leave.
I was thinking of a "no deal" scenario. If we get a BINO transition deal then I agree we could easily slip back into full membership but given the state of the Tory Party's negotiations with itself, not to mention the EU, and the short time available I think the chances of a transition are rapidly diminishing. As we were told (by Tusk i think?) right at the beginning of the process, it's a choice between hard Brexit and no Brexit.
No deal would be very disruptive and isn't what either side wants. But yes - no deal and then back in would be very difficult as you say.
BINO transition (needs a catchier title) largely puts off the tough decisions - I think that would be more tempting - and could be agreed quite quickly.
On topic - this is just the impact of bad press on Brexit, or normal statistical noise.
If the predicted economic damage comes - then that will move opinions much more obviously. But it may be too late then.
I do think it would be wise for someone to be working on a 'get back into the EU strategy' just in case public opinion shifts quickly.
Given all the trouble we have caused by our blundering attempt to leave I very much doubt the EU would have us back in the short term. We'd be left to stew for a few years to make sure we were sufficiently chastened never to attempt to leave again.
Why wouldn't they want us back?
I don't really buy this us causing lots of trouble argument, Brexit isn't even that big a political issue in EU countries as far as I can see.
If we get a transition deal which takes away our voting rights but leaves everything else the same (my rough understanding of what TM proposed), then it will still be much easier to stay in at the end of the transition than to leave.
Exactly. And that will be in 4 years time. A lot will have happened. Think bag to how different the Cameron/Clegg/Miliband world of 2013 looks to today. I'd think going straight back in after the transitional period is pretty likely.
They aren't going to be arsed with Britain being prima donnas. After having spent endless years dealing with numerous British politicians who have been at best high maintenance and at worst unhinged, they are not going to want to volunteer to do the whole thing all over again.
Britain could only rejoin once it had reached a consensus that it was signing up for the whole shebang. That would happen only if Brexit was catastrophic. So don't hold your breath.
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
Seems fitting as we approach the 100th birthday of Eire.
I would go with that.
Malvinas to Argentina too
I can understand (maybe) NI, but no one in the Falklands wants to be ruled by Argentina.
Few in Hong Kong wanted to be ruled by China.
Check out what Foreign Office minister Nicholas Ridley - that raving Corbynite anti-imperialist - said to Falkland Islanders not long before the invasion....basically we can't afford to defend you so accept Argentina having shared sovereignty and make the best of it.
We could beat Argentina if necessary to defend the Falklands, we were unlikely to beat China to defend Hong Kong
And we still could beat the Argies, we’ve got a few more military resources down there now than we had in 1982!
On topic - this is just the impact of bad press on Brexit, or normal statistical noise.
If the predicted economic damage comes - then that will move opinions much more obviously. But it may be too late then.
I do think it would be wise for someone to be working on a 'get back into the EU strategy' just in case public opinion shifts quickly.
Given all the trouble we have caused by our blundering attempt to leave I very much doubt the EU would have us back in the short term. We'd be left to stew for a few years to make sure we were sufficiently chastened never to attempt to leave again.
Why wouldn't they want us back?
I don't really buy this us causing lots of trouble argument, Brexit isn't even that big a political issue in EU countries as far as I can see.
If we get a transition deal which takes away our voting rights but leaves everything else the same (my rough understanding of what TM proposed), then it will still be much easier to stay in at the end of the transition than to leave.
Exactly. And that will be in 4 years time. A lot will have happened. Think bag to how different the Cameron/Clegg/Miliband world of 2013 looks to today. I'd think going straight back in after the transitional period is pretty likely.
If only that was true. The narrative will not change to that extent in four years, particularly with Corbyn's ambivalence towards the EU.
It may be a bad idea, but I fear Brexit does indeed mean Brexit!
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
Seems fitting as we approach the 100th birthday of Eire.
I would go with that.
Malvinas to Argentina too
I can understand (maybe) NI, but no one in the Falklands wants to be ruled by Argentina.
Few in Hong Kong wanted to be ruled by China.
Check out what Foreign Office minister Nicholas Ridley - that raving Corbynite anti-imperialist - said to Falkland Islanders not long before the invasion....basically we can't afford to defend you so accept Argentina having shared sovereignty and make the best of it.
We could beat Argentina if necessary to defend the Falklands, we were unlikely to beat China to defend Hong Kong
Not very easily these days. We have a much reduced defence capability compared with 1982. And even then the mission was touch and go and entirely dependent on our sweet talking the Americans around from their natural opposition to it. Not sure we could rely on them now. Furthermore we also had essential support from neighbouring countries like Pinochet's Chile, which would be very unlikely to be forthcoming today.
Whether or not we could still militarily defend the islands, our ownership of the Falklands is now an outdated colonial anachronism from which we gain zero benefit, ie it is a big waste of money. Hence Ridley's comments, and they are even more true today.
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
Seems fitting as we approach the 100th birthday of Eire.
I would go with that.
Malvinas to Argentina too
I can understand (maybe) NI, but no one in the Falklands wants to be ruled by Argentina.
Few in Hong Kong wanted to be ruled by China.
Check out what Foreign Office minister Nicholas Ridley - that raving Corbynite anti-imperialist - said to Falkland Islanders not long before the invasion....basically we can't afford to defend you so accept Argentina having shared sovereignty and make the best of it.
We could beat Argentina if necessary to defend the Falklands, we were unlikely to beat China to defend Hong Kong
Not very easily these days. We have a much reduced defence capability compared with 1982. And even then the mission was touch and go and entirely dependent on our sweet talking the Americans around from their natural opposition to it. Not sure we could rely on them now. Furthermore we also had essential support from neighbouring countries like Pinochet's Chile, which would be very unlikely to be forthcoming today.
Whether or not we could still militarily defend the islands, our ownership of the Falklands is now an outdated colonial anachronism from which we gain zero benefit, ie it is a big waste of money. Hence Ridley's comments, and they are even more true today.
While the UK may have a reduced capacity, the Argentine one has reduced even further.
On topic - this is just the impact of bad press on Brexit, or normal statistical noise.
If the predicted economic damage comes - then that will move opinions much more obviously. But it may be too late then.
I do think it would be wise for someone to be working on a 'get back into the EU strategy' just in case public opinion shifts quickly.
Given all the trouble we have caused by our blundering attempt to leave I very much doubt the EU would have us back in the short term. We'd be left to stew for a few years to make sure we were sufficiently chastened never to attempt to leave again.
Why wouldn't they want us back?
I don't really buy this us causing lots of trouble argument, Brexit isn't even that big a political issue in EU countries as far as I can see.
If we get a transition deal which takes away our voting rights but leaves everything else the same (my rough understanding of what TM proposed), then it will still be much easier to stay in at the end of the transition than to leave.
Exactly. And that will be in 4 years time. A lot will have happened. Think bag to how different the Cameron/Clegg/Miliband world of 2013 looks to today. I'd think going straight back in after the transitional period is pretty likely.
They aren't going to be arsed with Britain being prima donnas. After having spent endless years dealing with numerous British politicians who have been at best high maintenance and at worst unhinged, they are not going to want to volunteer to do the whole thing all over again.
I just don't think this is right.
The EU have consistently said they are stronger with Britain, they regret us leaving... if we came to regret it also - they would hardly push us away if there was a route for us to rejoin/stay in easily.
It is a full blown Scottish poll, not a subsample.
Baxtering that, plus using my GB EMA (exponential moving average) for all parties gives:
In Scotland, 8 SNP gains (5 from Con and 3 from LD incl Jo Swinson)
In GB, Con lose 37 (incl Amber Rudd and Zac Godsmith), Lab gain 31, LD lose net 1, PC lose, SNP gain 8.
Overall, Labour 33 short of a majority. (SNP on 43 and LDs on 11)
So the Tories can dust down the 2015 posters and put Corbyn in Sturgeon's pocket instead!
Ha ha! I don't think that would work as well in the new circumstances. Perhaps a poster of Arlene Foster with Theresa May in her pocket?
Foster is at least a Unionist and if the Tories get a small majority next time as they did in 2015 English voters can avoid having either Sturgeon or Foster holding the purse strings
More likely - they will avoid that by giving Labour a majority.
I’d only get excited if this kind of polling showed 15-20% leads for Wrong consistenly.
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
Arlene Foster is very emphatic that a customs border between NI and GB "cannot happen". If a customs border between NI and Ireland also cannot happen, then it's impossible to see any form of Brexit with a majority in the Commons.
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
Seems fitting as we approach the 100th birthday of Eire.
I would go with that.
Malvinas to Argentina too
I can understand (maybe) NI, but no one in the Falklands wants to be ruled by Argentina.
Few in Hong Kong wanted to be ruled by China.
Check out what Foreign Office minister Nicholas Ridley - that raving Corbynite anti-imperialist - said to Falkland Islanders not long before the invasion....basically we can't afford to defend you so accept Argentina having shared sovereignty and make the best of it.
We could beat Argentina if necessary to defend the Falklands, we were unlikely to beat China to defend Hong Kong
Not very easily these days. We have a much reduced defence capability compared with 1982. And even then the mission was touch and go and entirely dependent on our sweet talking the Americans around from their natural opposition to it. Not sure we could rely on them now. Furthermore we also had essential support from neighbouring countries like Pinochet's Chile, which would be very unlikely to be forthcoming today.
Whether or not we could still militarily defend the islands, our ownership of the Falklands is now an outdated colonial anachronism from which we gain zero benefit, ie it is a big waste of money. Hence Ridley's comments, and they are even more true today.
While the UK may have a reduced capacity, the Argentine one has reduced even further.
Comments
So now come the denunciations and the show trials. This week’s enemy within is Chancellor Philip Hammond, whose behaviour, according to the former Chancellor and arch-Brexiteer Nigel Lawson, is “very close to sabotage”.
Mr Hammond’s “crime” is that he is insufficiently enthusiastic about the progress of the revolution. The fact that British business and the rest of the world regard him as one of the grown-ups in the Government grappling with the true challenges of Brexit only confirms their paranoia that he’s a fifth columnist.
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/evening-standard-comment-brexit-hardliners-put-living-standards-at-risk-a3657926.html
I suspect this is just noise TBH.
Main opposition to Brexit still coming from LDs and Remain still cannot get to 50% let alone over it
Even then, it won’t change things, we’re leaving for good or ill.
ear, high (sb May), havw
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/918814160045199360
https://twitter.com/TelePolitics/status/918756199847288832
The government will have to cancel Brexit, or Brexit will cancel the government.
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2017-10-11/brexit-dup-fear-disaster-no-deal-border-implications/
Would show Brexit isn’t being managed very well.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/918813102682071040
Stay the single market then, dipshit.
As TSE says, it’s hard to get excited about anything less than a good double-digit lead to match the hardcore Brexiters double-digit gesture in the direction of reality. While this could be the start of a sharp move following on from increasing dissatisfaction with the government’s non-handling of negotiations it doesn’t seem that likely.
I guess the interesting point here is what happens as the government is seen as handling the negotiations badly: does it play out as decreased Tory support, increased support for removing May, or increased conviction that we shouldn’t leave. Obviously there will be an element of all three but it would be interesting to see whether any correlation can be observed.
Or an SDPer because his son joined the SDP
This is the table of all YouGov post referendum polling and I cannot see the numbers you suggest.
Wrong has never been above 45% before. Right has never been at 42% before.
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/uzdpdwbul2/YG Trackers - EU Tracker Questions_W.pdf
The downside to this combination is that everyone of all political persuasions would hate it, but if you can't remove the rock and you can't get out of the hard place...
Solves this problem, and a few others too.
Seems fitting as we approach the 100th birthday of Eire.
Osborne is certainly closer ideologically now to Cable than to May and Boris on most issues
E.g. compare March - Unweighted: Leave 816, Remain 936
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/rlhcaejxm0/TimesResults_170327_VI_Trackers_W.pdf
with October - Unweighted: Leave 699, Remain 743
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/ptmrf0v5kz/Timesresults_171011_VI_Trackers.pdf
The Conservatives had Heath, Thatcher and IDS all of whom represented London constituencies. WSC had constituencies on the edge of London but not actually in London.
Back to Newmarket.
Ruth & her acolytes must be disappointed after 'winning' the election in Scotland to now be in third place on 23%; not much to crow about for someone who loves a good crow.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/918775355829301253
Malvinas to Argentina too
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/918826090780610560
WSC was Epping and Woodford MP, my present abode.
Gaitskell - Leeds, Wilson - Liverpool, Callagahan - Cardiff, Foot - Ebbw Vale, Kinnock - welsh seat whose name escapes me, Smith - Glasgow, Blair - Sedgefield, Brown - Kirkaldy, Miliband - Doncaster.
It is hilarious Nats are 'celebrating' 40%, 5% less than Yes got in 2014, given before June they were expecting a clear mandate for indyref2 not losing almost half their seats
John Smith was Monklands East, not Glasgow
If the predicted economic damage comes - then that will move opinions much more obviously. But it may be too late then.
I do think it would be wise for someone to be working on a 'get back into the EU strategy' just in case public opinion shifts quickly.
If the Republic had been genuinely enthusiastic to reunify with the north the Brits would have been happy to give it to them from the early 70s onwards.
In Scotland, 8 SNP gains (5 from Con and 3 from LD incl Jo Swinson)
In GB, Con lose 37 (incl Amber Rudd and Zac Godsmith), Lab gain 31, LD lose net 1, PC lose 1, SNP gain 8.
Overall, Labour 33 short of a majority. (SNP on 43 and LDs on 11)
EDIT: He beat plenty of future Tory MPs there, it seems:
Paul Marland 1970
Tim Yeo 1974F
Peter Brooke 1974O
Robert Walter 1979
Peter Bone 1992
Very f*****ing Bed Wetty
John Redwood out did himself on the twatbadger stakes yesterday.
Check out what Foreign Office minister Nicholas Ridley - that raving Corbynite anti-imperialist - said to Falkland Islanders not long before the invasion....basically we can't afford to defend you so accept Argentina having shared sovereignty and make the best of it.
I don't really buy this us causing lots of trouble argument, Brexit isn't even that big a political issue in EU countries as far as I can see.
If we get a transition deal which takes away our voting rights but leaves everything else the same (my rough understanding of what TM proposed), then it will still be much easier to stay in at the end of the transition than to leave.
They know that as long as they stick together, the government can't be blown apart by the backbenchers. Boris just has to throw out some red meat from time to time in the form of some meaningless rhetoric to keep the more rabid Leavers happy, meanwhile they get on with quietly kicking Brexit into the long grass.
Following on from my previous at the end of the previous thread, I've done a very crude crunching of the numbers for the Wards in Boris Johnson's constituency. Boris has eight Wards and 24 Councillors which in 2014 split 23 Con and 1 Lab.
Putting in a 6% notional swing from Con to Lab, Labour win 8 seats leaving the split 14-9. The Conservatives currently run Hillingdon 42-23 so with no other changes that would make it 34-31 but I've not looked at the Wards in Nick Hurd's constituency that are in Hillingdon so it's possible there might be enough movement there for Lab to pick up a couple of extra seats.
In Boris's seat of Uxbridge & South Ruislip, I estimate Brunel, Hillingdon East and South Ruislip would become split Wards (2 Con, 1 Lab) while Labour would win both the remaining Uxbridge South seats (they already hold one) and all three in Yiewsley. This is quick and dirty number crunching with no end of caveats, assumptions and misconceptions.
If Tory tactical voting SNP to stop Labour succeeded in say ten seats, then labour would be 43 short of a majority and the SNP would be on 53. It doesn't change the high level picture much.
The idea that allowing the Chancellor to be attacked because he points out, quite reasonably, the issues involved is some sort of worthwhile tactical manoeuvre is strange, to say the least.
All it is doing is undermining the government and the country. It is also getting us nowhere in terms of an outcome which works for the majority.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyramine
Which I think accounts for the weird dreams sometimes experienced:
https://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/mind-read/sweet_dreams_are_made_of
I've never suffered from depression, and certainly have never been on meds, but I have experienced the odd seriously bad night after overindulging (Stilton, rather than Chianti - where there are perhaps confounding factors...)
But yes - no deal and then back in would be very difficult as you say.
BINO transition (needs a catchier title) largely puts off the tough decisions - I think that would be more tempting - and could be agreed quite quickly.
Britain could only rejoin once it had reached a consensus that it was signing up for the whole shebang. That would happen only if Brexit was catastrophic. So don't hold your breath.
It may be a bad idea, but I fear Brexit does indeed mean Brexit!
Whether or not we could still militarily defend the islands, our ownership of the Falklands is now an outdated colonial anachronism from which we gain zero benefit, ie it is a big waste of money. Hence Ridley's comments, and they are even more true today.
The EU have consistently said they are stronger with Britain, they regret us leaving... if we came to regret it also - they would hardly push us away if there was a route for us to rejoin/stay in easily.