Over in the USA a big swing to the Democrats in the generic congress poll from a 5.7% lead on 26 June to 8.4% lead today, - not yet reflected in the betting.
Today government sources issued a bullish statement and released the names of six individuals who could replace any Brexiteers who might resign. They are Dominic Raab, the housing minister, Rishi Sunak, the communities minister, Stuart Andrew, the whip, Alex Burghart, a parliamentary private secretary, and Kit Malthouse, who used to work for Mr Johnson.
That's a very remarkable tactic that I've not seen in politics before. It will annoy loyalists who are not on the list ("you may be loyal but you're not one of our top 6 loyalists, sorry mate") and I wonder if it will stiffen rather than weaken the backbones of the targets ("You're going to replace me with WHO?"). But the six themselves should be very pleased.
Might cheer up a few more who regard most of the existing cabinet as crap ?
Yes I think it sends out a wider message - there is a hungry generation coming up to replace you, once out you're not coming back. I suspect an effective play.
Which it is. It is a demand that can't be accepted. If the EU do not bend, and show no sign of doing so, remaining or no Deal are the only options that look probable.
So, the beastly EU we have voted to Leave have been so beastly in not agreeing to the terms for our leaving that we'll have to stay. Right...
The political life expectency of any PM who agreed to that would be measured in picoseconds.
So no deal it is.
I didn't say we must stay. The point was that if our option on leaving is unacceptable to them, and theirs is unacceptable to us, and neither side can or will bend enough, you either have to no deal or change course entirely. I don't believe that things get too hard will lead us to remain, but it or no Deal seem the only options on the table unless the previously intractable become tractable.
Ive also said repeatedly an accidental no deal is most likely. We cannot bend on this point, and that has to mean no deal if the EU persists .
But no deal is not an option
That's why I say 'accidental' no deal. I don't think either side genuinely wants it as an option (though elements in both certainly do). However, the assumption that the other side simply will back down because it is in their interests is fundamentally flawed. Even if both sides recognise that, political realities may prevent action to back down (and in the EU's case prevent them from thinking they need to back down, as they are in the stronger position). The EU acting as though the UK is being stubbornly quirky about not wanting to accept a border in between GB and NI is a case in point - if they think we will back down because no deal is a disaster, they may find we don' have the MP numbers to back down on that point.
No deal can, and may well, happen without anyone wanting it.
Over in the USA a big swing to the Democrats in the generic congress poll from a 5.7% lead on 26 June to 8.4% lead today, - not yet reflected in the betting.
Which it is. It is a demand that can't be accepted. If the EU do not bend, and show no sign of doing so, remaining or no Deal are the only options that look probable.
So, the beastly EU we have voted to Leave have been so beastly in not agreeing to the terms for our leaving that we'll have to stay. Right...
The political life expectency of any PM who agreed to that would be measured in picoseconds.
So no deal it is.
I didn't say we must stay. The point was that if our option on leaving is unacceptable to them, and theirs is unacceptable to us, and neither side can or will bend enough, you either have to no deal or change course entirely. I don't believe that things get too hard will lead us to remain, but it or no Deal seem the only options on the table unless the previously intractable become tractable.
Ive also said repeatedly an accidental no deal is most likely. We cannot bend on this point, and that has to mean no deal if the EU persists .
But no deal is not an option
Say's who?
"No Deal" is the inevitable/default outcome once the clock runs out if a deal can't be agreed...
Because it would be an economic catastrophe. The EU knows this and that when the chips are down, we will take whatever deal is on offer, no matter how bad. It’s unfeotunate that the Leave campaign lied about German carmakers demanding a deal but that’s not the EU’s fault.
Which it is. It is a demand that can't be accepted. If the EU do not bend, and show no sign of doing so, remaining or no Deal are the only options that look probable.
So, the beastly EU we have voted to Leave have been so beastly in not agreeing to the terms for our leaving that we'll have to stay. Right...
The political life expectency of any PM who agreed to that would be measured in picoseconds.
So no deal it is.
I didn't say we must stay. The point was that if our option on leaving is unacceptable to them, and theirs is unacceptable to us, and neither side can or will bend enough, you either have to no deal or change course entirely. I don't believe that things get too hard will lead us to remain, but it or no Deal seem the only options on the table unless the previously intractable become tractable.
Ive also said repeatedly an accidental no deal is most likely. We cannot bend on this point, and that has to mean no deal if the EU persists .
But no deal is not an option
Say's who?
"No Deal" is the inevitable/default outcome once the clock runs out if a deal can't be agreed...
Because it would be an economic catastrophe. The EU knows this and that when the chips are down, we will take whatever deal is on offer, no matter how bad.
You're wrong. There are situations where we might well want to capitulate, but MPs won't countenance a government that does so. It might well be the greater of two evils at that point, but this assertion that because it would be a disaster people will see sense ignores that political and emotion will play into this. If people were so logical we wouldn't be in half the messes we are.
Think how close Greece came to not accepting bailout conditions a few years back. Yes, that was a case where the government did indeed take the deal on offer in the end, but how close was it? They got democratic backing for not doing so. Someone, somewhere, will in that situation take the alternate path, intentionally or not.
The EU has been quite clear in its belief that if we were sensible we would never have voted Brexit in the first place. The idea that our government, under immense political strain, will not do something unsensible, is a much bigger gamble than they pretend.
It usually works, but is a very high risk strategy. Yes, one which would hit us harder than it hits them. But high risk nonetheless.
Which it is. It is a demand that can't be accepted. If the EU do not bend, and show no sign of doing so, remaining or no Deal are the only options that look probable.
So, the beastly EU we have voted to Leave have been so beastly in not agreeing to the terms for our leaving that we'll have to stay. Right...
The political life expectency of any PM who agreed to that would be measured in picoseconds.
So no deal it is.
I didn't say we must stay. The point was that if our option on leaving is unacceptable to them, and theirs is unacceptable to us, and neither side can or will bend enough, you either have to no deal or change course entirely. I don't believe that things get too hard will lead us to remain, but it or no Deal seem the only options on the table unless the previously intractable become tractable.
Ive also said repeatedly an accidental no deal is most likely. We cannot bend on this point, and that has to mean no deal if the EU persists .
But no deal is not an option
Say's who?
"No Deal" is the inevitable/default outcome once the clock runs out if a deal can't be agreed...
Because it would be an economic catastrophe. The EU knows this and that when the chips are down, we will take whatever deal is on offer, no matter how bad.
You're wrong. There are situations where we might well want to capitulate, but MPs won't countenance a government that does so. It might well be the greater of two evils at that point, but this assertion that because it would be a disaster people will see sense ignores that political and emotion will play into this. If people were so logical we wouldn't be in half the messes we are.
Think how close Greece came to not accepting bailout conditions a few years back. Yes, that was a case where the government did indeed take the deal on offer in the end, but how close was it? They got democratic backing for not doing so. Someone, somewhere, will in that situation take the alternate path, intentionally or not.
The EU has been quite clear in its belief that if we were sensible we would never have voted Brexit in the first place. The idea that our government, under immense political strain, will not do something unsensible, is a much bigger gamble than they pretend.
It usually works, but is a very high risk strategy. Yes, one which would hit us harder than it hits them. But high risk nonetheless.
Which is presumably why Barnier is signalling some slight softening of the EU position.
On the question of labour and Brexit, it's not clear that opposing Hard Brexit wins Labour too many votes per se. But that last qualification is important. A Labour party that wanted, say, EEA, would finish up a more cohesive and coherent party, and those qualities would drive votes.
I think that's a fairly astute point that's missed due to the intense focus on 'Labour leavers'. If you're vehemently anti-immigration to the point that you'll place it above almost everything else in wanting a hard Brexit, then a) you probably don't like Corbyn too much anyway, b) He isn't going to be able to satisfy you and stay true to both himself and his support. If you're still voting Labour despite this, then it's unlikely softening Brexit is going to lose your support.
On the otherhand, there's a real danger Labour end up trying to please everyone by keeping up the pretence of their own cake and eat it Brexit - no jobs lost, outside SM, reducing immigration but miraculously in a kind and inoffensive way - and end up pleasing no one, as no one buys it.
Which it is. It is a demand that can't be accepted. If the EU do not bend, and show no sign of doing so, remaining or no Deal are the only options that look probable.
So, the beastly EU we have voted to Leave have been so beastly in not agreeing to the terms for our leaving that we'll have to stay. Right...
The political life expectency of any PM who agreed to that would be measured in picoseconds.
So no deal it is.
I didn't say we must stay. The point was that if our option on leaving is unacceptable to them, and theirs is unacceptable to us, and neither side can or will bend enough, you either have to no deal or change course entirely. I don't believe that things get too hard will lead us to remain, but it or no Deal seem the only options on the table unless the previously intractable become tractable.
Ive also said repeatedly an accidental no deal is most likely. We cannot bend on this point, and that has to mean no deal if the EU persists .
But no deal is not an option
That's why I say 'accidental' no deal. I don't think either side genuinely wants it as an option (though elements in both certainly do). However, the assumption that the other side simply will back down because it is in their interests is fundamentally flawed. Even if both sides recognise that, political realities may prevent action to back down (and in the EU's case prevent them from thinking they need to back down, as they are in the stronger position). The EU acting as though the UK is being stubbornly quirky about not wanting to accept a border in between GB and NI is a case in point - if they think we will back down because no deal is a disaster, they may find we don' have the MP numbers to back down on that point.
No deal can, and may well, happen without anyone wanting it.
Older gamers among us may recall Chris Crawford's 'Balance of Power'.
Over in the USA a big swing to the Democrats in the generic congress poll from a 5.7% lead on 26 June to 8.4% lead today, - not yet reflected in the betting.
Over in the USA a big swing to the Democrats in the generic congress poll from a 5.7% lead on 26 June to 8.4% lead today, - not yet reflected in the betting.
Their leader will never support one, and neither will plenty of their MPs who represent strong Leave constituencies. Starmer is telling people what they want to hear.
On the question of labour and Brexit, it's not clear that opposing Hard Brexit wins Labour too many votes per se. But that last qualification is important. A Labour party that wanted, say, EEA, would finish up a more cohesive and coherent party, and those qualities would drive votes.
A Corbyn led Labour Party that backed EEA and free movement would gain few if any more voters other than piling up even bigger majorities in the inner cities and university towns but would risk losing Leave marginal seats to the Tories. 8 out of 10 of the most vulnerable Labour seats voted Leave, if the Tories won them those seats alone would give the Tories the 326 they need for a majority.
The only Labour Party that might make EEA work is a centrist one led by Umunna or Creasy who could win a few Remain voting Tory marginals in Barnet or Reading or Putney etc to make up for any Leave voting marginals lost and maybe gain more LD tactical votes too. However that is not an option under Corbyn who is too left-wing for most Tory and LD voting Remainers
Over in the USA a big swing to the Democrats in the generic congress poll from a 5.7% lead on 26 June to 8.4% lead today, - not yet reflected in the betting.
I whacked on another 100 quid @1.96 a few days ago
The Generic ballot is a great indicator historical indicatorand I am convinced it is going ot get much worse for the Pubs in October when health insurance premiums are due.
Best one day circular walk based around the ridgeway?
The Ridgeway is a trail of two halves; the stretch to the west of the Thames is a high chalkland path, exposed and linear. The eastern is very different; much more wooded and low.
For the western, something around Uffington Castle and the superb Wayland's Smithy would give you a good walk. For the eastern, SeanT's in a good place, with Coombe Hill and Wendover Woods.
I've no idea about the best place for barefoot trail walking ...
Mr. B, I think that classified bet suggestion is worth considering. I've also backed Hartley to not be classified at 2.75. He has a 4/9 DNF rate, the worst of current drivers.
Best one day circular walk based around the ridgeway?
The Ridgeway is a trail of two halves; the stretch to the west of the Thames is a high chalkland path, exposed and linear. The eastern is very different; much more wooded and low.
For the western, something around Uffington Castle and the superb Wayland's Smithy would give you a good walk. For the eastern, SeanT's in a good place, with Coombe Hill and Wendover Woods.
I've no idea about the best place for barefoot trail walking ...
Their leader will never support one, and neither will plenty of their MPs who represent strong Leave constituencies. Starmer is telling people what they want to hear.
He won't have to actively support it. He just has to strategically withdraw his opposition.
Over in the USA a big swing to the Democrats in the generic congress poll from a 5.7% lead on 26 June to 8.4% lead today, - not yet reflected in the betting.
I whacked on another 100 quid @1.96 a few days ago
The Generic ballot is a great indicator historical indicatorand I am convinced it is going ot get much worse for the Pubs in October when health insurance premiums are due...
Hope so (and of course, as tariffs start to bite the farmers) - I just added to my position at 2.02.
Over in the USA a big swing to the Democrats in the generic congress poll from a 5.7% lead on 26 June to 8.4% lead today, - not yet reflected in the betting.
Their leader will never support one, and neither will plenty of their MPs who represent strong Leave constituencies. Starmer is telling people what they want to hear.
A second referendum would be an easy way for remain supporting Labour MPs to reconcile their views with their leave supporters. The deal is crap, they will say, and we won't support it but you will have the final say in a referendum. The overwhelming majority of Labour Party members take the same view and this will inevitably increase the pressure on the leadership to modify its position. If Corbyn thinks promising a second referendum will help him into Downing Street I would expect him to go for it. We are not at that stage yet but we could easily be there before Brexit day.
He's ok'd it. Farage was venting on Twitter yesterday about 'the greatest insult ever to an American President', worse than being shot (Lincoln, Garfield, Kennedy) or having your house burned down (by us....) apparently....
This isn't the Trump balloon
My mistake. A nobody like Khan should be flattered....
A nobody that has the largest personal mandate in Europe after the French president.
Okay.
And nothing has the biggest electoral mandate in Europe bigger than Brexit.
Over in the USA a big swing to the Democrats in the generic congress poll from a 5.7% lead on 26 June to 8.4% lead today, - not yet reflected in the betting.
That almost exactly matches the 2006 midterms when the Democrats had an 8% lead and won a majority of 30 in the House to take control from the GOP
Any views on what the odds should be ? Around evens looks very generous to me.
You will have to ask a better betting expert than me but in my view the Democrats should be strong favourites to take the House with that big a lead
The only thing stopping me going all in on this is that at the end of the day American politics is frikin' nuts right now and all kinds of unexpected "Big Events" could happen to swing the voters behind the Republicans.
Mr. B, I think that classified bet suggestion is worth considering. I've also backed Hartley to not be classified at 2.75. He has a 4/9 DNF rate, the worst of current drivers....
17 classified last year, but they didn't have DRS around one of the corners, or quite the same heat, or only three engines for the season...
Over in the USA a big swing to the Democrats in the generic congress poll from a 5.7% lead on 26 June to 8.4% lead today, - not yet reflected in the betting.
That almost exactly matches the 2006 midterms when the Democrats had an 8% lead and won a majority of 30 in the House to take control from the GOP
Any views on what the odds should be ? Around evens looks very generous to me.
You will have to ask a better betting expert than me but in my view the Democrats should be strong favourites to take the House with that big a lead
The only thing stopping me going all in on this is that at the end of the day American politics is frikin' nuts right now and all kinds of unexpected "Big Events" could happen to swing the voters behind the Republicans.
Though Congressional Republicans have a lower approval rating even than Trump
On the question of labour and Brexit, it's not clear that opposing Hard Brexit wins Labour too many votes per se. But that last qualification is important. A Labour party that wanted, say, EEA, would finish up a more cohesive and coherent party, and those qualities would drive votes.
A Corbyn led Labour Party that backed EEA and free movement would gain few if any more voters other than piling up even bigger majorities in the inner cities and university towns but would risk losing Leave marginal seats to the Tories. 8 out of 10 of the most vulnerable Labour seats voted Leave, if the Tories won them those seats alone would give the Tories the 326 they need for a majority.
The only Labour Party that might make EEA work is a centrist one led by Umunna or Creasy who could win a few Remain voting Tory marginals in Barnet or Reading or Putney etc to make up for any Leave voting marginals lost and maybe gain more LD tactical votes too. However that is not an option under the left-wing Corbyn
Not sure this is true though - as any leave voting marginal still has a significant number of remain voters, and Corbyn does not go down well with 'leave means leave' type voters anyway. There are two main reasons for leaving the EU (and being fully out) cited by working class leave voters I've spoken to - being anti-immigration and red tape for small businesses. Corbyn is an unlikely champion of those to say the least. Those voters may be bleeding away whether he promises to uphold a hard Brexit or not - with the added problem that it'll annoy those with jobs dependent on a softish Brexit landing and the liberal, younger Remainers who tactically or reluctantly embraced the party in 2017 to block May from having carte blanche.
You're right that a more centrist type (although arguably not 'centrist' in the pre-2015 sense, just without Corbyn's hard left baggage and general unpopularity) - but his best hope may still be trying to enthuse the left/liberal side of the Brexit culture war rather than fail to convince anyone other than the relatively small number of genuine believers. He still might lose, because he's a bad leader, and on the evidence of his dealings with anti-Semitism a pretty awful person - but that's the rub.
On the question of labour and Brexit, it's not clear that opposing Hard Brexit wins Labour too many votes per se. But that last qualification is important. A Labour party that wanted, say, EEA, would finish up a more cohesive and coherent party, and those qualities would drive votes.
A Corbyn led Labour Party that backed EEA and free movement would gain few if any more voters other than piling up even st and maybe gain more LD tactical votes too. However that is not an option under the left-wing Corbyn
Not sure this is true though - as any leave voting marginal still has a significant number of remain voters, and Corbyn does not go down well with 'leave means leave' type voters anyway. There are two main reasons for leaving the EU (and being fully out) cited by working class leave voters I've spoken to - being anti-immigration and red tape for small businesses. Corbyn is an unlikely champion of those to say the least. Those voters may be bleeding away whether he promises to uphold a hard Brexit or not - with the added problem that it'll annoy those with jobs dependent on a softish Brexit landing and the liberal, younger Remainers who tactically or reluctantly embraced the party in 2017 to block May from having carte blanche.
You're right that a more centrist type (although arguably not 'centrist' in the pre-2015 sense, just without Corbyn's hard left baggage and general unpopularity) - but his best hope may still be trying to enthuse the left/liberal side of the Brexit culture war rather than fail to convince anyone other than the relatively small number of genuine believers. He still might lose, because he's a bad leader, and on the evidence of his dealings with anti-Semitism a pretty awful person - but that's the rub.
Corbyn clearly only held Labour marginals with majorities under 1000 in strong Leave seats due to 'Leave means Leave' voters sticking with Labour.
Enthusing left liberal voters in safe inner city Labour seats is not going to get Corbyn to No 10 with a majority, Tory centrist Remain voters are more likely to do that and the evidence remains while Corbyn remains Labour leader those voters will not touch him with a bargepole. So his best bet is to hold the Labour seats he has, win back a few Leave seats he lost in 2017 like Mansfield and Stoke South and Middlesbrough South and Cleveland and get into No 10 in another hung parliament propped up by the SNP, the Greens and the LDs
OK, the question is simple now. Here is what the UK is doing, how much market access does the EU give us based on that arrangement? Not oui, not non, but combien.
And the answer will likely be, almost total free access in sectors of relevance to the Irish border, not so much in GB based sectors, where the EU will cherry pick ruthlessly to their self interest.
I retain the belief that there will be a deal done broadly on May's hard BINO prospectus, where I have deviated from that it was always in speculative mode.
Comments
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-generic-ballot-polls/?ex_cid=irpromo
I think @pulpstar has called this right.
No deal can, and may well, happen without anyone wanting it.
https://twitter.com/thomasknox/status/1015276660596330496
Think how close Greece came to not accepting bailout conditions a few years back. Yes, that was a case where the government did indeed take the deal on offer in the end, but how close was it? They got democratic backing for not doing so. Someone, somewhere, will in that situation take the alternate path, intentionally or not.
The EU has been quite clear in its belief that if we were sensible we would never have voted Brexit in the first place. The idea that our government, under immense political strain, will not do something unsensible, is a much bigger gamble than they pretend.
It usually works, but is a very high risk strategy. Yes, one which would hit us harder than it hits them. But high risk nonetheless.
And fairly difficult to distinguish May's sobs from Fox or Johnson at that distance, I think.
Decent photo, though.
Could do with updating for France (and some others):
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180607005897/en/French-Defense-Industry-Report-2018-Market-Attractiveness
As a percentage of GDP, the country's defense expenditure is expected to average 2.2% over 2019-2023...
On the otherhand, there's a real danger Labour end up trying to please everyone by keeping up the pretence of their own cake and eat it Brexit - no jobs lost, outside SM, reducing immigration but miraculously in a kind and inoffensive way - and end up pleasing no one, as no one buys it.
Youthful PBers may like to read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balance_of_Power_(video_game)
Labour's shifts in position have been pretty remarkable over time, though they seem to be getting away with it.
Around evens looks very generous to me.
The only Labour Party that might make EEA work is a centrist one led by Umunna or Creasy who could win a few Remain voting Tory marginals in Barnet or Reading or Putney etc to make up for any Leave voting marginals lost and maybe gain more LD tactical votes too. However that is not an option under Corbyn who is too left-wing for most Tory and LD voting Remainers
I whacked on another 100 quid @1.96 a few days ago
The Generic ballot is a great indicator historical indicatorand I am convinced it is going ot get much worse for the Pubs in October when health insurance premiums are due.
Only events dear boy will sink me.
Are there are other parts of the UK where they write English in “their” accents?
For the western, something around Uffington Castle and the superb Wayland's Smithy would give you a good walk. For the eastern, SeanT's in a good place, with Coombe Hill and Wendover Woods.
I've no idea about the best place for barefoot trail walking ...
Edited extra bit: and with that, I am off.
Whole electorates have changed their mind over the time that's elapsed since the referendum:
from 1950 (Labour) to 1951 (Tory)
from 1964 (almost a hung parliament) to 1966 (Labour landslide)
from 2015 (Tory majority) to 2017 (hung parliament).
So, from 2016 (leave the EU) to 2019, 2020, 2012 ... ????
Why weren't the voters warned Brexit is for life, not just for one parliament?
----->
Why does he even need to ask? The PM has fudged. It's what she does.
You're right that a more centrist type (although arguably not 'centrist' in the pre-2015 sense, just without Corbyn's hard left baggage and general unpopularity) - but his best hope may still be trying to enthuse the left/liberal side of the Brexit culture war rather than fail to convince anyone other than the relatively small number of genuine believers. He still might lose, because he's a bad leader, and on the evidence of his dealings with anti-Semitism a pretty awful person - but that's the rub.
Enthusing left liberal voters in safe inner city Labour seats is not going to get Corbyn to No 10 with a majority, Tory centrist Remain voters are more likely to do that and the evidence remains while Corbyn remains Labour leader those voters will not touch him with a bargepole. So his best bet is to hold the Labour seats he has, win back a few Leave seats he lost in 2017 like Mansfield and Stoke South and Middlesbrough South and Cleveland and get into No 10 in another hung parliament propped up by the SNP, the Greens and the LDs
And the answer will likely be, almost total free access in sectors of relevance to the Irish border, not so much in GB based sectors, where the EU will cherry pick ruthlessly to their self interest.
I retain the belief that there will be a deal done broadly on May's hard BINO prospectus, where I have deviated from that it was always in speculative mode.