Thornberry has probably accumulated too much bad blood given her career-climbing under Corbyn. Far too self-important.
Nandy is well positioned, but a little too quiet.
Beyond that there's the clear force that is Lammy, or the white knight D Milliband marching in from the west (joking in both cases)
Long-Bailey seems a bit (to say the least) thick, but she is improving dramatically.
Benn, Cooper, Khan, Burnham somehow I can't see.
I suspect that there's a real chance for an inexperienced candidate to do well. I don't know much about these people, but the likes of Haigh, Pennycook, Ali.
For some reason at some point I seem to have backed Luciana Berger too.
Umunna is the clear favourite? Seriously?
In my view he's only 29/32 on BF because he pulled out last time. I'd have him about 6ish if he was certain to run, probably shorter.
So the membership (who decide the leader) will dislike Thornberry for serving under the leader they overwhelmingly voted for twice and flock to Umunna who has sat back and criticised the popular leader?
I'm not saying it can't happen I just don't follow the logic of the current membership not liking what it voted for....
You make a good point, I guess I'm thinking about the early maneuvering rather than a final vote. I don't think Umunna will run anyway.
In all my time in local government I can't recall any Labour councillor ever waxing lyrical about the underestimated abilities of Mr Umunna
Even if the Commission wins, it will lose, because it will have a sullen, divided and resentful Britain perpetually unsatisfied with its relationship and disruptive.
The UK won't simply fall into line and forget all about it, like Selmayr seems to (very naively) think it will.
There's just no possible way for them to make the British happy. The main argument the British are having is with their own contradictory promises, so even if the EU side totally ignored its own interests and gave them everything they wanted to the fullest extent permitted by logic, the British would still be furious at the outcome and blame it on them.
i think you're right and Leave would probably win referendum 2.0
At least then the Remainers would have to shut up for 30 years, and we would go into the darkness, united. As it were.
I doubt it. It would just become "well that wasn't the real referendum either, let's have another one, just in case".
Anyway, as I pointed out earlier today. No Tory PM could ever propose another referendum. It would be the end of our party.
I think "we said Leave, we meant it" would be very potent. British electorates really don't like a bad loser.
Ultra-Remainers fail to see this as they've convinced themselves their case has already been proven, which it hasn't and won't be.
Plus the £350mn/week would be even more correct (increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment)
Or maybe it would be even less accurate when they double our rebate in my preferred hypothetical?
Edit: as reward.
Chance of that happening: 0.
The chances of your preferred hypothetical seemed quite low as well, although there are advantages to the EU letting the UK go if we ask to stay having made a mess of trying to leave it works for them as well, there are many reasons for them to want us to stay.
If we tried to reverse course it would be silly for the EU to then push to make us leave, there have been mentions from various Europeans about Britain changing its mind and staying on the same terms.
What's my preferred hypothetical?
Is that the one that connects your preferred adjacent to your preferred opposite?
Even if the Commission wins, it will lose, because it will have a sullen, divided and resentful Britain perpetually unsatisfied with its relationship and disruptive.
The UK won't simply fall into line and forget all about it, like Selmayr seems to (very naively) think it will.
There's just no possible way for them to make the British happy. The main argument the British are having is with their own contradictory promises, so even if the EU side totally ignored its own interests and gave them everything they wanted to the fullest extent permitted by logic, the British would still be furious at the outcome and blame it on them.
If we stay, EVERYTHING that goes wrong in Britan will be the fault of the EU.
If we Leave, EVERYTHING that goes wrong in Britain will be the fault of Brexit.
It is written.
(Frankly, I can't see why the EU would want us back anyway, because at some point the pressure to leave will build up again, fuelled by an already huge body of the viciously infuriated.)
i think you're right and Leave would probably win referendum 2.0
At least then the Remainers would have to shut up for 30 years, and we would go into the darkness, united. As it were.
I doubt it. It would just become "well that wasn't the real referendum either, let's have another one, just in case".
Anyway, as I pointed out earlier today. No Tory PM could ever propose another referendum. It would be the end of our party.
I think "we said Leave, we meant it" would be very potent. British electorates really don't like a bad loser.
Ultra-Remainers fail to see this as they've convinced themselves their case has already been proven, which it hasn't and won't be.
Plus the £350mn/week would be even more correct (increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment)
Or maybe it would be even less accurate when they double our rebate in my preferred hypothetical?
Edit: as reward.
Chance of that happening: 0.
The chances of your preferred hypothetical seemed quite low as well, although there are advantages to the EU letting the UK go if we ask to stay having made a mess of trying to leave it works for them as well, there are many reasons for them to want us to stay.
If we tried to reverse course it would be silly for the EU to then push to make us leave, there have been mentions from various Europeans about Britain changing its mind and staying on the same terms.
What's my preferred hypothetical?
'increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment'
I'm sure he had the best of intentions when he picked up his quill.
The simplest explanation is Ken thinks he was right about Hitler because that used to be what historians thought, or some of them anyway. Similarly, another leading politician also claimed that Hitler initially wanted just to expel Jews from Germany rather than kill them. The reason he was criticised but not labelled an anti-semite is of course that he is prime minister of Israel.
Though we'd all be better off if Ken would just STFU.
O/T Anyone seeing the lunar eclipse? It's completely feckin' cloudy here for the first evening in weeks!
Yep, same here in Sussex. We've had wonderfully clear skies and excellent moons every day this week.. .until tonight.
Sod's law, eh? Never mind there's another one on January 21st.
Ahah. Just took another look after that post and the clouds had parted. Too late for totality - a thin sliver of sunlight on the eastern edge of the moon - but a thing of beauty nonetheless. Commiserations to those of you still cloud-ridden
i think you're right and Leave would probably win referendum 2.0
At least then the Remainers would have to shut up for 30 years, and we would go into the darkness, united. As it were.
I doubt it. It would just become "well that wasn't the real referendum either, let's have another one, just in case".
Anyway, as I pointed out earlier today. No Tory PM could ever propose another referendum. It would be the end of our party.
I think "we said Leave, we meant it" would be very potent. British electorates really don't like a bad loser.
Ultra-Remainers fail to see this as they've convinced themselves their case has already been proven, which it hasn't and won't be.
Plus the £350mn/week would be even more correct (increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment)
Or maybe it would be even less accurate when they double our rebate in my preferred hypothetical?
Edit: as reward.
Chance of that happening: 0.
The chances of your preferred hypothetical seemed quite low as well, although there are advantages to the EU letting the UK go if we ask to stay having made a mess of trying to leave it works for them as well, there are many reasons for them to want us to stay.
If we tried to reverse course it would be silly for the EU to then push to make us leave, there have been mentions from various Europeans about Britain changing its mind and staying on the same terms.
What's my preferred hypothetical?
'increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment'
Ah, I wouldn’t say it was preferred. The former will definitely happen though, inflation takes care of that.
Can I ask the PB Brains Trust if anyone has any knowledge of Mental Health in action in the NHS: specifically, what the process would be if someone tried to section themselves?
I have a heroine in a thriller who is about to do that: i.e. she is dubious of her own sanity, and stability, and to save her family and friends she presents herself at a Mental Health Unit, saying "please section me and take me in, I think I am mad".
How would that work in Britain?
I say "Britain" because I have a good friend who - years ago - tried to do precisely this, but in Ireland. He went into a hospital, with a mental health ward, tried to get himself certified as insane (he WAS having lot of issues) but a doctor listened to him, and talked him down and said "look, I could sign this paper and send you through those security doors, but it might be a long time before you come out" and my mate saw the sense in this, and went home, and calmed down.
And now, amazingly, and wonderfully, he's a successful man: owns a home, has a good business, has girlfriends, is well liked by many. And he thanks that doctor every day.
But is it, and would it, be the same in the UK, if you tried to dump yourself in the loony bin?
All advice welcome. Thankyou.
I tried to get my mother sectioned(or whatever the word is) earlier and that's no lie.
i think you're right and Leave would probably win referendum 2.0
At least then the Remainers would have to shut up for 30 years, and we would go into the darkness, united. As it were.
I doubt it. It would just become "well that wasn't the real referendum either, let's have another one, just in case".
Anyway, as I pointed out earlier today. No Tory PM could ever propose another referendum. It would be the end of our party.
I think "we said Leave, we meant it" would be very potent. British electorates really don't like a bad loser.
Ultra-Remainers fail to see this as they've convinced themselves their case has already been proven, which it hasn't and won't be.
Plus the £350mn/week would be even more correct (increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment)
Or maybe it would be even less accurate when they double our rebate in my preferred hypothetical?
Edit: as reward.
Chance of that happening: 0.
The chances of your preferred hypothetical seemed quite low as well, although there are advantages to the EU letting the UK go if we ask to stay having made a mess of trying to leave it works for them as well, there are many reasons for them to want us to stay.
If we tried to reverse course it would be silly for the EU to then push to make us leave, there have been mentions from various Europeans about Britain changing its mind and staying on the same terms.
What's my preferred hypothetical?
Is that the one that connects your preferred adjacent to your preferred opposite?
i think you're right and Leave would probably win referendum 2.0
At least then the Remainers would have to shut up for 30 years, and we would go into the darkness, united. As it were.
I doubt it. It would just become "well that wasn't the real referendum either, let's have another one, just in case".
Anyway, as I pointed out earlier today. No Tory PM could ever propose another referendum. It would be the end of our party.
I think "we said Leave, we meant it" would be very potent. British electorates really don't like a bad loser.
Ultra-Remainers fail to see this as they've convinced themselves their case has already been proven, which it hasn't and won't be.
Plus the £350mn/week would be even more correct (increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment)
Or maybe it would be even less accurate when they double our rebate in my preferred hypothetical?
Edit: as reward.
Chance of that happening: 0.
The chances of your preferred hypothetical seemed quite low as well, although there are advantages to the EU letting the UK go if we ask to stay having made a mess of trying to leave it works for them as well, there are many reasons for them to want us to stay.
If we tried to reverse course it would be silly for the EU to then push to make us leave, there have been mentions from various Europeans about Britain changing its mind and staying on the same terms.
What's my preferred hypothetical?
'increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment'
Ah, I wouldn’t say it was preferred. The former will definitely happen though, inflation takes care of that.
I was tempted to write some kind of disclaimer as I understand the EU contributions aren't a set number but a formula to figure out the number so the number could obviously change. My point basically is I don't think the EU would adjust our contributions formula or the rebate. Or at least you are making assumptions that favour your point by saying they would.
I don't think they would for another referendum we had before we left anyway, rejoining if we did leave could be a different story.
@Tykejohnno That's tough to deal with, I'm hoping for the best for you and your Mum.
i think you're right and Leave would probably win referendum 2.0
At least then the Remainers would have to shut up for 30 years, and we would go into the darkness, united. As it were.
I doubt it. It would just become "well that wasn't the real referendum either, let's have another one, just in case".
Anyway, as I pointed out earlier today. No Tory PM could ever propose another referendum. It would be the end of our party.
I think "we said Leave, we meant it" would be very potent. British electorates really don't like a bad loser.
Ultra-Remainers fail to see this as they've convinced themselves their case has already been proven, which it hasn't and won't be.
Plus the £350mn/week would be even more correct (increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment)
Or maybe it would be even less accurate when they double our rebate in my preferred hypothetical?
Edit: as reward.
Chance of that happening: 0.
The chances of your preferred hypothetical seemed quite low as well, although there are advantages to the EU letting the UK go if we ask to stay having made a mess of trying to leave it works for them as well, there are many reasons for them to want us to stay.
If we tried to reverse course it would be silly for the EU to then push to make us leave, there have been mentions from various Europeans about Britain changing its mind and staying on the same terms.
What's my preferred hypothetical?
'increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment'
Ah, I wouldn’t say it was preferred. The former will definitely happen though, inflation takes care of that.
I was tempted to write some kind of disclaimer as I understand the EU contributions aren't a set number but a formula to figure out the number so the number could obviously change. My point basically is I don't think the EU would adjust our contributions formula or the rebate. Or at least you are making assumptions that favour your point by saying they would.
I don't think they would for another referendum we had before we left anyway, rejoining if we did leave could be a different story.
I was referring to the £350mn a week figure. That gets more correct the longer we stay in simply due to inflation. And ro think we’ll be able to keep the rebate after all this “no cherry picking” talk from Brussels....
I'm sure he had the best of intentions when he picked up his quill.
The simplest explanation is Ken thinks he was right about Hitler because that used to be what historians thought, or some of them anyway. Similarly, another leading politician also claimed that Hitler initially wanted just to expel Jews from Germany rather than kill them. The reason he was criticised but not labelled an anti-semite is of course that he is prime minister of Israel.
Though we'd all be better off if Ken would just STFU.
Um, no, the things you think historians used to think are still what they uncontroversially think. Try searching Haavara Agreement.
Even if the Commission wins, it will lose, because it will have a sullen, divided and resentful Britain perpetually unsatisfied with its relationship and disruptive.
The UK won't simply fall into line and forget all about it, like Selmayr seems to (very naively) think it will.
There's just no possible way for them to make the British happy. The main argument the British are having is with their own contradictory promises, so even if the EU side totally ignored its own interests and gave them everything they wanted to the fullest extent permitted by logic, the British would still be furious at the outcome and blame it on them.
Oh, there is. They could grant the UK a CETA+ trade deal, with a special status for NI.
That would do it. Failing that, I'd be happy with Chequers compromise. Or even a looser associate membership status for the UK of the EU.
i think you're right and Leave would probably win referendum 2.0
At least then the Remainers would have to shut up for 30 years, and we would go into the darkness, united. As it were.
.
Chance of that happening: 0.
The chances of your preferred hypothetical seemed quite low as well, although there are advantages to the EU letting the UK go if we ask to stay having made a mess of trying to leave it works for them as well, there are many reasons for them to want us to stay.
If we tried to reverse course it would be silly for the EU to then push to make us leave, there have been mentions from various Europeans about Britain changing its mind and staying on the same terms.
What's my preferred hypothetical?
'increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment'
Ah, I wouldn’t say it was preferred. The former will definitely happen though, inflation takes care of that.
I was tempted to write some kind of disclaimer as I understand the EU contributions aren't a set number but a formula to figure out the number so the number could obviously change. My point basically is I don't think the EU would adjust our contributions formula or the rebate. Or at least you are making assumptions that favour your point by saying they would.
I don't think they would for another referendum we had before we left anyway, rejoining if we did leave could be a different story.
I was referring to the £350mn a week figure. That gets more correct the longer we stay in simply due to inflation. And ro think we’ll be able to keep the rebate after all this “no cherry picking” talk from Brussels....
I wasn't sure if the 'and' made increased budget contributions part of the punishment.
I honestly can't say for sure and TBH I don't even think a second referendum will happen anyway so I really am arguing this as a hypothetical rather than deep belief but I really don't think you can assume a second referendum would be run with the rebate removed, I'm not sure it is even more likely than not (assuming we get to a 2nd ref)
i think you're right and Leave would probably win referendum 2.0
At least then the Remainers would have to shut up for 30 years, and we would go into the darkness, united. As it were.
I doubt it. It would just become "well that wasn't the real referendum either, let's have another one, just in case".
Anyway, as I pointed out earlier today. No Tory PM could ever propose another referendum. It would be the end of our party.
I think "we said Leave, we meant it" would be very potent. British electorates really don't like a bad loser.
Ultra-Remainers fail to see this as they've convinced themselves their case has already been proven, which it hasn't and won't be.
Plus the £350mn/week would be even more correct (increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment)
Or maybe it would be even less accurate when they double our rebate in my preferred hypothetical?
Edit: as reward.
Chance of that happening: 0.
The chances of your preferred hypothetical seemed quite low as well, although there are advantages to the EU letting the UK go if we ask to stay having made a mess of trying to leave it works for them as well, there are many reasons for them to want us to stay.
If we tried to reverse course it would be silly for the EU to then push to make us leave, there have been mentions from various Europeans about Britain changing its mind and staying on the same terms.
What's my preferred hypothetical?
'increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment'
Ah, I wouldn’t say it was preferred. The former will definitely happen though, inflation takes care of that.
I don't think they would for another referendum we had before we left anyway, rejoining if we did leave could be a different story.
@Tykejohnno That's tough to deal with, I'm hoping for the best for you and your Mum.
The UK rebate is not treaty based. It's a component of the septennial MFF and requires unanimity. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide whether such unanimity would be forthcoming.
Yay. Fab. I love PB. Think that pretty much sorts it: in terms of self sectioning. I have enough detail to furnish my chapter 28.
Thankyou to everyone who offered advice, dixie, Foxy, ralph, et al, brilliant.
What did we all do, before the internet?!
Make things up and pray it's plausible enough for the purpose?
Basically, yes. And use our imaginations.
Ideally we'd be expert and experienced in all our scenarios, e.g. Shakespeare would have been a pre-Roman King, Tolstoy would have been a suicidal female in love with the wrong man, Dan Brown would have studied "symbology" at Yale as he was menaced by Templars....
In reality, this is hard, for a writer. So we do enough research to make it sound plausible, the skill lies in making the EMOTIONS plausible - and, luckily, they are universal.
An interesting insight, thanks. More often than not I am struck by how convincing the author is*. Whenever think I have a novel in me, I read a good one someone else has written and I realise how clever they are and how crap mine would be.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
Who cares what non-voters think?
I can't tell whether you're being serious or sarcastic there?
i think you're right and Leave would probably win referendum 2.0
At least then the Remainers would have to shut up for 30 years, and we would go into the darkness, united. As it were.
I doubt it. It would just become "well that wasn't the real referendum either, let's have another one, just in case".
Anyway, as I pointed out earlier today. No Tory PM could ever propose another referendum. It would be the end of our party.
I think "we said Leave, we meant it" would be very potent. British electorates really don't like a bad loser.
Ultra-Remainers fail to see this as they've convinced themselves their case has already been proven, which it hasn't and won't be.
Plus the £350mn/week would be even more correct (increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment)
Or maybe it would be even less accurate when they double our rebate in my preferred hypothetical?
Edit: as reward.
Chance of that happening: 0.
The chances of your preferred.
What's my preferred hypothetical?
'increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment'
Ah, I wouldn’t say it was preferred. The former will definitely happen though, inflation takes care of that.
I don't think they would for another referendum we had before we left anyway, rejoining if we did leave could be a different story.
@Tykejohnno That's tough to deal with, I'm hoping for the best for you and your Mum.
The UK rebate is not treaty based. It's a component of the septennial MFF and requires unanimity. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide whether such unanimity would be forthcoming.
I agree. We have shat the bed, a Cleveland Steamer on the chest of our neighbour. Whatever the outcome, it will be bitter and divisive. This is not the end of the culture war, this is not even the beginning of the end. I don't even think that it is the end of the beginning.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
Who cares what non-voters think?
I can't tell whether you're being serious or sarcastic there?
More seriously, if Remain won a hypothetical third referendum 90/10, but only achieved the same vote as last time, I don’t think that’d be legitimate.
i think you're right and Leave would probably win referendum 2.0
At least then the Remainers would have to shut up for 30 years, and we would go into the darkness, united. As it were.
I doubt it. It would just become "well that wasn't the real referendum either, let's have another one, just in case".
Anyway, as I pointed out earlier today. No Tory PM could ever propose another referendum. It would be the end of our party.
I think "we said Leave, we meant it" would be very potent. British electorates really don't like a bad loser.
Ultra-Remainers fail to see this as they've convinced themselves their case has already been proven, which it hasn't and won't be.
Plus the £350mn/week would be even more correct (increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment)
Or maybe it would be even less accurate when they double our rebate in my preferred hypothetical?
Edit: as reward.
Chance of that happening: 0.
The chances of your preferred.
What's my preferred hypothetical?
'increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment'
Ah, I wouldn’t say it was preferred. The former will definitely happen though, inflation takes care of that.
I don't think they would for another referendum we had before we left anyway, rejoining if we did leave could be a different story.
@Tykejohnno That's tough to deal with, I'm hoping for the best for you and your Mum.
The UK rebate is not treaty based. It's a component of the septennial MFF and requires unanimity. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide whether such unanimity would be forthcoming.
I agree. We have shat the bed, a Cleveland Steamer on the chest of our neighbour. . Whatever the outcome, it will be bitter and divisive. This isnot the end of the culture war, this is not even the beginning of the end. I don't even think that it is the end of the beginning.
Not even the end of the beginning of the beginning?
Thornberry has probably accumulated too much bad blood given her career-climbing under Corbyn. Far too self-important.
Nandy is well positioned, but a little too quiet.
Beyond that there's the clear force that is Lammy, or the white knight D Milliband marching in from the west (joking in both cases)
Long-Bailey seems a bit (to say the least) thick, but she is improving dramatically.
Benn, Cooper, Khan, Burnham somehow I can't see.
I suspect that there's a real chance for an inexperienced candidate to do well. I don't know much about these people, but the likes of Haigh, Pennycook, Ali.
For some reason at some point I seem to have backed Luciana Berger too.
Umunna is the clear favourite? Seriously?
In my view he's only 29/32 on BF because he pulled out last time. I'd have him about 6ish if he was certain to run, probably shorter.
So the membership (who decide the leader) will dislike Thornberry for serving under the leader they overwhelmingly voted for twice and flock to Umunna who has sat back and criticised the popular leader?
I'm not saying it can't happen I just don't follow the logic of the current membership not liking what it voted for....
You make a good point, I guess I'm thinking about the early maneuvering rather than a final vote. I don't think Umunna will run anyway.
In all my time in local government I can't recall any Labour councillor ever waxing lyrical about the underestimated abilities of Mr Umunna
i think you're right and Leave would probably win referendum 2.0
At least then the Remainers would have to shut up for 30 years, and we would go into the darkness, united. As it were.
I doubt it. It would just become "well that wasn't the real referendum either, let's have another one, just in case".
Anyway, as I pointed out earlier today. No Tory PM could ever propose another referendum. It would be the end of our party.
I think "we said Leave, we meant it" would be very potent. British electorates really don't like a bad loser.
Ultra-Remainers fail to see this as they've convinced themselves their case has already been proven, which it hasn't and won't be.
Plus the £350mn/week would be even more correct (increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment)
Or maybe it would be even less accurate when they double our rebate in my preferred hypothetical?
Edit: as reward.
Chance of that happening: 0.
The chances of your preferred hypothetical seemed quite low as well, although there are advantages to the EU letting the UK go if we ask to stay having made a mess of trying to leave it works for them as well, there are many reasons for them to want us to stay.
If we tried to reverse course it would be silly for the EU to then push to make us leave, there have been mentions from various Europeans about Britain changing its mind and staying on the same terms.
What's my preferred hypothetical?
'increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment'
Ah, I wouldn’t say it was preferred. The former will definitely happen though, inflation takes care of that.
I don't think they would for another referendum we had before we left anyway, rejoining if we did leave could be a different story.
@Tykejohnno That's tough to deal with, I'm hoping for the best for you and your Mum.
The UK rebate is not treaty based. It's a component of the septennial MFF and requires unanimity. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide whether such unanimity would be forthcoming.
Forgive my ignorance but is the unanimity required to keep it (renew it so to speak) or drop it?
i think you're right and Leave would probably win referendum 2.0
At least then the Remainers would have to shut up for 30 years, and we would go into the darkness, united. As it were.
I doubt it. It would just become "well that wasn't the real referendum either, let's have another one, just in case".
Anyway, as I pointed out earlier today. No Tory PM could ever propose another referendum. It would be the end of our party.
Plus the £350mn/week would be even more correct (increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment)
Or maybe it would be even less accurate when they double our rebate in my preferred hypothetical?
Edit: as reward.
Chance of that happening: 0.
What's my preferred hypothetical?
'increases in budget contribution and the end of the rebate as punishment'
Ah, I wouldn’t say it was preferred. The former will definitely happen though, inflation takes care of that.
I don't think they would for another referendum we had before we left anyway, rejoining if we did leave could be a different story.
@Tykejohnno That's tough to deal with, I'm hoping for the best for you and your Mum.
The UK rebate is not treaty based. It's a component of the septennial MFF and requires unanimity. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide whether such unanimity would be forthcoming.
Forgive my ignorance but is the unanimity required to keep it (renew it so to speak) or drop it?
I assume it follows the EU's will.
It's required to keep it. People often think it's some kind of treaty opt out (as the UK and Denmark have for the Euro) negotiated by the blessed Margaret, but 'tis not.
There are all kinds of rebates and abatements in the MFF. Brexit gives the EU the opportunity to get rid of the lot, and they've indicated that this is their intention.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
It was pointed out to me on Twitter that enough Leavers would think "fuck this, our vote doesn't count" that there is no way Remain (or whatever) would get 17.4m votes. And I think this is true. Remain 2.0 wouldn't get anywhere near. So you'd have the largest mandate in UK democratic history, overridden by a very dodgy second vote, which gets far fewer votes???
Much as I would like parliament to hand this squawling malformed baby - of Brexit - back to the people. It isn't going to happen. Indeed, it must not.
If I may coin a phrase: Brexit means: Brexit.
I think it depends how it's put. I can see though that if it looked like one side was well ahead, there might be a lower overall turnout. But the idea the Leavers will push for a boycott if they fear losing is laughably undemocratic.
In any event, we didn't say Blair couldn't be PM in 1997 because he got fewer votes than Major had in 1992. Each vote has to stand on its own.
Oh, there is. They could grant the UK a CETA+ trade deal, with a special status for NI.
But you don't seem to take the implications of that special status seriously. It would mean NI in the single market and customs union because CETA+ cannot deliver frictionless trade.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
It was pointed out to me on Twitter that enough Leavers would think "fuck this, our vote doesn't count" that there is no way Remain (or whatever) would get 17.4m votes. And I think this is true. Remain 2.0 wouldn't get anywhere near. So you'd have the largest mandate in UK democratic history, overridden by a very dodgy second vote, which gets far fewer votes???
Oh, there is. They could grant the UK a CETA+ trade deal, with a special status for NI.
But you don't seem to take the implications of that special status seriously. It would mean NI in the single market and customs union because CETA+ cannot deliver frictionless trade.
Unacceptable politically.
And, unacceptable to Ireland. Because most of their exports come here.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
It was pointed out to me on Twitter that enough Leavers would think "fuck this, our vote doesn't count" that there is no way Remain (or whatever) would get 17.4m votes. And I think this is true. Remain 2.0 wouldn't get anywhere near. So you'd have the largest mandate in UK democratic history, overridden by a very dodgy second vote, which gets far fewer votes???
Why don’t we hold it and see ?
We won't and we can't. for the reasons I cite. They are inarguable (unless the polls swing 70/30 or more in favour of a revote, which I severely doubt)
It's a fuck up, for sure.
“There is no way Remain... would get 17.4m votes...” Rather than take your word for it, I’d rather accept the challenge.
Oh, there is. They could grant the UK a CETA+ trade deal, with a special status for NI.
But you don't seem to take the implications of that special status seriously. It would mean NI in the single market and customs union because CETA+ cannot deliver frictionless trade.
Unacceptable politically.
And, unacceptable to Ireland. Because most of their exports come here.
That's no longer true, unless you're including transhipments.
Oh, there is. They could grant the UK a CETA+ trade deal, with a special status for NI.
But you don't seem to take the implications of that special status seriously. It would mean NI in the single market and customs union because CETA+ cannot deliver frictionless trade.
Unacceptable politically.
And, unacceptable to Ireland. Because most of their exports come here.
That's no longer true, unless you're including transhipments.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
It was pointed out to me on Twitter that enough Leavers would think "fuck this, our vote doesn't count" that there is no way Remain (or whatever) would get 17.4m votes. And I think this is true. Remain 2.0 wouldn't get anywhere near. So you'd have the largest mandate in UK democratic history, overridden by a very dodgy second vote, which gets far fewer votes???
Why don’t we hold it and see ?
We won't and we can't. for the reasons I cite. They are inarguable (unless the polls swing 70/30 or more in favour of a revote, which I severely doubt)
It's a fuck up, for sure.
“There is no way Remain... would get 17.4m votes...” Rather than take your word for it, I’d rather accept the challenge.
No conservative government would last long enough to implement it.
There will be no further referendum; a general election would have to come first.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
It was pointed out to me on Twitter that enough Leavers would think "fuck this, our vote doesn't count" that there is no way Remain (or whatever) would get 17.4m votes. And I think this is true. Remain 2.0 wouldn't get anywhere near. So you'd have the largest mandate in UK democratic history, overridden by a very dodgy second vote, which gets far fewer votes???
Why don’t we hold it and see ?
We won't and we can't. for the reasons I cite. They are inarguable (unless the polls swing 70/30 or more in favour of a revote, which I severely doubt)
It's a fuck up, for sure.
“There is no way Remain... would get 17.4m votes...” Rather than take your word for it, I’d rather accept the challenge.
No conservative government would last long enough to implement it.
There will be no further referendum; a general election would have to come first.
What if the reason for holding the referendum is primarily to avoid a General Election and to stymie Corbyn?
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
It was pointed out to me on Twitter that enough Leavers would think "fuck this, our vote doesn't count" that there is no way Remain (or whatever) would get 17.4m votes. And I think this is true. Remain 2.0 wouldn't get anywhere near. So you'd have the largest mandate in UK democratic history, overridden by a very dodgy second vote, which gets far fewer votes???
Why don’t we hold it and see ?
We won't and we can't. for the reasons I cite. They are inarguable (unless the polls swing 70/30 or more in favour of a revote, which I severely doubt)
It's a fuck up, for sure.
“There is no way Remain... would get 17.4m votes...” Rather than take your word for it, I’d rather accept the challenge.
No conservative government would last long enough to implement it.
There will be no further referendum; a general election would have to come first.
Do you think enough ERGers would actually vote NC in their own party’s government if it came to it? Otherwise there probably aren’t the votes in the Commons to block it.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
It was pointed out to me on Twitter that enough Leavers would think "fuck this, our vote doesn't count" that there is no way Remain (or whatever) would get 17.4m votes. And I think this is true. Remain 2.0 wouldn't get anywhere near. So you'd have the largest mandate in UK democratic history, overridden by a very dodgy second vote, which gets far fewer votes???
Why don’t we hold it and see ?
We won't and we can't. for the reasons I cite. They are inarguable (unless the polls swing 70/30 or more in favour of a revote, which I severely doubt)
It's a fuck up, for sure.
“There is no way Remain... would get 17.4m votes...” Rather than take your word for it, I’d rather accept the challenge.
No conservative government would last long enough to implement it.
There will be no further referendum; a general election would have to come first.
What if the reason for holding the referendum is primarily to avoid a General Election and to stymie Corbyn?
You do not understand the Tory party.
May would be out in 5 minutes if she suggested it. To be replaced by *anyone else who wouldn’t do that*
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
It was pointed out to me on Twitter that enough Leavers would think "fuck this, our vote doesn't count" that there is no way Remain (or whatever) would get 17.4m votes. And I think this is true. Remain 2.0 wouldn't get anywhere near. So you'd have the largest mandate in UK democratic history, overridden by a very dodgy second vote, which gets far fewer votes???
Why don’t we hold it and see ?
We won't and we can't. for the reasons I cite. They are inarguable (unless the polls swing 70/30 or more in favour of a revote, which I severely doubt)
It's a fuck up, for sure.
“There is no way Remain... would get 17.4m votes...” Rather than take your word for it, I’d rather accept the challenge.
No conservative government would last long enough to implement it.
There will be no further referendum; a general election would have to come first.
Do you think enough ERGers would actually vote NC in their own party’s government if it came to it? Otherwise there probably aren’t the votes in the Commons to block it.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
It was pointed out to me on Twitter that enough Leavers would think "fuck this, our vote doesn't count" that there is no way Remain (or whatever) would get 17.4m votes. And I think this is true. Remain 2.0 wouldn't get anywhere near. So you'd have the largest mandate in UK democratic history, overridden by a very dodgy second vote, which gets far fewer votes???
Why don’t we hold it and see ?
We won't and we can't. for the reasons I cite. They are inarguable (unless the polls swing 70/30 or more in favour of a revote, which I severely doubt)
It's a fuck up, for sure.
“There is no way Remain... get 17.4m votes...” Rather than take your word for it, I’d rather accept the challenge.
And if they don't? What if Remain wins with just 12m? What then? We must not pursue this perversion of our democracy.
I have sadly concluded that we must quit the EU, WHATEVER the pain, and then cope with what happens next. We will endure. We are an old and great nation, with much resilience.
And in the long run (and this is why I voted Brexit, for my daughters, not me) we are definitely better off OUT this vile, undemocratic monstrosity, with its drunken unelected presidents and its conniving, Teutonic cardinals. That has been proven, for sure, over recent months.
Mrs T would probably have labelled that attitude ‘frit’.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
It was pointed out to me on Twitter that enough Leavers would think "fuck this, our vote doesn't count" that there is no way Remain (or whatever) would get 17.4m votes. And I think this is true. Remain 2.0 wouldn't get anywhere near. So you'd have the largest mandate in UK democratic history, overridden by a very dodgy second vote, which gets far fewer votes???
Why don’t we hold it and see ?
We won't and we can't. for the reasons I cite. They are inarguable (unless the polls swing 70/30 or more in favour of a revote, which I severely doubt)
It's a fuck up, for sure.
“There is no way Remain... would get 17.4m votes...” Rather than take your word for it, I’d rather accept the challenge.
No conservative government would last long enough to implement it.
There will be no further referendum; a general election would have to come first.
Do you think enough ERGers would actually vote NC in their own party’s government if it came to it? Otherwise there probably aren’t the votes in the Commons to block it.
VofNC in her as Tory leader.
If polls showed support for a second referendum and the cabinet were behind it, any attempt to VoNC her would be defeated and would be pretty futile.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
It was pointed out to me on Twitter that enough Leavers would think "fuck this, our vote doesn't count" that there is no way Remain (or whatever) would get 17.4m votes. And I think this is true. Remain 2.0 wouldn't get anywhere near. So you'd have the largest mandate in UK democratic history, overridden by a very dodgy second vote, which gets far fewer votes???
Why don’t we hold it and see ?
We won't and we can't. for the reasons I cite. They are inarguable (unless the polls swing 70/30 or more in favour of a revote, which I severely doubt)
It's a fuck up, for sure.
“There is no way Remain... would get 17.4m votes...” Rather than take your word for it, I’d rather accept the challenge.
No conservative government would last long enough to implement it.
There will be no further referendum; a general election would have to come first.
It’s not impossible to imagine a majority in parliament for a second referendum occurring before a consensus to set aside the FTPA.
A lot more popular than Kate Hoey, although that is a bar nobody should really fail to clear. Be happy to see both of them and Woodcock gone. Wish them all the best of luck outside of politics though.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
It was pointed out to me on Twitter that enough Leavers would think "fuck this, our vote doesn't count" that there is no way Remain (or whatever) would get 17.4m votes. And I think this is true. Remain 2.0 wouldn't get anywhere near. So you'd have the largest mandate in UK democratic history, overridden by a very dodgy second vote, which gets far fewer votes???
Why don’t we hold it and see ?
We won't and we can't. for the reasons I cite. They are inarguable (unless the polls swing 70/30 or more in favour of a revote, which I severely doubt)
It's a fuck up, for sure.
“There is no way Remain... would get 17.4m votes...” Rather than take your word for it, I’d rather accept the challenge.
No conservative government would last long enough to implement it.
There will be no further referendum; a general election would have to come first.
It’s not impossible to imagine a majority in parliament for a second referendum occurring before a consensus to set aside the FTPA.
She wouldn’t be leader long enough to do anything if a second referendum was proposed.
Neither leaver nor remainer Tory MPs want a second referendum, apart from a few on the fringes.
A lot more popular than Kate Hoey, although that is a bar nobody should really fail to clear. Be happy to see both of them and Woodcock gone. Wish them all the best of luck outside of politics though.
Edit: O'Mara as well!
Field is Labour through and through.
And has been far more loyal to the Labour leadership than the current leader has.
The concept you are looking for is "voluntary patient", also known as an "informal patient". A voluntary patient is someone having in-patient treatment in a psychiatric hospital of their own free will.
However, good luck with getting that without the following. 1 Some SERIOUSLY fucked up behaviour. 2 A well-informed and eloquent advocate from outwith the system.
As Foxy said, you are far more likely to be treated as an outpatient for cost reasons. If you fulfil condition 1, you can be sectioned anyway. It is easy for conditions such as anorexia, as it relies on a numerical figure (your BMI). Fall below, and you will be admitted. For psychoses...well it would sadly be a lottery based on budget, bed availibility and the mood and judgment of the psychiartrist at the time you see them. You will be helped if the fear of the cost of litigation outweighs the strain on the budget. See point 2.
She wouldn’t be leader long enough to do anything if a second referendum was proposed.
Neither leaver nor remainer Tory MPs want a second referendum, apart from a few on the fringes.
The party base would absolutely explode, too.
Think it through.
She'd be leader for at least 24 hours after she proposed it, agreed? In that time, the political reaction to the idea of a second referendum could be judged. If people agree with her, it would be political suicide for the party to try to remove her to prevent it from happening.
A lot more popular than Kate Hoey, although that is a bar nobody should really fail to clear. Be happy to see both of them and Woodcock gone. Wish them all the best of luck outside of politics though.
Edit: O'Mara as well!
You'd like 100% of Labour MPs to have the same view on Brexit? No room for the slightest dissent on the subject.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
Why don’t we hold it and see ?
We won't and we can't. for the reasons I cite. They are inarguable (unless the polls swing 70/30 or more in favour of a revote, which I severely doubt)
It's a fuck up, for sure.
“There is no way Remain... would get 17.4m votes...” Rather than take your word for it, I’d rather accept the challenge.
It’s not impossible to imagine a majority in parliament for a second referendum occurring before a consensus to set aside the FTPA.
My last post before I hit the sack. I know there's been a lot of invective hurled about by both sides, but I've been very cheered by the way in which the UK has dealt with Brexit, at least internally. We've had a variety of legal challenges, the Lords have held the government's feet to the fire, a reasonable amount of parliamentary time and the demonstrations have been peaceful.
I don't know if we're going to have a second referendum; it seems unlikely, or at least on the terms that some are suggesting.
That would require the EU27 to agree, ahead of time, that the UK could actually revoke article 50 and continue membership. I know that some (e.g. Tusk) have said that would be allowed, but these are individual comments, rather than a broad European consensus.
Given the timescales, the obvious harbinger for a second referendum would be HMG asking for an extension of the A50 deadline. So, if you're mad keen for Euref 2 : The Elite Strike Back, then that's your best bet.
She wouldn’t be leader long enough to do anything if a second referendum was proposed.
Neither leaver nor remainer Tory MPs want a second referendum, apart from a few on the fringes.
The party base would absolutely explode, too.
Think it through.
She'd be leader for at least 24 hours after she proposed it, agreed? In that time, the political reaction to the idea of a second referendum could be judged. If people agree with her, it would be political suicide for the party to try to remove her to prevent it from happening.
Not agreed, actually.
Tory MPs would be apoplectic. Absolutely apoplectic.
We would be out of power for decades if we even hinted at reneging on Brexit.
She wouldn’t be leader long enough to do anything if a second referendum was proposed.
Neither leaver nor remainer Tory MPs want a second referendum, apart from a few on the fringes.
The party base would absolutely explode, too.
Think it through.
She'd be leader for at least 24 hours after she proposed it, agreed? In that time, the political reaction to the idea of a second referendum could be judged. If people agree with her, it would be political suicide for the party to try to remove her to prevent it from happening.
Not agreed, actually.
Tory MPs would be apoplectic. Absolutely apoplectic.
We would be out of power for decades if we even hinted at reneging on Brexit.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
I can't see how it would be that clear cut. And since only 37.5% of the electorate voted to leave, if a similar or larger number voted to remain in ref2, it would be undeniably valid.
It was pointed out to me on Twitter that enough Leavers would think "fuck this, our vote doesn't count" that there is no way Remain (or whatever) would get 17.4m votes. And I think this is true. Remain 2.0 wouldn't get anywhere near. So you'd have the largest mandate in UK democratic history, overridden by a very dodgy second vote, which gets far fewer votes???
Why don’t we hold it and see ?
We won't and we can't. for the reasons I cite. They are inarguable (unless the polls swing 70/30 or more in favour of a revote, which I severely doubt)
It's a fuck up, for sure.
“There is no way Remain... would get 17.4m votes...” Rather than take your word for it, I’d rather accept the challenge.
No conservative government would last long enough to implement it.
There will be no further referendum; a general election would have to come first.
It’s not impossible to imagine a majority in parliament for a second referendum occurring before a consensus to set aside the FTPA.
She wouldn’t be leader long enough to do anything if a second referendum was proposed.
Neither leaver nor remainer Tory MPs want a second referendum, apart from a few on the fringes.
A lot more popular than Kate Hoey, although that is a bar nobody should really fail to clear. Be happy to see both of them and Woodcock gone. Wish them all the best of luck outside of politics though.
You may be happy that there is apparently a coordinated move in place to deselect Labour MPs who rebel over Brexit. You can forget about the 24% of Leave voters who are still prepared to vote Labour though, according to the latest YouGov, including myself. If you can't remain a Labour MP if you are in favour of Brexit, then surely the rest of us can't remain as a Labour voters either?
She wouldn’t be leader long enough to do anything if a second referendum was proposed.
Neither leaver nor remainer Tory MPs want a second referendum, apart from a few on the fringes.
The party base would absolutely explode, too.
Think it through.
She'd be leader for at least 24 hours after she proposed it, agreed? In that time, the political reaction to the idea of a second referendum could be judged. If people agree with her, it would be political suicide for the party to try to remove her to prevent it from happening.
Not agreed, actually.
Tory MPs would be apoplectic. Absolutely apoplectic.
We would be out of power for decades if we even hinted at reneging on Brexit.
It would kill the Party. Simple as that.
It would merely be the end of an era, and complete the ERG-ectomy that Cameron was hoping to perform in 2016.
I reckon 55/45 for Remain, mostly by better turnout from the young, and worse turnout by bored CDEs.
I reckon 75:25 for Remain, because the Leavers will quite properly boycott a second referendum. And then where will you be? No mandate.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That was pointed out to me today, and it rather skittled me. What if Leavers simply boycott the second referendum? It means a 2nd vote will 1. be catastrophic for our democracy and 2.the vote is morally invalid, whatever the result. So the damage will be done for no benefit.
It's a real threat. And I am sure it will happen.
My sad, drunken conclusion is that we have to press on. Brexit, hard, soft or diamond, is what will happen. Oy vay.
Why don’t we hold it and see ?
We won't and we can't. for the reasons I cite. They are inarguable (unless the polls swing 70/30 or more in favour of a revote, which I severely doubt)
It's a fuck up, for sure.
“There is no way Remain... would get 17.4m votes...” Rather than take your word for it, I’d rather accept the challenge.
It’s not impossible to imagine a majority in parliament for a second referendum occurring before a consensus to set aside the FTPA.
My last post before I hit the sack. I know there's been a lot of invective hurled about by both sides, but I've been very cheered by the way in which the UK has dealt with Brexit, at least internally. We've had a variety of legal challenges, the Lords have held the government's feet to the fire, a reasonable amount of parliamentary time and the demonstrations have been peaceful.
I don't know if we're going to have a second referendum; it seems unlikely, or at least on the terms that some are suggesting.
That would require the EU27 to agree, ahead of time, that the UK could actually revoke article 50 and continue membership. I know that some (e.g. Tusk) have said that would be allowed, but these are individual comments, rather than a broad European consensus.
Given the timescales, the obvious harbinger for a second referendum would be HMG asking for an extension of the A50 deadline. So, if you're mad keen for Euref 2 : The Elite Strike Back, then that's your best bet.
She wouldn’t be leader long enough to do anything if a second referendum was proposed.
Neither leaver nor remainer Tory MPs want a second referendum, apart from a few on the fringes.
The party base would absolutely explode, too.
Think it through.
She'd be leader for at least 24 hours after she proposed it, agreed? In that time, the political reaction to the idea of a second referendum could be judged. If people agree with her, it would be political suicide for the party to try to remove her to prevent it from happening.
Not agreed, actually.
Tory MPs would be apoplectic. Absolutely apoplectic.
We would be out of power for decades if we even hinted at reneging on Brexit.
It would kill the Party. Simple as that.
It would merely be the end of an era, and complete the ERG-ectomy that Cameron was hoping to perform in 2016.
Ah yes, Cameron's plan to silence the eurosceptics has worked so well so far...
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
No deal would be more popular with the party than EEA/CU.
No deal would be more popular with the party than not brexiting.
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
You are coming across on matters Tory Party as I would if I lectured Mumsnet on breast-feeding.
A lot more popular than Kate Hoey, although that is a bar nobody should really fail to clear. Be happy to see both of them and Woodcock gone. Wish them all the best of luck outside of politics though.
Edit: O'Mara as well!
You'd like 100% of Labour MPs to have the same view on Brexit? No room for the slightest dissent on the subject.
I think about 50% of those MPs I mentioned have a similar view on Brexit to me/Labour, or at least closer than Hoey and Fields is, for me personally it is about more than just Brexit and I'm guessing from the totals that is the case with their CLPs as well.
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
You are coming across on matters Tory Party as I would if I lectured Mumsnet on breast-feeding.
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
Yes, destroying the Tory party is looking like the probable outcome of:
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
No deal would be more popular with the party than EEA/CU.
No deal would be more popular with the party than not brexiting.
If you want to end up with a party where the only people who vote for it are its members, it might work...
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
No deal would be more popular with the party than EEA/CU.
No deal would be more popular with the party than not brexiting.
If you want to end up with a party where the only people who vote for it are its members, it might work...
Wasn't there a poll showing a surprising number of people were in favour of no deal?
A lot more popular than Kate Hoey, although that is a bar nobody should really fail to clear. Be happy to see both of them and Woodcock gone. Wish them all the best of luck outside of politics though.
You may be happy that there is apparently a coordinated move in place to deselect Labour MPs who rebel over Brexit. You can forget about the 24% of Leave voters who are still prepared to vote Labour though, according to the latest YouGov, including myself. If you can't remain a Labour MP if you are in favour of Brexit, then surely the rest of us can't remain as a Labour voters either?
O'Mara and Woodcock are pro EU or at least not really Brexitity.
Skinner is pro Brexit for example and I wouldn't want him to be deselected. Speaking for myself it is for many reasons, I imagine much the same with the CLPs considering how the votes went, that Hoey couldn't get a single vote is telling. I could see a situation given the right candidate where I would be happy for a more eurosceptic MP to replace the current one, say someone replacing Woodcock (if he hadn't gone already) as an example.
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
No deal would be more popular with the party than EEA/CU.
No deal would be more popular with the party than not brexiting.
If you want to end up with a party where the only people who vote for it are its members, it might work...
A lot more popular than Kate Hoey, although that is a bar nobody should really fail to clear. Be happy to see both of them and Woodcock gone. Wish them all the best of luck outside of politics though.
You may be happy that there is apparently a coordinated move in place to deselect Labour MPs who rebel over Brexit. You can forget about the 24% of Leave voters who are still prepared to vote Labour though, according to the latest YouGov, including myself. If you can't remain a Labour MP if you are in favour of Brexit, then surely the rest of us can't remain as a Labour voters either?
O'Mara and Woodcock are pro EU or at least not really Brexitity.
Skinner is pro Brexit for example and I wouldn't want him to be deselected. Speaking for myself it is for many reasons, I imagine much the same with the CLPs considering how the votes went, that Hoey couldn't get a single vote is telling. I could see a situation given the right candidate where I would be happy for a more eurosceptic MP to replace the current one, say someone replacing Woodcock (if he hadn't gone already) as an example.
The irony of the hard left demanding loyalty to the leadership is breathtaking.
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
Yes, destroying the Tory party is looking like the probable outcome of:
No Deal Brexit
Vassal State Brexit
A50 Withdrawal
#peoplesvote
So it is not all doom and gloom.
As someone who didn't lift a finger to help the leave campaign and in fact actively sabotaged its chances by voting remain I do feel a little guilty about reaping the potential future rewards...
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
No deal would be more popular with the party than EEA/CU.
No deal would be more popular with the party than not brexiting.
If you want to end up with a party where the only people who vote for it are its members, it might work...
Most people are not EU fanatics.
Most people are sceptical about the EU.
Many people actively dislike it.
No reason for anyone to get apoplectic about another referendum then... It should be no more controversial than having a referendum on abolishing British Summer Time.
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
No deal would be more popular with the party than EEA/CU.
No deal would be more popular with the party than not brexiting.
If you want to end up with a party where the only people who vote for it are its members, it might work...
Most people are not EU fanatics.
Most people are sceptical about the EU.
Many people actively dislike it.
No reason for anyone to get apoplectic about another referendum then... It should be no more controversial than having a referendum on abolishing British Summer Time.
Having one reintroducing BST after just having abolished it would be another matter.
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
No deal would be more popular with the party than EEA/CU.
No deal would be more popular with the party than not brexiting.
If you want to end up with a party where the only people who vote for it are its members, it might work...
Most people are not EU fanatics.
Most people are sceptical about the EU.
Many people actively dislike it.
No reason for anyone to get apoplectic about another referendum then... It should be no more controversial than having a referendum on abolishing British Summer Time.
Messages matter.
The Tory party questioning the electorate on matters European destroys their brand.
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
No deal would be more popular with the party than EEA/CU.
No deal would be more popular with the party than not brexiting.
If you want to end up with a party where the only people who vote for it are its members, it might work...
Most people are not EU fanatics.
Most people are sceptical about the EU.
Many people actively dislike it.
No reason for anyone to get apoplectic about another referendum then... It should be no more controversial than having a referendum on abolishing British Summer Time.
Messages matter.
The Tory party questioning the electorate on matters European destroys their brand.
It would be a 'Ratner moment'.
The Ratner moment was Cameron's 2016 campaign: "Vote Remain - We think it's crap too."
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
No deal would be more popular with the party than EEA/CU.
No deal would be more popular with the party than not brexiting.
If you want to end up with a party where the only people who vote for it are its members, it might work...
Most people are not EU fanatics.
Most people are sceptical about the EU.
Many people actively dislike it.
No reason for anyone to get apoplectic about another referendum then... It should be no more controversial than having a referendum on abolishing British Summer Time.
I'm starting to come to the conclusion that a second referendum may actually be desirable. Not, of course, that a sound thrashing would give remainers pause for thought, the first one certainly didn't - but it would certainly enable us leavers to enjoy a two-world-wars-and-one-world-cup level of gloating for a decade or more...
As much as william might dream up fantasy solutions to destroy a party that he doesn't understand, the current political climate with:
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal - Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the - the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
What would destroy the party is to impose No Deal against the will of the people.
No deal would be more popular with the party than EEA/CU.
No deal would be more popular with the party than not brexiting.
If you want to end up with a party where the only people who vote for it are its members, it might work...
Most people are not EU fanatics.
Most people are sceptical about the EU.
Many people actively dislike it.
No reason for anyone to get apoplectic about another referendum then... It should be no more controversial than having a referendum on abolishing British Summer Time.
I'm starting to come to the conclusion that a second referendum may actually be desirable. Not, of course, that a sound thrashing would give remainers pause for thought, the first one certainly didn't - but it would certainly enable us leavers to enjoy a two-world-wars-and-one-world-cup level of gloating for a decade or more...
I'm settling for the satisfaction that will come from SeanT winning his bet with william.
A lot more popular than Kate Hoey, although that is a bar nobody should really fail to clear. Be happy to see both of them and Woodcock gone. Wish them all the best of luck outside of politics though.
You may be happy that there is apparently a coordinated move in place to deselect Labour MPs who rebel over Brexit. You can forget about the 24% of Leave voters who are still prepared to vote Labour though, according to the latest YouGov, including myself. If you can't remain a Labour MP if you are in favour of Brexit, then surely the rest of us can't remain as a Labour voters either?
O'Mara and Woodcock are pro EU or at least not really Brexitity.
Skinner is pro Brexit for example and I wouldn't want him to be deselected. Speaking for myself it is for many reasons, I imagine much the same with the CLPs considering how the votes went, that Hoey couldn't get a single vote is telling. I could see a situation given the right candidate where I would be happy for a more eurosceptic MP to replace the current one, say someone replacing Woodcock (if he hadn't gone already) as an example.
The irony of the hard left demanding loyalty to the leadership is breathtaking.
But carry on chum, it helps us Blues.
I can't see replacing Hoey as being anything but a bonus for the vote in that constituency. Frank Field has a safe seat in Liverpool, if we had Satan as our candidate we would probably win it at a canter. Woodcock, who left anyway would have probably had a worse result than Frank Field in his CLP and there were actually people (or so I heard) who wanted a Labour government threatening to vote for other parties because they wouldn't vote for him. Not sure I even need to make the case for O' Mara.
Maybe Woodcock might help you, but equally it might help us, the rest I can't really see it at all.
A lot more popular than Kate Hoey, although that is a bar nobody should really fail to clear. Be happy to see both of them and Woodcock gone. Wish them all the best of luck outside of politics though.
You may be happy that there is apparently a coordinated move in place to deselect Labour MPs who rebel over Brexit. You can forget about the 24% of Leave voters who are still prepared to vote Labour though, according to the latest YouGov, including myself. If you can't remain a Labour MP if you are in favour of Brexit, then surely the rest of us can't remain as a Labour voters either?
O'Mara and Woodcock are pro EU or at least not really Brexitity.
Skinner is pro Brexit for example and I wouldn't want him to be deselected. Speaking for myself it is for many reasons, I imagine much the same with the CLPs considering how the votes went, that Hoey couldn't get a single vote is telling. I could see a situation given the right candidate where I would be happy for a more eurosceptic MP to replace the current one, say someone replacing Woodcock (if he hadn't gone already) as an example.
The irony of the hard left demanding loyalty to the leadership is breathtaking.
But carry on chum, it helps us Blues.
I can't see replacing Hoey as being anything but a bonus for the vote in that constituency. Frank Field has a safe seat in Liverpool, if we had Satan as our candidate we would probably win it at a canter. Woodcock, who left anyway would have probably had a worse result than Frank Field in his CLP and there were actually people (or so I heard) who wanted a Labour government threatening to vote for other parties because they wouldn't vote for him. Not sure I even need to make the case for O' Mara.
Maybe Woodcock might help you, but equally it might help us, the rest I can't really see it at all.
See below.
Messages matter.
A full-blown hard left takeover of the party (rather than just the leadership) wouldn't endear Labour to the public.
Comments
Nope. Invisible, just cloudy, and its nearly finished
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/27/ken-livingstone-i-never-said-hitler-was-a-zionist?CMP=share_btn_tw
I'm sure he had the best of intentions when he picked up his quill.
Git of a thing.
If we Leave, EVERYTHING that goes wrong in Britain will be the fault of Brexit.
It is written.
(Frankly, I can't see why the EU would want us back anyway, because at some point the pressure to leave will build up again, fuelled by an already huge body of the viciously infuriated.)
Though we'd all be better off if Ken would just STFU.
*Essex borderlands area
Oh look, the ‘experts’ were all wrong about Trump. Wonder if there is any chance they could be wrong about Brexit?
I don't think they would for another referendum we had before we left anyway, rejoining if we did leave could be a different story.
@Tykejohnno That's tough to deal with, I'm hoping for the best for you and your Mum.
The Leavers will simply say that since the establishment broke their promise last time, there is no point voting again.
That would do it. Failing that, I'd be happy with Chequers compromise. Or even a looser associate membership status for the UK of the EU.
I honestly can't say for sure and TBH I don't even think a second referendum will happen anyway so I really am arguing this as a hypothetical rather than deep belief but I really don't think you can assume a second referendum would be run with the rebate removed, I'm not sure it is even more likely than not (assuming we get to a 2nd ref)
(*Though I've not read any of yours!
https://order-order.com/2018/07/27/labour-suspends-yet-another-councillor-anti-semitism/
What a moral cesspit Labour members are swimming in.
I assume it follows the EU's will.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/labour-members-move-to-suspend-brexiteer-mp-frank-field-for-backing-tories-birkenhead-labour-party_uk_5b59b0ebe4b0de86f493f2e3
https://twitter.com/DavidDavisMP/status/695208361625796608
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-deal-eu-liam-fox-boris-johnson-a7851656.html
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/07/27/reserve-parachute-secret-brexit-plan-drawn-ministers-case-chequers/
I’m guessing John is saying it’s a component of the budget that must be agreed every seven years via unanimity.
There are all kinds of rebates and abatements in the MFF. Brexit gives the EU the opportunity to get rid of the lot, and they've indicated that this is their intention.
In any event, we didn't say Blair couldn't be PM in 1997 because he got fewer votes than Major had in 1992. Each vote has to stand on its own.
And, unacceptable to Ireland. Because most of their exports come here.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/07/michael-cohen-trump-tower-meeting/566225/
(Which I’ll grant isn’t the most stunning revelation.)
Rather than take your word for it, I’d rather accept the challenge.
There will be no further referendum; a general election would have to come first.
May would be out in 5 minutes if she suggested it. To be replaced by *anyone else who wouldn’t do that*
https://twitter.com/GeorgeAylett/status/1022944100084056069
A lot more popular than Kate Hoey, although that is a bar nobody should really fail to clear. Be happy to see both of them and Woodcock gone. Wish them all the best of luck outside of politics though.
Edit: O'Mara as well!
Neither leaver nor remainer Tory MPs want a second referendum, apart from a few on the fringes.
The party base would absolutely explode, too.
And has been far more loyal to the Labour leadership than the current leader has.
1 Some SERIOUSLY fucked up behaviour.
2 A well-informed and eloquent advocate from outwith the system.
As Foxy said, you are far more likely to be treated as an outpatient for cost reasons. If you fulfil condition 1, you can be sectioned anyway.
It is easy for conditions such as anorexia, as it relies on a numerical figure (your BMI). Fall below, and you will be admitted.
For psychoses...well it would sadly be a lottery based on budget, bed availibility and the mood and judgment of the psychiartrist at the time you see them.
You will be helped if the fear of the cost of litigation outweighs the strain on the budget. See point 2.
A Labour MP has said she "will be robustly defending" herself against allegations she lied about who was behind the wheel of a speeding car."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-44981410
She'd be leader for at least 24 hours after she proposed it, agreed? In that time, the political reaction to the idea of a second referendum could be judged. If people agree with her, it would be political suicide for the party to try to remove her to prevent it from happening.
I don't know if we're going to have a second referendum; it seems unlikely, or at least on the terms that some are suggesting.
That would require the EU27 to agree, ahead of time, that the UK could actually revoke article 50 and continue membership. I know that some (e.g. Tusk) have said that would be allowed, but these are individual comments, rather than a broad European consensus.
Given the timescales, the obvious harbinger for a second referendum would be HMG asking for an extension of the A50 deadline. So, if you're mad keen for Euref 2 : The Elite Strike Back, then that's your best bet.
Tory MPs would be apoplectic. Absolutely apoplectic.
We would be out of power for decades if we even hinted at reneging on Brexit.
You can forget about the 24% of Leave voters who are still prepared to vote Labour though, according to the latest YouGov, including myself.
If you can't remain a Labour MP if you are in favour of Brexit, then surely the rest of us can't remain as a Labour voters either?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44967650
- HMG preparing more and more for no deal
- Labour leaning more and more remain, and deselecting long-standing MPs who are more in touch with a good proportion of their base than the
- the EU rejecting the Chequers deal.
I'd be more bullish about a GE with a Leaver coupon agreement.
Leave would win a decent majority.
No deal would be more popular with the party than not brexiting.
No Deal Brexit
Vassal State Brexit
A50 Withdrawal
#peoplesvote
So it is not all doom and gloom.
Skinner is pro Brexit for example and I wouldn't want him to be deselected. Speaking for myself it is for many reasons, I imagine much the same with the CLPs considering how the votes went, that Hoey couldn't get a single vote is telling. I could see a situation given the right candidate where I would be happy for a more eurosceptic MP to replace the current one, say someone replacing Woodcock (if he hadn't gone already) as an example.
Most people are sceptical about the EU.
Many people actively dislike it.
But carry on chum, it helps us Blues.
The Tory party questioning the electorate on matters European destroys their brand.
It would be a 'Ratner moment'.
Maybe Woodcock might help you, but equally it might help us, the rest I can't really see it at all.
Messages matter.
A full-blown hard left takeover of the party (rather than just the leadership) wouldn't endear Labour to the public.