If we finally leave, then I expect a serious rejoin campaign to start within months.
This could cause a faultline down the centre of Labour which will have a massive impact on next leader contest.
Do you envisage that being an ideologically led campaign, or a more pragmatic - look how badly it's going - one?
I'm sure if Brexit goes badly (beyond initial troubles) that you're right in that such a movement will emerge. If it's ideological (i.e. if Brexit isn't a big disaster) then I can't see that at first it'll be too problematic for either main party. I can see (say) Soubry campaigning from day one, but not too many on her side initially.
It may be that the LDs have more initial trouble, although longer term they could be a big beneficiary.
Likely that LDs would stick with being strongly pro EU and it would be picked up by bigger parties, say Labour, if it proved to be successful and started bringing them in votes. Unless Brexit is a huge and sustained disaster I can't see a big party campaigning to go straight back in if we come out.
What happened to Jess Phillips? Why no mention of her in the leadership stakes? She has that rare quality for a Labour MP of seeming to be a real human being with a sense of humour
Probably too openly anti left faction of the party or has been in the past. I'm slowly warming to her (from a very cold place) but she has been quite combative in the recent party civil war and on a side which contained less of the members.
She left the party while Blair was leader. Seems a good position.
That would score her some brownie points but more recent actions would have put quite a few on the left off her, those in a similar place but less vocal against the leadership are probably in a better place in the short term. Like I said earlier I am slowly warming to her but in a leadership election I would probably hold some of the more recent stuff against her and would prefer (in a straight choice) someone similar without that baggage. In the longer term that would fade.
I don't know how representative that view is but I can imagine a fair few holding it.
It was war gamed and the stumbling block to calling the GE was MPs, Labour and ERG who don’t feel the bad deal was sufficiently taken back to EU for renegotiation.
Today Saturday 2nd, we are right in middle of that stumbling block to calling the GE being removed. That’s why she chose the route. EU caves, done deal. EU don’t renegotiate then the obstacle to calling it has been removed.
It mighty be Thursday 28th March, or week or two later.
I still think EU and Dublin are melting sufficiently and will blink.
I basically agree - apart from the EU blinking. I'm pretty sure they won't. I think she'll get cosmetics only. The point of current activity is simply to keep the deal alive. It needs to be still there, at the death, in order to prevail.
Then if it goes through, for want of feasible alternatives and with the minds of the ERG and the DUP focused by the threat of a GE, fine. And I think it probably will.
If it doesn't, TM calls that election. Late March, early April, as you say.
Yes. We have it.
PS: Who wins the election if it happens? - I desperately hope Labour but my device says the Cons with an overall majority of 50.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
Which is why I feel a GE would be the very last option tried. All the polling evidence suggests it would be a coin toss. And why gamble that when you have 3 years to go? Oh wait...
I wonder what proportion of their income is from the UK?
Have they never heard of Ratner?
I don't think that they're saying their product is shit. In fact they're marketing model of publicity seeking wind ups seems remarkably successful.
'I'll take Paddy's mediocre odds cos I want to stick one to them & take money off them' seems not a bad strategy.
Ratner took the piss out of the people who were his consumers. Paddy Power risks the same with its UK punters, for a cheap political gag.
But as you allude, they seem to be of the school of "all publicity is good publicity." I wonder if Gerald Ratner is still happy to be an alumni of that school?
I think it’s slightly different
Paddy Power is taking the piss out of its customers. Ratner implied they were idiots (how do you think we can make a crystal decanter for less than a fiver - because it’s shit).
People came to the conclusion that only an idiot would buy from him and so they didn’t want to be seen in his shops
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
In my constituency it was a landslide on postal votes (yes you can tally them as they are counted). If the election was only votes counted on Election Day we would have lost that seat. We held it by a couple of thousand. It was grim though, very grim. In the space of a fortnight we went from expecting to take all six of the comstituencies in our county to holding three.
I think once you concede you have to change the timetable to cope with reality the games up. Delay Brexit and it's like the latin for the plural of eggs. It's ova.
Interesting. Rees-Mogg has maintained till now that plummeting to WTO terms in a few weeks would be perfectly hunky dory. So why is he now endorsing this Heath Robinson Malthouse thing? Cold feet?
I dislike Paddy Power. They have that particular brand of jokey patronizing contempt for their punters that you see in hard drug dealers and in Donald Trump.
Pleased to report that I was banned by them a couple of years back. Badge of honour.
If we finally leave, then I expect a serious rejoin campaign to start within months.
This could cause a faultline down the centre of Labour which will have a massive impact on next leader contest.
Do you envisage that being an ideologically led campaign, or a more pragmatic - look how badly it's going - one?
I'm sure if Brexit goes badly (beyond initial troubles) that you're right in that such a movement will emerge. If it's ideological (i.e. if Brexit isn't a big disaster) then I can't see that at first it'll be too problematic for either main party. I can see (say) Soubry campaigning from day one, but not too many on her side initially.
It may be that the LDs have more initial trouble, although longer term they could be a big beneficiary.
Likely that LDs would stick with being strongly pro EU and it would be picked up by bigger parties, say Labour, if it proved to be successful and started bringing them in votes. Unless Brexit is a huge and sustained disaster I can't see a big party campaigning to go straight back in if we come out.
What happened to Jess Phillips? Why no mention of her in the leadership stakes? She has that rare quality for a Labour MP of seeming to be a real human being with a sense of humour
Probably too openly anti left faction of the party or has been in the past. I'm slowly warming to her (from a very cold place) but she has been quite combative in the recent party civil war and on a side which contained less of the members.
She left the party while Blair was leader. Seems a good position.
Momentum cranks hate her and want her deselected iirc.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
The evidence from my canvassing was that the Conservative vote was solid, and so it proved. What I had not appreciated was how strong the Labour vote was.
Polling suggested Labour's share had peaked at c.36%, a week before polling day. In the event, it kept growing.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
.
I have come across those comments in the Archives - having got as far as 1st June 2017 with one week of the campaign left. Ironical to read the dismissive comments on YouGov showing the Tory lead at just 3% whilst ICM had them 12% ahead.
I think once you concede you have to change the timetable to cope with reality the games up. Delay Brexit and it's like the latin for the plural of eggs. It's ova.
Interesting. Rees-Mogg has maintained till now that plummeting to WTO terms in a few weeks would be perfectly hunky dory. So why is he now endorsing this Heath Robinson Malthouse thing? Cold feet?
He was on LBC last night answering phone calls and said that he felt it was the best way to ensure that Brexit actually happened. He was asking the callers 'Have I gone soft?' and the general response (obviously not scientific) was 'Yes'.
Has anyone talked about the BBC 2 “inside Europe” documentary? I was a reluctant leaver. I declared on here my most likely decision to vote leave on how I felt the EU had humiliated Cameron when he asked for some shift on free movement as a revised deal. Having watched the documentary. I think I might have been wrong on my assessment that he asked for little and got even less.
Listening to Farage denounce what had been a series of tough compromises in a negotiation, I felt embarrassed...
Also brought up the major diplomatic failure it was for Cameron to leave the EPP. Something that Tim repeatedly banged on about. It left him isolated and outside of the loop and discussions resulting in the earlier humiliation of blocking a treaty change and then the EU just creating a new treaty outside of the Eu for the eurozone.
I really enjoyed it. Excellent programme. One of the biggest takeaways for me was the reminder of just how dominant the immigration issue was in everyone's thinking, Remain side and Leave. Much talk these days of May being unreasonable with her 'red lines' but as regards that one - ending FOM hence UK out of the SM - she had little choice.
But that's the one issue where politicians in general have been most at fault.
They should have been truthful about the British economy's need for migrant workers. And as May pretty much sat on the fence during the referendum campaign, she's actually more to blame than many of them.
Just because something is good for the economy doesn’t mean it has democratic support. People vote how they want and Government has to adapt not the other way around...
Sorry, but I think it's plain silly to think that public opinion isn't affected by the words and actions of politicians, as well as affecting them. Each of those things affects the other, and when politicians are too cowardly to tell the truth they have a large share of the responsibility for what happens.
The late great Roy Jenkins would be best described as an enlightened and liberal elitist. He and a few allies got a pile of pioneering legislation through the HoC 50-60 years ago which is now seen as ahead of its time. That's how leadership should work.
Following behind (er, 'respecting') the voters is pathetic and isn't how a parliamentary system is supposed to work.
Tony Benn used to talk about two kinds of politicians - signposts and weathercocks.
Off topic: So British Airways will become non-British after Brexit. Well done leavers - a real result. Take back control!
Talking of airlines when we start needing landing cards at EU airports will there be extra staff to help the Hartlepudlians to fill them in?
Dispensation will be given for Hartlepudlians to use any one of a) Argos order ticket, b) old Ladbroke's bookie slip or c) back of a Bennie Hedgehogs packet.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
The evidence from my canvassing was that the Conservative vote was solid, and so it proved. What I had not appreciated was how strong the Labour vote was.
Polling suggested Labour's share had peaked at c.36%, a week before polling day. In the event, it kept growing.
Yougov had Labour on 39% a week before Polling Day.
The late great Roy Jenkins would be best described as an enlightened and liberal elitist. He and a few allies got a pile of pioneering legislation through the HoC 50-60 years ago which is now seen as ahead of its time. That's how leadership should work.
Following behind (er, 'respecting') the voters is pathetic and isn't how a parliamentary system is supposed to work.
I agree. I respect the most the politicians who seek to change the views* of the public rather than pander to them.
* provided the views are not my views obvs - my views I think should be pandered to at all times.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
The evidence from my canvassing was that the Conservative vote was solid, and so it proved. What I had not appreciated was how strong the Labour vote was.
Polling suggested Labour's share had peaked at c.36%, a week before polling day. In the event, it kept growing.
Yougov had Labour on 39% a week before Polling Day.
Which is why I feel a GE would be the very last option tried. All the polling evidence suggests it would be a coin toss. And why gamble that when you have 3 years to go? Oh wait...
Well in the scenario painted - that TM cannot get anything but a Labour brexit through the House - a general election WILL be a last resort.
No other option will give her a chance of survival.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
I think once you concede you have to change the timetable to cope with reality the games up. Delay Brexit and it's like the latin for the plural of eggs. It's ova.
Interesting. Rees-Mogg has maintained till now that plummeting to WTO terms in a few weeks would be perfectly hunky dory. So why is he now endorsing this Heath Robinson Malthouse thing? Cold feet?
He was on LBC last night answering phone calls and said that he felt it was the best way to ensure that Brexit actually happened. He was asking the callers 'Have I gone soft?' and the general response (obviously not scientific) was 'Yes'.
I suspect he's just another Leaver preparing his alibi for No Deal disasters to come: 'If only they'd listened to me with my plan X then we wouldn't be in this mess.'
The late great Roy Jenkins would be best described as an enlightened and liberal elitist. He and a few allies got a pile of pioneering legislation through the HoC 50-60 years ago which is now seen as ahead of its time. That's how leadership should work.
Following behind (er, 'respecting') the voters is pathetic and isn't how a parliamentary system is supposed to work.
I agree. I respect the most the politicians who seek to change the views* of the public rather than pander to them.
* provided the views are not my views obvs - my views I think should be pandered to at all times.
There were three Conservative MP's who voted for every piece of "permissive" legislation in the 1960's.
To nobody's surprise, one was Sir Ian Gilmour. But, I'm sure everyone is surprised that the other two were Enoch Powell and Ronald Bell.
The Labour party seem to have a remarkable surplus of potential leaders unelectable to high office, while real stars hang around waiting for goodness knows what to happen. The thought that we could be having Hammond v Eagle, Osborne v Cooper or Cameron v D Miliband or Gove v H Benn makes me feel we are missing a lot of leadership and a lot of harmless entertainment.
The common characteristic of most the Labour names in David Herdson's frame is that they find hard questions extraordinarily challenging.
I think once you concede you have to change the timetable to cope with reality the games up. Delay Brexit and it's like the latin for the plural of eggs. It's ova.
Interesting. Rees-Mogg has maintained till now that plummeting to WTO terms in a few weeks would be perfectly hunky dory. So why is he now endorsing this Heath Robinson Malthouse thing? Cold feet?
He was on LBC last night answering phone calls and said that he felt it was the best way to ensure that Brexit actually happened. He was asking the callers 'Have I gone soft?' and the general response (obviously not scientific) was 'Yes'.
Isn't it all an act?
Malthouse revolves around removing the backstop and using the technical border tricks that the EU say they wont agree to.
JRM knows this and so it all an act on the way to his beloved No Deal.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
The Tories did actually hold Hastings
Yes. But looking at the result if they really were bussing people over to Eastbourne during the campaign they weren't doing the wisest thing.
Why not calmly say to them: but she could call a general election?
Gotta love logic.
A general election doesn’t avoid no deal.
yes It does. 😁
Wake up. EU grant time for the GE to resolve. May winning the GE on her deal, the party fought the election on easily passes the commons.
The People’s Vote dream is dead. No deal nightmare (largely cannily built by the Government spin machine) is so yesterdays news.
This is how it plays out now, William,
EU and Dublin help build the ladders ERG and Labour leavers can use in the commons.
If it don’t look like enough (though i am confident it will) May still puts to commons again, it might pass.
If it doesn’t, she calls the General election. Flow back up to the bit that says wake up.
I don’t want to hurt you, just think its important remainers who still feed the unicorn to realise Hard Brexit is happening on Mays terms.
With you apart from the "May wins the GE on her deal" bit. It is quite unpopular you know. And, one thing less popular than that would be calling an election and spending six weeks droning on and on about its technical merits.
It wont be technical, brexit element of the election will be waffle. The brexit election will be wall to wall stop Corbyn and hard left from gaining power, the brexit deal buried beneath that.
Because negative campaigning went so well for the Tories last time.
And went equally badly for Remain and yet the 'project fear' headlines continue apace - not leats from you.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
The Tories did actually hold Hastings
Yes. But looking at the result if they really were bussing people over to Eastbourne during the campaign they weren't doing the wisest thing.
Not necessarily, yes Hastings was close but the Tories still held it and the Tories also only lost Eastbourne by 1,609 votes
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
Then your eyes were wrong - the Conservatives weren't pasted nationally.
There were certainly some very poor individual Conservative results but counter-balanced by some very good individual Conservative results. Sometimes these even happened in adjacent constituencies.
What we need to remember though is that personal anecdotes should always have warnings attached and that opinion polls you don't like are not necessarily wrong.
Not Dawn Butler. She is one of the most ineffective members of the Front Bench and often has difficulty stringing a sentence together.
Jeez - that's a pretty low bar she cannot cross but she's certainly not alone.
From Attlee, Gaitskill, Wilson, Foot and Barbara Castle and Roy Jenkins and Dennis Healey to Keir Starmer, Rebecca Long Bailey and Dawn Butler in not much more than a generation.
Even a step down from Blair, Brown, Balls and Miliband, Labour is scraping the barrel now.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
I will be voting Labour in the hope of witnessing a determined and successful attack on inequality and unearned privilege. It's such an exciting prospect. It gets me all pumped up.
I do have concerns about Jeremy though. My biggest one is whether his temperament will hold up to being PM. He seems a bit tetchy at times when faced with sharp scrutiny.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
I will be voting Labour in the hope of witnessing a determined and successful attack on inequality and unearned privilege. It's such an exciting prospect. It gets me all pumped up.
I do have concerns about Jeremy though. My biggest one is whether his temperament will hold up to being PM. He seems a bit tetchy at times when faced with sharp scrutiny.
Labour members like Corbyn because they see themselves in what they see of him: compassionate, under-stated, polite, principled and uncompromising on social justice. The minority among the members that profoundly dislike him see him very differently. I am not sure there is another candidate currently who would be seen in similar ways. I think the next Labour leader will come from the left, but I am not convinced he/she will be as far left and I think that unity is likely to be a very powerful message.
Yes, from my very different position I entirely agree on both counts.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
Then your eyes were wrong - the Conservatives weren't pasted nationally.
There were certainly some very poor individual Conservative results but counter-balanced by some very good individual Conservative results. Sometimes these even happened in adjacent constituencies.
What we need to remember though is that personal anecdotes should always have warnings attached and that opinion polls you don't like are not necessarily wrong.
Yes the 42% Tory voteshare was the highest the Tories had got since 1983, just the 39% Labour voteshare was the highest Labour had got since 2001
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
I will be voting Labour in the hope of witnessing a determined and successful attack on inequality and unearned privilege. It's such an exciting prospect. It gets me all pumped up.
I do have concerns about Jeremy though. My biggest one is whether his temperament will hold up to being PM. He seems a bit tetchy at times when faced with sharp scrutiny.
Do you not think?
He'll be a complete and utter disaster frankly.
Yes, but. Would that be a step up or down from the current shower in government?
Do I take it that the current Gibraltar passport does not say Colony ?
Wikipedia:
"In 2002, the British Parliament passed the British Overseas Territories Act 2002. This reclassified the UK's dependent territories as overseas territories"
An interesting discussion on what makes a progressive MP. One who votes against the majority view. Does that not make Jezza progressive? He wants to make us into Venezuela even though the 'populists' disagree.
In thirty years time, after feasting on our daily dead-rat ration, we'll hail the foresight of the British Trotskyite Party who pushed against the old ways.
Let's be honest, 'populist' is a fancy word for popular things you don't agree with.
A more logical definition of 'progressive' would be things that promote unity. Identity politics doesn't spring to mind, and hatred of people who don't agree with you doesn't either. I'd suggest the 'Golden Rule' as a rough guide but that would be wasted on some.
Edit, Yes, I don't always observe it but then I never claim to be a Saint.
Do I take it that the current Gibraltar passport does not say Colony ?
Wikipedia:
"In 2002, the British Parliament passed the British Overseas Territories Act 2002. This reclassified the UK's dependent territories as overseas territories"
Gibraltar is officially a BOT.
Is that a rebranding exercise, or is there a real change from colony to BOT?
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
Then your eyes were wrong - the Conservatives weren't pasted nationally.
There were certainly some very poor individual Conservative results but counter-balanced by some very good individual Conservative results. Sometimes these even happened in adjacent constituencies.
What we need to remember though is that personal anecdotes should always have warnings attached and that opinion polls you don't like are not necessarily wrong.
Some Conservative results were brilliant, as others were terrible. If you had been campaigning in the West Midlands or NE Scotland, you would have expected a very big win.
I think once you concede you have to change the timetable to cope with reality the games up. Delay Brexit and it's like the latin for the plural of eggs. It's ova.
Interesting. Rees-Mogg has maintained till now that plummeting to WTO terms in a few weeks would be perfectly hunky dory. So why is he now endorsing this Heath Robinson Malthouse thing? Cold feet?
In that respect he's no different to May a while back, remember "no deal is better than a bad deal"?
I don't think [I may be wrong] that he's ever actually said that he doesn't want a deal. Just that we'd be fine without one, so don't need to accept punitive terms like the backstop.
Not Dawn Butler. She is one of the most ineffective members of the Front Bench and often has difficulty stringing a sentence together.
Jeez - that's a pretty low bar she cannot cross but she's certainly not alone.
From Attlee, Gaitskill, Wilson, Foot and Barbara Castle and Roy Jenkins and Dennis Healey to Keir Starmer, Rebecca Long Bailey and Dawn Butler in not much more than a generation.
Even a step down from Blair, Brown, Balls and Miliband, Labour is scraping the barrel now.
With respect, Attlee is a good three generations ago. Gaitskell died 56 years ago too.
Do I take it that the current Gibraltar passport does not say Colony ?
Wikipedia:
"In 2002, the British Parliament passed the British Overseas Territories Act 2002. This reclassified the UK's dependent territories as overseas territories"
Gibraltar is officially a BOT.
Is that a rebranding exercise, or is there a real change from colony to BOT?
Seems to be all about rights as citizens to be British as far as I can tell. From 2002 this became automatic.
Do I take it that the current Gibraltar passport does not say Colony ?
Wikipedia:
"In 2002, the British Parliament passed the British Overseas Territories Act 2002. This reclassified the UK's dependent territories as overseas territories"
Gibraltar is officially a BOT.
Is that a rebranding exercise, or is there a real change from colony to BOT?
I think its more an acknowledgement of the real changes that had already occured. Gibraltar is fully (minus foreign affairs/defence) self-governing already.
It's a fascinating question - because no one quite knows what Labour Party they'll be leading. There's a good point made in Corbynism:A Critical Approach, which is that Corbynism doesn't work without him as the myth of the man (an utter fraud in my view) holds groups with contradictory views together.
To game it out, firstly, I think it'll either be John McDonnell or a woman. There's a recognition that the next leader should be a woman, and none of the male candidates acceptable to the Corbynistas have done anything to emerge as a candidate good enough to override that. Excepting John Ashworth, who's a bit too nice for this particular bloodsport, they're yes men, intellectual pygmies (looking at you Mr. Burgon), or clearly don't want the job (Starmer). Lewis appears to want it but has burnt his bridges with the Corbyn machine over Brexit. Not that the women have done great either - but have the advantage of their sex, generally being fresh faces, and not being Richard Burgon. Of them Rayner seems most competent, has a good backstory, and seems to be back in favour with the Corbynistas after pissing them off for some reason I can't remember. Pidcock and Long-Bailey seem to just robotically repeat declarations of love for Corbyn. Osamor is toast if she runs. Butler may well be a decent bet then. Thornberry has I think played things badly. She could've been a unity candidate, but her pronouncements on Syria and anti-Semitism mean she's loathed by moderates, but is unlikely to be trusted as a pukka Corbyn heir.
But I think that McDonnell could get it if we're dealing with a post-split Labour - as the only person able to say they are more Jeremy than thou, or as a caretaker if no clear Corbyn candidate emerges.
Finally, if a moderate wins, it'll be Yvette Cooper. She's obviously still a bete noir for the bulk of Corbynistas, but has won a few friends among the most pro-European of them. She's also na northern MP - so could win some seemingly unlikely backing if her main opponent is a bit Islingtonian. Against her, is obviously the fact that She's one of the New Labour old guard and so the membership and union barons converting would be a huge admission of failure. Finally, the very things that are likely to lead to Corbynism falling out of favour (playing midwife to a dreadful Brexit, going further down far left rabbitholes in public) are ones that are liable to cause a split.
A tough one , but Butler seems a reasonable shout.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
I will be voting Labour in the hope of witnessing a determined and successful attack on inequality and unearned privilege. It's such an exciting prospect. It gets me all pumped up.
I do have concerns about Jeremy though. My biggest one is whether his temperament will hold up to being PM. He seems a bit tetchy at times when faced with sharp scrutiny.
Do you not think?
He'll be a complete and utter disaster frankly.
Yes, but. Would that be a step up or down from the current shower in government?
On the issue of having an old time mentality some Remainers seem to have a 50s mentality.
That's 1850s in the American Deep South.
A desire for some 'cultured' lifestyle of ease for the privileged based on exploitation either of the Third World for manufactured goods or an immigrant serf class for UK services and agriculture.
The areas which voted Leave are viewed as the equivalent of the backwoods / hillbillies / rednecks by this mentality.
There were three Conservative MP's who voted for every piece of "permissive" legislation in the 1960's.
To nobody's surprise, one was Sir Ian Gilmour. But, I'm sure everyone is surprised that the other two were Enoch Powell and Ronald Bell.
Enoch Powell?
I am indeed knocked down with a feather. I wonder if he was one of those types who simply enjoy confounding expectations. You think you know what my position on (X) is bound to be? - well think again sucker! Because, you know what, I'm a free thinker, I am, a free thinker.
An interesting discussion on what makes a progressive MP. One who votes against the majority view. Does that not make Jezza progressive? He wants to make us into Venezuela even though the 'populists' disagree.
In thirty years time, after feasting on our daily dead-rat ration, we'll hail the foresight of the British Trotskyite Party who pushed against the old ways.
Let's be honest, 'populist' is a fancy word for popular things you don't agree with.
A more logical definition of 'progressive' would be things that promote unity. Identity politics doesn't spring to mind, and hatred of people who don't agree with you doesn't either. I'd suggest the 'Golden Rule' as a rough guide but that would be wasted on some.
Edit, Yes, I don't always observe it but then I never claim to be a Saint.
Agree with you about the populist bit. Spot on definition imho. However, why should progressives promote "unity"? An example which springs to mind is Equal marriage. Most people would describe that as a progressive measure. It did not promote unity in any way. It divided opinion, often virulently, for the benefit of a relatively small group. If we only had policies which unified we'd never really get much done. A striking example is obvious.
There were three Conservative MP's who voted for every piece of "permissive" legislation in the 1960's.
To nobody's surprise, one was Sir Ian Gilmour. But, I'm sure everyone is surprised that the other two were Enoch Powell and Ronald Bell.
Enoch Powell?
I am indeed knocked down with a feather. I wonder if he was one of those types who simply enjoy confounding expectations. You think you know what my position on (X) is bound to be? - well think again sucker! Because, you know what, I'm a free thinker, I am, a free thinker.
As was Ronald Bell, who was leading light in the Monday Club.
Do I take it that the current Gibraltar passport does not say Colony ?
Wikipedia:
"In 2002, the British Parliament passed the British Overseas Territories Act 2002. This reclassified the UK's dependent territories as overseas territories"
Bit snowflaky there from Farage. 'colony' and 'territory' are more or less synonymous in this context. Normally it's the Farages of this world who mock liberals for bringing emotion into words beyond their strict definitions.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
I will be voting Labour in the hope of witnessing a determined and successful attack on inequality and unearned privilege. It's such an exciting prospect. It gets me all pumped up.
I do have concerns about Jeremy though. My biggest one is whether his temperament will hold up to being PM. He seems a bit tetchy at times when faced with sharp scrutiny.
Do you not think?
I have serious qualms re-Corbyn - and do not think of him as a Leader figure really. But then , neither is May. On the other hand, were he to actually become PM I could imagine him enjoying quite an extended honeymoon with the electorate. He would be very unassuming and different - and display an authenticity which would strike a chord with many as ' a breath of fresh air'. I know others think very differently and that he would be a disaster from the start , but that is my gut feeling as to how things would pan out.
An interesting discussion on what makes a progressive MP. One who votes against the majority view. Does that not make Jezza progressive? He wants to make us into Venezuela even though the 'populists' disagree.
In thirty years time, after feasting on our daily dead-rat ration, we'll hail the foresight of the British Trotskyite Party who pushed against the old ways.
Let's be honest, 'populist' is a fancy word for popular things you don't agree with.
A more logical definition of 'progressive' would be things that promote unity. Identity politics doesn't spring to mind, and hatred of people who don't agree with you doesn't either. I'd suggest the 'Golden Rule' as a rough guide but that would be wasted on some.
Edit, Yes, I don't always observe it but then I never claim to be a Saint.
Reactionary is fairly easy to define; progressive, on the other hand, first requires a definition of what constitutes progress.
Labour members like Corbyn because they see themselves in what they see of him: compassionate, under-stated, polite, principled and uncompromising on social justice. The minority among the members that profoundly dislike him see him very differently. I am not sure there is another candidate currently who would be seen in similar ways. I think the next Labour leader will come from the left, but I am not convinced he/she will be as far left and I think that unity is likely to be a very powerful message.
Yes, from my very different position I entirely agree on both counts.
Subtract ideology and personality and look at it technically. He’s rubbish at the dispatch box. He’s rubbish giving speeches. Last week when door stepped to ask wether he was backing Yvette amendment he ran away from the microphones. He turned down the opportunity to get what he believes across, turned down opportunity to shape the narrative just gave them a grumpy bugger off.
He’s inept as a leader. Not good enough. Unconvincing and rubbish.
His role in this world is not orthodoxy, its protest. He runs from the microphones because playing this game, the game that MUST be played is just not him.
"One idea floating around the Berlaymont in recent days would extend the article 50 deadline not just for a few months but for two years to allow Britain to negotiate a free-trade agreement with the EU.
The withdrawal agreement would not be abandoned but would be placed in a quiet corner while Britain and the EU negotiated their future economic relationship.
Advocates of the proposal acknowledge that it creates problems for both sides but argue that most can be resolved"
Extending A50 by 2 years is equivalent to a 2 year no change transition period but we wouldn't be a "rule-taker" and the backstop issue can be put back two years. Too sensible a proposal I guess.
There were three Conservative MP's who voted for every piece of "permissive" legislation in the 1960's.
To nobody's surprise, one was Sir Ian Gilmour. But, I'm sure everyone is surprised that the other two were Enoch Powell and Ronald Bell.
Enoch Powell?
I am indeed knocked down with a feather. I wonder if he was one of those types who simply enjoy confounding expectations. You think you know what my position on (X) is bound to be? - well think again sucker! Because, you know what, I'm a free thinker, I am, a free thinker.
There was a curious phenomenon at play when Ed Miliband was LOTO. Because everyone had seemingly agreed that he was crap, various right-wing pundits suddenly started writing about how great he really was, presumably to exhibit their maverick credentials. This hasn't happened with Corbyn though. Presumably they now think it's too serious for that.
"One idea floating around the Berlaymont in recent days would extend the article 50 deadline not just for a few months but for two years to allow Britain to negotiate a free-trade agreement with the EU.
The withdrawal agreement would not be abandoned but would be placed in a quiet corner while Britain and the EU negotiated their future economic relationship.
Advocates of the proposal acknowledge that it creates problems for both sides but argue that most can be resolved"
Extending A50 by 2 years is equivalent to a 2 year no change transition period but we wouldn't be a "rule-taker" and the backstop issue can be put back two years. Too sensible a proposal I guess.
Apart from the delay this will cause to actually leaving, it’s not a bad idea at all. Good to see some in Brussels recognise that not having the FT talks at the same time was a mistake.
An interesting discussion on what makes a progressive MP. One who votes against the majority view. Does that not make Jezza progressive? He wants to make us into Venezuela even though the 'populists' disagree.
In thirty years time, after feasting on our daily dead-rat ration, we'll hail the foresight of the British Trotskyite Party who pushed against the old ways.
Let's be honest, 'populist' is a fancy word for popular things you don't agree with.
A more logical definition of 'progressive' would be things that promote unity. Identity politics doesn't spring to mind, and hatred of people who don't agree with you doesn't either. I'd suggest the 'Golden Rule' as a rough guide but that would be wasted on some.
Edit, Yes, I don't always observe it but then I never claim to be a Saint.
Reactionary is fairly easy to define; progressive, on the other hand, first requires a definition of what constitutes progress.
But surely you can't define 'reactionary' until you've defined 'progressive'.
Labour members like Corbyn because they see themselves in what they see of him: compassionate, under-stated, polite, principled and uncompromising on social justice. The minority among the members that profoundly dislike him see him very differently. I am not sure there is another candidate currently who would be seen in similar ways. I think the next Labour leader will come from the left, but I am not convinced he/she will be as far left and I think that unity is likely to be a very powerful message.
Yes, from my very different position I entirely agree on both counts.
Subtract ideology and personality and look at it technically. He’s rubbish at the dispatch box. He’s rubbish giving speeches. Last week when door stepped to ask wether he was backing Yvette amendment he ran away from the microphones. He turned down the opportunity to get what he believes across, turned down opportunity to shape the narrative just gave them a grumpy bugger off.
He’s inept as a leader. Not good enough. Unconvincing and rubbish.
His role in this world is not orthodoxy, its protest. He runs from the microphones because playing this game, the game that MUST be played is just not him.
"One idea floating around the Berlaymont in recent days would extend the article 50 deadline not just for a few months but for two years to allow Britain to negotiate a free-trade agreement with the EU.
The withdrawal agreement would not be abandoned but would be placed in a quiet corner while Britain and the EU negotiated their future economic relationship.
Advocates of the proposal acknowledge that it creates problems for both sides but argue that most can be resolved"
Extending A50 by 2 years is equivalent to a 2 year no change transition period but we wouldn't be a "rule-taker" and the backstop issue can be put back two years. Too sensible a proposal I guess.
It would also allow those who like to posture lots more opportunity to posture.
Whether anything would actually be successfully negotiated in the extra two years is perhaps doubtful.
Why not calmly say to them: but she could call a general election?
Gotta love logic.
A general election doesn’t avoid no deal.
yes It does. 😁
Wake up. EU grant time for the GE to resolve. May winning the GE on her deal, the party fought the election on easily passes the commons.
The People’s Vote dream is dead. No deal nightmare (largely cannily built by the Government spin machine) is so yesterdays news.
This is how it plays out now, William,
EU and Dublin help build the ladders ERG and Labour leavers can use in the commons.
If it don’t look like enough (though i am confident it will) May still puts to commons again, it might pass.
If it doesn’t, she calls the General election. Flow back up to the bit that says wake up.
I don’t want to hurt you, just think its important remainers who still feed the unicorn to realise Hard Brexit is happening on Mays terms.
With you apart from the "May wins the GE on her deal" bit. It is quite unpopular you know. And, one thing less popular than that would be calling an election and spending six weeks droning on and on about its technical merits.
It wont be technical, brexit element of the election will be waffle. The brexit election will be wall to wall stop Corbyn and hard left from gaining power, the brexit deal buried beneath that.
Because negative campaigning went so well for the Tories last time.
It’s different this time. Both the brexit can be stopped and Jez isn’t so bad bubbles have burst. That makes big difference to exactly the same tactics now working.
If i am right the bubbles have Burst, the same tactic now works beautifully doesn’t it?
Do I take it that the current Gibraltar passport does not say Colony ?
Wikipedia:
"In 2002, the British Parliament passed the British Overseas Territories Act 2002. This reclassified the UK's dependent territories as overseas territories"
Bit snowflaky there from Farage. 'colony' and 'territory' are more or less synonymous in this context. Normally it's the Farages of this world who mock liberals for bringing emotion into words beyond their strict definitions.
I can't honestly remember any conservative mocking a liberal for that reason. The idea that conservatives are more calm and rational than liberals is absurd. Just wave a flag at one. Conservatism is sentiment on a stick.
There's nothing wrong with an emotional approach of course. It's a better guide to action than logic most of the time.
There were three Conservative MP's who voted for every piece of "permissive" legislation in the 1960's.
To nobody's surprise, one was Sir Ian Gilmour. But, I'm sure everyone is surprised that the other two were Enoch Powell and Ronald Bell.
Enoch Powell?
I am indeed knocked down with a feather. I wonder if he was one of those types who simply enjoy confounding expectations. You think you know what my position on (X) is bound to be? - well think again sucker! Because, you know what, I'm a free thinker, I am, a free thinker.
There was a curious phenomenon at play when Ed Miliband was LOTO. Because everyone had seemingly agreed that he was crap, various right-wing pundits suddenly started writing about how great he really was, presumably to exhibit their maverick credentials. This hasn't happened with Corbyn though. Presumably they now think it's too serious for that.
Much of the defence of EdM was merely pointing out that he was better than his over-rated, complacent and cowardly brother.
Thornberry has I think played things badly. She could've been a unity candidate, but her pronouncements on Syria and anti-Semitism mean she's loathed by moderates, but is unlikely to be trusted as a pukka Corbyn heir.
I don't think I agree with this. I think Thornberry is reflecting the members' view on antisemitism: that it's been exaggerated by the media, but all the same that Corbyn has been too lax in dealing with it, and has himself gone over-the-top sometimes with some of his comments on Israel. I don't think either that or Syria would be big issues for her (to be honest I don't remember her saying much of anything on Syria, but in my experience Labour members aren't that interested in that issue anyway). On most domestic issues she seems pretty in line with Corbyn / the membership.
I think the bigger issue for her is whether she'd be more 'electable' with the public than Corbyn is, because it's not clear to me that she would be.
It's a fascinating question - because no one quite knows what Labour Party they'll be leading. There's a good point made in Corbynism:A Critical Approach, which is that Corbynism doesn't work without him as the myth of the man (an utter fraud in my view) holds groups with contradictory views together.
To game it out, firstly, I think it'll either be John McDonnell or a woman. There's a recognition that the next leader should be a woman, and none of the male candidates acceptable to the Corbynistas have done anything to emerge as a candidate good enough to override that. Excepting John Ashworth, who's a bit too nice for this particular bloodsport, they're yes men, intellectual pygmies (looking at you Mr. Burgon), or clearly don't want the job (Starmer). Lewis appears to want it but has burnt his bridges with the Corbyn machine over Brexit. Not that the women have done great either - but have the advantage of their sex, generally being fresh faces, and not being Richard Burgon. Of them Rayner seems most competent, has a good backstory, and seems to be back in favour with the Corbynistas after pissing them off for some reason I can't remember. Pidcock and Long-Bailey seem to just robotically repeat declarations of love for Corbyn. Osamor is toast if she runs. Butler may well be a decent bet then. Thornberry has I think played things badly. She could've been a unity candidate, but her pronouncements on Syria and anti-Semitism mean she's loathed by moderates, but is unlikely to be trusted as a pukka Corbyn heir.
But I think that McDonnell could get it if we're dealing with a post-split Labour - as the only person able to say they are more Jeremy than thou, or as a caretaker if no clear Corbyn candidate emerges.
Finally, if a moderate wins, it'll be Yvette Cooper. She's obviously still a bete noir for the bulk of Corbynistas, but has won a few friends among the most pro-European of them. She's also na northern MP - so could win some seemingly unlikely backing if her main opponent is a bit Islingtonian. Against her, is obviously the fact that She's one of the New Labour old guard and so the membership and union barons converting would be a huge admission of failure. Finally, the very things that are likely to lead to Corbynism falling out of favour (playing midwife to a dreadful Brexit, going further down far left rabbitholes in public) are ones that are liable to cause a split.
A tough one , but Butler seems a reasonable shout.
A reasonable shout if you plan to be out of power for quite a time.
Do I take it that the current Gibraltar passport does not say Colony ?
Wikipedia:
"In 2002, the British Parliament passed the British Overseas Territories Act 2002. This reclassified the UK's dependent territories as overseas territories"
Bit snowflaky there from Farage. 'colony' and 'territory' are more or less synonymous in this context. Normally it's the Farages of this world who mock liberals for bringing emotion into words beyond their strict definitions.
I can't honestly remember any conservative mocking a liberal for that reason. The idea that conservatives are more calm and rational than liberals is absurd. Just wave a flag at one. Conservatism is sentiment on a stick.
There's nothing wrong with an emotional approach of course. It's a better guide to action than logic most of the time.
It has been suggested that any important decision decided calmly and logically should also be confirmed when drunk.
An interesting discussion on what makes a progressive MP. One who votes against the majority view. Does that not make Jezza progressive? He wants to make us into Venezuela even though the 'populists' disagree.
In thirty years time, after feasting on our daily dead-rat ration, we'll hail the foresight of the British Trotskyite Party who pushed against the old ways.
Let's be honest, 'populist' is a fancy word for popular things you don't agree with.
A more logical definition of 'progressive' would be things that promote unity. Identity politics doesn't spring to mind, and hatred of people who don't agree with you doesn't either. I'd suggest the 'Golden Rule' as a rough guide but that would be wasted on some.
Edit, Yes, I don't always observe it but then I never claim to be a Saint.
Reactionary is fairly easy to define; progressive, on the other hand, first requires a definition of what constitutes progress.
But surely you can't define 'reactionary' until you've defined 'progressive'.
Reactionary means not wanting stuff to change - often as a result of having an outsize stake (material or emotional) in the established order. Or simply a temperamental aversion to change.
Why not calmly say to them: but she could call a general election?
Gotta love logic.
A general election doesn’t avoid no deal.
yes It does. 😁
Wake up. EU grant time for the GE to resolve. May winning the GE on her deal, the party fought the election on easily passes the commons.
The People’s Vote dream is dead. No deal nightmare (largely cannily built by the Government spin machine) is so yesterdays news.
This is how it plays out now, William,
EU and Dublin help build the ladders ERG and Labour leavers can use in the commons.
If it don’t look like enough (though i am confident it will) May still puts to commons again, it might pass.
If it doesn’t, she calls the General election. Flow back up to the bit that says wake up.
I don’t want to hurt you, just think its important remainers who still feed the unicorn to realise Hard Brexit is happening on Mays terms.
With you apart from the "May wins the GE on her deal" bit. It is quite unpopular you know. And, one thing less popular than that would be calling an election and spending six weeks droning on and on about its technical merits.
It wont be technical, brexit element of the election will be waffle. The brexit election will be wall to wall stop Corbyn and hard left from gaining power, the brexit deal buried beneath that.
Wasn't that the plan last time?
It’s been the plan all along. Sometimes takes a while to hollow someone’s support out and get through a politicains firewalls.
Remember the pantomime before Christmas? Tories in unison with their get Jez “they’re behind you”. Jez cracked. Stupid Siberian Egg laying goose it looked like to me with my lip reading skills.
A mere hors d'oeuvre compared to the real thing coming throughout March (providing EU and Irish don’t surrender monkey to the English in February as I suspect they will)
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
Then your eyes were wrong - the Conservatives weren't pasted nationally.
There were certainly some very poor individual Conservative results but counter-balanced by some very good individual Conservative results. Sometimes these even happened in adjacent constituencies.
What we need to remember though is that personal anecdotes should always have warnings attached and that opinion polls you don't like are not necessarily wrong.
Some Conservative results were brilliant, as others were terrible. If you had been campaigning in the West Midlands or NE Scotland, you would have expected a very big win.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
Then your eyes were wrong - the Conservatives weren't pasted nationally.
There were certainly some very poor individual Conservative results but counter-balanced by some very good individual Conservative results. Sometimes these even happened in adjacent constituencies.
What we need to remember though is that personal anecdotes should always have warnings attached and that opinion polls you don't like are not necessarily wrong.
Some Conservative results were brilliant, as others were terrible. If you had been campaigning in the West Midlands or NE Scotland, you would have expected a very big win.
Ditto Torbay!
Do you think Labour will beat the LibDems in Torbay next time?
So all the top tier for the 2020 Democratic nomination lead Trump but while Biden and Sanders beat Trump comfortably, Trump is able to run Harris and Warren much closer
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
I will be voting Labour in the hope of witnessing a determined and successful attack on inequality and unearned privilege. It's such an exciting prospect. It gets me all pumped up.
I do have concerns about Jeremy though. My biggest one is whether his temperament will hold up to being PM. He seems a bit tetchy at times when faced with sharp scrutiny.
Do you not think?
He'll be a complete and utter disaster frankly.
Yes, but. Would that be a step up or down from the current shower in government?
A very good question.
Truly we are in desperate times.
In their inflexibility and stubborn refusal to listen to more moderate voices, their hostility to business, it's clear that May and Corbyn have a lot in common.
Reading down the 538 article, the other interesting thing is that Trump is on the wrong side of the wedge issues where there is a strong public opinion in a particular direction. I continue to lay him for the Republican nomination.
So all the top tier for the 2020 Democratic nomination lead Trump but while Biden and Sanders beat Trump comfortably, Trump is able to run Harris and Warren much closer
An interesting discussion on what makes a progressive MP. One who votes against the majority view. Does that not make Jezza progressive? He wants to make us into Venezuela even though the 'populists' disagree.
In thirty years time, after feasting on our daily dead-rat ration, we'll hail the foresight of the British Trotskyite Party who pushed against the old ways.
Let's be honest, 'populist' is a fancy word for popular things you don't agree with.
A more logical definition of 'progressive' would be things that promote unity. Identity politics doesn't spring to mind, and hatred of people who don't agree with you doesn't either. I'd suggest the 'Golden Rule' as a rough guide but that would be wasted on some.
Edit, Yes, I don't always observe it but then I never claim to be a Saint.
Reactionary is fairly easy to define; progressive, on the other hand, first requires a definition of what constitutes progress.
But surely you can't define 'reactionary' until you've defined 'progressive'.
Reactionary means not wanting stuff to change - often as a result of having an outsize stake (material or emotional) in the established order. Or simply a temperamental aversion to change.
Progressive is a much more slippery term.
It means someone who reacts against specifically progressive politics. If we lived in a liberal utopia, a reactionary still wouldn't be a liberal.
It is a complete myth that nobody thought Corbyn was in with a shout in 2017. That was largely true for the three weeks or so following May's announcement on 18th April but was far from being the case by the last week of May. I have spent a few days reading the PB Archives of that campaign , and it was very apparent that a week to ten days before Polling Day there was real fear and panic in Tory ranks - although many were also dismissive of the narrowing poll lead.
All the evidence of my own eyes was that the Tories were in for a pasting. Funnily enough the thing that kept me believing it would actually turn out all right for them was pasting my observations on here. The dismissals seemed very authoritative and were often from people who were involved in the actual campaign. The one that sticks in my memory was reporting seeing a large group of very organised looking Labour activists working a Tory part of Hastings. I was told that the local Tories were so confident in Hastings that their foot soldiers were being deployed in more vulnerable seats. (I suppose they meant Eastbourne rather than Canterbury.)
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
Then your eyes were wrong - the Conservatives weren't pasted nationally.
There were certainly some very poor individual Conservative results but counter-balanced by some very good individual Conservative results. Sometimes these even happened in adjacent constituencies.
What we need to remember though is that personal anecdotes should always have warnings attached and that opinion polls you don't like are not necessarily wrong.
Some Conservative results were brilliant, as others were terrible. If you had been campaigning in the West Midlands or NE Scotland, you would have expected a very big win.
Ditto Torbay!
Do you think Labour will beat the LibDems in Torbay next time?
Possibly, although the LibDems picked a real duff candidate last time.
I don’t want to hurt you, just think its important remainers who still feed the unicorn to realise Hard Brexit is happening on Mays terms.
We agree on the most likely future (May deal passed and maybe after a snap GE) but point of order on the above -
All that is happening is the Withdrawal Agreement. This does not ensure a Hard Brexit. In fact the Backstop steers the other way.
There’s a lot of smarts in your tin, Kin. {don’t tell anyone else but you are my favourite poster} But to me the FA, nebulous though it is, sets us on path to hard brexit.
Comments
I don't know how representative that view is but I can imagine a fair few holding it.
Then if it goes through, for want of feasible alternatives and with the minds of the ERG and the DUP focused by the threat of a GE, fine. And I think it probably will.
If it doesn't, TM calls that election. Late March, early April, as you say.
Yes. We have it.
PS: Who wins the election if it happens? - I desperately hope Labour but my device says the Cons with an overall majority of 50.
Oh wait...
Paddy Power is taking the piss out of its customers. Ratner implied they were idiots (how do you think we can make a crystal decanter for less than a fiver - because it’s shit).
People came to the conclusion that only an idiot would buy from him and so they didn’t want to be seen in his shops
All that is happening is the Withdrawal Agreement. This does not ensure a Hard Brexit. In fact the Backstop steers the other way.
I won't make the mistake of thinking that this forum is especially well informed about politics again. Quite apart from anything else, I think I might well have had a punt on a hung parliament.
https://twitter.com/PPOffers/status/587616467799027712
https://www.pimlicoplumbers.com/blog/after-yesterday-s-pro-brexit-siege-of-pimlico-headquarters-we-re-going-to-have-to-up-security
Here's one exchange:
Nigel Percival-Carruthers:
“Another chancer reveals his true nature.
London is a cancer on this country.”
Sod brexit and screw the EU:
“Why blame London?”
Timothy Dix:
“Because London is full of Remainers and foreigners.”
Pleased to report that I was banned by them a couple of years back. Badge of honour.
So little chance.
Here's a passport from the 80s.
Polling suggested Labour's share had peaked at c.36%, a week before polling day. In the event, it kept growing.
Anyway, I must be off. Play nicely, everyone.
* provided the views are not my views obvs - my views I think should be pandered to at all times.
No other option will give her a chance of survival.
Can we see its current equivalent ?
To nobody's surprise, one was Sir Ian Gilmour. But, I'm sure everyone is surprised that the other two were Enoch Powell and Ronald Bell.
The common characteristic of most the Labour names in David Herdson's frame is that they find hard questions extraordinarily challenging.
Malthouse revolves around removing the backstop and using the technical border tricks that the EU say they wont agree to.
JRM knows this and so it all an act on the way to his beloved No Deal.
There were certainly some very poor individual Conservative results but counter-balanced by some very good individual Conservative results. Sometimes these even happened in adjacent constituencies.
What we need to remember though is that personal anecdotes should always have warnings attached and that opinion polls you don't like are not necessarily wrong.
Even a step down from Blair, Brown, Balls and Miliband, Labour is scraping the barrel now.
I do have concerns about Jeremy though. My biggest one is whether his temperament will hold up to being PM. He seems a bit tetchy at times when faced with sharp scrutiny.
Do you not think?
Brexiteers want to go further back than that...
http://www.thisishartlepool.co.uk/attractions/artgallery.asp
"In 2002, the British Parliament passed the British Overseas Territories Act 2002. This reclassified the UK's dependent territories as overseas territories"
Gibraltar is officially a BOT.
In thirty years time, after feasting on our daily dead-rat ration, we'll hail the foresight of the British Trotskyite Party who pushed against the old ways.
Let's be honest, 'populist' is a fancy word for popular things you don't agree with.
A more logical definition of 'progressive' would be things that promote unity. Identity politics doesn't spring to mind, and hatred of people who don't agree with you doesn't either. I'd suggest the 'Golden Rule' as a rough guide but that would be wasted on some.
Edit, Yes, I don't always observe it but then I never claim to be a Saint.
I don't think [I may be wrong] that he's ever actually said that he doesn't want a deal. Just that we'd be fine without one, so don't need to accept punitive terms like the backstop.
Compare to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guernsey_passport#/media/File:Guernsey_passport.jpg
To game it out, firstly, I think it'll either be John McDonnell or a woman. There's a recognition that the next leader should be a woman, and none of the male candidates acceptable to the Corbynistas have done anything to emerge as a candidate good enough to override that. Excepting John Ashworth, who's a bit too nice for this particular bloodsport, they're yes men, intellectual pygmies (looking at you Mr. Burgon), or clearly don't want the job (Starmer). Lewis appears to want it but has burnt his bridges with the Corbyn machine over Brexit. Not that the women have done great either - but have the advantage of their sex, generally being fresh faces, and not being Richard Burgon. Of them Rayner seems most competent, has a good backstory, and seems to be back in favour with the Corbynistas after pissing them off for some reason I can't remember. Pidcock and Long-Bailey seem to just robotically repeat declarations of love for Corbyn. Osamor is toast if she runs. Butler may well be a decent bet then. Thornberry has I think played things badly. She could've been a unity candidate, but her pronouncements on Syria and anti-Semitism mean she's loathed by moderates, but is unlikely to be trusted as a pukka Corbyn heir.
But I think that McDonnell could get it if we're dealing with a post-split Labour - as the only person able to say they are more Jeremy than thou, or as a caretaker if no clear Corbyn candidate emerges.
Finally, if a moderate wins, it'll be Yvette Cooper. She's obviously still a bete noir for the bulk of Corbynistas, but has won a few friends among the most pro-European of them. She's also na northern MP - so could win some seemingly unlikely backing if her main opponent is a bit Islingtonian. Against her, is obviously the fact that She's one of the New Labour old guard and so the membership and union barons converting would be a huge admission of failure. Finally, the very things that are likely to lead to Corbynism falling out of favour (playing midwife to a dreadful Brexit, going further down far left rabbitholes in public) are ones that are liable to cause a split.
A tough one , but Butler seems a reasonable shout.
Truly we are in desperate times.
That's 1850s in the American Deep South.
A desire for some 'cultured' lifestyle of ease for the privileged based on exploitation either of the Third World for manufactured goods or an immigrant serf class for UK services and agriculture.
The areas which voted Leave are viewed as the equivalent of the backwoods / hillbillies / rednecks by this mentality.
I am indeed knocked down with a feather. I wonder if he was one of those types who simply enjoy confounding expectations. You think you know what my position on (X) is bound to be? - well think again sucker! Because, you know what, I'm a free thinker, I am, a free thinker.
However, why should progressives promote "unity"?
An example which springs to mind is Equal marriage. Most people would describe that as a progressive measure. It did not promote unity in any way. It divided opinion, often virulently, for the benefit of a relatively small group.
If we only had policies which unified we'd never really get much done. A striking example is obvious.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/almost-half-of-voters-are-dead-set-against-voting-for-trump/
Even setting aside Mueller....
He’s inept as a leader. Not good enough. Unconvincing and rubbish.
His role in this world is not orthodoxy, its protest. He runs from the microphones because playing this game, the game that MUST be played is just not him.
"One idea floating around the Berlaymont in recent days would extend the article 50 deadline not just for a few months but for two years to allow Britain to negotiate a free-trade agreement with the EU.
The withdrawal agreement would not be abandoned but would be placed in a quiet corner while Britain and the EU negotiated their future economic relationship.
Advocates of the proposal acknowledge that it creates problems for both sides but argue that most can be resolved"
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/may-s-prospects-for-brexit-deal-hinge-on-not-appeasing-brexiteer-mps-1.3778094
Extending A50 by 2 years is equivalent to a 2 year no change transition period but we wouldn't be a "rule-taker" and the backstop issue can be put back two years. Too sensible a proposal I guess.
Hardly ancient news.
Whether anything would actually be successfully negotiated in the extra two years is perhaps doubtful.
If i am right the bubbles have Burst, the same tactic now works beautifully doesn’t it?
And Am i right the bubbles have burst?
There's nothing wrong with an emotional approach of course. It's a better guide to action than logic most of the time.
I think the bigger issue for her is whether she'd be more 'electable' with the public than Corbyn is, because it's not clear to me that she would be.
And vice versa.
Progressive is a much more slippery term.
It’s been the plan all along. Sometimes takes a while to hollow someone’s support out and get through a politicains firewalls.
Remember the pantomime before Christmas? Tories in unison with their get Jez “they’re behind you”.
Jez cracked. Stupid Siberian Egg laying goose it looked like to me with my lip reading skills.
A mere hors d'oeuvre compared to the real thing coming throughout March (providing EU and Irish don’t surrender monkey to the English in February as I suspect they will)
Biden 53.3% Trump 40.4%
Sanders 52% Trump 41.2%
Harris 46.6% Trump 42.4%
Warren 45.8% Trump 42.5%
So all the top tier for the 2020 Democratic nomination lead Trump but while Biden and Sanders beat Trump comfortably, Trump is able to run Harris and Warren much closer
https://www.clickondetroit.com/michigan-politics/wdivdetroit-news-poll-trump-faces-uphill-re-election-battle-in-michigan
I continue to lay him for the Republican nomination.
Surely its only EV swing polls that matter between now and November 20?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-45082053
But to me the FA, nebulous though it is, sets us on path to hard brexit.