politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour needs a better response than the TIGers should resign a

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour needs a better response than the TIGers should resign and fight by-elections

If LAB had demanded that Jared O'Mara quit his Sheffield Hallam seat then its calls for the seven to resign and have by-elections would carry more weight.

Read the full story here

Big_G_NorthWales

First

Big_G_NorthWales

And I have not put on the central heating today for the first time since October

Spring on the way perhaps and everyone's Brexit will soon all be agreed amicably !!!!!

tlg86

But two of those four examples - on the same topic, but in reverse - have come quite recently.

Big_G_NorthWales

Every time I look at the broadcast media there is only Chris Williamson commenting, usually demanding by elections.

Is it me but are many labour mps avoiding the media at present, even plotting

oxfordsimon

Similary, Labour currently run Dudley council because of a defection - and didn't call for a council by-election then.

MarqueeMark

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Every time I look at the broadcast media there is only Chris Williamson commenting, usually demanding by elections.

Is it me but are many labour mps avoiding the media at present, even plotting

The more the people see of Williamson, the more Labour slide in the polls....

Keep his diary full of media apppointments, please.

tlg86

Shaun Woodward should have called a by-election in Witney, just for a laugh.

Charles

@ydoethur

FPT - on advanced notice if someone can demonstrate they have made reasonable efforts to provide notice (eg writing to last known address and asking a known communicant to pass the information on) then the courts will often seem that sufficient

Otherwise you get the farce of writs needing to be served in person that you sometimes see

MikeSmithson

tlg86 said:

Shaun Woodward should have called a by-election in Witney, just for a laugh.

If Mr. Woodward had not switched and created a vacancy in Witney at GE2001 then Cameron might never have been elected leader and PM - and we might never have had Brexit

Torby_Fennel

It's perfectly natural for Labour to wish to destroy this threat to them before it has chance to grow (and if they didn't think it had potential to threaten them they wouldn't be trying to crush it at birth). It's also perfectly natural (and reasonable) for TIG MPs to want time to build something solid enough to put to the electorate before actually putting it to the electorate. As for the Conservatives - they've calculated that TIG will hurt Labour more than it'll hurt them so they're happy to lose a few fingers and toes so long as Labour loses whole limbs.

Artist

They all won comfortably in 2015 under a centre-left leader as well, so there's no real ideological reason for them to hold a by-election.

RobD

Artist said:

They all won comfortably in 2015 under a centre-left leader as well, so there's no real ideological reason for them to hold a by-election.

But thy also stood under the 2017 manifesto....

JenS

The trouble with the Labour line-to-take on "hold a by election" is that it only has traction with those who hate the defectors anyway - who you don't need to address. In fact, it is the only completely irrelevant audience to craft a message towards.

You might want to appeal to the defectors to come back. You might want to reassure like minded potential defectors that there is no need to follow them out. You might want to reassure Labour voters that the problem has been recognised, and is being solved, and/or that the party will do something concrete to make itself more electable, in spite of the split.

The "hold a by election" line is utterly useless for winning over any of those audiences. It is positively counterproductive for most of them.

It shows a high level of political ineptitude and self indulgence that this is the Corbyn team response - and it is notable that it was not the John McDonnell response.

williamglenn

MikeSmithson said:

tlg86 said:

Shaun Woodward should have called a by-election in Witney, just for a laugh.

If Mr. Woodward had not switched and created a vacancy in Witney at GE2001 then Cameron might never have been elected leader and PM - and we might never have had Brexit

If William Hague hadn't led the Tories towards the Eurosceptic and illiberal fringe, Shaun Woodward might not have defected.

Charles

williamglenn said:

MikeSmithson said:

tlg86 said:

Shaun Woodward should have called a by-election in Witney, just for a laugh.

If Mr. Woodward had not switched and created a vacancy in Witney at GE2001 then Cameron might never have been elected leader and PM - and we might never have had Brexit

If William Hague hadn't led the Tories towards the Eurosceptic and illiberal fringe, Shaun Woodward might not have defected.

If Camilla Sainsbury hadn’t got knocked up he wouldn’t have had the money to defect...

Roger

If all the MPs who voted against Corbyn during the great Labour Revolt we could have a leader without a party which would be interesting. It wuld at least show the flaw in Labour's election procedure

El_Capitano

MikeSmithson said:

tlg86 said:

Shaun Woodward should have called a by-election in Witney, just for a laugh.

If Mr. Woodward had not switched and created a vacancy in Witney at GE2001 then Cameron might never have been elected leader and PM - and we might never have had Brexit

It's not infeasible that a centrist could take Witney at some point, and I'm not the only local to think so:

https://twitter.com/isabeloakeshott/status/789391672148799488

Liz Leffman isn't standing next time round as it happens, but if TIG were to put up a candidate, who knows what might transpire...

williamglenn

Nadine Dorries says only one member of the ERG actually wants to leave with no deal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47334575/brexit-nadine-dorries-on-erg-members-backing-pm-s-deal

david_herdson

MarqueeMark said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Every time I look at the broadcast media there is only Chris Williamson commenting, usually demanding by elections.

Is it me but are many labour mps avoiding the media at present, even plotting

The more the people see of Williamson, the more Labour slide in the polls....

Keep his diary full of media apppointments, please.

I think it's the other way round: the more Labour slide in the polls, the more that Williamson is the only Labour MP prepared to go on TV?

david_herdson

JenS said:

The trouble with the Labour line-to-take on "hold a by election" is that it only has traction with those who hate the defectors anyway - who you don't need to address. In fact, it is the only completely irrelevant audience to craft a message towards.

You might want to appeal to the defectors to come back. You might want to reassure like minded potential defectors that there is no need to follow them out. You might want to reassure Labour voters that the problem has been recognised, and is being solved, and/or that the party will do something concrete to make itself more electable, in spite of the split.

The "hold a by election" line is utterly useless for winning over any of those audiences. It is positively counterproductive for most of them.

It shows a high level of political ineptitude and self indulgence that this is the Corbyn team response - and it is notable that it was not the John McDonnell response.

One of the recent polls found that the public did think, by something like two-to-one, that the MPs should fight by-elections, but while that might back Labour's position, I'd also file it under "issues the public really don't give a toss about but will answer if you shove a clipboard under their nose".

Tykejohnno

All these hard remainers who have joined the New Remain party want a second referendum.

Any of them put themselves up for the vote yet ?

TOPPING

david_herdson said:

JenS said:

The trouble with the Labour line-to-take on "hold a by election" is that it only has traction with those who hate the defectors anyway - who you don't need to address. In fact, it is the only completely irrelevant audience to craft a message towards.

You might want to appeal to the defectors to come back. You might want to reassure like minded potential defectors that there is no need to follow them out. You might want to reassure Labour voters that the problem has been recognised, and is being solved, and/or that the party will do something concrete to make itself more electable, in spite of the split.

The "hold a by election" line is utterly useless for winning over any of those audiences. It is positively counterproductive for most of them.

It shows a high level of political ineptitude and self indulgence that this is the Corbyn team response - and it is notable that it was not the John McDonnell response.

One of the recent polls found that the public did think, by something like two-to-one, that the MPs should fight by-elections, but while that might back Labour's position, I'd also file it under "issues the public really don't give a toss about but will answer if you shove a clipboard under their nose".

Indeed. Just like Brexit.

david_herdson

Torby_Fennel said:

It's perfectly natural for Labour to wish to destroy this threat to them before it has chance to grow (and if they didn't think it had potential to threaten them they wouldn't be trying to crush it at birth). It's also perfectly natural (and reasonable) for TIG MPs to want time to build something solid enough to put to the electorate before actually putting it to the electorate. As for the Conservatives - they've calculated that TIG will hurt Labour more than it'll hurt them so they're happy to lose a few fingers and toes so long as Labour loses whole limbs.

The best TIG argument against by-elections (right now) is that it'd take them all out of the Commons at the precise moment that they have maximum leverage on the most important question to them and to the country. Obviously, that argument has an expiry date but by then, the heat might have gone out of the issue.

TOPPING

david_herdson said:

Torby_Fennel said:

It's perfectly natural for Labour to wish to destroy this threat to them before it has chance to grow (and if they didn't think it had potential to threaten them they wouldn't be trying to crush it at birth). It's also perfectly natural (and reasonable) for TIG MPs to want time to build something solid enough to put to the electorate before actually putting it to the electorate. As for the Conservatives - they've calculated that TIG will hurt Labour more than it'll hurt them so they're happy to lose a few fingers and toes so long as Labour loses whole limbs.

The best TIG argument against by-elections (right now) is that it'd take them all out of the Commons at the precise moment that they have maximum leverage on the most important question to them and to the country. Obviously, that argument has an expiry date but by then, the heat might have gone out of the issue.

Whatever the optics, they would be mad to chance losing their seats right now. They hold what might be the greatest leverage they ever will and a few more of them will see a formal meeting at No.10 to discuss options.

Luckyguy1983

Torby_Fennel said:

It's perfectly natural for Labour to wish to destroy this threat to them before it has chance to grow (and if they didn't think it had potential to threaten them they wouldn't be trying to crush it at birth). It's also perfectly natural (and reasonable) for TIG MPs to want time to build something solid enough to put to the electorate before actually putting it to the electorate. As for the Conservatives - they've calculated that TIG will hurt Labour more than it'll hurt them so they're happy to lose a few fingers and toes so long as Labour loses whole limbs.

Fingers and toes is a rather flattering metaphor for what the Tories lost so far. I'd liken it more to getting rid of a bunion.

Andrew

MarqueeMark said:

The more the people see of Williamson, the more Labour slide in the polls....

Indeed.

You'd imagine Labour would try keep him away from the media. The problem is ...... he's just saying what Corbyn's thinking.

Pulpstar

williamglenn said:

Nadine Dorries says only one member of the ERG actually wants to leave with no deal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47334575/brexit-nadine-dorries-on-erg-members-backing-pm-s-deal

Is it Anne Marie Morris ?

IanB2

Lead could do with a proof reading.

OblitusSumMe

Big_G_NorthWales said:

And I have not put on the central heating today for the first time since October

Spring on the way perhaps and everyone's Brexit will soon all be agreed amicably !!!!!

It was 18C in Aberdeenshire yesterday.

In his temperature scale, Isaac Newton in 1701 defined 6 degrees Newton as "the heat at midday about the month of July". Six degrees Newton is just over 18C.

IanB2

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Every time I look at the broadcast media there is only Chris Williamson commenting, usually demanding by elections.

Is it me but are many labour mps avoiding the media at present, even plotting

Maybe there are just way too many that Labour can't risk putting up?

eek

williamglenn said:

Nadine Dorries says only one member of the ERG actually wants to leave with no deal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47334575/brexit-nadine-dorries-on-erg-members-backing-pm-s-deal

At some point (in the very near future) they need to actually vote for either the deal on the table or admit it's a bad job and suggest we revoke and try again...

david_herdson

On topic, as far as I can tell, there is only one other instance of a defector to Labour resigning to recontest the seat, in addition to the Preston by-election Mike quotes: the Hull by-election in 1926, when Joseph Kenworthy defected from the Liberals (and held the seat at the by-election).

There are several other pre-WW2 examples of MPs from other parties doing likewise but it's still pretty rare.

IanB2

williamglenn said:

Nadine Dorries says only one member of the ERG actually wants to leave with no deal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47334575/brexit-nadine-dorries-on-erg-members-backing-pm-s-deal

The rest in their hearts don't really want to leave at all?

oxfordsimon

eek said:

williamglenn said:

Nadine Dorries says only one member of the ERG actually wants to leave with no deal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47334575/brexit-nadine-dorries-on-erg-members-backing-pm-s-deal

At some point (in the very near future) they need to actually vote for either the deal on the table or admit it's a bad job and suggest we revoke and try again...

Because the EU is going to be far more likely to give us a better deal after having wasted 2 years on the current one...

IanB2

OblitusSumMe said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

And I have not put on the central heating today for the first time since October

Spring on the way perhaps and everyone's Brexit will soon all be agreed amicably !!!!!

It was 18C in Aberdeenshire yesterday.

In his temperature scale, Isaac Newton in 1701 defined 6 degrees Newton as "the heat at midday about the month of July". Six degrees Newton is just over 18C.

The wonder of a fohn wind.

TudorRose

david_herdson said:

JenS said:

The trouble with the Labour line-to-take on "hold a by election" is that it only has traction with those who hate the defectors anyway - who you don't need to address. In fact, it is the only completely irrelevant audience to craft a message towards.

You might want to appeal to the defectors to come back. You might want to reassure like minded potential defectors that there is no need to follow them out. You might want to reassure Labour voters that the problem has been recognised, and is being solved, and/or that the party will do something concrete to make itself more electable, in spite of the split.

The "hold a by election" line is utterly useless for winning over any of those audiences. It is positively counterproductive for most of them.

It shows a high level of political ineptitude and self indulgence that this is the Corbyn team response - and it is notable that it was not the John McDonnell response.

One of the recent polls found that the public did think, by something like two-to-one, that the MPs should fight by-elections, but while that might back Labour's position, I'd also file it under "issues the public really don't give a toss about but will answer if you shove a clipboard under their nose".

There's an online petition with around 100,000 signatures for by-elections in Tigger seats, so some public awareness and support.

AlastairMeeks

The call by Jeremy Corbyn to include a provision in the next manifesto making it easier for constituencies to ask for a recall when MPs change parties was not just calculated to stiffen the resolve of other potential defectors but profoundly silly. By that stage the horses would have bolted. It would give rise to absolutely no consequences for the current batch of defectors, who if re-elected at the next general election would already have refreshed their mandate.

Chris

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

There are two stunning bets on offer right now on BF exchange:

- lay Corbyn as PM after May at 7.8
- lay a no deal exit on 29/3 at 5.0 (out from 4.4 just a few hours ago)

Just curious about why you think laying the No Deal would be good value.

Do we have any tangible evidence that the EU will agree an extension if there is still deadlock in the Commons?

I always believed that May would never go for no deal. It's the worst legacy in history for any PM. And she promised business she would never go there, two years back.

Subsequently, she has clearly been motivated the most by holding her beloved Tory party together, rather than delivering the best outcome for the country (otherwise she would have bitten Corbyn's hand off for his CU proposal). Now, it is obvious that 'no deal' will destroy the Tory party, not withstanding its impact on the country.

Therefore the BF bet is hugely attractive. Especially as it is tied to 29th March.

Thanks. I just wondered whether anything had changed in the last day or so. Obviously the odds have changed quite a bit. I'm not sure why.

I have a bet on No Deal, but essentially as an insurance policy. I'll be very happy if I lose the bet (provided No Deal doesn't materialise in May).

If you fancy adding to your insurance policy, I will happily take the other side of the bet.

No, I don't want to add to it, thanks. But I don't think 20% is obviously too high a probability for No Deal next month, either.

Do you foresee an extension even if the Commons hasn't approved the deal by 29 March?

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Meeks, Corbyn: reacting to yesterday's crisis tomorrow.

IanB2

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

There are two stunning bets on offer right now on BF exchange:

- lay Corbyn as PM after May at 7.8
- lay a no deal exit on 29/3 at 5.0 (out from 4.4 just a few hours ago)

Just curious about why you think laying the No Deal would be good value.

Do we have any tangible evidence that the EU will agree an extension if there is still deadlock in the Commons?

I always believed that May would never go for no deal. It's the worst legacy in history for any PM. And she promised business she would never go there, two years back.

Subsequently, she has clearly been motivated the most by holding her beloved Tory party together, rather than delivering the best outcome for the country (otherwise she would have bitten Corbyn's hand off for his CU proposal). Now, it is obvious that 'no deal' will destroy the Tory party, not withstanding its impact on the country.

Therefore the BF bet is hugely attractive. Especially as it is tied to 29th March.

Thanks. I just wondered whether anything had changed in the last day or so. Obviously the odds have changed quite a bit. I'm not sure why.

I have a bet on No Deal, but essentially as an insurance policy. I'll be very happy if I lose the bet (provided No Deal doesn't materialise in May).

If you fancy adding to your insurance policy, I will happily take the other side of the bet.

No, I don't want to add to it, thanks. But I don't think 20% is obviously too high a probability for No Deal next month, either.

Do you foresee an extension even if the Commons hasn't approved the deal by 29 March?

For sure. Or revocation. May can't risk no deal. Especially after all the promises she's made. No PM could.

williamglenn

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

IanB2

AlastairMeeks said:

The call by Jeremy Corbyn to include a provision in the next manifesto making it easier for constituencies to ask for a recall when MPs change parties was not just calculated to stiffen the resolve of other potential defectors but profoundly silly. By that stage the horses would have bolted. It would give rise to absolutely no consequences for the current batch of defectors, who if re-elected at the next general election would already have refreshed their mandate.

Ironically it would deter them from rejoining. So who says Corbyn doesn't think well ahead?

Richard_Nabavi

AlastairMeeks said:

The call by Jeremy Corbyn to include a provision in the next manifesto making it easier for constituencies to ask for a recall when MPs change parties was not just calculated to stiffen the resolve of other potential defectors but profoundly silly. By that stage the horses would have bolted. It would give rise to absolutely no consequences for the current batch of defectors, who if re-elected at the next general election would already have refreshed their mandate.

True, but if he did get into government and enact this, it would allow the Labour whips to threaten any refuseniks with being chucked out of the party and having therefore to defend a by-election.

OblitusSumMe

IanB2 said:

OblitusSumMe said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

And I have not put on the central heating today for the first time since October

Spring on the way perhaps and everyone's Brexit will soon all be agreed amicably !!!!!

It was 18C in Aberdeenshire yesterday.

In his temperature scale, Isaac Newton in 1701 defined 6 degrees Newton as "the heat at midday about the month of July". Six degrees Newton is just over 18C.

The wonder of a fohn wind.

Not with a southerly wind to the south of the mountains I would have thought.

Richard_Nabavi

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Three months? Who on earth is looking that far ahead?

IanB2

OblitusSumMe said:

IanB2 said:

OblitusSumMe said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

And I have not put on the central heating today for the first time since October

Spring on the way perhaps and everyone's Brexit will soon all be agreed amicably !!!!!

It was 18C in Aberdeenshire yesterday.

In his temperature scale, Isaac Newton in 1701 defined 6 degrees Newton as "the heat at midday about the month of July". Six degrees Newton is just over 18C.

The wonder of a fohn wind.

Not with a southerly wind to the south of the mountains I would have thought.

There's no other way Aberdeenshire gets to 18 C in February. Must be a descending airflow off the Cairngorms.

david_herdson

TudorRose said:

david_herdson said:

JenS said:

The trouble with the Labour line-to-take on "hold a by election" is that it only has traction with those who hate the defectors anyway - who you don't need to address. In fact, it is the only completely irrelevant audience to craft a message towards.

You might want to appeal to the defectors to come back. You might want to reassure like minded potential defectors that there is no need to follow them out. You might want to reassure Labour voters that the problem has been recognised, and is being solved, and/or that the party will do something concrete to make itself more electable, in spite of the split.

The "hold a by election" line is utterly useless for winning over any of those audiences. It is positively counterproductive for most of them.

It shows a high level of political ineptitude and self indulgence that this is the Corbyn team response - and it is notable that it was not the John McDonnell response.

One of the recent polls found that the public did think, by something like two-to-one, that the MPs should fight by-elections, but while that might back Labour's position, I'd also file it under "issues the public really don't give a toss about but will answer if you shove a clipboard under their nose".

There's an online petition with around 100,000 signatures for by-elections in Tigger seats, so some public awareness and support.

A number which I imagine has a sizable overlap with the Momentum keyboard army. Meanwhile, in the real world ...

Chris

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

There are two stunning bets on offer right now on BF exchange:

- lay Corbyn as PM after May at 7.8
- lay a no deal exit on 29/3 at 5.0 (out from 4.4 just a few hours ago)

Just curious about why you think laying the No Deal would be good value.

Do we have any tangible evidence that the EU will agree an extension if there is still deadlock in the Commons?

I always believed that May would never go for no deal. It's the worst legacy in history for any PM. And she promised business she would never go there, two years back.

Subsequently, she has clearly been motivated the most by holding her beloved Tory party together, rather than delivering the best outcome for the country (otherwise she would have bitten Corbyn's hand off for his CU proposal). Now, it is obvious that 'no deal' will destroy the Tory party, not withstanding its impact on the country.

Therefore the BF bet is hugely attractive. Especially as it is tied to 29th March.

Thanks. I just wondered whether anything had changed in the last day or so. Obviously the odds have changed quite a bit. I'm not sure why.

I have a bet on No Deal, but essentially as an insurance policy. I'll be very happy if I lose the bet (provided No Deal doesn't materialise in May).

If you fancy adding to your insurance policy, I will happily take the other side of the bet.

No, I don't want to add to it, thanks. But I don't think 20% is obviously too high a probability for No Deal next month, either.

Do you foresee an extension even if the Commons hasn't approved the deal by 29 March?

For sure. Or revocation. May can't risk no deal. Especially after all the promises she's made. No PM could.

But what I meant was do you foresee the other countries agreeing to the request, if parliament is still deadlocked?

williamglenn

Richard_Nabavi said:

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Three months? Who on earth is looking that far ahead?

They even suggest she should go out "on a high" after the local elections!

IanB2

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

There are two stunning bets on offer right now on BF exchange:

- lay Corbyn as PM after May at 7.8
- lay a no deal exit on 29/3 at 5.0 (out from 4.4 just a few hours ago)

Just curious about why you think laying the No Deal would be good value.

Do we have any tangible evidence that the EU will agree an extension if there is still deadlock in the Commons?

I always believed that May would never go for no deal. It's the worst legacy in history for any PM. And she promised business she would never go there, two years back.

Subsequently, she has clearly been motivated the most by holding her beloved Tory party together, rather than delivering the best outcome for the country (otherwise she would have bitten Corbyn's hand off for his CU proposal). Now, it is obvious that 'no deal' will destroy the Tory party, not withstanding its impact on the country.

Therefore the BF bet is hugely attractive. Especially as it is tied to 29th March.

Thanks. I just wondered whether anything had changed in the last day or so. Obviously the odds have changed quite a bit. I'm not sure why.

I have a bet on No Deal, but essentially as an insurance policy. I'll be very happy if I lose the bet (provided No Deal doesn't materialise in May).

If you fancy adding to your insurance policy, I will happily take the other side of the bet.

No, I don't want to add to it, thanks. But I don't think 20% is obviously too high a probability for No Deal next month, either.

Do you foresee an extension even if the Commons hasn't approved the deal by 29 March?

For sure. Or revocation. May can't risk no deal. Especially after all the promises she's made. No PM could.

But what I meant was do you foresee the other countries agreeing to the request, if parliament is still deadlocked?

Absolutely. Why wouldn't they?

AlastairMeeks

Richard_Nabavi said:

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Three months? Who on earth is looking that far ahead?

Timescales, huh. I wrote this 12 days ago:

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/02/10/crossing-the-rubicon/

It feels like half a lifetime ago now.

TheWhiteRabbit

El_Capitano said:

MikeSmithson said:

tlg86 said:

Shaun Woodward should have called a by-election in Witney, just for a laugh.

If Mr. Woodward had not switched and created a vacancy in Witney at GE2001 then Cameron might never have been elected leader and PM - and we might never have had Brexit

It's not infeasible that a centrist could take Witney at some point, and I'm not the only local to think so:

https://twitter.com/isabeloakeshott/status/789391672148799488

Liz Leffman isn't standing next time round as it happens, but if TIG were to put up a candidate, who knows what might transpire...

She fell back, relative to the by-election, at GE2017.

TudorRose

david_herdson said:

TudorRose said:

david_herdson said:

JenS said:

The trouble with the Labour line-to-take on "hold a by election" is that it only has traction with those who hate the defectors anyway - who you don't need to address. In fact, it is the only completely irrelevant audience to craft a message towards.

You might want to appeal to the defectors to come back. You might want to reassure like minded potential defectors that there is no need to follow them out. You might want to reassure Labour voters that the problem has been recognised, and is being solved, and/or that the party will do something concrete to make itself more electable, in spite of the split.

The "hold a by election" line is utterly useless for winning over any of those audiences. It is positively counterproductive for most of them.

It shows a high level of political ineptitude and self indulgence that this is the Corbyn team response - and it is notable that it was not the John McDonnell response.

One of the recent polls found that the public did think, by something like two-to-one, that the MPs should fight by-elections, but while that might back Labour's position, I'd also file it under "issues the public really don't give a toss about but will answer if you shove a clipboard under their nose".

There's an online petition with around 100,000 signatures for by-elections in Tigger seats, so some public awareness and support.

A number which I imagine has a sizable overlap with the Momentum keyboard army. Meanwhile, in the real world ...

I think some of it is driven by Leave/UKIP supporters wanting to reduce the chances of a second referendum. Strange bedfellows...

TGOHF

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Well quite - they don't want her negotiating the next phase of talks with the EU- time for a fresh vision.

TudorRose

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

There are two stunning bets on offer right now on BF exchange:

- lay Corbyn as PM after May at 7.8
- lay a no deal exit on 29/3 at 5.0 (out from 4.4 just a few hours ago)

Just curious about why you think laying the No Deal would be good value.

Do we have any tangible evidence that the EU will agree an extension if there is still deadlock in the Commons?

I always believed that May would never go for no deal. It's the worst legacy in history for any PM. And she promised business she would never go there, two years back.

Subsequently, she has clearly been motivated the most by holding her beloved Tory party together, rather than delivering the best outcome for the country (otherwise she would have bitten Corbyn's hand off for his CU proposal). Now, it is obvious that 'no deal' will destroy the Tory party, not withstanding its impact on the country.

Therefore the BF bet is hugely attractive. Especially as it is tied to 29th March.

Thanks. I just wondered whether anything had changed in the last day or so. Obviously the odds have changed quite a bit. I'm not sure why.

I have a bet on No Deal, but essentially as an insurance policy. I'll be very happy if I lose the bet (provided No Deal doesn't materialise in May).

If you fancy adding to your insurance policy, I will happily take the other side of the bet.

No, I don't want to add to it, thanks. But I don't think 20% is obviously too high a probability for No Deal next month, either.

Do you foresee an extension even if the Commons hasn't approved the deal by 29 March?

For sure. Or revocation. May can't risk no deal. Especially after all the promises she's made. No PM could.

But what I meant was do you foresee the other countries agreeing to the request, if parliament is still deadlocked?

Absolutely. Why wouldn't they?

To force a decision?

Scott_P

They are freaking out...

https://twitter.com/Change_Britain/status/1098990522755108865

AlastairMeeks

Richard_Nabavi said:

AlastairMeeks said:

The call by Jeremy Corbyn to include a provision in the next manifesto making it easier for constituencies to ask for a recall when MPs change parties was not just calculated to stiffen the resolve of other potential defectors but profoundly silly. By that stage the horses would have bolted. It would give rise to absolutely no consequences for the current batch of defectors, who if re-elected at the next general election would already have refreshed their mandate.

True, but if he did get into government and enact this, it would allow the Labour whips to threaten any refuseniks with being chucked out of the party and having therefore to defend a by-election.

Doesn't that just encourage current wobblers to go now?

Penddu

Lets just say that the law changed to force a by election. Potential defectors then just wouldnt defect - they would just ignore the whip and do their own thing. Like ERG.

Scott_P

Yesterday's woman...

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1098987691243393025

Penddu

And i dont remember Labour in Welsh Assembly insisting on a byelection when Dafydd Ellis Thomas defected to them. Just a bunch of whingeing bad losers.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/Maomentum_/status/1098991932263542785

El_Capitano

TheWhiteRabbit said:

El_Capitano said:

MikeSmithson said:

tlg86 said:

Shaun Woodward should have called a by-election in Witney, just for a laugh.

If Mr. Woodward had not switched and created a vacancy in Witney at GE2001 then Cameron might never have been elected leader and PM - and we might never have had Brexit

It's not infeasible that a centrist could take Witney at some point, and I'm not the only local to think so:

https://twitter.com/isabeloakeshott/status/789391672148799488

Liz Leffman isn't standing next time round as it happens, but if TIG were to put up a candidate, who knows what might transpire...

She fell back, relative to the by-election, at GE2017.

Indeed. There was very little Lib Dem campaigning in Witney for GE2017 because it wasn't a target seat and all local resources had been diverted to OxWAb, and the Lib Dem organisation locally isn't strong enough to win the seat for the foreseeable.

But the seat's demographics are changing, becoming more urban and within the ambit of Oxford - which reduces the Tories' two advantages (the rural areas and Carterton's loyalty to the military). In 10/15 years' time I don't expect it to be such a safe seat.

IanB2

TudorRose said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

There are two stunning bets on offer right now on BF exchange:

- lay Corbyn as PM after May at 7.8
- lay a no deal exit on 29/3 at 5.0 (out from 4.4 just a few hours ago)

Just curious about why you think laying the No Deal would be good value.

Do we have any tangible evidence that the EU will agree an extension if there is still deadlock in the Commons?

I always believed that May would never go for no deal. It's the worst legacy in history for any PM. And she promised business she would never go there, two years back.

Subsequently, she has clearly been motivated the most by holding her beloved Tory party together, rather than delivering the best outcome for the country (otherwise she would have bitten Corbyn's hand off for his CU proposal). Now, it is obvious that 'no deal' will destroy the Tory party, not withstanding its impact on the country.

Therefore the BF bet is hugely attractive. Especially as it is tied to 29th March.

Thanks. I just wondered whether anything had changed in the last day or so. Obviously the odds have changed quite a bit. I'm not sure why.

I have a bet on No Deal, but essentially as an insurance policy. I'll be very happy if I lose the bet (provided No Deal doesn't materialise in May).

If you fancy adding to your insurance policy, I will happily take the other side of the bet.

No, I don't want to add to it, thanks. But I don't think 20% is obviously too high a probability for No Deal next month, either.

Do you foresee an extension even if the Commons hasn't approved the deal by 29 March?

For sure. Or revocation. May can't risk no deal. Especially after all the promises she's made. No PM could.

But what I meant was do you foresee the other countries agreeing to the request, if parliament is still deadlocked?

Absolutely. Why wouldn't they?

To force a decision?

No deal is a failure to make a decision.

They'd rather increase the chances of a sensible eventual decision.

The only scenario where you might have a point is if they are sure we would blink and revoke, if denied the chance to delay. high stakes, that.

Chris

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

There are two stunning bets on offer right now on BF exchange:

- lay Corbyn as PM after May at 7.8
- lay a no deal exit on 29/3 at 5.0 (out from 4.4 just a few hours ago)

Just curious about why you think laying the No Deal would be good value.

Do we have any tangible evidence that the EU will agree an extension if there is still deadlock in the Commons?

I always believed that May would never go for no deal. It's the worst legacy in history for any PM. And she promised business she would never go there, two years back.

Subsequently, she has clearly been motivated the most by holding her beloved Tory party together, rather than delivering the best outcome for the country (otherwise she would have bitten Corbyn's hand off for his CU proposal). Now, it is obvious that 'no deal' will destroy the Tory party, not withstanding its impact on the country.

Therefore the BF bet is hugely attractive. Especially as it is tied to 29th March.

Thanks. I just wondered whether anything had changed in the last day or so. Obviously the odds have changed quite a bit. I'm not sure why.

I have a bet on No Deal, but essentially as an insurance policy. I'll be very happy if I lose the bet (provided No Deal doesn't materialise in May).

If you fancy adding to your insurance policy, I will happily take the other side of the bet.

No, I don't want to add to it, thanks. But I don't think 20% is obviously too high a probability for No Deal next month, either.

Do you foresee an extension even if the Commons hasn't approved the deal by 29 March?

For sure. Or revocation. May can't risk no deal. Especially after all the promises she's made. No PM could.

But what I meant was do you foresee the other countries agreeing to the request, if parliament is still deadlocked?

Absolutely. Why wouldn't they?

Well, a number of people within the EU have said they wouldn't. Verhofstadt said an extension beyond the Euro-elections was "unthinkable", for example.

I suppose it depends whether you think they're willing to carry on extending the timetable indefinitely for no particular reason. If not, the line has to be drawn somewhere.

As a barrack-room European head of government, I can see an argument for the Council declaring next month that an extension will be dependent on the deal passing the Commons by 29 March.

Richard_Nabavi

AlastairMeeks said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

AlastairMeeks said:

The call by Jeremy Corbyn to include a provision in the next manifesto making it easier for constituencies to ask for a recall when MPs change parties was not just calculated to stiffen the resolve of other potential defectors but profoundly silly. By that stage the horses would have bolted. It would give rise to absolutely no consequences for the current batch of defectors, who if re-elected at the next general election would already have refreshed their mandate.

True, but if he did get into government and enact this, it would allow the Labour whips to threaten any refuseniks with being chucked out of the party and having therefore to defend a by-election.

Doesn't that just encourage current wobblers to go now?

In principle, yes, if they take it seriously. But I imagine whether any would-be defectors will be much more influenced by immediate concerns and whether or not Corbyn shows any signs of addressing them.

TudorRose

TGOHF said:

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Well quite - they don't want her negotiating the next phase of talks with the EU- time for a fresh vision.

I think this is a really key point. Assuming TM's deal gets through in some form over the coming weeks/months the real negotiating has only just begun with the EU. I would hope (perhaps unreasonably) that the Government would have learnt from the current experience that you need to have the right plan and the right person in place.

But don't ask me who that might be....

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/George_Osborne/status/1098987661530972161

Richard_Nabavi

TudorRose said:

TGOHF said:

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Well quite - they don't want her negotiating the next phase of talks with the EU- time for a fresh vision.

I think this is a really key point. Assuming TM's deal gets through in some form over the coming weeks/months the real negotiating has only just begun with the EU. I would hope (perhaps unreasonably) that the Government would have learnt from the current experience that you need to have the right plan and the right person in place.

But don't ask me who that might be....

Whoever it is will be blamed for going native and turning out to be a closet Remoaner who gave in on everything.

You may bookmark this post.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/tictoc/status/1098994706225213440

TudorRose

IanB2 said:

TudorRose said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

Chris said:

IanB2 said:

There are two stunning bets on offer right now on BF exchange:

- lay Corbyn as PM after May at 7.8
- lay a no deal exit on 29/3 at 5.0 (out from 4.4 just a few hours ago)

Just curious about why you think laying the No Deal would be good value.

Do we have any tangible evidence that the EU will agree an extension if there is still deadlock in the Commons?

I always believed that May would never go for no deal. It's the worst legacy in history for any PM. And she promised business she would never go there, two years back.

Subsequently, she has clearly been motivated the most by holding her beloved Tory party together, rather than delivering the best outcome for the country (otherwise she would have bitten Corbyn's hand off for his CU proposal). Now, it is obvious that 'no deal' will destroy the Tory party, not withstanding its impact on the country.

Therefore the BF bet is hugely attractive. Especially as it is tied to 29th March.

Thanks. I just wondered whether anything had changed in the last day or so. Obviously the odds have changed quite a bit. I'm not sure why.

I have a bet on No Deal, but essentially as an insurance policy. I'll be very happy if I lose the bet (provided No Deal doesn't materialise in May).

If you fancy adding to your insurance policy, I will happily take the other side of the bet.

No, I don't want to add to it, thanks. But I don't think 20% is obviously too high a probability for No Deal next month, either.

Do you foresee an extension even if the Commons hasn't approved the deal by 29 March?

For sure. Or revocation. May can't risk no deal. Especially after all the promises she's made. No PM could.

But what I meant was do you foresee the other countries agreeing to the request, if parliament is still deadlocked?

Absolutely. Why wouldn't they?

To force a decision?

No deal is a failure to make a decision.

They'd rather increase the chances of a sensible eventual decision.

The only scenario where you might have a point is if they are sure we would blink and revoke, if denied the chance to delay. high stakes, that.

I think they believe that the HoC will take May's deal if push comes to shove. None of them want prolonged uncertainty because of their own domestic economic and political pressures.

TGOHF

TudorRose said:

TGOHF said:

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Well quite - they don't want her negotiating the next phase of talks with the EU- time for a fresh vision.

I think this is a really key point. Assuming TM's deal gets through in some form over the coming weeks/months the real negotiating has only just begun with the EU. I would hope (perhaps unreasonably) that the Government would have learnt from the current experience that you need to have the right plan and the right person in place.

But don't ask me who that might be....

Gove with Cummings back as Chief of Staff/EU strategist.

DecrepitJohnL

williamglenn said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Three months? Who on earth is looking that far ahead?

They even suggest she should go out "on a high" after the local elections!

And if the PM does not retire, then the same senior ministers might, just might, no-confidence her at the end of the year.

algarkirk

IanB2 said:

williamglenn said:

Nadine Dorries says only one member of the ERG actually wants to leave with no deal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47334575/brexit-nadine-dorries-on-erg-members-backing-pm-s-deal

The rest in their hearts don't really want to leave at all?

One more reason why TMs deal will eventually go through. By mid March the fig leaf required will be small and thin, but it'll do. Lots of Labour will abstain 'to prevent crashing out apocalypse' or some such. The story will then move on quite quickly to the next even more sticky phase.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/lisaocarroll/status/1098994862714744834

Dadge

oxfordsimon said:

eek said:

williamglenn said:

Nadine Dorries says only one member of the ERG actually wants to leave with no deal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47334575/brexit-nadine-dorries-on-erg-members-backing-pm-s-deal

At some point (in the very near future) they need to actually vote for either the deal on the table or admit it's a bad job and suggest we revoke and try again...

Because the EU is going to be far more likely to give us a better deal after having wasted 2 years on the current one...

Given that the backstop ain't going nowhere, a "better deal" can only be a softer one. The ERG know this, and are prepared to force the country towards No Deal. Therefore it's up to the rest of parliament to thwart them. I think any delay or revocation will only be to get the current WA agreed by parliament, or if the ERG aren't careful, a softer WA that includes a de jure customs union (instead of the de facto one implied by the backstop).

DecrepitJohnL

deleted

malcolmg

IanB2 said:

OblitusSumMe said:

IanB2 said:

OblitusSumMe said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

And I have not put on the central heating today for the first time since October

Spring on the way perhaps and everyone's Brexit will soon all be agreed amicably !!!!!

It was 18C in Aberdeenshire yesterday.

In his temperature scale, Isaac Newton in 1701 defined 6 degrees Newton as "the heat at midday about the month of July". Six degrees Newton is just over 18C.

The wonder of a fohn wind.

Not with a southerly wind to the south of the mountains I would have thought.

There's no other way Aberdeenshire gets to 18 C in February. Must be a descending airflow off the Cairngorms.

It was reported as just that on weather

williamglenn

algarkirk said:

IanB2 said:

williamglenn said:

Nadine Dorries says only one member of the ERG actually wants to leave with no deal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-47334575/brexit-nadine-dorries-on-erg-members-backing-pm-s-deal

The rest in their hearts don't really want to leave at all?

One more reason why TMs deal will eventually go through. By mid March the fig leaf required will be small and thin, but it'll do. Lots of Labour will abstain 'to prevent crashing out apocalypse' or some such. The story will then move on quite quickly to the next even more sticky phase.

You need to factor in that it's not a one-off vote. They have to approve the deal in the meaningful vote, and then pass the legislation, most likely after an extension, and the legislation could reopen the whole controversy about what precisely we're agreeing to.

Richard_Nabavi

The (re-tread) story about May going in the summer is clearly being deliberately leaked to encourage the recalcitrant to back the deal.

Mind you, I've long thought that she'll go this year.

IanB2

Councillor defections this week so far:

Brighton - Lab to Con
Brighton - Lab (former council leader) to IND
Derby - Lab to IND
Guildford - Con to IND
Kingston - LD to Green
Stafford - Lab to IND
Swindon - Lab to IND
W Somerset - Con to LD

malcolmg

El_Capitano said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

El_Capitano said:

MikeSmithson said:

tlg86 said:

Shaun Woodward should have called a by-election in Witney, just for a laugh.

If Mr. Woodward had not switched and created a vacancy in Witney at GE2001 then Cameron might never have been elected leader and PM - and we might never have had Brexit

It's not infeasible that a centrist could take Witney at some point, and I'm not the only local to think so:

https://twitter.com/isabeloakeshott/status/789391672148799488

Liz Leffman isn't standing next time round as it happens, but if TIG were to put up a candidate, who knows what might transpire...

She fell back, relative to the by-election, at GE2017.

Indeed. There was very little Lib Dem campaigning in Witney for GE2017 because it wasn't a target seat and all local resources had been diverted to OxWAb, and the Lib Dem organisation locally isn't strong enough to win the seat for the foreseeable.

But the seat's demographics are changing, becoming more urban and within the ambit of Oxford - which reduces the Tories' two advantages (the rural areas and Carterton's loyalty to the military). In 10/15 years' time I don't expect it to be such a safe seat.

Libdem conference in Scotland has managed to get about 60 attendees in a 700 capacity hall, surprised that many are there.

Richard_Tyndall

TOPPING said:

david_herdson said:

Torby_Fennel said:

It's perfectly natural for Labour to wish to destroy this threat to them before it has chance to grow (and if they didn't think it had potential to threaten them they wouldn't be trying to crush it at birth). It's also perfectly natural (and reasonable) for TIG MPs to want time to build something solid enough to put to the electorate before actually putting it to the electorate. As for the Conservatives - they've calculated that TIG will hurt Labour more than it'll hurt them so they're happy to lose a few fingers and toes so long as Labour loses whole limbs.

The best TIG argument against by-elections (right now) is that it'd take them all out of the Commons at the precise moment that they have maximum leverage on the most important question to them and to the country. Obviously, that argument has an expiry date but by then, the heat might have gone out of the issue.

Whatever the optics, they would be mad to chance losing their seats right now. They hold what might be the greatest leverage they ever will and a few more of them will see a formal meeting at No.10 to discuss options.

And to be fair I don't see why they should. They were elected as individual representatives and much as I disagree with every one of them on the main issue of the day, they should not be bound by the party system to stand down.

It is different if you are an MEP who was elected on a party slate. In that instance I think the law should be changed so you are forced to stand down.

algarkirk

TGOHF said:

TudorRose said:

TGOHF said:

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Well quite - they don't want her negotiating the next phase of talks with the EU- time for a fresh vision.

I think this is a really key point. Assuming TM's deal gets through in some form over the coming weeks/months the real negotiating has only just begun with the EU. I would hope (perhaps unreasonably) that the Government would have learnt from the current experience that you need to have the right plan and the right person in place.

But don't ask me who that might be....

Gove with Cummings back as Chief of Staff/EU strategist.

No candidate really makes sense as next PM to negotiate the next phase, because it is impossible to think of someone who believes that the outcome they will inherit is the best possible option in the best of all possible worlds. The great majority of candidates have queered their own pitch (Boris, DD and others) and the rest are mostly people who think this was a terrible idea anyway (Hammond and others). Which would, to be fair, make Gove the pick of the bunch. But, and it is a big but, there are millions of people who don't like him at all. I think they are wrong but it makes no difference. He is widely hated. While he could beat Labour in in GE under JC that would also be true of Alan Partridge with Harry Worth as deputy. But he won't be facing JC in 2022.

(BTW the people who would really scare me if I was up against them and trying to win an election would be Heidi Allen and Luciana Berger).

Nigelb

Really interesting long read on O’Rourke’s Texas campaign:
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/02/22/beto-orourke-campaign-strategy-2020-225193

Next time round it could be considerably more efficient, having learned from beginner mistakes - and as he’d have the cash to scale up much earlier...

MarqueeMark

Richard_Tyndall said:

It is different if you are an MEP who was elected on a party slate. In that instance I think the law should be changed so you are forced to stand down.

After 29th March, that will be exclusively an EU concern, not ours.....

TudorRose

algarkirk said:

TGOHF said:

TudorRose said:

TGOHF said:

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Well quite - they don't want her negotiating the next phase of talks with the EU- time for a fresh vision.

I think this is a really key point. Assuming TM's deal gets through in some form over the coming weeks/months the real negotiating has only just begun with the EU. I would hope (perhaps unreasonably) that the Government would have learnt from the current experience that you need to have the right plan and the right person in place.

But don't ask me who that might be....

Gove with Cummings back as Chief of Staff/EU strategist.

No candidate really makes sense as next PM to negotiate the next phase, because it is impossible to think of someone who believes that the outcome they will inherit is the best possible option in the best of all possible worlds. The great majority of candidates have queered their own pitch (Boris, DD and others) and the rest are mostly people who think this was a terrible idea anyway (Hammond and others). Which would, to be fair, make Gove the pick of the bunch. But, and it is a big but, there are millions of people who don't like him at all. I think they are wrong but it makes no difference. He is widely hated. While he could beat Labour in in GE under JC that would also be true of Alan Partridge with Harry Worth as deputy. But he won't be facing JC in 2022.

(BTW the people who would really scare me if I was up against them and trying to win an election would be Heidi Allen and Luciana Berger).

Leadsome?

Or argue you need a proven business person in charge to negotiate and go with Hunt.

I think Allen's star has fallen following the footage of her comments about Brexit at the 2017 election.

IanB2

MarqueeMark said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

It is different if you are an MEP who was elected on a party slate. In that instance I think the law should be changed so you are forced to stand down.

After 29th March, that will be exclusively an EU concern, not ours.....

Because there can't be any by-elections with the main event so close?

Scrapheap_as_was

IanB2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Every time I look at the broadcast media there is only Chris Williamson commenting, usually demanding by elections.

Is it me but are many labour mps avoiding the media at present, even plotting

Maybe there are just way too many that Labour can't risk putting up?

Is it because he's about the only Corbynite cult member who isn't on the front bench so to avoid having a front bencher potentially inflame things there is little choice out there from the backbenches to speak for the cult?

[not worded that well but hopefully get the point]

MarqueeMark

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/lisaocarroll/status/1098994862714744834

May going as a quid pro quo for supporting her deal seems essential. No way she should be within a million miles of the trade agreements. Ditto Robbins.

TGOHF

algarkirk said:

TGOHF said:

TudorRose said:

TGOHF said:

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Well quite - they don't want her negotiating the next phase of talks with the EU- time for a fresh vision.

I think this is a really key point. Assuming TM's deal gets through in some form over the coming weeks/months the real negotiating has only just begun with the EU. I would hope (perhaps unreasonably) that the Government would have learnt from the current experience that you need to have the right plan and the right person in place.

But don't ask me who that might be....

Gove with Cummings back as Chief of Staff/EU strategist.

No candidate really makes sense as next PM to negotiate the next phase, because it is impossible to think of someone who believes that the outcome they will inherit is the best possible option in the best of all possible worlds. The great majority of candidates have queered their own pitch (Boris, DD and others) and the rest are mostly people who think this was a terrible idea anyway (Hammond and others). Which would, to be fair, make Gove the pick of the bunch. But, and it is a big but, there are millions of people who don't like him at all. I think they are wrong but it makes no difference. He is widely hated. While he could beat Labour in in GE under JC that would also be true of Alan Partridge with Harry Worth as deputy. But he won't be facing JC in 2022.

(BTW the people who would really scare me if I was up against them and trying to win an election would be Heidi Allen and Luciana Berger).

He would have had 3 years of being PM to offer at the GE - if he's been decent he would win no matter who Labour put up - they have little talent and most of that will be in the Tiggers within a month.

Luckyguy1983

Richard_Nabavi said:

TudorRose said:

TGOHF said:

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Well quite - they don't want her negotiating the next phase of talks with the EU- time for a fresh vision.

I think this is a really key point. Assuming TM's deal gets through in some form over the coming weeks/months the real negotiating has only just begun with the EU. I would hope (perhaps unreasonably) that the Government would have learnt from the current experience that you need to have the right plan and the right person in place.

But don't ask me who that might be....

Whoever it is will be blamed for going native and turning out to be a closet Remoaner who gave in on everything.

You may bookmark this post.

Only if they do.

Dadge

Looked at as an academic exercise, May's WA is probably the perfect (!) compromise, given the extremes of opinion on the subject. The trouble (as so often with compromises) is that everyone hates something about it. Also, she sold it so very badly at the outset, allowing the narrative to be set by the knockers. And we need to factor in that Corbyn has his eyes on an election and Number 10. So her policy of leading parliament to the edge of the cliff and daring them not to approve it, while it could/should work, is doomed. My money is the Noes having it, even if the meaningful vote is on 29 March itself.

algarkirk

TudorRose said:

algarkirk said:

TGOHF said:

TudorRose said:

TGOHF said:

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Well quite - they don't want her negotiating the next phase of talks with the EU- time for a fresh vision.

I think this is a really key point. Assuming TM's deal gets through in some form over the coming weeks/months the real negotiating has only just begun with the EU. I would hope (perhaps unreasonably) that the Government would have learnt from the current experience that you need to have the right plan and the right person in place.

But don't ask me who that might be....

Gove with Cummings back as Chief of Staff/EU strategist.

No candidate really makes sense as next PM to negotiate the next phase, because it is impossible to think of someone who believes that the outcome they will inherit is the best possible option in the best of all possible worlds. The great majority of candidates have queered their own pitch (Boris, DD and others) and the rest are mostly people who think this was a terrible idea anyway (Hammond and others). Which would, to be fair, make Gove the pick of the bunch. But, and it is a big but, there are millions of people who don't like him at all. I think they are wrong but it makes no difference. He is widely hated. While he could beat Labour in in GE under JC that would also be true of Alan Partridge with Harry Worth as deputy. But he won't be facing JC in 2022.

(BTW the people who would really scare me if I was up against them and trying to win an election would be Heidi Allen and Luciana Berger).

Leadsome?

Or argue you need a proven business person in charge to negotiate and go with Hunt.

I think Allen's star has fallen following the footage of her comments about Brexit at the 2017 election.

Personally I don't think Andrea Leadsom is PM material - and I think that became clear last time. So, No.
As to Heidi Allen, no politician survives scrutiny of their past in one sense. Some are good at overcoming it. I suspect that HA possibly has that elusive star quality. Whether she could now have chance to shine if off course a different question.
Hunt was a remainer, so No.

Luckyguy1983

FPT:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Reminds me of Farage when he repeated a well known anti-Semitic trope.

https://twitter.com/Rachael_Swindon/status/1098877152416722944

I'm glad I'm not in the situation of having anything public to declare about any family, but to my mind, it cannot be right to censor references that in other circumstances would be valid and in the public interest to make. I believe the same about criticism of the State of Israel. There is no doubt that a lot of such criticism is motivated by anti semitism, but surely no country (or organisation, or individual, or family if the family's decisions have wide reaching effects) can or should be immune from scrutiny. Apart from anything else, it is very unfair to the supposed beneficiaries of such censorship, as it has the potential to put them in an invidious position.

Morris_Dancer

F1: been a fire in the McLaren garage. Three staff members treated in hospital, believe they've all been released.

Luckyguy1983

algarkirk said:

TudorRose said:

algarkirk said:

TGOHF said:

TudorRose said:

TGOHF said:

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Well quite - they don't want her negotiating the next phase of talks with the EU- time for a fresh vision.

I think this is a really key point. Assuming TM's deal gets through in some form over the coming weeks/months the real negotiating has only just begun with the EU. I would hope (perhaps unreasonably) that the Government would have learnt from the current experience that you need to have the right plan and the right person in place.

But don't ask me who that might be....

Gove with Cummings back as Chief of Staff/EU strategist.

No candidate really makes sense as next PM to negotiate the next phase, because it is impossible to think of someone who believes that the outcome they will inherit is the best possible option in the best of all possible worlds. The great majority of candidates have queered their own pitch (Boris, DD and others) and the rest are mostly people who think this was a terrible idea anyway (Hammond and others). Which would, to be fair, make Gove the pick of the bunch. But, and it is a big but, there are millions of people who don't like him at all. I think they are wrong but it makes no difference. He is widely hated. While he could beat Labour in in GE under JC that would also be true of Alan Partridge with Harry Worth as deputy. But he won't be facing JC in 2022.

(BTW the people who would really scare me if I was up against them and trying to win an election would be Heidi Allen and Luciana Berger).

Leadsome?

Or argue you need a proven business person in charge to negotiate and go with Hunt.

I think Allen's star has fallen following the footage of her comments about Brexit at the 2017 election.

Personally I don't think Andrea Leadsom is PM material - and I think that became clear last time. So, No.
As to Heidi Allen, no politician survives scrutiny of their past in one sense. Some are good at overcoming it. I suspect that HA possibly has that elusive star quality. Whether she could now have chance to shine if off course a different question.
Hunt was a remainer, so No.

Thatcher wasn't either. Until she was.

Theuniondivvie

On topic, I was probably too absorbed by painfully unobtainable girls and the latest Clash album at the time to pay attention, but when the the SDP was formed how did Labour react? Squeals of betrayal or pained introspection?

rottenborough

Nigelb said:

Really interesting long read on O’Rourke’s Texas campaign:
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/02/22/beto-orourke-campaign-strategy-2020-225193

Next time round it could be considerably more efficient, having learned from beginner mistakes - and as he’d have the cash to scale up much earlier...

Really interesting article. Long though.

Will he run?

I'm pretty sure now that Biden will, if Sanders is in the race.

algarkirk

Luckyguy1983 said:

algarkirk said:

TudorRose said:

algarkirk said:

TGOHF said:

TudorRose said:

TGOHF said:

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Well quite - they don't want her negotiating the next phase of talks with the EU- time for a fresh vision.

I think this is a really key point. Assuming TM's deal gets through in some form over the coming weeks/months the real negotiating has only just begun with the EU. I would hope (perhaps unreasonably) that the Government would have learnt from the current experience that you need to have the right plan and the right person in place.

But don't ask me who that might be....

Gove with Cummings back as Chief of Staff/EU strategist.

No candidate really makes sense as next PM to negotiate the next phase, because it is impossible to think of someone who believes that the outcome they will inherit is the best possible option in the best of all possible worlds. The great majority of candidates have queered their own pitch (Boris, DD and others) and the rest are mostly people who think this was a terrible idea anyway (Hammond and others). Which would, to be fair, make Gove the pick of the bunch. But, and it is a big but, there are millions of people who don't like him at all. I think they are wrong but it makes no difference. He is widely hated. While he could beat Labour in in GE under JC that would also be true of Alan Partridge with Harry Worth as deputy. But he won't be facing JC in 2022.

(BTW the people who would really scare me if I was up against them and trying to win an election would be Heidi Allen and Luciana Berger).

Leadsome?

Or argue you need a proven business person in charge to negotiate and go with Hunt.

I think Allen's star has fallen following the footage of her comments about Brexit at the 2017 election.

Personally I don't think Andrea Leadsom is PM material - and I think that became clear last time. So, No.
As to Heidi Allen, no politician survives scrutiny of their past in one sense. Some are good at overcoming it. I suspect that HA possibly has that elusive star quality. Whether she could now have chance to shine if off course a different question.
Hunt was a remainer, so No.

Thatcher wasn't either. Until she was.

If Andrea Leadsom was Mrs Thatcher she would have beaten TM last time. MT took her chances.

Luckyguy1983

algarkirk said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

algarkirk said:

TudorRose said:

algarkirk said:

TGOHF said:

TudorRose said:

TGOHF said:

williamglenn said:

"Theresa May must go in three months, cabinet ministers say "

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/theresa-may-must-go-in-three-months-cabinet-ministers-say

Well quite - they don't want her negotiating the next phase of talks with the EU- time for a fresh vision.

I think this is a really key point. Assuming TM's deal gets through in some form over the coming weeks/months the real negotiating has only just begun with the EU. I would hope (perhaps unreasonably) that the Government would have learnt from the current experience that you need to have the right plan and the right person in place.

But don't ask me who that might be....

Gove with Cummings back as Chief of Staff/EU strategist.

No candidate really makes sense as next PM to negotiate the next phase, because it is impossible to think of someone who believes that the outcome they will inherit is the best possible option in the best of all possible worlds. The great majority of candidates have queered their own pitch (Boris, DD and others) and the rest are mostly people who think this was a terrible idea anyway (Hammond and others). Which would, to be fair, make Gove the pick of the bunch. But, and it is a big but, there are millions of people who don't like him at all. I think they are wrong but it makes no difference. He is widely hated. While he could beat Labour in in GE under JC that would also be true of Alan Partridge with Harry Worth as deputy. But he won't be facing JC in 2022.

(BTW the people who would really scare me if I was up against them and trying to win an election would be Heidi Allen and Luciana Berger).

Leadsome?

Or argue you need a proven business person in charge to negotiate and go with Hunt.

I think Allen's star has fallen following the footage of her comments about Brexit at the 2017 election.

Personally I don't think Andrea Leadsom is PM material - and I think that became clear last time. So, No.
As to Heidi Allen, no politician survives scrutiny of their past in one sense. Some are good at overcoming it. I suspect that HA possibly has that elusive star quality. Whether she could now have chance to shine if off course a different question.
Hunt was a remainer, so No.

Thatcher wasn't either. Until she was.

If Andrea Leadsom was Mrs Thatcher she would have beaten TM last time. MT took her chances.

But also had Airey Neave fixing a lot of things for her.