His views are a darned sight more relevant than those of an excuser and denier of anti-Semitism such as yourself.
Go forth and multiply.
I do not excuse Anti Sematism.
Yep, you do. Just look at your response to Corbyn's anti-Semitism. You make excuses and deny it.
I Corbyn is not AS
No matter how many times you say it. It doesn't make it true.
I feel it is completely unacceptable you call me an excuser of AS.
Corbyn is an anti-semite. That is just obvious. As we were discussing yesterday - look at the Islington mural issue for confirmation.
And I'm afraid that makes you an excuser of AS.
I will not engage further with you or JJ
You are both wrong.
Goodbye
To me that just reads like he isn't going to "engage" with you and JJ anymore.
I don't think he's left the sire so I'd keep the champagne on ice if I were you!
I regret anyone bowing out of debate. I think we managed to have an interesting (as in I was right) exchange with @TheJezziah yesterday on precisely the same topic.
@bjo was upset because when he said that Corbyn was not an anti-semite, I (and others) said he (Corbyn) was, and that @bjo was thereby excusing it.
I mean showing that Corbyn is an anti-semite is no great feat of intellectual prowess so I get why he bowed out of the debate, as you say with me and JJ in this instance, but I'm happy if they stay to try to argue.
Mr Foremain Lab voters would not go Blue in huge numbers but some will. Combined with a depressed turnout and some switching to LDs and TIG Labour, UKIP, Brexit it's clear Labour will go backwards. Scotland is not an option for them. Looking at their 60 odd defences with a 5,000 majority or less I reckon 60-70% are leave seats. John Mann should know in Bassetlaw only a marginal swing turns it blue.
Even if Labour hadn't splintered I could have envisaged a scenario where they won the popular vote but had less seats than the Tories. Gentrification of the major cities has played a huge part in messing up their spread of votes.
That is probably a good analysis, though it also depends on how many Tory votes turn red, and which cancels which. I would not vote Labour with Mr Thicky being in charge, but I might switch to TIG.
Yes, think there will be a lot more Red to Blue movers than the other way. Tories more likely to shed to UKIP or Tig/Libs but that is less of a problem in what are predominantly 2 horse races.
I do believe that - in common with the wider commentariat - you are massively overestimating the extent to which Brexit switches votes - particularly Labour votes. As was the case in 2017 , it would turn out to be a very secondary issue in a General Election campaign.
Look at the UKIP vote in Gower or Vale of Clwyd in 2015 and compare with 2017.
The growth of UKIP in these seats caused the seats to go Tory. Its demise returned the seats to Labour.
It is not direct Lab-> Con switchers that Labour have to worry about. It is leakage of the Labour Leaver vote to abstain or to another pro-Brexit party.
And you don't need to leak many votes to change the colour of a marginal.
I sort of agree, but there was a Survation "constituency-by-constituency" analysis a few months ago which claimed Brexit support had fallen quite heavily in traditionally Labour seats (while holding up better in traditionally Tory seats).
In any case, I think being opposing a second referendum would've been the optimum position for Labour to win the next general election - but, frankly, that now seems a pipe dream anyway, so if the task is just to keep hold of as much of their 2017 vote as possible, backing a referendum is probably correct.
Apparently Wales would likely vote Remain now.
Yeah, that Survation poll has the vast majority of councils in Wales flipping to Remain (though quite narrowly in a lot of cases).
Whether that poll is accurate, or whether things have changed since then, is another question.
Mr Foremain Lab voters would not go Blue in huge numbers but some will. Combined with a depressed turnout and some switching to LDs and TIG Labour, UKIP, Brexit it's clear Labour will go backwards. Scotland is not an option for them. Looking at their 60 odd defences with a 5,000 majority or less I reckon 60-70% are leave seats. John Mann should know in Bassetlaw only a marginal swing turns it blue.
Even if Labour hadn't splintered I could have envisaged a scenario where they won the popular vote but had less seats than the Tories. Gentrification of the major cities has played a huge part in messing up their spread of votes.
That is probably a good analysis, though it also depends on how many Tory votes turn red, and which cancels which. I would not vote Labour with Mr Thicky being in charge, but I might switch to TIG.
Yes, think there will be a lot more Red to Blue movers than the other way. Tories more likely to shed to UKIP or Tig/Libs but that is less of a problem in what are predominantly 2 horse races.
I do believe that - in common with the wider commentariat - you are massively overestimating the extent to which Brexit switches votes - particularly Labour votes. As was the case in 2017 , it would turn out to be a very secondary issue in a General Election campaign.
Look at the UKIP vote in Gower or Vale of Clwyd in 2015 and compare with 2017.
The growth of UKIP in these seats caused the seats to go Tory. Its demise returned the seats to Labour.
It is not direct Lab-> Con switchers that Labour have to worry about. It is leakage of the Labour Leaver vote to abstain or to another pro-Brexit party.
And you don't need to leak many votes to change the colour of a marginal.
I am aware that in 2015 the UKIP vote in Wales was far more at Labour's expense than was the case in most of England. It was no surprise,therefore, that the withdrawal of their candidates failed to confer any benefit on the Tories in those marginal seats in 2017. Many people also forget that much of the 2015 UKIP surge was based on Anti-Establishment sentiments - rather than the EU per se. In pre-Coalition days the LibDems benefitted from that , but were clearly in no position to do so in 2015. A lot of that Anti-Establishment vote went Corbyn's way last time and I see no reason why arguments re-any second referendum will much impact on that should we be faced with another general election.
Rees-Mogg says Brexiters won't back May's deal just to avoid short extension of article 50 On Sky News Jacob Rees-Mogg, the chair of the European Research Group, which represents Tories pushing for a harder Brexit, says what May is proposing on giving MPs a vote to extend article 50 would not change much. He says she is only proposing a short extension, and there would still be a cliff edge.
He says the threat of MPs voting for a short delay would not be enough to persuade Brexiters like himself to vote for May’s deal.
But if the delay were part of a project to delay Brexit altogether, that would be huge betrayal, he says.
I think this is the correct approach and I think they will back down and support the deal when the real cliff edge approaches in the summer. May's deal does have advantages for the ERG in that it allows them some wiggle room to continue Eurosceptic campaigning for years to come - something a no deal Brexit (the real deal) would not allow. For that reason I think May's deal strategically suits all shades of Blue.
Mr Foremain Lab voters would not go Blue in huge numbers but some will. Combined with a depressed turnout and some switching to LDs and TIG Labour, UKIP, Brexit it's clear Labour will go backwards. Scotland is not an option for them. Looking at their 60 odd defences with a 5,000 majority or less I reckon 60-70% are leave seats. John Mann should know in Bassetlaw only a marginal swing turns it blue.
Even if Labour hadn't splintered I could have envisaged a scenario where they won the popular vote but had less seats than the Tories. Gentrification of the major cities has played a huge part in messing up their spread of votes.
That is probably a good analysis, though it also depends on how many Tory votes turn red, and which cancels which. I would not vote Labour with Mr Thicky being in charge, but I might switch to TIG.
Yes, think there will be a lot more Red to Blue movers than the other way. Tories more likely to shed to UKIP or Tig/Libs but that is less of a problem in what are predominantly 2 horse races.
I do believe that - in common with the wider commentariat - you are massively overestimating the extent to which Brexit switches votes - particularly Labour votes. As was the case in 2017 , it would turn out to be a very secondary issue in a General Election campaign.
I suppose my hypothetical scenario is a GE before Brexit is concluded in which case there would be quite a lot of movement.
Even in that context I really do not believe that voters would be focussed on such a technical issue - in respect of which most people are sick to death - for much of an extended 6 week campaign. Corbyn would face a very receptive audience when raising other issues - as would any other politician.
"Even in Leave Labour seats a majority of Labour voters voted to Remain."
2017 General Election: St Helens South
Labour Marie Rimmer Votes 35,879 Conservative Ed McRandal Votes 11,536 Liberal Democrat Brian Spencer Votes 2,101 UKIP Mark Hitchen Votes 1,953 Green Jess Northey Votes 1,417
St Helens North
Labour Conor McGinn Votes 32,012 Conservative Jackson Ng Votes 13,606 UKIP Peter Peers Votes 2,097 Liberal Democrat Tom Morrison Votes 1,287 Green Party Rachel Parkinson Votes 1,220
Referendum result: 58% leave St Helens overall - 58% to leave - Remain 39,322 Leave 54,357
Try as I might, I' can't get this to match even 50% of Labour voters voting Remain. The alternative hypothesis is that perhaps you should stick to generalisations about your own constituency.
A key point is that the referendum pulled in lots of usual non-voters, mostly for leave, and therefore those who reported voting in earlier elections almost certainly lean toward Remain.
But even if we take your figures straight we are looking for 21,000 remainers, which could be 1,000 each from the LibDems and Green, 3,000 Tories and 16,000 Labour. With the 29,000 leavers being 2,000 UKIP, 11,000 from the Tories (incl handfuls from LD/Green), with 16,000 from Labour. So exactly 50%, using the 2015 pre-referendum result.
But, as I said, throw in a few thousand non voter leavers and the Labour split tips toward Remain.
Then add in the shift in opinion away from Leave since 2016, especially in Leave seats, and it tilts still further.
"Even in Leave Labour seats a majority of Labour voters voted to Remain."
2017 General Election: St Helens South
Labour Marie Rimmer Votes 35,879 Conservative Ed McRandal Votes 11,536 Liberal Democrat Brian Spencer Votes 2,101 UKIP Mark Hitchen Votes 1,953 Green Jess Northey Votes 1,417
St Helens North
Labour Conor McGinn Votes 32,012 Conservative Jackson Ng Votes 13,606 UKIP Peter Peers Votes 2,097 Liberal Democrat Tom Morrison Votes 1,287 Green Party Rachel Parkinson Votes 1,220
Referendum result: 58% leave St Helens overall - 58% to leave - Remain 39,322 Leave 54,357
Try as I might, I' can't get this to match even 50% of Labour voters voting Remain. The alternative hypothesis is that perhaps you should stick to generalisations about your own constituency.
The Labour vote would probably have been split something like 50/50 for Remain and Leave in seats like these. Difficult to say which side would have narrowly got more.
No no deal on 29/3 back up to 1.09. Someone is putting a lot of money up that no deal may still happen, and that money is being continually snapped up.
Vicky Ford, a Conservative, asks May to confirm that she will not whip ministers to block an extension of article 50 in the possible vote on 14 March.
May sidesteps the questions. She just repeats her point about not wanting an article 50 extension.
TMay is starting to look pretty stupid in all this. Her stoicism is now looking more like a rabbit in the headlights, that refuses to budge in the face of the oncoming juggernaut. She should get on with it, and say there will be a three month or even six month extension and tell the intellectually challenged ERG to go and play cummy biscuit.
I wonder whether like many a past Budget we will look back at the end of the week and think both Corbyn and May have attempted to be too clever by half and it's all come unstuck.
Corbyn's proposals already seem to be falling apart and meaning different things to different people.
May has managed to come across as ruling out no deal but then on second glance there's enough in it for the No Dealers to reject the Deal and approach a short extension no deal instead and enough for Remainers to reject the Deal and vote against No Deal.
Ultimately the Deal vote unless we get meaningful concessions from the EU will probably end up with an similar rejection to January's. Nothing has changed.
It's like midsummer in the garden today, apart from a slight chill in the breeze, yet still February. If we extend hopefully we push back the forecast Brexit storms.
Let's say there is an extension of three months, but then May manages to ram her deal through in... err.. May.
The deal calls for a 21 month transition to 31st December 2020.
Does that therefore mean the transition is now to 31st March 2021 (ie, its a fixed 21 month time frame), or does it mean we only get an 18 month transition period?
TMay is starting to look pretty stupid in all this. Her stoicism is now looking more like a rabbit in the headlights, that refuses to budge in the face of the oncoming juggernaut. She should get on with it, and say there will be a three month or even six month extension and tell the intellectually challenged ERG to go and play cummy biscuit.
Then the deal gets voted down again.
She's not delaying without reason. If Labour and/or the ERG stopped playing silly games, we'd have a managed exit this month.
Let's say there is an extension of three months, but then May manages to ram her deal through in... err.. May.
The deal calls for a 21 month transition to 31st December 2020.
Does that therefore mean the transition is now to 31st March 2021 (ie, its a fixed 21 month time frame), or does it mean we only get an 18 month transition period?
Let's say there is an extension of three months, but then May manages to ram her deal through in... err.. May.
The deal calls for a 21 month transition to 31st December 2020.
Does that therefore mean the transition is now to 31st March 2021 (ie, its a fixed 21 month time frame), or does it mean we only get an 18 month transition period?
Or does it mean no one has thought of that yet?
The latter. There'll have to be some tweaks to the deal with different dates. Not least because the finances move a bit.
Let's say there is an extension of three months, but then May manages to ram her deal through in... err.. May.
The deal calls for a 21 month transition to 31st December 2020.
Does that therefore mean the transition is now to 31st March 2021 (ie, its a fixed 21 month time frame), or does it mean we only get an 18 month transition period?
Or does it mean no one has thought of that yet?
Good point. I don't think they have caught up with that one yet.
Rees-Mogg says Brexiters won't back May's deal just to avoid short extension of article 50 On Sky News Jacob Rees-Mogg, the chair of the European Research Group, which represents Tories pushing for a harder Brexit, says what May is proposing on giving MPs a vote to extend article 50 would not change much. He says she is only proposing a short extension, and there would still be a cliff edge.
He says the threat of MPs voting for a short delay would not be enough to persuade Brexiters like himself to vote for May’s deal.
But if the delay were part of a project to delay Brexit altogether, that would be huge betrayal, he says.
I think this is the correct approach and I think they will back down and support the deal when the real cliff edge approaches in the summer. May's deal does have advantages for the ERG in that it allows them some wiggle room to continue Eurosceptic campaigning for years to come - something a no deal Brexit (the real deal) would not allow. For that reason I think May's deal strategically suits all shades of Blue.
Being cynical they may deep down prefer the far greater room for Eurosceptic campaigning that remaining would give them. But I am sure that even that bunch of politicians could not be that duplicitous.
TMay is starting to look pretty stupid in all this. Her stoicism is now looking more like a rabbit in the headlights, that refuses to budge in the face of the oncoming juggernaut. She should get on with it, and say there will be a three month or even six month extension and tell the intellectually challenged ERG to go and play cummy biscuit.
Then the deal gets voted down again.
She's not delaying without reason. If Labour and/or the ERG stopped playing silly games, we'd have a managed exit this month.
Some might disagree that May's is the only principled view and that her opponents from different sides are all playing silly games.
TMay is starting to look pretty stupid in all this. Her stoicism is now looking more like a rabbit in the headlights, that refuses to budge in the face of the oncoming juggernaut. She should get on with it, and say there will be a three month or even six month extension and tell the intellectually challenged ERG to go and play cummy biscuit.
Then the deal gets voted down again.
She's not delaying without reason. If Labour and/or the ERG stopped playing silly games, we'd have a managed exit this month.
Well, yes. We are caught in a kind of perpetual Brexit purgatory, brought on by my brother-in-faith (but nothing else) Jacob Rees-Mogg (and his cummy biscuit).
"Even in Leave Labour seats a majority of Labour voters voted to Remain."
2017 General Election: St Helens South
Labour Marie Rimmer Votes 35,879 Conservative Ed McRandal Votes 11,536 Liberal Democrat Brian Spencer Votes 2,101 UKIP Mark Hitchen Votes 1,953 Green Jess Northey Votes 1,417
St Helens North
Labour Conor McGinn Votes 32,012 Conservative Jackson Ng Votes 13,606 UKIP Peter Peers Votes 2,097 Liberal Democrat Tom Morrison Votes 1,287 Green Party Rachel Parkinson Votes 1,220
Referendum result: 58% leave St Helens overall - 58% to leave - Remain 39,322 Leave 54,357
Try as I might, I' can't get this to match even 50% of Labour voters voting Remain. The alternative hypothesis is that perhaps you should stick to generalisations about your own constituency.
The Labour vote would probably have been split something like 50/50 for Remain and Leave in seats like these. Difficult to say which side would have narrowly got more.
If Labour split 50/50, then you'd have about 31k voters for each side. That leaves about 8.5k votes to come for Remain from 5.5k LD+Grn, and ~23k Tories (assuming relatively equal changes in turnout between the two votes). You'd need something like 80%+ of Tories to have voted Leave to make that fit, which doesn't sound realistic to me.
Let's say there is an extension of three months, but then May manages to ram her deal through in... err.. May.
The deal calls for a 21 month transition to 31st December 2020.
Does that therefore mean the transition is now to 31st March 2021 (ie, its a fixed 21 month time frame), or does it mean we only get an 18 month transition period?
Or does it mean no one has thought of that yet?
I understand that 18 months is the gestation period for Unicorns
TMay is starting to look pretty stupid in all this. Her stoicism is now looking more like a rabbit in the headlights, that refuses to budge in the face of the oncoming juggernaut. She should get on with it, and say there will be a three month or even six month extension and tell the intellectually challenged ERG to go and play cummy biscuit.
Then the deal gets voted down again.
She's not delaying without reason. If Labour and/or the ERG stopped playing silly games, we'd have a managed exit this month.
Some might disagree that May's is the only principled view and that her opponents from different sides are all playing silly games.
May is the one who's chosen to play chicken. She doesn't earn sympathy points for picking a game she's so bad at
"Even in Leave Labour seats a majority of Labour voters voted to Remain."
2017 General Election: St Helens South
Labour Marie Rimmer Votes 35,879 Conservative Ed McRandal Votes 11,536 Liberal Democrat Brian Spencer Votes 2,101 UKIP Mark Hitchen Votes 1,953 Green Jess Northey Votes 1,417
St Helens North
Labour Conor McGinn Votes 32,012 Conservative Jackson Ng Votes 13,606 UKIP Peter Peers Votes 2,097 Liberal Democrat Tom Morrison Votes 1,287 Green Party Rachel Parkinson Votes 1,220
Referendum result: 58% leave St Helens overall - 58% to leave - Remain 39,322 Leave 54,357
Try as I might, I' can't get this to match even 50% of Labour voters voting Remain. The alternative hypothesis is that perhaps you should stick to generalisations about your own constituency.
The Labour vote would probably have been split something like 50/50 for Remain and Leave in seats like these. Difficult to say which side would have narrowly got more.
If Labour split 50/50, then you'd have about 31k voters for each side. That leaves about 8.5k votes to come for Remain from 5.5k LD+Grn, and ~23k Tories (assuming relatively equal changes in turnout between the two votes). You'd need something like 80%+ of Tories to have voted Leave to make that fit, which doesn't sound realistic to me.
Looks like a concession on MV and no deal - only go no deal if parliament votes for it, otherwise will offer a delay
Then what happens in when the extension comes to an end? It seems to me she is gambling a hell of a lot on her deal getting through in March.
When the extension comes to an end we are back here. Which is why it is sane to deal with this now.
Latest from the Grauniad. Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Brexit committee, asks what May would use the extra time granted by an article 50 extension for.
May sidesteps the question, and says if MPs want to avoid no deal, they must vote for a deal.
"Even in Leave Labour seats a majority of Labour voters voted to Remain."
2017 General Election: St Helens South
Labour Marie Rimmer Votes 35,879 Conservative Ed McRandal Votes 11,536 Liberal Democrat Brian Spencer Votes 2,101 UKIP Mark Hitchen Votes 1,953 Green Jess Northey Votes 1,417
St Helens North
Labour Conor McGinn Votes 32,012 Conservative Jackson Ng Votes 13,606 UKIP Peter Peers Votes 2,097 Liberal Democrat Tom Morrison Votes 1,287 Green Party Rachel Parkinson Votes 1,220
Referendum result: 58% leave St Helens overall - 58% to leave - Remain 39,322 Leave 54,357
Try as I might, I' can't get this to match even 50% of Labour voters voting Remain. The alternative hypothesis is that perhaps you should stick to generalisations about your own constituency.
The Labour vote would probably have been split something like 50/50 for Remain and Leave in seats like these. Difficult to say which side would have narrowly got more.
If Labour split 50/50, then you'd have about 31k voters for each side. That leaves about 8.5k votes to come for Remain from 5.5k LD+Grn, and ~23k Tories (assuming relatively equal changes in turnout between the two votes). You'd need something like 80%+ of Tories to have voted Leave to make that fit, which doesn't sound realistic to me.
There must have been a lot of people who voted in the referendum in a place like St Helens who don't usually vote in general elections, and they would have been something like 90% Leave, so perhaps that would reduce the Tory Leave share to something more like 70% or 65%. The overall Tory Leave vote across the country was estimated at 61% by YouGov but it would have been a lot lower in the southern half of the country.
Good move from May to ensure that if the Commons rejects her Deal it has to vote positively for No Deal or extending Article 50 instead
But who really believes that May will do what she will do?
She has backtracked and lied so often that I think anyone would be extremely foolish to take it as read that she would do that if we got to that stage.
She will say anything that gets her over the next few days and once she has done that she will think nothing of doing something completely different. Right back to her telling us she would not call a GE her word cannot be trusted sadly.
And to make matters worse TMay has decided to request the most disruptive postponement date possible (designed so the UK will need to have had elections they haven't planned for if and when they reextend) which the EU will almost definitely say no to and change to some other date. And she won't ask for it until the last minute, so nobody will be able to plan anything.
Labour have said that they will support a new referendum on whether Britain should leave the EU with a deal or remain an EU member if their own plan for Brexit is rejected. Do you think Labour are right or wrong to support a new referendum?
Labour are right to support a new referendum 43% Labour are wrong to support a new referendum 45% Don’t know 12%
Not sure whether that's good or bad for Labour....especially as they're not offering breakdown by party vote.
Hence my difficulty in fitting the figures to a Labour majority for Remain. However, I do have a sneaky hypothesis which might back up John Mann's views.
Let's just suppose that a lot of voters up here including Labour voters regard Westminster as being skewed towards the London bubble. And even worse, they regards Londoners as being soft, spoilt poshos. I know I'm bringing in stereotypes now. But seeing Labour pivot towards their Islington-type views, might it not induce a we'll show them attitude?
Or are those Northern Labour MPs like Mann worrying unnecessarily?
Labour have said that they will support a new referendum on whether Britain should leave the EU with a deal or remain an EU member if their own plan for Brexit is rejected. Do you think Labour are right or wrong to support a new referendum?
Labour are right to support a new referendum 43% Labour are wrong to support a new referendum 45% Don’t know 12%
Not sure whether that's good or bad for Labour....especially as they're not offering breakdown by party vote.
It's good, if you prefix something with "Party x was right to" you'll tend to drag the response down towards their VI, so it seems to be pulling them up.
Labour have said that they will support a new referendum on whether Britain should leave the EU with a deal or remain an EU member if their own plan for Brexit is rejected. Do you think Labour are right or wrong to support a new referendum?
Labour are right to support a new referendum 43% Labour are wrong to support a new referendum 45% Don’t know 12%
Not sure whether that's good or bad for Labour....especially as they're not offering breakdown by party vote.
It's good, if you prefix something with "Party x was right to" you'll tend to drag the response down towards their VI, so it seems to be pulling them up.
Surely it should be pulling the right figure up to remain’s share?
It makes you wonder which is worse.. the politicians slagging each off, or the media doing similarly to the politicians. The whole thing is unedifying.
Although that's a rather odd sequence in some ways (what happens if all three fail?), it's probably the best attempt at herding the cats into making some kind of decision that she could have come up with.
There is no strategy behind it - other than keeping May in No10 for another couple of weeks. I honestly don't think she's capable of formulating long term strategic policy. There's nothing there but a grim determination to survive.
She's the opposite of a strategic thinker. She'd be terrible at chess - thinks just the one move ahead.
As I said below she simply says whatever is required to get her over the next few days, then thinks nothing of backtracking on it once the immediate danger has passed.
Labour have said that they will support a new referendum on whether Britain should leave the EU with a deal or remain an EU member if their own plan for Brexit is rejected. Do you think Labour are right or wrong to support a new referendum?
Labour are right to support a new referendum 43% Labour are wrong to support a new referendum 45% Don’t know 12%
Not sure whether that's good or bad for Labour....especially as they're not offering breakdown by party vote.
It's good, if you prefix something with "Party x was right to" you'll tend to drag the response down towards their VI, so it seems to be pulling them up.
Surely it should be pulling the right figure up to remain’s share?
Labour have said that they will support a new referendum on whether Britain should leave the EU with a deal or remain an EU member if their own plan for Brexit is rejected. Do you think Labour are right or wrong to support a new referendum?
Labour are right to support a new referendum 43% Labour are wrong to support a new referendum 45% Don’t know 12%
Not sure whether that's good or bad for Labour....especially as they're not offering breakdown by party vote.
It's good, if you prefix something with "Party x was right to" you'll tend to drag the response down towards their VI, so it seems to be pulling them up.
Surely it should be pulling the right figure up to remain’s share?
Yes, both.
Difficult to say whether it’s good for Labour without the breakdown then.
In these two constituencies I suspect Mrs Rimmer will faithfully follow Jezza's lead, but Mr McGinn can be a little awkward. Both will be re-elected whatever they do, but other Northern Labour MPs will not be so confident.
Hence my difficulty in fitting the figures to a Labour majority for Remain. However, I do have a sneaky hypothesis which might back up John Mann's views.
Let's just suppose that a lot of voters up here including Labour voters regard Westminster as being skewed towards the London bubble. And even worse, they regards Londoners as being soft, spoilt poshos. I know I'm bringing in stereotypes now. But seeing Labour pivot towards their Islington-type views, might it not induce a we'll show them attitude?
Or are those Northern Labour MPs like Mann worrying unnecessarily?
Most MPs don't need to worry that much about how they vote on Brexit. Either their views will be in line with their constituents' or Brexit will be only one issue among many for their constituents.
I think for people like Caroline Flint and John Mann, it's simply that they feel morally obliged to honour what their constituents voted for.
Labour have said that they will support a new referendum on whether Britain should leave the EU with a deal or remain an EU member if their own plan for Brexit is rejected. Do you think Labour are right or wrong to support a new referendum?
Labour are right to support a new referendum 43% Labour are wrong to support a new referendum 45% Don’t know 12%
Not sure whether that's good or bad for Labour....especially as they're not offering breakdown by party vote.
It's good, if you prefix something with "Party x was right to" you'll tend to drag the response down towards their VI, so it seems to be pulling them up.
Surely it should be pulling the right figure up to remain’s share?
Yes, both.
Difficult to say whether it’s good for Labour without the breakdown then.
It matches YouGov's figures for those for/against a second referendum.
"Even in Leave Labour seats a majority of Labour voters voted to Remain."
2017 General Election: St Helens South
Labour Marie Rimmer Votes 35,879 Conservative Ed McRandal Votes 11,536 Liberal Democrat Brian Spencer Votes 2,101 UKIP Mark Hitchen Votes 1,953 Green Jess Northey Votes 1,417
St Helens North
Labour Conor McGinn Votes 32,012 Conservative Jackson Ng Votes 13,606 UKIP Peter Peers Votes 2,097 Liberal Democrat Tom Morrison Votes 1,287 Green Party Rachel Parkinson Votes 1,220
Referendum result: 58% leave St Helens overall - 58% to leave - Remain 39,322 Leave 54,357
Try as I might, I' can't get this to match even 50% of Labour voters voting Remain. The alternative hypothesis is that perhaps you should stick to generalisations about your own constituency.
The Labour vote would probably have been split something like 50/50 for Remain and Leave in seats like these. Difficult to say which side would have narrowly got more.
If Labour split 50/50, then you'd have about 31k voters for each side. That leaves about 8.5k votes to come for Remain from 5.5k LD+Grn, and ~23k Tories (assuming relatively equal changes in turnout between the two votes). You'd need something like 80%+ of Tories to have voted Leave to make that fit, which doesn't sound realistic to me.
There must have been a lot of people who voted in the referendum in a place like St Helens who don't usually vote in general elections, and they would have been something like 90% Leave, so perhaps that would reduce the Tory Leave share to something more like 70% or 65%. The overall Tory Leave vote across the country was estimated at 61% by YouGov but it would have been a lot lower in the southern half of the country.
Assuming the figures quoted above are right, close to 10k more people in St Helens voted in the 2017GE than the referendum.
What happens if Parliament rejects the Deal, rejects No Deal, and rejects extending A50?
No Deal continues to slide down the mountain, its progress unimpeded by the infantile actions of the members in Parliament. That's what happens.
The only way No Deal doesn't happen is if it gets sprinkled in holy water, has a crucifix applied to its forehead and a stake driven through its heart. Currently MPs are still arguing if it is a vampire or a werewolf. "I'm sure silver bullets will do the trick. I read that in a book somewhere...."
OK so one of the unicorns - NO DEAL - exits the stage. That's great. Good riddance. In this case my wallet and that of the country are aligned.
Next act of the drama looks likely to be a short extension, during which either the Deal goes through - as I think it probably will - or there is a further extension.
A further extension surely has to be for something specific. It has to be for REF2 or a GE or to re-negotiate a much softer Brexit as per Labour policy.
The latter cannot happen under a Tory PM therefore can be pretty much ruled out. So if not the Deal we get REF2 or we get a GE with Labour offering REF2.
Conclusion - since REF2 steers heavily to Remain it is clearer than ever that we either sign the Withdrawal Agreement or we do not leave the EU.
What happens if Parliament rejects the Deal, rejects No Deal, and rejects extending A50?
No Deal continues to slide down the mountain, its progress unimpeded by the infantile actions of the members in Parliament. That's what happens.
The only way No Deal doesn't happen is if it gets sprinkled in holy water, has a crucifix applied to its forehead and a stake driven through its heart. Currently MPs are still arguing if it is a vampire or a werewolf. "I'm sure silver bullets will do the trick. I read that in a book somewhere...."
Or, alternatively, there will be more votes later in March.
That said, if the Commons votes against the Deal and No Deal, I think it's unlikely that it would also vote against an extension? Why would it?
What happens if Parliament rejects the Deal, rejects No Deal, and rejects extending A50?
No Deal continues to slide down the mountain, its progress unimpeded by the infantile actions of the members in Parliament. That's what happens.
The only way No Deal doesn't happen is if it gets sprinkled in holy water, has a crucifix applied to its forehead and a stake driven through its heart. Currently MPs are still arguing if it is a vampire or a werewolf. "I'm sure silver bullets will do the trick. I read that in a book somewhere...."
The default result of both options in the extension vote is to leave with No Deal. The unwritten question is almost
Do you want to leave on March 29th without a deal or leave on June 29th without a deal?
What happens if Parliament rejects the Deal, rejects No Deal, and rejects extending A50?
No Deal continues to slide down the mountain, its progress unimpeded by the infantile actions of the members in Parliament. That's what happens.
The only way No Deal doesn't happen is if it gets sprinkled in holy water, has a crucifix applied to its forehead and a stake driven through its heart. Currently MPs are still arguing if it is a vampire or a werewolf. "I'm sure silver bullets will do the trick. I read that in a book somewhere...."
Or, alternatively, there will be more votes later in March.
That said, if the Commons votes against the Deal and No Deal, I think it's unlikely that it would also vote against an extension? Why would it?
Because Westminster is stacked to the rafters with fuckwits?
Jess Phillips is overplaying the emotion card. It is faux passion - nothing more.
Quite. There’s absolutely no evidence of any increase in people going without food, or evidence of increased number of children starving. To pre dismiss that her constituency while having a slightly higher unemployment rate than the nation as a whole, it isn’t still only 5% it was over 8% under labour.
OK so one of the unicorns - NO DEAL - exits the stage. That's great. Good riddance. In this case my wallet and that of the country are aligned.
Next act of the drama looks likely to be a short extension, during which either the Deal goes through - as I think it probably will - or there is a further extension.
A further extension surely has to be for something specific. It has to be for REF2 or a GE or to re-negotiate a much softer Brexit as per Labour policy.
The latter cannot happen under a Tory PM therefore can be pretty much ruled out. So if not the Deal we get REF2 or we get a GE with Labour offering REF2.
Conclusion - since REF2 steers heavily to Remain it is clearer than ever that we either sign the Withdrawal Agreement or we do not leave the EU.
Wonder if my analysis is shared by Mogg and ilk?
Even if every member of the ERG votes for May's deal does she have enough votes for her deal to go through? If not they have lost as the only logical next step would be to force Labour's referendum (as May won't have to take the blame for it).
"Even in Leave Labour seats a majority of Labour voters voted to Remain."
2017 General Election: St Helens South
Labour Marie Rimmer Votes 35,879 Conservative Ed McRandal Votes 11,536 Liberal Democrat Brian Spencer Votes 2,101 UKIP Mark Hitchen Votes 1,953 Green Jess Northey Votes 1,417
St Helens North
Labour Conor McGinn Votes 32,012 Conservative Jackson Ng Votes 13,606 UKIP Peter Peers Votes 2,097 Liberal Democrat Tom Morrison Votes 1,287 Green Party Rachel Parkinson Votes 1,220
Referendum result: 58% leave St Helens overall - 58% to leave - Remain 39,322 Leave 54,357
Try as I might, I' can't get this to match even 50% of Labour voters voting Remain. The alternative hypothesis is that perhaps you should stick to generalisations about your own constituency.
The Labour vote would probably have been split something like 50/50 for Remain and Leave in seats like these. Difficult to say which side would have narrowly got more.
If Labour split 50/50, then you'd have about 31k voters for each side. That leaves about 8.5k votes to come for Remain from 5.5k LD+Grn, and ~23k Tories (assuming relatively equal changes in turnout between the two votes). You'd need something like 80%+ of Tories to have voted Leave to make that fit, which doesn't sound realistic to me.
There must have been a lot of people who voted in the referendum in a place like St Helens who don't usually vote in general elections, and they would have been something like 90% Leave, so perhaps that would reduce the Tory Leave share to something more like 70% or 65%. The overall Tory Leave vote across the country was estimated at 61% by YouGov but it would have been a lot lower in the southern half of the country.
Assuming the figures quoted above are right, close to 10k more people in St Helens voted in the 2017GE than the referendum.
St Helens South contains 3 Knowsley wards, which have an expected yield of 11,418 votes according to electoral calculus yielding 91690 votes within the St Helens council area.
What happens if Parliament rejects the Deal, rejects No Deal, and rejects extending A50?
No Deal continues to slide down the mountain, its progress unimpeded by the infantile actions of the members in Parliament. That's what happens.
The only way No Deal doesn't happen is if it gets sprinkled in holy water, has a crucifix applied to its forehead and a stake driven through its heart. Currently MPs are still arguing if it is a vampire or a werewolf. "I'm sure silver bullets will do the trick. I read that in a book somewhere...."
Or, alternatively, there will be more votes later in March.
That said, if the Commons votes against the Deal and No Deal, I think it's unlikely that it would also vote against an extension? Why would it?
Because Westminster is stacked to the rafters with fuckwits?
I think pretty much every MP who votes against No Deal would have little choice but to then vote to extend. Even if Theresa May whips against both (and I'm not sure how she could), then I think that's the point at which ministers start resigning.
And even the Labour Leavers (other than Corbyn and maybe Hoey et al) surely would vote to extend at that point.
Jess Phillips is overplaying the emotion card. It is faux passion - nothing more.
Quite. There’s absolutely no evidence of any increase in people going without food, or evidence of increased number of children starving. To pre dismiss that her constituency while having a slightly higher unemployment rate than the nation as a whole, it isn’t still only 5% it was over 8% under labour.
It was designed to get her in the local press - so an easy win for her there. But it added nothing to the House to get overblown like that. It is theatrics - nothing more.
What happens if Parliament rejects the Deal, rejects No Deal, and rejects extending A50?
No Deal continues to slide down the mountain, its progress unimpeded by the infantile actions of the members in Parliament. That's what happens.
The only way No Deal doesn't happen is if it gets sprinkled in holy water, has a crucifix applied to its forehead and a stake driven through its heart. Currently MPs are still arguing if it is a vampire or a werewolf. "I'm sure silver bullets will do the trick. I read that in a book somewhere...."
The default result of both options in the extension vote is to leave with No Deal. The unwritten question is almost
Do you want to leave on March 29th without a deal or leave on June 29th without a deal?
Meanwhile, the people voting for an extension to Article 50 will have a huge overlap with those saying that the uncertainty around a Brexit outcome is costing jobs.
Can we set up 650 sets of stocks on Parliament Square Gardens, where all MPs will be pelted by the public with a selection of animal dung from London Zoo until they agree to pass May's Deal? No-one gets freed until they ALL agree.....
Even if every member of the ERG votes for May's deal does she have enough votes for her deal to go through? If not they have lost as the only logical next step would be to force Labour's referendum (as May won't have to take the blame for it).
I think that if the ERG get in line the Deal will have enough Labour votes to pass. But if it only just passes - and the DUP then play up - I am not sure if that is a wrap.
I do agree with you that being seen as 'forced' into offering REF2 by the opposition could be a lifeline for TM and the Tories. That is why I was not keen on it being Labour policy in anything other than a GE situation. Ah well, they've done it now.
"Even in Leave Labour seats a majority of Labour voters voted to Remain."
2017 General Election: St Helens South
Labour Marie Rimmer Votes 35,879 Conservative Ed McRandal Votes 11,536 Liberal Democrat Brian Spencer Votes 2,101 UKIP Mark Hitchen Votes 1,953 Green Jess Northey Votes 1,417
St Helens North
Labour Conor McGinn Votes 32,012 Conservative Jackson Ng Votes 13,606 UKIP Peter Peers Votes 2,097 Liberal Democrat Tom Morrison Votes 1,287 Green Party Rachel Parkinson Votes 1,220
Referendum result: 58% leave St Helens overall - 58% to leave - Remain 39,322 Leave 54,357
Try as I might, I' can't get this to match even 50% of Labour voters voting Remain. The alternative hypothesis is that perhaps you should stick to generalisations about your own constituency.
The Labour vote would probably have been split something like 50/50 for Remain and Leave in seats like these. Difficult to say which side would have narrowly got more.
If Labour split 50/50, then you'd have about 31k voters for each side. That leaves about 8.5k votes to come for Remain from 5.5k LD+Grn, and ~23k Tories (assuming relatively equal changes in turnout between the two votes). You'd need something like 80%+ of Tories to have voted Leave to make that fit, which doesn't sound realistic to me.
There must have been a lot of people who voted in the referendum in a place like St Helens who don't usually vote in general elections, and they would have been something like 90% Leave, so perhaps that would reduce the Tory Leave share to something more like 70% or 65%. The overall Tory Leave vote across the country was estimated at 61% by YouGov but it would have been a lot lower in the southern half of the country.
Assuming the figures quoted above are right, close to 10k more people in St Helens voted in the 2017GE than the referendum.
St Helens South contains 3 Knowsley wards, which have an expected yield of 11,418 votes according to electoral calculus yielding 91690 votes within the St Helens council area.
Strikes me as too little, too late. But it's an interesting move nonetheless, and poses the question of where Europe sees the future launcher market heading ...
Comments
@bjo was upset because when he said that Corbyn was not an anti-semite, I (and others) said he (Corbyn) was, and that @bjo was thereby excusing it.
I mean showing that Corbyn is an anti-semite is no great feat of intellectual prowess so I get why he bowed out of the debate, as you say with me and JJ in this instance, but I'm happy if they stay to try to argue.
Ah, I see where the problem is.
Whether that poll is accurate, or whether things have changed since then, is another question.
May sidesteps the questions. She just repeats her point about not wanting an article 50 extension.
But even if we take your figures straight we are looking for 21,000 remainers, which could be 1,000 each from the LibDems and Green, 3,000 Tories and 16,000 Labour. With the 29,000 leavers being 2,000 UKIP, 11,000 from the Tories (incl handfuls from LD/Green), with 16,000 from Labour. So exactly 50%, using the 2015 pre-referendum result.
But, as I said, throw in a few thousand non voter leavers and the Labour split tips toward Remain.
Then add in the shift in opinion away from Leave since 2016, especially in Leave seats, and it tilts still further.
He has a point.
Corbyn's proposals already seem to be falling apart and meaning different things to different people.
May has managed to come across as ruling out no deal but then on second glance there's enough in it for the No Dealers to reject the Deal and approach a short extension no deal instead and enough for Remainers to reject the Deal and vote against No Deal.
Ultimately the Deal vote unless we get meaningful concessions from the EU will probably end up with an similar rejection to January's. Nothing has changed.
Let's say there is an extension of three months, but then May manages to ram her deal through in... err.. May.
The deal calls for a 21 month transition to 31st December 2020.
Does that therefore mean the transition is now to 31st March 2021 (ie, its a fixed 21 month time frame), or does it mean we only get an 18 month transition period?
Or does it mean no one has thought of that yet?
She's not delaying without reason. If Labour and/or the ERG stopped playing silly games, we'd have a managed exit this month.
It's been ages since we had a defection. Feels almost like the first day the FTSE didn't drop 200 points during the financial crisis.
She has backtracked and lied so often that I think anyone would be extremely foolish to take it as read that she would do that if we got to that stage.
She will say anything that gets her over the next few days and once she has done that she will think nothing of doing something completely different. Right back to her telling us she would not call a GE her word cannot be trusted sadly.
Labour have said that they will support a new referendum on whether Britain should leave the EU with a deal or remain an EU member if their own plan for Brexit is rejected. Do you think Labour are right or wrong to support a new referendum?
Labour are right to support a new referendum 43%
Labour are wrong to support a new referendum 45%
Don’t know 12%
Not sure whether that's good or bad for Labour....especially as they're not offering breakdown by party vote.
Hence my difficulty in fitting the figures to a Labour majority for Remain. However, I do have a sneaky hypothesis which might back up John Mann's views.
Let's just suppose that a lot of voters up here including Labour voters regard Westminster as being skewed towards the London bubble. And even worse, they regards Londoners as being soft, spoilt poshos. I know I'm bringing in stereotypes now. But seeing Labour pivot towards their Islington-type views, might it not induce a we'll show them attitude?
Or are those Northern Labour MPs like Mann worrying unnecessarily?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxpYW_w5pgo
https://www.markpack.org.uk/149399/new-austin-brexit-take-back-control/
I think for people like Caroline Flint and John Mann, it's simply that they feel morally obliged to honour what their constituents voted for.
Really quite contemptuous.
"I think for people like Caroline Flint and John Mann, it's simply that they feel morally obliged to honour what their constituents voted for."
I suspect you're right. I'm always surprised to see honourable people in Parliament. They must feel very lonely at times.
https://twitter.com/DaSkwire/status/1100398893110571009
Everyone wants to blame someone else for the end result....
While I hate the idea of a referendum it seems its the only way out of this mess.
The European Elections that we can't avoid due to going beyond July will be fun....
The HoC is a direct result of Tezza calling an election asking the public to back her vision of Brexit, so it's their fault...
The only way No Deal doesn't happen is if it gets sprinkled in holy water, has a crucifix applied to its forehead and a stake driven through its heart. Currently MPs are still arguing if it is a vampire or a werewolf. "I'm sure silver bullets will do the trick. I read that in a book somewhere...."
Next act of the drama looks likely to be a short extension, during which either the Deal goes through - as I think it probably will - or there is a further extension.
A further extension surely has to be for something specific. It has to be for REF2 or a GE or to re-negotiate a much softer Brexit as per Labour policy.
The latter cannot happen under a Tory PM therefore can be pretty much ruled out. So if not the Deal we get REF2 or we get a GE with Labour offering REF2.
Conclusion - since REF2 steers heavily to Remain it is clearer than ever that we either sign the Withdrawal Agreement or we do not leave the EU.
Wonder if my analysis is shared by Mogg and ilk?
That said, if the Commons votes against the Deal and No Deal, I think it's unlikely that it would also vote against an extension? Why would it?
Do you want to leave on March 29th without a deal or leave on June 29th without a deal?
If not they have lost as the only logical next step would be to force Labour's referendum (as May won't have to take the blame for it).
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/431558-california-governor-cant-remember-what-he-called-trump-to-resign-over
California's Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) says he can't remember why he called on President Trump to resign last year, adding that he is focused on working with the federal government for the good of his state....
Anyone but Cameron
Also, not sure Scottie has twigged what Macmillan is saying there.
And even the Labour Leavers (other than Corbyn and maybe Hoey et al) surely would vote to extend at that point.
Can we set up 650 sets of stocks on Parliament Square Gardens, where all MPs will be pelted by the public with a selection of animal dung from London Zoo until they agree to pass May's Deal? No-one gets freed until they ALL agree.....
They'd thank me in the end.
I do agree with you that being seen as 'forced' into offering REF2 by the opposition could be a lifeline for TM and the Tories. That is why I was not keen on it being Labour policy in anything other than a GE situation. Ah well, they've done it now.
Pulps my fellow, you might be interested in the following:
https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/02/europe-unveils-design-of-reusable-rocket-that-looks-a-lot-like-a-falcon-9/
Strikes me as too little, too late. But it's an interesting move nonetheless, and poses the question of where Europe sees the future launcher market heading ...