This seems to me an obvious downside of the Tiggers not making themselves a party yet. No party, no candidates, no members that aren't already in the House of Commons. For a new party starting out by elections are mana from heaven and they are a lot less frequent than they used to be. They can't afford to keep missing out. If they think their grouping has a future as a party they need to get on with it.
It's a two-edged sword - if they took part and got 4% people would say meh, obviously another minor outfit. But they haven't even started on the job of deciding what they stand for (or if they have any chance of agreeing on it), beyond some generalist waffle. And at present it's very much top-down - they have some MPs and some money and a lot of tweets...
They might do more for their long term prospects by getting 5%, but being the difference between a Labour hold and a Tory gain, than they would be standing in a hypothetical safe seat (either party), getting 20% and finishing second, but making no difference to the actual result.
Right now, their best bet might just be putting the fear of God into the two main parties about what happens if they continue along their current trajectories.
In any case my guess is there'll be an unofficial bandwagon jumper. An independent Independent, if you will.
Ah, the B-word. Betrayal. Expect to hear it endlessly over the coming months. Whatever form of Brexit we end up with, Brexiteers will say it betrays the Brexit dream, Remainers that it betrays the British people, young people that it betrays their hopes of a bright future.
In the years to come we also face another mighty wave of betrayed anger: the rage of Leave voters who thought Brexit would cut immigration. Some who campaigned for Leave would rather that the referendum was all about sovereignty (which they consider a high-flown and principled reason) rather than immigration (which they think base and a little racist). Consider Boris Johnson’s recent rather weaselly remarks that he “didn’t say anything about Turkey during the referendum”, despite his multiple mentions of possible Turkish accession to the EU, the letter he wrote to David Cameron in June 2016 saying that “the only way to avoid having common borders with Turkey is to vote leave”, the poster run by his campaign stating that “Turkey (76 million people) is joining the EU”.
I'm no fan of BoJo, but that letter doesn't prove he said anything about Turkey during the referendum. I can quite easily believe that he took no part in writing that letter, nor bothered to read it before putting his name on it.
My favourite part of the letter was its claim that EU policy was "that Turkish acceleration should be ‘accelerated’".
Turkey is jerky.
In summary - Cameron/EU fibs over Turkey are fine, Bojo fibs are AWFUL WACISM.
Why do you deliberately misspell racist as waycist?
I've come late this, due to a gym trip followed by, but not as a consequence of, a trip to the local surgery to see the nurse.
Having had a look back, who or what are Renew? I have Googled them and they seem sort of faintly left, mildly centrist group in favour of motherhood and apple pie, but not really crusading about anything.
To be honest her choice is hold the Tory Party OR the Union together - she can only do one of those and chances are neither.
Perhaps but you only have to read the comments of HYUFD or the other Conservative members to know how important "our precious union" is to them - it's part of their name, it's at the core of their identity.
The whole Ulster issue and all that has flowed from that is part of that problem - a different pro-Brexit Government might have sold Ulster down the river (with all that would flow) for the possibility of a clean break from the SM and the CU. May could not do that because she is a Unionist (possibly more than a Conservative).
So many of her public utterances have been about unity and bringing the nation together whereas a more ideologically minded Brexit Government wouldn't have worried about that.
Ultimately, the definition of a "good deal" is one that holds the Union and the Conservative Party together.
Your last sentence is the most important aspect of this to this member
Don't be ridiculous Big G - that would mean staying in the EU.
Ah, the B-word. Betrayal. Expect to hear it endlessly over the coming months. Whatever form of Brexit we end up with, Brexiteers will say it betrays the Brexit dream, Remainers that it betrays the British people, young people that it betrays their hopes of a bright future.
In the years to come we also face another mighty wave of betrayed anger: the rage of Leave voters who thought Brexit would cut immigration. Some who campaigned for Leave would rather that the referendum was all about sovereignty (which they consider a high-flown and principled reason) rather than immigration (which they think base and a little racist). Consider Boris Johnson’s recent rather weaselly remarks that he “didn’t say anything about Turkey during the referendum”, despite his multiple mentions of possible Turkish accession to the EU, the letter he wrote to David Cameron in June 2016 saying that “the only way to avoid having common borders with Turkey is to vote leave”, the poster run by his campaign stating that “Turkey (76 million people) is joining the EU”.
I'm no fan of BoJo, but that letter doesn't prove he said anything about Turkey during the referendum. I can quite easily believe that he took no part in writing that letter, nor bothered to read it before putting his name on it.
My favourite part of the letter was its claim that EU policy was "that Turkish acceleration should be ‘accelerated’".
Boris Johnson might well not make the last three, never mind the last two. I'm not at all convinced that he will get as far as submitting himself to the verdict of his fellow MPs. He didn't last time.
That remains the great unknown factor. What has changed since 2016 that made him not a candidate then, but a candidate now? Surely not just his marriage?
Gove has pinky-sworn to support him properly this time.
I would suggest that all the reasons Gove had for not supporting him last time have been reinforced in spades by Boris' tenure at the Foreign Office. Supporting him the next time round would be utterly ridiculous after all the additional damning evidence.
Yeah, I totally agree with that; the additional nuance I was aiming for was suggesting that it might be almost as ridiculous for Boris to trust him again.
To be honest her choice is hold the Tory Party OR the Union together - she can only do one of those and chances are neither.
Perhaps but you only have to read the comments of HYUFD or the other Conservative members to know how important "our precious union" is to them - it's part of their name, it's at the core of their identity.
The whole Ulster issue and all that has flowed from that is part of that problem - a different pro-Brexit Government might have sold Ulster down the river (with all that would flow) for the possibility of a clean break from the SM and the CU. May could not do that because she is a Unionist (possibly more than a Conservative).
So many of her public utterances have been about unity and bringing the nation together whereas a more ideologically minded Brexit Government wouldn't have worried about that.
Ultimately, the definition of a "good deal" is one that holds the Union and the Conservative Party together.
Your last sentence is the most important aspect of this to this member
Don't be ridiculous Big G - that would mean staying in the EU.
I've come late this, due to a gym trip followed by, but not as a consequence of, a trip to the local surgery to see the nurse.
Having had a look back, who or what are Renew? I have Googled them and they seem sort of faintly left, mildly centrist group in favour of motherhood and apple pie, but not really crusading about anything.
They are a largely single issue anti-Brexit party, arguing for straight up revocation of A50. Though it would be fair to point out that they are currently working on a wider policy manifesto. They have had very limited success in London, where a Tory councillor defected to them a year or two ago (but failed to defend his seat in the locals).
Though undeniably a non-entity in terms of national or even local politics, they stand out from the other non-entity parties in being impressively organised in a few areas with regular canvassing etc and fairly well funded.
To be honest her choice is hold the Tory Party OR the Union together - she can only do one of those and chances are neither.
Perhaps but you only have to read the comments of HYUFD or the other Conservative members to know how important "our precious union" is to them - it's part of their name, it's at the core of their identity.
The whole Ulster issue and all that has flowed from that is part of that problem - a different pro-Brexit Government might have sold Ulster down the river (with all that would flow) for the possibility of a clean break from the SM and the CU. May could not do that because she is a Unionist (possibly more than a Conservative).
So many of her public utterances have been about unity and bringing the nation together whereas a more ideologically minded Brexit Government wouldn't have worried about that.
Ultimately, the definition of a "good deal" is one that holds the Union and the Conservative Party together.
Your last sentence is the most important aspect of this to this member
Don't be ridiculous Big G - that would mean staying in the EU.
I've come late this, due to a gym trip followed by, but not as a consequence of, a trip to the local surgery to see the nurse.
Having had a look back, who or what are Renew? I have Googled them and they seem sort of faintly left, mildly centrist group in favour of motherhood and apple pie, but not really crusading about anything.
They are a largely single issue anti-Brexit party, arguing for straight up revocation of A50. Though it would be fair to point out that they are currently working on a wider policy manifesto. They have had very limited success in London, where a Tory councillor defected to them a year or two ago (but failed to defend his seat in the locals).
Though undeniably a non-entity in terms of national or even local politics, they stand out from the other non-entity parties in being impressively organised in a few areas with regular canvassing etc and fairly well funded.
Thanks for that Mr Q, but 'impressively organised' in where outside the M25?
This seems to me an obvious downside of the Tiggers not making themselves a party yet. No party, no candidates, no members that aren't already in the House of Commons. For a new party starting out by elections are mana from heaven and they are a lot less frequent than they used to be. They can't afford to keep missing out. If they think their grouping has a future as a party they need to get on with it.
It's a two-edged sword - if they took part and got 4% people would say meh, obviously another minor outfit. But they haven't even started on the job of deciding what they stand for (or if they have any chance of agreeing on it), beyond some generalist waffle. And at present it's very much top-down - they have some MPs and some money and a lot of tweets...
They also all felt forced out of their current parties by the threat of deselection by extremists. This suggests an obvious way to attempt to make an impact in a by-election: hold an open primary to select an Independent Group candidate. I doubt there is time remaining for them to organise one, but it would have the potential to attract someone from the locality who could inspire support. Otherwise who else would their candidate be? Some policy wonk, or obscure councillor from more than a hundred miles away.
It's almost as if May wants Labour MPs to force through a Remain vs Deal referendum.
This fund also needs to be expanded 10 fold...
The announcement is just pathetic and I have no idea why TM or No 10 thought this was a good idea or even how it looks
Just crackers. I am more than non plussed and really do question who advises this stuff to TM and why she adopts it
Gordon Brown, if I recall correctly (it is quite likely that I do not), was very good at announcing large spending plans that, on closer inspection, turned out to consist mostly of pre-announced commitments plus a cherry on top that was new. The announcements thus tended to unravel quite quickly, but he pocketed the original headlines.
It seems ridiculous to criticise Theresa May for not following suit, but surely this is one case where it would have made a lot of sense? We are essentially committed to providing a stop gap for UK stakeholders about to lose EU funding (farmers, researchers, etc) - surely it would have made a tonne of sense to make one big announcement about committing to replace all EU regional funding, and add to it, and then announce all together as one package?
To be honest her choice is hold the Tory Party OR the Union together - she can only do one of those and chances are neither.
Perhaps but you only have to read the comments of HYUFD or the other Conservative members to know how important "our precious union" is to them - it's part of their name, it's at the core of their identity.
The whole Ulster issue and all that has flowed from that is part of that problem - a different pro-Brexit Government might have sold Ulster down the river (with all that would flow) for the possibility of a clean break from the SM and the CU. May could not do that because she is a Unionist (possibly more than a Conservative).
So many of her public utterances have been about unity and bringing the nation together whereas a more ideologically minded Brexit Government wouldn't have worried about that.
Ultimately, the definition of a "good deal" is one that holds the Union and the Conservative Party together.
Your last sentence is the most important aspect of this to this member
Don't be ridiculous Big G - that would mean staying in the EU.
If so so be it
Big G hath spoken.
I am annoyed with TM this morning and really am not fussed whether it is brexit or remain, just so long as it is not no deal
Ah, the B-word. Betrayal. Expect to hear it endlessly over the coming months. Whatever form of Brexit we end up with, Brexiteers will say it betrays the Brexit dream, Remainers that it betrays the British people, young people that it betrays their hopes of a bright future.
In the years to come we also face another mighty wave of betrayed anger: the rage of Leave voters who thought Brexit would cut immigration. Some who campaigned for Leave would rather that the referendum was all about sovereignty (which they consider a high-flown and principled reason) rather than immigration (which they think base and a little racist). Consider Boris Johnson’s recent rather weaselly remarks that he “didn’t say anything about Turkey during the referendum”, despite his multiple mentions of possible Turkish accession to the EU, the letter he wrote to David Cameron in June 2016 saying that “the only way to avoid having common borders with Turkey is to vote leave”, the poster run by his campaign stating that “Turkey (76 million people) is joining the EU”.
I'm no fan of BoJo, but that letter doesn't prove he said anything about Turkey during the referendum. I can quite easily believe that he took no part in writing that letter, nor bothered to read it before putting his name on it.
My favourite part of the letter was its claim that EU policy was "that Turkish acceleration should be ‘accelerated’".
Turkey is jerky.
In summary - Cameron/EU fibs over Turkey are fine, Bojo fibs are AWFUL WACISM.
Why do you deliberately misspell racist as waycist?
Maybe it had a similar derivation to Waaaaaambulance? Just an internet thing.
I've come late this, due to a gym trip followed by, but not as a consequence of, a trip to the local surgery to see the nurse.
Having had a look back, who or what are Renew? I have Googled them and they seem sort of faintly left, mildly centrist group in favour of motherhood and apple pie, but not really crusading about anything.
They are a largely single issue anti-Brexit party, arguing for straight up revocation of A50. Though it would be fair to point out that they are currently working on a wider policy manifesto. They have had very limited success in London, where a Tory councillor defected to them a year or two ago (but failed to defend his seat in the locals).
Though undeniably a non-entity in terms of national or even local politics, they stand out from the other non-entity parties in being impressively organised in a few areas with regular canvassing etc and fairly well funded.
Thanks for that Mr Q, but 'impressively organised' in where outside the M25?
It's almost as if May wants Labour MPs to force through a Remain vs Deal referendum.
This fund also needs to be expanded 10 fold...
The announcement is just pathetic and I have no idea why TM or No 10 thought this was a good idea or even how it looks
Just crackers. I am more than non plussed and really do question who advises this stuff to TM and why she adopts it
Gordon Brown, if I recall correctly (it is quite likely that I do not), was very good at announcing large spending plans that, on closer inspection, turned out to consist mostly of pre-announced commitments plus a cherry on top that was new. The announcements thus tended to unravel quite quickly, but he pocketed the original headlines.
It seems ridiculous to criticise Theresa May for not following suit, but surely this is one case where it would have made a lot of sense? We are essentially committed to providing a stop gap for UK stakeholders about to lose EU funding (farmers, researchers, etc) - surely it would have made a tonne of sense to make one big announcement about committing to replace all EU regional funding, and add to it, and then announce all together as one package?
It is too little too late for brexit and looks like a bribe which troubles me greatly
To be honest her choice is hold the Tory Party OR the Union together - she can only do one of those and chances are neither.
Perhaps but you only have to read the comments of HYUFD or the other Conservative members to know how important "our precious union" is to them - it's part of their name, it's at the core of their identity.
The whole Ulster issue and all that has flowed from that is part of that problem - a different pro-Brexit Government might have sold Ulster down the river (with all that would flow) for the possibility of a clean break from the SM and the CU. May could not do that because she is a Unionist (possibly more than a Conservative).
So many of her public utterances have been about unity and bringing the nation together whereas a more ideologically minded Brexit Government wouldn't have worried about that.
Ultimately, the definition of a "good deal" is one that holds the Union and the Conservative Party together.
Your last sentence is the most important aspect of this to this member
Don't be ridiculous Big G - that would mean staying in the EU.
If so so be it
Big G hath spoken.
I am annoyed with TM this morning and really am not fussed whether it is brexit or remain, just so long as it is not no deal
Everything May has been doing is making a No Deal exit more likely, whether accidentally or by design. No Deal has been the likeliest outcome ever since she came home with a Deal which was instantly rubbished - and has continued to be rubbished ever since - by all sides. (BTW I pressed the Off Topic button by mistake. My apologies.)
It's almost as if May wants Labour MPs to force through a Remain vs Deal referendum.
This fund also needs to be expanded 10 fold...
The announcement is just pathetic and I have no idea why TM or No 10 thought this was a good idea or even how it looks
Just crackers. I am more than non plussed and really do question who advises this stuff to TM and why she adopts it
Gordon Brown, if I recall correctly (it is quite likely that I do not), was very good at announcing large spending plans that, on closer inspection, turned out to consist mostly of pre-announced commitments plus a cherry on top that was new. The announcements thus tended to unravel quite quickly, but he pocketed the original headlines.
It seems ridiculous to criticise Theresa May for not following suit, but surely this is one case where it would have made a lot of sense? We are essentially committed to providing a stop gap for UK stakeholders about to lose EU funding (farmers, researchers, etc) - surely it would have made a tonne of sense to make one big announcement about committing to replace all EU regional funding, and add to it, and then announce all together as one package?
It is too little too late for brexit and looks like a bribe which troubles me greatly
And a bribe committed in advance, whether they vote for the deal or not.
Ah, the B-word. Betrayal. Expect to hear it endlessly over the coming months. Whatever form of Brexit we end up with, Brexiteers will say it betrays the Brexit dream, Remainers that it betrays the British people, young people that it betrays their hopes of a bright future.
In the years to come we also face another mighty wave of betrayed anger: the rage of Leave voters who thought Brexit would cut immigration. Some who campaigned for Leave would rather that the referendum was all about sovereignty (which they consider a high-flown and principled reason) rather than immigration (which they think base and a little racist). Consider Boris Johnson’s recent rather weaselly remarks that he “didn’t say anything about Turkey during the referendum”, despite his multiple mentions of possible Turkish accession to the EU, the letter he wrote to David Cameron in June 2016 saying that “the only way to avoid having common borders with Turkey is to vote leave”, the poster run by his campaign stating that “Turkey (76 million people) is joining the EU”.
I'm no fan of BoJo, but that letter doesn't prove he said anything about Turkey during the referendum. I can quite easily believe that he took no part in writing that letter, nor bothered to read it before putting his name on it.
My favourite part of the letter was its claim that EU policy was "that Turkish acceleration should be ‘accelerated’".
Turkey is jerky.
In summary - Cameron/EU fibs over Turkey are fine, Bojo fibs are AWFUL WACISM.
Why do you deliberately misspell racist as waycist?
Maybe it had a similar derivation to Waaaaaambulance? Just an internet thing.
Not sure about that.
It might imply that the poster considers concerns about racism to be infantile. But, who I am to say?
It's almost as if May wants Labour MPs to force through a Remain vs Deal referendum.
This fund also needs to be expanded 10 fold...
The announcement is just pathetic and I have no idea why TM or No 10 thought this was a good idea or even how it looks
Just crackers. I am more than non plussed and really do question who advises this stuff to TM and why she adopts it
The tin ear is looking pretty solid to be honest. This has been a massive own goal f up by looks of things.
And as I was banging on last month, potentially exposes how much work the EU was actually doing to help post-industrial areas (all of which was ignored during the referendum).
There is no way a Westminister/SE focused government will match what is about to be lost imho.
It's almost as if May wants Labour MPs to force through a Remain vs Deal referendum.
This fund also needs to be expanded 10 fold...
The announcement is just pathetic and I have no idea why TM or No 10 thought this was a good idea or even how it looks
Just crackers. I am more than non plussed and really do question who advises this stuff to TM and why she adopts it
Gordon Brown, if I recall correctly (it is quite likely that I do not), was very good at announcing large spending plans that, on closer inspection, turned out to consist mostly of pre-announced commitments plus a cherry on top that was new. The announcements thus tended to unravel quite quickly, but he pocketed the original headlines.
It seems ridiculous to criticise Theresa May for not following suit, but surely this is one case where it would have made a lot of sense? We are essentially committed to providing a stop gap for UK stakeholders about to lose EU funding (farmers, researchers, etc) - surely it would have made a tonne of sense to make one big announcement about committing to replace all EU regional funding, and add to it, and then announce all together as one package?
It is too little too late for brexit and looks like a bribe which troubles me greatly
And a bribe committed in advance, whether they vote for the deal or not.
Leave advocates still haven't accepted the terms of the bargain that they struck at the time of the referendum. They get to leave the EU, but at the price of prioritising shutting out foreigners.
At least Faust knew when he sold his soul.
Trouble is, they were so dumb that they couldn't even work out that of course immigration wouldn't fall.
Because this government for better or worse doesn't want to reduce immigration. Which, although an old battle (albeit @HYUFD still seems to be fighting it), shows explicitly that the EU was never the problem for UK immigration, it was always and continues to be a UK domestic issue.
Leave advocates weren't proposing an end to immigration just that we can control it.
Yeah I'm sure they are all over the moon that it hasn't fallen.
Plus it shows what has been obvious to most sensible people (ie no leavers) - it has always been under the government's control; they have just refused to do anything about it.
How is it under our control to restrict numbers of unskilled Europeans?
It's almost as if May wants Labour MPs to force through a Remain vs Deal referendum.
This fund also needs to be expanded 10 fold...
The announcement is just pathetic and I have no idea why TM or No 10 thought this was a good idea or even how it looks
Just crackers. I am more than non plussed and really do question who advises this stuff to TM and why she adopts it
Gordon Brown, if I recall correctly (it is quite likely that I do not), was very good at announcing large spending plans that, on closer inspection, turned out to consist mostly of pre-announced commitments plus a cherry on top that was new. The announcements thus tended to unravel quite quickly, but he pocketed the original headlines.
It seems ridiculous to criticise Theresa May for not following suit, but surely this is one case where it would have made a lot of sense? We are essentially committed to providing a stop gap for UK stakeholders about to lose EU funding (farmers, researchers, etc) - surely it would have made a tonne of sense to make one big announcement about committing to replace all EU regional funding, and add to it, and then announce all together as one package?
It is too little too late for brexit and looks like a bribe which troubles me greatly
And a bribe committed in advance, whether they vote for the deal or not.
It's sort of my point. It just didn't need to look like a bribe - it could've easily been presented as a Brexit dividend that would evaporate if No Deal. It's ended up looking like a bribe, and a bad one. Which I guess was the original point before I got involved.
The remarkable thing about May's latest masterstroke is that the shame and embarrassment make it now less likely Labour Leavers will vote for the deal.
Leave advocates still haven't accepted the terms of the bargain that they struck at the time of the referendum. They get to leave the EU, but at the price of prioritising shutting out foreigners.
At least Faust knew when he sold his soul.
Trouble is, they were so dumb that they couldn't even work out that of course immigration wouldn't fall.
Because this government for better or worse doesn't want to reduce immigration. Which, although an old battle (albeit @HYUFD still seems to be fighting it), shows explicitly that the EU was never the problem for UK immigration, it was always and continues to be a UK domestic issue.
Leave advocates weren't proposing an end to immigration just that we can control it.
Yeah I'm sure they are all over the moon that it hasn't fallen.
Plus it shows what has been obvious to most sensible people (ie no leavers) - it has always been under the government's control; they have just refused to do anything about it.
How is it under our control to restrict numbers of unskilled Europeans?
We had certain requirements which we chose not to impose (that said, they are reasonably strict as is). But we are talking about overall immigration levels and, like whack a mole, if immigration from one area dips then immigration from another area will increase to fill the gap.
One of my earliest by election memories is of Kingston upon Hull North held in late January 1966. Labour had narrowly gained the seat by just over 1000 votes in 1964 and the Government's majority was just three following the loss of Leyton at the January 1965 by election. It was a critical contest which the Tories had real hopes of winning ,but Labour managed a 4.7% swing in its favour with the majority increasing to over 5000. It set the scene for Wilson to call the March election that Spring which saw his majority boosted to 97.
The remarkable thing about May's latest masterstroke is that the shame and embarrassment make it now less likely Labour Leavers will vote for the deal.
If May's goal is to avoid splitting the Tory party, then she actively doesn't want their votes. The effect of May's intransigence is ultimately too force everyone into revealing their true bottom line, which for a majority will be 'no Brexit'.
This seems to me an obvious downside of the Tiggers not making themselves a party yet. No party, no candidates, no members that aren't already in the House of Commons. For a new party starting out by elections are mana from heaven and they are a lot less frequent than they used to be. They can't afford to keep missing out. If they think their grouping has a future as a party they need to get on with it.
It's a two-edged sword - if they took part and got 4% people would say meh, obviously another minor outfit. But they haven't even started on the job of deciding what they stand for (or if they have any chance of agreeing on it), beyond some generalist waffle. And at present it's very much top-down - they have some MPs and some money and a lot of tweets...
The national polling suggests that if they took it seriously, they'd get a lot more than 4%. But if they were taking it properly, they'd have already registered a Party name and would be actively trying to recruit defectors from all three main parties, or from Con and Lab and then seeking an alliance with the LDs (which IMO would be a bad strategy but an understandable one).
For any election, you don't need a detailed manifesto, you need at most three main messages. TIGs would be something like: - Stop Brexit; - The Tories and Labour are both useless (and Labour is a bit racist too): Protest; - It's time for a change.
I reckon that with a half-decent candidate and campaign, they should be able to pick up 15% at least given the former LD vote there and current circumstances; possibly much more. But even if it was just 15%, that would probably put them in a clear third and contrast them starkly with the Lib Dems. It might also affect the winner (though my guess is that it wouldn't), which would put the cat among them more generally, which is surely a TIG aim?
The biggest risk to TIG is that there is an early general election and that without any party organisation, they get swept away.
I agree. Other than that they have Brexit battles to fight in parliament which is presumably taking the whole of their attention, I really don't understand what TIG's political strategy is.
Even if the Eleven have no plans for the future, it's hardly going to be conducive to other MPs thinking of defecting if all the Group can offer is a dead-end.
One of my earliest by election memories is of Kingston upon Hull North held in late January 1966. Labour had narrowly gained the seat by just over 1000 votes in 1964 and the Government's majority was just three following the loss of Leyton at the January 1965 by election. It was a critical contest which the Tories had real hopes of winning ,but Labour managed a 4.7% swing in its favour with the majority increasing to over 5000. It set the scene for Wilson to call the March election that Spring which saw his majority boosted to 97.
Wasn't that the one where Wilson promised the building of the Humber Bridge. By-election bribe's ain't what they used to be.
Mr. Divvie, to be fair, it's probably some staffer who made an error, but it's a bit of a silly mistake to make.
The Telegraph used the same photo as a photo of Salisbury in January. It's from the Alamy stock photo service, so at least the government paid someone to use it (and they relied on Alamy correctly categorising their photos).
This seems to me an obvious downside of the Tiggers not making themselves a party yet. No party, no candidates, no members that aren't already in the House of Commons. For a new party starting out by elections are mana from heaven and they are a lot less frequent than they used to be. They can't afford to keep missing out. If they think their grouping has a future as a party they need to get on with it.
It's a two-edged sword - if they took part and got 4% people would say meh, obviously another minor outfit. But they haven't even started on the job of deciding what they stand for (or if they have any chance of agreeing on it), beyond some generalist waffle. And at present it's very much top-down - they have some MPs and some money and a lot of tweets...
The national polling suggests that if they took it seriously, they'd get a lot more than 4%. But if they were taking it properly, they'd have already registered a Party name and would be actively trying to recruit defectors from all three main parties, or from Con and Lab and then seeking an alliance with the LDs (which IMO would be a bad strategy but an understandable one).
For any election, you don't need a detailed manifesto, you need at most three main messages. TIGs would be something like: - Stop Brexit; - The Tories and Labour are both useless (and Labour is a bit racist too): Protest; - It's time for a change.
I reckon that with a half-decent candidate and campaign, they should be able to pick up 15% at least given the former LD vote there and current circumstances; possibly much more. But even if it was just 15%, that would probably put them in a clear third and contrast them starkly with the Lib Dems. It might also affect the winner (though my guess is that it wouldn't), which would put the cat among them more generally, which is surely a TIG aim?
The biggest risk to TIG is that there is an early general election and that without any party organisation, they get swept away.
I agree. Other than that they have Brexit battles to fight in parliament which is presumably taking the whole of their attention, I really don't understand what TIG's political strategy is.
Even if the Eleven have no plans for the future, it's hardly going to be conducive to other MPs thinking of defecting if all the Group can offer is a dead-end.
It does all seem a flash in the pan, local elections are not going to help TIG, I have asked it previously but I dont think MEPs, MSPs or AMs have jumped ship to them which does make the TIG seem a dead end
One of my earliest by election memories is of Kingston upon Hull North held in late January 1966. Labour had narrowly gained the seat by just over 1000 votes in 1964 and the Government's majority was just three following the loss of Leyton at the January 1965 by election. It was a critical contest which the Tories had real hopes of winning ,but Labour managed a 4.7% swing in its favour with the majority increasing to over 5000. It set the scene for Wilson to call the March election that Spring which saw his majority boosted to 97.
Wasn't that the one where Wilson promised the building of the Humber Bridge. By-election bribe's ain't what they used to be.
One of my earliest by election memories is of Kingston upon Hull North held in late January 1966. Labour had narrowly gained the seat by just over 1000 votes in 1964 and the Government's majority was just three following the loss of Leyton at the January 1965 by election. It was a critical contest which the Tories had real hopes of winning ,but Labour managed a 4.7% swing in its favour with the majority increasing to over 5000. It set the scene for Wilson to call the March election that Spring which saw his majority boosted to 97.
Wasn't that the one where Wilson promised the building of the Humber Bridge. By-election bribe's ain't what they used to be.
It was. And I guess the cost of the Humber Bridge in today's money is probably more than the £1.6bn May is offering to a whole list of areas over the next 7 years!
The irresistible force of the EU meets the immovable object that is the ERG. One of them is going to be crushed. And it won't be the EU.
Then the betrayal storyline will grow and either an existing party will adopt full leave as its position or a new radical party will arise to do so. And God help us all if its the latter
Theresa needs to be very careful here. She's in danger of making the EU look more generous and benign than she is, amongst the very constituency - namely the gritty northern masses - who bring a romantic tear to every Leaver's eye.
Theresa needs to be very careful here. She's in danger of making the EU look more generous and benign than she is, amongst the very constituency - namely the gritty northern masses - who bring a romantic tear to every Leaver's eye.
Sounds like something a closet Remainer might do...
This seems to me an obvious downside of the Tiggers not making themselves a party yet. No party, no candidates, no members that aren't already in the House of Commons. For a new party starting out by elections are mana from heaven and they are a lot less frequent than they used to be. They can't afford to keep missing out. If they think their grouping has a future as a party they need to get on with it.
It's a two-edged sword - if they took part and got 4% people would say meh, obviously another minor outfit. But they haven't even started on the job of deciding what they stand for (or if they have any chance of agreeing on it), beyond some generalist waffle. And at present it's very much top-down - they have some MPs and some money and a lot of tweets...
The national polling suggests that if they took it seriously, they'd get a lot more than 4%. But if they were taking it properly, they'd have already registered a Party name and would be actively trying to recruit defectors from all three main parties, or from Con and Lab and then seeking an alliance with the LDs (which IMO would be a bad strategy but an understandable one).
Fsnip
The biggest risk to TIG is that there is an early general election and that without any party organisation, they get swept away.
I agree. Other than that they have Brexit battles to fight in parliament which is presumably taking the whole of their attention, I really don't understand what TIG's political strategy is.
Even if the Eleven have no plans for the future, it's hardly going to be conducive to other MPs thinking of defecting if all the Group can offer is a dead-end.
It does all seem a flash in the pan, local elections are not going to help TIG, I have asked it previously but I dont think MEPs, MSPs or AMs have jumped ship to them which does make the TIG seem a dead end
According to sunday papers, TIG are in the process of setting up a party and are in discussions with electoral commission over the process, donations, name, structure etc.
Mr. Divvie, to be fair, it's probably some staffer who made an error, but it's a bit of a silly mistake to make.
The Telegraph used the same photo as a photo of Salisbury in January. It's from the Alamy stock photo service, so at least the government paid someone to use it (and they relied on Alamy correctly categorising their photos).
Perhaps they should recruit an Oxford geography graduate, if Theresa May will soon be available for new employment. To be serious, it is depressing that so much of our national life is in the hands of people to whom details don't matter.
45 years ago today Ted Heath left No 10 for the last time as PM and Harold Wilson began his second stint there! It really seems incredible that it is such a long time ago - it feels but a few years back.
Theresa needs to be very careful here. She's in danger of making the EU look more generous and benign than she is, amongst the very constituency - namely the gritty northern masses - who bring a romantic tear to every Leaver's eye.
Sounds like something a closet Remainer might do...
haha yes we've been played. Don't like the EU's shilling? Here's a ha'penny.
45 years ago today Ted Heath left No 10 for the last time as PM and Harold Wilson began his second stint there! It really seems incredible that it is such a long time ago - it feels but a few years back.
Ah. Harold Wilson. That Blairite with his pathetic social democracy.
the chancellor, Philip Hammond has merely brought forward some of the extra revenue said to be coming his way in his spring statement. There is no change in the traditional Whitehall paternalism. The cities money is a case of the lord of the manor handing out goodies to the indigent, if they win Whitehall’s version of It’s a Knockout.
This seems to me an obvious downside of the Tiggers not making themselves a party yet. No party, no candidates, no members that aren't already in the House of Commons. For a new party starting out by elections are mana from heaven and they are a lot less frequent than they used to be. They can't afford to keep missing out. If they think their grouping has a future as a party they need to get on with it.
It's a two-edged sword - if they took part and got 4% people would say meh, obviously another minor outfit. But they haven't even started on the job of deciding what they stand for (or if they have any chance of agreeing on it), beyond some generalist waffle. And at present it's very much top-down - they have some MPs and some money and a lot of tweets...
The national polling suggests that if they took it seriously, they'd get a lot more than 4%. But if they were taking it properly, they'd have already registered a Party name and would be actively trying to recruit defectors from all three main parties, or from Con and Lab and then seeking an alliance with the LDs (which IMO would be a bad strategy but an understandable one).
Fsnip
The biggest risk to TIG is that there is an early general election and that without any party organisation, they get swept away.
I agree. Other than that they have Brexit battles to fight in parliament which is presumably taking the whole of their attention, I really don't understand what TIG's political strategy is.
Even if the Eleven have no plans for the future, it's hardly going to be conducive to other MPs thinking of defecting if all the Group can offer is a dead-end.
It does all seem a flash in the pan, local elections are not going to help TIG, I have asked it previously but I dont think MEPs, MSPs or AMs have jumped ship to them which does make the TIG seem a dead end
According to sunday papers, TIG are in the process of setting up a party and are in discussions with electoral commission over the process, donations, name, structure etc.
1000s of small donations have come in.
People forget the SDP wasn't a party on day one.
No but it was much more prepared than TIG, it had appointed organisers, set up an office and already had lists of supporters outside Westminster ready to join up as members immediately after the launch. It was ready to go with the first by-election after the launch, which was Warrington. TIG has none of those things and none of its MPs come close to the heavyweights that launched the SDP - Jenkins & Williams in particular.
45 years ago today Ted Heath left No 10 for the last time as PM and Harold Wilson began his second stint there! It really seems incredible that it is such a long time ago - it feels but a few years back.
Ah. Harold Wilson. That Blairite with his pathetic social democracy.
Harold Wilson was paranoid, and not altogether wrong, about being undermined by the Establishment, MI5 and Israel South Africa.
To be honest her choice is hold the Tory Party OR the Union together - she can only do one of those and chances are neither.
Perhaps but you only have to read the comments of HYUFD or the other Conservative members to know how important "our precious union" is to them - it's part of their name, it's at the core of their identity.
The whole Ulster issue and all that has flowed from that is part of that problem - a different pro-Brexit Government might have sold Ulster down the river (with all that would flow) for the possibility of a clean break from the SM and the CU. May could not do that because she is a Unionist (possibly more than a Conservative).
So many of her public utterances have been about unity and bringing the nation together whereas a more ideologically minded Brexit Government wouldn't have worried about that.
Ultimately, the definition of a "good deal" is one that holds the Union and the Conservative Party together.
Your last sentence is the most important aspect of this to this member
G, you are happy to see the country ruined just to save the Tory party?
It's almost as if May wants Labour MPs to force through a Remain vs Deal referendum.
This fund also needs to be expanded 10 fold...
The announcement is just pathetic and I have no idea why TM or No 10 thought this was a good idea or even how it looks
Just crackers. I am more than non plussed and really do question who advises this stuff to TM and why she adopts it
You imagine there is some great strategy behind this kind of thing as it is hard to believe anyone could be so stupid, but they continually prove that they are just that.
45 years ago today Ted Heath left No 10 for the last time as PM and Harold Wilson began his second stint there! It really seems incredible that it is such a long time ago - it feels but a few years back.
Ah. Harold Wilson. That Blairite with his pathetic social democracy.
Wilson and Blair are the only Labour leaders to win an election in the last 65 years. In that time, seven Tories have won general elections, and six other Labour leaders have tried and failed (excluding Smith, who died before he contested an election).
For me, Wilson and Heath as contenders for government is ancient history - which is to say, I have no personal recollection of it. Presumably, other, younger people feel the same about the likes of John Major and Neil Kinnock.
It's almost as if May wants Labour MPs to force through a Remain vs Deal referendum.
This fund also needs to be expanded 10 fold...
The announcement is just pathetic and I have no idea why TM or No 10 thought this was a good idea or even how it looks
Just crackers. I am more than non plussed and really do question who advises this stuff to TM and why she adopts it
The tin ear is looking pretty solid to be honest. This has been a massive own goal f up by looks of things.
And as I was banging on last month, potentially exposes how much work the EU was actually doing to help post-industrial areas (all of which was ignored during the referendum).
There is no way a Westminister/SE focused government will match what is about to be lost imho.
Which is why Cornwall Council is getting its knickers in an almighty twist about the likely consequences of Leaving to grants down there.
To be honest her choice is hold the Tory Party OR the Union together - she can only do one of those and chances are neither.
Perhaps but you only have to read the comments of HYUFD or the other Conservative members to know how important "our precious union" is to them - it's part of their name, it's at the core of their identity.
The whole Ulster issue and all that has flowed from that is part of that problem - a different pro-Brexit Government might have sold Ulster down the river (with all that would flow) for the possibility of a clean break from the SM and the CU. May could not do that because she is a Unionist (possibly more than a Conservative).
So many of her public utterances have been about unity and bringing the nation together whereas a more ideologically minded Brexit Government wouldn't have worried about that.
Ultimately, the definition of a "good deal" is one that holds the Union and the Conservative Party together.
Your last sentence is the most important aspect of this to this member
G, you are happy to see the country ruined just to save the Tory party?
My conservative party is a one nation party, not the ERG wreckers
It's almost as if May wants Labour MPs to force through a Remain vs Deal referendum.
This fund also needs to be expanded 10 fold...
The announcement is just pathetic and I have no idea why TM or No 10 thought this was a good idea or even how it looks
Just crackers. I am more than non plussed and really do question who advises this stuff to TM and why she adopts it
You imagine there is some great strategy behind this kind of thing as it is hard to believe anyone could be so stupid, but they continually prove that they are just that.
How can anyone with an ounce of political thought not see how this looks. Speechless
Wishful thinking methinks. Highly unlikely, but I would happily live with such an outcome and so would approximately 50% of the population, plus or minus 2%
Mr. Divvie, to be fair, it's probably some staffer who made an error, but it's a bit of a silly mistake to make.
The Telegraph used the same photo as a photo of Salisbury in January. It's from the Alamy stock photo service, so at least the government paid someone to use it (and they relied on Alamy correctly categorising their photos).
Perhaps they should recruit an Oxford geography graduate, if Theresa May will soon be available for new employment. To be serious, it is depressing that so much of our national life is in the hands of people to whom details don't matter.
Pretty soon, if not already, much of your life will be in the hands of algorithms, coded by people to whom details don't matter, but trusted with blind faith by the powers that be.
To be honest her choice is hold the Tory Party OR the Union together - she can only do one of those and chances are neither.
Perhaps but you only have to read the comments of HYUFD or the other Conservative members to know how important "our precious union" is to them - it's part of their name, it's at the core of their identity.
The whole Ulster issue and all that has flowed from that is part of that problem - a different pro-Brexit Government might have sold Ulster down the river (with all that would flow) for the possibility of a clean break from the SM and the CU. May could not do that because she is a Unionist (possibly more than a Conservative).
So many of her public utterances have been about unity and bringing the nation together whereas a more ideologically minded Brexit Government wouldn't have worried about that.
Ultimately, the definition of a "good deal" is one that holds the Union and the Conservative Party together.
Your last sentence is the most important aspect of this to this member
G, you are happy to see the country ruined just to save the Tory party?
My conservative party is a one nation party, not the ERG wreckers
G, unfortunately it has gone to the dogs and is rotting from the head down.
Hold on wasn't Rentoul convinced May's deal would get through ?
I think he is just making the point that IF it is postponed THEN etc etc
This probably why he thinks in the end DUP will fold.
The DUP will not fold. Saying no is in their DNA. They have told their base that they will not give an inch and they will keep faith with that.
I suspect that the more sensible ones amongst them (one has to assume some of them are more sensible) have come to realise that Brexit will boost the chances of a unity referendum and would secretly like to dump the whole idea, and the best way of doing that is to carry on saying no until parliament votes to extend.
It's almost as if May wants Labour MPs to force through a Remain vs Deal referendum.
This fund also needs to be expanded 10 fold...
The announcement is just pathetic and I have no idea why TM or No 10 thought this was a good idea or even how it looks
Just crackers. I am more than non plussed and really do question who advises this stuff to TM and why she adopts it
The tin ear is looking pretty solid to be honest. This has been a massive own goal f up by looks of things.
And as I was banging on last month, potentially exposes how much work the EU was actually doing to help post-industrial areas (all of which was ignored during the referendum).
There is no way a Westminister/SE focused government will match what is about to be lost imho.
Which is why Cornwall Council is getting its knickers in an almighty twist about the likely consequences of Leaving to grants down there.
The only news with respect to the EU was always bad news as far as a lot of our media was concerned. Vulnerable people have been systematically conned. It will be the poor that suffer.
A business leader I spoke to the other day reiterated what many of us know; i.e. that a large number of businesses want an orderly Brexit so that they can then have the time to relocate their businesses outside the UK as the dust settles.
We are the largest contributor to the European Investment Bank, and a net contributor. "The EU" is simply being slightly more generous with our own money. The question you should ask yourself is why government is wedded to this model.
Hold on wasn't Rentoul convinced May's deal would get through ?
I think he is just making the point that IF it is postponed THEN etc etc
This probably why he thinks in the end DUP will fold.
The DUP will not fold. Saying no is in their DNA. They have told their base that they will not give an inch and they will keep faith with that.
I suspect that the more sensible ones amongst them (one has to assume some of them are more sensible) have come to realise that Brexit will boost the chances of a unity referendum and would secretly like to dump the whole idea, and the best way of doing that is to carry on saying no until parliament votes to extend.
Brexit will definitively mean a unified Ireland in my lifetime. The drum bashers are mental not stupid unlike their host organism the tories who are both.
Comments
Right now, their best bet might just be putting the fear of God into the two main parties about what happens if they continue along their current trajectories.
In any case my guess is there'll be an unofficial bandwagon jumper. An independent Independent, if you will.
Having had a look back, who or what are Renew? I have Googled them and they seem sort of faintly left, mildly centrist group in favour of motherhood and apple pie, but not really crusading about anything.
Just crackers. I am more than non plussed and really do question who advises this stuff to TM and why she adopts it
Though undeniably a non-entity in terms of national or even local politics, they stand out from the other non-entity parties in being impressively organised in a few areas with regular canvassing etc and fairly well funded.
to unravel quite quickly, but he pocketed the original headlines.
It seems ridiculous to criticise Theresa May for not following suit, but surely this is one case where it would have made a lot of sense? We are essentially committed to providing a stop gap for UK stakeholders about to lose EU funding (farmers, researchers, etc) - surely it would have made a tonne of sense to make one big announcement about committing to replace all EU regional funding, and add to it, and then announce all together as one package?
Possibly. If £13 billion could not make those regions love the EU why on earth May would think a derisory sum will make them love her deal?
She is just rubbish at politics.
Even if she gets her deal through - and I don’t see how - it will have no genuine consent behind it and will not last.
It might imply that the poster considers concerns about racism to be infantile. But, who I am to say?
And as I was banging on last month, potentially exposes how much work the EU was actually doing to help post-industrial areas (all of which was ignored during the referendum).
There is no way a Westminister/SE focused government will match what is about to be lost imho.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1102518497324736512
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/tomwarren/wwf-world-wide-fund-nature-parks-torture-death
https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/1102509516351029248
Even if the Eleven have no plans for the future, it's hardly going to be conducive to other MPs thinking of defecting if all the Group can offer is a dead-end.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1102534902174633984
RIP.
https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2019/03/martin-howe-it-is-far-better-to-risk-extending-article-50-than-to-accept-mays-bad-deal.html
1000s of small donations have come in.
People forget the SDP wasn't a party on day one.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/04/john-hickenlooper-launches-presidential-campaign-1200725
Edit: Unless you don't mean him.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/04/brexit-money-northern-england-labour-mps-may
The one thing about May's money today is that shows how much more generous the EU was than our own government to areas in need.
https://twitter.com/centrefortowns/status/1102508498779365376
https://twitter.com/centrefortowns/status/1102509185550422016
This probably why he thinks in the end DUP will fold.
For me, Wilson and Heath as contenders for government is ancient history - which is to say, I have no personal recollection of it. Presumably, other, younger people feel the same about the likes of John Major and Neil Kinnock.
https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/1102492596398641153
I suspect that the more sensible ones amongst them (one has to assume some of them are more sensible) have come to realise that Brexit will boost the chances of a unity referendum and would secretly like to dump the whole idea, and the best way of doing that is to carry on saying no until parliament votes to extend.
A business leader I spoke to the other day reiterated what many of us know; i.e. that a large number of businesses want an orderly Brexit so that they can then have the time to relocate their businesses outside the UK as the dust settles.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47440292
Another over-priced high street restaurant chain in the doo doo.
I find her charmless and hypocritical but she represents a substantial strand of current political thinking.