I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.
If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.
The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.
Ahem.
How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.
As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.
Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!
Have we agreed yet roughly how many were at yesterday's Meaningful March/Pointless Protest? My guess would be about half a million, but that includes dogs, Russian stooges and tourists just trying to find their way to Fortnum & Masons.
I was at yesterday's march and also at the anti Iraq war march in 2003.
It is difficult to estimate numbers when you are actually in a march. I tried arithmetic - how many abreast, how far apart, at what speed and for how long. Came out at about a million plus or minus half a million. It was very sprawling. People were stationary for ages in Park Lane and it sprawled out at many junctions. There weren't pictures from the air in 2003 to compare with yesterday's pictures but my own best estimate is that yesterday's march had at least as many as the 2003 march, and probably more.
I wish the mobile phone companies would publish numbers on stuff like this - I bet with their data you could get an estimate to within 10%.
Apparently the networks couldn't cope and a lot of people had no connection
That’s quite common at any large event. The expense of catering forsuch an unusually high capacity doesn’t make it worth it. It happens at most of the conferences I’ve been to. Unually high demand means little to no data access and intermittent call capacity.
Not sure Marr has been lucky in landing Starmer and IDS as guests on this critical weekend. Perhaps Sturgeon will have something interesting to say, if she can talk to a bigger picture than her domestic one?
Time she was promoting her domestic one, she cannot dither much longer or she will become like Corbyn.
The Revoke march had far better meme based placards than Farage's Ramble for the Permanently Bewildered. Unless Brexit can somehow be marketed as offering something positive for the under 60s then it's not going to be viable even if it is achieved in the near future.
It caused a militantly European cultural identity to appear in the UK in the way that 40+ years of membership of the EU and its progenitor organisation never did.
Yes, it's extremely depressing.
Nothing makes me more angry (go on, call me a Gammon) than when I see a Briton march with the yellow and blue flag. It brings out of all my innermost fears and demons.
I voted Brexit to try and bring a stop to that and to restrengthen our believe and pride in our nation and its democratic principles, and to set an example to Europe and the World of how else it could and should be done.
It hasn't exactly worked out like that.
Being a British Patriot and pro EU is not a contradiction. There were many Union Flags on the march alongside the EU ones. Of course some British patriots are anti, but surely no one has a monopoly of patriotism? Indeed a patriotism that treats 48% of it own voters as an internal enemy is taking the country in a very dangerous direction.
Listen to Heseltines speech for that patriotic pro EU view:
There's nothing patriotic about a desire to see your nation absorbed into a suprafederal union, and a new country.
This is at the heart of the issue. This is *why* we're all here.
But Heseltine himself gives you the answer. The world is changing and history doesn't run backwards.
"We are here, now, on the right side of history. In a shrinking world, of global terrorism, international tax avoidance, millisecond communication, giant corporations, superpowers, mass migration, climate change and a host of other threats, our duty is to build on our achievements, to maintain our access to the corridors of world power, to keep our place at the centre of the stages of the world"
History does run backwards sometimes. It's not a march toward some enlightened ideal
In the Glasman interview I linked to he points out that the word ‘progressive’ doesn’t always indicate a bright future, especially not if you’re at the Doctors
Seems a bit bad-tempered this morning. How can anyone be upset when David Lidington is being tipped to take over as Prime Minister?
We dont all have bets on him.
If his plan is to labour Brexit I'd be all for it not because I like labour but because it means we get a resolution, but I dont see how he would manage it - theoretically the numbers are there but he never get it through cabinet or to the commons.
He might be able to sell it as a replacement backstop. A transition arrangement until the EU finally agree on Max Fac and Canada+. It will be just as popular as the backstop among Tory Leavers though.
I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.
If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.
The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.
Ahem.
How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.
As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.
Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!
A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.
How can they help anything? This coup is exactly one week early. Once parliament forces the governments hand in whatever direction then an interim leader takes over to manage things knowing what the ppmath is. scrabbling around like this is not rearranging deck chairs on the titanic, its arguing over sunbathing spots in Pompeii.
what people lost was in no way compensated by "London" money. The butchering of manufacturing in the Midlands and North didnt replace high paying jobs, wages stagnated under Labour, no sizeable investments were made in infrastructure and while Mandelson was getting filthy rich.
People dont want charity, they want sensible jobs and to date none of the parties has anything in store to address that.
Because governments can't just magic high paying private sector jobs into existence. The loss of manufacturing jobs reflected ongoing productivity increases in the sector, the accession of China into the WTO and the high value of GBP - and only the latter could be blamed in any part on the government of the day (because they ran what were seen as sensible economic policies that boosted investor confidence). Labour's policies were perhaps too much of a sticking plaster, but compare Northern towns now with what they looked like in 2003 say and tell me that they were of no help at all.
And Brexit will help manufacturing how? Even Brexiteers' favourite economist, Patrick Minford, thinks that post Brexit the UK's manufacturing sector should disappear. That will go down like a bucket of cold sick in the Midlands and the North of England. Luckily, the Tory donors who paid for Brexit couldn't give two shits about that.
Again thats just nonsense,
The Blair government bet the farm on financial services and the "new" economy and lost. It held the pound high, penalised energy costs for manufacturing, did nothing to incentivise investment, encouraged takeovers of UK companies which we subsequently shut down and their order books offshored, wrecked the concept of a high skill high wage economy by throwing the doors open to cheap labour. And for the record the Conservatives havent been any better. But to say there was nothing the governmentcould do is just nonsense, it chose to do nothing.
It didn't 'hold the pound high' because the pound's value is market determined.
Labour's bet was that you can't fight comparative advantage. Unfortunately, they were probably right in that. Although I agree with you they could have done more, I think they did more than either the preceding or subsequent governments did, and more than anyone promoting Brexit plans to do.
Have we agreed yet roughly how many were at yesterday's Meaningful March/Pointless Protest? My guess would be about half a million, but that includes dogs, Russian stooges and tourists just trying to find their way to Fortnum & Masons.
I was at yesterday's march and also at the anti Iraq war march in 2003.
It is difficult to estimate numbers when you are actually in a march. I tried arithmetic - how many abreast, how far apart, at what speed and for how long. Came out at about a million plus or minus half a million. It was very sprawling. People were stationary for ages in Park Lane and it sprawled out at many junctions. There weren't pictures from the air in 2003 to compare with yesterday's pictures but my own best estimate is that yesterday's march had at least as many as the 2003 march, and probably more.
I wish the mobile phone companies would publish numbers on stuff like this - I bet with their data you could get an estimate to within 10%.
I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.
If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.
The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.
I still view the Brexit referendum vote as the sovereign corrective against federalism appearing at just the right moment. Many had realised the direction of travel in the early 90s, more still in the late noughties. But it didn’t find its popular expression or resonate until 2016 when the true implication of applying pan European schemes such as Free movement and Continental styles of governance on our polity became apparent
History forgets marches and movements that were superseded by events. There were substantial anti war movements immediately before WW1 and WW2 - well intentioned but ultimately seen as misguided. I suspect the same label will eventually apply to the last gasp pro-European-integration movements.
I think the idea that the logjam in parliament might not have occurred if May had involved them sooner is rather fanciful. Why has it occurred? Because of inflexible leaver ultras and die hard remainers. Theres no reason to suspect asking them things sooner would have led to more urgency from them.
It is more than fanciful, it is utter nonsense. Her only way to deliver Brexit smoothly was to get a big majority in the HoC. That was what GE17 was all about. Great idea, poor execution.
I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.
If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.
The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.
Ahem.
How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.
As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.
Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!
A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.
Only if we don’t leave. That’s still to be determined.
Have we agreed yet roughly how many were at yesterday's Meaningful March/Pointless Protest? My guess would be about half a million, but that includes dogs, Russian stooges and tourists just trying to find their way to Fortnum & Masons.
I was at yesterday's march and also at the anti Iraq war march in 2003.
It is difficult to estimate numbers when you are actually in a march. I tried arithmetic - how many abreast, how far apart, at what speed and for how long. Came out at about a million plus or minus half a million. It was very sprawling. People were stationary for ages in Park Lane and it sprawled out at many junctions. There weren't pictures from the air in 2003 to compare with yesterday's pictures but my own best estimate is that yesterday's march had at least as many as the 2003 march, and probably more.
I wish the mobile phone companies would publish numbers on stuff like this - I bet with their data you could get an estimate to within 10%.
Apparently the networks couldn't cope and a lot of people had no connection
I had no connection at all. Just a message telling me it was blocked. Throughout the whole march I heard people muttering about it.
I was surprised by the pictures on the TV showing it free flowing, but I think that was just at the very front looking at the aerial shot going along the line. We weren't far from the front, but we were stationary at Hyde park for an hour. I heard others were there for several hours. It then moved ok, but packed. It hurt the legs to take shorter steps than you would normally do. We managed to get just short of Downing Street and then the crowd density got very scary.
I got two excellent pictures of people dressed as Boris and Theresa. Amazingly good humoured. There were a few posters in poor taste, but also some very funny ones.
Hilary Benn talking a load of shit on Sophie Ridge. Had the PM had her way, the WA would have been signed before Christmas without the consent of Parliament. The MPs voted for the Grieve amendment so that Parliament could take back control. That the MPs cannot agree on a course of action is not the fault of the government as claimed by Benn.
It is great that at a time of crisis our political leaders are focused on discussing hard choices rather focusing on which gets to sit in the top chair with no plan for what theyd actually be able to do when they got there.
I haven't seen such dignified unity of effort at a time of crisis since I watched The death of Stalin last week.
Have we agreed yet roughly how many were at yesterday's Meaningful March/Pointless Protest? My guess would be about half a million, but that includes dogs, Russian stooges and tourists just trying to find their way to Fortnum & Masons.
I was at yesterday's march and also at the anti Iraq war march in 2003.
It is difficult to estimate numbers when you are actually in a march. I tried arithmetic - how many abreast, how far apart, at what speed and for how long. Came out at about a million plus or minus half a million. It was very sprawling. People were stationary for ages in Park Lane and it sprawled out at many junctions. There weren't pictures from the air in 2003 to compare with yesterday's pictures but my own best estimate is that yesterday's march had at least as many as the 2003 march, and probably more.
I wish the mobile phone companies would publish numbers on stuff like this - I bet with their data you could get an estimate to within 10%.
Have we agreed yet roughly how many were at yesterday's Meaningful March/Pointless Protest? My guess would be about half a million, but that includes dogs, Russian stooges and tourists just trying to find their way to Fortnum & Masons.
I was at yesterday's march and also at the anti Iraq war march in 2003.
It is difficult to estimate numbers when you are actually in a march. I tried arithmetic - how many abreast, how far apart, at what speed and for how long. Came out at about a million plus or minus half a million. It was very sprawling. People were stationary for ages in Park Lane and it sprawled out at many junctions. There weren't pictures from the air in 2003 to compare with yesterday's pictures but my own best estimate is that yesterday's march had at least as many as the 2003 march, and probably more.
I wish the mobile phone companies would publish numbers on stuff like this - I bet with their data you could get an estimate to within 10%.
Apparently the networks couldn't cope and a lot of people had no connection
That’s quite common at any large event. The expense of catering forsuch an unusually high capacity doesn’t make it worth it. It happens at most of the conferences I’ve been to. Unually high demand means little to no data access and intermittent call capacity.
I can never get on the internet when I'm at PL football matches.
what people lost was in no way compensated by "London" money. The butchering of manufacturing in the Midlands and North didnt replace high paying jobs, wages stagnated under Labour, no sizeable investments were made in infrastructure and while Mandelson was getting filthy rich.
People dont want charity, they want sensible jobs and to date none of the parties has anything in store to address that.
Because governments can't just magic high paying private sector jobs into existence. The loss of manufacturing jobs reflected ongoing productivity increases in the sector, the accession of China into the WTO and the high value of GBP - and only the latter could be blamed in any part on the government of the day (because they ran what were seen as sensible economic policies that boosted investor confidence). Labour's policies were perhaps too much of a sticking plaster, but compare Northern towns now with what they looked like in 2003 say and tell me that they were of no help at all.
And Brexit will help manufacturing how? Even Brexiteers' favourite economist, Patrick Minford, thinks that post Brexit the UK's manufacturing sector should disappear. That will go down like a bucket of cold sick in the Midlands and the North of England. Luckily, the Tory donors who paid for Brexit couldn't give two shits about that.
Again thats just nonsense,
The Blair government bet the farm on financial services and the "new" economy and lost. It held the pound high, penalised energy costs for manufacturing, did nothing to incentivise investment, encouraged takeovers of UK companies which we subsequently shut down and their order books offshored, wrecked the concept of a high skill high wage economy by throwing the doors open to cheap labour. And for the record the Conservatives havent been any better. But to say there was nothing the governmentcould do is just nonsense, it chose to do nothing.
It didn't 'hold the pound high' because the pound's value is market determined.
Labour's bet was that you can't fight comparative advantage. Unfortunately, they were probably right in that. Although I agree with you they could have done more, I think they did more than either the preceding or subsequent governments did, and more than anyone promoting Brexit plans to do.
Incidentally, I saw a brexiter in a Facebook group talking about the Law of Comparative Advantage but claiming it was an actual law passed by the EU. In case anyone is unhappy with the standard of debate on this forum.
Perhaps that's what the next generation want, but for me it's very depressing. If all Conservatism means is just good stewardship of the national finances and day-to-day administration and otherwise abrogating any leadership of the national debate (and I admit, to many, that's all they want) then politics no longer holds any real interest for me.
It's an interesting viewpoint but what are the alternatives? I certainly would not want the Tory party to follow the path taken by the Republican party in the US. What policies do you want them to propose that they are not?
I am a Conservative voter (or at least I have been up to now) but I don't want radical attacks on the welfare state, indeed the harshness of the reforms on disability for example offend me as does the incompetence with which UC has been introduced. I certainly don't want the equivalent of US Evangelicals having any say on social policy. I am not up for another wave of privatisations, the recent experience of private sector involvement in the provision of public services has not been a success on any measure. What do I want?
* Sound public finances and reduced government debt (as a share of GDP). *Efficient and effective public services which are adequately funded to meet the challenges we have given to them. *The application of our laws to all and for all. Having some of our citizens treated as second class because of "cultural sensitivity" is unacceptable. *A society that is, so far as possible, left to get on with their own lives without politicians thinking we need new laws on everything all the time. * A society that is compassionate about those in need.
I accept it is not the most ambitious list. One might say it is almost conservative.
Exactly my thoughts David
Unfortunately it is a million mile from current Conservatism, in fact almost complete opposite.
Have we agreed yet roughly how many were at yesterday's Meaningful March/Pointless Protest? My guess would be about half a million, but that includes dogs, Russian stooges and tourists just trying to find their way to Fortnum & Masons.
I was at yesterday's march and also at the anti Iraq war march in 2003.
It is difficult to estimate numbers when you are actually in a march. I tried arithmetic - how many abreast, how far apart, at what speed and for how long. Came out at about a million plus or minus half a million. It was very sprawling. People were stationary for ages in Park Lane and it sprawled out at many junctions. There weren't pictures from the air in 2003 to compare with yesterday's pictures but my own best estimate is that yesterday's march had at least as many as the 2003 march, and probably more.
I wish the mobile phone companies would publish numbers on stuff like this - I bet with their data you could get an estimate to within 10%.
Apparently the networks couldn't cope and a lot of people had no connection
That's true too. I couldn't get a signal for at least two hours.
what people lost was in no way compensated by "London" money. The butchering of manufacturing in the Midlands and North didnt replace high paying jobs, wages stagnated under Labour, no sizeable investments were made in infrastructure and while Mandelson was getting filthy rich.
People dont want charity, they want sensible jobs and to date none of the parties has anything in store to address that.
Because governments can't just m at all.
And Brexit will help manufacturing how? Even Brexiteers' favourite economist, Patrick Minford, thinks that post Brexit the UK's manufacturing sector should disappear. That will go down like a bucket of cold sick in the Midlands and the North of England. Luckily, the Tory donors who paid for Brexit couldn't give two shits about that.
Again thats just nonsense,
The Blair government bet the farm on financial services and the "new" economy and lost. It held the pound high, penalised energy costs for manufacturing, did nothing to incentivise investment, encouraged takeovers of UK companies which we subsequently shut down and their order books offshored, wrecked the concept of a high skill high wage economy by throwing the doors open to cheap labour. And for the record the Conservatives havent been any better. But to say there was nothing the governmentcould do is just nonsense, it chose to do nothing.
It didn't 'hold the pound high' because the pound's value is market determined.
Labour's bet was that you can't fight comparative advantage. Unfortunately, they were probably right in that. Although I agree with you they could have done more, I think they did more than either the preceding or subsequent governments did, and more than anyone promoting Brexit plans to do.
Then how come we have the concept of a currency being over\under valued ? For most of the Blair years the £ was about 1.50 to the euro when it should have been about 1.3
As for comparative advantage just gobbledigook. You make your own advantages. The UK instead decided to lob disadvantages on its own industries.
Perhaps that's what the next generation want, but for me it's very depressing. If all Conservatism means is just good stewardship of the national finances and day-to-day administration and otherwise abrogating any leadership of the national debate (and I admit, to many, that's all they want) then politics no longer holds any real interest for me.
It's an interesting viewpoint but what are the alternatives? I certainly would not want the Tory party to follow the path taken by the Republican party in the US. What policies do you want them to propose that they are not?
I am a Conservative voter (or at least I have been up to now) but I don't want radical attacks on the welfare state, indeed the harshness of the reforms on disability for example offend me as does the incompetence with which UC has been introduced. I certainly don't want the equivalent of US Evangelicals having any say on social policy. I am not up for another wave of privatisations, the recent experience of private sector involvement in the provision of public services has not been a success on any measure. What do I want?
* Sound public finances and reduced government debt (as a share of GDP). *Efficient and effective public services which are adequately funded to meet the challenges we have given to them. *The application of our laws to all and for all. Having some of our citizens treated as second class because of "cultural sensitivity" is unacceptable. *A society that is, so far as possible, left to get on with their own lives without politicians thinking we need new laws on everything all the time. * A society that is compassionate about those in need.
I accept it is not the most ambitious list. One might say it is almost conservative.
Exactly my thoughts David
Unfortunately it is a million mile from current Conservatism, in fact almost complete opposite.
But it is my conservatism Malc and if I may be bold not too far from yourself
Have we agreed yet roughly how many were at yesterday's Meaningful March/Pointless Protest? My guess would be about half a million, but that includes dogs, Russian stooges and tourists just trying to find their way to Fortnum & Masons.
I was at yesterday's march and also at the anti Iraq war march in 2003.
It is difficult to estimate numbers when you are actually in a march. I tried arithmetic - how many abreast, how far apart, at what speed and for how long. Came out at about a million plus or minus half a million. It was very sprawling. People were stationary for ages in Park Lane and it sprawled out at many junctions. There weren't pictures from the air in 2003 to compare with yesterday's pictures but my own best estimate is that yesterday's march had at least as many as the 2003 march, and probably more.
I wish the mobile phone companies would publish numbers on stuff like this - I bet with their data you could get an estimate to within 10%.
Apparently the networks couldn't cope and a lot of people had no connection
I had no connection at all. Just a message telling me it was blocked. Throughout the whole march I heard people muttering about it.
I was surprised by the pictures on the TV showing it free flowing, but I think that was just at the very front looking at the aerial shot going along the line. We weren't far from the front, but we were stationary at Hyde park for an hour. I heard others were there for several hours. It then moved ok, but packed. It hurt the legs to take shorter steps than you would normally do. We managed to get just short of Downing Street and then the crowd density got very scary.
I got two excellent pictures of people dressed as Boris and Theresa. Amazingly good humoured. There were a few posters in poor taste, but also some very funny ones.
Oh and I was very surprised to see the large number of 'Tories against Brexit' posterboards being carried on the march.
Have we agreed yet roughly how many were at yesterday's Meaningful March/Pointless Protest? My guess would be about half a million, but that includes dogs, Russian stooges and tourists just trying to find their way to Fortnum & Masons.
I was at yesterday's march and also at the anti Iraq war march in 2003.
It is difficult to estimate numbers when you are actually in a march. I tried arithmetic - how many abreast, how far apart, at what speed and for how long. Came out at about a million plus or minus half a million. It was very sprawling. People were stationary for ages in Park Lane and it sprawled out at many junctions. There weren't pictures from the air in 2003 to compare with yesterday's pictures but my own best estimate is that yesterday's march had at least as many as the 2003 march, and probably more.
I wish the mobile phone companies would publish numbers on stuff like this - I bet with their data you could get an estimate to within 10%.
Apparently the networks couldn't cope and a lot of people had no connection
That's true too. I couldn't get a signal for at least two hours.
That's like a normal day if you are on EE near where I live.. fortunately we switched to Vodaphone=happy days.
I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.
If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.
The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.
Ahem.
How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.
As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.
Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!
A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.
Only if we don’t leave. That’s still to be determined.
We're not leaving. 2 years of trying has failed so somehow they'll get us there. All that remains is the tricky process of reversing things.
First step, Tory implosion as they panic as Brexit slips away, and they try something stupid like replacing May before they have any idea what the next leader would need to do.
I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.
If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.
The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.
Ahem.
How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.
As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.
Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!
A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.
Were you a member of a political party you’d realise how hilarious that sounds. It is interesting to reflect that the tiny pro-European minority in the party consists largely of middle class, middle aged men between the age of aggrieved (that was meant to say Grieve, but is quite a funny autocorrect so I’ve left it) and Clarke. Our younger members and politicians are in the main far more eurosceptic than their preceding generations.
The Conservative party is 80% + Eurosceptic. This used to be just the membership - since the Brexit vote it has been their vote, too.
Revoke will never happen because of this; long delay is death by a thousand cuts (the deepest of which would be the MEP elections).
If Liddington does concede to soft brexit, we'll see the amusing prospect of the Conservative party campaigning against their own government's Brexit policy at the next election.
I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.
If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.
The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.
The trouble with the referendum is that it was a (near) 50/50 split.
If we remain, don't be misguided by the admittedly impressive sight of one or even two (sorry, Casino) people marching through london waving blue flags. The country remains deeply divided.
If we remain, it will be as a recalcitrant, unhappy member. In it for the money, in it because we'll go broke otherwise. Forced to accept the political project for fear of losing jobs. We won't become fervently pro-EU, because outside of metropolitan Remania, we never have.
LBJ famously said it is better to be inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in. But if we remain I suspect our relationship with the EU will be one of us inside the tent, pissing all over the walls, the sleeping bags, and our fellow members. Particularly when we elect a load of hardline nationalists. Don't think it can happen? Look north of the border to see what happens when a nation narrowly decides to "remain" and isn't happy about it...
He is right. How long will the world keep laughing at our brexit humiliation? Do they stop laughing just because Theresa May is picked up and thrown out the window by her own cabinet? Or does that cause them to wet themselves at same time as laughing? 😕
If Liddington does concede to soft brexit, we'll see the amusing prospect of the Conservative party campaigning against their own government's Brexit policy at the next election.
Worth it.
I dont see the issue - unless they're prepared to no deal Brexit without a fight, which not enough are, it really as simple as do you want soft Brexit or no Brexit. It's not difficult.
These bozos are still unable to agree what the choices are let alone make one though.
How can they help anything? This coup is exactly one week early. Once parliament forces the governments hand in whatever direction then an interim leader takes over to manage things knowing what the ppmath is. scrabbling around like this is not rearranging deck chairs on the titanic, its arguing over sunbathing spots in Pompeii.
But if May stays, Cooper/Letwin ensures that de facto leadership passes elsewhere, and May is left in the same position as she was sitting eating her sandwich in that windowless room whilst the EU had dinner and decided our fate next door. A new leader is really their only chance to grab hold of the process.
Incidentally, I saw a brexiter in a Facebook group talking about the Law of Comparative Advantage but claiming it was an actual law passed by the EU. In case anyone is unhappy with the standard of debate on this forum.
lol - related right-populism, that you could also totally imagine TMay saying:
what people lost was in no way compensated by "London" money. The butchering of manufacturing in the Midlands and North didnt replace high paying jobs, wages stagnated under Labour, no sizeable investments were made in infrastructure and while Mandelson was getting filthy rich.
People dont want charity, they want sensible jobs and to date none of the parties has anything in store to address that.
Because governments can't just magic high paying private sector jobs into existence. The loss of manufacturing jobs reflected ongoing productivity increases in the sector, the accession of China into the WTO and the high value of GBP - and only the latter could be blamed in any part on the government of the day (because they ran what were seen as sensible economic policies that boosted investor confidence). Labour's policies were perhaps too much of a sticking plaster, but compare Northern towns now with what they looked like in 2003 say and tell me that they were of no help at all.
And Brexit will help manufacturing how? Even Brexiteers' favourite economist, Patrick Minford, thinks that post Brexit the UK's manufacturing sector should disappear. That will go down like a bucket of cold sick in the Midlands and the North of England. Luckily, the Tory donors who paid for Brexit couldn't give two shits about that.
Perhaps having policies that encourage projects outside London and the south east may have helped a little. The cretins have totally ignored anything outside the M25, happy to have the south awash with our cash and that of the foreign launderers. The gits even make Scotland pay a share of the London projects into the bargain and interest on the loans, whilst cutting our budgets.
Off topic but for those interested in going on a cruise avoid the video on the media this morning watching the Viking Sky pitch and roll with no engines. Apart from no engines, my wife and I have experienced several similar occassions at sea, notably crossing the North Sea, the Atlantic and Antarctica
LBJ famously said it is better to be inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in. But if we remain I suspect our relationship with the EU will be one of us inside the tent, pissing all over the walls, the sleeping bags, and our fellow members. Particularly when we elect a load of hardline nationalists. Don't think it can happen? Look north of the border to see what happens when a nation narrowly decides to "remain" and isn't happy about it...
That was the 52/48 win for Remain in 2016 scenario, but that ship has sailed. Instead it went the other way, and Brexit was tested to destruction as a viable political project.
If Liddington does concede to soft brexit, we'll see the amusing prospect of the Conservative party campaigning against their own government's Brexit policy at the next election.
Even Lidington cannot concede anything. He would be in the same deadlock as TM
I think the idea that the logjam in parliament might not have occurred if May had involved them sooner is rather fanciful. Why has it occurred? Because of inflexible leaver ultras and die hard remainers. Theres no reason to suspect asking them things sooner would have led to more urgency from them.
It is more than fanciful, it is utter nonsense. Her only way to deliver Brexit smoothly was to get a big majority in the HoC. That was what GE17 was all about. Great idea, poor execution.
No it wasn't because ultimately in 2017 nobody saw the urgency to get a large majority plus she made.it about stuff like the dementia tax.
One alternative was to continue with a working but small majority with the option of an election when it became necessary. Come last December she could have been in a position to threaten or hold an election if the deal wasn't passed.
The Revoke march had far better meme based placards than Farage's Ramble for the Permanently Bewildered. Unless Brexit can somehow be marketed as offering something positive for the under 60s then it's not going to be viable even if it is achieved in the near future.
It caused a militantly European cultural identity to appear in the UK in the way that 40+ years of membership of the EU and its progenitor organisation never did.
Yes, it's extremely depressing.
Nothing makes me more angry (go on, call me a Gammon) than when I see a Briton march with the yellow and blue flag. It brings out of all my innermost fears and demons.
I voted Brexit to try and bring a stop to that and to restrengthen our believe and pride in our nation and its democratic principles, and to set an example to Europe and the World of how else it could and should be done.
It hasn't exactly worked out like that.
Being a British Patriot and pro EU is not a contradiction. There were many Union Flags on the march alongside the EU ones. Of course some British patriots are anti, but surely no one has a monopoly of patriotism? Indeed a patriotism that treats 48% of it own voters as an internal enemy is taking the country in a very dangerous direction.
Listen to Heseltines speech for that patriotic pro EU view:
There's nothing patriotic about a desire to see your nation absorbed into a suprafederal union, and a new country.
This is at the heart of the issue. This is *why* we're all here.
But Heseltine himself gives you the answer. The world is changing and history doesn't run backwards.
"We are here, now, on the right side of history. In a shrinking world, of global terrorism, international tax avoidance, millisecond communication, giant corporations, superpowers, mass migration, climate change and a host of other threats, our duty is to build on our achievements, to maintain our access to the corridors of world power, to keep our place at the centre of the stages of the world"
History does run backwards sometimes. It's not a march toward some enlightened ideal
You are right that many things go in cycles, examples being social conservatism/liberalism and the strength of religion in societies.
But history cannot return things to how they were before - which is part of the fundamental mistake many leavers have made, the other being to overlook the rupture and challenge of the transition, regardless of how feasible is their desired end state.
How can they help anything? This coup is exactly one week early. Once parliament forces the governments hand in whatever direction then an interim leader takes over to manage things knowing what the ppmath is. scrabbling around like this is not rearranging deck chairs on the titanic, its arguing over sunbathing spots in Pompeii.
But if May stays, Cooper/Letwin ensures that de facto leadership passes elsewhere, and May is left in the same position as she was sitting eating her sandwich in that windowless room whilst the EU had dinner and decided our fate next door. A new leader is really their only chance to grab hold of the process.
How? The reports are they dont agree what they want and even if they did it wont get through the commons . It's too late to grab hold, either they replaced May long before now or they have to wait.
Slamming on the breaks when you're only 2 feet from smashing into a wall doesn't achieve anything
LBJ famously said it is better to be inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in. But if we remain I suspect our relationship with the EU will be one of us inside the tent, pissing all over the walls, the sleeping bags, and our fellow members. Particularly when we elect a load of hardline nationalists. Don't think it can happen? Look north of the border to see what happens when a nation narrowly decides to "remain" and isn't happy about it...
That was the 52/48 win for Remain in 2016 scenario, but that ship has sailed. Instead it went the other way, and Brexit was tested to destruction as a viable political project.
Do you honestly think the people marching yesterday represent a sudden outpouring of love for the EU? No, the million or so who marched were pretty pro-EU in 2016 and before. You are right that Brexit has been tested almost to the point of destruction and we may well end up remaining after kicking Brexit into the long grass. But my point was that this does not lead to a sudden outpouring of love for the EU. What remains is a deeply resentful and unhappy member of the project that is sure to elect hardline nationalists who will do what they can to clog up the works. Honestly - why would the EU even want us?
Hilary Benn talking a load of shit on Sophie Ridge. Had the PM had her way, the WA would have been signed before Christmas without the consent of Parliament. The MPs voted for the Grieve amendment so that Parliament could take back control. That the MPs cannot agree on a course of action is not the fault of the government as claimed by Benn.
No, because the Cooper-Boles amendment failed - that was the one that would have enabled MPs to set the Parliamentary agenda. The Government has up to now not allowed MPs the chance to adopt an alternative strategy. Essentially Grieve's amendment prevented the Government from doing stuff, but the Government has prevented MPs from doing stuff.
Seems a bit bad-tempered this morning. How can anyone be upset when David Lidington is being tipped to take over as Prime Minister?
Or even worse Gove , a mendacious lying toerag of the first order.
A bit early on a Sunday for tortology, Malc…...
A new one on me Suare, and not much explanation on google other than it may be about cakes, nice word though. I presume it is around combination of words.
If Liddington does concede to soft brexit, we'll see the amusing prospect of the Conservative party campaigning against their own government's Brexit policy at the next election.
Even Lidington cannot concede anything. He would be in the same deadlock as TM
swapping a useless nonentity for another useless nonentity will achieve nothing G.
I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.
If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.
The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.
Yet again I agree with what you are posting Royal. Where and why this came, not necessarily though your direction of travel.
This crisis in Britain now has been a growing shadow across these lands for the last 25 years at least. right from the start in the 97 GE as Maastricht sank into the English mindfulness. Preferring Blair as PM over Hague and Howard masked what was really happening, masked that Labour had no answer to the negative impacts of Ever more EU integration, globalisation, de industrialisation, no government then or since will tackle looming social care and NHS time bombs, and the only answer to British unease over immigration to UK in EU single market has been brexit.
So lets be honest and see the role nationalism and identity has played in this brexit outcome, there were two union jacks behind Theresa May as she addressed the nation this week, yet she is oblivious to how this crisis challenges them, threatening to make them relics from a bygone age, if those union jacks are weaker today than ever it proves what this whole process has underlined, its not the British parliament anymore is it? Its not a British Brexit, it’s the English who have done this.
It’s the ego of a Captain of this world that wore the pips for hundreds of years, and couldn’t face going back into the ranks when the inevitable time came. Unless you actually believe such times may never come?
Yet, unlike your post, now is not that moment, the English are not yet ready.
LBJ famously said it is better to be inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in. But if we remain I suspect our relationship with the EU will be one of us inside the tent, pissing all over the walls, the sleeping bags, and our fellow members. Particularly when we elect a load of hardline nationalists. Don't think it can happen? Look north of the border to see what happens when a nation narrowly decides to "remain" and isn't happy about it...
That was the 52/48 win for Remain in 2016 scenario, but that ship has sailed. Instead it went the other way, and Brexit was tested to destruction as a viable political project.
Do you honestly think the people marching yesterday represent a sudden outpouring of love for the EU? No, the million or so who marched were pretty pro-EU in 2016 and before. You are right that Brexit has been tested almost to the point of destruction and we may well end up remaining after kicking Brexit into the long grass. But my point was that this does not lead to a sudden outpouring of love for the EU. What remains is a deeply resentful and unhappy member of the project that is sure to elect hardline nationalists who will do what they can to clog up the works. Honestly - why would the EU even want us?
If Liddington does concede to soft brexit, we'll see the amusing prospect of the Conservative party campaigning against their own government's Brexit policy at the next election.
Even Lidington cannot concede anything. He would be in the same deadlock as TM
swapping a useless nonentity for another useless nonentity will achieve nothing G.
I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.
If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.
The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.
Ahem.
How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.
As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.
Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!
A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.
Were you a member of a political party you’d realise how hilarious that sounds. It is interesting to reflect that the tiny pro-European minority in the party consists largely of middle class, middle aged men between the age of aggrieved (that was meant to say Grieve, but is quite a funny autocorrect so I’ve left it) and Clarke. Our younger members and politicians are in the main far more eurosceptic than their preceding generations.
The Conservative party is 80% + Eurosceptic. This used to be just the membership - since the Brexit vote it has been their vote, too.
Revoke will never happen because of this; long delay is death by a thousand cuts (the deepest of which would be the MEP elections).
It is no doubt a weird statistical fluke of small numbers, but all the Conservative Party members I know are strongly pro-EU. And I met another couple on the train home from the march yesterday. Not trying to make any particular point other than it is very easy for your personal experiences to be misleading.
I think the idea that the logjam in parliament might not have occurred if May had involved them sooner is rather fanciful. Why has it occurred? Because of inflexible leaver ultras and die hard remainers. Theres no reason to suspect asking them things sooner would have led to more urgency from them.
And the casualty is TM who tried to reflect the 52/48 vote with the least worst exit
She didn't. She tried for a compromise among the 52% and ignored the 48%. She's now wasted 33 months. F*** her.
BTW this morning the petition for Revoke - not just a Ratifying Referendum - has got to 4.9 million whereas I heard on R4 yesterday that one urging a No Deal exit had got to 490,000.
Hilary Benn talking a load of shit on Sophie Ridge. Had the PM had her way, the WA would have been signed before Christmas without the consent of Parliament. The MPs voted for the Grieve amendment so that Parliament could take back control. That the MPs cannot agree on a course of action is not the fault of the government as claimed by Benn.
No, because the Cooper-Boles amendment failed - that was the one that would have enabled MPs to set the Parliamentary agenda. The Government has up to now not allowed MPs the chance to adopt an alternative strategy. Essentially Grieve's amendment prevented the Government from doing stuff, but the Government has prevented MPs from doing stuff.
Perhaps that's what the next generation want, but for me it's very depressing. If all Conservatism means is just good stewardship of the national finances and day-to-day administration and otherwise abrogating any leadership of the national debate (and I admit, to many, that's all they want) then politics no longer holds any real interest for me.
It's an interesting viewpoint but what are the alternatives? I certainly would not want the Tory party to follow the path taken by the Republican party in the US. What policies do you want them to propose that they are not?
I am a Conservative voter (or at least I have been up to now) but I don't want radical attacks on the welfare state, indeed the harshness of the reforms on disability for example offend me as does the incompetence with which UC has been introduced. I certainly don't want the equivalent of US Evangelicals having any say on social policy. I am not up for another wave of privatisations, the recent experience of private sector involvement in the provision of public services has not been a success on any measure. What do I want?
* Sound public finances and reduced government debt (as a share of GDP). *Efficient and effective public services which are adequately funded to meet the challenges we have given to them. *The application of our laws to all and for all. Having some of our citizens treated as second class because of "cultural sensitivity" is unacceptable. *A society that is, so far as possible, left to get on with their own lives without politicians thinking we need new laws on everything all the time. * A society that is compassionate about those in need.
I accept it is not the most ambitious list. One might say it is almost conservative.
Exactly my thoughts David
Unfortunately it is a million mile from current Conservatism, in fact almost complete opposite.
But it is my conservatism Malc and if I may be bold not too far from yourself
Indeed G but we should not hold our breath awaiting its return.
I think the idea that the logjam in parliament might not have occurred if May had involved them sooner is rather fanciful. Why has it occurred? Because of inflexible leaver ultras and die hard remainers. Theres no reason to suspect asking them things sooner would have led to more urgency from them.
And the casualty is TM who tried to reflect the 52/48 vote with the least worst exit
She didn't. She tried for a compromise among the 52% and ignored the 48%. She's now wasted 33 months. F*** her.
BTW this morning the petition for Revoke - not just a Ratifying Referendum - has got to 4.9 million whereas I heard on R4 yesterday that one urging a No Deal exit had got to 490,000.
It is not the answer and will not happen unless through a referendum
IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too
The Revoke march had far better meme based placards than Farage's
Yes, it's extremely depressing.
Nothing makes me more angry (go on, call me a Gammon) than when I see a Briton march with the yellow and blue flag. It brings out of all my innermost fears and demons.
I voted Brexit to try and bring a stop to that and to restrengthen our believe and pride in our nation and its democratic principles, and to set an example to Europe and the World of how else it could and should be done.
It hasn't exactly worked out like that.
Being a British Patriot and pro EU is not a contradiction. There were many Union Flags on the march alongside the EU ones. Of course some British patriots are anti, but surely no one has a monopoly of patriotism? Indeed a patriotism that treats 48% of it own voters as an internal enemy is taking the country in a very dangerous direction.
Listen to Heseltines speech for that patriotic pro EU view:
There's nothing patriotic about a desire to see your nation absorbed into a suprafederal union, and a new country.
This is at the heart of the issue. This is *why* we're all here.
But Heseltine himself gives you the answer. The world is changing and history doesn't run backwards.
"We are here, now, on the right side of history. In a shrinking world, of global terrorism, international tax avoidance, millisecond communication, giant corporations, superpowers, mass migration, climate change and a host of other threats, our duty is to build on our achievements, to maintain our access to the corridors of world power, to keep our place at the centre of the stages of the world"
History does run backwards sometimes. It's not a march toward some enlightened ideal
You are right that many things go in cycles, examples being social conservatism/liberalism and the strength of religion in societies.
But history cannot return things to how they were before - which is part of the fundamental mistake many leavers have made, the other being to overlook the rupture and challenge of the transition, regardless of how feasible is their desired end state.
“Can anyone really have thought that this great greasy, congealed granny knot, tied and retied and tightened for nearly 50 years, could be undone by a single clean stroke?”
Perhaps that's what the next generation want, but for me it's very depressing. If all Conservatism means is just good stewardship of the national finances and day-to-day administration and otherwise abrogating any leadership of the national debate (and I admit, to many, that's all they want) then politics no longer holds any real interest for me.
It's an interesting viewpoint but what are the alternatives? I certainly would not want the Tory party to follow the path taken by the Republican party in the US. What policies do you want them to propose that they are not?
I am a Conservative voter (or at least I have been up to now) but I don't want radical attacks on the welfare state, indeed the harshness of the reforms on disability for example offend me as does the incompetence with which UC has been introduced. I certainly don't want the equivalent of US Evangelicals having any say on social policy. I am not up for another wave of privatisations, the recent experience of private sector involvement in the provision of public services has not been a success on any measure. What do I want?
* Sound public finances and reduced government debt (as a share of GDP). *Efficient and effective public services which are adequately funded to meet the challenges we have given to them. *The application of our laws to all and for all. Having some of our citizens treated as second class because of "cultural sensitivity" is unacceptable. *A society that is, so far as possible, left to get on with their own lives without politicians thinking we need new laws on everything all the time. * A society that is compassionate about those in need.
I accept it is not the most ambitious list. One might say it is almost conservative.
Exactly my thoughts David
Unfortunately it is a million mile from current Conservatism, in fact almost complete opposite.
But it is my conservatism Malc and if I may be bold not too far from yourself
Indeed G but we should not hold our breath awaiting its return.
If Liddington does concede to soft brexit, we'll see the amusing prospect of the Conservative party campaigning against their own government's Brexit policy at the next election.
Even Lidington cannot concede anything. He would be in the same deadlock as TM
swapping a useless nonentity for another useless nonentity will achieve nothing G.
It's just displacement activity. They're angry upset and desperate and so think putting someone else in will magically change the situation. It's a fantasy nothing more.
Sturgeon says she wants to see Article 50 revoked as a last resort but would prefer EUref2.
Says that is her first preference but does not rule out backing a Single Market and Customs Union BINO but SNP will continue to back EUref2 or revoke as their first preference
How can they help anything? This coup is exactly one week early. Once parliament forces the governments hand in whatever direction then an interim leader takes over to manage things knowing what the ppmath is. scrabbling around like this is not rearranging deck chairs on the titanic, its arguing over sunbathing spots in Pompeii.
But if May stays, Cooper/Letwin ensures that de facto leadership passes elsewhere, and May is left in the same position as she was sitting eating her sandwich in that windowless room whilst the EU had dinner and decided our fate next door. A new leader is really their only chance to grab hold of the process.
How? The reports are they dont agree what they want and even if they did it wont get through the commons . It's too late to grab hold, either they replaced May long before now or they have to wait.
Slamming on the breaks when you're only 2 feet from smashing into a wall doesn't achieve anything
IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too
More importantly he softened on opposition to the deal
IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too
He's an idiot. No sensible person could think that there is time to consult the members now. I'm actually worried for mps who think otherwise, i cannot conceive of how theyd think it appropriate in these circumstances, it frightens me they could think that .
How can they help anything? This coup is exactly one week early. Once parliament forces the governments hand in whatever direction then an interim leader takes over to manage things knowing what the ppmath is. scrabbling around like this is not rearranging deck chairs on the titanic, its arguing over sunbathing spots in Pompeii.
But if May stays, Cooper/Letwin ensures that de facto leadership passes elsewhere, and May is left in the same position as she was sitting eating her sandwich in that windowless room whilst the EU had dinner and decided our fate next door. A new leader is really their only chance to grab hold of the process.
How? The reports are they dont agree what they want and even if they did it wont get through the commons . It's too late to grab hold, either they replaced May long before now or they have to wait.
Slamming on the breaks when you're only 2 feet from smashing into a wall doesn't achieve anything
I think the idea that the logjam in parliament might not have occurred if May had involved them sooner is rather fanciful. Why has it occurred? Because of inflexible leaver ultras and die hard remainers. Theres no reason to suspect asking them things sooner would have led to more urgency from them.
And the casualty is TM who tried to reflect the 52/48 vote with the least worst exit
100% agreed. Which is the problem.
Leavers were optimistic and looking for the best exit. Remainers were distraught and looking for the least worst exit.
We needed someone looking for the best, not managed decline.
I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.
If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.
The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.
Ahem.
How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.
As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.
Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!
A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.
Were you a member of a political party you’d realise how hilarious that sounds. It is interesting to reflect that the tiny pro-European minority in the party consists largely of middle class, middle aged men between the age of aggrieved (that was meant to say Grieve, but is quite a funny autocorrect so I’ve left it) and Clarke. Our younger members and politicians are in the main far more eurosceptic than their preceding generations.
The Conservative party is 80% + Eurosceptic. This used to be just the membership - since the Brexit vote it has been their vote, too.
Revoke will never happen because of this; long delay is death by a thousand cuts (the deepest of which would be the MEP elections).
It is no doubt a weird statistical fluke of small numbers, but all the Conservative Party members I know are strongly pro-EU. And I met another couple on the train home from the march yesterday. Not trying to make any particular point other than it is very easy for your personal experiences to be misleading.
Your friends have lost.
The Conservative party is now pre-2016 UKIP: hard right, deeply anti-EU, xenophobic and English nationalist. All those vying to take over from May know this very clearly.
IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too
He's an idiot. No sensible person could think that there is time to consult the members now. I'm actually worried for mps who think otherwise, i cannot conceive of how theyd think it appropriate in these circumstances, it frightens me they could think that .
I did not read that into his comments.
He does not want TM to go now but when she does he looks for a proper leadership election and going to the membership which will take appox 3 months
IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too
May's last throw of the dice: a Night of the Long Knives, massive Cabinet sackings to be replaced with the ambitious next generation of MPs.....
Hilary Benn talking a load of shit on Sophie Ridge. Had the PM had her way, the WA would have been signed before Christmas without the consent of Parliament. The MPs voted for the Grieve amendment so that Parliament could take back control. That the MPs cannot agree on a course of action is not the fault of the government as claimed by Benn.
No, because the Cooper-Boles amendment failed - that was the one that would have enabled MPs to set the Parliamentary agenda. The Government has up to now not allowed MPs the chance to adopt an alternative strategy. Essentially Grieve's amendment prevented the Government from doing stuff, but the Government has prevented MPs from doing stuff.
This week, with luck, will change that.
Lets hope your lot step up to the plate, then. That would make a nice change.
We are in a complete time loop - the BBC headline is 'May urged to quit to help Brexit deal pass'. We really have gone nowhere in 3 months.
Have a good day everyone, I'm going to enjoy this glorious sunshine and pray MPs do better than they have to date and actually choose something in the week.
I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.
The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.
Ahem.
How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.
As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.
Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!
A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.
Were you a member of a political party you’d realise how hilarious that sounds. It is interesting to reflect that the tiny pro-European minority in the party consists largely of middle class, middle aged men between the age of aggrieved (that was meant to say Grieve, but is quite a funny autocorrect so I’ve left it) and Clarke. Our younger members and politicians are in the main far more eurosceptic than their preceding generations.
The Conservative party is 80% + Eurosceptic. This used to be just the membership - since the Brexit vote it has been their vote, too.
Revoke will never happen because of this; long delay is death by a thousand cuts (the deepest of which would be the MEP elections).
It is no doubt a weird statistical fluke of small numbers, but all the Conservative Party members I know are strongly pro-EU. And I met another couple on the train home from the march yesterday. Not trying to make any particular point other than it is very easy for your personal experiences to be misleading.
Your friends have lost.
The Conservative party is now pre-2016 UKIP: hard right, deeply anti-EU, xenophobic and English nationalist. All those vying to take over from May know this very clearly.
Do not judge all of us as ERG supporters. I am a conservative member who rejects their views of the unattainable aims of no deal
IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too
He's an idiot. No sensible person could think that there is time to consult the members now. I'm actually worried for mps who think otherwise, i cannot conceive of how theyd think it appropriate in these circumstances, it frightens me they could think that .
I did not read that into his comments.
He does not want TM to go now but when she does he looks for a proper leadership election and going to the membership which will take appox 3 months
Others do though, it was reported last night that a row was brewing over replacing leader now without an election.
The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.
Ahem.
How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.
As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.
Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!
A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.
Were you a member of a political party you’d realise how hilarious that sounds. It is interesting to reflect that the tiny pro-European minority in the party consists largely of middle class, middle aged men between the age of aggrieved (that was meant to say Grieve, but is quite a funny autocorrect so I’ve left it) and Clarke. Our younger members and politicians are in the main far more eurosceptic than their preceding generations.
The Conservative party is 80% + Eurosceptic. This used to be just the membership - since the Brexit vote it has been their vote, too.
Revoke will never happen because of this; long delay is death by a thousand cuts (the deepest of which would be the MEP elections).
It is no doubt a weird statistical fluke of small numbers, but all the Conservative Party members I know are strongly pro-EU. And I met another couple on the train home from the march yesterday. Not trying to make any particular point other than it is very easy for your personal experiences to be misleading.
Your friends have lost.
The Conservative party is now pre-2016 UKIP: hard right, deeply anti-EU, xenophobic and English nationalist. All those vying to take over from May know this very clearly.
LBJ famously said it is better to be inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in. But if we remain I suspect our relationship with the EU will be one of us inside the tent, pissing all over the walls, the sleeping bags, and our fellow members. Particularly when we elect a load of hardline nationalists. Don't think it can happen? Look north of the border to see what happens when a nation narrowly decides to "remain" and isn't happy about it...
That was the 52/48 win for Remain in 2016 scenario, but that ship has sailed. Instead it went the other way, and Brexit was tested to destruction as a viable political project.
It hasn't been remotely tested to destruction. What has been tested to destruction is the ability of MPs to agree a form of Brexit in the circumstances where a large proportion don't accept that Brexit should happen. We're staying in the EU because the MPs can't agree if or how to leave is not testing Brexit to destruction. For it to be tested to destruction it has to happen in one form or another.
It's easy to say that May didn't do enough "reaching out to remainers". But how many remainers are opposing the deal because they genuinely think she could have done better (as opposed to just opposing it because 'it's not as good as remain' - with the implication that Leavers didn't know what they were voting for - even though that was the main argument made by them during the referendum)?
I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.
If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace bership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.
The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.
Ahem.
How the Leavers mEU Army, and a United States of Europe.
As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.
Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!
A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.
Were you a member of a political party you’d realise how hilarious that sounds. It is interesting to reflect that the tiny pro-European minority in the party consists largely of middle class, middle aged men between the age of aggrieved (that was meant to say Grieve, but is quite a funny autocorrect so I’ve left it) and Clarke. Our younger members and politicians are in the main far more eurosceptic than their preceding generations.
The Conservative party is 80% + Eurosceptic. This used to be just the membership - since the Brexit vote it has been their vote, too.
Revoke will never happen because of this; long delay is death by a thousand cuts (the deepest of which would be the MEP elections).
It is no doubt a weird statistical fluke of small numbers, but all the Conservative Party members I know are strongly pro-EU. And I met another couple on the train home from the march yesterday. Not trying to make any particular point other than it is very easy for your personal experiences to be misleading.
Your friends have lost.
The Conservative party is now pre-2016 UKIP: hard right, deeply anti-EU, xenophobic and English nationalist. All those vying to take over from May know this very clearly.
The mirror image of your previous situation, then.
IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too
He's an idiot. No sensible person could think that there is time to consult the members now. I'm actually worried for mps who think otherwise, i cannot conceive of how theyd think it appropriate in these circumstances, it frightens me they could think that .
I did not read that into his comments.
He does not want TM to go now but when she does he looks for a proper leadership election and going to the membership which will take appox 3 months
Others do though, it was reported last night that a row was brewing over replacing leader now without an election.
IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too
He's an idiot. No sensible person could think that there is time to consult the members now. I'm actually worried for mps who think otherwise, i cannot conceive of how theyd think it appropriate in these circumstances, it frightens me they could think that .
The growth of calling public figures ‘stupid’ or ‘an idiot’ fails to appreciate that their public pronouncements always have multiple contexts, rather than existing in an intellectual vacuum.
Let me give you a little context for comments like this: Tory associations need to have AGMS by the end of March; much recent posturing is inextricably linked to this. MPs can’t stand up and say ‘we won’t give you a vote in this leadership election either’.
Maurice Glasman’s Blue Labour was something I was excited about in the early Ed Miliband years, and I really enjoyed this interview by Giles Fraser, particularly his views on why EU membership is a negative for the working class
IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too
He's an idiot. No sensible person could think that there is time to consult the members now. I'm actually worried for mps who think otherwise, i cannot conceive of how theyd think it appropriate in these circumstances, it frightens me they could think that .
I did not read that into his comments.
He does not want TM to go now but when she does he looks for a proper leadership election and going to the membership which will take appox 3 months
Others do though, it was reported last night that a row was brewing over replacing leader now without an election.
Presumably they could try to replace May as PM but not leader of the Tory Party. That's the only way of avoiding a contest, is it not? Mind you, I could see a VoNC succeeding in those circumstances.
Have we agreed yet roughly how many were at yesterday's Meaningful March/Pointless Protest? My guess would be about half a million, but that includes dogs, Russian stooges and tourists just trying to find their way to Fortnum & Masons.
I was at yesterday's march and also at the anti Iraq war march in 2003.
It is difficult to estimate numbers when you are actually in a march. I tried arithmetic - how many abreast, how far apart, at what speed and for how long. Came out at about a million plus or minus half a million. It was very sprawling. People were stationary for ages in Park Lane and it sprawled out at many junctions. There weren't pictures from the air in 2003 to compare with yesterday's pictures but my own best estimate is that yesterday's march had at least as many as the 2003 march, and probably more.
I wish the mobile phone companies would publish numbers on stuff like this - I bet with their data you could get an estimate to within 10%.
Creative idea!
What you really need is tfl bus and tube numbers.
An even better idea, though my son walked all the way from Barnes to Park Lane to join the march and would be missed by tfl.
IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too
May's last throw of the dice: a Night of the Long Knives, massive Cabinet sackings to be replaced with the ambitious next generation of MPs.....
Interesting idea. If somehow that enabled her to get her deal through then it'd be possible I guess. I can't see how it could enable her deal though - possibly could enable no deal.
I doubt the government would last long enough in those circumstances though - bound to be a VONC, and some of the sacked might well abstain.
Maurice Glasman’s Blue Labour was something I was excited about in the early Ed Miliband years, and I really enjoyed this interview by Giles Fraser, particularly his views on why EU membership is a negative for the working class
LBJ famously said it is better to be inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in. But if we remain I suspect our relationship with the EU will be one of us inside the tent, pissing all over the walls, the sleeping bags, and our fellow members. Particularly when we elect a load of hardline nationalists. Don't think it can happen? Look north of the border to see what happens when a nation narrowly decides to "remain" and isn't happy about it...
That was the 52/48 win for Remain in 2016 scenario, but that ship has sailed. Instead it went the other way, and Brexit was tested to destruction as a viable political project.
It hasn't been remotely tested to destruction. What has been tested to destruction is the ability of MPs to agree a form of Brexit in the circumstances where a large proportion don't accept that Brexit should happen. We're staying in the EU because the MPs can't agree if or how to leave is not testing Brexit to destruction. For it to be tested to destruction it has to happen in one form or another.
It's easy to say that May didn't do enough "reaching out to remainers". But how many remainers are opposing the deal because they genuinely think she could have done better (as opposed to just opposing it because 'it's not as good as remain')?
She did reach out to Remainers. Saying otherwise is garbage.
When even Ken Clarke thinks it is a deal worth backing she reached out to Remainers.
What she's not done is keep the opposition on board. But the opposition is opposing her because it opposes her not because of the deal.
The Revoke march had far better meme based placards than Farage's
Yes, it's extremely depressing.
Nothing makes me more angry (go on, call me a Gammon) than when I see a Briton march with the yellow and blue flag. It brings out of all my innermost fears and demons.
I voted Brexit to try and bring a stop to that and to restrengthen our believe and pride in our nation and its democratic principles, and to set an example to Europe and the World of how else it could and should be done.
It hasn't exactly worked out like that.
Being a British Patriot and pro EU is not a contradiction. There were many Union Flags on the march alongside the EU ones. Of course some British patriots are anti, but surely no one has a monopoly of patriotism? Indeed a patriotism that treats 48% of it own voters as an internal enemy is taking the country in a very dangerous direction.
Listen to Heseltines speech for that patriotic pro EU view:
There's nothing patriotic about a desire to see your nation absorbed into a suprafederal union, and a new country.
This is at the heart of the issue. This is *why* we're all here.
But Heseltine himself gives you the answer. The world is changing and history doesn't run backwards.
"We are here, now, on the right side of history. In a shrinking world, of global terrorism, international tax avoidance, millisecond communication, giant corporations, superpowers, mass migration, climate change and a host of other threats, our duty is to build on our achievements, to maintain our access to the corridors of world power, to keep our place at the centre of the stages of the world"
History does run backwards sometimes. It's not a march toward some enlightened ideal
You are right that many things go in cycles, examples being social conservatism/liberalism and the strength of religion in societies.
But history cannot return things to how they were before - which is part of the fundamental mistake many leavers have made, the other being to overlook the rupture and challenge of the transition, regardless of how feasible is their desired end state.
“Can anyone really have thought that this great greasy, congealed granny knot, tied and retied and tightened for nearly 50 years, could be undone by a single clean stroke?”
Within May's own party almost all 2016 Remainers back the deal (with a few hardline exceptions) while it is Leavers that oppose it. May's deal is a very Remainer deal.
Opposition for oppositions sake from Corbyn and co does not change that.
If someone had told you in 2016 there was a deal backed by Ken Clarke while opposed by the ERG nobody would have said that the deal maker had not reached out to Remainers.
I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.
If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.
The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.
Ahem.
How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.
As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.
Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!
Brexit has failed because the vast majority of those in prominent positions who campaigned for it had no idea how the EU works, had no concept of how integrated the UK is in cross-border supply chains, never bothered to understand the very specific problems of the Irish border and had no knowledge of what drives FTAs. They thought that Brexit could be delivered on the back of 500 word articles and speeches about liberty and tyranny. If they had bothered to do the hard yards, they might have come up with a viable plan. But that would also have involved some honesty about the sacrifices leaving the EU would involve. And that, of course, is why those who had done the hard work either: (1) lied, or (2) advocated a slow transition out of the EU involving the EEA/EFTA.
Starmer says Labour will vote for a permanent Customs Union and the benefits of the Single Market first in any indicative votes and if that fails for a 'People's Vote' EUref2. However he is concerned whether May will accept what the Commons votes for and push her Deal again
Comments
Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!
Where’s jer rem me corr bin
Labour's bet was that you can't fight comparative advantage. Unfortunately, they were probably right in that. Although I agree with you they could have done more, I think they did more than either the preceding or subsequent governments did, and more than anyone promoting Brexit plans to do.
History forgets marches and movements that were superseded by events. There were substantial anti war movements immediately before WW1 and WW2 - well intentioned but ultimately seen as misguided. I suspect the same label will eventually apply to the last gasp pro-European-integration movements.
I was surprised by the pictures on the TV showing it free flowing, but I think that was just at the very front looking at the aerial shot going along the line. We weren't far from the front, but we were stationary at Hyde park for an hour. I heard others were there for several hours. It then moved ok, but packed. It hurt the legs to take shorter steps than you would normally do. We managed to get just short of Downing Street and then the crowd density got very scary.
I got two excellent pictures of people dressed as Boris and Theresa. Amazingly good humoured. There were a few posters in poor taste, but also some very funny ones.
I haven't seen such dignified unity of effort at a time of crisis since I watched The death of Stalin last week.
As for comparative advantage just gobbledigook. You make your own advantages. The UK instead decided to lob disadvantages on its own industries.
First step, Tory implosion as they panic as Brexit slips away, and they try something stupid like replacing May before they have any idea what the next leader would need to do.
The Conservative party is 80% + Eurosceptic. This used to be just the membership - since the Brexit vote it has been their vote, too.
Revoke will never happen because of this; long delay is death by a thousand cuts (the deepest of which would be the MEP elections).
If we remain, don't be misguided by the admittedly impressive sight of one or even two (sorry, Casino) people marching through london waving blue flags. The country remains deeply divided.
If we remain, it will be as a recalcitrant, unhappy member. In it for the money, in it because we'll go broke otherwise. Forced to accept the political project for fear of losing jobs. We won't become fervently pro-EU, because outside of metropolitan Remania, we never have.
LBJ famously said it is better to be inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in. But if we remain I suspect our relationship with the EU will be one of us inside the tent, pissing all over the walls, the sleeping bags, and our fellow members. Particularly when we elect a load of hardline nationalists. Don't think it can happen? Look north of the border to see what happens when a nation narrowly decides to "remain" and isn't happy about it...
I dont see the issue - unless they're prepared to no deal Brexit without a fight, which not enough are, it really as simple as do you want soft Brexit or no Brexit. It's not difficult.
These bozos are still unable to agree what the choices are let alone make one though.
https://twitter.com/essexpr/status/1109489011276595202?s=21
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VB3uQHa14g
The gits even make Scotland pay a share of the London projects into the bargain and interest on the loans, whilst cutting our budgets.
One alternative was to continue with a working but small majority with the option of an election when it became necessary. Come last December she could have been in a position to threaten or hold an election if the deal wasn't passed.
But history cannot return things to how they were before - which is part of the fundamental mistake many leavers have made, the other being to overlook the rupture and challenge of the transition, regardless of how feasible is their desired end state.
Slamming on the breaks when you're only 2 feet from smashing into a wall doesn't achieve anything
This week, with luck, will change that.
This crisis in Britain now has been a growing shadow across these lands for the last 25 years at least. right from the start in the 97 GE as Maastricht sank into the English mindfulness. Preferring Blair as PM over Hague and Howard masked what was really happening, masked that Labour had no answer to the negative impacts of Ever more EU integration, globalisation, de industrialisation, no government then or since will tackle looming social care and NHS time bombs, and the only answer to British unease over immigration to UK in EU single market has been brexit.
So lets be honest and see the role nationalism and identity has played in this brexit outcome, there were two union jacks behind Theresa May as she addressed the nation this week, yet she is oblivious to how this crisis challenges them, threatening to make them relics from a bygone age, if those union jacks are weaker today than ever it proves what this whole process has underlined, its not the British parliament anymore is it? Its not a British Brexit, it’s the English who have done this.
It’s the ego of a Captain of this world that wore the pips for hundreds of years, and couldn’t face going back into the ranks when the inevitable time came. Unless you actually believe such times may never come?
Yet, unlike your post, now is not that moment, the English are not yet ready.
Losers love a march.
BTW this morning the petition for Revoke - not just a Ratifying Referendum - has got to 4.9 million whereas I heard on R4 yesterday that one urging a No Deal exit had got to 490,000.
https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/
Says that is her first preference but does not rule out backing a Single Market and Customs Union BINO but SNP will continue to back EUref2 or revoke as their first preference
Leavers were optimistic and looking for the best exit.
Remainers were distraught and looking for the least worst exit.
We needed someone looking for the best, not managed decline.
The Conservative party is now pre-2016 UKIP: hard right, deeply anti-EU, xenophobic and English nationalist. All those vying to take over from May know this very clearly.
He does not want TM to go now but when she does he looks for a proper leadership election and going to the membership which will take appox 3 months
Have a good day everyone, I'm going to enjoy this glorious sunshine and pray MPs do better than they have to date and actually choose something in the week.
I predict May goes before April 12th.
It's easy to say that May didn't do enough "reaching out to remainers". But how many remainers are opposing the deal because they genuinely think she could have done better (as opposed to just opposing it because 'it's not as good as remain' - with the implication that Leavers didn't know what they were voting for - even though that was the main argument made by them during the referendum)?
Welcome to TIG.
Let me give you a little context for comments like this: Tory associations need to have AGMS by the end of March; much recent posturing is inextricably linked to this. MPs can’t stand up and say ‘we won’t give you a vote in this leadership election either’.
The modern middle class lifestyle is dependent upon exploitation.
I doubt the government would last long enough in those circumstances though - bound to be a VONC, and some of the sacked might well abstain.
When even Ken Clarke thinks it is a deal worth backing she reached out to Remainers.
What she's not done is keep the opposition on board. But the opposition is opposing her because it opposes her not because of the deal.
The Country has not got a prayer with these utterly useless mps
Opposition for oppositions sake from Corbyn and co does not change that.
If someone had told you in 2016 there was a deal backed by Ken Clarke while opposed by the ERG nobody would have said that the deal maker had not reached out to Remainers.