> @ydoethur said: > They sit with the Greens! (Also Plaid and - more surprisingly - the SNP.) ---------------------------------------------- Less clunky than the other group with Green in their name.
> @Foxy said: > > @AndyJS said: > > > > @another_richard said: > > > > > @AndyJS said: > > > > > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures: > > > > > > > > > > Con 31% (-5) > > > > > Lab 31% (-1) > > > > > LD 17% (+7) > > > > > UKIP 4% (-8) > > > > > Others 17% (+7) > > > > > > > > Those are much better for the the Conservatives and Labour and pretty dismal for the LibDems. > > > > > > I don't understand your "dismal" comment. It's true the LDs got 27% at the 1994 local elections and they haven't got anywhere near that level recently. > > > > The LibDems were continually above 20% throughout the 2000s in local elections. > > So the best NEV in a decade is "dismal"? > > You must be rather dizzy, spinning so much!
According to Wilkipedia the LibDems managed 18% in the 2017 Local Elections. It did not help them much in the General Election just five weeks later! Labour's 2017 share is given as 27%.
Suppose a Con-Lab deal were struck: how much time would be required to pass a vote and avert the European election?
It is May 5th. The elections are on May 23rd. You are talking about cancelling an election 18 days before it is scheduled to take place. Leave aside the rights or wrong of Remain or Leave for the moment. Farage posits that the two-party system is broken. If we are reduced to such a crazy position then he is correct, because something has gone very badly wrong.
> @Foxy said: > > @AndyJS said: > > > > @another_richard said: > > > > > @AndyJS said: > > > > > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures: > > > > > > > > > > Con 31% (-5) > > > > > Lab 31% (-1) > > > > > LD 17% (+7) > > > > > UKIP 4% (-8) > > > > > Others 17% (+7) > > > > > > > > Those are much better for the the Conservatives and Labour and pretty dismal for the LibDems. > > > > > > I don't understand your "dismal" comment. It's true the LDs got 27% at the 1994 local elections and they haven't got anywhere near that level recently. > > > > The LibDems were continually above 20% throughout the 2000s in local elections. > > So the best NEV in a decade is "dismal"? > > You must be rather dizzy, spinning so much!
And its not even the best LibDem NEV for a decade.
That was the 18% the LibDems received in 2017.
If you want the whole list its on page 66 of this report:
> > > > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures:
>
> > > >
>
> > > > Con 31% (-5)
>
> > > > Lab 31% (-1)
>
> > > > LD 17% (+7)
>
> > > > UKIP 4% (-8)
>
> > > > Others 17% (+7)
>
> > >
>
> > > Those are much better for the the Conservatives and Labour and pretty dismal for the LibDems.
>
> >
>
> > I don't understand your "dismal" comment. It's true the LDs got 27% at the 1994 local elections and they haven't got anywhere near that level recently.
>
>
>
> The LibDems were continually above 20% throughout the 2000s in local elections.
>
> So the best NEV in a decade is "dismal"?
>
> You must be rather dizzy, spinning so much!
You're sounding increasingly desperate.
Even with the ideal circumstances of this year the LibDems still can't reach the level they regarded as normal for over a decade.
Your recovery is slower and weaker than what the Conservatives managed under Hague and Labour managed under EdM.
No, I am increasingly positive that we are moving in the right direction. I cannot see how things can get better for either Con or Labour, and the LDs are likely to benefit.
> @viewcode said: > Good afternoon, everyone. > > Suppose a Con-Lab deal were struck: how much time would be required to pass a vote and avert the European election? > > It is May 5th. The elections are on May 23rd. You are talking about cancelling an election 18 days before it is scheduled to take place. Leave aside the rights or wrong of Remain or Leave for the moment. Farage posits that the two-party system is broken. If we are reduced to such a crazy position then he is correct, because something has gone very badly wrong. ---------------------------------------------------------- I don't quite see the connection between the two issues. Agreed it is too late to cancel the elections even if a deal is struck (one of the two big reasons, the other being not being able to carry the MPs, that I doubt a deal), but if one was and even if the elections were cancelled what would they have to do with the 2 party system being broken? People have been saying that for decades, and maybe it will finally be true, but the two largest parties agreeing something would not render the 2 party broken, and cancelling an election for a body we're about to leave would not shown the two party system is broken either - we just cannot cancel because legally we won't be out in time.
> @geoffw said: > Cheer up people! It may never happen.
You mean a divided Union, divided countries within that Union, divided parties and a throbbing culture war taking place in all levels of society aren't going to happen?
> @Theuniondivvie said: > > @geoffw said: > > Cheer up people! It may never happen. > > You mean a divided Union, divided countries within that Union, divided parties and a throbbing culture war taking place in all levels of society aren't going to happen? > > Phew!
There are few things that are pleasant when described as 'throbbing'. Ugh. I was all for a culture war until then.
> @bigjohnowls said: > > @justin124 said: > > > @anothernick said: > > > > @NickPalmer said: > > > > > @SouthamObserver said: > > > > > > @Jonathan said: > > > > > > > @SouthamObserver said: > > > > > > > I don't see how Labour stays together if Corbyn does a deal with the Tories and I don't see how such a deal gets through the Commons. So why would Corbyn do it? There is no upside for him. Here's hoping, though. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think he could whip it, the upside is to be seen to be statesmanlike and more importantly to start to move things on from Brexit onto more fertile ground for Labour. > > > > > > > > > > He will most certainly whip, but how many Labour MPs would obey the whip? I would estimate less than 100. > > > > > > > > Disagree - I think fewer than 100 would revolt. He'd get virtually all the lefties plus virtually all the loyalists. > > > > > > > > I agree with kle4 that it's weird that coming to a compromise is seen as sleazy. The problem both in Parliament and in the country in general is that too many people have decided that there is only One True Position, and everything else must be rejected as outrageous. Since any one position only has minority support, it means everything gets shot down. > > > > > > Disagree with Nick on this one. Seems to me that the chances of Corbyn persuading the PLP to accept a deal with the Tories are minimal. Cannot see people such as Watson, Starmer, Thornbery, Clive Lewis, etc etc accepting it (unless it included a "confirmatory vote" of course). Any other deal would lead to his instant transformation into Ramsay MacCorbyn and probably a substantial split. I would not stay in the party myself, and I've been a member for more than forty years and there are many more like me in my large London CLP. > > > > Personally I have always believed in a 'confirmatory vote' and was advocating it prior to the 23rd June 2016. There was no such committment,however, from Labour at the 2017 election . Were he to reach a deal along the lines being mooted, Corbyn could reasonably claim to be complying with the Manifesto pledge to honour the referendum result. > > Agreeing a Deal including a Customs Union close alignment to SM and workers rights has been party policy since last years Conference. Anyone mardying off has no idea what compromise means.
Labour should not be in the business of compromising with the Tory right. Even Blair would not have gone that far.
> @Foxy said: > No, I am increasingly positive that we are moving in the right direction. I cannot see how things can get better for either Con or Labour, and the LDs are likely to benefit. -------------------------------------------------------------- Now just to pick someone as leader who can capitalise on the fortuitous circumstances.
> @kle4 said: > > @viewcode said: > > Good afternoon, everyone. > > > > Suppose a Con-Lab deal were struck: how much time would be required to pass a vote and avert the European election? > > > > It is May 5th. The elections are on May 23rd. You are talking about cancelling an election 18 days before it is scheduled to take place. Leave aside the rights or wrong of Remain or Leave for the moment. Farage posits that the two-party system is broken. If we are reduced to such a crazy position then he is correct, because something has gone very badly wrong. > > I don't quite see the connection between the two issues. Agreed it is too late to cancel the elections even if a deal is struck (one of the two big reasons, the other being not being able to carry the MPs, that I doubt a deal), but if one was and even if the elections were cancelled what would they have to do with the 2 party system being broken? People have been saying that for decades, and maybe it will finally be true, but the two largest parties agreeing something would not render the 2 party broken, and cancelling an election for a body we're about to leave would not shown the two party system is broken either - we just cannot cancel because legally we won't be out in time.
People have been saying the 2 party system is broken for decades but in 2017 (remember that far back?) Labour + Conservative was the highest 2 party share of the vote since 1970.
> @Foxy said: > > @Foxy said: > > > > @AndyJS said: > > > > > > > > @another_richard said: > > > > > > > > > @AndyJS said: > > > > > > > > > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Con 31% (-5) > > > > > > > > > Lab 31% (-1) > > > > > > > > > LD 17% (+7) > > > > > > > > > UKIP 4% (-8) > > > > > > > > > Others 17% (+7) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Those are much better for the the Conservatives and Labour and pretty dismal for the LibDems. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand your "dismal" comment. It's true the LDs got 27% at the 1994 local elections and they haven't got anywhere near that level recently. > > > > > > > > > > > > The LibDems were continually above 20% throughout the 2000s in local elections. > > > > > > So the best NEV in a decade is "dismal"? > > > > > > You must be rather dizzy, spinning so much! > > > > You're sounding increasingly desperate. > > > > Even with the ideal circumstances of this year the LibDems still can't reach the level they regarded as normal for over a decade. > > > > Your recovery is slower and weaker than what the Conservatives managed under Hague and Labour managed under EdM. > > No, I am increasingly positive that we are moving in the right direction. I cannot see how things can get better for either Con or Labour, and the LDs are likely to benefit.
The LibDems never expected to lose so much support when they went into government and then they expected to regain much more and much faster when they left government.
> Actually I don't expect a deal to be agreed. Neither leader can deliver their parliamentaryarty so a deal would lead only serve to illustrate how impotent both of them are. The result of the local elections, which will be reinforced by the Euros, is that both no dealers and revoke/remain/2nd referendum suppprters are more certain than ever that they are right, compromise is now even less likely than it was before. The impasse is deepening and no solution is yet in sight.
=====bloody broken quotes system=====
Indeed. There is no solution! A third of the country is adamant that we Leave Now. A third of the country is adamant we Remain. The other third couldn't give a rat's arse. Party lines used to be that divide, now it is Brexit, and neither party is remotely able to cope with this fundamental realignment without breaking apart.
> > What do you care what the English media says or doesn’t say? it’s Scots you need to convince.
> >
> > You obviously don't listen to news or media, we have to beg Westminster first and also the English media run the media in Scotland. Obviously you are one of these half witted ones that conflate England with UK and know zilch about Scotland.
> >
> > You seem nice.
> >
> > I am indeed, a gentleman and a scholar.
> > PS; as my previous 21K posts will show.
>
> I think you missed out "as 4 of my 21k posts will show...."
1 or 2 tops......
Bit of green cheese from asore loser there, you are well named.
> @anothernick said: > > @bigjohnowls said: > > > @justin124 said: > > > > @anothernick said: > > > > > @NickPalmer said: > > > > > > @SouthamObserver said: > > > > > > > @Jonathan said: > > > > > > > > @SouthamObserver said: > > > > > > > > I don't see how Labour stays together if Corbyn does a deal with the Tories and I don't see how such a deal gets through the Commons. So why would Corbyn do it? There is no upside for him. Here's hoping, though. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think he could whip it, the upside is to be seen to be statesmanlike and more importantly to start to move things on from Brexit onto more fertile ground for Labour. > > > > > > > > > > > > He will most certainly whip, but how many Labour MPs would obey the whip? I would estimate less than 100. > > > > > > > > > > Disagree - I think fewer than 100 would revolt. He'd get virtually all the lefties plus virtually all the loyalists. > > > > > > > > > > I agree with kle4 that it's weird that coming to a compromise is seen as sleazy. The problem both in Parliament and in the country in general is that too many people have decided that there is only One True Position, and everything else must be rejected as outrageous. Since any one position only has minority support, it means everything gets shot down. > > > > > > > > Disagree with Nick on this one. Seems to me that the chances of Corbyn persuading the PLP to accept a deal with the Tories are minimal. Cannot see people such as Watson, Starmer, Thornbery, Clive Lewis, etc etc accepting it (unless it included a "confirmatory vote" of course). Any other deal would lead to his instant transformation into Ramsay MacCorbyn and probably a substantial split. I would not stay in the party myself, and I've been a member for more than forty years and there are many more like me in my large London CLP. > > > > > > Personally I have always believed in a 'confirmatory vote' and was advocating it prior to the 23rd June 2016. There was no such committment,however, from Labour at the 2017 election . Were he to reach a deal along the lines being mooted, Corbyn could reasonably claim to be complying with the Manifesto pledge to honour the referendum result. > > > > Agreeing a Deal including a Customs Union close alignment to SM and workers rights has been party policy since last years Conference. Anyone mardying off has no idea what compromise means. > > Labour should not be in the business of compromising with the Tory right. Even Blair would not have gone that far.
The Tory right will be outraged about any compromise with Labour.
> @anothernick said: > > @bigjohnowls said: > > > @justin124 said: > > > > @anothernick said: > > > > > @NickPalmer said: > > > > > > @SouthamObserver said: > > > > > > > @Jonathan said: > > > > > > > > @SouthamObserver said: > > > > > > > > I don't see how Labour stays together if Corbyn does a deal with the Tories and I don't see how such a deal gets through the Commons. So why would Corbyn do it? There is no upside for him. Here's hoping, though. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think he could whip it, the upside is to be seen to be statesmanlike and more importantly to start to move things on from Brexit onto more fertile ground for Labour. > > > > > > > > > > > > He will most certainly whip, but how many Labour MPs would obey the whip? I would estimate less than 100. > > > > > > > > > > Disagree - I think fewer than 100 would revolt. He'd get virtually all the lefties plus virtually all the loyalists. > > > > > > > > > > I agree with kle4 that it's weird that coming to a compromise is seen as sleazy. The problem both in Parliament and in the country in general is that too many people have decided that there is only One True Position, and everything else must be rejected as outrageous. Since any one position only has minority support, it means everything gets shot down. > > > > > > > > Disagree with Nick on this one. Seems to me that the chances of Corbyn persuading the PLP to accept a deal with the Tories are minimal. Cannot see people such as Watson, Starmer, Thornbery, Clive Lewis, etc etc accepting it (unless it included a "confirmatory vote" of course). Any other deal would lead to his instant transformation into Ramsay MacCorbyn and probably a substantial split. I would not stay in the party myself, and I've been a member for more than forty years and there are many more like me in my large London CLP. > > > > > > Personally I have always believed in a 'confirmatory vote' and was advocating it prior to the 23rd June 2016. There was no such committment,however, from Labour at the 2017 election . Were he to reach a deal along the lines being mooted, Corbyn could reasonably claim to be complying with the Manifesto pledge to honour the referendum result. > > > > Agreeing a Deal including a Customs Union close alignment to SM and workers rights has been party policy since last years Conference. Anyone mardying off has no idea what compromise means. > > Labour should not be in the business of compromising with the Tory right. Even Blair would not have gone that far.
I think the ERG and Watson,Benn etc will be in the same no compromise lobby wont they?
> @geoffw said: > > @geoffw said: > > > Cheer up people! It may never happen. > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > What is 'it'? > > Whatever you like Mr kle4. > I'm just trying for some hits on the absurd new 'like' button.
Perhaps the quotes system will go back to normal when we collectively hit a certain number of 'likes'?
> @anothernick said: Labour should not be in the business of compromising with the Tory right. Even Blair would not have gone that far. --------------------------------------------------------- Eh? Labour have been walking down the lobbies with the furthest right members of the Tory party on Brexit for the better part of a year. Not with the same endgame in mind, but willing to work with them and risk that those people will get what they want as a result.
And if, a big if, the 'Tory right' in the form of May and loyalists are essentially offering what Labour said it wanted on Brexit, then why would that compromise be going too far? If you demand x and are given x, the refrain of 'oppositions oppose' makes no sense.
Labour MPs know this of course, which is why so many have demanded a confirmatory referendum even if the Tories were to give them exactly what they claim to have wanted on Brexit. Fortunately since despite what the Borisgraph will say any May offer will surely not be exactly Labour's policy, they can continue to say the Tories have not gone far enough to the Labour position. If they are lucky they will even be right.
There has to be a word for the rhetorical technique where you subliminally diminish/augment something by slapping an adjective to a word, like "clean" brexit, "technical" recession or "advisory" referendum. It's not just a "theoretical" model, it's an actual fact. You of all people should know that legal fictions are not fictions in law and legal technicalities cannot be waved away by handwavium.
> @another_richard said: > > @anothernick said: > > > @bigjohnowls said: > > > > @justin124 said: > > > > > @anothernick said: > > > > > > @NickPalmer said: > > > > > > > @SouthamObserver said: > > > > > > > > @Jonathan said: > > > > > > > > > @SouthamObserver said: > > > > > > > > > I don't see how Labour stays together if Corbyn does a deal with the Tories and I don't see how such a deal gets through the Commons. So why would Corbyn do it? There is no upside for him. Here's hoping, though. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think he could whip it, the upside is to be seen to be statesmanlike and more importantly to start to move things on from Brexit onto more fertile ground for Labour. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He will most certainly whip, but how many Labour MPs would obey the whip? I would estimate less than 100. > > > > > > > > > > > > Disagree - I think fewer than 100 would revolt. He'd get virtually all the lefties plus virtually all the loyalists. > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with kle4 that it's weird that coming to a compromise is seen as sleazy. The problem both in Parliament and in the country in general is that too many people have decided that there is only One True Position, and everything else must be rejected as outrageous. Since any one position only has minority support, it means everything gets shot down. > > > > > > > > > > Disagree with Nick on this one. Seems to me that the chances of Corbyn persuading the PLP to accept a deal with the Tories are minimal. Cannot see people such as Watson, Starmer, Thornbery, Clive Lewis, etc etc accepting it (unless it included a "confirmatory vote" of course). Any other deal would lead to his instant transformation into Ramsay MacCorbyn and probably a substantial split. I would not stay in the party myself, and I've been a member for more than forty years and there are many more like me in my large London CLP. > > > > > > > > Personally I have always believed in a 'confirmatory vote' and was advocating it prior to the 23rd June 2016. There was no such committment,however, from Labour at the 2017 election . Were he to reach a deal along the lines being mooted, Corbyn could reasonably claim to be complying with the Manifesto pledge to honour the referendum result. > > > > > > Agreeing a Deal including a Customs Union close alignment to SM and workers rights has been party policy since last years Conference. Anyone mardying off has no idea what compromise means. > > > > Labour should not be in the business of compromising with the Tory right. Even Blair would not have gone that far. > > The Tory right will be outraged about any compromise with Labour.
It is not a compromise with the Tory right, they want no deal (or claim to), it is a compromise with the Tory centre and left and the Labour leadership getting 90% of what they want.
> @AndyJS said: > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures: > > Con 31% (-5) > Lab 31% (-1) > LD 17% (+7) > UKIP 4% (-8) > Others 17% (+7)
Seems a rather pointless exercise when the Brexit Party isn't included?
> @another_richard said: > > @Foxy said: > > > @AndyJS said: > > > > > > @another_richard said: > > > > > > > @AndyJS said: > > > > > > > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Con 31% (-5) > > > > > > > Lab 31% (-1) > > > > > > > LD 17% (+7) > > > > > > > UKIP 4% (-8) > > > > > > > Others 17% (+7) > > > > > > > > > > > > Those are much better for the the Conservatives and Labour and pretty dismal for the LibDems. > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand your "dismal" comment. It's true the LDs got 27% at the 1994 local elections and they haven't got anywhere near that level recently. > > > > > > > > The LibDems were continually above 20% throughout the 2000s in local elections. > > > > So the best NEV in a decade is "dismal"? > > > > You must be rather dizzy, spinning so much! > > You're sounding increasingly desperate. > > Even with the ideal circumstances of this year the LibDems still can't reach the level they regarded as normal for over a decade. > > Your recovery is slower and weaker than what the Conservatives managed under Hague and Labour managed under EdM.
Agree - it is very heard to imagine better conditions for a huge LD vote increase . if it was really there. I would wait to see how well they do at the Euros.
> @GIN1138 said: > > @AndyJS said: > > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures: > > > > Con 31% (-5) > > Lab 31% (-1) > > LD 17% (+7) > > UKIP 4% (-8) > > Others 17% (+7) > > Seems a rather pointless exercise when the Brexit Party isn't included?
Perhaps they should have put up some candidates then.
> @another_richard said: > > @GIN1138 said: > > > @AndyJS said: > > > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures: > > > > > > Con 31% (-5) > > > Lab 31% (-1) > > > LD 17% (+7) > > > UKIP 4% (-8) > > > Others 17% (+7) > > > > Seems a rather pointless exercise when the Brexit Party isn't included? > > Perhaps they should have put up some candidates then.
They didn't need to, many of the Tory councillors elected will be voting for them shortly.
> > > > Seems a rather pointless exercise when the Brexit Party isn't included? > > Perhaps they should have put up some candidates then.
I see that in the East Midlands 'the independent network' is standing as a grouping in the EU elections; do we think this will be confused with Change UK?
> @kle4 said: > > @another_richard said: > > > @GIN1138 said: > > > > @AndyJS said: > > > > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures: > > > > > > > > Con 31% (-5) > > > > Lab 31% (-1) > > > > LD 17% (+7) > > > > UKIP 4% (-8) > > > > Others 17% (+7) > > > > > > Seems a rather pointless exercise when the Brexit Party isn't included? > > > > Perhaps they should have put up some candidates then. > > They didn't need to, many of the Tory councillors elected will be voting for them shortly.
So what - its not going to achieve anything beyond posturing.
Of course posturing is the thing Farage wants to do.
Jeremy Corbyn is not particularly interesting. Labour officials tell me that the key to understanding him is to grasp his intellectual inferiority complex, which resulted in him turning to political dogmatism as others with his disadvantages turn to Scientology. The socialist dogmas of the 1970s gave his limited mind certainty and freedom from responsibility, and a set of enduring precepts.
The problem st the moment is that we are in a transition phase. The last vestiges of Royal Prerogative still have to be swept away and we need to put on place a system where the ginal decidion on all policy is made by Parliament directing the Executive and with the ability to remove that executive easily if they will not abide by Parliament's wishes.
There has to be a word for the rhetorical technique where you subliminally diminish/augment something by slapping an adjective to a word, like "clean" brexit, "technical" recession or "advisory" referendum. It's not just a "theoretical" model, it's an actual fact. You of all people should know that legal fictions are not fictions in law and legal technicalities cannot be waved away by handwavium.
> > I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now.
>
> >
>
> > Sadly so. For all this talk of customs unions in the last couple of weeks, how many people are actually weighing up the positives and negatives of that arrangement?
> I agree with his analysis but I frankly no longer care. If a CU is what it takes to achieve Brexit and get out of this mess I would pay that price. At the moment our MPs are giving us the worst of all possible worlds, paying the price of being in but getting none of the benefits whilst living in a world of uncertainty and confusion. It is remarkable that is not doing even more damage than it is.
>
> Customs Union will not get through , it is even worse than May's deal on its own and more stupid as well. Excuse the use of poor grammar, I have an 8 year old desperate to show me computer games.
Listen well, young padwa. You have much to learn.
I completely disagree with all but the last of his points. I don't want to be 'at the front of the queue' when it comes to the US and others dishing out trade deals - I wouldn't trust our politicians to negotiate their way out of a paper bag. I don't believe for a minute that we enjoy influence in India, Kenya etc. from being their advocate within the common market, and if we do, and if such influence is beneficial to us, it can be replaced in other ways. CU seems like a safe, mushy, halfway playpen to me. And that's good. Turkey situation will do me just fine.
> @Luckyguy1983 said: > > @malcolmg said: > > > > @Sandpit said: > > > > > > > I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sadly so. For all this talk of customs unions in the last couple of weeks, how many people are actually weighing up the positives and negatives of that arrangement? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1112608964053745669 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with his analysis but I frankly no longer care. If a CU is what it takes to achieve Brexit and get out of this mess I would pay that price. At the moment our MPs are giving us the worst of all possible worlds, paying the price of being in but getting none of the benefits whilst living in a world of uncertainty and confusion. It is remarkable that is not doing even more damage than it is. > > > > > > Customs Union will not get through , it is even worse than May's deal on its own and more stupid as well. Excuse the use of poor grammar, I have an 8 year old desperate to show me computer games. > > > > Listen well, young padwa. You have much to learn. > > I completely disagree with all but the last of his points. I don't want to be 'at the front of the queue' when it comes to the US and others dishing out trade deals - I wouldn't trust our politicians to negotiate their way out of a paper bag. I don't believe for a minute that we enjoy influence in India, Kenya etc. from being their advocate within the common market, and if we do, and if such influence is beneficial to us, it can be replaced in other ways. CU seems like a safe, mushy, halfway playpen to me. And that's good. Turkey situation will do me just fine.
And how uch will you be prepared to pay for your "halfway playpen"? Because NOBODY has given us a cost estimate yet....
May's Shit Deal + Corbyn's side-order of Norovirus.....
> @Luckyguy1983 said: > > @malcolmg said: > > > > @Sandpit said: > > > > > > > I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sadly so. For all this talk of customs unions in the last couple of weeks, how many people are actually weighing up the positives and negatives of that arrangement? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1112608964053745669 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with his analysis but I frankly no longer care. If a CU is what it takes to achieve Brexit and get out of this mess I would pay that price. At the moment our MPs are giving us the worst of all possible worlds, paying the price of being in but getting none of the benefits whilst living in a world of uncertainty and confusion. It is remarkable that is not doing even more damage than it is. > > > > > > Customs Union will not get through , it is even worse than May's deal on its own and more stupid as well. Excuse the use of poor grammar, I have an 8 year old desperate to show me computer games. > > > > Listen well, young padwa. You have much to learn. > > I completely disagree with all but the last of his points. I don't want to be 'at the front of the queue' when it comes to the US and others dishing out trade deals - I wouldn't trust our politicians to negotiate their way out of a paper bag. I don't believe for a minute that we enjoy influence in India, Kenya etc. from being their advocate within the common market, and if we do, and if such influence is beneficial to us, it can be replaced in other ways. CU seems like a safe, mushy, halfway playpen to me. And that's good. Turkey situation will do me just fine.
Hannan is a believer in Libertarian Pirate Island.
He thinks of Liam Fox as some modern Drake or Raleigh.
Excellent header. To some extent the constitutional changes are acting against the typical FTP elective dictatorship. The leaders of the big parties - May and Corbyn - haven't understood the new dynamic and continue to act dictatorially rather than invest in stable coalitions.
Late thoughts on the local elections:
Labour lost Remain voters without gaining Leavers. It's not so much a reaction against Brexit and certainly not a call to get Brexit done. Labour just doesn't have a compelling offer.
Excellent result for the Lib Dems. They didn't just get a load of new councillors. Usefully they are piled up in particular areas. Expect to see a slew of MPs at the next election, which should also help replenish their depleted MP gene pool for future leadership.
The Conservatives have lost their Costa Geriatrica strongholds like Bournemouth. Demographic changes as much as pissed off Remainers, I think.
Further shift from Ulster unionist parties to Alliance and other non aligned parties are another baby step towards a United Ireland, I believe. Importantly these parties are anti Brexit and have Irish identity.
> @Luckyguy1983 said: > > @malcolmg said: > > > > @Sandpit said: > > > > > > > I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sadly so. For all this talk of customs unions in the last couple of weeks, how many people are actually weighing up the positives and negatives of that arrangement? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1112608964053745669 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with his analysis but I frankly no longer care. If a CU is what it takes to achieve Brexit and get out of this mess I would pay that price. At the moment our MPs are giving us the worst of all possible worlds, paying the price of being in but getting none of the benefits whilst living in a world of uncertainty and confusion. It is remarkable that is not doing even more damage than it is. > > > > > > Customs Union will not get through , it is even worse than May's deal on its own and more stupid as well. Excuse the use of poor grammar, I have an 8 year old desperate to show me computer games. > > > > Listen well, young padwa. You have much to learn. > > I completely disagree with all but the last of his points. I don't want to be 'at the front of the queue' when it comes to the US and others dishing out trade deals - I wouldn't trust our politicians to negotiate their way out of a paper bag. I don't believe for a minute that we enjoy influence in India, Kenya etc. from being their advocate within the common market, and if we do, and if such influence is beneficial to us, it can be replaced in other ways. CU seems like a safe, mushy, halfway playpen to me. And that's good. Turkey situation will do me just fine.
‐-------------
In that case you clearly misunderstand the Turkey situation. Turkey does not benefit from any if the FTAs that the EU signs. Exactly the reverse.Through its Customs Union Turkey suffers from an assymetric trade relationship whereby all those countries which have FTAs with the EU get to sell into Turkey free of tariffs whilst still being able to impose tariffs on Turkish goods. It would utterly destroy British exports to any country which has an FTA with the EU.
Comments
> They sit with the Greens! (Also Plaid and - more surprisingly - the SNP.)
----------------------------------------------
Less clunky than the other group with Green in their name.
The European United Left-Nordic Green Left
> > @AndyJS said:
>
> > > @another_richard said:
>
> > > > @AndyJS said:
>
> > > > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures:
>
> > > >
>
> > > > Con 31% (-5)
>
> > > > Lab 31% (-1)
>
> > > > LD 17% (+7)
>
> > > > UKIP 4% (-8)
>
> > > > Others 17% (+7)
>
> > >
>
> > > Those are much better for the the Conservatives and Labour and pretty dismal for the LibDems.
>
> >
>
> > I don't understand your "dismal" comment. It's true the LDs got 27% at the 1994 local elections and they haven't got anywhere near that level recently.
>
>
>
> The LibDems were continually above 20% throughout the 2000s in local elections.
>
> So the best NEV in a decade is "dismal"?
>
> You must be rather dizzy, spinning so much!
According to Wilkipedia the LibDems managed 18% in the 2017 Local Elections. It did not help them much in the General Election just five weeks later! Labour's 2017 share is given as 27%.
> > @AndyJS said:
>
> > > @another_richard said:
>
> > > > @AndyJS said:
>
> > > > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures:
>
> > > >
>
> > > > Con 31% (-5)
>
> > > > Lab 31% (-1)
>
> > > > LD 17% (+7)
>
> > > > UKIP 4% (-8)
>
> > > > Others 17% (+7)
>
> > >
>
> > > Those are much better for the the Conservatives and Labour and pretty dismal for the LibDems.
>
> >
>
> > I don't understand your "dismal" comment. It's true the LDs got 27% at the 1994 local elections and they haven't got anywhere near that level recently.
>
>
>
> The LibDems were continually above 20% throughout the 2000s in local elections.
>
> So the best NEV in a decade is "dismal"?
>
> You must be rather dizzy, spinning so much!
And its not even the best LibDem NEV for a decade.
That was the 18% the LibDems received in 2017.
If you want the whole list its on page 66 of this report:
https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7529#fullreport
> > @AndyJS said:
> > Write-up of the Waverley election where Nick P was standing.
> >
> > http://www.haslemereherald.com/article.cfm?id=135717&headline=Local Election 2019: Tories lose Waverley majority on historic day for borough&sectionIs=news&searchyear=2019
>
> An 'ex Nottingham MP'
--------------------------------
At least he has a fellow Lab councillor so they can form an actual group on the Council too.
> Good afternoon, everyone.
>
> Suppose a Con-Lab deal were struck: how much time would be required to pass a vote and avert the European election?
>
> It is May 5th. The elections are on May 23rd. You are talking about cancelling an election 18 days before it is scheduled to take place. Leave aside the rights or wrong of Remain or Leave for the moment. Farage posits that the two-party system is broken. If we are reduced to such a crazy position then he is correct, because something has gone very badly wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------
I don't quite see the connection between the two issues. Agreed it is too late to cancel the elections even if a deal is struck (one of the two big reasons, the other being not being able to carry the MPs, that I doubt a deal), but if one was and even if the elections were cancelled what would they have to do with the 2 party system being broken? People have been saying that for decades, and maybe it will finally be true, but the two largest parties agreeing something would not render the 2 party broken, and cancelling an election for a body we're about to leave would not shown the two party system is broken either - we just cannot cancel because legally we won't be out in time.
> Cheer up people! It may never happen.
You mean a divided Union, divided countries within that Union, divided parties and a throbbing culture war taking place in all levels of society aren't going to happen?
Phew!
> Cheer up people! It may never happen.
-------------------------------------------------------------
What is 'it'?
> > @geoffw said:
> > Cheer up people! It may never happen.
>
> You mean a divided Union, divided countries within that Union, divided parties and a throbbing culture war taking place in all levels of society aren't going to happen?
>
> Phew!
There are few things that are pleasant when described as 'throbbing'. Ugh. I was all for a culture war until then.
> > @justin124 said:
> > > @anothernick said:
> > > > @NickPalmer said:
> > > > > @SouthamObserver said:
> > > > > > @Jonathan said:
> > > > > > > @SouthamObserver said:
> > > > > > > I don't see how Labour stays together if Corbyn does a deal with the Tories and I don't see how such a deal gets through the Commons. So why would Corbyn do it? There is no upside for him. Here's hoping, though.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think he could whip it, the upside is to be seen to be statesmanlike and more importantly to start to move things on from Brexit onto more fertile ground for Labour.
> > > > >
> > > > > He will most certainly whip, but how many Labour MPs would obey the whip? I would estimate less than 100.
> > > >
> > > > Disagree - I think fewer than 100 would revolt. He'd get virtually all the lefties plus virtually all the loyalists.
> > > >
> > > > I agree with kle4 that it's weird that coming to a compromise is seen as sleazy. The problem both in Parliament and in the country in general is that too many people have decided that there is only One True Position, and everything else must be rejected as outrageous. Since any one position only has minority support, it means everything gets shot down.
> > >
> > > Disagree with Nick on this one. Seems to me that the chances of Corbyn persuading the PLP to accept a deal with the Tories are minimal. Cannot see people such as Watson, Starmer, Thornbery, Clive Lewis, etc etc accepting it (unless it included a "confirmatory vote" of course). Any other deal would lead to his instant transformation into Ramsay MacCorbyn and probably a substantial split. I would not stay in the party myself, and I've been a member for more than forty years and there are many more like me in my large London CLP.
> >
> > Personally I have always believed in a 'confirmatory vote' and was advocating it prior to the 23rd June 2016. There was no such committment,however, from Labour at the 2017 election . Were he to reach a deal along the lines being mooted, Corbyn could reasonably claim to be complying with the Manifesto pledge to honour the referendum result.
>
> Agreeing a Deal including a Customs Union close alignment to SM and workers rights has been party policy since last years Conference. Anyone mardying off has no idea what compromise means.
Labour should not be in the business of compromising with the Tory right. Even Blair would not have gone that far.
> No, I am increasingly positive that we are moving in the right direction. I cannot see how things can get better for either Con or Labour, and the LDs are likely to benefit.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Now just to pick someone as leader who can capitalise on the fortuitous circumstances.
> > @viewcode said:
> > Good afternoon, everyone.
> >
> > Suppose a Con-Lab deal were struck: how much time would be required to pass a vote and avert the European election?
> >
> > It is May 5th. The elections are on May 23rd. You are talking about cancelling an election 18 days before it is scheduled to take place. Leave aside the rights or wrong of Remain or Leave for the moment. Farage posits that the two-party system is broken. If we are reduced to such a crazy position then he is correct, because something has gone very badly wrong.
>
> I don't quite see the connection between the two issues. Agreed it is too late to cancel the elections even if a deal is struck (one of the two big reasons, the other being not being able to carry the MPs, that I doubt a deal), but if one was and even if the elections were cancelled what would they have to do with the 2 party system being broken? People have been saying that for decades, and maybe it will finally be true, but the two largest parties agreeing something would not render the 2 party broken, and cancelling an election for a body we're about to leave would not shown the two party system is broken either - we just cannot cancel because legally we won't be out in time.
People have been saying the 2 party system is broken for decades but in 2017 (remember that far back?) Labour + Conservative was the highest 2 party share of the vote since 1970.
I'm just trying for some hits on the absurd new 'like' button.
> > @Foxy said:
>
> > > @AndyJS said:
>
> >
>
> > > > @another_richard said:
>
> >
>
> > > > > @AndyJS said:
>
> >
>
> > > > > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures:
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > Con 31% (-5)
>
> >
>
> > > > > Lab 31% (-1)
>
> >
>
> > > > > LD 17% (+7)
>
> >
>
> > > > > UKIP 4% (-8)
>
> >
>
> > > > > Others 17% (+7)
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > Those are much better for the the Conservatives and Labour and pretty dismal for the LibDems.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > I don't understand your "dismal" comment. It's true the LDs got 27% at the 1994 local elections and they haven't got anywhere near that level recently.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > The LibDems were continually above 20% throughout the 2000s in local elections.
>
> >
>
> > So the best NEV in a decade is "dismal"?
>
> >
>
> > You must be rather dizzy, spinning so much!
>
>
>
> You're sounding increasingly desperate.
>
>
>
> Even with the ideal circumstances of this year the LibDems still can't reach the level they regarded as normal for over a decade.
>
>
>
> Your recovery is slower and weaker than what the Conservatives managed under Hague and Labour managed under EdM.
>
> No, I am increasingly positive that we are moving in the right direction. I cannot see how things can get better for either Con or Labour, and the LDs are likely to benefit.
The LibDems never expected to lose so much support when they went into government and then they expected to regain much more and much faster when they left government.
> Actually I don't expect a deal to be agreed. Neither leader can deliver their parliamentaryarty so a deal would lead only serve to illustrate how impotent both of them are. The result of the local elections, which will be reinforced by the Euros, is that both no dealers and revoke/remain/2nd referendum suppprters are more certain than ever that they are right, compromise is now even less likely than it was before. The impasse is deepening and no solution is yet in sight.
=====bloody broken quotes system=====
Indeed. There is no solution! A third of the country is adamant that we Leave Now. A third of the country is adamant we Remain. The other third couldn't give a rat's arse. Party lines used to be that divide, now it is Brexit, and neither party is remotely able to cope with this fundamental realignment without breaking apart.
I wonder what my new party will be called...
30 overs - Glos 161-1 vs Sussex
40 overs - Glos 200-3
50 overs - 335-6.
And even that's not as bad as the brutal pounding Shai Hope is giving Ireland...
> Cheer up people! It may never happen.
I think that's the source of a lot of the misery!
> > @bigjohnowls said:
> > > @justin124 said:
> > > > @anothernick said:
> > > > > @NickPalmer said:
> > > > > > @SouthamObserver said:
> > > > > > > @Jonathan said:
> > > > > > > > @SouthamObserver said:
> > > > > > > > I don't see how Labour stays together if Corbyn does a deal with the Tories and I don't see how such a deal gets through the Commons. So why would Corbyn do it? There is no upside for him. Here's hoping, though.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think he could whip it, the upside is to be seen to be statesmanlike and more importantly to start to move things on from Brexit onto more fertile ground for Labour.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > He will most certainly whip, but how many Labour MPs would obey the whip? I would estimate less than 100.
> > > > >
> > > > > Disagree - I think fewer than 100 would revolt. He'd get virtually all the lefties plus virtually all the loyalists.
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with kle4 that it's weird that coming to a compromise is seen as sleazy. The problem both in Parliament and in the country in general is that too many people have decided that there is only One True Position, and everything else must be rejected as outrageous. Since any one position only has minority support, it means everything gets shot down.
> > > >
> > > > Disagree with Nick on this one. Seems to me that the chances of Corbyn persuading the PLP to accept a deal with the Tories are minimal. Cannot see people such as Watson, Starmer, Thornbery, Clive Lewis, etc etc accepting it (unless it included a "confirmatory vote" of course). Any other deal would lead to his instant transformation into Ramsay MacCorbyn and probably a substantial split. I would not stay in the party myself, and I've been a member for more than forty years and there are many more like me in my large London CLP.
> > >
> > > Personally I have always believed in a 'confirmatory vote' and was advocating it prior to the 23rd June 2016. There was no such committment,however, from Labour at the 2017 election . Were he to reach a deal along the lines being mooted, Corbyn could reasonably claim to be complying with the Manifesto pledge to honour the referendum result.
> >
> > Agreeing a Deal including a Customs Union close alignment to SM and workers rights has been party policy since last years Conference. Anyone mardying off has no idea what compromise means.
>
> Labour should not be in the business of compromising with the Tory right. Even Blair would not have gone that far.
The Tory right will be outraged about any compromise with Labour.
> > @bigjohnowls said:
> > > @justin124 said:
> > > > @anothernick said:
> > > > > @NickPalmer said:
> > > > > > @SouthamObserver said:
> > > > > > > @Jonathan said:
> > > > > > > > @SouthamObserver said:
> > > > > > > > I don't see how Labour stays together if Corbyn does a deal with the Tories and I don't see how such a deal gets through the Commons. So why would Corbyn do it? There is no upside for him. Here's hoping, though.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think he could whip it, the upside is to be seen to be statesmanlike and more importantly to start to move things on from Brexit onto more fertile ground for Labour.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > He will most certainly whip, but how many Labour MPs would obey the whip? I would estimate less than 100.
> > > > >
> > > > > Disagree - I think fewer than 100 would revolt. He'd get virtually all the lefties plus virtually all the loyalists.
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with kle4 that it's weird that coming to a compromise is seen as sleazy. The problem both in Parliament and in the country in general is that too many people have decided that there is only One True Position, and everything else must be rejected as outrageous. Since any one position only has minority support, it means everything gets shot down.
> > > >
> > > > Disagree with Nick on this one. Seems to me that the chances of Corbyn persuading the PLP to accept a deal with the Tories are minimal. Cannot see people such as Watson, Starmer, Thornbery, Clive Lewis, etc etc accepting it (unless it included a "confirmatory vote" of course). Any other deal would lead to his instant transformation into Ramsay MacCorbyn and probably a substantial split. I would not stay in the party myself, and I've been a member for more than forty years and there are many more like me in my large London CLP.
> > >
> > > Personally I have always believed in a 'confirmatory vote' and was advocating it prior to the 23rd June 2016. There was no such committment,however, from Labour at the 2017 election . Were he to reach a deal along the lines being mooted, Corbyn could reasonably claim to be complying with the Manifesto pledge to honour the referendum result.
> >
> > Agreeing a Deal including a Customs Union close alignment to SM and workers rights has been party policy since last years Conference. Anyone mardying off has no idea what compromise means.
>
> Labour should not be in the business of compromising with the Tory right. Even Blair would not have gone that far.
I think the ERG and Watson,Benn etc will be in the same no compromise lobby wont they?
> > @geoffw said:
>
> > Cheer up people! It may never happen.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> What is 'it'?
>
> Whatever you like Mr kle4.
> I'm just trying for some hits on the absurd new 'like' button.
Perhaps the quotes system will go back to normal when we collectively hit a certain number of 'likes'?
Labour should not be in the business of compromising with the Tory right. Even Blair would not have gone that far.
---------------------------------------------------------
Eh? Labour have been walking down the lobbies with the furthest right members of the Tory party on Brexit for the better part of a year. Not with the same endgame in mind, but willing to work with them and risk that those people will get what they want as a result.
And if, a big if, the 'Tory right' in the form of May and loyalists are essentially offering what Labour said it wanted on Brexit, then why would that compromise be going too far? If you demand x and are given x, the refrain of 'oppositions oppose' makes no sense.
Labour MPs know this of course, which is why so many have demanded a confirmatory referendum even if the Tories were to give them exactly what they claim to have wanted on Brexit. Fortunately since despite what the Borisgraph will say any May offer will surely not be exactly Labour's policy, they can continue to say the Tories have not gone far enough to the Labour position. If they are lucky they will even be right.
> > @anothernick said:
> > > @bigjohnowls said:
> > > > @justin124 said:
> > > > > @anothernick said:
> > > > > > @NickPalmer said:
> > > > > > > @SouthamObserver said:
> > > > > > > > @Jonathan said:
> > > > > > > > > @SouthamObserver said:
> > > > > > > > > I don't see how Labour stays together if Corbyn does a deal with the Tories and I don't see how such a deal gets through the Commons. So why would Corbyn do it? There is no upside for him. Here's hoping, though.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think he could whip it, the upside is to be seen to be statesmanlike and more importantly to start to move things on from Brexit onto more fertile ground for Labour.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > He will most certainly whip, but how many Labour MPs would obey the whip? I would estimate less than 100.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Disagree - I think fewer than 100 would revolt. He'd get virtually all the lefties plus virtually all the loyalists.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree with kle4 that it's weird that coming to a compromise is seen as sleazy. The problem both in Parliament and in the country in general is that too many people have decided that there is only One True Position, and everything else must be rejected as outrageous. Since any one position only has minority support, it means everything gets shot down.
> > > > >
> > > > > Disagree with Nick on this one. Seems to me that the chances of Corbyn persuading the PLP to accept a deal with the Tories are minimal. Cannot see people such as Watson, Starmer, Thornbery, Clive Lewis, etc etc accepting it (unless it included a "confirmatory vote" of course). Any other deal would lead to his instant transformation into Ramsay MacCorbyn and probably a substantial split. I would not stay in the party myself, and I've been a member for more than forty years and there are many more like me in my large London CLP.
> > > >
> > > > Personally I have always believed in a 'confirmatory vote' and was advocating it prior to the 23rd June 2016. There was no such committment,however, from Labour at the 2017 election . Were he to reach a deal along the lines being mooted, Corbyn could reasonably claim to be complying with the Manifesto pledge to honour the referendum result.
> > >
> > > Agreeing a Deal including a Customs Union close alignment to SM and workers rights has been party policy since last years Conference. Anyone mardying off has no idea what compromise means.
> >
> > Labour should not be in the business of compromising with the Tory right. Even Blair would not have gone that far.
>
> The Tory right will be outraged about any compromise with Labour.
It is not a compromise with the Tory right, they want no deal (or claim to), it is a compromise with the Tory centre and left and the Labour leadership getting 90% of what they want.
> Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures:
>
> Con 31% (-5)
> Lab 31% (-1)
> LD 17% (+7)
> UKIP 4% (-8)
> Others 17% (+7)
Seems a rather pointless exercise when the Brexit Party isn't included?
> > @Foxy said:
> > > @AndyJS said:
> >
> > > > @another_richard said:
> >
> > > > > @AndyJS said:
> >
> > > > > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures:
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > Con 31% (-5)
> >
> > > > > Lab 31% (-1)
> >
> > > > > LD 17% (+7)
> >
> > > > > UKIP 4% (-8)
> >
> > > > > Others 17% (+7)
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Those are much better for the the Conservatives and Labour and pretty dismal for the LibDems.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > I don't understand your "dismal" comment. It's true the LDs got 27% at the 1994 local elections and they haven't got anywhere near that level recently.
> >
> >
> >
> > The LibDems were continually above 20% throughout the 2000s in local elections.
> >
> > So the best NEV in a decade is "dismal"?
> >
> > You must be rather dizzy, spinning so much!
>
> You're sounding increasingly desperate.
>
> Even with the ideal circumstances of this year the LibDems still can't reach the level they regarded as normal for over a decade.
>
> Your recovery is slower and weaker than what the Conservatives managed under Hague and Labour managed under EdM.
Agree - it is very heard to imagine better conditions for a huge LD vote increase . if it was really there. I would wait to see how well they do at the Euros.
> > @AndyJS said:
> > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures:
> >
> > Con 31% (-5)
> > Lab 31% (-1)
> > LD 17% (+7)
> > UKIP 4% (-8)
> > Others 17% (+7)
>
> Seems a rather pointless exercise when the Brexit Party isn't included?
Perhaps they should have put up some candidates then.
> I don't know who is responsible but an excellent photograph for today's header. Almost Hogarthian.
There's been some great ones, if not with such great poses as the header
https://twitter.com/HoCPress/status/1106259210185162758
https://twitter.com/HoCPress/status/1113532048482930688/photo/1
> > @GIN1138 said:
> > > @AndyJS said:
> > > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures:
> > >
> > > Con 31% (-5)
> > > Lab 31% (-1)
> > > LD 17% (+7)
> > > UKIP 4% (-8)
> > > Others 17% (+7)
> >
> > Seems a rather pointless exercise when the Brexit Party isn't included?
>
> Perhaps they should have put up some candidates then.
They didn't need to, many of the Tory councillors elected will be voting for them shortly.
> > Seems a rather pointless exercise when the Brexit Party isn't included?
>
> Perhaps they should have put up some candidates then.
I see that in the East Midlands 'the independent network' is standing as a grouping in the EU elections; do we think this will be confused with Change UK?
> I don't know who is responsible but an excellent photograph for today's header. Almost Hogarthian.
>
> https://www.reddit.com/r/AccidentalRenaissance/
Image 1 'One day at a cafe' looks like a Saul Leiter
You don't see that very often.
> > @another_richard said:
> > > @GIN1138 said:
> > > > @AndyJS said:
> > > > Rallings and Thrasher have published their estimate of the equivalent national vote shares at the local elections. As usual, they're slightly different to the BBC figures:
> > > >
> > > > Con 31% (-5)
> > > > Lab 31% (-1)
> > > > LD 17% (+7)
> > > > UKIP 4% (-8)
> > > > Others 17% (+7)
> > >
> > > Seems a rather pointless exercise when the Brexit Party isn't included?
> >
> > Perhaps they should have put up some candidates then.
>
> They didn't need to, many of the Tory councillors elected will be voting for them shortly.
So what - its not going to achieve anything beyond posturing.
Of course posturing is the thing Farage wants to do.
> > @AndyJS said:
> > Write-up of the Waverley election where Nick P was standing.
> >
> > http://www.haslemereherald.com/article.cfm?id=135717&headline=Local Election 2019: Tories lose Waverley majority on historic day for borough&sectionIs=news&searchyear=2019
>
> An 'ex Nottingham MP'
Good write up, it sounds exciting.
Jeremy Corbyn is not particularly interesting. Labour officials tell me that the key to understanding him is to grasp his intellectual inferiority complex, which resulted in him turning to political dogmatism as others with his disadvantages turn to Scientology. The socialist dogmas of the 1970s gave his limited mind certainty and freedom from responsibility, and a set of enduring precepts.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/05/remember-orwells-chilling-warning-to-boot-licking-propagandists?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
> Nick Cohen:
>
> Jeremy Corbyn is not particularly interesting. Labour officials tell me that the key to understanding him is to grasp his intellectual inferiority complex, which resulted in him turning to political dogmatism as others with his disadvantages turn to Scientology. The socialist dogmas of the 1970s gave his limited mind certainty and freedom from responsibility, and a set of enduring precepts.
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/05/remember-orwells-chilling-warning-to-boot-licking-propagandists?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Sounds unkind, given plenty of intelligent people are also gung ho for political dogmatism which causes them to appear quite unitelligent.
https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/1124995051770269697
The problem st the moment is that we are in a transition phase. The last vestiges of Royal Prerogative still have to be swept away and we need to put on place a system where the ginal decidion on all policy is made by Parliament directing the Executive and with the ability to remove that executive easily if they will not abide by Parliament's wishes.
> Nurse!
>
> https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/1124995051770269697
Getting smacked up side the head by a Russian collision....
> > @malcolmg said:
>
> > > @Sandpit said:
>
> >
>
> > > I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Sadly so. For all this talk of customs unions in the last couple of weeks, how many people are actually weighing up the positives and negatives of that arrangement?
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1112608964053745669
>
>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I agree with his analysis but I frankly no longer care. If a CU is what it takes to achieve Brexit and get out of this mess I would pay that price. At the moment our MPs are giving us the worst of all possible worlds, paying the price of being in but getting none of the benefits whilst living in a world of uncertainty and confusion. It is remarkable that is not doing even more damage than it is.
>
> >
>
> > Customs Union will not get through , it is even worse than May's deal on its own and more stupid as well. Excuse the use of poor grammar, I have an 8 year old desperate to show me computer games.
>
>
>
> Listen well, young padwa. You have much to learn.
>
> I completely disagree with all but the last of his points. I don't want to be 'at the front of the queue' when it comes to the US and others dishing out trade deals - I wouldn't trust our politicians to negotiate their way out of a paper bag. I don't believe for a minute that we enjoy influence in India, Kenya etc. from being their advocate within the common market, and if we do, and if such influence is beneficial to us, it can be replaced in other ways. CU seems like a safe, mushy, halfway playpen to me. And that's good. Turkey situation will do me just fine.
And how uch will you be prepared to pay for your "halfway playpen"? Because NOBODY has given us a cost estimate yet....
May's Shit Deal + Corbyn's side-order of Norovirus.....
> > @malcolmg said:
>
> > > @Sandpit said:
>
> >
>
> > > I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Sadly so. For all this talk of customs unions in the last couple of weeks, how many people are actually weighing up the positives and negatives of that arrangement?
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1112608964053745669
>
>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I agree with his analysis but I frankly no longer care. If a CU is what it takes to achieve Brexit and get out of this mess I would pay that price. At the moment our MPs are giving us the worst of all possible worlds, paying the price of being in but getting none of the benefits whilst living in a world of uncertainty and confusion. It is remarkable that is not doing even more damage than it is.
>
> >
>
> > Customs Union will not get through , it is even worse than May's deal on its own and more stupid as well. Excuse the use of poor grammar, I have an 8 year old desperate to show me computer games.
>
>
>
> Listen well, young padwa. You have much to learn.
>
> I completely disagree with all but the last of his points. I don't want to be 'at the front of the queue' when it comes to the US and others dishing out trade deals - I wouldn't trust our politicians to negotiate their way out of a paper bag. I don't believe for a minute that we enjoy influence in India, Kenya etc. from being their advocate within the common market, and if we do, and if such influence is beneficial to us, it can be replaced in other ways. CU seems like a safe, mushy, halfway playpen to me. And that's good. Turkey situation will do me just fine.
Hannan is a believer in Libertarian Pirate Island.
He thinks of Liam Fox as some modern Drake or Raleigh.
Late thoughts on the local elections:
Labour lost Remain voters without gaining Leavers. It's not so much a reaction against Brexit and certainly not a call to get Brexit done. Labour just doesn't have a compelling offer.
Excellent result for the Lib Dems. They didn't just get a load of new councillors. Usefully they are piled up in particular areas. Expect to see a slew of MPs at the next election, which should also help replenish their depleted MP gene pool for future leadership.
The Conservatives have lost their Costa Geriatrica strongholds like Bournemouth. Demographic changes as much as pissed off Remainers, I think.
Further shift from Ulster unionist parties to Alliance and other non aligned parties are another baby step towards a United Ireland, I believe. Importantly these parties are anti Brexit and have Irish identity.
> > @malcolmg said:
>
> > > @Sandpit said:
>
> >
>
> > > I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Sadly so. For all this talk of customs unions in the last couple of weeks, how many people are actually weighing up the positives and negatives of that arrangement?
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1112608964053745669
>
>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I agree with his analysis but I frankly no longer care. If a CU is what it takes to achieve Brexit and get out of this mess I would pay that price. At the moment our MPs are giving us the worst of all possible worlds, paying the price of being in but getting none of the benefits whilst living in a world of uncertainty and confusion. It is remarkable that is not doing even more damage than it is.
>
> >
>
> > Customs Union will not get through , it is even worse than May's deal on its own and more stupid as well. Excuse the use of poor grammar, I have an 8 year old desperate to show me computer games.
>
>
>
> Listen well, young padwa. You have much to learn.
>
> I completely disagree with all but the last of his points. I don't want to be 'at the front of the queue' when it comes to the US and others dishing out trade deals - I wouldn't trust our politicians to negotiate their way out of a paper bag. I don't believe for a minute that we enjoy influence in India, Kenya etc. from being their advocate within the common market, and if we do, and if such influence is beneficial to us, it can be replaced in other ways. CU seems like a safe, mushy, halfway playpen to me. And that's good. Turkey situation will do me just fine.
‐-------------
In that case you clearly misunderstand the Turkey situation. Turkey does not benefit from any if the FTAs that the EU signs. Exactly the reverse.Through its Customs Union Turkey suffers from an assymetric trade relationship whereby all those countries which have FTAs with the EU get to sell into Turkey free of tariffs whilst still being able to impose tariffs on Turkish goods. It would utterly destroy British exports to any country which has an FTA with the EU.