YouGov GE poll Con 24 Lab 24 Brexit 18 LD 16 Green 7 CHUK 2 UKIP 2
"The latest YouGov/Times voting intention survey sees the vote share for the two main parties slump to 24% each since last week's results. Their combined 48% is the lowest two-party share of the vote YouGov has ever recorded."
> @isam said: > It really is remarkable that in an era is unprecedented fragmentation we can have Labour vote share plummeting, the Tories heading for single figures, LDs surging to 2nd, Brexit Party WAY out in front, and the Green surging to double figures, and we can have all that going on and STILL Change UK can't get any traction! > > The are a group lacking any character or passion who represent something each of the other parties dislike. > > They’re not traditional, they’re not for the working class, they’re not democratic, they don’t want to leave the EU, and they’re not Green, and despite their name, they don’t want to change anything except the clock back three years to Cameroon/Blairism.
Nonsense, they want to change the cosy two party hegemony, and to change the childish "we don't like foreigners" meme that has been allowed by same hegemony for far too long.
I guess they would also like to change the voting system, and probably the House of Lords. It is rather more positive change than trying to fuck up our economy so that we can delude ourselves we are more important than we are, and stirring up hatred and division, so beloved of Farage and his gullible acolytes. Sadly they have not gone about things very efficiently and their message has not been clear enough for the less politically literate.
> It really is remarkable that in an era is unprecedented fragmentation we can have Labour vote share plummeting, the Tories heading for single figures, LDs surging to 2nd, Brexit Party WAY out in front, and the Green surging to double figures, and we can have all that going on and STILL Change UK can't get any traction!
>
> The are a group lacking any character or passion who represent something each of the other parties dislike.
>
> They’re not traditional, they’re not for the working class, they’re not democratic, they don’t want to leave the EU, and they’re not Green, and despite their name, they don’t want to change anything except the clock back three years to Cameroon/Blairism.
Nonsense, they want to change the cosy two party hegemony, and to change the childish "we don't like foreigners" meme that has been allowed by same hegemony for far too long.
I guess they would also like to change the voting system, and probably the House of Lords. It is rather more positive change than trying to fuck up our economy so that we can delude ourselves we are more important than we are, and stirring up hatred and division, so beloved of Farage and his gullible acolytes. Sadly they have not gone about things very efficiently and their message has not been clear enough for the less politically literate.
You’re just saying what you’d like to change rather than what they do
> @isam said: > > @isam said: > > > Looking at the polling, there is no credible defence of FPTP left. > > > > > > Forget polls, we have a real life example. UKIP got 12.6% of the votes and 0.15% of the seats in 2015, but because they’re nasty no one cared. > > > > > > Imagine an all women party or all BAME party had got that representation for those votes. The clamour to change the voting system would have been overwhelming. As it is, I don’t think there’s even been a PB thread about it. > > > > Whatifery at its absolute best. > > > > And at least you finally admit the 2015 version of UKIP was nasty ... > > > > UKIP is nasty, was always nasty, and will always be nasty. And where UKIP was, and went, so the Brexit Party will go. > > I don’t think they were nasty, obviously as I would be calling myself nasty, which I don’t think I am. > > What do you mean ‘whatifery’? It’s a fact that they got 0.15% of the representation for 12.6% of the vote. Do you think that’s objectively fair?
It is 'whatifery' because you set up a fictional position where two groups you don't like (or at least never have a good word to say for), and then invent what would happen.
And as I said: UKIP were always nasty, are still nasty, and Brexit Party is no different, and will be no different.
Can someone tell me what the issue is with Metro bank, or post a link?
I have two mortgages with them.
Metrobank miscalculated its Risk Weighted Assets. This is a figure you report to the Prudential Regulatory Authority, which is approximately the value of your loan book multiplied by the risk of default. It's the main metric of risk exposure and is used to calculate capital retirements. The PRA doesn't look kindly on banks that don't get their RWA calculations correct. In Metrobank's these were category errors, which in principle are unlikely to happen accidentally.*
* Edit. Doesn't necessarily mean fraud. It could be a huge lapse of governance, but that isn't any better in the scheme of things.
> And there must be a reasonable chance that an extension would not be granted but, if it is, it will likely be until after the next GE.
The length of the extension offered will be determined by EU timetables, not UK ones. I'd therefore expect the next extension to run up to the end of the EU budget period (end 2020), with a commitment from the UK to hold a general election or referendum within that time period to attempt to break the political impasse.
Silly option, if plausible. Theres no guarantee either a GE or referendum breaks the impasse. They wont make a referendum binding in case the wrong thing wins and a GE just returns different bozos to argue and might be even more divided.
We elected this parliament to sort this shit out. With very awkward proportions, yes, but if they refuse to make a decision and try for an election they really all should retire .
> > Yes, that might make sense. Could a UK government commit to either given the Parliamentary arithmetic and the FTPA, though? > > The EU might well want the UK committed to a new budget cycle. It would have an impact on any new negotiations and the settlement figure.
I wouldn't be surprised if a longer extension was discussed - say to the next EU elections in 2024, or the end of the next budget cycle, but those dates are so far in the future I'd think they would find a closer date.
I don't think the EU can do anything other than reach agreement with the UK government and hope it has the authority to follow through. At least Corbyn would also support a GE.
It was observed by someone awhile back, I forget who, that sometimes there seems ample reasons for polling to do one thing but it does not. So for instance the Tories maintained very high ratings and leads despite being in open civil war for months. But then suddenly things shift and the polling finally start reflecting what seems like it should have been the case for month. So if people really are fed up with the main two and if remain is so popular both main two should be down and the lds should be up.
Perhaps we are finally getting there.
It's the bollx to Brexit wot done it!
Well something has woken people up that even if labour are the remain party checks are more unequivocal.
> @kyf_100 said: > > @Nigel_Foremain said: > > Graham Brady has done nothing really to offend me, but why does he have such a "punchable" face? And I am a Tory! > > The Germans have a word for it, as they always do. Backpfeifengesicht, a face that cries out for a slap.
Fantastic, I hadn't heard of that one! Thank you. I think Farage would probably win a Europe wide Backpfeifengesicht of The Year Award. People could queue up to slap his effigy.
It was observed by someone awhile back, I forget who, that sometimes there seems ample reasons for polling to do one thing but it does not. So for instance the Tories maintained very high ratings and leads despite being in open civil war for months. But then suddenly things shift and the polling finally start reflecting what seems like it should have been the case for month. So if people really are fed up with the main two and if remain is so popular both main two should be down and the lds should be up.
Perhaps we are finally getting there.
I think that is absolutely right. It took quite a while for Labour to be punished for Iraq. And the impact of the coalition on the Lib Dems took years as well. I think the Tories might have only just begun to pay for Brexit.
> @Nigel_Foremain said: > > @kyf_100 said: > > > @Nigel_Foremain said: > > > Graham Brady has done nothing really to offend me, but why does he have such a "punchable" face? And I am a Tory! > > > > The Germans have a word for it, as they always do. Backpfeifengesicht, a face that cries out for a slap. > > Fantastic, I hadn't heard of that one! Thank you. I think Farage would probably win a Europe wide Backpfeifengesicht of The Year Award. People could queue up to slap his effigy.
...then again if Trump were in the nominations it might be close.
> > Looking at the polling, there is no credible defence of FPTP left.
>
> >
>
> > Forget polls, we have a real life example. UKIP got 12.6% of the votes and 0.15% of the seats in 2015, but because they’re nasty no one cared.
>
> >
>
> > Imagine an all women party or all BAME party had got that representation for those votes. The clamour to change the voting system would have been overwhelming. As it is, I don’t think there’s even been a PB thread about it.
>
>
>
> Whatifery at its absolute best.
>
>
>
> And at least you finally admit the 2015 version of UKIP was nasty ...
>
>
>
> UKIP is nasty, was always nasty, and will always be nasty. And where UKIP was, and went, so the Brexit Party will go.
>
> I don’t think they were nasty, obviously as I would be calling myself nasty, which I don’t think I am.
>
> What do you mean ‘whatifery’? It’s a fact that they got 0.15% of the representation for 12.6% of the vote. Do you think that’s objectively fair?
It is 'whatifery' because you set up a fictional position where two groups you don't like (or at least never have a good word to say for), and then invent what would happen.
And as I said: UKIP were always nasty, are still nasty, and Brexit Party is no different, and will be no different.
Two groups I don’t like being women and BAME people? That is ridiculous, completely untrue and a pretty outrageous & unfounded slur.
I used the example of those groups because they would be more likely to get a sympathetic hearing from the media and the establishment than a party wanting to control immigration.
Not sure I get all this 'Change UK don't want to change anything, they just want to go back to Blairism' stuff.
For a start, we clearly no longer live in a Blair-style country, so that would be a change, and there is no doubt plenty of Blairite unfinished business e.g. PR.
To be honest, for all the faults, New Labour period now seems like some golden age of tranquility and well run administration.
> @NickPalmer said: > > @SouthamObserver said: > > Looking at the polling, it seems that a lot of voters have decided they don’t support Jeremy Corbyn’s nostalgic, Bennite Socialist vision for the UK after all; or maybe millions backed Labour in 2017 to stop a Tory hard Brexit. Hmmmm. > > I think it's more that it's a Euro-election and people are aligning with either hard Remain or hard Brexit, at the expense of more pragmatic/moderate/evasive (take your pick) parties. I met quite a lot of people in the locals who said they'd be glad to vote Labour for those and for a GE, but for the Euros they wanted to send a Remain message. >
Labour dropping to just 24% in the latest YouGov GE poll rather scuppers your theory. We have the most dysfunctional Conservative government that any of us have experienced and yet Labour can muster just 24% in that context?
Starmer's new statement that up to 150 Labour MPs would now vote against a Deal plus Customs Union without a referendum means that is probably dead too as the majority of Tory MPs would also vote against it and it would only get through with Labour votes.
Therefore based on the indicative votes and Withdrawal Agreement vote given May's Deal as is and Deal plus referendum are closest to a majority and got the most votes amongst MPs one of those is the likeliest outcome of Brexit if Deal plus Customs Union is dead. Much depends on the outcome of the European elections and Peterborough by election. If the Brexit Party win both then May's Deal may finally scrape through as some Labour MPs from Leave seats shift to back the Deal in fear of the Brexit Party taking their seats, if Labour win both and beat the Brexit Party though the momentum will be for a second referendum
Not sure I get all this 'Change UK don't want to change anything, they just want to go back to Blairism' stuff.
For a start, we clearly no longer live in a Blair-style country, so that would be a change, and there is no doubt plenty of Blairite unfinished business e.g. PR.
To be honest, for all the faults, New Labour period now seems like some golden age of tranquility and well run administration.
If you ignore destabilising the Middle East by invading Iraq and allowing the mass immigration that led to the current Brexit mess.
> @Wulfrun_Phil said: > First (in predicting an imminent new thread): > > YouGov GE poll > Con 24 > Lab 24 > Brexit 18 > LD 16 > Green 7 > CHUK 2 > UKIP 2 > > "The latest YouGov/Times voting intention survey sees the vote share for the two main parties slump to 24% each since last week's results. Their combined 48% is the lowest two-party share of the vote YouGov has ever recorded."
That is also the lowest combined 2 party share of the vote for the Tories and Labour since 1918 never mind under Yougov. The momentum is with the Brexit Party and LDs as the Tories and Labour lose Leavers and Remainers to both the former parties
> @kle4 said: > Silly option, if plausible. Theres no guarantee either a GE or referendum breaks the impasse. They wont make a referendum binding in case the wrong thing wins
I think they would make it binding - this is actually the obvious way through the treacle: Leavers are quite mistrustful of the idea that if they win a second referendum, that will actually be implemented, so if you're a pro-Deal Tory, you can make it look like you're demanding and getting a meaningful concession in making the referendum binding.
Also the referendum is generally seen as a way for mutually distrustful MPs to get behind something, so like with AV they'll want to set it up so the other side can't renege.
> @isam said: > Not sure I get all this 'Change UK don't want to change anything, they just want to go back to Blairism' stuff. > > For a start, we clearly no longer live in a Blair-style country, so that would be a change, and there is no doubt plenty of Blairite unfinished business e.g. PR. > > To be honest, for all the faults, New Labour period now seems like some golden age of tranquility and well run administration. > > > > If you ignore destabilising the Middle East by invading Iraq and allowing the mass immigration that led to the current Brexit mess.
The Middle East was not stable before Iraq. Immigration was a by-product of UK economic success.
> @kle4 said: > > @Cyclefree said: > > > On topic, I see the point but my recollection (though I was not focusing on politics as much as usual at the time) was that Sir Graham was following rather than leading expectations. > > > > > > I seem to recall that there also pressure to get a new government in place quickly rather than wait until September or whenever. Ironic really given that all May has done is delayed matters. A bit more time then to scrutinise the candidates might have served the Tories well. > > > > > > Would Gove have won against May? Hard to say? Would he have handled matters better? > > > > > > At any event, the government is - as anticipated by Tusk - wasting the time granted by the extension. > > > > > > If the Brexit party does win the euros, what effect will this - and any new Tory leader, if May is prised out - have on our October deadline? > > > > > > Two questions: will any new PM go for a No Deal exit and will they have a majority in Parliament if they do? > > > > > > And if they seek a new extension (for what?) will the EU agree and, if so, for how long? > > > > > > My view, FWIW, is that a No Deal PM Tory Party leader looks more likely than before but their chances of commanding an effective majority are lower. And there must be a reasonable chance that an extension would not be granted but, if it is, it will likely be until after the next GE. > > > > > > (Quite separately I do wonder why anyone sane would want to lead the Tories at this point. They are effectively split, deaf to common-sense and in panic mode.) > > > > > > Anyway, tonight I am off to see The Lehman Trilogy. Let’s hope this is not a bad omen for Metro Bank. > > > > I think your recollection is right but Mike is also right to point out that a contested vote would have highlighted May's serious weaknesses as a campaigner which just might have led to second thoughts. > > > > The extension to date has been a complete waste of time. No one is changing their position and we still have deadlock. It is hard to see any movement until we come up against the deadline again in October. Hopefully the EU will refuse a further extension and state that we either revoke or leave. We seem completely incapable of resolving this ourselves. > > Agreed it has been a waste of time. The EU is not immune to politics and for all they say they are prepared for no deal they did bit want that either and so chose an option to kick the can and hope something would come up the same as us. Macron was the most realistic of them.
If Macron were convinced that parliament would prefer to revoke rather than no deal, he might propose the high risk strategy of refusing a further extension, thereby forcing parliament to get off the pot, and bring all this time wasting to an end.
Mr. Borough, the Blair era also saw seeds planted that would yield a bitter crop.
Migration floodgates opened to deliberately rub the right's face in diversity, throwing away half the rebate, throwing away vetoes and a manifesto pledge for a referendum to sign us up to Lisbon, PFI proliferating (particularly in the NHS), the pensions golden age definitely ended by tax grabs, and endless wibbling instead of decisions on energy policy. Oh, and the worst recession in history.
There's probably more. Many of those mistakes were repeated or continued by the Coalition (energy stands out), but the Coalition at least got to grips with the massive deficit it inherited.
> @isam said: > > @isam said: > > > > @isam said: > > > > > > > Looking at the polling, there is no credible defence of FPTP left. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forget polls, we have a real life example. UKIP got 12.6% of the votes and 0.15% of the seats in 2015, but because they’re nasty no one cared. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Imagine an all women party or all BAME party had got that representation for those votes. The clamour to change the voting system would have been overwhelming. As it is, I don’t think there’s even been a PB thread about it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Whatifery at its absolute best. > > > > > > > > > > > > And at least you finally admit the 2015 version of UKIP was nasty ... > > > > > > > > > > > > UKIP is nasty, was always nasty, and will always be nasty. And where UKIP was, and went, so the Brexit Party will go. > > > > > > I don’t think they were nasty, obviously as I would be calling myself nasty, which I don’t think I am. > > > > > > What do you mean ‘whatifery’? It’s a fact that they got 0.15% of the representation for 12.6% of the vote. Do you think that’s objectively fair? > > > > It is 'whatifery' because you set up a fictional position where two groups you don't like (or at least never have a good word to say for), and then invent what would happen. > > > > And as I said: UKIP were always nasty, are still nasty, and Brexit Party is no different, and will be no different. > > Two groups I don’t like being women and BAME people? That is ridiculous, completely untrue and a pretty outrageous & unfounded slur. > > I used the example of those groups because they would be more likely to get a sympathetic hearing from the media and the establishment than a party wanting to control immigration.
Can you show me one post of yours in the past where you've practively talked positively about BAME or women's rights? I'd be interested to see one, because you always seemed to stick up for UKIP's (ahem) somewhat antiquated views on such matters.
(And I don't mean things like 'I talked to a Muslim once').
I'd also argue that the Brexit Party is getting a very sympathetic hearing from the media at the moment. Farage is everywhere.
> @isam said: > > @isam said: > > > > @isam said: > > > > > > > Looking at the polling, there is no credible defence of FPTP left. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forget polls, we have a real life example. UKIP got 12.6% of the votes and 0.15% of the seats in 2015, but because they’re nasty no one cared. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Imagine an all women party or all BAME party had got that representation for those votes. The clamour to change the voting system would have been overwhelming. As it is, I don’t think there’s even been a PB thread about it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Whatifery at its absolute best. > > > > > > > > > > > > And at least you finally admit the 2015 version of UKIP was nasty ... > > > > > > > > > > > > UKIP is nasty, was always nasty, and will always be nasty. And where UKIP was, and went, so the Brexit Party will go. > > > > > > I don’t think they were nasty, obviously as I would be calling myself nasty, which I don’t think I am. > > > > > > What do you mean ‘whatifery’? It’s a fact that they got 0.15% of the representation for 12.6% of the vote. Do you think that’s objectively fair? > > > > It is 'whatifery' because you set up a fictional position where two groups you don't like (or at least never have a good word to say for), and then invent what would happen. > > > > And as I said: UKIP were always nasty, are still nasty, and Brexit Party is no different, and will be no different. > > Two groups I don’t like being women and BAME people? That is ridiculous, completely untrue and a pretty outrageous & unfounded slur. > > I used the example of those groups because they would be more likely to get a sympathetic hearing from the media and the establishment than a party wanting to control immigration.
Are you seriously suggesting Farage has not had a sympathetic hearing form the media? The Daily Telegraph, The Express, The Mail? It seems a bit too sympathetic to me. Even the BBC has not called him out for what he is. The only person that has suggested what he may be was UKIP founder Alan Sked, who accused him of being a racist. Farage has not sued.
> @thecommissioner said: > The details of the Comres from the weekend had Labour on 29 and the LD on 27 in London, and the LD one point ahead of Lab in the SE. > > Brexit are neck and neck with Labour in the NE and Wales and some way clear in Yorks and Humber. There's something like a 7 point swing from Lab>>BP in the Northern eastern regions. > > BP miles ahead in the SW.
If London is a Labour v LD battle, confirms London as the heart of Remainerism.
Even in Scotland on the Comres figures the Brexit Party made the top 2 as they did in every other GB region and Wales, joint second with the LDs behind the SNP but not in London
Not sure I get all this 'Change UK don't want to change anything, they just want to go back to Blairism' stuff.
For a start, we clearly no longer live in a Blair-style country, so that would be a change, and there is no doubt plenty of Blairite unfinished business e.g. PR.
To be honest, for all the faults, New Labour period now seems like some golden age of tranquility and well run administration.
Do they want to go back to Blairism? (Not a rhetorical question). All I understand from them is that leaving the EU is bad. That’s it.
Mr. Tokyo, making a second referendum binding would not go down as well as you may think.
Leave won the first, but effectively annulling that result and saying "This time it's for real" whilst presenting options, presumably, of Remain and May's Not Universally Popular Deal will raise the question of why the "Real Leave" option isn't on the ballot.
Plus, suppose Remain won. When Leave wins, another vote is required. When Remain wins, the matter is settled. The idea that'd go down well or be the end of things is rather optimistic.
Simply for getting May's deal through Parliament, a second referendum may be the only way it happens. But that way resolution does not lie, merely an exciting new array of divisions and problems.
> @HYUFD said: > > @thecommissioner said: > > The details of the Comres from the weekend had Labour on 29 and the LD on 27 in London, and the LD one point ahead of Lab in the SE. > > > > Brexit are neck and neck with Labour in the NE and Wales and some way clear in Yorks and Humber. There's something like a 7 point swing from Lab>>BP in the Northern eastern regions. > > > > BP miles ahead in the SW. > > If London is a Labour v LD battle, confirms London as the heart of Remainerism. > > Even in Scotland on the Comres figures the Brexit Party made the top 2 as they did in every other GB region and Wales, joint second with the LDs behind the SNP but not in London
Fascist "values" seem frighteningly all pervasive.
The Brexit Party now well out in front for the European elections, Labour battling the LDs for third, the Tories battling the Greens for 4th, CUK well behind
Mr. Borough, the Blair era also saw seeds planted that would yield a bitter crop.
Migration floodgates opened to deliberately rub the right's face in diversity, throwing away half the rebate, throwing away vetoes and a manifesto pledge for a referendum to sign us up to Lisbon, PFI proliferating (particularly in the NHS), the pensions golden age definitely ended by tax grabs, and endless wibbling instead of decisions on energy policy. Oh, and the worst recession in history.
There's probably more. Many of those mistakes were repeated or continued by the Coalition (energy stands out), but the Coalition at least got to grips with the massive deficit it inherited.
Not sure I get all this 'Change UK don't want to change anything, they just want to go back to Blairism' stuff.
For a start, we clearly no longer live in a Blair-style country, so that would be a change, and there is no doubt plenty of Blairite unfinished business e.g. PR. To be honest, for all the faults, New Labour period now seems like some golden age of tranqurility and well run administration.
This polarization didn’t come from nowhere; the Blair years created the tinder that is now burning.
> @isam said: > Not sure I get all this 'Change UK don't want to change anything, they just want to go back to Blairism' stuff. > > For a start, we clearly no longer live in a Blair-style country, so that would be a change, and there is no doubt plenty of Blairite unfinished business e.g. PR. > > To be honest, for all the faults, New Labour period now seems like some golden age of tranquility and well run administration. > > > > If you ignore destabilising the Middle East by invading Iraq and allowing the mass immigration that led to the current Brexit mess.
Good to see that you recognise that Brexit has caused a mess.
> > What do you mean ‘whatifery’? It’s a fact that they got 0.15% of the representation for 12.6% of the vote. Do you think that’s objectively fair?
>
>
>
> It is 'whatifery' because you set up a fictional position where two groups you don't like (or at least never have a good word to say for), and then invent what would happen.
>
>
>
> And as I said: UKIP were always nasty, are still nasty, and Brexit Party is no different, and will be no different.
>
Are you seriously suggesting Farage has not had a sympathetic hearing form the media? The Daily Telegraph, The Express, The Mail? It seems a bit too sympathetic to me. Even the BBC has not called him out for what he is. The only person that has suggested what he may be was UKIP founder Alan Sked, who accused him of being a racist. Farage has not sued.
I’m not suggesting that at all, as The Brexit Party hasn’t got 12.6% of the vote and 0.15% of the representation. I’m suggesting that if a party representing a minority group got the same result, there would have been a lot more made of it
The reason the right and the left still really hate Blair is the same reason why the left hate Thatcher. They defeated and humiliated them. The greater the defeat, the greater the hate.
Not only was New Labour better than this, any government was better than this.
> @Morris_Dancer said: > Mr. Borough, the Blair era also saw seeds planted that would yield a bitter crop. > > Migration floodgates opened to deliberately rub the right's face in diversity.
Good Lord! Diversity is something to rub one's face in, alongside all those other unpleasant things one might rub a face in, is it? I really do hope not, Mr. Dancer.
Can you show me one post of yours in the past where you've practively talked positively about BAME or women's rights? I'd be interested to see one, because you always seemed to stick up for UKIP's (ahem) somewhat antiquated views on such matters.
(And I don't mean things like 'I talked to a Muslim once').
I'd also argue that the Brexit Party is getting a very sympathetic hearing from the media at the moment. Farage is everywhere.
I’m not really interested in getting into personal slanging matches, but the onus is on you to prove what you accuse me of, not vice versa.
> @Morris_Dancer said: > Mr. Tokyo, making a second referendum binding would not go down as well as you may think. > > Leave won the first, but effectively annulling that result and saying "This time it's for real" whilst presenting options, presumably, of Remain and May's Not Universally Popular Deal will raise the question of why the "Real Leave" option isn't on the ballot. > > Plus, suppose Remain won. When Leave wins, another vote is required. When Remain wins, the matter is settled. The idea that'd go down well or be the end of things is rather optimistic. > > Simply for getting May's deal through Parliament, a second referendum may be the only way it happens. But that way resolution does not lie, merely an exciting new array of divisions and problems.
This is the problem with referenda, unless you go for the full fat Swiss type system, and sadly I don't think our population is ready for that. If Remain had "won" by 3 or 4 percentage points do you think El Duce Farage would have retired, and said, oh well we had better accept the will-o-the-people? Nope, don't think so, and neither do you!
Mr. Rata, that's a reference to a quote from someone who worked for Blair/Labour at the time, indicating the increased migration rate was primarily embraced to annoy the right.
Governing a country on the basis of annoying your opponents (possibly to then play the race card if they suggest migration is too high) is not sensible.
> Silly option, if plausible. Theres no guarantee either a GE or referendum breaks the impasse. They wont make a referendum binding in case the wrong thing wins
I think they would make it binding - this is actually the obvious way through the treacle: Leavers are quite mistrustful of the idea that if they win a second referendum, that will actually be implemented, so if you're a pro-Deal Tory, you can make it look like you're demanding and getting a meaningful concession in making the referendum binding.
Also the referendum is generally seen as a way for mutually distrustful MPs to get behind something, so like with AV they'll want to set it up so the other side can't renege.
You have the fundamental issue:
- the voters voted to leave - Parliament voted to leave - Parliament can’t agree how to leave - There a vote should be “leave with the only deal available” or “leave without a deal”
Is Liz Truss (?) on the loo with her trousers up? Not a great look either way for a political picture, but it maybe does suggest she is much like the rest of us, or not!
Mr. Foremain, I agree that Farage et al. would've continued.
However, most people, including most Leavers, would've recognised and respected the democratic result. I wouldn't've been thrilled, but democracy means that sometimes you lose.
The media and political class would've been entirely cheerful and chanting about the importance of democracy and will of the people and, the fringe aside, that would've been that.
But the electorate voted the wrong way. The bastards.
Very kind of the politicians to offer them a chance to have another try, though.
Is Liz Truss (?) on the loo with her trousers up? Not a great look either way for a political picture, but it maybe does suggest she is much like the rest of us, or not!
There is a certain Daenerys Targaryen vibe to that Liz Truss pose...
> @Jonathan said: > The reason the right and the left still really hate Blair is the same reason why the left hate Thatcher. They defeated and humiliated them. The greater the defeat, the greater the hate. > > Not only was New Labour better than this, any government was better than this. >
Indeed. I used to loathe Blair, but I now look back on his governance and realise he was actually quite good. Brown was a different matter though, even if he did "save the world"!
Mrs May negotiated a soft Brexit with the EU. However a rebel bunch (fewer than a hundred). mostly Tories, voted against it because they wanted a harder Brexit.
A much bigger bunch of MPs (well over three hundred) voted against it because they wanted to Remain. And that's why they brought in the HoC to make the final decision.
In a final irony, one small group call themselves Democrats.
Now being a Leave voter and having a small brain, have I got this wrong?
> @Morris_Dancer said: > Mr. Rata, that's a reference to a quote from someone who worked for Blair/Labour at the time, indicating the increased migration rate was primarily embraced to annoy the right. > > Governing a country on the basis of annoying your opponents (possibly to then play the race card if they suggest migration is too high) is not sensible.
A unique aspect of the Blair years was that the right found themselves impotent and in opposition for more than a decade. As a result, a right-wing opposition protest politics developed in the UK for the first time. Brexit was born out of this movement. I don't think Blair can be blamed for it. Opposition was inevitable.
Looking at the polling, it seems that a lot of voters have decided they don’t support Jeremy Corbyn’s nostalgic, Bennite Socialist vision for the UK after all; or maybe millions backed Labour in 2017 to stop a Tory hard Brexit. Hmmmm.
Corbyn is what keeps me and my wife awake at night.
I'm the same with that Herbie film that has Lindsay Lohan in it.
Mr. Jonathan, whilst the prolonged opposition period for the right was a new thing, that does neglect the ongoing integration of the UK into the EU, against the wishes of the electorate.
Divorcing the actual changes (even to the extent of Labour abandoning a manifesto commitment to a referendum) that occurred regarding the EU seems unwise when considering how and why the UK electorate's view of the EU evolved over that same period.
> @CD13 said: > Now lets look at what has happened. > > The referendum was won by Leave. > > Mrs May negotiated a soft Brexit with the EU. However a rebel bunch (fewer than a hundred). mostly Tories, voted against it because they wanted a harder Brexit. > > A much bigger bunch of MPs (well over three hundred) voted against it because they wanted to Remain. And that's why they brought in the HoC to make the final decision. > > In a final irony, one small group call themselves Democrats. > > Now being a Leave voter and having a small brain, have I got this wrong?
Yes, since the rebel bunch (ERG and DUP) - who all claimed to believe in Brexit - were all the votes needed to have delivered our exit by now.
> @Morris_Dancer said: > Mr. Foremain, I agree that Farage et al. would've continued. > > However, most people, including most Leavers, would've recognised and respected the democratic result. I wouldn't've been thrilled, but democracy means that sometimes you lose. > > The media and political class would've been entirely cheerful and chanting about the importance of democracy and will of the people and, the fringe aside, that would've been that. > > But the electorate voted the wrong way. The bastards. > > Very kind of the politicians to offer them a chance to have another try, though.
Mr Dancer, I think you are suffering form Brexit blindness, an affliction we perhaps all suffer from, though it affect leavers differently form remainers. For leavers it tends to be "haha, yaboo, we won, but we are still really angry and we want a much more aggressive form of Brexit than we originally said we wanted"
I think if Remain had got the same margin as Leave got most leavers, if not all, would not have respected it one bit. The Tory party would be pretty much exactly where it is today and the ERG, UKIP, Faragists etc. would be making government impossible with calls for another referendum. Speculation, I know, but reasonable speculation.
> @CD13 said: > Now lets look at what has happened. > > The referendum was won by Leave. > > Mrs May negotiated a soft Brexit with the EU. However a rebel bunch (fewer than a hundred). mostly Tories, voted against it because they wanted a harder Brexit. > > A much bigger bunch of MPs (well over three hundred) voted against it because they wanted to Remain. And that's why they brought in the HoC to make the final decision. > > In a final irony, one small group call themselves Democrats. > > Now being a Leave voter and having a small brain, have I got this wrong?
> @Morris_Dancer said: > Mr. Jonathan, whilst the prolonged opposition period for the right was a new thing, that does neglect the ongoing integration of the UK into the EU, against the wishes of the electorate. > > Divorcing the actual changes (even to the extent of Labour abandoning a manifesto commitment to a referendum) that occurred regarding the EU seems unwise when considering how and why the UK electorate's view of the EU evolved over that same period.
> @Nigel_Foremain said: > > @Jonathan said: > > The reason the right and the left still really hate Blair is the same reason why the left hate Thatcher. They defeated and humiliated them. The greater the defeat, the greater the hate. > > > > Not only was New Labour better than this, any government was better than this. > > > > Indeed. I used to loathe Blair, but I now look back on his governance and realise he was actually quite good. Brown was a different matter though, even if he did "save the world"!
I hate the way Brown is misquoted, he actually said "not only did we save the world...". A bolder claim ;-)
> @Pro_Rata said: > > @Morris_Dancer said: > > Mr. Borough, the Blair era also saw seeds planted that would yield a bitter crop. > > > > Migration floodgates opened to deliberately rub the right's face in diversity. > > Good Lord! Diversity is something to rub one's face in, alongside all those other unpleasant things one might rub a face in, is it? I really do hope not, Mr. Dancer. > > >
So how has Rotherham benefited from thousands of East European Roma migrating there ?
I think you might doubt it by reading the Labour manifesto for 2017. But more profoundly the left wing case in favour of a corporatist club putting up protectionist measures such as agricultural tariffs against poor African countries seems to me to be not made out. The huge centre left/left case against the EU as a cosy club of cronies is not being made very loudly. Where is Jeremy Corbyn when you need him?
Mr. Jonathan, the Conservatives were spark out for the first half of his tenure, and divided also in the third Labour term (with IDS being toppled). The electoral mountain was too large to climb, yet when Cameron came along he made a huge gain.
All the whole, EU-sceptical sentiment was rising in the aftermath of Blair throwing away half the rebate and Brown deciding to renege on a manifesto pledge.
Metrobank: wrong box was ticked on loan classification. Perhaps the management instructed said box to be thus ticked. That could be a reason for the share price to fall. But it isn't a reason for a run on the bank.
> @CD13 said: > Now lets look at what has happened. > > The referendum was won by Leave. > > Mrs May negotiated a soft Brexit with the EU. However a rebel bunch (fewer than a hundred). mostly Tories, voted against it because they wanted a harder Brexit. > > A much bigger bunch of MPs (well over three hundred) voted against it because they wanted to Remain. And that's why they brought in the HoC to make the final decision. > > In a final irony, one small group call themselves Democrats. > > Now being a Leave voter and having a small brain, have I got this wrong?
I have no idea about the size of your brain. If this concerns you I suggest you ask your doctor for an MRI scan.
PS. People who argue for something different to 52% of the population and seek to change opinion does not make them undemocratic
> @algarkirk said: > > I think you might doubt it by reading the Labour manifesto for 2017. But more profoundly the left wing case in favour of a corporatist club putting up protectionist measures such as agricultural tariffs against poor African countries seems to me to be not made out. The huge centre left/left case against the EU as a cosy club of cronies is not being made very loudly. Where is Jeremy Corbyn when you need him?
Except the EU doesn't put up agricultural tariffs against poor African countries and introduced a policy of unilateral zero tariffs with all the poorest countries two decades ago.
> @Nigel_Foremain said: > > I think if Remain had got the same margin as Leave got most leavers, if not all, would not have respected it one bit. The Tory party would be pretty much exactly where it is today and the ERG, UKIP, Faragists etc. would be making government impossible with calls for another referendum. Speculation, I know, but reasonable speculation. --------
Exactly. We'd have heard endlessly about how more people voted Leave than voted for any political party, with people arguing that the scale of the Leave vote "in the face of the full force of the establishment" shows that the future is Brexit.
> @edmundintokyo said: > > @rkrkrk said: > > On the topic of European elections, just been contacted by a not-very-political family member suggesting I vote Lib Dems vs. Labour in S. East as they have a better chance against the Brexit party. Is that actually true? > > I think they both have a decent chance of getting 1, and need quite a heroic performance to get 2? So probably not. > > However if the goal is to back a Remain candidate you also need to look at whether the party supports Remain, which with the LDs is Yes and with Labour is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Thanks. My primary goal is to avoid a hard Brexit. My fear is the lib dems and co. will get their second referendum, lose it and then I think the country is forced into a very damaging hard Brexit.
> @Morris_Dancer said: > Mr. Jonathan, the Conservatives were spark out for the first half of his tenure, and divided also in the third Labour term (with IDS being toppled). The electoral mountain was too large to climb, yet when Cameron came along he made a huge gain. > > All the whole, EU-sceptical sentiment was rising in the aftermath of Blair throwing away half the rebate and Brown deciding to renege on a manifesto pledge.
The seeds of Eurosceptism were sowed during Maastricht. But in the 2000s it was largely a minority pursuit.
> > On the topic of European elections, just been contacted by a not-very-political family member suggesting I vote Lib Dems vs. Labour in S. East as they have a better chance against the Brexit party. Is that actually true?
>
> I think they both have a decent chance of getting 1, and need quite a heroic performance to get 2? So probably not.
>
> However if the goal is to back a Remain candidate you also need to look at whether the party supports Remain, which with the LDs is Yes and with Labour is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Thanks. My primary goal is to avoid a hard Brexit.
My fear is the lib dems and co. will get their second referendum, lose it and then I think the country is forced into a very damaging hard Brexit.
That's a pretty unlikely sequence of events you're afraid of.
> @isam said: > > @isam said: > > > > Can you show me one post of yours in the past where you've practively talked positively about BAME or women's rights? I'd be interested to see one, because you always seemed to stick up for UKIP's (ahem) somewhat antiquated views on such matters. > > > > (And I don't mean things like 'I talked to a Muslim once'). > > > > I'd also argue that the Brexit Party is getting a very sympathetic hearing from the media at the moment. Farage is everywhere. > > I’m not really interested in getting into personal slanging matches, but the onus is on you to prove what you accuse me of, not vice versa.
Well, I'd take your past body of posts on here as fairly good evidence of my point.
Mr. Jonathan, perhaps, but giving away half the rebate for nothing and reneging on the referendum provided plentiful water and sunlight for the shoots to thrive.
Mr. Jonathan, perhaps, but giving away half the rebate for nothing and reneging on the referendum provided plentiful water and sunlight for the shoots to thrive.
So Brexit is just revenge against the political dominance of New Labour?
> @rottenborough said: > If we haven't left EU by Labour conference, then it will be a bloodbath. > >
We will certainly not have left the EU by September.
And there will be a concerted attempt to commit Labour to a second referendum but given that the party is about 80% of the way there already this is unlikely to provoke the kind of bloodbath we can expect from the Tories.
I specifically cited political acts that involved the UK/EU relationship and were not exactly popular with the electorate. What part of that implies revenge against New Labour?
This look like a battle between the Lib Dems and the brexit party
I could never vote for the Liberal Democrats after that day of infamy on 11 May 2010 and I rule nothing out to prevent them from coming first or second in the European elections.
> @Benpointer said: > > @edmundintokyo said: > > > > @rkrkrk said: > > > > On the topic of European elections, just been contacted by a not-very-political family member suggesting I vote Lib Dems vs. Labour in S. East as they have a better chance against the Brexit party. Is that actually true? > > > > > > I think they both have a decent chance of getting 1, and need quite a heroic performance to get 2? So probably not. > > > > > > However if the goal is to back a Remain candidate you also need to look at whether the party supports Remain, which with the LDs is Yes and with Labour is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ > > > > Thanks. My primary goal is to avoid a hard Brexit. > > My fear is the lib dems and co. will get their second referendum, lose it and then I think the country is forced into a very damaging hard Brexit. > > That's a pretty unlikely sequence of events you're afraid of.
It's unlikely that there will be a second referendum. But this is the bit that voting Lib Dem supports.
But I think a second referendum would be 50/50. And if Leave wins twice, then I think it's very likely we will have a hard Brexit.
I specifically cited political acts that involved the UK/EU relationship and were not exactly popular with the electorate. What part of that implies revenge against New Labour?
You didn't offer any substantive argument against the EU budget or the Lisbon treaty, just a vague feeling that the New Labour government stitched you up somehow.
I could never vote for the Liberal Democrats after that day of infamy on 11 May 2010 and I rule nothing out to prevent them from coming first or second in the European elections.
Would you vote Tory if your vote was the difference between the Lib Dems coming second and third?
> Can you show me one post of yours in the past where you've practively talked positively about BAME or women's rights? I'd be interested to see one, because you always seemed to stick up for UKIP's (ahem) somewhat antiquated views on such matters.
>
>
>
> (And I don't mean things like 'I talked to a Muslim once').
>
>
>
> I'd also argue that the Brexit Party is getting a very sympathetic hearing from the media at the moment. Farage is everywhere.
>
> I’m not really interested in getting into personal slanging matches, but the onus is on you to prove what you accuse me of, not vice versa.
Well, I'd take your past body of posts on here as fairly good evidence of my point.
Mr. Glenn, in what way was Blair giving away half the rebate to the advantage of the UK or its electorate? That's not a vague feeling, it's a specific act of pro-EU and anti-UK idiocy.
Lisbon involves removing vetoes and moving to QMV, which I've repeatedly argued against. Furthermore, we were promised a referendum, which wasn't held.
> @Benpointer said: > > @edmundintokyo said: > > > > @rkrkrk said: > > > > On the topic of European elections, just been contacted by a not-very-political family member suggesting I vote Lib Dems vs. Labour in S. East as they have a better chance against the Brexit party. Is that actually true? > > > > > > I think they both have a decent chance of getting 1, and need quite a heroic performance to get 2? So probably not. > > > > > > However if the goal is to back a Remain candidate you also need to look at whether the party supports Remain, which with the LDs is Yes and with Labour is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ > > > > Thanks. My primary goal is to avoid a hard Brexit. > > My fear is the lib dems and co. will get their second referendum, lose it and then I think the country is forced into a very damaging hard Brexit. > > That's a pretty unlikely sequence of events you're afraid of.
Not really that unlikely, remain could even win the second referendum but find the Brexit party win the GE, with the remain vote split across many parties, and take us out on their terms.
A remainer campaigning for a referendum without being able to accept any form of brexit is taking far too a high risk imo, but I guess that depends how you view no deal vs Mays deal vs CU/SM options. For me no deal is the disaster and getting to 0% of no deal quickly should be the plan.
> @rkrkrk said: > > @edmundintokyo said: > > > @rkrkrk said: > > > On the topic of European elections, just been contacted by a not-very-political family member suggesting I vote Lib Dems vs. Labour in S. East as they have a better chance against the Brexit party. Is that actually true? > > > > I think they both have a decent chance of getting 1, and need quite a heroic performance to get 2? So probably not. > > > > However if the goal is to back a Remain candidate you also need to look at whether the party supports Remain, which with the LDs is Yes and with Labour is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ > > Thanks. My primary goal is to avoid a hard Brexit. > My fear is the lib dems and co. will get their second referendum, lose it and then I think the country is forced into a very damaging hard Brexit.
Based on the local election results I'd suggest it's very likely that the LibDems will beat Labour in the South East region - which was your question - and hence be the better choice to reduce the Brexit Party's chances of getting more seats.
As to which outcome leads to which Brexit conclusion, who can say? I saw someone recently argue that the better the Brexit Party does, the less likely is Brexit. All we can do as voters is ensure that the viewpoint we wish to express is represented by the results of the election as best as possible.
> @NickPalmer said: > > @SouthamObserver said: > > Looking at the polling, it seems that a lot of voters have decided they don’t support Jeremy Corbyn’s nostalgic, Bennite Socialist vision for the UK after all; or maybe millions backed Labour in 2017 to stop a Tory hard Brexit. Hmmmm. > > I think it's more that it's a Euro-election and people are aligning with either hard Remain or hard Brexit, at the expense of more pragmatic/moderate/evasive (take your pick) parties. I met quite a lot of people in the locals who said they'd be glad to vote Labour for those and for a GE, but for the Euros they wanted to send a Remain message. > > Anecdata: my long-standing friend who usually votes Tory (and once voted BNP in the Euros) is having doubts about Brexit and plans to vote Green on the basis that he likes the environment and they are anti-Brexit but "not as obsessive about it as the LibDems".
Yep. The current polls are another warning of the disastrous electoral consequences of centrism.
A good line by Paul Mason. Corbyn and Co should pick it up and run with it. A much more impressive rallying cry for the euro election than sitting on the fence pandering to their own little englanders......
"We're an internationalist party at war with the forces of xenophobia"
Mrs May negotiated a soft Brexit with the EU. However a rebel bunch (fewer than a hundred). mostly Tories, voted against it because they wanted a harder Brexit.
A much bigger bunch of MPs (well over three hundred) voted against it because they wanted to Remain. And that's why they brought in the HoC to make the final decision.
In a final irony, one small group call themselves Democrats.
Now being a Leave voter and having a small brain, have I got this wrong?
Yes. Mrs May’s deal is a hard Brexit. Staying in the CU and SM à la Norway is a soft Brexit.
There has been a shifting of this particular Overton window in the last two years. No Deal used to be unimaginable and beyond any definition of ‘hard Brexit’.
Comments
YouGov GE poll
Con 24
Lab 24
Brexit 18
LD 16
Green 7
CHUK 2
UKIP 2
"The latest YouGov/Times voting intention survey sees the vote share for the two main parties slump to 24% each since last week's results. Their combined 48% is the lowest two-party share of the vote YouGov has ever recorded."
> It really is remarkable that in an era is unprecedented fragmentation we can have Labour vote share plummeting, the Tories heading for single figures, LDs surging to 2nd, Brexit Party WAY out in front, and the Green surging to double figures, and we can have all that going on and STILL Change UK can't get any traction!
>
> The are a group lacking any character or passion who represent something each of the other parties dislike.
>
> They’re not traditional, they’re not for the working class, they’re not democratic, they don’t want to leave the EU, and they’re not Green, and despite their name, they don’t want to change anything except the clock back three years to Cameroon/Blairism.
Nonsense, they want to change the cosy two party hegemony, and to change the childish "we don't like foreigners" meme that has been allowed by same hegemony for far too long.
I guess they would also like to change the voting system, and probably the House of Lords. It is rather more positive change than trying to fuck up our economy so that we can delude ourselves we are more important than we are, and stirring up hatred and division, so beloved of Farage and his gullible acolytes. Sadly they have not gone about things very efficiently and their message has not been clear enough for the less politically literate.
It's almost as if there are two parties sheltering under the same party brand...
> > @isam said:
>
> > Looking at the polling, there is no credible defence of FPTP left.
>
> >
>
> > Forget polls, we have a real life example. UKIP got 12.6% of the votes and 0.15% of the seats in 2015, but because they’re nasty no one cared.
>
> >
>
> > Imagine an all women party or all BAME party had got that representation for those votes. The clamour to change the voting system would have been overwhelming. As it is, I don’t think there’s even been a PB thread about it.
>
>
>
> Whatifery at its absolute best.
>
>
>
> And at least you finally admit the 2015 version of UKIP was nasty ...
>
>
>
> UKIP is nasty, was always nasty, and will always be nasty. And where UKIP was, and went, so the Brexit Party will go.
>
> I don’t think they were nasty, obviously as I would be calling myself nasty, which I don’t think I am.
>
> What do you mean ‘whatifery’? It’s a fact that they got 0.15% of the representation for 12.6% of the vote. Do you think that’s objectively fair?
It is 'whatifery' because you set up a fictional position where two groups you don't like (or at least never have a good word to say for), and then invent what would happen.
And as I said: UKIP were always nasty, are still nasty, and Brexit Party is no different, and will be no different.
* Edit. Doesn't necessarily mean fraud. It could be a huge lapse of governance, but that isn't any better in the scheme of things.
We elected this parliament to sort this shit out. With very awkward proportions, yes, but if they refuse to make a decision and try for an election they really all should retire .
>
> Yes, that might make sense. Could a UK government commit to either given the Parliamentary arithmetic and the FTPA, though?
>
> The EU might well want the UK committed to a new budget cycle. It would have an impact on any new negotiations and the settlement figure.
I wouldn't be surprised if a longer extension was discussed - say to the next EU elections in 2024, or the end of the next budget cycle, but those dates are so far in the future I'd think they would find a closer date.
I don't think the EU can do anything other than reach agreement with the UK government and hope it has the authority to follow through. At least Corbyn would also support a GE.
> > @Nigel_Foremain said:
> > Graham Brady has done nothing really to offend me, but why does he have such a "punchable" face? And I am a Tory!
>
> The Germans have a word for it, as they always do. Backpfeifengesicht, a face that cries out for a slap.
Fantastic, I hadn't heard of that one! Thank you. I think Farage would probably win a Europe wide Backpfeifengesicht of The Year Award. People could queue up to slap his effigy.
> > @kyf_100 said:
> > > @Nigel_Foremain said:
> > > Graham Brady has done nothing really to offend me, but why does he have such a "punchable" face? And I am a Tory!
> >
> > The Germans have a word for it, as they always do. Backpfeifengesicht, a face that cries out for a slap.
>
> Fantastic, I hadn't heard of that one! Thank you. I think Farage would probably win a Europe wide Backpfeifengesicht of The Year Award. People could queue up to slap his effigy.
...then again if Trump were in the nominations it might be close.
I used the example of those groups because they would be more likely to get a sympathetic hearing from the media and the establishment than a party wanting to control immigration.
For a start, we clearly no longer live in a Blair-style country, so that would be a change, and there is no doubt plenty of Blairite unfinished business e.g. PR.
To be honest, for all the faults, New Labour period now seems like some golden age of tranquility and well run administration.
> > @SouthamObserver said:
> > Looking at the polling, it seems that a lot of voters have decided they don’t support Jeremy Corbyn’s nostalgic, Bennite Socialist vision for the UK after all; or maybe millions backed Labour in 2017 to stop a Tory hard Brexit. Hmmmm.
>
> I think it's more that it's a Euro-election and people are aligning with either hard Remain or hard Brexit, at the expense of more pragmatic/moderate/evasive (take your pick) parties. I met quite a lot of people in the locals who said they'd be glad to vote Labour for those and for a GE, but for the Euros they wanted to send a Remain message.
>
Labour dropping to just 24% in the latest YouGov GE poll rather scuppers your theory. We have the most dysfunctional Conservative government that any of us have experienced and yet Labour can muster just 24% in that context?
> > @MikeSmithson said:
> > https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/1127803270104326144?s=19
> > This look like a battle between the Lib Dems and the brexit party
>
> Some "battle" - Brexit Party is nearly 20% ahead!
On those percentages, Brexit would get over half the seats under D'Hondt.
Therefore based on the indicative votes and Withdrawal Agreement vote given May's Deal as is and Deal plus referendum are closest to a majority and got the most votes amongst MPs one of those is the likeliest outcome of Brexit if Deal plus Customs Union is dead. Much depends on the outcome of the European elections and Peterborough by election. If the Brexit Party win both then May's Deal may finally scrape through as some Labour MPs from Leave seats shift to back the Deal in fear of the Brexit Party taking their seats, if Labour win both and beat the Brexit Party though the momentum will be for a second referendum
> https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1127837081529663493
>
> It's almost as if there are two parties sheltering under the same party brand...
Similar to the Tories in that regard. It is difficult to see how long both parties can survive the strains of such divergent opinions
> First (in predicting an imminent new thread):
>
> YouGov GE poll
> Con 24
> Lab 24
> Brexit 18
> LD 16
> Green 7
> CHUK 2
> UKIP 2
>
> "The latest YouGov/Times voting intention survey sees the vote share for the two main parties slump to 24% each since last week's results. Their combined 48% is the lowest two-party share of the vote YouGov has ever recorded."
That is also the lowest combined 2 party share of the vote for the Tories and Labour since 1918 never mind under Yougov. The momentum is with the Brexit Party and LDs as the Tories and Labour lose Leavers and Remainers to both the former parties
> Silly option, if plausible. Theres no guarantee either a GE or referendum breaks the impasse. They wont make a referendum binding in case the wrong thing wins
I think they would make it binding - this is actually the obvious way through the treacle: Leavers are quite mistrustful of the idea that if they win a second referendum, that will actually be implemented, so if you're a pro-Deal Tory, you can make it look like you're demanding and getting a meaningful concession in making the referendum binding.
Also the referendum is generally seen as a way for mutually distrustful MPs to get behind something, so like with AV they'll want to set it up so the other side can't renege.
> Not sure I get all this 'Change UK don't want to change anything, they just want to go back to Blairism' stuff.
>
> For a start, we clearly no longer live in a Blair-style country, so that would be a change, and there is no doubt plenty of Blairite unfinished business e.g. PR.
>
> To be honest, for all the faults, New Labour period now seems like some golden age of tranquility and well run administration.
>
>
>
> If you ignore destabilising the Middle East by invading Iraq and allowing the mass immigration that led to the current Brexit mess.
The Middle East was not stable before Iraq. Immigration was a by-product of UK economic success.
> > @Cyclefree said:
>
> > On topic, I see the point but my recollection (though I was not focusing on politics as much as usual at the time) was that Sir Graham was following rather than leading expectations.
>
> >
>
> > I seem to recall that there also pressure to get a new government in place quickly rather than wait until September or whenever. Ironic really given that all May has done is delayed matters. A bit more time then to scrutinise the candidates might have served the Tories well.
>
> >
>
> > Would Gove have won against May? Hard to say? Would he have handled matters better?
>
> >
>
> > At any event, the government is - as anticipated by Tusk - wasting the time granted by the extension.
>
> >
>
> > If the Brexit party does win the euros, what effect will this - and any new Tory leader, if May is prised out - have on our October deadline?
>
> >
>
> > Two questions: will any new PM go for a No Deal exit and will they have a majority in Parliament if they do?
>
> >
>
> > And if they seek a new extension (for what?) will the EU agree and, if so, for how long?
>
> >
>
> > My view, FWIW, is that a No Deal PM Tory Party leader looks more likely than before but their chances of commanding an effective majority are lower. And there must be a reasonable chance that an extension would not be granted but, if it is, it will likely be until after the next GE.
>
> >
>
> > (Quite separately I do wonder why anyone sane would want to lead the Tories at this point. They are effectively split, deaf to common-sense and in panic mode.)
>
> >
>
> > Anyway, tonight I am off to see The Lehman Trilogy. Let’s hope this is not a bad omen for Metro Bank.
>
>
>
> I think your recollection is right but Mike is also right to point out that a contested vote would have highlighted May's serious weaknesses as a campaigner which just might have led to second thoughts.
>
>
>
> The extension to date has been a complete waste of time. No one is changing their position and we still have deadlock. It is hard to see any movement until we come up against the deadline again in October. Hopefully the EU will refuse a further extension and state that we either revoke or leave. We seem completely incapable of resolving this ourselves.
>
> Agreed it has been a waste of time. The EU is not immune to politics and for all they say they are prepared for no deal they did bit want that either and so chose an option to kick the can and hope something would come up the same as us. Macron was the most realistic of them.
If Macron were convinced that parliament would prefer to revoke rather than no deal, he might propose the high risk strategy of refusing a further extension, thereby forcing parliament to get off the pot, and bring all this time wasting to an end.
Migration floodgates opened to deliberately rub the right's face in diversity, throwing away half the rebate, throwing away vetoes and a manifesto pledge for a referendum to sign us up to Lisbon, PFI proliferating (particularly in the NHS), the pensions golden age definitely ended by tax grabs, and endless wibbling instead of decisions on energy policy. Oh, and the worst recession in history.
There's probably more. Many of those mistakes were repeated or continued by the Coalition (energy stands out), but the Coalition at least got to grips with the massive deficit it inherited.
Blair's time was one of missed opportunities.
> > @isam said:
>
> > > @isam said:
>
> >
>
> > > Looking at the polling, there is no credible defence of FPTP left.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Forget polls, we have a real life example. UKIP got 12.6% of the votes and 0.15% of the seats in 2015, but because they’re nasty no one cared.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Imagine an all women party or all BAME party had got that representation for those votes. The clamour to change the voting system would have been overwhelming. As it is, I don’t think there’s even been a PB thread about it.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Whatifery at its absolute best.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > And at least you finally admit the 2015 version of UKIP was nasty ...
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > UKIP is nasty, was always nasty, and will always be nasty. And where UKIP was, and went, so the Brexit Party will go.
>
> >
>
> > I don’t think they were nasty, obviously as I would be calling myself nasty, which I don’t think I am.
>
> >
>
> > What do you mean ‘whatifery’? It’s a fact that they got 0.15% of the representation for 12.6% of the vote. Do you think that’s objectively fair?
>
>
>
> It is 'whatifery' because you set up a fictional position where two groups you don't like (or at least never have a good word to say for), and then invent what would happen.
>
>
>
> And as I said: UKIP were always nasty, are still nasty, and Brexit Party is no different, and will be no different.
>
> Two groups I don’t like being women and BAME people? That is ridiculous, completely untrue and a pretty outrageous & unfounded slur.
>
> I used the example of those groups because they would be more likely to get a sympathetic hearing from the media and the establishment than a party wanting to control immigration.
Can you show me one post of yours in the past where you've practively talked positively about BAME or women's rights? I'd be interested to see one, because you always seemed to stick up for UKIP's (ahem) somewhat antiquated views on such matters.
(And I don't mean things like 'I talked to a Muslim once').
I'd also argue that the Brexit Party is getting a very sympathetic hearing from the media at the moment. Farage is everywhere.
> > @isam said:
>
> > > @isam said:
>
> >
>
> > > Looking at the polling, there is no credible defence of FPTP left.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Forget polls, we have a real life example. UKIP got 12.6% of the votes and 0.15% of the seats in 2015, but because they’re nasty no one cared.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Imagine an all women party or all BAME party had got that representation for those votes. The clamour to change the voting system would have been overwhelming. As it is, I don’t think there’s even been a PB thread about it.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Whatifery at its absolute best.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > And at least you finally admit the 2015 version of UKIP was nasty ...
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > UKIP is nasty, was always nasty, and will always be nasty. And where UKIP was, and went, so the Brexit Party will go.
>
> >
>
> > I don’t think they were nasty, obviously as I would be calling myself nasty, which I don’t think I am.
>
> >
>
> > What do you mean ‘whatifery’? It’s a fact that they got 0.15% of the representation for 12.6% of the vote. Do you think that’s objectively fair?
>
>
>
> It is 'whatifery' because you set up a fictional position where two groups you don't like (or at least never have a good word to say for), and then invent what would happen.
>
>
>
> And as I said: UKIP were always nasty, are still nasty, and Brexit Party is no different, and will be no different.
>
> Two groups I don’t like being women and BAME people? That is ridiculous, completely untrue and a pretty outrageous & unfounded slur.
>
> I used the example of those groups because they would be more likely to get a sympathetic hearing from the media and the establishment than a party wanting to control immigration.
Are you seriously suggesting Farage has not had a sympathetic hearing form the media? The Daily Telegraph, The Express, The Mail? It seems a bit too sympathetic to me. Even the BBC has not called him out for what he is. The only person that has suggested what he may be was UKIP founder Alan Sked, who accused him of being a racist. Farage has not sued.
> The details of the Comres from the weekend had Labour on 29 and the LD on 27 in London, and the LD one point ahead of Lab in the SE.
>
> Brexit are neck and neck with Labour in the NE and Wales and some way clear in Yorks and Humber. There's something like a 7 point swing from Lab>>BP in the Northern eastern regions.
>
> BP miles ahead in the SW.
If London is a Labour v LD battle, confirms London as the heart of Remainerism.
Even in Scotland on the Comres figures the Brexit Party made the top 2 as they did in every other GB region and Wales, joint second with the LDs behind the SNP but not in London
Leave won the first, but effectively annulling that result and saying "This time it's for real" whilst presenting options, presumably, of Remain and May's Not Universally Popular Deal will raise the question of why the "Real Leave" option isn't on the ballot.
Plus, suppose Remain won. When Leave wins, another vote is required. When Remain wins, the matter is settled. The idea that'd go down well or be the end of things is rather optimistic.
Simply for getting May's deal through Parliament, a second referendum may be the only way it happens. But that way resolution does not lie, merely an exciting new array of divisions and problems.
> > @thecommissioner said:
> > The details of the Comres from the weekend had Labour on 29 and the LD on 27 in London, and the LD one point ahead of Lab in the SE.
> >
> > Brexit are neck and neck with Labour in the NE and Wales and some way clear in Yorks and Humber. There's something like a 7 point swing from Lab>>BP in the Northern eastern regions.
> >
> > BP miles ahead in the SW.
>
> If London is a Labour v LD battle, confirms London as the heart of Remainerism.
>
> Even in Scotland on the Comres figures the Brexit Party made the top 2 as they did in every other GB region and Wales, joint second with the LDs behind the SNP but not in London
Fascist "values" seem frighteningly all pervasive.
> https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/1127803270104326144?s=19
> This look like a battle between the Lib Dems and the brexit party
The Brexit Party now well out in front for the European elections, Labour battling the LDs for third, the Tories battling the Greens for 4th, CUK well behind
https://twitter.com/iandunt/status/1127841221949501440?s=21
> Not sure I get all this 'Change UK don't want to change anything, they just want to go back to Blairism' stuff.
>
> For a start, we clearly no longer live in a Blair-style country, so that would be a change, and there is no doubt plenty of Blairite unfinished business e.g. PR.
>
> To be honest, for all the faults, New Labour period now seems like some golden age of tranquility and well run administration.
>
>
>
> If you ignore destabilising the Middle East by invading Iraq and allowing the mass immigration that led to the current Brexit mess.
Good to see that you recognise that Brexit has caused a mess.
Not only was New Labour better than this, any government was better than this.
> Mr. Borough, the Blair era also saw seeds planted that would yield a bitter crop.
>
> Migration floodgates opened to deliberately rub the right's face in diversity.
Good Lord! Diversity is something to rub one's face in, alongside all those other unpleasant things one might rub a face in, is it? I really do hope not, Mr. Dancer.
> Mr. Tokyo, making a second referendum binding would not go down as well as you may think.
>
> Leave won the first, but effectively annulling that result and saying "This time it's for real" whilst presenting options, presumably, of Remain and May's Not Universally Popular Deal will raise the question of why the "Real Leave" option isn't on the ballot.
>
> Plus, suppose Remain won. When Leave wins, another vote is required. When Remain wins, the matter is settled. The idea that'd go down well or be the end of things is rather optimistic.
>
> Simply for getting May's deal through Parliament, a second referendum may be the only way it happens. But that way resolution does not lie, merely an exciting new array of divisions and problems.
This is the problem with referenda, unless you go for the full fat Swiss type system, and sadly I don't think our population is ready for that. If Remain had "won" by 3 or 4 percentage points do you think El Duce Farage would have retired, and said, oh well we had better accept the will-o-the-people? Nope, don't think so, and neither do you!
Governing a country on the basis of annoying your opponents (possibly to then play the race card if they suggest migration is too high) is not sensible.
- the voters voted to leave
- Parliament voted to leave
- Parliament can’t agree how to leave
- There a vote should be “leave with the only deal available” or “leave without a deal”
> Welcome to the Tory leadership candidate fashion show.
>
> https://twitter.com/iandunt/status/1127841221949501440?s=21
Is Liz Truss (?) on the loo with her trousers up? Not a great look either way for a political picture, but it maybe does suggest she is much like the rest of us, or not!
However, most people, including most Leavers, would've recognised and respected the democratic result. I wouldn't've been thrilled, but democracy means that sometimes you lose.
The media and political class would've been entirely cheerful and chanting about the importance of democracy and will of the people and, the fringe aside, that would've been that.
But the electorate voted the wrong way. The bastards.
Very kind of the politicians to offer them a chance to have another try, though.
> The reason the right and the left still really hate Blair is the same reason why the left hate Thatcher. They defeated and humiliated them. The greater the defeat, the greater the hate.
>
> Not only was New Labour better than this, any government was better than this.
>
Indeed. I used to loathe Blair, but I now look back on his governance and realise he was actually quite good. Brown was a different matter though, even if he did "save the world"!
The referendum was won by Leave.
Mrs May negotiated a soft Brexit with the EU. However a rebel bunch (fewer than a hundred). mostly Tories, voted against it because they wanted a harder Brexit.
A much bigger bunch of MPs (well over three hundred) voted against it because they wanted to Remain. And that's why they brought in the HoC to make the final decision.
In a final irony, one small group call themselves Democrats.
Now being a Leave voter and having a small brain, have I got this wrong?
> Mr. Rata, that's a reference to a quote from someone who worked for Blair/Labour at the time, indicating the increased migration rate was primarily embraced to annoy the right.
>
> Governing a country on the basis of annoying your opponents (possibly to then play the race card if they suggest migration is too high) is not sensible.
A unique aspect of the Blair years was that the right found themselves impotent and in opposition for more than a decade. As a result, a right-wing opposition protest politics developed in the UK for the first time. Brexit was born out of this movement. I don't think Blair can be blamed for it. Opposition was inevitable.
Divorcing the actual changes (even to the extent of Labour abandoning a manifesto commitment to a referendum) that occurred regarding the EU seems unwise when considering how and why the UK electorate's view of the EU evolved over that same period.
> Now lets look at what has happened.
>
> The referendum was won by Leave.
>
> Mrs May negotiated a soft Brexit with the EU. However a rebel bunch (fewer than a hundred). mostly Tories, voted against it because they wanted a harder Brexit.
>
> A much bigger bunch of MPs (well over three hundred) voted against it because they wanted to Remain. And that's why they brought in the HoC to make the final decision.
>
> In a final irony, one small group call themselves Democrats.
>
> Now being a Leave voter and having a small brain, have I got this wrong?
Yes, since the rebel bunch (ERG and DUP) - who all claimed to believe in Brexit - were all the votes needed to have delivered our exit by now.
> Mr. Foremain, I agree that Farage et al. would've continued.
>
> However, most people, including most Leavers, would've recognised and respected the democratic result. I wouldn't've been thrilled, but democracy means that sometimes you lose.
>
> The media and political class would've been entirely cheerful and chanting about the importance of democracy and will of the people and, the fringe aside, that would've been that.
>
> But the electorate voted the wrong way. The bastards.
>
> Very kind of the politicians to offer them a chance to have another try, though.
Mr Dancer, I think you are suffering form Brexit blindness, an affliction we perhaps all suffer from, though it affect leavers differently form remainers. For leavers it tends to be "haha, yaboo, we won, but we are still really angry and we want a much more aggressive form of Brexit than we originally said we wanted"
I think if Remain had got the same margin as Leave got most leavers, if not all, would not have respected it one bit. The Tory party would be pretty much exactly where it is today and the ERG, UKIP, Faragists etc. would be making government impossible with calls for another referendum. Speculation, I know, but reasonable speculation.
> Now lets look at what has happened.
>
> The referendum was won by Leave.
>
> Mrs May negotiated a soft Brexit with the EU. However a rebel bunch (fewer than a hundred). mostly Tories, voted against it because they wanted a harder Brexit.
>
> A much bigger bunch of MPs (well over three hundred) voted against it because they wanted to Remain. And that's why they brought in the HoC to make the final decision.
>
> In a final irony, one small group call themselves Democrats.
>
> Now being a Leave voter and having a small brain, have I got this wrong?
May's Deal is hard Brexit.
> Mr. Jonathan, whilst the prolonged opposition period for the right was a new thing, that does neglect the ongoing integration of the UK into the EU, against the wishes of the electorate.
>
> Divorcing the actual changes (even to the extent of Labour abandoning a manifesto commitment to a referendum) that occurred regarding the EU seems unwise when considering how and why the UK electorate's view of the EU evolved over that same period.
The electorate backed Blair three times.
That doesn't mean most Leavers wouldn't've respected the result. The political class as a whole certainly would have.
> > @Jonathan said:
> > The reason the right and the left still really hate Blair is the same reason why the left hate Thatcher. They defeated and humiliated them. The greater the defeat, the greater the hate.
> >
> > Not only was New Labour better than this, any government was better than this.
> >
>
> Indeed. I used to loathe Blair, but I now look back on his governance and realise he was actually quite good. Brown was a different matter though, even if he did "save the world"!
I hate the way Brown is misquoted, he actually said "not only did we save the world...". A bolder claim ;-)
> > @Morris_Dancer said:
> > Mr. Borough, the Blair era also saw seeds planted that would yield a bitter crop.
> >
> > Migration floodgates opened to deliberately rub the right's face in diversity.
>
> Good Lord! Diversity is something to rub one's face in, alongside all those other unpleasant things one might rub a face in, is it? I really do hope not, Mr. Dancer.
>
>
>
So how has Rotherham benefited from thousands of East European Roma migrating there ?
All the whole, EU-sceptical sentiment was rising in the aftermath of Blair throwing away half the rebate and Brown deciding to renege on a manifesto pledge.
> Now lets look at what has happened.
>
> The referendum was won by Leave.
>
> Mrs May negotiated a soft Brexit with the EU. However a rebel bunch (fewer than a hundred). mostly Tories, voted against it because they wanted a harder Brexit.
>
> A much bigger bunch of MPs (well over three hundred) voted against it because they wanted to Remain. And that's why they brought in the HoC to make the final decision.
>
> In a final irony, one small group call themselves Democrats.
>
> Now being a Leave voter and having a small brain, have I got this wrong?
I have no idea about the size of your brain. If this concerns you I suggest you ask your doctor for an MRI scan.
PS. People who argue for something different to 52% of the population and seek to change opinion does not make them undemocratic
>
> I think you might doubt it by reading the Labour manifesto for 2017. But more profoundly the left wing case in favour of a corporatist club putting up protectionist measures such as agricultural tariffs against poor African countries seems to me to be not made out. The huge centre left/left case against the EU as a cosy club of cronies is not being made very loudly. Where is Jeremy Corbyn when you need him?
Except the EU doesn't put up agricultural tariffs against poor African countries and introduced a policy of unilateral zero tariffs with all the poorest countries two decades ago.
> If we haven't left EU by Labour conference, then it will be a bloodbath.
>
>
In what way?
>
> I think if Remain had got the same margin as Leave got most leavers, if not all, would not have respected it one bit. The Tory party would be pretty much exactly where it is today and the ERG, UKIP, Faragists etc. would be making government impossible with calls for another referendum. Speculation, I know, but reasonable speculation.
--------
Exactly. We'd have heard endlessly about how more people voted Leave than voted for any political party, with people arguing that the scale of the Leave vote "in the face of the full force of the establishment" shows that the future is Brexit.
> > @rkrkrk said:
> > On the topic of European elections, just been contacted by a not-very-political family member suggesting I vote Lib Dems vs. Labour in S. East as they have a better chance against the Brexit party. Is that actually true?
>
> I think they both have a decent chance of getting 1, and need quite a heroic performance to get 2? So probably not.
>
> However if the goal is to back a Remain candidate you also need to look at whether the party supports Remain, which with the LDs is Yes and with Labour is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Thanks. My primary goal is to avoid a hard Brexit.
My fear is the lib dems and co. will get their second referendum, lose it and then I think the country is forced into a very damaging hard Brexit.
> Mr. Jonathan, the Conservatives were spark out for the first half of his tenure, and divided also in the third Labour term (with IDS being toppled). The electoral mountain was too large to climb, yet when Cameron came along he made a huge gain.
>
> All the whole, EU-sceptical sentiment was rising in the aftermath of Blair throwing away half the rebate and Brown deciding to renege on a manifesto pledge.
The seeds of Eurosceptism were sowed during Maastricht. But in the 2000s it was largely a minority pursuit.
> > @isam said:
>
>
>
> Can you show me one post of yours in the past where you've practively talked positively about BAME or women's rights? I'd be interested to see one, because you always seemed to stick up for UKIP's (ahem) somewhat antiquated views on such matters.
>
>
>
> (And I don't mean things like 'I talked to a Muslim once').
>
>
>
> I'd also argue that the Brexit Party is getting a very sympathetic hearing from the media at the moment. Farage is everywhere.
>
> I’m not really interested in getting into personal slanging matches, but the onus is on you to prove what you accuse me of, not vice versa.
Well, I'd take your past body of posts on here as fairly good evidence of my point.
> If we haven't left EU by Labour conference, then it will be a bloodbath.
>
>
We will certainly not have left the EU by September.
And there will be a concerted attempt to commit Labour to a second referendum but given that the party is about 80% of the way there already this is unlikely to provoke the kind of bloodbath we can expect from the Tories.
?
I specifically cited political acts that involved the UK/EU relationship and were not exactly popular with the electorate. What part of that implies revenge against New Labour?
> > @edmundintokyo said:
>
> > > @rkrkrk said:
>
> > > On the topic of European elections, just been contacted by a not-very-political family member suggesting I vote Lib Dems vs. Labour in S. East as they have a better chance against the Brexit party. Is that actually true?
>
> >
>
> > I think they both have a decent chance of getting 1, and need quite a heroic performance to get 2? So probably not.
>
> >
>
> > However if the goal is to back a Remain candidate you also need to look at whether the party supports Remain, which with the LDs is Yes and with Labour is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>
>
>
> Thanks. My primary goal is to avoid a hard Brexit.
>
> My fear is the lib dems and co. will get their second referendum, lose it and then I think the country is forced into a very damaging hard Brexit.
>
> That's a pretty unlikely sequence of events you're afraid of.
It's unlikely that there will be a second referendum.
But this is the bit that voting Lib Dem supports.
But I think a second referendum would be 50/50. And if Leave wins twice, then I think it's very likely we will have a hard Brexit.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48237126
> https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/1127803270104326144
>
>
>
> This look like a battle between the Lib Dems and the brexit party
>
> I could never vote for the Liberal Democrats
Now if only the Greens and LibDems could have got together, we'd have a race on our hands.
Lisbon involves removing vetoes and moving to QMV, which I've repeatedly argued against. Furthermore, we were promised a referendum, which wasn't held.
> > @edmundintokyo said:
>
> > > @rkrkrk said:
>
> > > On the topic of European elections, just been contacted by a not-very-political family member suggesting I vote Lib Dems vs. Labour in S. East as they have a better chance against the Brexit party. Is that actually true?
>
> >
>
> > I think they both have a decent chance of getting 1, and need quite a heroic performance to get 2? So probably not.
>
> >
>
> > However if the goal is to back a Remain candidate you also need to look at whether the party supports Remain, which with the LDs is Yes and with Labour is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>
>
>
> Thanks. My primary goal is to avoid a hard Brexit.
>
> My fear is the lib dems and co. will get their second referendum, lose it and then I think the country is forced into a very damaging hard Brexit.
>
> That's a pretty unlikely sequence of events you're afraid of.
Not really that unlikely, remain could even win the second referendum but find the Brexit party win the GE, with the remain vote split across many parties, and take us out on their terms.
A remainer campaigning for a referendum without being able to accept any form of brexit is taking far too a high risk imo, but I guess that depends how you view no deal vs Mays deal vs CU/SM options. For me no deal is the disaster and getting to 0% of no deal quickly should be the plan.
> > @edmundintokyo said:
> > > @rkrkrk said:
> > > On the topic of European elections, just been contacted by a not-very-political family member suggesting I vote Lib Dems vs. Labour in S. East as they have a better chance against the Brexit party. Is that actually true?
> >
> > I think they both have a decent chance of getting 1, and need quite a heroic performance to get 2? So probably not.
> >
> > However if the goal is to back a Remain candidate you also need to look at whether the party supports Remain, which with the LDs is Yes and with Labour is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>
> Thanks. My primary goal is to avoid a hard Brexit.
> My fear is the lib dems and co. will get their second referendum, lose it and then I think the country is forced into a very damaging hard Brexit.
Based on the local election results I'd suggest it's very likely that the LibDems will beat Labour in the South East region - which was your question - and hence be the better choice to reduce the Brexit Party's chances of getting more seats.
As to which outcome leads to which Brexit conclusion, who can say? I saw someone recently argue that the better the Brexit Party does, the less likely is Brexit. All we can do as voters is ensure that the viewpoint we wish to express is represented by the results of the election as best as possible.
> > @SouthamObserver said:
> > Looking at the polling, it seems that a lot of voters have decided they don’t support Jeremy Corbyn’s nostalgic, Bennite Socialist vision for the UK after all; or maybe millions backed Labour in 2017 to stop a Tory hard Brexit. Hmmmm.
>
> I think it's more that it's a Euro-election and people are aligning with either hard Remain or hard Brexit, at the expense of more pragmatic/moderate/evasive (take your pick) parties. I met quite a lot of people in the locals who said they'd be glad to vote Labour for those and for a GE, but for the Euros they wanted to send a Remain message.
>
> Anecdata: my long-standing friend who usually votes Tory (and once voted BNP in the Euros) is having doubts about Brexit and plans to vote Green on the basis that he likes the environment and they are anti-Brexit but "not as obsessive about it as the LibDems".
Yep. The current polls are another warning of the disastrous electoral consequences of centrism.
> https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1127843948150571008?s=20
A good line by Paul Mason. Corbyn and Co should pick it up and run with it. A much more impressive rallying cry for the euro election than sitting on the fence pandering to their own little englanders......
"We're an internationalist party at war with the forces of xenophobia"
The Conservatives are not, currently, able to leave with no deal, leave with a deal, or remain. They're becalmed, doing nothing.
The anti-Conservative sentiment is as much a frustrated electorate wanting them to just do something rather than wibbling in circles, I'd guess.
There has been a shifting of this particular Overton window in the last two years. No Deal used to be unimaginable and beyond any definition of ‘hard Brexit’.