> @isam said: > > No. The 2016 referendum was the public telling parliament we wanted to Leave. After that there was, and still is, no option but to Leave, and all MPs were obliged to do was vote through the PMs deal. >
There's a contradiction in saying "politicians shouldn't decide - the PM should decide". It's as if you see the referendum as a proxy presidential election for an all-powerful Brexit leader.
This is a joke, right? Rearrange these letters in a different order: GER.
Had they come on board we would be out of the EU by now. The group is not exactly chock full of "Remain MPs".
The maths says you should arrange these letters; ON
Had all the ERG voted down her Deal and every other MP voted for it we’d have left. Reverse that and we’d be where we are now
most wholly from Leavers.
Dominic Grieve stacked the deck so that MPs who wanted to stop Brexit happening had the casting vote on whether we leave or not.
Yes I agree with your point there. Had parliament not been asked to agree the deal it would have passed. But it was used for party political purposes by Labour. Was that Grieve's intention? Perhaps. But the fact remains that the Cons had the wherewithal, even with the DUP's position, to get this over the line and it was the Leavers who scuppered it.
We were told by the previous PM that the decision would be ours, not politicians. MPs having the power to vote down a deal that a PM had agreed goes against that 100%, and is the reason Farage seems to be doing well. They even had a GE afterwards where they promised to respect the result. I find it hard to see how Remain voters can shrug their shoulders at this really.
It comes down to the simple fact of whether MPs believe it is more important to leave whatever the damage or whether they think people should be "saved from themselves". And all this with a party political overlay obscuring the real motives of those not in government.
As a Remain voter, I can see merit in both positions. We voted to leave and we haven't left so something has gone badly wrong, yet at the same time the damage I believe would be caused by "just leaving" is something that no government could contemplate inflicting upon the country.
And hence we are where we are.
That would be almost acceptable if it weren’t for the defence of Labour MPs (elected on a pledge to implement the referendum result) voting against the deal being ‘but the ERG are too’, implying they’d have voted for it had the ERG done so.
> No. The 2016 referendum was the public telling parliament we wanted to Leave. After that there was, and still is, no option but to Leave, and all MPs were obliged to do was vote through the PMs deal.
>
There's a contradiction in saying "politicians shouldn't decide - the PM should decide". It's as if you see the referendum as a proxy presidential election for an all-powerful Brexit leader.
It’s not a contradiction, the only thing the public were asked was Leave or Remain. Then it was over to the PM to negotiate a deal with the EU, which she did. If that had have been that, and we left with her Deal, it would have been completely uncontroversial
> @isam said: > > It’s not a contradiction, the only thing the public were asked was Leave or Remain. Then it was over to the PM to negotiate a deal with the EU, which she did. If that had have been that, and we left with her Deal, it would have been completely uncontroversial
You’re dreaming. If May had approved her own deal by executive fiat you can just imagine what Brexiteers would be saying about it and her.
This is a joke, right? Rearrange these letters in a different order: GER.
Had they come on board we would be out of the EU by now. The group is not exactly chock full of "Remain MPs".
The maths says you should arrange these letters; ON
Had all the ERG voted down her Deal and every other MP voted for it we’d have left. Reverse that and we’d be where we are now
most wholly from Leavers.
Dominic Grieve stacked the deck so that MPs who wanted to stop Brexit happening had the casting vote on whether we leave or not.
Yes I agree with your point there. Had parliament not been asked to agree the deal it would have passed. But it was used for party political purposes by Labour. Was that Grieve's intention? Perhaps. But the fact remains that the Cons had the wherewithal, even with the DUP's position, to get this over the line and it was the Leavers who scuppered it.
We were told by the previous PM that ally.
It comes down to the simple fact of whether MPs believe it is more important to leave whatever the damage or whether they think people should be "saved from themselves". And all this with a party political overlay obscuring the real motives of those not in government.
As a Remain voter, I can see merit in both positions. We voted to leave and we haven't left so something has gone badly wrong, yet at the same time the damage I believe would be caused by "just leaving" is something that no government could contemplate inflicting upon the country.
And hence we are where we are.
That would be almost acceptable if it weren’t for the defence of Labour MPs (elected on a pledge to implement the referendum result) voting against the deal being ‘but the ERG are too’, implying they’d have voted for it had the ERG done so.
The ERG not supporting the deal gave Lab the cover to say that. And they were right - if the Cons couldn't even convince their own party why on earth should Lab provide support? That's not how politics works.
If the whole of the Cons Party, meanwhile, had said: "we are united for the national interest, although yes there are parts we don't agree with but this is for the greater good" then that would have put a huge amount of pressure on Lab to support the deal.
As it was the ERG gave Lab a get out of jail (or into No.10) card.
This is a joke, right? Rearrange these letters in a different order: GER.
Had they come on board we would be out of the EU by now. The group is not exactly chock full of "Remain MPs".
The maths says you should arrange these letters; ON
Had all the ERG voted down her Deal and every other MP voted for it we’d have left. Reverse that and we’d be where we are now
most wholly from Leavers.
Dominic Grieve stacked the deck so that MPs who wanted to stop Brexit happening had the casting vote on whether we leave or not.
Yes I agree with your point there. Had parliament not been asked to agree the deal it would have passed. But it was used for party political purposes by Labour. Was that Grieve's intention? Perhaps. But the fact remains that the Cons had the wherewithal, even with the DUP's position, to get this over the line and it was the Leavers who scuppered it.
We were told by the previous PM that ally.
It comes down to the simple fact of whether MPs believe it is more important to leave whatever the damage or whether they think people should be "saved from themselves". And all this with a party political overlay obscuring the real motives of those not in government.
As a Remain voter, I can see merit in both positions. We voted to leave and we haven't left so something has gone badly wrong, yet at the same time the damage I believe would be caused by "just leaving" is something that no government could contemplate inflicting upon the country.
And hence we are where we are.
That would be almost acceptable if it weren’t for the defence of Labour MPs (elected on a pledge to implement the referendum result) voting against the deal being ‘but the ERG are too’, implying they’d have voted for it had the ERG done so.
The ERG not supporting the deal gave Lab the cover to say that. And they were right - if the Cons couldn't even convince their own party why on earth should Lab provide support? That's not how politics works.
If the whole of the Cons Party, meanwhile, had said: "we are united for the national interest, although yes there are parts we don't agree with but this is for the greater good" then that would have put a huge amount of pressure on Lab to support the deal.
As it was the ERG gave Lab a get out of jail (or into No.10) card.
> It’s not a contradiction, the only thing the public were asked was Leave or Remain. Then it was over to the PM to negotiate a deal with the EU, which she did. If that had have been that, and we left with her Deal, it would have been completely uncontroversial
You’re dreaming. If May had approved her own deal by executive fiat you can just imagine what Brexiteers would be saying about it and her.
Who cares what they’d be saying? They’re saying it now anyway
You make it sound as if May wasnt one of those Remainers.
So we had a government entrusted to enact a policy and within that government's own ranks there was dissent, and that dissent, to begin with, was almost wholly from Leavers.
Dominic Grieve stacked the deck so that MPs who wanted to stop Brexit happening had the casting vote on whether we leave or not.
Yes I agree with your point there. Had parliament not been asked to agree the deal it would have passed. But it was used for party political purposes by Labour. Was that Grieve's intention? Perhaps. But the fact remains that the Cons had the wherewithal, even with the DUP's position, to get this over the line and it was the Leavers who scuppered it.
We were told by the previous PM that the decision would be ours, not politicians. MPs having the power to vote down a deal that a PM had agreed goes against that 100%, and is the reason Farage seems to be doing well. They even had a GE afterwards where they promised to respect the result. I find it hard to see how Remain voters can shrug their shoulders at this really.
The WA takes us out of the EU. It implements the referendum result. And yet it has been Leavers above all who have been shrieking that it doesn’t. On what basis it is hard to say. Those opposed to the WA on the Leave side seem to think both that the EU should give everything Britain wants and that Britain should have nothing to do with the EU at all.
They are saying now the complete opposite of what they said during the referendum.
They are liars. Liars who had no plan and who blame everyone except themselves when they have to confront reality. They are liars who are willing to cause great harm to this country and the most vulnerable people in it.
It is their behaviour which has turned people like me, really quite sympathetic to the critics of the EU, concerned about its long-term trajectory and wondering how Britain could happily fit in with it, into convinced Remainers - or rejoiners, if necessary - because I have seen the ugly untrue myth which the the No Deal Leavers are busily creating and fear the ugly future which their behaviour is creating and enabling.
Old Jellyfish Spine prepares the ground for a PM Boris accommodation.
'David Mundell hits out at SNP 'demonising' of Boris Johnson who has thrown his hat in ring for Tory leadership
...At the same conference, Mr Mundell claimed Mr Johnson was “not an asset” to the party in Scotland and accused him of being "focused on his own self-interest and not on the interests of our country" after he attacked the PM’s Brexit plan. Yet The Herald has been told that the Scottish Secretary has not ruled himself out of serving in a Johnson Cabinet.'
Seems Johnson has his leadership election video ready, must be popular, has had 117,000 views already. His use of words that obviously I don't understand just shows his Pa's money wasn't wasted at Eton and Oxford...
> @isam said: > You make it sound as if May wasnt one of those Remainers. > > The truth is that Remain MPs pretended to accept the loss in order to get re elected in 2017, since when they have refused to vote for anything that involves us leaving, while many agitate to ignore it reverse the referendum altogether. If you were an ordinary member of the public who voted Leave, how have you been listened to would you say? > > > This is a joke, right? Rearrange these letters in a different order: GER. > > Had they come on board we would be out of the EU by now. The group is not exactly chock full of "Remain MPs". > > The maths says you should arrange these letters; ON > > Had all the ERG voted down her Deal and every other MP voted for it we’d have left. Reverse that and we’d be where we are now > > I think we can take the Labour Party out of the equation as they are mostly remainers true but they are the opposition and it was fanciful, given as @AlastairMeeks and many others on here have pointed out, the gross errors of judgement by May at the outset to think they would support her. Plus it's not their job to do so - that is the political system we are in and not to recognise that is I think naive. > > So we had a government entrusted to enact a policy and within that government's own ranks there was dissent, and that dissent, to begin with, was almost wholly from Leavers. > > Dominic Grieve stacked the deck so that MPs who wanted to stop Brexit happening had the casting vote on whether we leave or not. > > Yes I agree with your point there. Had parliament not been asked to agree the deal it would have passed. But it was used for party political purposes by Labour. Was that Grieve's intention? Perhaps. But the fact remains that the Cons had the wherewithal, even with the DUP's position, to get this over the line and it was the Leavers who scuppered it. > > We were told by the previous PM that the decision would be ours, not politicians. MPs having the power to vote down a deal that a PM had agreed goes against that 100%, and is the reason Farage seems to be doing well. They even had a GE afterwards where they promised to respect the result. I find it hard to see how Remain voters can shrug their shoulders at this really.
I don't know how many times this needs explained, but many Remain voters were disappointed about the result but wanted to move on and find consensus. But they were faced with a hostile media and government who treated their legitimate concerns about the *way* we left as remoaning or, worse, treachery. That radicalised some remainers.
==You can't expect people who are systematically marginalised to compromise cheerfully.==
The sensible compromise out forward early on by the SNP was the canary in this poison-filled mine.
Politics should be about finding consensus, and those who treat it like a knockout tournament create huge damage.
You make it sound as if May wasnt one of those Remainers.
So we had a government entrusted to enact a policy and within that government's own ranks there was dissent, and that dissent, to begin with, was almost wholly from Leavers.
Dominic Grieve stacked the deck so that MPs who wanted to stop Brexit happening had the casting vote on whether we leave or not.
Yes I agree with your point there. Had parliament not been asked to agree the deal it would have passed. But it was used for party political purposes by Labour. Was that Grieve's intention? Perhaps. But the fact remains that the Cons had the wherewithal, even with the DUP's position, to get this over the line and it was the Leavers who scuppered it.
We were told by the previous PM that the decision would be ours, not politicians. MPs having the power to vote down a deal that a PM had agreed goes against that 100%, and is the reason Farage seems to be doing well. They even had a GE afterwards where they promised to respect the result. I find it hard to see how Remain voters can shrug their shoulders at this really.
The WA takes us out of the EU. It implements the referendum result. And yet it has been Leavers above all who have been shrieking that it doesn’t. On what basis it is hard to say. Those opposed to the WA on the Leave side seem to think both that the EU should give everything Britain wants and that Britain should have nothing to do with the EU at all.
They are saying now the complete opposite of what they said during the referendum.
They are liars. Liars who had no plan and who blame everyone except themselves when they have to confront reality. They are liars who are willing to cause great harm to this country and the most vulnerable people in it.
It is their behaviour which has turned people like me, really quite sympathetic to the critics of the EU, concerned about its long-term trajectory and wondering how Britain could happily fit in with it, into convinced Remainers - or rejoiners, if necessary - because I have seen the ugly untrue myth which the the No Deal Leavers are busily creating and fear the ugly future which their behaviour is creating and enabling.
Why let the behaviour of people you consider extremists obstruct you from doing what you pledged to because it was morally correct?
So what? No one is doubting that there is a solid 30-40% of people who are super-vexed about this. Doesn't change the facts on the ground.
Why not just agree the PMs deal and try to calm things down? Is it better to have the 30-40% of people who felt left behind and isolated, angry as well?
> @isam said: > Hence > > > > > So what? No one is doubting that there is a solid 30-40% of people who are super-vexed about this. Doesn't change the facts on the ground. > > Why not just agree the PMs deal and try to calm things down? Is it better to have the 30-40% of people who felt left behind and isolated, angry as well?
Thought I would repost this which got lost in the change of thread on Wednesday evening:
Interesting developments at the Guildford BC meeting tonight where a new Leader was elected.
After the recent elections, the new composition was LD 17 R4GV 15 CON 9 GGG 4 LAB 2 GRN 1
I believe the Conservatives offered their services as kingmakers to both the LDs and the R4GV/GGG group of local Independents. The LDs and R4GV also met but no deal was done and the two groups each put their leader up to be Council leader tonight.
The LD leader won 23-19 with 4 abstentions - the numbers are a bit confusing. It has been reported 5 Conservatives and the 2 Labour members supported the LD while the other four Conservatives (including the Mayor) abstained. I suspect the Green voted with the R4GV/GGG group.
So we have a minority LD administration it seems but the Conservative Group split down the middle as to whether it should be supported.
The Deputy Leadership post has also gone to the LDs. The Corporate Standards & Governance Committee has split 2 LD, 2 R4GV, 1 CON, 1 GGG and 1 LAB.
Waverley, another Surrey Council where the Conservatives lost overall control, holds its AGM next Tuesday. Reports of "constructive" meetings between Farnham Residents, LDs and the Conservatives. I can't see a tripartite administration however.
So what? No one is doubting that there is a solid 30-40% of people who are super-vexed about this. Doesn't change the facts on the ground.
Why not just agree the PMs deal and try to calm things down? Is it better to have the 30-40% of people who felt left behind and isolated, angry as well?
Don't look at me I was, am and will be a supporter of her deal. It is, to bring this back to the beginning, the ERG that are the problem. Although of course now their activities have so shot through the authority of TMay that anyone and everyone has decided they can do what they want.
And without resorting/descending to insult, once it has been explained to those 30-40% that her deal is in fact leaving, then I'm sure the rump angry mob will be in the tens of thousands at best.
> @isam said: > So what? No one is doubting that there is a solid 30-40% of people who are super-vexed about this. Doesn't change the facts on the ground.
>
> Why not just agree the PMs deal and try to calm things down? Is it better to have the 30-40% of people who felt left behind and isolated, angry as well?
Agreeing the PMs deal would not calm things down.
Have to completely disagree there. It would all be over
So what? No one is doubting that there is a solid 30-40% of people who are super-vexed about this. Doesn't change the facts on the ground.
Why not just agree the PMs deal and try to calm things down? Is it better to have the 30-40% of people who felt left behind and isolated, angry as well?
Don't look at me I was, am and will be a supporter of her deal. It is, to bring this back to the beginning, the ERG that are the problem. Although of course now their activities have so shot through the authority of TMay that anyone and everyone has decided they can do what they want.
And without resorting/descending to insult, once it has been explained to those 30-40% that her deal is in fact leaving, then I'm sure the rump angry mob will be in the tens of thousands at best.
I’m not asking whether you agree the deal, I mean MPs!
I agree that had MPs agreed it, we would be getting on with other things now. What I can’t understand is why people choose to blame one set of MPs for not voting for it and let others off the hook.
So what? No one is doubting that there is a solid 30-40% of people who are super-vexed about this. Doesn't change the facts on the ground.
Why not just agree the PMs deal and try to calm things down? Is it better to have the 30-40% of people who felt left behind and isolated, angry as well?
Don't look at me I was, am and will be a supporter of her deal. It is, to bring this back to the beginning, the ERG that are the problem. Although of course now their activities have so shot through the authority of TMay that anyone and everyone has decided they can do what they want.
And without resorting/descending to insult, once it has been explained to those 30-40% that her deal is in fact leaving, then I'm sure the rump angry mob will be in the tens of thousands at best.
I’m not asking whether you agree the deal, I mean MPs!
I agree that had MPs agreed it, we would be getting on with other things now. What I can’t understand is why people choose to blame one set of MPs for not voting for it and let others off the hook.
Because one set of MPs is the government and in charge. It is, meanwhile, the opposition's job description and obligation to oppose the government.
So what? No one is doubting that there is a solid 30-40% of people who are super-vexed about this. Doesn't change the facts on the ground.
Why not just agree the PMs deal and try to calm things down? Is it better to have the 30-40% of people who felt left behind and isolated, angry as well?
Don't look at me I was, am and will be a supporter of her deal. It is, to bring this back to the beginning, the ERG that are the problem. Although of course now their activities have so shot through the authority of TMay that anyone and everyone has decided they can do what they want.
And without resorting/descending to insult, once it has been explained to those 30-40% that her deal is in fact leaving, then I'm sure the rump angry mob will be in the tens of thousands at best.
I’m not asking whether you agree the deal, I mean MPs!
I agree that had MPs agreed it, we would be getting on with other things now. What I can’t understand is why people choose to blame one set of MPs for not voting for it and let others off the hook.
Because one set of MPs is the government and in charge.
2 rumours from 2 well(ish) connected friends. 1) Nigel Farage would be up to supporting BoJo, and may be willing to wind down TBP for him if he wins. What quid pro quo might be involved, if any, who knows. 2) Some of the CringeUK MPs, having found the political wilderness distressing, want to go back to Labour. Whether JC will forgive their sins is another question...
> @John_McLean said: > Seems Johnson has his leadership election video ready, must be popular, has had 117,000 views already. His use of words that obviously I don't understand just shows his Pa's money wasn't wasted at Eton and Oxford... > > https://twitter.com/i/status/1129045200129671168
People have constantly told me that the Green Party doesn't incentivise the main parties to care about the environment, because that is our USP and no one can outdo us on it. Will this have the same effect on "No Deal"? Or will Tories just jump on it to try and get them all back?
You make it sound as if May wasnt one of those Remainers.
The WA takes us out of the EU. It implements the referendum result. And yet it has been Leavers above all who have been shrieking that it doesn’t. On what basis it is hard to say. Those opposed to the WA on the Leave side seem to think both that the EU should give everything Britain wants and that Britain should have nothing to do with the EU at all.
They are liars. Liars who had no plan and who blame everyone except themselves when they have to confront reality. They are liars who are willing to cause great harm to this country and the most vulnerable people in it.
It is their behaviour which has turned people like me, really quite sympathetic to the critics of the EU, concerned about its long-term trajectory and wondering how Britain could happily fit in with it, into convinced Remainers - or rejoiners, if necessary - because I have seen the ugly untrue myth which the the No Deal Leavers are busily creating and fear the ugly future which their behaviour is creating and enabling.
Why let the behaviour of people you consider extremists obstruct you from doing what you pledged to because it was morally correct?
Why have Leaver MPs not done that which they pledged to do?
It is not morally correct to do something which you think will harm the people you represent and your country.
The only substantive reason for doing Brexit now being advanced by those in favour of it is because this was voted for. This is to put process above substance. There is no merit in continuing to pursue a harmful course.
And the Brexit being put forward by the No Dealers is harmful. They don’t deny it. They glory in it. They claim that it will not be as bad as WW2. Was that the claim in 2016? Or on the side of a bus?
They are willing to inflict pain on others.
It is not the basis on which they won. And yet they now have the nerve to claim that it is they who are being democratic. No.
Let’s see them spell out in detail exactly what No Deal means in practice - with specifics. How they would enable Britain to do the things it has been doing under the 700 international agreements it will fall out of if it leaves without a Deal, for instance. Let’s have a vote about their precise proposals and let’s see if that is what the people want now.
Politicians who are willing to inflict harm on people are not behaving morally.
You make it sound as if May wasnt one of those Remainers.
Why let the behaviour of people you consider extremists obstruct you from doing what you pledged to because it was morally correct?
Why have Leaver MPs not done that which they pledged to do?
It is not morally correct to do something which you think will harm the people you represent and your country.
The only substantive reason for doing Brexit now being advanced by those in favour of it is because this was voted for. This is to put process above substance. There is no merit in continuing to pursue a harmful course.
And the Brexit being put forward by the No Dealers is harmful. They don’t deny it. They glory in it. They claim that it will not be as bad as WW2. Was that the claim in 2016? Pr on the side of a bus?
They are willing to inflict pain on others.
It is not the basis on which they won. And yet they now have the nerve to claim that it is they who are being democratic. No.
Let’s see them spell out in detail exactly what No Deal means in practice - with specifics. How they would enable Britain to do the things it has been doing under the 700 international agreements it will fall out of if it leaves without a Deal, for instance. Let’s have a vote about their precise proposals and let’s see if that is what the people want now.
Politicians who are willing to inflict harm on people are not behaving morally.
So getting elected on a pledge to honour the result, then voting against it at every opportunity is ok so long as people you consider extremists are doing it as well?
It doesn’t matter what No dealers wanted, if the people voted in to pass the Brexit deal had voted to do so, we’d have left and the ERG would be marginalised
If an ERGer said put your head in the oven would they do it too?
So what? No one is doubting that there is a solid 30-40% of people who are super-vexed about this. Doesn't change the facts on the ground.
Why not just agree the PMs deal and try to calm things down? Is it better to have the 30-40% of people who felt left behind and isolated, angry as well?
Don't look at me I was, am and will be a supporter of her deal. It is, to bring this back to the beginning, the ERG that are the problem. Although of course now their activities have so shot through the authority of TMay that anyone and everyone has decided they can do what they want.
And without resorting/descending to insult, once it has been explained to those 30-40% that her deal is in fact leaving, then I'm sure the rump angry mob will be in the tens of thousands at best.
I’m not asking whether you agree the deal, I mean MPs!
I agree that had MPs agreed it, we would be getting on with other things now. What I can’t understand is why people choose to blame one set of MPs for not voting for it and let others off the hook.
Because one set of MPs is the government and in charge.
It isn’t a party political issue
It's always a party political issue. My Lab Brexit is better than your Cons Brexit/your Brexit is putting the country at risk/we wouldn't have started from here/we wouldn't have done it like that.
Everyone (including small children although they couldn't vote) understands how this works and understood it as they walked to the ballot box in 2016 and 2017.
After GE 2017 a lot of people who like to analyse opinion polls were praising YouGov to the skies for their innovative and accurate new system. But on the Euro Elections, not so, I hear no talk of Gold Standard. Is it the same system?
Their regular polling, which is exactly what the Euro polling is, was a decent bit out, one of the poorer pollsters in that regard.
They separately did a special constituency by constituency model which called places like Canterbury and Kensington for Labour which was pretty damn accurate clearly.
I got a ChUK leaflet! We've had Brexit, LibDem, Green and now ChUK. Still waiting for Tory and Labour….
My wife has had a directly addressed LibDem leaflet. I have not.
Same here. It's been suggested the LibDems are "deduping" the lists to get maximum bang per buck, i.e. printing/sending leaflets just to one member of the household.
> @148grss said: > 2 rumours from 2 well(ish) connected friends. 1) Nigel Farage would be up to supporting BoJo, and may be willing to wind down TBP for him if he wins. What quid pro quo might be involved, if any, who knows. 2) Some of the CringeUK MPs, having found the political wilderness distressing, want to go back to Labour. Whether JC will forgive their sins is another question...
That's interesting. I was thinking about this the other day. Why would someone vote for the Tory Party led by Boris when they can vote for Nigel Farage's Brexit Party? I appreciate FPTP is difficult for as new party to overcome, but if I were Nigel, I'd show Boris and the Tories no mercy.
> @tlg86 said: > > @148grss said: > > 2 rumours from 2 well(ish) connected friends. 1) Nigel Farage would be up to supporting BoJo, and may be willing to wind down TBP for him if he wins. What quid pro quo might be involved, if any, who knows. 2) Some of the CringeUK MPs, having found the political wilderness distressing, want to go back to Labour. Whether JC will forgive their sins is another question... > > That's interesting. I was thinking about this the other day. Why would someone vote for the Tory Party led by Boris when they can vote for Nigel Farage's Brexit Party? I appreciate FPTP is difficult for as new party to overcome, but if I were Nigel, I'd show Boris and the Tories no mercy.
I don't think Boris has the stones to actually leave the EU without a deal. It'll be May redux in about a year's time with the Tories probably in an even bigger crisis than they are now.
> @stodge said: > Morning all > > Thought I would repost this which got lost in the change of thread on Wednesday evening: > > Interesting developments at the Guildford BC meeting tonight where a new Leader was elected. > > After the recent elections, the new composition was LD 17 R4GV 15 CON 9 GGG 4 LAB 2 GRN 1 > > I believe the Conservatives offered their services as kingmakers to both the LDs and the R4GV/GGG group of local Independents. The LDs and R4GV also met but no deal was done and the two groups each put their leader up to be Council leader tonight. > > The LD leader won 23-19 with 4 abstentions - the numbers are a bit confusing. It has been reported 5 Conservatives and the 2 Labour members supported the LD while the other four Conservatives (including the Mayor) abstained. I suspect the Green voted with the R4GV/GGG group. > > So we have a minority LD administration it seems but the Conservative Group split down the middle as to whether it should be supported. > > The Deputy Leadership post has also gone to the LDs. The Corporate Standards & Governance Committee has split 2 LD, 2 R4GV, 1 CON, 1 GGG and 1 LAB. > > Waverley, another Surrey Council where the Conservatives lost overall control, holds its AGM next Tuesday. Reports of "constructive" meetings between Farnham Residents, LDs and the Conservatives. I can't see a tripartite administration however.
Are you local to Guildford Stodge?
Yes the Green supported the Independents and the Tories voted 5 for the LD and 3 abstained.
Although I am a liberal I am not happy with this. I have no inside knowledge as to what happened in the discussions so it may have been inevitable, but the result of the election was clearly against the shenanigans of the Conservative Executive, so it is not good to have another established party taking control, particularly with the support of the previous Conservative leader of the council. I think the LDs should have done a deal with the Indies and if they couldn't manage that then let the Indies take the council.
You make it sound as if May wasnt one of those Remainers.
Why let the behaviour of people you consider extremists obstruct you from doing what you pledged to because it was morally correct?
Why have Leaver MPs not done that which they pledged to do?
It is not morally correct to do something which you think will harm the people you represent and your country.
The only substantive reason for doing Brexit now being advanced by those in favour of it is because this was voted for. This is to put process above substance. There is no merit in continuing to pursue a harmful course.
And the Brexit being put forward by the No Dealers is harmful. They don’t deny it. They glory in it. They claim that it will not be as bad as WW2. Was that the claim in 2016? Pr on the side of a bus?
They are willing to inflict pain on others.
It is not the basis on which they won. And yet they now have the nerve to claim that it is they who are being democratic. No.
Let’s see them spell out in detail exactly what No Deal means in practice - with specifics. How they would enable Britain to do the things it has been doing under the 700 international agreements it will fall out of if it leaves without a Deal, for instance. Let’s have a vote about their precise proposals and let’s see if that is what the people want now.
Politicians who are willing to inflict harm on people are not behaving morally.
So getting elected on a pledge to honour the result, then voting against it at every opportunity is ok so long as people you consider extremists are doing it as well?
It doesn’t matter what No dealers wanted, if the people voted in to pass the Brexit deal had voted to do so, we’d have left and the ERG would be marginalised
If an ERGer said put your head in the oven would they do it too?
The leave MPS are the ones who have refused to support a deal enacting the result. If they won’t support it, there is no good reason why those who think that leaving is wrong should do their dirty work for them.
Leavers’ behaviour has driven me into the Remain camp. They have done the same in Parliament. Leavers need to take responsibility for their actions, something they seem wholly unwilling to do.
I don't think Boris has the stones to actually leave the EU without a deal. It'll be May redux in about a year's time with the Tories probably in an even bigger crisis than they are now.
I agree. Once in the hot seat I doubt there is a PM that would countenance leaving without a deal.
You make it sound as if May wasnt one of those Remainers.
Why let the behaviour of people you consider extremists obstruct you from doing what you pledged to because it was morally correct?
Why have Leaver MPs not done that which they pledged to do?
It is not morally correct to do something which you think will harm the people you represent and your country.
The only substantive reason for doing Brexit now being advanced by those in favour of it is because this was voted for. This is to put process above substance. There is no merit in continuing to pursue a harmful course.
And the Brexit being put forward by the No Dealers is harmful. They don’t deny it. They glory in it. They claim that it will not be as bad as WW2. Was that the claim in 2016? Pr on the side of a bus?
Politicians who are willing to inflict harm on people are not behaving morally.
So getting elected on a pledge to honour the result, then voting against it at every opportunity is ok so long as people you consider extremists are doing it as well?
It doesn’t matter what No dealers wanted, if the people voted in to pass the Brexit deal had voted to do so, we’d have left and the ERG would be marginalised
If an ERGer said put your head in the oven would they do it too?
The leave MPS are the ones who have refused to support a deal enacting the result. If they won’t support it, there is no good reason why those who think that leaving is wrong should do their dirty work for them.
Leavers’ behaviour has driven me into the Remain camp. They have done the same in Parliament. Leavers need to take responsibility for their actions, something they seem wholly unwilling to do.
No, Remain MPs who promised to enact the result, but haven’t, can’t blame their behaviour on the ERG. It’s like saying there should be no control on immigration at all because Nick Griffin wanted to deport non white people.
So what? No one is doubting that there is a solid 30-40% of people who are super-vexed about this. Doesn't change the facts on the ground.
Why not just agree the PMs deal and try to calm things down? Is it better to have the 30-40% of people who felt left behind and isolated, angry as well?
Don't look at me I was, am and will be a supporter of her deal. It is, to bring this back to the beginning, the ERG that are the problem. Although of course now their activities have so shot through the authority of TMay that anyone and everyone has decided they can do what they want.
And without resorting/descending to insult, once it has been explained to those 30-40% that her deal is in fact leaving, then I'm sure the rump angry mob will be in the tens of thousands at best.
I’m not asking whether you agree the deal, I mean MPs!
I agree that had MPs agreed it, we would be getting on with other things now. What I can’t understand is why people choose to blame one set of MPs for not voting for it and let others off the hook.
Because one set of MPs is the government and in charge.
It isn’t a party political issue
It's always a party political issue. My Lab Brexit is better than your Cons Brexit/your Brexit is putting the country at risk/we wouldn't have started from here/we wouldn't have done it like that.
Everyone (including small children although they couldn't vote) understands how this works and understood it as they walked to the ballot box in 2016 and 2017.
Does anyone think many Conservative MPs would be lining up behind a Brexit deal if it was the other way around with Conservative members screaming at them that the deal is betrayal and polling showing it unpopular in the country?
Only one single Conservative MP voted for the Labour Brexit plan when the chance arose because it was Labour's Brexit plan. One of the reactions on here was that MP should be deselected, although that wasn't repeated when it was revealed to be Ken Clarke.
> @El_Capitano said: > I got a ChUK leaflet! We've had Brexit, LibDem, Green and now ChUK. Still waiting for Tory and Labour…. > > My wife has had a directly addressed LibDem leaflet. I have not. > > Same here. It's been suggested the LibDems are "deduping" the lists to get maximum bang per buck, i.e. printing/sending leaflets just to one member of the household.
That is a common technique to maximise the impact of the freepost. It is likely that the leaflet will be different.
I don't think Boris has the stones to actually leave the EU without a deal. It'll be May redux in about a year's time with the Tories probably in an even bigger crisis than they are now.
Any seasoned Boris observer must know that a deft pivot to Remain & Reform will be a distinct possibility if he does somehow manage to become PM.
> @MikeSmithson said: > > @El_Capitano said: > > I got a ChUK leaflet! We've had Brexit, LibDem, Green and now ChUK. Still waiting for Tory and Labour…. > > > > My wife has had a directly addressed LibDem leaflet. I have not. > > > > Same here. It's been suggested the LibDems are "deduping" the lists to get maximum bang per buck, i.e. printing/sending leaflets just to one member of the household. > > That is a common technique to maximise the impact of the freepost. It is likely that the leaflet will be different.
Children got the same leaflet on the same day, My wife got a different leaflet a week or so later. Mine still outstanding.
After GE 2017 a lot of people who like to analyse opinion polls were praising YouGov to the skies for their innovative and accurate new system. But on the Euro Elections, not so, I hear no talk of Gold Standard. Is it the same system?
I don't know the answer to your question. But a brief response may help.
YouGov use an online panel: a self-selecting group of people who respind to questions via an app on their phone or other means. They try to make it representative by actively recruiting nonpolitical types and by weighting (both approaches have their limit). They usually treat this panel as a sample and draw conclusions about voting intentions as if it was a sample. A few years ago they realised that they could use other methods on this panel. On of them is MRP, which uses the known characteristics of panel members (age, sex, location, jobtype) toestimate the vote in each constituency and hence who will win those constituencies.
So the first approach works like an opinion poll, the second more like a model. But the output from both is in the same format: labour get x% of the vote, con gets y%, and so on.
To know which is which you have to either read the release or looked at the published document: it will say in the small print the approach it used.
So I can't tell you which one is which, but I have pointed out how you can find out. Does that help?
Comments
>
> No. The 2016 referendum was the public telling parliament we wanted to Leave. After that there was, and still is, no option but to Leave, and all MPs were obliged to do was vote through the PMs deal.
>
There's a contradiction in saying "politicians shouldn't decide - the PM should decide". It's as if you see the referendum as a proxy presidential election for an all-powerful Brexit leader.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/05/17/metro-bank-raises-375m-discounted-share-placing/
Is that his plan?
Naught else. And I've now voted by post anyway.
> I got a ChUK leaflet! We've had Brexit, LibDem, Green and now ChUK. Still waiting for Tory and Labour….
I've had Lab and [NO] Change UK so nfar.
>
> It’s not a contradiction, the only thing the public were asked was Leave or Remain. Then it was over to the PM to negotiate a deal with the EU, which she did. If that had have been that, and we left with her Deal, it would have been completely uncontroversial
You’re dreaming. If May had approved her own deal by executive fiat you can just imagine what Brexiteers would be saying about it and her.
If the whole of the Cons Party, meanwhile, had said: "we are united for the national interest, although yes there are parts we don't agree with but this is for the greater good" then that would have put a huge amount of pressure on Lab to support the deal.
As it was the ERG gave Lab a get out of jail (or into No.10) card.
> https://twitter.com/yougov/status/1129284575216242688?s=21
That's really striking.
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1129300143113678848
Who cares what they’d be saying? They’re saying it now anyway
They are saying now the complete opposite of what they said during the referendum.
They are liars. Liars who had no plan and who blame everyone except themselves when they have to confront reality. They are liars who are willing to cause great harm to this country and the most vulnerable people in it.
It is their behaviour which has turned people like me, really quite sympathetic to the critics of the EU, concerned about its long-term trajectory and wondering how Britain could happily fit in with it, into convinced Remainers - or rejoiners, if necessary - because I have seen the ugly untrue myth which the the No Deal Leavers are busily creating and fear the ugly future which their behaviour is creating and enabling.
'David Mundell hits out at SNP 'demonising' of Boris Johnson who has thrown his hat in ring for Tory leadership
...At the same conference, Mr Mundell claimed Mr Johnson was “not an asset” to the party in Scotland and accused him of being "focused on his own self-interest and not on the interests of our country" after he attacked the PM’s Brexit plan.
Yet The Herald has been told that the Scottish Secretary has not ruled himself out of serving in a Johnson Cabinet.'
https://tinyurl.com/y4p33zwk
What an appalling mess she (and Cameron) have made (with plenty of help from Jezza). I find it hard to see how this will be undone now.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1129045200129671168
> You make it sound as if May wasnt one of those Remainers.
>
> The truth is that Remain MPs pretended to accept the loss in order to get re elected in 2017, since when they have refused to vote for anything that involves us leaving, while many agitate to ignore it reverse the referendum altogether. If you were an ordinary member of the public who voted Leave, how have you been listened to would you say?
>
>
> This is a joke, right? Rearrange these letters in a different order: GER.
>
> Had they come on board we would be out of the EU by now. The group is not exactly chock full of "Remain MPs".
>
> The maths says you should arrange these letters; ON
>
> Had all the ERG voted down her Deal and every other MP voted for it we’d have left. Reverse that and we’d be where we are now
>
> I think we can take the Labour Party out of the equation as they are mostly remainers true but they are the opposition and it was fanciful, given as @AlastairMeeks and many others on here have pointed out, the gross errors of judgement by May at the outset to think they would support her. Plus it's not their job to do so - that is the political system we are in and not to recognise that is I think naive.
>
> So we had a government entrusted to enact a policy and within that government's own ranks there was dissent, and that dissent, to begin with, was almost wholly from Leavers.
>
> Dominic Grieve stacked the deck so that MPs who wanted to stop Brexit happening had the casting vote on whether we leave or not.
>
> Yes I agree with your point there. Had parliament not been asked to agree the deal it would have passed. But it was used for party political purposes by Labour. Was that Grieve's intention? Perhaps. But the fact remains that the Cons had the wherewithal, even with the DUP's position, to get this over the line and it was the Leavers who scuppered it.
>
> We were told by the previous PM that the decision would be ours, not politicians. MPs having the power to vote down a deal that a PM had agreed goes against that 100%, and is the reason Farage seems to be doing well. They even had a GE afterwards where they promised to respect the result. I find it hard to see how Remain voters can shrug their shoulders at this really.
I don't know how many times this needs explained, but many Remain voters were disappointed about the result but wanted to move on and find consensus. But they were faced with a hostile media and government who treated their legitimate concerns about the *way* we left as remoaning or, worse, treachery.
That radicalised some remainers.
==You can't expect people who are systematically marginalised to compromise cheerfully.==
The sensible compromise out forward early on by the SNP was the canary in this poison-filled mine.
Politics should be about finding consensus, and those who treat it like a knockout tournament create huge damage.
> Hence
>
>
>
>
> So what? No one is doubting that there is a solid 30-40% of people who are super-vexed about this. Doesn't change the facts on the ground.
>
> Why not just agree the PMs deal and try to calm things down? Is it better to have the 30-40% of people who felt left behind and isolated, angry as well?
Agreeing the PMs deal would not calm things down.
Thought I would repost this which got lost in the change of thread on Wednesday evening:
Interesting developments at the Guildford BC meeting tonight where a new Leader was elected.
After the recent elections, the new composition was LD 17 R4GV 15 CON 9 GGG 4 LAB 2 GRN 1
I believe the Conservatives offered their services as kingmakers to both the LDs and the R4GV/GGG group of local Independents. The LDs and R4GV also met but no deal was done and the two groups each put their leader up to be Council leader tonight.
The LD leader won 23-19 with 4 abstentions - the numbers are a bit confusing. It has been reported 5 Conservatives and the 2 Labour members supported the LD while the other four Conservatives (including the Mayor) abstained. I suspect the Green voted with the R4GV/GGG group.
So we have a minority LD administration it seems but the Conservative Group split down the middle as to whether it should be supported.
The Deputy Leadership post has also gone to the LDs. The Corporate Standards & Governance Committee has split 2 LD, 2 R4GV, 1 CON, 1 GGG and 1 LAB.
Waverley, another Surrey Council where the Conservatives lost overall control, holds its AGM next Tuesday. Reports of "constructive" meetings between Farnham Residents, LDs and the Conservatives. I can't see a tripartite administration however.
And without resorting/descending to insult, once it has been explained to those 30-40% that her deal is in fact leaving, then I'm sure the rump angry mob will be in the tens of thousands at best.
However if there’s an issue with the sample it can get magnified . I think it’s likely the BP will poll over 30% .
It’s what happens to the rest that seems the biggest issue between the pollsters .
I agree that had MPs agreed it, we would be getting on with other things now. What I can’t understand is why people choose to blame one set of MPs for not voting for it and let others off the hook.
> Seems Johnson has his leadership election video ready, must be popular, has had 117,000 views already. His use of words that obviously I don't understand just shows his Pa's money wasn't wasted at Eton and Oxford...
>
> https://twitter.com/i/status/1129045200129671168
gosh
that is cutting satire.
Surprised they wouldn't prefer to jump to the Lib Dems, frankly.
> https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1129284570229202944
People have constantly told me that the Green Party doesn't incentivise the main parties to care about the environment, because that is our USP and no one can outdo us on it. Will this have the same effect on "No Deal"? Or will Tories just jump on it to try and get them all back?
It is not morally correct to do something which you think will harm the people you represent and your country.
The only substantive reason for doing Brexit now being advanced by those in favour of it is because this was voted for. This is to put process above substance. There is no merit in continuing to pursue a harmful course.
And the Brexit being put forward by the No Dealers is harmful. They don’t deny it. They glory in it. They claim that it will not be as bad as WW2. Was that the claim in 2016? Or on the side of a bus?
They are willing to inflict pain on others.
It is not the basis on which they won. And yet they now have the nerve to claim that it is they who are being democratic. No.
Let’s see them spell out in detail exactly what No Deal means in practice - with specifics. How they would enable Britain to do the things it has been doing under the 700 international agreements it will fall out of if it leaves without a Deal, for instance. Let’s have a vote about their precise proposals and let’s see if that is what the people want now.
Politicians who are willing to inflict harm on people are not behaving morally.
It doesn’t matter what No dealers wanted, if the people voted in to pass the Brexit deal had voted to do so, we’d have left and the ERG would be marginalised
If an ERGer said put your head in the oven would they do it too?
Everyone (including small children although they couldn't vote) understands how this works and understood it as they walked to the ballot box in 2016 and 2017.
They separately did a special constituency by constituency model which called places like Canterbury and Kensington for Labour which was pretty damn accurate clearly.
> 2 rumours from 2 well(ish) connected friends. 1) Nigel Farage would be up to supporting BoJo, and may be willing to wind down TBP for him if he wins. What quid pro quo might be involved, if any, who knows. 2) Some of the CringeUK MPs, having found the political wilderness distressing, want to go back to Labour. Whether JC will forgive their sins is another question...
That's interesting. I was thinking about this the other day. Why would someone vote for the Tory Party led by Boris when they can vote for Nigel Farage's Brexit Party? I appreciate FPTP is difficult for as new party to overcome, but if I were Nigel, I'd show Boris and the Tories no mercy.
> > @148grss said:
> > 2 rumours from 2 well(ish) connected friends. 1) Nigel Farage would be up to supporting BoJo, and may be willing to wind down TBP for him if he wins. What quid pro quo might be involved, if any, who knows. 2) Some of the CringeUK MPs, having found the political wilderness distressing, want to go back to Labour. Whether JC will forgive their sins is another question...
>
> That's interesting. I was thinking about this the other day. Why would someone vote for the Tory Party led by Boris when they can vote for Nigel Farage's Brexit Party? I appreciate FPTP is difficult for as new party to overcome, but if I were Nigel, I'd show Boris and the Tories no mercy.
I don't think Boris has the stones to actually leave the EU without a deal. It'll be May redux in about a year's time with the Tories probably in an even bigger crisis than they are now.
> Morning all
>
> Thought I would repost this which got lost in the change of thread on Wednesday evening:
>
> Interesting developments at the Guildford BC meeting tonight where a new Leader was elected.
>
> After the recent elections, the new composition was LD 17 R4GV 15 CON 9 GGG 4 LAB 2 GRN 1
>
> I believe the Conservatives offered their services as kingmakers to both the LDs and the R4GV/GGG group of local Independents. The LDs and R4GV also met but no deal was done and the two groups each put their leader up to be Council leader tonight.
>
> The LD leader won 23-19 with 4 abstentions - the numbers are a bit confusing. It has been reported 5 Conservatives and the 2 Labour members supported the LD while the other four Conservatives (including the Mayor) abstained. I suspect the Green voted with the R4GV/GGG group.
>
> So we have a minority LD administration it seems but the Conservative Group split down the middle as to whether it should be supported.
>
> The Deputy Leadership post has also gone to the LDs. The Corporate Standards & Governance Committee has split 2 LD, 2 R4GV, 1 CON, 1 GGG and 1 LAB.
>
> Waverley, another Surrey Council where the Conservatives lost overall control, holds its AGM next Tuesday. Reports of "constructive" meetings between Farnham Residents, LDs and the Conservatives. I can't see a tripartite administration however.
Are you local to Guildford Stodge?
Yes the Green supported the Independents and the Tories voted 5 for the LD and 3 abstained.
Although I am a liberal I am not happy with this. I have no inside knowledge as to what happened in the discussions so it may have been inevitable, but the result of the election was clearly against the shenanigans of the Conservative Executive, so it is not good to have another established party taking control, particularly with the support of the previous Conservative leader of the council. I think the LDs should have done a deal with the Indies and if they couldn't manage that then let the Indies take the council.
Leavers’ behaviour has driven me into the Remain camp. They have done the same in Parliament. Leavers need to take responsibility for their actions, something they seem wholly unwilling to do.
> https://twitter.com/JoeMurphyLondon/status/1129314090403475456
I'm actually more surprised she was up for blocking it
Only one single Conservative MP voted for the Labour Brexit plan when the chance arose because it was Labour's Brexit plan. One of the reactions on here was that MP should be deselected, although that wasn't repeated when it was revealed to be Ken Clarke.
> I got a ChUK leaflet! We've had Brexit, LibDem, Green and now ChUK. Still waiting for Tory and Labour….
>
> My wife has had a directly addressed LibDem leaflet. I have not.
>
> Same here. It's been suggested the LibDems are "deduping" the lists to get maximum bang per buck, i.e. printing/sending leaflets just to one member of the household.
That is a common technique to maximise the impact of the freepost. It is likely that the leaflet will be different.
> > @El_Capitano said:
> > I got a ChUK leaflet! We've had Brexit, LibDem, Green and now ChUK. Still waiting for Tory and Labour….
> >
> > My wife has had a directly addressed LibDem leaflet. I have not.
> >
> > Same here. It's been suggested the LibDems are "deduping" the lists to get maximum bang per buck, i.e. printing/sending leaflets just to one member of the household.
>
> That is a common technique to maximise the impact of the freepost. It is likely that the leaflet will be different.
Children got the same leaflet on the same day, My wife got a different leaflet a week or so later. Mine still outstanding.
YouGov use an online panel: a self-selecting group of people who respind to questions via an app on their phone or other means. They try to make it representative by actively recruiting nonpolitical types and by weighting (both approaches have their limit). They usually treat this panel as a sample and draw conclusions about voting intentions as if it was a sample. A few years ago they realised that they could use other methods on this panel. On of them is MRP, which uses the known characteristics of panel members (age, sex, location, jobtype) toestimate the vote in each constituency and hence who will win those constituencies.
So the first approach works like an opinion poll, the second more like a model. But the output from both is in the same format: labour get x% of the vote, con gets y%, and so on.
To know which is which you have to either read the release or looked at the published document: it will say in the small print the approach it used.
So I can't tell you which one is which, but I have pointed out how you can find out. Does that help?