Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Food for thought for would-be defectors to the Brexit Party
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Food for thought for would-be defectors to the Brexit Party
Mike Greene, the Brexit Party candidate for the Peterborough by-election, reportedly met Nigel Farage for the first time the night before he was unveiled as the new party’s representative. You have to hope that he does better due diligence on the companies he invests in.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The sensible thing to do when asked by an authority for information or a visit is to be pleasant and co-operative not behave like a cry-baby and assume that what is happening to you is motivated by malice.
Obviously, you ensure that the authority is acting within its powers but, assuming that it is, complaining about it doing what it is there to do, is defensive and curious, for a party so keen on speaking truth to power. Allegedly.
It does rather give the impression that transparency and openness are for others and not for Nigel's vehicle.
Oh - and good post, Alastair. I expect you will be showered with bouquets by the usual suspects.
* Although the woman who actually set it up resigned from it eight weeks later and has since been airbrushed out of the history.
It's spelt Führerprinzip.
[And fixating on Farage is a mistake...].
> On the other hand, for would-be defectors the issue is a bit more complex. Do they throw in their lot with Farage - accepting, as Alastair points out, that the price is unconditional submission to his will - or do they try to mould the Conservative Party into something positioned in much the same place as the Brexit Party? It's hard to see how there can be room for two competing parties in the same space.
-----------
Farage clearly thinks there's a gap for the right to do a variant of the Republicans' Southern strategy in Britain, but perhaps the Tory brand is too toxic to pull it off, in which case his party makes sense.
the fall of the value of the pound after the referendum vote has made the products that British Steel sells more expensive
Err...
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/may/21/brexit-latest-news-developments-cabinet-to-discuss-latest-brexit-offer-to-mps-as-ministers-feud-in-public-over-no-deal-live-news
> Why is TBP so worried about scrutiny? (Re the Electoral Commission's visit.)
>
> The sensible thing to do when asked by an authority for information or a visit is to be pleasant and co-operative not behave like a cry-baby and assume that what is happening to you is motivated by malice.
>
> Obviously, you ensure that the authority is acting within its powers but, assuming that it is, complaining about it doing what it is there to do, is defensive and curious, for a party so keen on speaking truth to power. Allegedly.
>
> It does rather give the impression that transparency and openness are for others and not for Nigel's vehicle.
>
> Oh - and good post, Alastair. I expect you will be showered with bouquets by the usual suspects.
I'm fairly sure Farage's outrage is entirely synthetic; what could fit his narrative better than the chance to claim that the dark anti democratic forces of the deep state are trying to sabotage his plan to stand up for the little guy?
> Just an aside, but if Remain had spent less time wibbling about Farage and more focusing on arguments that weren't apocalyptic, they would've won.
Just an aside, but if Leave had spent more time focusing on arguments that were realistic, they wouldn't have won.
However, I would take issue with this:
<I>For it is not a party, but a company controlled by Nigel Farage. He appoints the board. There are no members. Those registered supporters are the fools who are easily parted from their money – they get nothing for it.</I>
Firstly, while the Brexit Party might be registered as a company, it is also a political party. It is registered with the Electoral Commission and is a machine for promoting a political policy (or presumably, in time, set of policies) and for electing individuals to office: that is what a Party is.
And also, we're in danger of looking at party membership too transactionally i.e. what does the member get for their cash. I don't think this the right way to do so. People join or register as supporters or activists or whatever because they believe in what the party (or Farage, if you prefer) stands for. They don't expect to get anything back other than the chance to implement a political platform they agree with.
In any case, the Brexit party must develop some kind of localism simply because Farage cannot do everything himself. He might retain power to overrule anything but come next year's local elections, local members (for want of a better term) will no doubt decide who stands where.
However, at a national level, Alastair's points are right: those who do have to interact with Farage because of the nature of their roles will find that it's his way or the highway.
This isn't entirely without risk to Farage: he cannot regard every MP who defects as expendable or else he destroys his party's credibility. Nonetheless, that's to get a long way ahead of ourselves: they don't have any MPs yet and Brexit might well occur as soon as October.
Presumably, Farage has decided on that authoritarian model based in part on his experiences of leading UKIP's ragbag army, and on the unhappy experiences of his successors in that role. When you build a movement based on appealing to the discontented, it does make some sense to minimise the opportunity for them to express discontent internally.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1130840204703686658
And if Remain had done a better job taking its focus from Farage and making the arguments (and countering those you say were unrealistic on the other side), likewise.
I did offer this sort of advice at the time, regarding the 'back of the queue' (some were too busy tittering with glee) and 'Nigel Farage's Little England' comments (apparently I was wrong to be annoyed). Still, ignore it if you like. Focus on Farage. Lose again, and then be annoyed. Again.
> Oh dear Alastair?
>
> Oh, deary, deary me.
>
> Never mind it will soon all be over, and the nasty man will leave establishment sychophants alone to get back to normal. Well at least until the 6th June.
It is precisely because, if the polls are to be believed, Farage is not going to disappear that it is important for him and his record to be put under scrutiny.
If he really wants to be a politician and revolutionise us all, he would welcome such scrutiny not view it as some form of lese majeste.
The fact that his reaction and that of his supporters is to attack those wishing to scrutinise him and to shout "conspiracy" and "victim" is in itself telling - and not in a flattering way.
> Why is TBP so worried about scrutiny? (Re the Electoral Commission's visit.)
>
> The sensible thing to do when asked by an authority for information or a visit is to be pleasant and co-operative not behave like a cry-baby and assume that what is happening to you is motivated by malice.
>
> Obviously, you ensure that the authority is acting within its powers but, assuming that it is, complaining about it doing what it is there to do, is defensive and curious, for a party so keen on speaking truth to power. Allegedly.
>
> It does rather give the impression that transparency and openness are for others and not for Nigel's vehicle.
>
> By loudly complaining about it the stakes are raised. If the Electoral Commision had wanted to damage them just before the election by pulling them up for some minor error, by publicly screaming bias Farage ensures they’ll only act if they have something really juicy otherwise it won’t be worth the obvious Comey comparisons.
Any competent regulator would know exactly how to deal with that. I have my doubts about the competence of this particular regulator. So you may be right in your analysis.
Nonetheless, even if it is ignored for now and some time to come, these are signs of an approach to politics which is, at a minimum, antipathetic to the sort of scrutiny which should be the hallmark of an open democratic country and of the political parties within it. They are worrying signs, to my mind, and just because people won't listen to them now does not mean that those raising the concerns are wrong to do so.
> > @radsatser said:
> > Oh dear Alastair?
> >
> > Oh, deary, deary me.
> >
> > Never mind it will soon all be over, and the nasty man will leave establishment sychophants alone to get back to normal. Well at least until the 6th June.
>
> It is precisely because, if the polls are to be believed, Farage is not going to disappear that it is important for him and his record to be put under scrutiny.
>
> If he really wants to be a politician and revolutionise us all, he would welcome such scrutiny not view it as some form of lese majeste.
>
> The fact that his reaction and that of his supporters is to attack those wishing to scrutinise him and to shout "conspiracy" and "victim" is in itself telling - and not in a flattering way.
When people talk about Farage I think of Berlusconi. Lots of people hated him, they tried to stop him, and they (mostly) failed. Being flawed and having more ego than most of us doesn't disbar him from success.
The central intellectual problem for Heffer and Johnson was how to reconcile their avowed unionism and hatred of Europe with support for the most pro-European prime minister since Heath. Blair and Campbell did their best to solve it for them by invoking the Führerprinzip. Tony Blair's famous comment at Prime Minister's Questions — 'I lead my party. He follows his' — was aimed just as much at the Thatcherite right as at the Labour party
https://www.questia.com/magazine/1P3-45215941/alastair-campbell-s-tory-poodles
> This thread - excellent as always - is correct but misses an important point. The purpose of Nigel Farage is not to run the country - heaven forbid - but to be the catalyst by which ordinary people can rediscover a bit of a voice in matters after far too long in which popular opinion has been taken for granted. He has never got very close to being elected to parliament because people won't put him there. And as things stand they certainly won't put his party anywhere near power. But people do value his unique, Mr Toad like, contribution to public life and keep electing him as a means of saying something important but without granting him personal power.
+1
> > @brokenwheel said:
>
> > Why is TBP so worried about scrutiny? (Re the Electoral Commission's visit.)
>
> >
>
> > The sensible thing to do when asked by an authority for information or a visit is to be pleasant and co-operative not behave like a cry-baby and assume that what is happening to you is motivated by malice.
>
> >
>
> > Obviously, you ensure that the authority is acting within its powers but, assuming that it is, complaining about it doing what it is there to do, is defensive and curious, for a party so keen on speaking truth to power. Allegedly.
>
> >
>
> > It does rather give the impression that transparency and openness are for others and not for Nigel's vehicle.
>
> >
>
> > By loudly complaining about it the stakes are raised. If the Electoral Commision had wanted to damage them just before the election by pulling them up for some minor error, by publicly screaming bias Farage ensures they’ll only act if they have something really juicy otherwise it won’t be worth the obvious Comey comparisons.
>
>
>
> Any competent regulator would know exactly how to deal with that. I have my doubts about the competence of this particular regulator. So you may be right in your analysis.
>
>
>
> Nonetheless, even if it is ignored for now and some time to come, these are signs of an approach to politics which is, at a minimum, antipathetic to the sort of scrutiny which should be the hallmark of an open democratic country and of the political parties within it. They are worrying signs, to my mind, and just because people won't listen to them now does not mean that those raising the concerns are wrong to do so.
>
> No problem with scrutiny. My problem is when scrutiny is seemingly only applied to one side. Where are the investigations over Labour’s PayPal button, or the People’s Vote, or the Led by Donkeys apparent disregard for spending limits?
I don't know why the EC isn't investigating them. They should. But as I said I have not been particularly impressed with the EC's record.
You may not have a problem with scrutiny. But TBP seems to. Saying in response to scrutiny "Why aren't you going after the other guy?" is pathetic.
> Was anyone on here seriously considering signing up to the Brexit party?
No.
Not for a moment.
> This thread - excellent as always - is correct but misses an important point. The purpose of Nigel Farage is not to run the country - heaven forbid - but to be the catalyst by which ordinary people can rediscover a bit of a voice in matters after far too long in which popular opinion has been taken for granted. He has never got very close to being elected to parliament because people won't put him there. And as things stand they certainly won't put his party anywhere near power. But people do value his unique, Mr Toad like, contribution to public life and keep electing him as a means of saying something important but without granting him personal power.
"The purpose of Nigel Farage is not to run the country". Are you sure about that?
> > @Morris_Dancer said:
> > Just an aside, but if Remain had spent less time wibbling about Farage and more focusing on arguments that weren't apocalyptic, they would've won.
>
> Just an aside, but if Leave had spent more time focusing on arguments that were realistic, they wouldn't have won.
>
If you want to win at something, it's probably better to focus on what you are doing, rather than on what you think the other side should or should not be doing.
“FAAAARRRRAAAAAGGGGGE!” 😡 😡😡
https://youtu.be/t4zYlOU7Fpk
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-48348512
> > @Cyclefree said:
> > > @radsatser said:
> > > Oh dear Alastair?
> > >
> > > Oh, deary, deary me.
> > >
> > > Never mind it will soon all be over, and the nasty man will leave establishment sychophants alone to get back to normal. Well at least until the 6th June.
> >
> > It is precisely because, if the polls are to be believed, Farage is not going to disappear that it is important for him and his record to be put under scrutiny.
> >
> > If he really wants to be a politician and revolutionise us all, he would welcome such scrutiny not view it as some form of lese majeste.
> >
> > The fact that his reaction and that of his supporters is to attack those wishing to scrutinise him and to shout "conspiracy" and "victim" is in itself telling - and not in a flattering way.
>
> When people talk about Farage I think of Berlusconi. Lots of people hated him, they tried to stop him, and they (mostly) failed. Being flawed and having more ego than most of us doesn't disbar him from success.
Berlusconi was much more admired in Italy than people outside Italy realised. That's why he was successful; that - and the total collapse of the Christian Democrats and the Socialists. But even though he got power Berlusconi mostly failed. His time in office was wasted time for Italy. One reason, in fact, why Italy has now turned to the likes of the 5-Star Movement and La Lega.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125575094
> > @Morris_Dancer said:
> > Just an aside, but if Remain had spent less time wibbling about Farage and more focusing on arguments that weren't apocalyptic, they would've won.
>
> Just an aside, but if Leave had spent more time focusing on arguments that were realistic, they wouldn't have won.
>
If Leave had spent a bit more time coming up with a workable plan for leaving we wouldn't be where we are now.
> Nigel Farage is more likely to be the next prime minister than Jacob Rees-Mogg according to Betfair Exchange punters.
>
>
>
> https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125575094
>
> It won't be either !
That feels like a "struck by lightning"/"winning a lottery jackpot" comparison
> Nigel Farage is more likely to be the next prime minister than Jacob Rees-Mogg according to Betfair Exchange punters.
>
>
>
> https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125575094
>
> It won't be either !
True.
> Nigel Farage is more likely to be the next prime minister than Jacob Rees-Mogg according to Betfair Exchange punters.
>
>
>
> https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125575094
>
> It won't be either !
Agreed. And thankfully. Neither man inspires confidence in terms of high office.
The Corbyn price looks like very good insurance to me - who knows what will happen in the next few weeks?
>
> Ah, if only the civil service weren’t banned from preparing for it.
It's been three years since the vote with the whole energy of the state dedicated to it. When do you think preparations should have started to make a difference?
> https://twitter.com/rowenamason/status/1130847608010752001
She's a prisoner of the Brexiteers, almost feel sorry for her.
And the first phase of that plan has been carried out via the WA; the second phase (the actual leaving and negotiating a trade deal bit) will follow.
And the result will be staying as close to the EU and its structures as possible and within its regulatory ambit.
Only dolts such as Steve Baker and Mark Francois, and who knows some PB Leavers on here thought it would be within a 100 miles of no deal.
> > @RobD said:
> >
> > Ah, if only the civil service weren’t banned from preparing for it.
>
> It's been three years since the vote with the whole energy of the state dedicated to it. When do you think preparations should have started to make a difference?
Maybe we'd be six months closer to Brexit by now, i.e. already out.
> > @Pulpstar said:
> > Nigel Farage is more likely to be the next prime minister than Jacob Rees-Mogg according to Betfair Exchange punters.
> >
> >
> >
> > https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125575094
> >
> > It won't be either !
>
> That feels like a "struck by lightning"/"winning a lottery jackpot" comparison
Given May is ~ 1.02 to go this year, that means the odds for the field should be around 50-1 combined {Given May clings on till 2022}.
If Nigel is 1000.0 then that's a 5% chance he'll get in based on May clinging on. That's too high still. He's a lay at any price (Biggest red in my book right now)
https://twitter.com/ashcowburn/status/1130835325159391236
> > @RobD said:
>
> > > @brokenwheel said:
>
> > > By loudly complaining about it the stakes are raised. If the Electoral Commision had wanted to damage them just before the election by pulling them up for some minor error, by publicly screaming bias Farage ensures they’ll only act if they have something really juicy otherwise it won’t be worth the obvious Comey comparisons.
> > Any competent regulator would know exactly how to deal with that. I have my doubts about the competence of this particular regulator. So you may be right in your analysis.
> > Nonetheless, even if it is ignored for now and some time to come, these are signs of an approach to politics which is, at a minimum, antipathetic to the sort of scrutiny which should be the hallmark of an open democratic country and of the political parties within it. They are worrying signs, to my mind, and just because people won't listen to them now does not mean that those raising the concerns are wrong to do so.
> > No problem with scrutiny. My problem is when scrutiny is seemingly only applied to one side. Where are the investigations over Labour’s PayPal button, or the People’s Vote, or the Led by Donkeys apparent disregard for spending limits?
>
> I don't know why the EC isn't investigating them. They should. But as I said I have not been particularly impressed with the EC's record.
>
> You may not have a problem with scrutiny. But TBP seems to. Saying in response to scrutiny "Why aren't you going after the other guy?" is pathetic.
>
> Is it, especially when the claims are about as tenuous as those levelled against TBP. Why are they focusing on this set of claims and not the other?
Yes, it is pathetic. You are deflecting. When an authority asks you for information you concentrate on responding fully and properly. When it is over and there is nothing wrong, you breathe a sigh of relief and get on with what you are there to do.
If on the other hand casting aspersions on everyone else's motives, making it look like you're the victim, attacking others is what you're about, then it makes sense. That is the criticism to be made of Farage: that he is good at attacking others and saying what he is against but when asked to come up with actual practical solutions that can be implemented he is a failure. Or rather the point of him is to sow discontent rather than try and resolve problems.
I have a particular contempt for people who do that. It is always very easy to point out what's wrong. It is easy to destroy. Trying to come up with solutions is much much harder - but infinitely more worthwhile.
But none of that is the point.
It seems to me that the popular plan for having a voice includes voting for Mr Farage's lot on two conditions: one that they are clearly distanced from anything that smacks of extremism of any sort (violence, fascism and all that) and secondly that Farage and his lot don't actually get a sniff of running the country but that that remains in the hands of the broadly competent, like moderate Tories and moderate Labour.
The most worrying thing is that by chance both those excellent groups who have now run a decent and sane country - which all PBs absolutely love otherwise they would stop being interested - for nigh on 100 years between them have gone awol. Suppose Farage looked the most competent show in town? Now, that would be a worry. But it would not be his fault.
> > @RobD said:
> > > @RobD said:
> >
> > > > @brokenwheel said:
> >
>
> > > > By loudly complaining about it the stakes are raised. If the Electoral Commision had wanted to damage them just before the election by pulling them up for some minor error, by publicly screaming bias Farage ensures they’ll only act if they have something really juicy otherwise it won’t be worth the obvious Comey comparisons.
>
> > > Any competent regulator would know exactly how to deal with that. I have my doubts about the competence of this particular regulator. So you may be right in your analysis.
>
> > > Nonetheless, even if it is ignored for now and some time to come, these are signs of an approach to politics which is, at a minimum, antipathetic to the sort of scrutiny which should be the hallmark of an open democratic country and of the political parties within it. They are worrying signs, to my mind, and just because people won't listen to them now does not mean that those raising the concerns are wrong to do so.
>
> > > No problem with scrutiny. My problem is when scrutiny is seemingly only applied to one side. Where are the investigations over Labour’s PayPal button, or the People’s Vote, or the Led by Donkeys apparent disregard for spending limits?
> >
>
> > I don't know why the EC isn't investigating them. They should. But as I said I have not been particularly impressed with the EC's record.
> >
> > You may not have a problem with scrutiny. But TBP seems to. Saying in response to scrutiny "Why aren't you going after the other guy?" is pathetic.
> >
> > Is it, especially when the claims are about as tenuous as those levelled against TBP. Why are they focusing on this set of claims and not the other?
>
> Yes, it is pathetic. You are deflecting. When an authority asks you for information you concentrate on responding fully and properly. When it is over and there is nothing wrong, you breathe a sigh of relief and get on with what you are there to do.
>
> If on the other hand casting aspersions on everyone else's motives, making it look like you're the victim, attacking others is what you're about, then it makes sense. That is the criticism to be made of Farage: that he is good at attacking others and saying what he is against but when asked to come up with actual practical solutions that can be implemented he is a failure. Or rather the point of him is to sow discontent rather than try and resolve problems.
>
> I have a particular contempt for people who do that. It is always very easy to point out what's wrong. It is easy to destroy. Trying to come up with solutions is much much harder - but infinitely more worthwhile.
>
>
Is there any suggestion that TBP have not responded fully and properly?
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1130849932326256641
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1130849934716985346
> Looks like Oakeshott has deleted her tweet. Nevertheless good to see the electoral commission checking proper procedure has been followed and well done to the Brexit party for coming through with a clean bill of health.
https://twitter.com/IsabelOakeshott/status/1130844101807493121
> I don't know why the EC isn't investigating them. They should. But as I said I have not been particularly impressed with the EC's record.
>
> You may not have a problem with scrutiny. But TBP seems to. Saying in response to scrutiny "Why aren't you going after the other guy?" is pathetic.
Wrong; the absolutely fundamental principle underlying the rule of law, is that the law applies and is enforced exactly equally for all parties. Selective prosecution is discrimination and is illegal; do you regard it as "pathetic" when people of colour rightly complain that stop and search laws are applied disproportionately against them?
> > @Pulpstar said:
> > Looks like Oakeshott has deleted her tweet. Nevertheless good to see the electoral commission checking proper procedure has been followed and well done to the Brexit party for coming through with a clean bill of health.
>
> https://twitter.com/IsabelOakeshott/status/1130844101807493121
She has not.
I planned each charted course
Each careful step along the byway
And more, much more than this
I did it my way
Yes, there were times, I'm sure you knew
When I bit off more than I could chew
But through it all, when there was doubt
I ate it up and spit it out
I faced it all and I stood tall
And did it my way
twitter.com IsabelOakeshott status 1130842699471441920
twitter.com IsabelOakeshott status 1130844101807493121
https://news.sky.com/story/full-of-remainers-nigel-farage-slams-electoral-commission-as-it-looks-into-brexit-party-funding-11725530
> @ExiledInScotland She deleted the original tweet and reposted a slightly amended version (See @Scott_P post downthread)
What did she change?
However, Conservative MPs until now have still not acted against a party leader who has done exactly the same on Brexit for the last 3 years while throwing in a healthy dollop of added duplicity to boot. Farage indeed fell out with an extraordinarily large number of key figures in his party, and May has also fallen out with and lost an extraordinarily large number of Cabinet colleagues. So at the moment it is the parallels between Farage and the current Conservative Party that are striking.
Nothing has changed.
> Is she talking directly to (those in) the gods?
Does seem strange
Good elision!
> > @Harris_Tweed said:
> > > @Pulpstar said:
> > > Nigel Farage is more likely to be the next prime minister than Jacob Rees-Mogg according to Betfair Exchange punters.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125575094
> > >
> > > It won't be either !
> >
> > That feels like a "struck by lightning"/"winning a lottery jackpot" comparison
>
> Given May is ~ 1.02 to go this year, that means the odds for the field should be around 50-1 combined {Given May clings on till 2022}.
> If Nigel is 1000.0 then that's a 5% chance he'll get in based on May clinging on. That's too high still. He's a lay at any price (Biggest red in my book right now)
I agree. There's a >0 chance that Con/Lab screw it up so badly that he reaches a tipping point of votes which overcomes the FPTP against new/small/evenly-spread parties. But it ain't all that much >0.
(And even that would probably require a significant majority of all Leavers to vote for him, which seems unlikely given many favour far softer forms of Brexit)
> https://twitter.com/rowenamason/status/1130847608010752001
Having to back down to Chris Grayling requires a level of crapness previously unknown to humankind.
haha and the whole of the UK committed to the customs union if the backstop is triggered!
> Legal obligation to "seek" alternative arrangements to the backstop.
>
> haha and the whole of the UK committed to the customs union if the backstop is triggered!
That sounds pretty meaningless.
Now THAT is what I call kicking it into the long grass.
Weak weak weak.
> That sounds pretty meaningless.
>
> Not at all it was the only possible option. The whole of the UK will stay in the "customs arrangement".
Oh, I mean the first bit - a legal obligation to seek alternatives.
> > @Scott_P said:
> > https://twitter.com/rowenamason/status/1130847608010752001
>
> Having to back down to Chris Grayling requires a level of crapness previously unknown to humankind.
Those who were thinking a humiliating result in the Euros might cause her to go before the WA vote.....backing down to Chris Grayling should cause her to go by tea-time....
Nevertheless, the choice to make the Brexit Party a limited company rather than a political party bothers me greatly. It's not unreasonable to expect that those putting themselves up for election subject themselves to public scrutiny. Being a private company shields the Brexit Party from that scrutiny. They can, for example, take loans from anyone. The ownership and can control be hidden from view.
I'm not sure that's healthy.
The common ground she's aiming for just doesn't seem to be there, however hard she searches for it.