> @Richard_Nabavi said: > Richard – you are a serious analyst and know the Tory Party inside out. Can you please explain Boris' strategy to me? My sense is his early position makes it much harder for him to make the ballot, and even more difficult to negotiate with the EU. If he doesn't make the ballot, his popularity in the party is irrelevant. Am I missing something? > > I wouldn't claim to know the party inside out - David Herdson or JohnO know much more than me about it - but FWIW I think your point is correct. However, Boris might be calculating that he has so much momentum that he will make it to the final two anyway, and that the most important thing is to maximise his support amongst members (who unfortunately have largely swallowed the naive line that no deal would be harmless). <
+++++
Do you think Boris is simply lying? i.e. he knows his plan ultimately won't work, but he's doing it now to look hard and Brexity, win the leadership, and to get Farage off his back. He might then call a GE, win it, and "change his mind".
> > > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still?
> > >
> > > Although, has the turnout massively favoured Remain?
> > >
> > > Where turnout is up 4% or more there are more Leave areas
> >
> > That's a completely artificial metric to use. Why 4%? Why treat "Leave" areas the same whether they were 51% Leave or 65% Leave? No sensible statistician would use that approach.
> >
> > The obvious, statistically proper measure is to correlate change in turnout (2019 minus 2014) with 2016 Brexit vote. There you get a reasonably strong (r2=0.44), statistically robust (p<0.001) negative correlation - that is a very clear, reasonably strong (but not massive) picture where turnout change is higher in more Remain areas.
>
> But how much that will effect the outcome depends on the relative frequency of leave/remain areas, which I think is isam's point?
I don't think that's a sensible approach as there is little commonality between an area that voted 50.1% Leave and one which voted 70% leave. Higher turnout in the latter area is fairly plainly good for the Brexit Party. Higher turnout in the latter isn't - it's more or less a wash (and of course could be driven by higher turnout from the 49.9%).
You lose all statistical power if you reduce it (completely unnecessarily) to a categorical "Brexit or Remain" measure. Anyone sensible wants to get the full range - does a 70% Brexit area have a higher or lower turnout change than a 55% Brexit one? How does that compare with 55% remain, or 70% Remain?
Almost all the points on that graph are between 40-50% either way, and there are many more on the Leave side than the Remain. Sorry you seem to be so uptight about it, I was looking at it on my phone while sitting over the fishing lake not in NASA's control centre
> @Nigel_Foremain said: > > @Foxy said: > > > @FF43 said: > > > > @ah009 said: > > > > > > > Farage might not be a fascist. He's certainly friends with some. That leads one to think his views overlap with theirs to some extent. > > > > That's too close for my liking. I think it's fair to call him a fascist sympathiser. And I don't want the man anywhere near any levers of power. > > > > > > ___________________ > > > > > > It's an interesting question. I started out thinking it was ridiculous to think of Farage as a fascist, but the more I get to know about the Brexit Party, the more it becomes clear it is a fascist party - in some respects only. > > > > > > The messaging of betrayal, that only the Party represents the nation's values against corrupt and traitorous elites, that only the despotic Leader can sort things out. These are taken from the 1930s fascist party playbook. As are the populist rallies. > > > > > > The Brexit Party has however none of the militarism of the 1930s fascist parties, has no interest in going to war, is opposed to violence. The racism is covert rather than overt. > > > > > > It may be more accurate to describe the Brexit Party as proto-fascist or neo-fascist. > > > > > > > > > > While I am no fan of the BXP or of Farage, I would not describe him as Fascist. Populist, demagogue, and autocratic, but there is more to Fascism than that. I think the style of the meetings owes more to Trumpism, and in turn that is borrowed from the revivalist Evangelical style. Indeed the pioneer of that revivalist rally campaign style in the UK is Jeremy Corbyn. > > > > People like to believe, and are thirsty for hope. They are easy meat for hucksters and charlatans whether political or religious, who promise a simple solution to complex issues. > > Note that I didn't say Farage was a 1930s style fascist. I admit that it is an opinion, but it is an opinion based on evidence, that he is what you could call a Modern Fascist. It is more subtle than 1930s type fascism. It is only non-militaristic and not overtly racist because they believe they will not get away with it. Plenty of references to war and "khaki" by Farage though, and it was interesting that a picture of him was released in military uniform (laughably CCF I think). He must have released that himself. I have no doubt that Farage would adopt all the ostentatious paraphernalia of fascism if he could manage it.
So in the end you accusations of fascism are based on nothing more than the fact you don't like him with no actual, evidence to back up your assertions.
> @Nigelb said: > > @HYUFD said: > > > @Richard_Nabavi said: > > > https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1131926527418019840 > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, that is exactly right. It's a major blunder by Boris, and a massive hostage to fortune if he does become PM. > > > > No, Boris is right, now May has gone he has to tell the EU to compromise on the backstop or he is ready to go to No Deal > > I think you're as right about his chances of doing that as you were about the chances of May's fourth attempt with the WA.
I still think the WA could have passed finally, just but it is MPs fault for voting it down 3 times, now we must go to No Deal if no backstop concessions from the EU we cannot extend again as the surge of the Brexit Party confirms
> @Scott_P said: > Important thread > > https://twitter.com/redhistorian/status/1131927340664184832 I think there are many important points made in that thread. You could extend it backwards and say that all of the promises to hold referendums on the EU have been a way to avoid responsibility for policy on the EU.
> @SouthamObserver said: > > @AndyJS said: > > Relatively high turnout in Warwick — 42%, up from 38%. > > Yep - I asked at the polling station last night and they said it had been a decent turnout.
The LDs shouldn't have any problems topping the poll there. Next door Solihull will be interesting.
> @Chris said: > > @HYUFD said: > > > @Stark_Dawning said: > > > Madness from Boris. He's just reheating Theresa's 'No Deal is better than a bad deal'. He'll never get anything past Nigel and the ERG before November, so he's essentially bound himself to a crash out. He's stuffed. > > > > Not madness at all, Boris will go for No Deal if the EU will not amend the backstop as the vast majority of Leave voters and 2017 Tory voters now want and win back voters from the Brexit Party and win an autumn general election on that platform if necessary. > > > > While Boris unites Leavers behind him, Corbyn is increasingly losing Remainers to the LDs and Greens, fatal under FPTP > > Right - you think "No Deal" might win a general election where it wouldn't win a straight referendum, because of FPTP.
Yes, 400 seats voted Leave ie 2/3 even if Leave won only 52% of the popular vote.
Even on the popular vote Opinium last weekend had No Deal ahead of Revoke and extend combined. Plus Leavers would be largely united behind Boris while the Remain parties would be split, fatal under FPTP
Do you think Boris is simply lying? i.e. he knows his plan ultimately won't work, but he's doing it now to look hard and Brexity, win the leadership, and to get Farage off his back. He might then call a GE, win it, and "change his mind".
Given his history, it seems entirely plausible.
'Lying' is putting it too strongly. His relationship with the truth is too elastic to be boxed into such a clear-cut concept.
What someone should ask him is what he would do if, by some miracle, he reached a new deal with the EU, but too late to enact the legislation by 31st October. He seems to have given Farage even that hostage to fortune.
Incidentally, I do wonder whether the rumoured deal with Amber Rudd can survive this.
> @HYUFD said: > > @Byronic said: > > > @Barnesian said: > > > > @Scott_P said: > > > > https://twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1131910015982419970 > > > > > > Gosh. He sounds just like Theresa May!< > > > > +++++ > > > > Quite. What a stupid opening move from Boris. Day 1 of the campaign.... and he's just made a Teresa May-like mistake, giving himself an unnecessary red line, and handing over a whacking great hostage to fortune. > > > > How can he not have learned from her disastrous inflexibility? To have any chance of delivering Brexit, you need to maintain maximum agility, keep open as much room for compromise, as possible. > > > > I thought he was meant to be cunning, at least? > > Rubbish, if we do not leave in October the Brexit Party will slaughter the Tories (and indeed Labour too in Leave areas). > > Enough. If the Commons refuses to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement as is and the EU refuses to amend the backstop No Deal it has to be
As there won't be any elections until May next year, when are they supposed to do this slaughtering?
> @nico67 said: > Wouldn’t it be funny if the government collapsed before a new leader was in charge . > > I think Bozo has made a huge mistake . Better to have just said he’ll get a better deal and leave it there . > > I expect the Tory infighting to turn into a complete blood bath over the next few weeks .
"Funny" in the sense of "an incompetent allotment-gardening Marxist takes power, backed by separatists from Scotland, and starts wrecking both the economy and the Union - with hilarious consequences"?
> @RobD said: > > @SirNorfolkPassmore said: > > > @RobD said: > > > > @SirNorfolkPassmore said: > > > > > @isam said: > > > > > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still? > > > > > > > > > > Although, has the turnout massively favoured Remain? > > > > > > > > > > Where turnout is up 4% or more there are more Leave areas > > > > > > > > That's a completely artificial metric to use. Why 4%? Why treat "Leave" areas the same whether they were 51% Leave or 65% Leave? No sensible statistician would use that approach. > > > > > > > > The obvious, statistically proper measure is to correlate change in turnout (2019 minus 2014) with 2016 Brexit vote. There you get a reasonably strong (r2=0.44), statistically robust (p<0.001) negative correlation - that is a very clear, reasonably strong (but not massive) picture where turnout change is higher in more Remain areas. > > > > > > But how much that will effect the outcome depends on the relative frequency of leave/remain areas, which I think is isam's point? > > > > I don't think that's a sensible approach as there is little commonality between an area that voted 50.1% Leave and one which voted 70% leave. Higher turnout in the latter area is fairly plainly good for the Brexit Party. Higher turnout in the latter isn't - it's more or less a wash (and of course could be driven by higher turnout from the 49.9%). > > > > You lose all statistical power if you reduce it (completely unnecessarily) to a categorical "Brexit or Remain" measure. Anyone sensible wants to get the full range - does a 70% Brexit area have a higher or lower turnout change than a 55% Brexit one? How does that compare with 55% remain, or 70% Remain? > > Not arguing that point, but you can have a strong correlation with a million leave areas of low turnout and one remain area of high turnout. In that scenario, it wouldn't matter at all because of the sheer number of leave areas.
But you won't get a million Leave areas and one Remain area because we know that there were, in fact, a fairly equivalent number of Remain and Leave areas in 2016, and all of those areas voted yesterday!
As it happens, the areas reporting turnout figures so far include a mix of more Remain and more Leave areas too... but even if (for whatever reason) you had a preponderance of Leave areas the straightforward correlation tells you a lot - if turnout is much lower in very Leave areas, but virtually unchanged (or even up a bit) in only slightly Leave areas, that's highly suggestive of greater numbers of Remain voters driving higher turnout.
> @Bob__Sykes said: > > @nico67 said: > > Wouldn’t it be funny if the government collapsed before a new leader was in charge . > > > > I think Bozo has made a huge mistake . Better to have just said he’ll get a better deal and leave it there . > > > > I expect the Tory infighting to turn into a complete blood bath over the next few weeks . > > "Funny" in the sense of "an incompetent allotment-gardening Marxist takes power, backed by separatists from Scotland, and starts wrecking both the economy and the Union - with hilarious consequences"? >
Except the Tories will be largely united under Boris on a hard Brexit platform, it is Labour who would be split with Remainers demanding Corbyn commits to a second referendum
> @rcs1000 said: > > @HYUFD said: > > > @Byronic said: > > > > @Barnesian said: > > > > > @Scott_P said: > > > > > https://twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1131910015982419970 > > > > > > > > Gosh. He sounds just like Theresa May!< > > > > > > +++++ > > > > > > Quite. What a stupid opening move from Boris. Day 1 of the campaign.... and he's just made a Teresa May-like mistake, giving himself an unnecessary red line, and handing over a whacking great hostage to fortune. > > > > > > How can he not have learned from her disastrous inflexibility? To have any chance of delivering Brexit, you need to maintain maximum agility, keep open as much room for compromise, as possible. > > > > > > I thought he was meant to be cunning, at least? > > > > Rubbish, if we do not leave in October the Brexit Party will slaughter the Tories (and indeed Labour too in Leave areas). > > > > Enough. If the Commons refuses to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement as is and the EU refuses to amend the backstop No Deal it has to be > > As there won't be any elections until May next year, when are they supposed to do this slaughtering?
At the next general election and all elections before
> @Byronic said: > If Boris wins the leadership with this stance - happy to go out with No Deal, then the pressure will be on Corbyn to call for a new vote, no ifs or buts. > > I suspect Corbyn will cave and do that. > > If Corbyn refuses, we could see the rise and rise of the LDs, as all the Remainers and anti No Dealers flock to Vince. They could actually win the next GE.
I really do think the final sentence is pie in the sky - and contradicted by what appears to be a pretty low turnout. Voters are not straining at the leash to vote on Brexit one way or the other - if they were we would have seen 70% turnouts yesterday. The message is much more one of boredom and indifference - and the effect is to greatly flatter the extremists represented by the Brexit Party and the LibDems who have turned out in disproportionately large numbers.
The Swiss model, of course, includes FoM. I don't see Boris having the slightest problem with FoM, but getting it past the ultras would be the difficult bit.
Comments
> Relatively high turnout in Warwick — 42%, up from 38%.
Yep - I asked at the polling station last night and they said it had been a decent turnout.
> Richard – you are a serious analyst and know the Tory Party inside out. Can you please explain Boris' strategy to me? My sense is his early position makes it much harder for him to make the ballot, and even more difficult to negotiate with the EU. If he doesn't make the ballot, his popularity in the party is irrelevant. Am I missing something?
>
> I wouldn't claim to know the party inside out - David Herdson or JohnO know much more than me about it - but FWIW I think your point is correct. However, Boris might be calculating that he has so much momentum that he will make it to the final two anyway, and that the most important thing is to maximise his support amongst members (who unfortunately have largely swallowed the naive line that no deal would be harmless). <
+++++
Do you think Boris is simply lying? i.e. he knows his plan ultimately won't work, but he's doing it now to look hard and Brexity, win the leadership, and to get Farage off his back. He might then call a GE, win it, and "change his mind".
Given his history, it seems entirely plausible.
I think Bozo has made a huge mistake . Better to have just said he’ll get a better deal and leave it there .
I expect the Tory infighting to turn into a complete blood bath over the next few weeks .
https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/1131931368580161536
> > @Pulpstar said:
> > PM Boris won't go to no deal. Take it as read.<
>
> ++++
>
> Show us your workings?
I'll do a piece on it at the weekend
> > @Foxy said:
> > > @FF43 said:
> > > > @ah009 said:
> > >
> > > > Farage might not be a fascist. He's certainly friends with some. That leads one to think his views overlap with theirs to some extent.
> > > > That's too close for my liking. I think it's fair to call him a fascist sympathiser. And I don't want the man anywhere near any levers of power.
> > >
> > > ___________________
> > >
> > > It's an interesting question. I started out thinking it was ridiculous to think of Farage as a fascist, but the more I get to know about the Brexit Party, the more it becomes clear it is a fascist party - in some respects only.
> > >
> > > The messaging of betrayal, that only the Party represents the nation's values against corrupt and traitorous elites, that only the despotic Leader can sort things out. These are taken from the 1930s fascist party playbook. As are the populist rallies.
> > >
> > > The Brexit Party has however none of the militarism of the 1930s fascist parties, has no interest in going to war, is opposed to violence. The racism is covert rather than overt.
> > >
> > > It may be more accurate to describe the Brexit Party as proto-fascist or neo-fascist.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > While I am no fan of the BXP or of Farage, I would not describe him as Fascist. Populist, demagogue, and autocratic, but there is more to Fascism than that. I think the style of the meetings owes more to Trumpism, and in turn that is borrowed from the revivalist Evangelical style. Indeed the pioneer of that revivalist rally campaign style in the UK is Jeremy Corbyn.
> >
> > People like to believe, and are thirsty for hope. They are easy meat for hucksters and charlatans whether political or religious, who promise a simple solution to complex issues.
>
> Note that I didn't say Farage was a 1930s style fascist. I admit that it is an opinion, but it is an opinion based on evidence, that he is what you could call a Modern Fascist. It is more subtle than 1930s type fascism. It is only non-militaristic and not overtly racist because they believe they will not get away with it. Plenty of references to war and "khaki" by Farage though, and it was interesting that a picture of him was released in military uniform (laughably CCF I think). He must have released that himself. I have no doubt that Farage would adopt all the ostentatious paraphernalia of fascism if he could manage it.
So in the end you accusations of fascism are based on nothing more than the fact you don't like him with no actual, evidence to back up your assertions.
> > @HYUFD said:
> > > @Richard_Nabavi said:
> > > https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1131926527418019840
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes, that is exactly right. It's a major blunder by Boris, and a massive hostage to fortune if he does become PM.
> >
> > No, Boris is right, now May has gone he has to tell the EU to compromise on the backstop or he is ready to go to No Deal
>
> I think you're as right about his chances of doing that as you were about the chances of May's fourth attempt with the WA.
I still think the WA could have passed finally, just but it is MPs fault for voting it down 3 times, now we must go to No Deal if no backstop concessions from the EU we cannot extend again as the surge of the Brexit Party confirms
> Important thread
>
> https://twitter.com/redhistorian/status/1131927340664184832
I think there are many important points made in that thread. You could extend it backwards and say that all of the promises to hold referendums on the EU have been a way to avoid responsibility for policy on the EU.
> > @AndyJS said:
> > Relatively high turnout in Warwick — 42%, up from 38%.
>
> Yep - I asked at the polling station last night and they said it had been a decent turnout.
The LDs shouldn't have any problems topping the poll there. Next door Solihull will be interesting.
> > @HYUFD said:
> > > @Stark_Dawning said:
> > > Madness from Boris. He's just reheating Theresa's 'No Deal is better than a bad deal'. He'll never get anything past Nigel and the ERG before November, so he's essentially bound himself to a crash out. He's stuffed.
> >
> > Not madness at all, Boris will go for No Deal if the EU will not amend the backstop as the vast majority of Leave voters and 2017 Tory voters now want and win back voters from the Brexit Party and win an autumn general election on that platform if necessary.
> >
> > While Boris unites Leavers behind him, Corbyn is increasingly losing Remainers to the LDs and Greens, fatal under FPTP
>
> Right - you think "No Deal" might win a general election where it wouldn't win a straight referendum, because of FPTP.
Yes, 400 seats voted Leave ie 2/3 even if Leave won only 52% of the popular vote.
Even on the popular vote Opinium last weekend had No Deal ahead of Revoke and extend combined. Plus Leavers would be largely united behind Boris while the Remain parties would be split, fatal under FPTP
What someone should ask him is what he would do if, by some miracle, he reached a new deal with the EU, but too late to enact the legislation by 31st October. He seems to have given Farage even that hostage to fortune.
Incidentally, I do wonder whether the rumoured deal with Amber Rudd can survive this.
> So there is at least one good reason to welcome Boris, our new overlord
>
>
>
> https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/1131931368580161536
>
>
>
> And this is why, despite everything, I'm still minded to vote for Boris.<
++++
Yes, I can see the logic. Not sure I agree, but I get it,
And then there's this. Hmm..
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1131932728230850561
> > @Byronic said:
> > > @Barnesian said:
> > > > @Scott_P said:
> > > > https://twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1131910015982419970
> > >
> > > Gosh. He sounds just like Theresa May!<
> >
> > +++++
> >
> > Quite. What a stupid opening move from Boris. Day 1 of the campaign.... and he's just made a Teresa May-like mistake, giving himself an unnecessary red line, and handing over a whacking great hostage to fortune.
> >
> > How can he not have learned from her disastrous inflexibility? To have any chance of delivering Brexit, you need to maintain maximum agility, keep open as much room for compromise, as possible.
> >
> > I thought he was meant to be cunning, at least?
>
> Rubbish, if we do not leave in October the Brexit Party will slaughter the Tories (and indeed Labour too in Leave areas).
>
> Enough. If the Commons refuses to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement as is and the EU refuses to amend the backstop No Deal it has to be
As there won't be any elections until May next year, when are they supposed to do this slaughtering?
> Wouldn’t it be funny if the government collapsed before a new leader was in charge .
>
> I think Bozo has made a huge mistake . Better to have just said he’ll get a better deal and leave it there .
>
> I expect the Tory infighting to turn into a complete blood bath over the next few weeks .
"Funny" in the sense of "an incompetent allotment-gardening Marxist takes power, backed by separatists from Scotland, and starts wrecking both the economy and the Union - with hilarious consequences"?
> > @SirNorfolkPassmore said:
> > > @RobD said:
> > > > @SirNorfolkPassmore said:
> > > > > @isam said:
> > > > > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still?
> > > > >
> > > > > Although, has the turnout massively favoured Remain?
> > > > >
> > > > > Where turnout is up 4% or more there are more Leave areas
> > > >
> > > > That's a completely artificial metric to use. Why 4%? Why treat "Leave" areas the same whether they were 51% Leave or 65% Leave? No sensible statistician would use that approach.
> > > >
> > > > The obvious, statistically proper measure is to correlate change in turnout (2019 minus 2014) with 2016 Brexit vote. There you get a reasonably strong (r2=0.44), statistically robust (p<0.001) negative correlation - that is a very clear, reasonably strong (but not massive) picture where turnout change is higher in more Remain areas.
> > >
> > > But how much that will effect the outcome depends on the relative frequency of leave/remain areas, which I think is isam's point?
> >
> > I don't think that's a sensible approach as there is little commonality between an area that voted 50.1% Leave and one which voted 70% leave. Higher turnout in the latter area is fairly plainly good for the Brexit Party. Higher turnout in the latter isn't - it's more or less a wash (and of course could be driven by higher turnout from the 49.9%).
> >
> > You lose all statistical power if you reduce it (completely unnecessarily) to a categorical "Brexit or Remain" measure. Anyone sensible wants to get the full range - does a 70% Brexit area have a higher or lower turnout change than a 55% Brexit one? How does that compare with 55% remain, or 70% Remain?
>
> Not arguing that point, but you can have a strong correlation with a million leave areas of low turnout and one remain area of high turnout. In that scenario, it wouldn't matter at all because of the sheer number of leave areas.
But you won't get a million Leave areas and one Remain area because we know that there were, in fact, a fairly equivalent number of Remain and Leave areas in 2016, and all of those areas voted yesterday!
As it happens, the areas reporting turnout figures so far include a mix of more Remain and more Leave areas too... but even if (for whatever reason) you had a preponderance of Leave areas the straightforward correlation tells you a lot - if turnout is much lower in very Leave areas, but virtually unchanged (or even up a bit) in only slightly Leave areas, that's highly suggestive of greater numbers of Remain voters driving higher turnout.
This thread has expired.
It is deceased.
It is an ex-Thread
> > @nico67 said:
> > Wouldn’t it be funny if the government collapsed before a new leader was in charge .
> >
> > I think Bozo has made a huge mistake . Better to have just said he’ll get a better deal and leave it there .
> >
> > I expect the Tory infighting to turn into a complete blood bath over the next few weeks .
>
> "Funny" in the sense of "an incompetent allotment-gardening Marxist takes power, backed by separatists from Scotland, and starts wrecking both the economy and the Union - with hilarious consequences"?
>
Except the Tories will be largely united under Boris on a hard Brexit platform, it is Labour who would be split with Remainers demanding Corbyn commits to a second referendum
> > @HYUFD said:
> > > @Byronic said:
> > > > @Barnesian said:
> > > > > @Scott_P said:
> > > > > https://twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1131910015982419970
> > > >
> > > > Gosh. He sounds just like Theresa May!<
> > >
> > > +++++
> > >
> > > Quite. What a stupid opening move from Boris. Day 1 of the campaign.... and he's just made a Teresa May-like mistake, giving himself an unnecessary red line, and handing over a whacking great hostage to fortune.
> > >
> > > How can he not have learned from her disastrous inflexibility? To have any chance of delivering Brexit, you need to maintain maximum agility, keep open as much room for compromise, as possible.
> > >
> > > I thought he was meant to be cunning, at least?
> >
> > Rubbish, if we do not leave in October the Brexit Party will slaughter the Tories (and indeed Labour too in Leave areas).
> >
> > Enough. If the Commons refuses to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement as is and the EU refuses to amend the backstop No Deal it has to be
>
> As there won't be any elections until May next year, when are they supposed to do this slaughtering?
At the next general election and all elections before
> If Boris wins the leadership with this stance - happy to go out with No Deal, then the pressure will be on Corbyn to call for a new vote, no ifs or buts.
>
> I suspect Corbyn will cave and do that.
>
> If Corbyn refuses, we could see the rise and rise of the LDs, as all the Remainers and anti No Dealers flock to Vince. They could actually win the next GE.
I really do think the final sentence is pie in the sky - and contradicted by what appears to be a pretty low turnout. Voters are not straining at the leash to vote on Brexit one way or the other - if they were we would have seen 70% turnouts yesterday. The message is much more one of boredom and indifference - and the effect is to greatly flatter the extremists represented by the Brexit Party and the LibDems who have turned out in disproportionately large numbers.