> @Ploppikins said: > I thought the 2019 EU elections would be the most divisive campaign in living memory. I was wrong. Remarkably little happened in my area apart from a few leaflets. > > However, far worse has been the reaction on social media (particularly twitter). The number of remainers crowing over flawed graphs (e.g including Lab in remain totals, or conveniently ignoring the Tories in pro-Brexit totals) and leavers trolling GIFs of Farage laughing like a leathery clown is sickening. > > New PM is going to have to be a miracle worker.
> @dyedwoolie said: > Labour, the party of Manchester, Liverpool and a little bit of London. The scouse idiots will be the very last rats to desert
What was notable was that the Labour party vote held up best in areas with large BAME populations.
I think you will probably find that the Lib Dem and Green 'surge' was disproportionately white and middle class in London - whereas the BAME vote stuck with Labour. It would certainly explain the differential results in places like Newham, Hounslow, Redbridge, Barking and Dagenham etc - in the latter Labour got nearly five times the LD vote and the BXP got nearly four times the LD vote there too. The Brexit party also won the zone 5-6 boroughs which backed leave in 2016 - Bexley, Havering, Hillingdon and additionally Bromley.
London is quite a diverse place politically once you get outside the more 'fashionable' areas - and not every borough followed the trend.
Khan will have no bother pulling together his coalition to win easily next May - the poor, renters BAME voters etc. In the end London will continue to trend Labour for demographic reasons.
For me the most significant figure from this election was thr Turnout - which came in at just under 37% with more than 63% not being bothered to vote at all. That does not strike me as clear evidence of voters straining at the leash to express their views on Brexit. EU elections have always been treated frivolously - even by many who do vote - and the attempt to translate this data into a GE result is just bonkers or at best naive.Had last Thursday been polling day for a General Election , I have no doubt that both major parties would have exceeded 30% - support for the Brexit Party , the LibDems and the Greens would have been much lower in terms of vote shares.
Having first said anyone trying to translate these results into a GE is "bonkers", we are then treated to the expert assertion that the majority of those who didn't vote are apparently Conservative and Labour voters who simply abstained and who will come out in their droves for a GE.
Well, maybe, but that's just your bonkers assumption as well. It's entirely possible TBP would pick up more support as would the other parties.
At the moment, the combined CON-LAB share is down to just over 50% from 84% in 2017 so that's a lot of lost voters looking for other homes.
On the topic of VONCs, there are at least 5 ex-Lab MPs who are not going to want an early election: Field, Woodcock, O’Mara, Austin, Hopkins.
Williamson is also suspended (but I suspect Corbyn would let him back on).
There is also Lloyd who left the LD whip to vote for Brexit
I can’t imagine the CHUKs would want an early election either.
I wouldn’t expect any of them to vote for PM Boris or Raab but there might be a nasty stomach bug going round that day...
I also forgot Ivan Lewis.
Also Nick Boles - although doubt he would vote for any Con right winger.
If the CUKs join the LDs they would vote for an early election.
As for the others, how much do they value their seats, which they wil llose at the next election anyway, vs a potential no deal? I don't doubt some will at least not show up for such a vote, but all of them? It won't take many.
For me the most significant figure from this election was thr Turnout - which came in at just under 37% with more than 63% not being bothered to vote at all. That does not strike me as clear evidence of voters straining at the leash to express their views on Brexit. EU elections have always been treated frivolously - even by many who do vote - and the attempt to translate this data into a GE result is just bonkers or at best naive.Had last Thursday been polling day for a General Election , I have no doubt that both major parties would have exceeded 30% - support for the Brexit Party , the LibDems and the Greens would have been much lower in terms of vote shares.
In 2017 the LDs looked dead and UKIP looked dead. Now, Brexit, LD and Greens are all looking very much alive. Whereas last time your realistic options were basically tories or Labour, this time there could be a self-reinforcing split of the vote shares. Because Brexit threatens the tories,LDs and Greens feel more confortable voting for their parties than Labour. Because Labour is threatened by LDs and Greens, Brexit supporters won't fear a Corbyn government gettinga majority.
We will most likely see a return to the post 2010 battleground of different regions being different 2 party contests. SNP OR con, LD or Lab, LD or Tory, Brexit or lab, tory or lab etc.
> @Byronic said: > > @El_Capitano said: > > Sarah Wollaston admitting that CUK screwed up. I wouldn't be surprised to see her and Heidi Allen end up in the Lib Dems sooner rather than later. > > > > https://twitter.com/sarahwollaston/status/1132942571024592896 < > > +++++ > > What a cavalcade of cack her career has been. > >
Disagree (strongly). She was a local GP, who came to politics late. She was notable for being selected by an "open primary" of all voters, not just the usual Tory Selectariat -therefore it was to be expected that she was not an orthodox party clone. She has made some interesting and thought provoking points on healthcare and the NHS, and her independence of thought is to be welcomed. If she does go over to the dark side of Lib Demmery I hope she will be welcomed and put to good use.
Why do the Tories even bother in NI? It is simply humiliating. Eleventh place.
I think it speaks very well of them. If we are one United Kingdom, then every citizen should have the chance to vote for the major parties if they so wish.
> @viewcode said: > Why do the Tories even bother in NI? It is simply humiliating. Eleventh place. > > I think it speaks very well of them. If we are one United Kingdom, then every citizen should have the chance to vote for the major parties if they so wish.
Agreed fully, it is poor from the other parties. (Also poor from the NI public continuing to vote on sectarian and religious lines).
They are still counting in NI and the Republic thanks to the wonders of STV.
The first count for the Midlands North West constituency is just being announced now - and there will be several more counts to come. Mairead McGuinness of Fine Gael - who we see a lot on our TVs and who often chairs the European parliament as one of the Vice Presidents - has topped the poll and been elected on the first count and her surplus will now be distributed.
Her running mate for Fine Gael - who is also likely to win a seat - is a former Rose of Tralee!
Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn.
If there was a GE now he cwould not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets.
The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM.
At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him?
On the topic of VONCs, there are at least 5 ex-Lab MPs who are not going to want an early election: Field, Woodcock, O’Mara, Austin, Hopkins.
Williamson is also suspended (but I suspect Corbyn would let him back on).
There is also Lloyd who left the LD whip to vote for Brexit
I can’t imagine the CHUKs would want an early election either.
I wouldn’t expect any of them to vote for PM Boris or Raab but there might be a nasty stomach bug going round that day...
I also forgot Ivan Lewis.
Also Nick Boles - although doubt he would vote for any Con right winger.
If the CUKs join the LDs they would vote for an early election.
As for the others, how much do they value their seats, which they wil llose at the next election anyway, vs a potential no deal? I don't doubt some will at least not show up for such a vote, but all of them? It won't take many.
Allan and Wollaston might defect the LDs and hold their seats. The others don’t have much chance and I can’t see Chuka’s ego letting him join the LDs.
It’s also worth remembering that being an MP is a lucrative gig. Onasanya hung on and made her constituents recall her.
> @justin124 said: > For me the most significant figure from this election was thr Turnout - which came in at just under 37% with more than 63% not being bothered to vote at all. That does not strike me as clear evidence of voters straining at the leash to express their views on Brexit. EU elections have always been treated frivolously - even by many who do vote - and the attempt to translate this data into a GE result is just bonkers or at best naive.Had last Thursday been polling day for a General Election , I have no doubt that both major parties would have exceeded 30% - support for the Brexit Party , the LibDems and the Greens would have been much lower in terms of vote shares.
I suppose that's the Corbyn line now - that low turnout means that these results aren't very significant at all. Actually in comparative terms turnout was extremely buoyant for a Euro election held without any parallel local elections, but let's put that to one side.
If you want to factor in turnout, then I think it just makes matters worse for Labour now. The most significant figure (for you) should be that, given the chance, more than 19 out of every 20 people eligible to vote in a national election chose not to put their X in support of a Labour Party led by Corbyn.
> @brendan16 said: > > @Ploppikins said: > > I thought the 2019 EU elections would be the most divisive campaign in living memory. I was wrong. Remarkably little happened in my area apart from a few leaflets. > > > > However, far worse has been the reaction on social media (particularly twitter). The number of remainers crowing over flawed graphs (e.g including Lab in remain totals, or conveniently ignoring the Tories in pro-Brexit totals) and leavers trolling GIFs of Farage laughing like a leathery clown is sickening. > > > > New PM is going to have to be a miracle worker. > > > @dyedwoolie said: > > Labour, the party of Manchester, Liverpool and a little bit of London. The scouse idiots will be the very last rats to desert > > What was notable was that the Labour party vote held up best in areas with large BAME populations. > > I think you will probably find that the Lib Dem and Green 'surge' was disproportionately white and middle class in London - whereas the BAME vote stuck with Labour. It would certainly explain the differential results in places like Newham, Hounslow, Redbridge, Barking and Dagenham etc - in the latter Labour got nearly five times the LD vote and the BXP got nearly four times the LD vote there too. The Brexit party also won the zone 5-6 boroughs which backed leave in 2016 - Bexley, Havering, Hillingdon and additionally Bromley. > > London is quite a diverse place once you get outside the more 'fashionable' areas - and not every borough followed the trend. > >
A detailed analysis would presumably show a strong correlation between what's left of Labour's support in this election and concentrations of BAME voters all over the map - Leicester and Luton being prime examples. In many rural areas it posted less than 5%.
> @GarethoftheVale2 said: > On the topic of VONCs, there are at least 5 ex-Lab MPs who are not going to want an early election: Field, Woodcock, O’Mara, Austin, Hopkins. > > Williamson is also suspended (but I suspect Corbyn would let him back on). > > There is also Lloyd who left the LD whip to vote for Brexit > > I can’t imagine the CHUKs would want an early election either. > > I wouldn’t expect any of them to vote for PM Boris or Raab but there might be a nasty stomach bug going round that day... > > I also forgot Ivan Lewis. > > Also Nick Boles - although doubt he would vote for any Con right winger. > > If the CUKs join the LDs they would vote for an early election. > > As for the others, how much do they value their seats, which they wil llose at the next election anyway, vs a potential no deal? I don't doubt some will at least not show up for such a vote, but all of them? It won't take many. > > Allan and Wollaston might defect the LDs and hold their seats. The others don’t have much chance and I can’t see Chuka’s ego letting him join the LDs. > > It’s also worth remembering that being an MP is a lucrative gig. Onasanya hung on and made her constituents recall her.
So only a couple might join in the vote, and it comes down to how many Tory remainers put their money where their mouth is. But your point about the lucrative gig is relevant to how many might switch as well - sure not all will have as much chance as those two at holding their seats if they switch, but they'd have a better chance, some of them at any rate. If it is about holding onto the gig, long term, it might be their best shot.
A detailed analysis would presumably show a strong correlation between what's left of Labour's support in this election and concentrations of BAME voters all over the map - Leicester and Luton being prime examples. In many rural areas it posted less than 5%.
Newham, Tower Hamlets. I wouldn't say BAME was correct, more like an Islamic vote
> > > > What a cavalcade of cack her career has been. > > > > > > Disagree (strongly). She was a local GP, who came to politics late. She was notable for being selected by an "open primary" of all voters, not just the usual Tory Selectariat -therefore it was to be expected that she was not an orthodox party clone. She has made some interesting and thought provoking points on healthcare and the NHS, and her independence of thought is to be welcomed. If she does go over to the dark side of Lib Demmery I hope she will be welcomed and put to good use. <
+++++
And what do you think of her decision to join the Leave campaign, then suddenly realise, ten days before the vote, that she was an ardent Remainer, so ardent she left the Tories and joined the CUK's to call for Revoke?
Do you think that makes her principled and impressive, and intellectually coherent, or a pathetic careerist fool who agreed to be a double agent in the Leave campaign, in return for a job from Cameron, which she never got cause her betrayal achieved nothing?
She's an idiot. She might be a nice lady and a good doctor, but she has the political IQ of a demented parakeet.
> @stodge said: > For me the most significant figure from this election was thr Turnout - which came in at just under 37% with more than 63% not being bothered to vote at all. That does not strike me as clear evidence of voters straining at the leash to express their views on Brexit. EU elections have always been treated frivolously - even by many who do vote - and the attempt to translate this data into a GE result is just bonkers or at best naive.Had last Thursday been polling day for a General Election , I have no doubt that both major parties would have exceeded 30% - support for the Brexit Party , the LibDems and the Greens would have been much lower in terms of vote shares. > > Having first said anyone trying to translate these results into a GE is "bonkers", we are then treated to the expert assertion that the majority of those who didn't vote are apparently Conservative and Labour voters who simply abstained and who will come out in their droves for a GE. > > Well, maybe, but that's just your bonkers assumption as well. It's entirely possible TBP would pick up more support as would the other parties. > > At the moment, the combined CON-LAB share is down to just over 50% from 84% in 2017 so that's a lot of lost voters looking for other homes.
63% were not sufficiently bothered about Brexit to turn up at all last Thursday, and it is not unreasonable to assume that the much higher Turnout at a General Election would be heavily skewed to voters with other concerns. Moreover, many of the 37% who did vote last week would focus on other issues - and would be likely to vote differently. In May 2014 UKIP led by Farage managed over 26% - yet less than a year later at the 2015 election that poll share more than halved to 12.5% - despite the momentum generated by two defections from the Tories and the by election victories which followed them.
> @Byronic said: > > @augustus_carp said: > > > > > > > What a cavalcade of cack her career has been. > > > > > > > > > > Disagree (strongly). She was a local GP, who came to politics late. She was notable for being selected by an "open primary" of all voters, not just the usual Tory Selectariat -therefore it was to be expected that she was not an orthodox party clone. She has made some interesting and thought provoking points on healthcare and the NHS, and her independence of thought is to be welcomed. If she does go over to the dark side of Lib Demmery I hope she will be welcomed and put to good use. < > > +++++ > > And what do you think of her decision to join the Leave campaign, then suddenly realise, ten days before the vote, that she was an ardent Remainer, so ardent she left the Tories and joined the CUK's to call for Revoke? > > Do you think that makes her principled and impressive, and intellectually coherent, or a pathetic careerist fool who agreed to be a double agent in the Leave campaign, in return for a job from Cameron, which she never got cause her betrayal achieved nothing? > > She's an idiot. She might be a nice lady and a good doctor, but she has the political IQ of a demented parakeet. >
Alternatively, she did some research, weighed up the evidence and changed her mind accordingly.
Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn.
If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets.
The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM.
At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him?
First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is.
Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015.
Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue.
OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
> @StuartDickson said: > > @kle4 said: > > > @CarlottaVance said: > > > > > https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1132976778845347841 > > > > > > > > > > > > Theresa May can be criticised for many things but she tried her utmost to deliver a meaningful Brexit. > > > > Quite. Badly, and she failed, but she tried. > > Eddie the Eagle “tried” being a ski jumper. He failed. But it was a great comic act.
Difference is, Eddie knew when to jump. May had to be pushed.
> > > > She's an idiot. She might be a nice lady and a good doctor, but she has the political IQ of a demented parakeet. > > > > Alternatively, she did some research, weighed up the evidence and changed her mind accordingly. <
+++++
If you honestly believe that (do you???) then you are as silly as her.
I think you are putting gallantry ahead of logic. You like her, so you forgive her. But really her behaviour has been daft, devious and entirely counter-productive. And now she will lose the next election, and her sad political "career" will be over. I don't see the local Lib Dems accepting her in a seat they would hope to win all by themselves.
For me the most significant figure from this election was thr Turnout - which came in at just under 37% with more than 63% not being bothered to vote at all. That does not strike me as clear evidence of voters straining at the leash to express their views on Brexit. EU elections have always been treated frivolously - even by many who do vote - and the attempt to translate this data into a GE result is just bonkers or at best naive.Had last Thursday been polling day for a General Election , I have no doubt that both major parties would have exceeded 30% - support for the Brexit Party , the LibDems and the Greens would have been much lower in terms of vote shares.
In 2017 the LDs looked dead and UKIP looked dead. Now, Brexit, LD and Greens are all looking very much alive. Whereas last time your realistic options were basically tories or Labour, this time there could be a self-reinforcing split of the vote shares. Because Brexit threatens the tories,LDs and Greens feel more confortable voting for their parties than Labour. Because Labour is threatened by LDs and Greens, Brexit supporters won't fear a Corbyn government gettinga majority.
We will most likely see a return to the post 2010 battleground of different regions being different 2 party contests. SNP OR con, LD or Lab, LD or Tory, Brexit or lab, tory or lab etc.
LOL, SNP or CON, are you barking, Cons are miles and miles behind SNP. No contest ever it is a massacre.
> @stodge said: > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn. > > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets. > > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM. > > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him? > > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is. > > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015. > > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue. > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
Isn't the answer obvious? The Labour leader doesn't want it. He has never been pro the EU in his life, against it in fact, consistently throughout his career. The mystery to me is why anyone ever thought that he would change the views of a lifetime.
> @isam said: > A detailed analysis would presumably show a strong correlation between what's left of Labour's support in this election and concentrations of BAME voters all over the map - Leicester and Luton being prime examples. In many rural areas it posted less than 5%. > > Newham, Tower Hamlets. I wouldn't say BAME was correct, more like an Islamic vote<
+++++
Bradford too. This is toxic for Labour. Reduced to the Muslim vote, Merseyside, and some ex coal miners.
> @Wulfrun_Phil said: > > @justin124 said: > > For me the most significant figure from this election was thr Turnout - which came in at just under 37% with more than 63% not being bothered to vote at all. That does not strike me as clear evidence of voters straining at the leash to express their views on Brexit. EU elections have always been treated frivolously - even by many who do vote - and the attempt to translate this data into a GE result is just bonkers or at best naive.Had last Thursday been polling day for a General Election , I have no doubt that both major parties would have exceeded 30% - support for the Brexit Party , the LibDems and the Greens would have been much lower in terms of vote shares. > > I suppose that's the Corbyn line now - that low turnout means that these results aren't very significant at all. Actually in comparative terms turnout was extremely buoyant for a Euro election held without any parallel local elections, but let's put that to one side. > > If you want to factor in turnout, then I think it just makes matters worse for Labour now. The most significant figure (for you) should be that, given the chance, more than 19 out of every 20 people eligible to vote in a national election chose not to put their X in support of a Labour Party led by Corbyn.
Voters have never shown much interest in EU elections here ever since the EU Parliament first was directly elected in 1979. Attitudes have tended to be pretty frivolous - even in the ranks of the politically aware.Last week most people opted to ignore the hype by declining to participate in a single issue election.
> @stodge said: > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn. > > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets. > > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM. > > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him? > > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is. > > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015. > > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue. > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
"Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British.
> Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn.
>
> If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets.
>
> The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM.
>
> At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him?
>
> First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is.
>
> Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015.
>
> Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue.
>
> OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
Isn't the answer obvious? The Labour leader doesn't want it. He has never been pro the EU in his life, against it in fact, consistently throughout his career. The mystery to me is why anyone ever thought that he would change the views of a lifetime.
How much choice does he have now? Labour are not getting to renegotiate a new deal, so there is no other deal than the Tories to consider in a referendum, so they will back remain. Sure, he can still dream of a GE and hold up the illusion his MPs would agree Brexit, but how likely is that?
> @Byronic said: > > @isam said: > > A detailed analysis would presumably show a strong correlation between what's left of Labour's support in this election and concentrations of BAME voters all over the map - Leicester and Luton being prime examples. In many rural areas it posted less than 5%. > > > > Newham, Tower Hamlets. I wouldn't say BAME was correct, more like an Islamic vote< > > +++++ > > Bradford too. This is toxic for Labour. Reduced to the Muslim vote, Merseyside, and some ex coal miners.
Under Corbyn it was pretty much inevitable that Labour would eventually turn into a mixture of Respect and the SWP. Some of us even pointed it out a while ago.
Supposedly there are remainers who accept the vote and think we should leave with a deal (or possibly even no deal). That is certainly true of quite a few MPs.
Does anyone have a feel for what percentage of the population this is and how they voted? I am assuming they would vote Lab or Tory, but what is their percentage?
If there was another referendum how many would revert?
The antics of the ERG considerably reduced the number in this category, in which I used to be myself. Remember the days of surveys showing between 60 and 70% in favour of leaving? Respecting a democratic result is one thing. Putting up with pissing about is quite different.
So my guess is that there would have been about 10-20% up until recently, probably around 5% now. And they'd vote according to their pre-Brexit preference.
> Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue. > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.<
+++++
Are you really offended by being called a Brit?!?
Anyhoo, we basically agree. And congrats to the Lib Dems on a fine performance. I would be delighted if they took over as the official opposition. I'd not be unhappy if they won the GE, to be honest.
> @stodge said: > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn. > > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets. > > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM. > > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him? > > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is. > > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015. > > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue. > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
The ideal scenario is one in which another coup is attempted against Corbyn, and that this ends in a split (with the hard left and soft left parties subsequently wiping each other out in a General Election.) But that outcome is obviously too good to be true.
Failing that, Corbyn, his shadow cabinet and their policies being pulled apart under extensive scrutiny during the next election campaign might at least help to weaken Labour. If they're going to somehow crawl back into Government then one would at least hope for them to be firmly shackled to parties (likely the SNP and/or the Lib Dems) that have their flaws but at least benefit from not being totally bloody insane.
> @Cyclefree said: > > @stodge said: > > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn. > > > > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets. > > > > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM. > > > > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him? > > > > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is. > > > > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015. > > > > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue. > > > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't. > > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British.
Huh? Many Brits use that word about themselves wholly without any sense of self-hatred. I hear it plenty, and have used it myself without ever having been challenged. I don't think I know any republicans (in the NI sense at least).
> @kle4 said: > > @kle4 said: > > > Well, the headline at the least has it nailed I think > > > https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1132976662256259074 > > > > > > I know this is trivial but Raab looks like one of the puppets in Thunderbirds. > > I thought he was meant to be the handsome one of the race.
No. He looks like those cardboard cut out dolls I had in my childhood on which you could put on different paper outfits. He is bland and dull looking. He might make a good male model for knitting patterns, possibly. He has all the sex appeal of a pint of milk.
None of the candidates is remotely handsome. Some are really quite ghastly. In a game of Avoid, Marry, Snog they'd all be in the Avoid bucket.
> Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue.
>
> OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.<
+++++
Are you really offended by being called a Brit?!?
Anyhoo, we basically agree. And congrats to the Lib Dems on a fine performance. I would be delighted if they took over as the official opposition. I'd not be unhappy if they won the GE, to be honest.
As to the latter point, I couldn’t name 5 of their policies absent remain in the EU. Could you? I guess that they’ll have more media airtime now so there’s more opportunity to be heard. What do they plan to say?
> > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British. <
++++
Utter nonsense. The IRA had much nastier words. "Brits" is a widely accepted, informal descriptor. It's journalistic shorthand used in most of our national newspapers for a start "Brits Look Forward To A Scorching Summer!". Americans use it and no one is offended.
Calm down. There are plenty of real things to be upset about. This culture of taking offence at everything is corrosive and mad.
> @ah009 said: > > @StuartDickson said: > > > @kle4 said: > > > > @CarlottaVance said: > > > > > > > https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1132976778845347841 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Theresa May can be criticised for many things but she tried her utmost to deliver a meaningful Brexit. > > > > > > Quite. Badly, and she failed, but she tried. > > > > Eddie the Eagle “tried” being a ski jumper. He failed. But it was a great comic act. > > Difference is, Eddie knew when to jump. May had to be pushed.
It depends where you think the Tories future lies. Barwell was looking at things from the perspective of winning back Croydon - Bradley from the perspective of retaining Mansfield.
Its the same problem Labour has - how do you keep London and the north/midlands on board? There is such a massive dislocation now in England between (inner) London and the university towns and everywhere else. How do they bridge that gap - when by definition the media/most MPs is so London centric - cos thats where they live.
> @ah009 said: > > @Cyclefree said: > > > @stodge said: > > > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn. > > > > > > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets. > > > > > > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM. > > > > > > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him? > > > > > > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is. > > > > > > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015. > > > > > > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue. > > > > > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't. > > > > > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British. > > Huh? Many Brits use that word about themselves wholly without any sense of self-hatred. I hear it plenty, and have used it myself without ever having been challenged. I don't think I know any republicans (in the NI sense at least).
They may well do. But nonetheless in an Irish context it is abusive. I would not use it to describe myself or anyone else but possibly that's because of my own background.
> @Cyclefree said: > > @ah009 said: > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > @stodge said: > > > > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn. > > > > > > > > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets. > > > > > > > > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM. > > > > > > > > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him? > > > > > > > > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is. > > > > > > > > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015. > > > > > > > > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue. > > > > > > > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't. > > > > > > > > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British. > > > > Huh? Many Brits use that word about themselves wholly without any sense of self-hatred. I hear it plenty, and have used it myself without ever having been challenged. I don't think I know any republicans (in the NI sense at least). > > They may well do. But nonetheless in an Irish context it is abusive. I would not use it to describe myself or anyone else but possibly that's because of my own background.
I had never heard the term had ever been offensive. Learn something every day I guess.
> @malcolmg said: > For me the most significant figure from this election was thr Turnout - which came in at just under 37% with more than 63% not being bothered to vote at all. That does not strike me as clear evidence of voters straining at the leash to express their views on Brexit. EU elections have always been treated frivolously - even by many who do vote - and the attempt to translate this data into a GE result is just bonkers or at best naive.Had last Thursday been polling day for a General Election , I have no doubt that both major parties would have exceeded 30% - support for the Brexit Party , the LibDems and the Greens would have been much lower in terms of vote shares. > > In 2017 the LDs looked dead and UKIP looked dead. Now, Brexit, LD and Greens are all looking very much alive. Whereas last time your realistic options were basically tories or Labour, this time there could be a self-reinforcing split of the vote shares. Because Brexit threatens the tories,LDs and Greens feel more confortable voting for their parties than Labour. Because Labour is threatened by LDs and Greens, Brexit supporters won't fear a Corbyn government gettinga majority. > > We will most likely see a return to the post 2010 battleground of different regions being different 2 party contests. SNP OR con, LD or Lab, LD or Tory, Brexit or lab, tory or lab etc. > > LOL, SNP or CON, are you barking, Cons are miles and miles behind SNP. No contest ever it is a massacre.
Indeed! The SNP had a good result yesterday - but its poll share of 37.7% was little changed from the 2017 GE. This was despite the likelihood that it was a beneficiary of anti-Brexit protest votes - along with the LibDems and Greens.The party did not exceed expectations in terms of vote share, and I would expect their vote share at a Westminster election to be lower - probably below 35%. Both Labour and the Tories had an abysmal result yesterday - but would do much better at a GE.
63% were not sufficiently bothered about Brexit to turn up at all last Thursday, and it is not unreasonable to assume that the much higher Turnout at a General Election would be heavily skewed to voters with other concerns. Moreover, many of the 37% who did vote last week would focus on other issues - and would be likely to vote differently. In May 2014 UKIP led by Farage managed over 26% - yet less than a year later at the 2015 election that poll share more than halved to 12.5% - despite the momentum generated by two defections from the Tories and the by election victories which followed them.
To be fair, turnout at the 2017 GE was 69% and 72% in the 2016 Referendum so we can probably draw the line at 75% so a quarter of people don't vote at all.
You are quite correct - we know people left the Conservative and Labour parties and leant their votes to TBP, LDs, Greens and others and it's more than likely a lot of these will return but to assume they all will seems unwise.
I'm also wary of drawing parallels - the world of 2019 isn't the same as 2014. The crucial question is first on the centre-right, IF TBP and the Conservatives go fishing in the same pool neither will have enough for supper.
The other aspect is the political paralysis Brexit has caused would impact on the "other issues" - where are we with social care for example? Yes, the Government has a good story to tell on the economy (as long as nobody talks about productivity and efficiency) but in other areas, there has been almost complete inertia since 2016.
> > None of the candidates is remotely handsome. Some are really quite ghastly. In a game of Avoid, Marry, Snog they'd all be in the Avoid bucket. > > (I'd go for a drink with Tobias Ellwood, though.)<
++++
Hmmm. I wonder how you'd feel if a man was so damning of a bunch of female candidates, based on their looks? "They're all ugly old hags" etc?
FWIW Boris wasn't bad looking in his youth. He's podged out a bit now, however, and the hair is less charming, as it thins.
> @Byronic said: > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > > > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British. < > > ++++ > > Utter nonsense. The IRA had much nastier words. "Brits" is a widely accepted, informal descriptor. It's journalistic shorthand used in most of our national newspapers for a start "Brits Look Forward To A Scorching Summer!". Americans use it and no one is offended. > > Calm down. There are plenty of real things to be upset about. This culture of taking offence at everything is corrosive and mad.
I don't take offence at it. Nor am I upset by it. I am merely pointing out how it has been used in a part of Britain. "Brits out of Ireland" posters and signs and banners were pretty common during the Troubles. It wasn't meant nicely.
> @Byronic said: > > @Cyclefree said: > > > @kle4 said: > > > > > None of the candidates is remotely handsome. Some are really quite ghastly. In a game of Avoid, Marry, Snog they'd all be in the Avoid bucket. > > > > (I'd go for a drink with Tobias Ellwood, though.)< > > ++++ > > Hmmm. I wonder how you'd feel if a man was so damning of a bunch of female candidates, based on their looks? "They're all ugly old hags" etc? > > FWIW Boris wasn't bad looking in his youth. He's podged out a bit now, however, and the hair is less charming, as it thins.
Nothing wrong with being judgemental. All discerning people do it.
> @augustus_carp said: > > @Byronic said: > > > @El_Capitano said: > > > Sarah Wollaston admitting that CUK screwed up. I wouldn't be surprised to see her and Heidi Allen end up in the Lib Dems sooner rather than later. > > > > > > https://twitter.com/sarahwollaston/status/1132942571024592896 < > > > > +++++ > > > > What a cavalcade of cack her career has been. > > > > > > Disagree (strongly). She was a local GP, who came to politics late. She was notable for being selected by an "open primary" of all voters, not just the usual Tory Selectariat -therefore it was to be expected that she was not an orthodox party clone. She has made some interesting and thought provoking points on healthcare and the NHS, and her independence of thought is to be welcomed. If she does go over to the dark side of Lib Demmery I hope she will be welcomed and put to good use.
The three Tory MPs who joined the TIGs were muppets. They were caught up in Labour's internal battles over Corbyn and anti-semitism - and should have left well alone.
Dr. Wollaston has revelled in being a member of the "awkward squad" in the Conservative Party. Fine. But her stance over the EU has been, at its most charitable interpretation, all over the shop. At its least charitable, she tried to act as a plant inside Leave, her "defection" timed to cause maximum mischief. Her telling us in the constituency party in the meeting to re-adopt her as the Tory candidate in 2017, that she would work to implement Brexit - and then doing exactly the opposite - leaves my attitude towards her at the less charitable end of the spectrum.
> @brendan16 said: > > @ah009 said: > > > @StuartDickson said: > > > > @kle4 said: > > > > > @CarlottaVance said: > > > > > > > > > https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1132976778845347841 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Theresa May can be criticised for many things but she tried her utmost to deliver a meaningful Brexit. > > > > > > > > Quite. Badly, and she failed, but she tried. > > > > > > Eddie the Eagle “tried” being a ski jumper. He failed. But it was a great comic act. > > > > Difference is, Eddie knew when to jump. May had to be pushed. > > It depends where you think the Tories future lies. Barwell was looking at things from the perspective of winning back Croydon - Bradley from the perspective of retaining Mansfield. > > Its the same problem Labour has - how do you keep London and the north/midlands on board? There is such a massive dislocation now in England between (inner) London and the university towns and everywhere else. How do they bridge that gap - when by definition the media/most MPs is so London centric - cos thats where they live.
It's not a new problem. This is what's been going on in Scotland for years. There' are only three possible futures: 1. Federalism, and here I mean not just the four nations but regions. 2. Proportional representation (my favoured option) 3. Disintegrations (the default if 1. or 2. can't be agreed)
The main opposition to the first two will be the Conservative and Unionist Party, thus they will be the ones to deliver number 3. Unless they can be swept out of the way
For the record, my dislike of the term "Brit" stems not from any connotations with Ulster but because it is linguistically lazy. The term "British" is perfectly adequate and doesn't require any further shortening.
I think I first saw the term in the Currant Bun in the 80s and it grew from there. I'm not culturally or racially offended by the term but I am linguistically offended (there's a new term for you).
Sometimes language is worth fighting for and defending so I prefer the term British.
> @Cyclefree said: > > @Byronic said: > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > > > > > > > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British. < > > > > ++++ > > > > Utter nonsense. The IRA had much nastier words. "Brits" is a widely accepted, informal descriptor. It's journalistic shorthand used in most of our national newspapers for a start "Brits Look Forward To A Scorching Summer!". Americans use it and no one is offended. > > > > Calm down. There are plenty of real things to be upset about. This culture of taking offence at everything is corrosive and mad. > > I don't take offence at it. Nor am I upset by it. I am merely pointing out how it has been used in a part of Britain. "Brits out of Ireland" posters and signs and banners were pretty common during the Troubles. It wasn't meant nicely.<
++++
No, it wasn't meant nicely, but the term Brit in itself - which is what we are arguing - wasn't a boo-word in that phrase. It was just easy, punchy shorthand.
"The British out of Ireland" just sounds weird. "Britons out of Ireland" is pompous and absurd. So they went for a tabloidesque "Brits". Fair enough.
When the IRA wanted to be actively racially offensive they would call the Brits "Huns". Some hardcore ScotNats use the same word for Rangers fans/the English.
> @brendan16 said: > It depends where you think the Tories future lies. Barwell was looking at things from the perspective of winning back Croydon - Bradley from the perspective of retaining Mansfield. > > Its the same problem Labour has - how do you keep London and the north/midlands on board? There is such a massive dislocation now in England between (inner) London and the university towns and everywhere else. How do they bridge that gap - when by definition the media/most MPs is so London centric - cos thats where they live.
Neither party can bridge the gap, and I agree with Mr Goodwin: Bradley is right. Better, from the point of view of their medium-term survival, that the Tories risk losing one or two dozen Remain-leaning constituencies in the South-East to the Yellows than being wrecked through having their vote split by the Brexit Party.
> @Byronic said: > > @Cyclefree said: > > > @kle4 said: > > > > > None of the candidates is remotely handsome. Some are really quite ghastly. In a game of Avoid, Marry, Snog they'd all be in the Avoid bucket. > > > > (I'd go for a drink with Tobias Ellwood, though.)< > > ++++ > > Hmmm. I wonder how you'd feel if a man was so damning of a bunch of female candidates, based on their looks? "They're all ugly old hags" etc? > > FWIW Boris wasn't bad looking in his youth. He's podged out a bit now, however, and the hair is less charming, as it thins.
I have no problem at all with someone expressing their opinion on the looks of a group of women. I have done so myself about women in public life. And been quite rude too.
I made no comment about whether or not their looks have any bearing on their suitability for the post they seek. I don't think they do.
Boris has always, to me anyway, looked like a boiled potato in a suit. He looks like someone who doesn't wash. Never understood what women see him. And I say that having met him.
> @Roger said: > > @Byronic said: > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > @kle4 said: > > > > > > > > None of the candidates is remotely handsome. Some are really quite ghastly. In a game of Avoid, Marry, Snog they'd all be in the Avoid bucket. > > > > > > (I'd go for a drink with Tobias Ellwood, though.)< > > > > ++++ > > > > Hmmm. I wonder how you'd feel if a man was so damning of a bunch of female candidates, based on their looks? "They're all ugly old hags" etc? > > > > FWIW Boris wasn't bad looking in his youth. He's podged out a bit now, however, and the hair is less charming, as it thins. > > Nothing wrong with being judgemental. All discerning people do it.
For the record, my dislike of the term "Brit" stems not from any connotations with Ulster but because it is linguistically lazy. The term "British" is perfectly adequate and doesn't require any further shortening.
I think I first saw the term in the Currant Bun in the 80s and it grew from there. I'm not culturally or racially offended by the term but I am linguistically offended (there's a new term for you).
Sometimes language is worth fighting for and defending so I prefer the term British.
The abbreviation for "July" is "Jul".
Pause.
How busy do one have to be for that to be a legitimate timesaver?....
> > None of the candidates is remotely handsome. Some are really quite ghastly. In a game of Avoid, Marry, Snog they'd all be in the Avoid bucket.
> >
> > (I'd go for a drink with Tobias Ellwood, though.)<
>
> ++++
>
> Hmmm. I wonder how you'd feel if a man was so damning of a bunch of female candidates, based on their looks? "They're all ugly old hags" etc?
>
> FWIW Boris wasn't bad looking in his youth. He's podged out a bit now, however, and the hair is less charming, as it thins.
I have no problem at all with someone expressing their opinion on the looks of a group of women. I have done so myself about women in public life. And been quite rude too.
I made no comment about whether or not their looks have any bearing on their suitability for the post they seek. I don't think they do.
Boris has always, to me anyway, looked like a boiled potato in a suit. He looks like someone who doesn't wash. Never understood what women see him. And I say that having met him.
He's an inspiration to us homely looking guys everywhere. Now I just need to become Foreign Secretary somehow, that will impress people.
3. Disintegrations (the default if 1. or 2. can't be agreed)
The main opposition to the first two will be the Conservative and Unionist Party, thus they will be the ones to deliver number 3. Unless they can be swept out of the way
Federalism and political reform within England becomes much more achievable in a post-UK environment, otherwise everything gets seen through the prism of putting sticking plasters on the union.
The positive for Leavers to take, despite the fact the result doesn't make anything that much clearer really, is that at least we have someone talking up for us now. Six months ago all we heard in the media were reports from parliament of Brexit being thwarted and MPs screaming for revoke or a second referendum, preventing No Deal, and feeling quite smug about it while Mrs May looked as though she was about to feint. No we have our own Mr Smug with a big mouth back, and the scales are level again.
> > I have no problem at all with someone expressing their opinion on the looks of a group of women. I have done so myself about women in public life. And been quite rude too. > > I made no comment about whether or not their looks have any bearing on their suitability for the post they seek. I don't think they do. > > Boris has always, to me anyway, looked like a boiled potato in a suit. He looks like someone who doesn't wash. Never understood what women see him. And I say that having met him. > > <
+++++
Fair dos. I am mystified by your sexual choices, however. You really prefer this guy, Tobias Ellwood, over Raab?
No, it wasn't meant nicely, but the term Brit in itself - which is what we are arguing - wasn't a boo-word in that phrase. It was just easy, punchy shorthand.
"The British out of Ireland" just sounds weird. "Britons out of Ireland" is pompous and absurd. So they went for a tabloidesque "Brits". Fair enough.
When the IRA wanted to be actively racially offensive they would call the Brits "Huns". Some hardcore ScotNats use the same word for Rangers fans/the English.
Just because something is "keen, punchy shorthand" doesn't mean we should embrace it or regret the shortening of the perfectly good word "British".
"British out of Ireland" - nothing wrong with that.
"Romanes eunt domus" - as someone else once said, somewhere, sometime.
> @williamglenn said: > It's not a new problem. This is what's been going on in Scotland for years. There' are only three possible futures: > > 1. Federalism, and here I mean not just the four nations but regions. > > 2. Proportional representation (my favoured option) > > 3. Disintegrations (the default if 1. or 2. can't be agreed) > > > > The main opposition to the first two will be the Conservative and Unionist Party, thus they will be the ones to deliver number 3. Unless they can be swept out of the way > > Federalism and political reform within England becomes much more achievable in a post-UK environment, otherwise everything gets seen through the prism of putting sticking plasters on the union.
Full-on federalism could be a useful solution for reconstituting the UK, if it lasts long enough to implement the idea, but Balkanising England is an unwanted and daft proposal. Much stronger local Government? Yes. 8, 9 or 10 separate cantons (mostly with arbitrary and artificial borders,) all with their own Parliaments and different sets of laws? No thank you.
> @Byronic said: > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > > > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British. < > > ++++ > > Utter nonsense. The IRA had much nastier words. "Brits" is a widely accepted, informal descriptor. It's journalistic shorthand used in most of our national newspapers for a start "Brits Look Forward To A Scorching Summer!". Americans use it and no one is offended. > > Calm down. There are plenty of real things to be upset about. This culture of taking offence at everything is corrosive and mad.
> @stodge said: > No, it wasn't meant nicely, but the term Brit in itself - which is what we are arguing - wasn't a boo-word in that phrase. It was just easy, punchy shorthand. > > "The British out of Ireland" just sounds weird. "Britons out of Ireland" is pompous and absurd. So they went for a tabloidesque "Brits". Fair enough. > > > When the IRA wanted to be actively racially offensive they would call the Brits "Huns". Some hardcore ScotNats use the same word for Rangers fans/the English. > > Just because something is "keen, punchy shorthand" doesn't mean we should embrace it or regret the shortening of the perfectly good word "British". > > "British out of Ireland" - nothing wrong with that. > > "Romanes eunt domus" - as someone else once said, somewhere, sometime.<
> @justin124 said: > > @stodge said: > > For me the most significant figure from this election was thr Turnout - which came in at just under 37% with more than 63% not being bothered to vote at all. That does not strike me as clear evidence of voters straining at the leash to express their views on Brexit. EU elections have always been treated frivolously - even by many who do vote - and the attempt to translate this data into a GE result is just bonkers or at best naive.Had last Thursday been polling day for a General Election , I have no doubt that both major parties would have exceeded 30% - support for the Brexit Party , the LibDems and the Greens would have been much lower in terms of vote shares. > > > > Having first said anyone trying to translate these results into a GE is "bonkers", we are then treated to the expert assertion that the majority of those who didn't vote are apparently Conservative and Labour voters who simply abstained and who will come out in their droves for a GE. > > > > Well, maybe, but that's just your bonkers assumption as well. It's entirely possible TBP would pick up more support as would the other parties. > > > > At the moment, the combined CON-LAB share is down to just over 50% from 84% in 2017 so that's a lot of lost voters looking for other homes. > > 63% were not sufficiently bothered about Brexit to turn up at all last Thursday, and it is not unreasonable to assume that the much higher Turnout at a General Election would be heavily skewed to voters with other concerns. Moreover, many of the 37% who did vote last week would focus on other issues - and would be likely to vote differently. In May 2014 UKIP led by Farage managed over 26% - yet less than a year later at the 2015 election that poll share more than halved to 12.5% - despite the momentum generated by two defections from the Tories and the by election victories which followed them.
The key reason that the Tories and Labour will do better in a GE is because of the straight-jacket of our FPTP electoral system. If we had a PR voting system I don't think that there would be any guarantee that people would return to the big 2. Unfortunately our system works on a Buggin's Turn basis and for the vast majority of us in England if you aren't voting Labour or Tory you may as well stay at home.
Meanwhile. Ulster Unionist finishes sixth and is eliminated on Second Count. Almost as stunning as Tories in fifth. Alliance looking nailed on for the third seat now.
> @Black_Rook said: > > Full-on federalism could be a useful solution for reconstituting the UK, if it lasts long enough to implement the idea, but Balkanising England is an unwanted and daft proposal. Much stronger local Government? Yes. 8, 9 or 10 separate cantons (mostly with arbitrary and artificial borders,) all with their own Parliaments and different sets of laws? No thank you. -------
A full-on federal UK doesn't make sense because of the imbalance. It would be better to have separate sovereign states as part of a European union, but there would be nothing to stop the nations of Great Britain agreeing to additional integration between themselves.
> @Cyclefree said: > > @ah009 said: > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > @stodge said: > > > > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn. > > > > > > > > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets. > > > > > > > > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM. > > > > > > > > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him? > > > > > > > > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is. > > > > > > > > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015. > > > > > > > > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue. > > > > > > > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't. > > > > > > > > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British. > > > > Huh? Many Brits use that word about themselves wholly without any sense of self-hatred. I hear it plenty, and have used it myself without ever having been challenged. I don't think I know any republicans (in the NI sense at least). > > They may well do. But nonetheless in an Irish context it is abusive. I would not use it to describe myself or anyone else but possibly that's because of my own background.
I thought PB was a British site in the main. All of this snowflakery when there is so much of greater importance to consider is bizarre.
> @stodge said: > For the record, my dislike of the term "Brit" stems not from any connotations with Ulster but because it is linguistically lazy. The term "British" is perfectly adequate and doesn't require any further shortening. > > I think I first saw the term in the Currant Bun in the 80s and it grew from there. I'm not culturally or racially offended by the term but I am linguistically offended (there's a new term for you). > > Sometimes language is worth fighting for and defending so I prefer the term British.
> Maybe Jo Swinson can work something out with Caroline Lucas. Change UK's best option is being allowed to sit as LDs under the same kind of Co-op Labour model. Some sort of Remain alliance in any snap election seems more plausible now with both Greens and LDs doing better, they have both so much more to gain from cooperation.
Change got 3.5%, servitude to the LD model would betray the half a million who voted for them. Minor partner in an alliance would be more appropriate - stand aside in the bulk of seats in return for a free run in 40 or 50, areas where the Lib Dems are dirt plus the seats of the current MPs. Or convince the LDs to rebrand and claim a merger when in reality it's a takeover but with the bonus of new branding.
> @Byronic said: > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > > I have no problem at all with someone expressing their opinion on the looks of a group of women. I have done so myself about women in public life. And been quite rude too. > > > > I made no comment about whether or not their looks have any bearing on their suitability for the post they seek. I don't think they do. > > > > Boris has always, to me anyway, looked like a boiled potato in a suit. He looks like someone who doesn't wash. Never understood what women see him. And I say that having met him. > > > > < > > +++++ > > Fair dos. I am mystified by your sexual choices, however. You really prefer this guy, Tobias Ellwood, over Raab? > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobias_Ellwood#/media/File:Official_portrait_of_Mr_Tobias_Ellwood_crop_2.jpg > > While we're on the subject, I quite fancy Penny Mordaunt, though she could do with losing a few stone. > > When she was younger and slimmer she was borderline stunning. A proper nine out of ten. > > https://www.civilsociety.co.uk/people.penny-mordaunt.html > > >
Er, I said I'd go for a drink. Your assumption about what that means is illuminating. I'd go for a drink with Mr Ellwood because he seems interesting and intelligent and I can imagine having a worthwhile conversation with him. I'd go for a drink with Yiannis Varoufakis too - even though he can sometimes look like Voldemort.
And yes on the looks front I'd prefer Ellwood over Raab. Raab comes across as wooden and dull and, frankly, a bit self-regarding. It's not an appealing mixture.
Penny Mordaunt is good looking I agree. Esther McVey is quite pretty if a bit sharp-looking. Andrea Leadsom looks OK though her hooded eyes don't do her any favours. Liz Truss looked absolutely bonkers in her recent photo shoot.
Parliament is not exactly endowed with good lookers, frankly. Still, that's the least of our worries.
> @felix said: > > @Cyclefree said: > > > @ah009 said: > > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > > @stodge said: > > > > > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn. > > > > > > > > > > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets. > > > > > > > > > > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM. > > > > > > > > > > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him? > > > > > > > > > > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is. > > > > > > > > > > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015. > > > > > > > > > > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue. > > > > > > > > > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't. > > > > > > > > > > > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British. > > > > > > Huh? Many Brits use that word about themselves wholly without any sense of self-hatred. I hear it plenty, and have used it myself without ever having been challenged. I don't think I know any republicans (in the NI sense at least). > > > > They may well do. But nonetheless in an Irish context it is abusive. I would not use it to describe myself or anyone else but possibly that's because of my own background. > > I thought PB was a British site in the main. All of this snowflakery when there is so much of greater importance to consider is bizarre.
Northern Ireland is part of Britain. Or had you forgotten?
> > > > I do not believe that anything other than a tiny handful of Tories would VONC a new leader or that the DUP would.
> > > >
> > > > Tiny handful maybe enough
> > >
> > > VONC isn't enough to stop Brexit though. It has to be done in time to hold the election and a new government prevents Brexit. Plus there's no guarantee under FPTP that Brexit supporters won't win the election.
> > >
> > > If the election is between a hard Brexiteer leading the Tories, Corbyn still prevaricating and the Lib Dems etc there's every chance the Tories could win the election just as the BXP won last week's election.
> > After a VONC, there are 14 days to find a PM who commands the confidence of the house in a vote of confidence. There may be sufficient MPs to give that confidence to someone who will ask the EU for an extension (which they will get in the circumstances) and then resign for a GE. The extension may be for four years of course. "Here you are. Don't come back bothering us until you've sorted yourself out".
>
> Corbyn won't give confidence to anyone else and Corbyn won't resign if he gets in power.
Scenario: It's 20th October 2019. 3 Days ago the HoC voted no confidence in Her Majesty's prime minister because he's just sitting on his hands waiting for Halloween The VoNC was carried by 15 Votes. Now that the country really is in crisis 50 plus Conservatives (including Mrs May), most Labour Party MPs and all minor parties have agreed to send Ken Clarke to the Queen to form an emergency government on the grounds of preventing No Deal Brexit and holding GE in November.
Are you really claiming that Corbyn would not support this emergency government, when he is so close the the GE that he believes he can win??
Emergency government that gives the Tories time to get their shit together vs immediate GE?
> @isam said: > The positive for Leavers to take, despite the fact the result doesn't make anything that much clearer really, is that at least we have someone talking up for us now. Six months ago all we heard in the media were reports from parliament of Brexit being thwarted and MPs screaming for revoke or a second referendum, preventing No Deal, and feeling quite smug about it while Mrs May looked as though she was about to feint. No we have our own Mr Smug with a big mouth back, and the scales are level again.
Your Mr Smug, as you put it, is now demanding a role in the negotiations with the EU. At the risk of being called smug or patronising or whatever, there are currently no negotiations taking place with the EU nor are any planned because as he knows the terms of the extension to 31 October were that the WA was not up for renegotiation.
We can take the WA or leave without a deal. I thought he wanted us to do the latter.
> @Cyclefree said: > > @felix said: > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > @ah009 said: > > > > > @Cyclefree said: > > > > > > @stodge said: > > > > > > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn. > > > > > > > > > > > > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets. > > > > > > > > > > > > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM. > > > > > > > > > > > > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him? > > > > > > > > > > > > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is. > > > > > > > > > > > > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015. > > > > > > > > > > > > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue. > > > > > > > > > > > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British. > > > > > > > > Huh? Many Brits use that word about themselves wholly without any sense of self-hatred. I hear it plenty, and have used it myself without ever having been challenged. I don't think I know any republicans (in the NI sense at least). > > > > > > They may well do. But nonetheless in an Irish context it is abusive. I would not use it to describe myself or anyone else but possibly that's because of my own background. > > > > I thought PB was a British site in the main. All of this snowflakery when there is so much of greater importance to consider is bizarre. > > Northern Ireland is part of Britain. Or had you forgotten?
Brit really isn't a derogatory term to most of the population, although I accept you have a different view. I've been called it many times. Mind you, I'm not offended by any name calling. Unless you called me a Lib Dem.
> The positive for Leavers to take, despite the fact the result doesn't make anything that much clearer really, is that at least we have someone talking up for us now. Six months ago all we heard in the media were reports from parliament of Brexit being thwarted and MPs screaming for revoke or a second referendum, preventing No Deal, and feeling quite smug about it while Mrs May looked as though she was about to feint. No we have our own Mr Smug with a big mouth back, and the scales are level again.
Your Mr Smug, as you put it, is now demanding a role in the negotiations with the EU. At the risk of being called smug or patronising or whatever, there are currently no negotiations taking place with the EU nor are any planned because as he knows the terms of the extension to 31 October were that the WA was not up for renegotiation.
We can take the WA or leave without a deal. I thought he wanted us to do the latter.
So what exactly is he on about?
Trying to reassure people who want a deal by promising a unicorn and that he won't intend to take us out no deal as a first option. Positioning only.
> @isam said: > The positive for Leavers to take, despite the fact the result doesn't make anything that much clearer really, is that at least we have someone talking up for us now. Six months ago all we heard in the media were reports from parliament of Brexit being thwarted and MPs screaming for revoke or a second referendum, preventing No Deal, and feeling quite smug about it while Mrs May looked as though she was about to feint. No we have our own Mr Smug with a big mouth back, and the scales are level again.
Yep, we've got another potential route to leaving the EU even if Brexit is cancelled by this Parliament, which is to elect a Brexit Party government/Farage Prime Minister.
Brit really isn't a derogatory term to most of the population, although I accept you have a different view. I've been called it many times. Mind you, I'm not offended by any name calling. Unless you called me a Lib Dem.
No doubt you insist on the full Liberal Democrat *ducks*
Comments
> I thought the 2019 EU elections would be the most divisive campaign in living memory. I was wrong. Remarkably little happened in my area apart from a few leaflets.
>
> However, far worse has been the reaction on social media (particularly twitter). The number of remainers crowing over flawed graphs (e.g including Lab in remain totals, or conveniently ignoring the Tories in pro-Brexit totals) and leavers trolling GIFs of Farage laughing like a leathery clown is sickening.
>
> New PM is going to have to be a miracle worker.
> @dyedwoolie said:
> Labour, the party of Manchester, Liverpool and a little bit of London. The scouse idiots will be the very last rats to desert
What was notable was that the Labour party vote held up best in areas with large BAME populations.
I think you will probably find that the Lib Dem and Green 'surge' was disproportionately white and middle class in London - whereas the BAME vote stuck with Labour. It would certainly explain the differential results in places like Newham, Hounslow, Redbridge, Barking and Dagenham etc - in the latter Labour got nearly five times the LD vote and the BXP got nearly four times the LD vote there too. The Brexit party also won the zone 5-6 boroughs which backed leave in 2016 - Bexley, Havering, Hillingdon and additionally Bromley.
London is quite a diverse place politically once you get outside the more 'fashionable' areas - and not every borough followed the trend.
Khan will have no bother pulling together his coalition to win easily next May - the poor, renters BAME voters etc. In the end London will continue to trend Labour for demographic reasons.
Well, maybe, but that's just your bonkers assumption as well. It's entirely possible TBP would pick up more support as would the other parties.
At the moment, the combined CON-LAB share is down to just over 50% from 84% in 2017 so that's a lot of lost voters looking for other homes.
As for the others, how much do they value their seats, which they wil llose at the next election anyway, vs a potential no deal? I don't doubt some will at least not show up for such a vote, but all of them? It won't take many.
We will most likely see a return to the post 2010 battleground of different regions being different 2 party contests. SNP OR con, LD or Lab, LD or Tory, Brexit or lab, tory or lab etc.
> > @El_Capitano said:
> > Sarah Wollaston admitting that CUK screwed up. I wouldn't be surprised to see her and Heidi Allen end up in the Lib Dems sooner rather than later.
> >
> > https://twitter.com/sarahwollaston/status/1132942571024592896 <
>
> +++++
>
> What a cavalcade of cack her career has been.
>
>
Disagree (strongly). She was a local GP, who came to politics late. She was notable for being selected by an "open primary" of all voters, not just the usual Tory Selectariat -therefore it was to be expected that she was not an orthodox party clone. She has made some interesting and thought provoking points on healthcare and the NHS, and her independence of thought is to be welcomed. If she does go over to the dark side of Lib Demmery I hope she will be welcomed and put to good use.
> Why do the Tories even bother in NI? It is simply humiliating. Eleventh place.
>
> I think it speaks very well of them. If we are one United Kingdom, then every citizen should have the chance to vote for the major parties if they so wish.
Agreed fully, it is poor from the other parties. (Also poor from the NI public continuing to vote on sectarian and religious lines).
The first count for the Midlands North West constituency is just being announced now - and there will be several more counts to come. Mairead McGuinness of Fine Gael - who we see a lot on our TVs and who often chairs the European parliament as one of the Vice Presidents - has topped the poll and been elected on the first count and her surplus will now be distributed.
Her running mate for Fine Gael - who is also likely to win a seat - is a former Rose of Tralee!
Who says politics isn't one big beauty contest.
https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1132976662256259074
If there was a GE now he cwould not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets.
The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM.
At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him?
It’s also worth remembering that being an MP is a lucrative gig. Onasanya hung on and made her constituents recall her.
> For me the most significant figure from this election was thr Turnout - which came in at just under 37% with more than 63% not being bothered to vote at all. That does not strike me as clear evidence of voters straining at the leash to express their views on Brexit. EU elections have always been treated frivolously - even by many who do vote - and the attempt to translate this data into a GE result is just bonkers or at best naive.Had last Thursday been polling day for a General Election , I have no doubt that both major parties would have exceeded 30% - support for the Brexit Party , the LibDems and the Greens would have been much lower in terms of vote shares.
I suppose that's the Corbyn line now - that low turnout means that these results aren't very significant at all. Actually in comparative terms turnout was extremely buoyant for a Euro election held without any parallel local elections, but let's put that to one side.
If you want to factor in turnout, then I think it just makes matters worse for Labour now. The most significant figure (for you) should be that, given the chance, more than 19 out of every 20 people eligible to vote in a national election chose not to put their X in support of a Labour Party led by Corbyn.
> > @Ploppikins said:
> > I thought the 2019 EU elections would be the most divisive campaign in living memory. I was wrong. Remarkably little happened in my area apart from a few leaflets.
> >
> > However, far worse has been the reaction on social media (particularly twitter). The number of remainers crowing over flawed graphs (e.g including Lab in remain totals, or conveniently ignoring the Tories in pro-Brexit totals) and leavers trolling GIFs of Farage laughing like a leathery clown is sickening.
> >
> > New PM is going to have to be a miracle worker.
>
> > @dyedwoolie said:
> > Labour, the party of Manchester, Liverpool and a little bit of London. The scouse idiots will be the very last rats to desert
>
> What was notable was that the Labour party vote held up best in areas with large BAME populations.
>
> I think you will probably find that the Lib Dem and Green 'surge' was disproportionately white and middle class in London - whereas the BAME vote stuck with Labour. It would certainly explain the differential results in places like Newham, Hounslow, Redbridge, Barking and Dagenham etc - in the latter Labour got nearly five times the LD vote and the BXP got nearly four times the LD vote there too. The Brexit party also won the zone 5-6 boroughs which backed leave in 2016 - Bexley, Havering, Hillingdon and additionally Bromley.
>
> London is quite a diverse place once you get outside the more 'fashionable' areas - and not every borough followed the trend.
>
>
A detailed analysis would presumably show a strong correlation between what's left of Labour's support in this election and concentrations of BAME voters all over the map - Leicester and Luton being prime examples. In many rural areas it posted less than 5%.
> On the topic of VONCs, there are at least 5 ex-Lab MPs who are not going to want an early election: Field, Woodcock, O’Mara, Austin, Hopkins.
>
> Williamson is also suspended (but I suspect Corbyn would let him back on).
>
> There is also Lloyd who left the LD whip to vote for Brexit
>
> I can’t imagine the CHUKs would want an early election either.
>
> I wouldn’t expect any of them to vote for PM Boris or Raab but there might be a nasty stomach bug going round that day...
>
> I also forgot Ivan Lewis.
>
> Also Nick Boles - although doubt he would vote for any Con right winger.
>
> If the CUKs join the LDs they would vote for an early election.
>
> As for the others, how much do they value their seats, which they wil llose at the next election anyway, vs a potential no deal? I don't doubt some will at least not show up for such a vote, but all of them? It won't take many.
>
> Allan and Wollaston might defect the LDs and hold their seats. The others don’t have much chance and I can’t see Chuka’s ego letting him join the LDs.
>
> It’s also worth remembering that being an MP is a lucrative gig. Onasanya hung on and made her constituents recall her.
So only a couple might join in the vote, and it comes down to how many Tory remainers put their money where their mouth is. But your point about the lucrative gig is relevant to how many might switch as well - sure not all will have as much chance as those two at holding their seats if they switch, but they'd have a better chance, some of them at any rate. If it is about holding onto the gig, long term, it might be their best shot.
> Well, the headline at the least has it nailed I think
> https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1132976662256259074
35% mandate? Novel idea.
> >
> > What a cavalcade of cack her career has been.
> >
> >
>
> Disagree (strongly). She was a local GP, who came to politics late. She was notable for being selected by an "open primary" of all voters, not just the usual Tory Selectariat -therefore it was to be expected that she was not an orthodox party clone. She has made some interesting and thought provoking points on healthcare and the NHS, and her independence of thought is to be welcomed. If she does go over to the dark side of Lib Demmery I hope she will be welcomed and put to good use. <
+++++
And what do you think of her decision to join the Leave campaign, then suddenly realise, ten days before the vote, that she was an ardent Remainer, so ardent she left the Tories and joined the CUK's to call for Revoke?
Do you think that makes her principled and impressive, and intellectually coherent, or a pathetic careerist fool who agreed to be a double agent in the Leave campaign, in return for a job from Cameron, which she never got cause her betrayal achieved nothing?
She's an idiot. She might be a nice lady and a good doctor, but she has the political IQ of a demented parakeet.
> https://twitter.com/JamesERothwell/status/1133003156760268800
It's twitter, but even so, practically all the replies are that the WA as a whole must go, the backstop is meaningless to the debate.
> For me the most significant figure from this election was thr Turnout - which came in at just under 37% with more than 63% not being bothered to vote at all. That does not strike me as clear evidence of voters straining at the leash to express their views on Brexit. EU elections have always been treated frivolously - even by many who do vote - and the attempt to translate this data into a GE result is just bonkers or at best naive.Had last Thursday been polling day for a General Election , I have no doubt that both major parties would have exceeded 30% - support for the Brexit Party , the LibDems and the Greens would have been much lower in terms of vote shares.
>
> Having first said anyone trying to translate these results into a GE is "bonkers", we are then treated to the expert assertion that the majority of those who didn't vote are apparently Conservative and Labour voters who simply abstained and who will come out in their droves for a GE.
>
> Well, maybe, but that's just your bonkers assumption as well. It's entirely possible TBP would pick up more support as would the other parties.
>
> At the moment, the combined CON-LAB share is down to just over 50% from 84% in 2017 so that's a lot of lost voters looking for other homes.
63% were not sufficiently bothered about Brexit to turn up at all last Thursday, and it is not unreasonable to assume that the much higher Turnout at a General Election would be heavily skewed to voters with other concerns. Moreover, many of the 37% who did vote last week would focus on other issues - and would be likely to vote differently. In May 2014 UKIP led by Farage managed over 26% - yet less than a year later at the 2015 election that poll share more than halved to 12.5% - despite the momentum generated by two defections from the Tories and the by election victories which followed them.
> > @augustus_carp said:
>
> > >
> > > What a cavalcade of cack her career has been.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Disagree (strongly). She was a local GP, who came to politics late. She was notable for being selected by an "open primary" of all voters, not just the usual Tory Selectariat -therefore it was to be expected that she was not an orthodox party clone. She has made some interesting and thought provoking points on healthcare and the NHS, and her independence of thought is to be welcomed. If she does go over to the dark side of Lib Demmery I hope she will be welcomed and put to good use. <
>
> +++++
>
> And what do you think of her decision to join the Leave campaign, then suddenly realise, ten days before the vote, that she was an ardent Remainer, so ardent she left the Tories and joined the CUK's to call for Revoke?
>
> Do you think that makes her principled and impressive, and intellectually coherent, or a pathetic careerist fool who agreed to be a double agent in the Leave campaign, in return for a job from Cameron, which she never got cause her betrayal achieved nothing?
>
> She's an idiot. She might be a nice lady and a good doctor, but she has the political IQ of a demented parakeet.
>
Alternatively, she did some research, weighed up the evidence and changed her mind accordingly.
Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015.
Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue.
OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
> Well, the headline at the least has it nailed I think
> https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1132976662256259074
I know this is trivial but Raab looks like one of the puppets in Thunderbirds.
> > @kle4 said:
> > > @CarlottaVance said:
> >
> > > https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1132976778845347841
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Theresa May can be criticised for many things but she tried her utmost to deliver a meaningful Brexit.
> >
> > Quite. Badly, and she failed, but she tried.
>
> Eddie the Eagle “tried” being a ski jumper. He failed. But it was a great comic act.
Difference is, Eddie knew when to jump. May had to be pushed.
> >
> > She's an idiot. She might be a nice lady and a good doctor, but she has the political IQ of a demented parakeet.
> >
>
> Alternatively, she did some research, weighed up the evidence and changed her mind accordingly. <
+++++
If you honestly believe that (do you???) then you are as silly as her.
I think you are putting gallantry ahead of logic. You like her, so you forgive her. But really her behaviour has been daft, devious and entirely counter-productive. And now she will lose the next election, and her sad political "career" will be over. I don't see the local Lib Dems accepting her in a seat they would hope to win all by themselves.
> Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn.
>
> If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets.
>
> The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM.
>
> At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him?
>
> First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is.
>
> Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015.
>
> Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue.
>
> OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
Isn't the answer obvious? The Labour leader doesn't want it. He has never been pro the EU in his life, against it in fact, consistently throughout his career. The mystery to me is why anyone ever thought that he would change the views of a lifetime.
> A detailed analysis would presumably show a strong correlation between what's left of Labour's support in this election and concentrations of BAME voters all over the map - Leicester and Luton being prime examples. In many rural areas it posted less than 5%.
>
> Newham, Tower Hamlets. I wouldn't say BAME was correct, more like an Islamic vote<
+++++
Bradford too. This is toxic for Labour. Reduced to the Muslim vote, Merseyside, and some ex coal miners.
> > @justin124 said:
> > For me the most significant figure from this election was thr Turnout - which came in at just under 37% with more than 63% not being bothered to vote at all. That does not strike me as clear evidence of voters straining at the leash to express their views on Brexit. EU elections have always been treated frivolously - even by many who do vote - and the attempt to translate this data into a GE result is just bonkers or at best naive.Had last Thursday been polling day for a General Election , I have no doubt that both major parties would have exceeded 30% - support for the Brexit Party , the LibDems and the Greens would have been much lower in terms of vote shares.
>
> I suppose that's the Corbyn line now - that low turnout means that these results aren't very significant at all. Actually in comparative terms turnout was extremely buoyant for a Euro election held without any parallel local elections, but let's put that to one side.
>
> If you want to factor in turnout, then I think it just makes matters worse for Labour now. The most significant figure (for you) should be that, given the chance, more than 19 out of every 20 people eligible to vote in a national election chose not to put their X in support of a Labour Party led by Corbyn.
Voters have never shown much interest in EU elections here ever since the EU Parliament first was directly elected in 1979. Attitudes have tended to be pretty frivolous - even in the ranks of the politically aware.Last week most people opted to ignore the hype by declining to participate in a single issue election.
> Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn.
>
> If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets.
>
> The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM.
>
> At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him?
>
> First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is.
>
> Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015.
>
> Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue.
>
> OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
"Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British.
> > @isam said:
> > A detailed analysis would presumably show a strong correlation between what's left of Labour's support in this election and concentrations of BAME voters all over the map - Leicester and Luton being prime examples. In many rural areas it posted less than 5%.
> >
> > Newham, Tower Hamlets. I wouldn't say BAME was correct, more like an Islamic vote<
>
> +++++
>
> Bradford too. This is toxic for Labour. Reduced to the Muslim vote, Merseyside, and some ex coal miners.
Under Corbyn it was pretty much inevitable that Labour would eventually turn into a mixture of Respect and the SWP. Some of us even pointed it out a while ago.
So my guess is that there would have been about 10-20% up until recently, probably around 5% now. And they'd vote according to their pre-Brexit preference.
> Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue.
>
> OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.<
+++++
Are you really offended by being called a Brit?!?
Anyhoo, we basically agree. And congrats to the Lib Dems on a fine performance. I would be delighted if they took over as the official opposition. I'd not be unhappy if they won the GE, to be honest.
> Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn.
>
> If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets.
>
> The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM.
>
> At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him?
>
> First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is.
>
> Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015.
>
> Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue.
>
> OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
The ideal scenario is one in which another coup is attempted against Corbyn, and that this ends in a split (with the hard left and soft left parties subsequently wiping each other out in a General Election.) But that outcome is obviously too good to be true.
Failing that, Corbyn, his shadow cabinet and their policies being pulled apart under extensive scrutiny during the next election campaign might at least help to weaken Labour. If they're going to somehow crawl back into Government then one would at least hope for them to be firmly shackled to parties (likely the SNP and/or the Lib Dems) that have their flaws but at least benefit from not being totally bloody insane.
> > @stodge said:
> > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn.
> >
> > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets.
> >
> > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM.
> >
> > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him?
> >
> > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is.
> >
> > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015.
> >
> > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue.
> >
> > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
>
>
> "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British.
Huh? Many Brits use that word about themselves wholly without any sense of self-hatred. I hear it plenty, and have used it myself without ever having been challenged. I don't think I know any republicans (in the NI sense at least).
> https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1133006944296427522
He's not opening with 'Now before The Saj'? I'm disappointed in The Saj.
> > @kle4 said:
>
> > Well, the headline at the least has it nailed I think
>
> > https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1132976662256259074
>
>
>
>
>
> I know this is trivial but Raab looks like one of the puppets in Thunderbirds.
>
> I thought he was meant to be the handsome one of the race.
No. He looks like those cardboard cut out dolls I had in my childhood on which you could put on different paper outfits. He is bland and dull looking. He might make a good male model for knitting patterns, possibly. He has all the sex appeal of a pint of milk.
None of the candidates is remotely handsome. Some are really quite ghastly. In a game of Avoid, Marry, Snog they'd all be in the Avoid bucket.
(I'd go for a drink with Tobias Ellwood, though.)
>
>
> "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British. <
++++
Utter nonsense. The IRA had much nastier words. "Brits" is a widely accepted, informal descriptor. It's journalistic shorthand used in most of our national newspapers for a start "Brits Look Forward To A Scorching Summer!". Americans use it and no one is offended.
Calm down. There are plenty of real things to be upset about. This culture of taking offence at everything is corrosive and mad.
> > @StuartDickson said:
> > > @kle4 said:
> > > > @CarlottaVance said:
> > >
> > > > https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1132976778845347841
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Theresa May can be criticised for many things but she tried her utmost to deliver a meaningful Brexit.
> > >
> > > Quite. Badly, and she failed, but she tried.
> >
> > Eddie the Eagle “tried” being a ski jumper. He failed. But it was a great comic act.
>
> Difference is, Eddie knew when to jump. May had to be pushed.
It depends where you think the Tories future lies. Barwell was looking at things from the perspective of winning back Croydon - Bradley from the perspective of retaining Mansfield.
Its the same problem Labour has - how do you keep London and the north/midlands on board? There is such a massive dislocation now in England between (inner) London and the university towns and everywhere else. How do they bridge that gap - when by definition the media/most MPs is so London centric - cos thats where they live.
> > @Cyclefree said:
> > > @stodge said:
> > > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn.
> > >
> > > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets.
> > >
> > > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM.
> > >
> > > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him?
> > >
> > > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is.
> > >
> > > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015.
> > >
> > > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue.
> > >
> > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
> >
> >
> > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British.
>
> Huh? Many Brits use that word about themselves wholly without any sense of self-hatred. I hear it plenty, and have used it myself without ever having been challenged. I don't think I know any republicans (in the NI sense at least).
They may well do. But nonetheless in an Irish context it is abusive. I would not use it to describe myself or anyone else but possibly that's because of my own background.
> > @ah009 said:
> > > @Cyclefree said:
> > > > @stodge said:
> > > > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn.
> > > >
> > > > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets.
> > > >
> > > > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM.
> > > >
> > > > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him?
> > > >
> > > > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is.
> > > >
> > > > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015.
> > > >
> > > > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue.
> > > >
> > > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
> > >
> > >
> > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British.
> >
> > Huh? Many Brits use that word about themselves wholly without any sense of self-hatred. I hear it plenty, and have used it myself without ever having been challenged. I don't think I know any republicans (in the NI sense at least).
>
> They may well do. But nonetheless in an Irish context it is abusive. I would not use it to describe myself or anyone else but possibly that's because of my own background.
I had never heard the term had ever been offensive. Learn something every day I guess.
> For me the most significant figure from this election was thr Turnout - which came in at just under 37% with more than 63% not being bothered to vote at all. That does not strike me as clear evidence of voters straining at the leash to express their views on Brexit. EU elections have always been treated frivolously - even by many who do vote - and the attempt to translate this data into a GE result is just bonkers or at best naive.Had last Thursday been polling day for a General Election , I have no doubt that both major parties would have exceeded 30% - support for the Brexit Party , the LibDems and the Greens would have been much lower in terms of vote shares.
>
> In 2017 the LDs looked dead and UKIP looked dead. Now, Brexit, LD and Greens are all looking very much alive. Whereas last time your realistic options were basically tories or Labour, this time there could be a self-reinforcing split of the vote shares. Because Brexit threatens the tories,LDs and Greens feel more confortable voting for their parties than Labour. Because Labour is threatened by LDs and Greens, Brexit supporters won't fear a Corbyn government gettinga majority.
>
> We will most likely see a return to the post 2010 battleground of different regions being different 2 party contests. SNP OR con, LD or Lab, LD or Tory, Brexit or lab, tory or lab etc.
>
> LOL, SNP or CON, are you barking, Cons are miles and miles behind SNP. No contest ever it is a massacre.
Indeed! The SNP had a good result yesterday - but its poll share of 37.7% was little changed from the 2017 GE. This was despite the likelihood that it was a beneficiary of anti-Brexit protest votes - along with the LibDems and Greens.The party did not exceed expectations in terms of vote share, and I would expect their vote share at a Westminster election to be lower - probably below 35%. Both Labour and the Tories had an abysmal result yesterday - but would do much better at a GE.
You are quite correct - we know people left the Conservative and Labour parties and leant their votes to TBP, LDs, Greens and others and it's more than likely a lot of these will return but to assume they all will seems unwise.
I'm also wary of drawing parallels - the world of 2019 isn't the same as 2014. The crucial question is first on the centre-right, IF TBP and the Conservatives go fishing in the same pool neither will have enough for supper.
The other aspect is the political paralysis Brexit has caused would impact on the "other issues" - where are we with social care for example? Yes, the Government has a good story to tell on the economy (as long as nobody talks about productivity and efficiency) but in other areas, there has been almost complete inertia since 2016.
> > @kle4 said:
>
> None of the candidates is remotely handsome. Some are really quite ghastly. In a game of Avoid, Marry, Snog they'd all be in the Avoid bucket.
>
> (I'd go for a drink with Tobias Ellwood, though.)<
++++
Hmmm. I wonder how you'd feel if a man was so damning of a bunch of female candidates, based on their looks? "They're all ugly old hags" etc?
FWIW Boris wasn't bad looking in his youth. He's podged out a bit now, however, and the hair is less charming, as it thins.
>
> I had never heard the term had ever been offensive. Learn something every day I guess.<
++++++
It's only offensive to people desperately eager to be offended. The idea it is *actually* pejorative is ridiculous. Ignore.
> > @Cyclefree said:
>
> >
> >
> > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British. <
>
> ++++
>
> Utter nonsense. The IRA had much nastier words. "Brits" is a widely accepted, informal descriptor. It's journalistic shorthand used in most of our national newspapers for a start "Brits Look Forward To A Scorching Summer!". Americans use it and no one is offended.
>
> Calm down. There are plenty of real things to be upset about. This culture of taking offence at everything is corrosive and mad.
I don't take offence at it. Nor am I upset by it. I am merely pointing out how it has been used in a part of Britain. "Brits out of Ireland" posters and signs and banners were pretty common during the Troubles. It wasn't meant nicely.
> > @Cyclefree said:
> > > @kle4 said:
>
> >
> > None of the candidates is remotely handsome. Some are really quite ghastly. In a game of Avoid, Marry, Snog they'd all be in the Avoid bucket.
> >
> > (I'd go for a drink with Tobias Ellwood, though.)<
>
> ++++
>
> Hmmm. I wonder how you'd feel if a man was so damning of a bunch of female candidates, based on their looks? "They're all ugly old hags" etc?
>
> FWIW Boris wasn't bad looking in his youth. He's podged out a bit now, however, and the hair is less charming, as it thins.
Nothing wrong with being judgemental. All discerning people do it.
> > @Byronic said:
> > > @El_Capitano said:
> > > Sarah Wollaston admitting that CUK screwed up. I wouldn't be surprised to see her and Heidi Allen end up in the Lib Dems sooner rather than later.
> > >
> > > https://twitter.com/sarahwollaston/status/1132942571024592896 <
> >
> > +++++
> >
> > What a cavalcade of cack her career has been.
> >
> >
>
> Disagree (strongly). She was a local GP, who came to politics late. She was notable for being selected by an "open primary" of all voters, not just the usual Tory Selectariat -therefore it was to be expected that she was not an orthodox party clone. She has made some interesting and thought provoking points on healthcare and the NHS, and her independence of thought is to be welcomed. If she does go over to the dark side of Lib Demmery I hope she will be welcomed and put to good use.
The three Tory MPs who joined the TIGs were muppets. They were caught up in Labour's internal battles over Corbyn and anti-semitism - and should have left well alone.
Dr. Wollaston has revelled in being a member of the "awkward squad" in the Conservative Party. Fine. But her stance over the EU has been, at its most charitable interpretation, all over the shop. At its least charitable, she tried to act as a plant inside Leave, her "defection" timed to cause maximum mischief. Her telling us in the constituency party in the meeting to re-adopt her as the Tory candidate in 2017, that she would work to implement Brexit - and then doing exactly the opposite - leaves my attitude towards her at the less charitable end of the spectrum.
> > @ah009 said:
> > > @StuartDickson said:
> > > > @kle4 said:
> > > > > @CarlottaVance said:
> > > >
> > > > > https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1132976778845347841
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Theresa May can be criticised for many things but she tried her utmost to deliver a meaningful Brexit.
> > > >
> > > > Quite. Badly, and she failed, but she tried.
> > >
> > > Eddie the Eagle “tried” being a ski jumper. He failed. But it was a great comic act.
> >
> > Difference is, Eddie knew when to jump. May had to be pushed.
>
> It depends where you think the Tories future lies. Barwell was looking at things from the perspective of winning back Croydon - Bradley from the perspective of retaining Mansfield.
>
> Its the same problem Labour has - how do you keep London and the north/midlands on board? There is such a massive dislocation now in England between (inner) London and the university towns and everywhere else. How do they bridge that gap - when by definition the media/most MPs is so London centric - cos thats where they live.
It's not a new problem. This is what's been going on in Scotland for years. There' are only three possible futures:
1. Federalism, and here I mean not just the four nations but regions.
2. Proportional representation (my favoured option)
3. Disintegrations (the default if 1. or 2. can't be agreed)
The main opposition to the first two will be the Conservative and Unionist Party, thus they will be the ones to deliver number 3. Unless they can be swept out of the way
I think I first saw the term in the Currant Bun in the 80s and it grew from there. I'm not culturally or racially offended by the term but I am linguistically offended (there's a new term for you).
Sometimes language is worth fighting for and defending so I prefer the term British.
> > @Byronic said:
> > > @Cyclefree said:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British. <
> >
> > ++++
> >
> > Utter nonsense. The IRA had much nastier words. "Brits" is a widely accepted, informal descriptor. It's journalistic shorthand used in most of our national newspapers for a start "Brits Look Forward To A Scorching Summer!". Americans use it and no one is offended.
> >
> > Calm down. There are plenty of real things to be upset about. This culture of taking offence at everything is corrosive and mad.
>
> I don't take offence at it. Nor am I upset by it. I am merely pointing out how it has been used in a part of Britain. "Brits out of Ireland" posters and signs and banners were pretty common during the Troubles. It wasn't meant nicely.<
++++
No, it wasn't meant nicely, but the term Brit in itself - which is what we are arguing - wasn't a boo-word in that phrase. It was just easy, punchy shorthand.
"The British out of Ireland" just sounds weird. "Britons out of Ireland" is pompous and absurd. So they went for a tabloidesque "Brits". Fair enough.
When the IRA wanted to be actively racially offensive they would call the Brits "Huns". Some hardcore ScotNats use the same word for Rangers fans/the English.
> It depends where you think the Tories future lies. Barwell was looking at things from the perspective of winning back Croydon - Bradley from the perspective of retaining Mansfield.
>
> Its the same problem Labour has - how do you keep London and the north/midlands on board? There is such a massive dislocation now in England between (inner) London and the university towns and everywhere else. How do they bridge that gap - when by definition the media/most MPs is so London centric - cos thats where they live.
Neither party can bridge the gap, and I agree with Mr Goodwin: Bradley is right. Better, from the point of view of their medium-term survival, that the Tories risk losing one or two dozen Remain-leaning constituencies in the South-East to the Yellows than being wrecked through having their vote split by the Brexit Party.
> > @Cyclefree said:
> > > @kle4 said:
>
> >
> > None of the candidates is remotely handsome. Some are really quite ghastly. In a game of Avoid, Marry, Snog they'd all be in the Avoid bucket.
> >
> > (I'd go for a drink with Tobias Ellwood, though.)<
>
> ++++
>
> Hmmm. I wonder how you'd feel if a man was so damning of a bunch of female candidates, based on their looks? "They're all ugly old hags" etc?
>
> FWIW Boris wasn't bad looking in his youth. He's podged out a bit now, however, and the hair is less charming, as it thins.
I have no problem at all with someone expressing their opinion on the looks of a group of women. I have done so myself about women in public life. And been quite rude too.
I made no comment about whether or not their looks have any bearing on their suitability for the post they seek. I don't think they do.
Boris has always, to me anyway, looked like a boiled potato in a suit. He looks like someone who doesn't wash. Never understood what women see him. And I say that having met him.
> > @Byronic said:
> > > @Cyclefree said:
> > > > @kle4 said:
> >
> > >
> > > None of the candidates is remotely handsome. Some are really quite ghastly. In a game of Avoid, Marry, Snog they'd all be in the Avoid bucket.
> > >
> > > (I'd go for a drink with Tobias Ellwood, though.)<
> >
> > ++++
> >
> > Hmmm. I wonder how you'd feel if a man was so damning of a bunch of female candidates, based on their looks? "They're all ugly old hags" etc?
> >
> > FWIW Boris wasn't bad looking in his youth. He's podged out a bit now, however, and the hair is less charming, as it thins.
>
> Nothing wrong with being judgemental. All discerning people do it.
Thank you!
Pause.
How busy do one have to be for that to be a legitimate timesaver?....
>
> I have no problem at all with someone expressing their opinion on the looks of a group of women. I have done so myself about women in public life. And been quite rude too.
>
> I made no comment about whether or not their looks have any bearing on their suitability for the post they seek. I don't think they do.
>
> Boris has always, to me anyway, looked like a boiled potato in a suit. He looks like someone who doesn't wash. Never understood what women see him. And I say that having met him.
>
> <
+++++
Fair dos. I am mystified by your sexual choices, however. You really prefer this guy, Tobias Ellwood, over Raab?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobias_Ellwood#/media/File:Official_portrait_of_Mr_Tobias_Ellwood_crop_2.jpg
While we're on the subject, I quite fancy Penny Mordaunt, though she could do with losing a few stone.
When she was younger and slimmer she was borderline stunning. A proper nine out of ten.
https://www.civilsociety.co.uk/people.penny-mordaunt.html
"British out of Ireland" - nothing wrong with that.
"Romanes eunt domus" - as someone else once said, somewhere, sometime.
> It's not a new problem. This is what's been going on in Scotland for years. There' are only three possible futures:
>
> 1. Federalism, and here I mean not just the four nations but regions.
>
> 2. Proportional representation (my favoured option)
>
> 3. Disintegrations (the default if 1. or 2. can't be agreed)
>
>
>
> The main opposition to the first two will be the Conservative and Unionist Party, thus they will be the ones to deliver number 3. Unless they can be swept out of the way
>
> Federalism and political reform within England becomes much more achievable in a post-UK environment, otherwise everything gets seen through the prism of putting sticking plasters on the union.
Full-on federalism could be a useful solution for reconstituting the UK, if it lasts long enough to implement the idea, but Balkanising England is an unwanted and daft proposal. Much stronger local Government? Yes. 8, 9 or 10 separate cantons (mostly with arbitrary and artificial borders,) all with their own Parliaments and different sets of laws? No thank you.
> > @Cyclefree said:
>
> >
> >
> > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British. <
>
> ++++
>
> Utter nonsense. The IRA had much nastier words. "Brits" is a widely accepted, informal descriptor. It's journalistic shorthand used in most of our national newspapers for a start "Brits Look Forward To A Scorching Summer!". Americans use it and no one is offended.
>
> Calm down. There are plenty of real things to be upset about. This culture of taking offence at everything is corrosive and mad.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/past-six-days/2019-05-26/culture/dreyers-english-by-benjamin-dreyer-review-know-your-grammatical-rights-and-wrongs-j3xgvhwfg
> No, it wasn't meant nicely, but the term Brit in itself - which is what we are arguing - wasn't a boo-word in that phrase. It was just easy, punchy shorthand.
>
> "The British out of Ireland" just sounds weird. "Britons out of Ireland" is pompous and absurd. So they went for a tabloidesque "Brits". Fair enough.
>
>
> When the IRA wanted to be actively racially offensive they would call the Brits "Huns". Some hardcore ScotNats use the same word for Rangers fans/the English.
>
> Just because something is "keen, punchy shorthand" doesn't mean we should embrace it or regret the shortening of the perfectly good word "British".
>
> "British out of Ireland" - nothing wrong with that.
>
> "Romanes eunt domus" - as someone else once said, somewhere, sometime.<
++++
Help.
It's a good job you're not a tabloid sub-editor.
> > @stodge said:
> > For me the most significant figure from this election was thr Turnout - which came in at just under 37% with more than 63% not being bothered to vote at all. That does not strike me as clear evidence of voters straining at the leash to express their views on Brexit. EU elections have always been treated frivolously - even by many who do vote - and the attempt to translate this data into a GE result is just bonkers or at best naive.Had last Thursday been polling day for a General Election , I have no doubt that both major parties would have exceeded 30% - support for the Brexit Party , the LibDems and the Greens would have been much lower in terms of vote shares.
> >
> > Having first said anyone trying to translate these results into a GE is "bonkers", we are then treated to the expert assertion that the majority of those who didn't vote are apparently Conservative and Labour voters who simply abstained and who will come out in their droves for a GE.
> >
> > Well, maybe, but that's just your bonkers assumption as well. It's entirely possible TBP would pick up more support as would the other parties.
> >
> > At the moment, the combined CON-LAB share is down to just over 50% from 84% in 2017 so that's a lot of lost voters looking for other homes.
>
> 63% were not sufficiently bothered about Brexit to turn up at all last Thursday, and it is not unreasonable to assume that the much higher Turnout at a General Election would be heavily skewed to voters with other concerns. Moreover, many of the 37% who did vote last week would focus on other issues - and would be likely to vote differently. In May 2014 UKIP led by Farage managed over 26% - yet less than a year later at the 2015 election that poll share more than halved to 12.5% - despite the momentum generated by two defections from the Tories and the by election victories which followed them.
The key reason that the Tories and Labour will do better in a GE is because of the straight-jacket of our FPTP electoral system. If we had a PR voting system I don't think that there would be any guarantee that people would return to the big 2. Unfortunately our system works on a Buggin's Turn basis and for the vast majority of us in England if you aren't voting Labour or Tory you may as well stay at home.
Alliance looking nailed on for the third seat now.
>
> Full-on federalism could be a useful solution for reconstituting the UK, if it lasts long enough to implement the idea, but Balkanising England is an unwanted and daft proposal. Much stronger local Government? Yes. 8, 9 or 10 separate cantons (mostly with arbitrary and artificial borders,) all with their own Parliaments and different sets of laws? No thank you.
-------
A full-on federal UK doesn't make sense because of the imbalance. It would be better to have separate sovereign states as part of a European union, but there would be nothing to stop the nations of Great Britain agreeing to additional integration between themselves.
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1133006944296427522
> And we are off:
>
> https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1133006944296427522<;
+++++
Well that's his campaign over.
Jesus.
Wooden. wobbly camera, vacuous platitudes. And I really wanted it to be good. I want a choice for the nation.
How hard is it to get a camera that doesn't bloody wobble??!! BXP managed it with all their social media. Helpless. Clueless. Hopeless.
Unless I have missed some Kremlin nuance.
> > @ah009 said:
> > > @Cyclefree said:
> > > > @stodge said:
> > > > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn.
> > > >
> > > > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets.
> > > >
> > > > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM.
> > > >
> > > > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him?
> > > >
> > > > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is.
> > > >
> > > > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015.
> > > >
> > > > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue.
> > > >
> > > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
> > >
> > >
> > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British.
> >
> > Huh? Many Brits use that word about themselves wholly without any sense of self-hatred. I hear it plenty, and have used it myself without ever having been challenged. I don't think I know any republicans (in the NI sense at least).
>
> They may well do. But nonetheless in an Irish context it is abusive. I would not use it to describe myself or anyone else but possibly that's because of my own background.
I thought PB was a British site in the main. All of this snowflakery when there is so much of greater importance to consider is bizarre.
> For the record, my dislike of the term "Brit" stems not from any connotations with Ulster but because it is linguistically lazy. The term "British" is perfectly adequate and doesn't require any further shortening.
>
> I think I first saw the term in the Currant Bun in the 80s and it grew from there. I'm not culturally or racially offended by the term but I am linguistically offended (there's a new term for you).
>
> Sometimes language is worth fighting for and defending so I prefer the term British.
Unspoofable!
ALL CHANGE!
> > @Cyclefree said:
>
> >
> > I have no problem at all with someone expressing their opinion on the looks of a group of women. I have done so myself about women in public life. And been quite rude too.
> >
> > I made no comment about whether or not their looks have any bearing on their suitability for the post they seek. I don't think they do.
> >
> > Boris has always, to me anyway, looked like a boiled potato in a suit. He looks like someone who doesn't wash. Never understood what women see him. And I say that having met him.
> >
> > <
>
> +++++
>
> Fair dos. I am mystified by your sexual choices, however. You really prefer this guy, Tobias Ellwood, over Raab?
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobias_Ellwood#/media/File:Official_portrait_of_Mr_Tobias_Ellwood_crop_2.jpg
>
> While we're on the subject, I quite fancy Penny Mordaunt, though she could do with losing a few stone.
>
> When she was younger and slimmer she was borderline stunning. A proper nine out of ten.
>
> https://www.civilsociety.co.uk/people.penny-mordaunt.html
>
>
>
Er, I said I'd go for a drink. Your assumption about what that means is illuminating. I'd go for a drink with Mr Ellwood because he seems interesting and intelligent and I can imagine having a worthwhile conversation with him. I'd go for a drink with Yiannis Varoufakis too - even though he can sometimes look like Voldemort.
And yes on the looks front I'd prefer Ellwood over Raab. Raab comes across as wooden and dull and, frankly, a bit self-regarding. It's not an appealing mixture.
Penny Mordaunt is good looking I agree. Esther McVey is quite pretty if a bit sharp-looking. Andrea Leadsom looks OK though her hooded eyes don't do her any favours. Liz Truss looked absolutely bonkers in her recent photo shoot.
Parliament is not exactly endowed with good lookers, frankly. Still, that's the least of our worries.
> > @Cyclefree said:
> > > @ah009 said:
> > > > @Cyclefree said:
> > > > > @stodge said:
> > > > > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn.
> > > > >
> > > > > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets.
> > > > >
> > > > > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM.
> > > > >
> > > > > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him?
> > > > >
> > > > > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is.
> > > > >
> > > > > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015.
> > > > >
> > > > > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue.
> > > > >
> > > > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British.
> > >
> > > Huh? Many Brits use that word about themselves wholly without any sense of self-hatred. I hear it plenty, and have used it myself without ever having been challenged. I don't think I know any republicans (in the NI sense at least).
> >
> > They may well do. But nonetheless in an Irish context it is abusive. I would not use it to describe myself or anyone else but possibly that's because of my own background.
>
> I thought PB was a British site in the main. All of this snowflakery when there is so much of greater importance to consider is bizarre.
Northern Ireland is part of Britain. Or had you forgotten?
> And we are off:
>
> https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1133006944296427522
Continuing the theme we now have the Hood from Thunderbirds
> https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1133013541982752768
>
>
>
> https://twitter.com/BBCVickiYoung/status/1132999450341924865<;
++++
Wow. Yes. Is McDonnell beginning to move against Corbyn? Seems that way.
I can't believe I am cheering on an IRA-hugging Leninist, but, go John! Take down Magic Grandpa. He has delighted us enough with his vests.
> The positive for Leavers to take [...] is that at least we have someone talking up for us now.
Christ
> The positive for Leavers to take, despite the fact the result doesn't make anything that much clearer really, is that at least we have someone talking up for us now. Six months ago all we heard in the media were reports from parliament of Brexit being thwarted and MPs screaming for revoke or a second referendum, preventing No Deal, and feeling quite smug about it while Mrs May looked as though she was about to feint. No we have our own Mr Smug with a big mouth back, and the scales are level again.
Your Mr Smug, as you put it, is now demanding a role in the negotiations with the EU. At the risk of being called smug or patronising or whatever, there are currently no negotiations taking place with the EU nor are any planned because as he knows the terms of the extension to 31 October were that the WA was not up for renegotiation.
We can take the WA or leave without a deal. I thought he wanted us to do the latter.
So what exactly is he on about?
> Saj at 24 on BF<
+++++
It'll be 54 by Close of Play
> > @rottenborough said:
> > And we are off:
> >
> > https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1133006944296427522
>
> Continuing the theme we now have the Hood from Thunderbirds
He is an ex-investment banker from Deutsche Bank.
That is enough for me to say: Just No.
> > @felix said:
> > > @Cyclefree said:
> > > > @ah009 said:
> > > > > @Cyclefree said:
> > > > > > @stodge said:
> > > > > > Seeking out positives for the Tories (it's not easy), one possible silver lining is the clear evidence that people REALLY don't want to vote for Corbyn.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If there was a GE now he could not win. I do not believe he would win at any point, or in any circumstances. He probably wouldn't win if he were facing a Hitler-led Tory party advocating the shooting of all pets.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Brits don't want a mad old Marxist as PM.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > At some point, surely, the Labour party - even the hard left - will wake up and realise this. I suspect McDonnell knows it already. But how and when will they move against him?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > First, I'm British, not a "Brit", whatever once of those is.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Second, it's brave or extremely partisan to go looking for positives when the Party has put up its worst performance in history - I don't recall many offering such kind words to the LDs in 2015.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Be that as it may - you are correct in there is a huge negative groundswell against Corbyn but his continued presence at the helm of Labour helps so many - the Conservatives, LDs, Greens, Brexit Party etc that I'm tempted to say long may it continue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OTOH, a centrist Labour Party pivoting back to a pro-REMAIN second referendum position would be in an electorally much stronger position - the mystery to me is you can see it, I can see it, everyone else can see it but Labour can't or won't.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "Brit" is a fairly abusive term the IRA used about the British.
> > > >
> > > > Huh? Many Brits use that word about themselves wholly without any sense of self-hatred. I hear it plenty, and have used it myself without ever having been challenged. I don't think I know any republicans (in the NI sense at least).
> > >
> > > They may well do. But nonetheless in an Irish context it is abusive. I would not use it to describe myself or anyone else but possibly that's because of my own background.
> >
> > I thought PB was a British site in the main. All of this snowflakery when there is so much of greater importance to consider is bizarre.
>
> Northern Ireland is part of Britain. Or had you forgotten?
Brit really isn't a derogatory term to most of the population, although I accept you have a different view. I've been called it many times. Mind you, I'm not offended by any name calling. Unless you called me a Lib Dem.
> The positive for Leavers to take, despite the fact the result doesn't make anything that much clearer really, is that at least we have someone talking up for us now. Six months ago all we heard in the media were reports from parliament of Brexit being thwarted and MPs screaming for revoke or a second referendum, preventing No Deal, and feeling quite smug about it while Mrs May looked as though she was about to feint. No we have our own Mr Smug with a big mouth back, and the scales are level again.
Yep, we've got another potential route to leaving the EU even if Brexit is cancelled by this Parliament, which is to elect a Brexit Party government/Farage Prime Minister.