Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As Johnson launches CON membership polling finds his backers m

1234689

Comments

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 24,704

    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:



    Britain isn't a confederation.

    We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.

    So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
    No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.

    The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
    FPT

    Just to understand your issues with the back stop:

    1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping
    2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI

    Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:

    1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force*
    2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **

    * arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force

    ** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
    Polling seems to demonstrate that around two thirds of the NI electorate are not massively bothered by either 1 or 2, if it comes to a choice between the WA and No Deal.

    If all that’s at issue were the consent of the NI electorate, the WA would have passed long ago.

    Yep - Remainers solution.

    Triggering the backstop? I thought it was an automatic procedure.

    It is - to protect the interests of NI. But if you leave the decision to the people of NI then that is no longer an issue. Let them decide if they want a customs border on the island of Ireland or in the Irish Sea.

    Unless you get the wrong answer.

    The system in NI remains a bit mad but it works. Tinker with it at your peril.

    Northern Ireland has made clear time and again what it wants. Given how precious our Union is to the Conservative party, maybe it should trust the people of Northern Ireland.

    As I said it's best to leave sleeping dogs lie in NI.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 40,742
    Charles said:



    Britain isn't a confederation.

    We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.

    So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
    No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.

    The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
    FPT

    Just to understand your issues with the back stop:

    1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping
    2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI

    Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:

    1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force*
    2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **

    * arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force

    ** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
    Yes those are exactly my concerns. And those are fine solutions.

    1. I would expand and say that NI must have not just MEPs but representation on the European Council too. Maybe allow Arlene Foster and the NI executive to take the place of the UK in the Council. Granting Foster veto powers where May previously would have had them.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 35,673


    BF has Rory makes last two at a crazy 4.1
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 2,993

    TOPPING said:

    O/T

    Megha Mohan, BBC Gender and Identity correspondent

    wtf!

    That acronym is the non-politically correct version of the job title.
    Who rather that wot?
    Like the old joke - whereas a psychologist asks "how are you?", an existential phenomenologist asks "are you?"
    Heard joke once: Man goes to doctor. Says he's depressed. Says life seems harsh and cruel. Says he feels all alone in threatening world where what lies ahead is vague and uncertain.

    Doctor says, "Treatment is simple. The great blogger Mike Smithson is online tonight. Go and read politicalbetting.com. That should pick you up." Man bursts into tears. Says "But Doctor... I am Mike Smithson!"

    Good joke. Everybody laugh. Roll on snare drum. Curtains.
    If only it were curtains for your attempts at humour Sunil! :wink:
    I thought it was quite witty. All in the eye of the beholder, granted.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,113
    Clarke nailing Barclay on his approach
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 2,993



    BF has Rory makes last two at a crazy 4.1
    A tenner has been matched at 4!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 35,673
    Ken now asking whether it is right for Boris or anon be allowed to shut down HoC.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 35,673
    Barclay doesn't answer.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 34,055
    TOPPING said:

    As I said it's best to leave sleeping dogs lie in NI.

    It's ironic that as Brexit is causing the Ulsterisation of English politics, in Northern Ireland it seems to be driving an unprecedented rise of non-sectarian forces.


  • BF has Rory makes last two at a crazy 4.1
    Mike laying it maybe?
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469

    Charles said:



    Britain isn't a confederation.

    We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.

    So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
    No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.

    The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
    FPT

    Just to understand your issues with the back stop:

    1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping
    2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI

    Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:

    1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force*
    2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **

    * arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force

    ** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
    Yes those are exactly my concerns. And those are fine solutions.

    1. I would expand and say that NI must have not just MEPs but representation on the European Council too. Maybe allow Arlene Foster and the NI executive to take the place of the UK in the Council. Granting Foster veto powers where May previously would have had them.
    Basically, NI becomes a "country" in the EU. So much for the indivisibility of the UK, then.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,113



    BF has Rory makes last two at a crazy 4.1
    Mike laying it maybe?
    I couldn’t see Mike’s bet on offer on the LB site
  • ChrisChris Posts: 6,509
    In the event that No Deal happens, and goes badly wrong, how many deaths definitely attributable to disruption of medical supplies could the prime minister survive?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 40,742

    Charles said:



    Britain isn't a confederation.

    We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.

    So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
    No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.

    The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
    FPT

    Just to understand your issues with the back stop:

    1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping
    2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI

    Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:

    1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force*
    2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **

    * arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force

    ** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
    Yes those are exactly my concerns. And those are fine solutions.

    1. I would expand and say that NI must have not just MEPs but representation on the European Council too. Maybe allow Arlene Foster and the NI executive to take the place of the UK in the Council. Granting Foster veto powers where May previously would have had them.
    Basically, NI becomes a "country" in the EU. So much for the indivisibility of the UK, then.
    On condition of 2 ... that NI votes for it.

    If NI votes for it, and if they have representation then I am ok with it.

    If they don't have representatives and if they don't vote for it I'm not.

    Simple?
  • TrèsDifficileTrèsDifficile Posts: 866
    edited June 2019
    IanB2 said:



    BF has Rory makes last two at a crazy 4.1
    Mike laying it maybe?
    I couldn’t see Mike’s bet on offer on the LB site
    10/1 now.

    https://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-gb/betting/politics/uk/uk-politics/next-permanent-tory-leader/226303233/


    To Make Final Two
    Void if no MP vote resulting in a final pairing.
    Boris Johnson
    2/7
    Jeremy Hunt
    1/2
    Michael Gove
    3/1
    Sajid Javid
    6/1
    Andrea Leadsom
    8/1
    Dominic Raab
    10/1
    Rory Stewart
    10/1
    Esther McVey
    50/1
    Matt Hancock
    50/1
    Mark Harper
    100/1
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 40,742

    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:



    Britain isn't a confederation.

    We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.

    So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
    No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.

    The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
    FPT

    Just to understand your issues with the back stop:

    1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping
    2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI

    Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:

    1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force*
    2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **

    * arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force

    ** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
    Had the May administration not been dependent on the DUP for S&C, then I suspect there would have been a referendum in Northern Ireland.

    I wonder if a referendum there is on Boris's agenda.

    Yep, a referendum solves it. Do you think the ERG would vote for that?

    A referendum doesn't solve it unless they have representation. You can't vote to make yourself irreversibly a colony. You can't elect a party that will abolish elections.
  • paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 1,135
    IanB2 said:



    BF has Rory makes last two at a crazy 4.1
    Mike laying it maybe?
    I couldn’t see Mike’s bet on offer on the LB site
    disappeared a few mins ago. price was 10/1 before it went.

    paddy's and hills both have the market up.
  • IanB2 said:



    BF has Rory makes last two at a crazy 4.1
    Mike laying it maybe?
    I couldn’t see Mike’s bet on offer on the LB site
    disappeared a few mins ago. price was 10/1 before it went.

    paddy's and hills both have the market up.
    I can still see it


  • BF has Rory makes last two at a crazy 4.1
    Betting Post somewhat related to this. I have put a £5 on Matt Hancock at 20/1 to have the fewest votes. Rationale here is part because he seems to have sunk without trace in the past few days and lost momentum but also because he is fishing in the same pool as Rory Stewart and I suspect the more pro-Remain MPs may look to give Rory a boost in the first round to create perceived momentum, thus taking support from Hancock.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 13,986
    JackW said:

    Froome out of Tour de France with suspected broken leg.

    Femur. Very bad.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 34,569

    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:



    Britain isn't a confederation.

    We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.

    So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
    No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.

    The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
    FPT

    Just to understand your issues with the back stop:

    1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping
    2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI

    Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:

    1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force*
    2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **

    * arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force

    ** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
    Had the May administration not been dependent on the DUP for S&C, then I suspect there would have been a referendum in Northern Ireland.

    I wonder if a referendum there is on Boris's agenda.

    Yep, a referendum solves it. Do you think the ERG would vote for that?

    A referendum doesn't solve it unless they have representation. You can't vote to make yourself irreversibly a colony. You can't elect a party that will abolish elections.

    If they do not like what is on offer they can vote to reject it.

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Rory Stewart has only 7 declared backers. Why aren't more MPs publicly supporting him if he's going to do better than expected?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 34,569

    TOPPING said:

    As I said it's best to leave sleeping dogs lie in NI.

    It's ironic that as Brexit is causing the Ulsterisation of English politics, in Northern Ireland it seems to be driving an unprecedented rise of non-sectarian forces.

    Yes, the rise of the Alliance Party is rather inspiring, isn't it?

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 27,584
    SpaceX are getting really cocky now, landing rockets back even when it’s foggy outside!
  • As suspected would happen, the Mail has started to attack Boris..banner headline says it all

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7131781/Boris-launches-Tory-bid-warning-party-DEAD-unless-Brexit-happens.html
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 35,673
    Chris said:

    In the event that No Deal happens, and goes badly wrong, how many deaths definitely attributable to disruption of medical supplies could the prime minister survive?

    Who knows in the current insane political climate. Probably do a Norman Lamont and say it is a price worth paying.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 15,012
    kinabalu said:

    JackW said:

    Froome out of Tour de France with suspected broken leg.

    Femur. Very bad.
    Doesn't @pulpstar have money on him winning five TDFs?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 35,297

    TOPPING said:

    As I said it's best to leave sleeping dogs lie in NI.

    It's ironic that as Brexit is causing the Ulsterisation of English politics, in Northern Ireland it seems to be driving an unprecedented rise of non-sectarian forces.

    Yes, the rise of the Alliance Party is rather inspiring, isn't it?

    Sister party of the LibDems - not so surprising given their recent rise in Great Britain?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 27,584
    kinabalu said:

    JackW said:

    Froome out of Tour de France with suspected broken leg.

    Femur. Very bad.
    Ouch!
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    TOPPING said:

    A possible pivot is of course staring us in the face.

    Let us remember that the WA *is* leaving. All Boris needs to do is bring his essential Borisness into play by telling the Francois gang just that and to vote it through and Voila!

    Could work. Should work. And takes us to where we could have been in November.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    As suspected would happen, the Mail has started to attack Boris..banner headline says it all

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7131781/Boris-launches-Tory-bid-warning-party-DEAD-unless-Brexit-happens.html

    Who are they supporting?
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 2,993
    AndyJS said:

    Rory Stewart has only 7 declared backers. Why aren't more MPs publicly supporting him if he's going to do better than expected?

    If they were publicly supporting him then all his support wouldn't be unexpected.

    I'm being facetious, I agree with you. I would vote Rory, but there's many reasons I'm not a Tory MP.
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138

    PClipp said:

    I look forward to all the rebuttals from the death cult:

    6 to 8 months to prepare and we have had over 30 months come Halloween. Do the maths.
    So you want Britain to crash out of the EU when it is unprepared, including on stockpiles of medicine?
    No I want the UK to be prepared and come Halloween there will be no excuse not to be prepared.
    So it takes 6-8 months to prepare. So what?
    It will have been over 40 months to prepare since the Brexit vote
    It will have been over three years since a PM was elected saying "No Deal is better than a bad deal"
    It will have been over 30 months since the invocation of Article 50
    More cruically though:
    It will have been over 12 months since mass resignations from the cabinet made it look unlikely that the government could pass the withdrawal agreement.
    It will have been over 10 months since the vote on the withdrawal agreement was pulled as it would be lost.
    It will have been over 9 months since the house rejected the Withdrawal Agreement by record margins.
    So why in that time have 6-8 months of preparations not occured?
    So you read about a report from last month that says that Britain will not be ready for 31 October and just decide that it should be so Britain will just have to suffer if it isn't. Right.
    And they wonder why I call it a death cult.
    Tell me please why more than 12 months since it became obvious the WA was doomed the civil service haven't done 6-8 months of preparations?
    Not fit for the role if that's the case.
    The civil service is answerable to its bosses. Who have not been able to agree among themselves. Please stop blaming the civil service.
    The civil service have a duty to prepare for all eventualities, including the fall of the government and the opposition taking over. Not just the whims of the government of the day.

    Given no deal has been a likely outcome it is a deriliction of duty not to prepare for it.
    I thought they were forbidden by the Prime Minister of the day (Mr Cameron) to prepare for a Leave victory in the referendum?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 35,297
    Quincel said:

    TOPPING said:

    O/T

    Megha Mohan, BBC Gender and Identity correspondent

    wtf!

    That acronym is the non-politically correct version of the job title.
    Who rather that wot?
    Like the old joke - whereas a psychologist asks "how are you?", an existential phenomenologist asks "are you?"
    Heard joke once: Man goes to doctor. Says he's depressed. Says life seems harsh and cruel. Says he feels all alone in threatening world where what lies ahead is vague and uncertain.

    Doctor says, "Treatment is simple. The great blogger Mike Smithson is online tonight. Go and read politicalbetting.com. That should pick you up." Man bursts into tears. Says "But Doctor... I am Mike Smithson!"

    Good joke. Everybody laugh. Roll on snare drum. Curtains.
    If only it were curtains for your attempts at humour Sunil! :wink:
    I thought it was quite witty. All in the eye of the beholder, granted.
    Um, thank you! I just, er, borrowed it from "Watchmen" :)
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Sandpit said:

    SpaceX are getting really cocky now, landing rockets back even when it’s foggy outside!

    Take off, surely. Unless they're back already?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 27,584
    Anorak said:

    Sandpit said:

    SpaceX are getting really cocky now, landing rockets back even when it’s foggy outside!

    Take off, surely. Unless they're back already?
    Back already.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 53,973
    Rory was 34 a few days ago. Pretty sharp fall.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,113
    Clarke takes the floor
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Anorak said:

    Sandpit said:

    SpaceX are getting really cocky now, landing rockets back even when it’s foggy outside!

    Take off, surely. Unless they're back already?
    Oh yeah. First stage return. Back.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 14,876
    Looks plausible:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/12/boris-johnson-brexit-general-election

    Boris may well think his best shot is a honeymoon election, running against the supposed spectres of the Commission on the one hand and Corbyn on the other.
    Then he gets his majority of 170 and is free to do...

    what?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 40,742
    PClipp said:

    PClipp said:

    I look forward to all the rebuttals from the death cult:

    6 to 8 months to prepare and we have had over 30 months come Halloween. Do the maths.
    So you want Britain to crash out of the EU when it is unprepared, including on stockpiles of medicine?
    No I want the UK to be prepared and come Halloween there will be no excuse not to be prepared.
    So it takes 6-8 months to prepare. So what?
    It will have been over 40 months to prepare since the Brexit vote
    It will have been over three years since a PM was elected saying "No Deal is better than a bad deal"
    It will have been over 30 months since the invocation of Article 50
    More cruically though:
    It will have been over 12 months since mass resignations from the cabinet made it look unlikely that the government could pass the withdrawal agreement.
    It will have been over 10 months since the vote on the withdrawal agreement was pulled as it would be lost.
    It will have been over 9 months since the house rejected the Withdrawal Agreement by record margins.
    So why in that time have 6-8 months of preparations not occured?
    So you read about a report from last month that says that Britain will not be ready for 31 October and just decide that it should be so Britain will just have to suffer if it isn't. Right.
    And they wonder why I call it a death cult.
    Tell me please why more than 12 months since it became obvious the WA was doomed the civil service haven't done 6-8 months of preparations?
    Not fit for the role if that's the case.
    The civil service is answerable to its bosses. Who have not been able to agree among themselves. Please stop blaming the civil service.
    The civil service have a duty to prepare for all eventualities, including the fall of the government and the opposition taking over. Not just the whims of the government of the day.

    Given no deal has been a likely outcome it is a deriliction of duty not to prepare for it.
    I thought they were forbidden by the Prime Minister of the day (Mr Cameron) to prepare for a Leave victory in the referendum?
    So the groundbreaking quarter percentage point interest rate that Remainers credit with averting an unavoidable immediate recession if we voted Leave and turned hundreds of thousands of job losses into job gains was completely unplanned? Just imagine what could have happened with some planning?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 40,742

    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:



    Britain isn't a confederation.

    We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.

    So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
    No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.

    The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
    FPT

    Just to understand your issues with the back stop:

    1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping
    2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI

    Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:

    1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force*
    2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **

    * arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force

    ** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
    Had the May administration not been dependent on the DUP for S&C, then I suspect there would have been a referendum in Northern Ireland.

    I wonder if a referendum there is on Boris's agenda.

    Yep, a referendum solves it. Do you think the ERG would vote for that?

    A referendum doesn't solve it unless they have representation. You can't vote to make yourself irreversibly a colony. You can't elect a party that will abolish elections.

    If they do not like what is on offer they can vote to reject it.

    So you have no principled objection to a party being elected that abolishes democracy? That abolishes future elections?
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469
    kinabalu said:

    JackW said:

    Froome out of Tour de France with suspected broken leg.

    Femur. Very bad.
    But you can take drugs for the bone to set quickly !
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 6,817
    If there is criticism of lack of no deal planning it should go to whoever stood down the planners after the extension.
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469

    Charles said:



    Britain isn't a confederation.

    We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.

    So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
    No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.

    The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
    FPT

    Just to understand your issues with the back stop:

    1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping
    2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI

    Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:

    1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force*
    2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **

    * arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force

    ** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
    Yes those are exactly my concerns. And those are fine solutions.

    1. I would expand and say that NI must have not just MEPs but representation on the European Council too. Maybe allow Arlene Foster and the NI executive to take the place of the UK in the Council. Granting Foster veto powers where May previously would have had them.
    Basically, NI becomes a "country" in the EU. So much for the indivisibility of the UK, then.
    On condition of 2 ... that NI votes for it.

    If NI votes for it, and if they have representation then I am ok with it.

    If they don't have representatives and if they don't vote for it I'm not.

    Simple?
    I would agree with this solution. But will the DUP and hardcore Unionists go along with it ?
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 6,817

    kinabalu said:

    JackW said:

    Froome out of Tour de France with suspected broken leg.

    Femur. Very bad.
    But you can take drugs for the bone to set quickly !
    That could be interpreted in a number of ways😁
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 53,973
    It won't happen, but I'd laugh my head off if Boris was bottom of the ballot.

    It baffles me why people are supporting him. Even if you want a Brexit so hard you can only see it via pirate DVDs from the Netherlands, wouldn't you go for someone who has a record for getting things done and keeping commitments, rather than the opposite?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 6,292

    PClipp said:



    I thought they were forbidden by the Prime Minister of the day (Mr Cameron) to prepare for a Leave victory in the referendum?

    So the groundbreaking quarter percentage point interest rate that Remainers credit with averting an unavoidable immediate recession if we voted Leave and turned hundreds of thousands of job losses into job gains was completely unplanned? Just imagine what could have happened with some planning?
    Bank of England are independent and did do planning for Brexit.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Sandpit said:

    Anorak said:

    Sandpit said:

    SpaceX are getting really cocky now, landing rockets back even when it’s foggy outside!

    Take off, surely. Unless they're back already?
    Back already.


    The shot of it rising through the clouds is like something from a Hollywood movie. Scroll to T=0 and enjoy.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 27,584
    September election still 12.5 on Betfair.

    This covers the new PM calling one straight away, the PM losing a VoNC straight away, and the scenario where the new Con leader clearly doesn’t command a majority in the Commons and Mrs May gets stuck in No. 10 while an election takes place.

    Value bet in my mind, but DYOR.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited June 2019
    Sandpit said:

    September election still 12.5 on Betfair.

    This covers the new PM calling one straight away, the PM losing a VoNC straight away, and the scenario where the new Con leader clearly doesn’t command a majority in the Commons and Mrs May gets stuck in No. 10 while an election takes place.

    Value bet in my mind, but DYOR.

    I can see Boris going for a snap election as soon as he's elected. It's the sort of thing he'd do. I don't think any of the other candidates would risk it.
  • PeterMannionPeterMannion Posts: 706
    AndyJS said:

    Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.

    What are the odds on him getting less than 85 actual votes on Thursday?!
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 3,902
    edited June 2019

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good launch by Boris, made clear he still wants a Deal with the EU but unlike May will not take No Deal off the table and made clear the Tories must deliver Brexit Deal or No Deal

    He was subdued, even nervous, and managed to be gaff free but has made impossible promises
    What promise is impossible?
    No deal on 31st October
    Not impossible, there are multiple paths to it happening. Just improbable as it stands.

    Possible ways.

    1: Boris three-line whips for No Deal making it a Confidence motion. Passes.
    2: Boris calls an election for a mandate for it. Wins.
    3: Boris find a way to avoid asking for an extension. Times out, default out.
    4: Macron (or A N Other) vetoes an extension. Times out, default out.
    How do you make something a confidence motion in the post-FTPA era?
    Say that you are viewing this as a matter of confidence and if the vote fails you are tabling an early election motion the next day and will whip the party to vote in favour of the early election. Whip will be removed from anyone who rebels in either vote.
    The election motion requites a 2/3 majority so that would be a completely pointless manoeuvre.
    Corbyn would whip in favour, any Labour MPs who broke that whip would have their whip removed.

    SNP and DUP probably opposed but its moot.

    434 = 2/3rds of 650 (even not taking into account speakers and Sinn Fein).

    Tory and Labour alone have 560
    Why would Labour whip in favour of an immediate election. This is one of the few times when it would be politically and electorally better to ensure a November election and there would be plausible reasons to do so - for the entertainment of watching Boris fail to deliver on October 31st if nothing else...
    Corbyn would look ridiculous to turn down an election. It would be worse than Gordon Brown cancelling the election that never was. Furthermore he couldn't it is just not in his wavelength to reject an election.
    There could well be a majority in the HoC for sitting back and watching Johnson negotiate Oct 31st. It would be very much in Labour's interest to have an election after that date rather than before it.

    I also expect Johnson is absolutely relying on Parliament blocking No Deal. Then he can saw I tried but parliament stopped me. If they don't I expect him to wet himself
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 27,584
    AndyJS said:

    Sandpit said:

    September election still 12.5 on Betfair.

    This covers the new PM calling one straight away, the PM losing a VoNC straight away, and the scenario where the new Con leader clearly doesn’t command a majority in the Commons and Mrs May gets stuck in No. 10 while an election takes place.

    Value bet in my mind, but DYOR.

    I can see Boris going for a snap election as soon as he's elected. It's the sort of thing he'd do. I don't think any of the other candidates would risk it.
    If he wants any chance of negotiating a better deal with the EU, it’s the only opportunity he’s got. An election in October a week before the deadline isn’t going to fly.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 34,055

    AndyJS said:

    Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.

    What are the odds on him getting less than 85 actual votes on Thursday?!
    Are you among the 85? :)
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 2,993

    AndyJS said:

    Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.

    What are the odds on him getting less than 85 actual votes on Thursday?!
    I would be curious on a market for 'Boris Johnson getting fewer votes in first ballot than public backers via ConHome that morning'. I'd be very surprised though, I really would.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 1,970
    AndyJS said:

    Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.

    Pulpstar's list of non-declareds on Monday seemed to me to have a fair number of ERG on it as well, although perhaps it's only because they are all infamous now and stand out like a sore thumb (well, at least in PB circles). Is that still the case?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 40,742
    OllyT said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good launch by Boris, made clear he still wants a Deal with the EU but unlike May will not take No Deal off the table and made clear the Tories must deliver Brexit Deal or No Deal

    He was subdued, even nervous, and managed to be gaff free but has made impossible promises
    What promise is impossible?
    No deal on 31st October
    Not impossible, there are multiple paths to it happening. Just improbable as it stands.

    Possible ways.

    1: Boris three-line whips for No Deal making it a Confidence motion. Passes.
    2: Boris calls an election for a mandate for it. Wins.
    3: Boris find a way to avoid asking for an extension. Times out, default out.
    4: Macron (or A N Other) vetoes an extension. Times out, default out.
    How do you make something a confidence motion in the post-FTPA era?
    Say that you are viewing this as a matter of confidence and if the vote fails you are tabling an early election motion the next day and will whip the party to vote in favour of the early election. Whip will be removed from anyone who rebels in either vote.
    The election motion requites a 2/3 majority so that would be a completely pointless manoeuvre.
    Corbyn would whip in favour, any Labour MPs who broke that whip would have their whip removed.

    SNP and DUP probably opposed but its moot.

    434 = 2/3rds of 650 (even not taking into account speakers and Sinn Fein).

    Tory and Labour alone have 560
    Why would Labour whip in favour of an immediate election. This is one of the few times when it would be politically and electorally better to ensure a November election and there would be plausible reasons to do so - for the entertainment of watching Boris fail to deliver on October 31st if nothing else...
    Corbyn would look ridiculous to turn down an election. It would be worse than Gordon Brown cancelling the election that never was. Furthermore he couldn't it is just not in his wavelength to reject an election.
    There could well be a majority in the HoC for sitting back and watching Johnson negotiate Oct 31st. It would be very much in Labour's interest to have an election after that date rather than before it.
    That is overthinking it. Is Corbyn going to say he would rather have a Tory Brexit than an election?
  • AndyJS said:

    As suspected would happen, the Mail has started to attack Boris..banner headline says it all

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7131781/Boris-launches-Tory-bid-warning-party-DEAD-unless-Brexit-happens.html

    Who are they supporting?
    Not sure but given (a) Geordie Greig is pro-Remain (b) Sarah Vine works there and (c) the Mail will hate the Telegraph getting credit for installing a leader, anyone but Boris. Hunt would be my best bet, or Gove...
  • eekeek Posts: 9,245
    OllyT said:



    Corbyn would look ridiculous to turn down an election. It would be worse than Gordon Brown cancelling the election that never was. Furthermore he couldn't it is just not in his wavelength to reject an election.

    There could well be a majority in the HoC for sitting back and watching Johnson negotiate Oct 31st. It would be very much in Labour's interest to have an election after that date rather than before it.
    While most of the time all parties would want an election - this time that isn't the case.

    If Boris fails to deliver Brexit by October 31st the Tory party will be completely destroyed in a subsequent election as TBP would have to stand. So why would you vote for an election where TBP may not stand and your party would be destroyed when if you wait a few weeks TBP will stand and it's the Tory party that would be destroyed.
  • eekeek Posts: 9,245



    That is overthinking it. Is Corbyn going to say he would rather have a Tory Brexit than an election?

    What do you think today's Opposition debate is working towards...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 35,146
    OllyT said:


    There could well be a majority in the HoC for sitting back and watching Johnson negotiate Oct 31st. It would be very much in Labour's interest to have an election after that date rather than before it.

    I also expect Johnson is absolutely relying on Parliament blocking No Deal. Then he can saw I tried but parliament stopped me.

    Then he can have a "Drain the Swamp" election......
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 32,679

    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:



    Britain isn't a confederation.

    We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.

    So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
    No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.

    The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
    FPT

    Just to understand your issues with the back stop:

    1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping
    2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI

    Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:

    1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force*
    2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **

    * arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force

    ** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
    Had the May administration not been dependent on the DUP for S&C, then I suspect there would have been a referendum in Northern Ireland.

    I wonder if a referendum there is on Boris's agenda.

    Yep, a referendum solves it. Do you think the ERG would vote for that?

    Well, they used to be very keen on referendums...
  • Quincel said:

    AndyJS said:

    Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.

    What are the odds on him getting less than 85 actual votes on Thursday?!
    I would be curious on a market for 'Boris Johnson getting fewer votes in first ballot than public backers via ConHome that morning'. I'd be very surprised though, I really would.
    I wouldn't be that surprised. Williamson is running BoJo's campaign amongst MPs. To give GW his credit, he was an effective Chief Whip and I am sure he has been using the same tactics in BoJo's campaign. The crucial difference is this ballot is private and not a public vote. So, I would imagine quite a few MPs have said yes to his face but may take a different tack in the vote.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Pro_Rata said:

    AndyJS said:

    Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.

    Pulpstar's list of non-declareds on Monday seemed to me to have a fair number of ERG on it as well, although perhaps it's only because they are all infamous now and stand out like a sore thumb (well, at least in PB circles). Is that still the case?
    A fair number of them have declared since then like Bill Cash, but there are still a few to come. Dominic Raab might hope to pick up some more support, from the likes of Christopher Chope and John Redwood.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 34,569

    Looks plausible:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/12/boris-johnson-brexit-general-election

    Boris may well think his best shot is a honeymoon election, running against the supposed spectres of the Commission on the one hand and Corbyn on the other.
    Then he gets his majority of 170 and is free to do...

    what?

    It's a huge risk for him. Not least because Labour would undoubtedly include a referendum with a Remain option in its manifesto if Johnson was looking to get a a mandate for No Deal.

  • argyllrsargyllrs Posts: 154
    Pro_Rata said:

    AndyJS said:

    Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.

    Pulpstar's list of non-declareds on Monday seemed to me to have a fair number of ERG on it as well, although perhaps it's only because they are all infamous now and stand out like a sore thumb (well, at least in PB circles). Is that still the case?
    From memory of an Alistair Meeks comment.
    At 85+ votes - if they all vote that way in secret, may already be enough to make the second ballot.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    AndyJS said:

    Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.

    What are the odds on him getting less than 85 actual votes on Thursday?!
    It would make Tory MPs look like a bunch of liars if that happens. That's one of the reasons I've been taking a keen interest in the public endorsements.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,620
    Scott_P said:
    It is not so much who comes last - it is who fails to meet the minimum vote threshold that really matters
  • BannedInParisBannedInParis Posts: 2,191


    That is overthinking it. Is Corbyn going to say he would rather have a Tory Brexit than an election?

    He's spent the last two years working pretty hard towards it.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    AndyJS said:

    Rory Stewart has only 7 declared backers. Why aren't more MPs publicly supporting him if he's going to do better than expected?

    I fear he won't do better than expected, but if he does it might be because the MPs that support him are scared of their local constituency members and of being deselected - which would imply that Rory has even less of a chance with the membership if he makes it that far - or they were quick to support another candidate and don't want the embarrassment of publicly changing support before the candidate they've declared for is forced to withdraw.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 3,902

    OllyT said:


    There could well be a majority in the HoC for sitting back and watching Johnson negotiate Oct 31st. It would be very much in Labour's interest to have an election after that date rather than before it.

    I also expect Johnson is absolutely relying on Parliament blocking No Deal. Then he can saw I tried but parliament stopped me.

    Then he can have a "Drain the Swamp" election......
    He can try that of course but which ever way you look at it Johnson is going to lose a lot of votes on October 31st so it is worth his opponents holding off for an election till after that date. Allowing him to go to the country before that date allows him to carry on promising unicorns for all.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,620
    AndyJS said:

    AndyJS said:

    Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.

    What are the odds on him getting less than 85 actual votes on Thursday?!
    It would make Tory MPs look like a bunch of liars if that happens. That's one of the reasons I've been taking a keen interest in the public endorsements.
    DD experienced a similar drop off in terms of real support back in 2005. What you say and what you do in the privacy of the voting booth are two very different things.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 9,710
    Ooer. Gareth Snell (Labour) says he'd vote for the WA now.
  • AndyJS said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    AndyJS said:

    Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.

    Pulpstar's list of non-declareds on Monday seemed to me to have a fair number of ERG on it as well, although perhaps it's only because they are all infamous now and stand out like a sore thumb (well, at least in PB circles). Is that still the case?
    A fair number of them have declared since then like Bill Cash, but there are still a few to come. Dominic Raab might hope to pick up some more support, from the likes of Christopher Chope and John Redwood.
    I think Wikipedia (or someone) had John Redwood in for Esther McVey as well as Philip Holloborne.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 8,341

    Ooer. Gareth Snell (Labour) says he'd vote for the WA now.

    Only a few more to go and we can have MV4.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    HoC - Dominic Grieve will VONC if Conservative government forces a no deal.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 10,296
    Lady Hermon did sound like someone likely to support Boris on a VNOC.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 40,742
    JackW said:

    HoC - Dominic Grieve will VONC if Conservative government forces a no deal.

    Funny then that he stood on a no deal is better than a bad deal manifesto.

    If he wont be a Tory at an ensuing election. If he defects to Lib Dems do you think he would hold his seat or would the Tories regain it?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Division Called ....
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,113
    Procedural motion to end the debate and have the vote now is carried without opposition. Division on the cross-party opposition day motion.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 24,704

    JackW said:

    HoC - Dominic Grieve will VONC if Conservative government forces a no deal.

    Funny then that he stood on a no deal is better than a bad deal manifesto.

    If he wont be a Tory at an ensuing election. If he defects to Lib Dems do you think he would hold his seat or would the Tories regain it?
    Country before Party? Alien for a Leaver the concept but it does happen.
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,835
    edited June 2019

    Ooer. Gareth Snell (Labour) says he'd vote for the WA now.

    Only a few more to go and we can have MV4.
    The last few rebel Tory MPs may feel more comfortable voting for the WA, if it's Boris in charge of the ensuing years as well.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 34,055

    JackW said:

    HoC - Dominic Grieve will VONC if Conservative government forces a no deal.

    Funny then that he stood on a no deal is better than a bad deal manifesto.
    The manifesto promised "the best possible deal" and a "smooth and orderly Brexit". It's contemptible to claim mandate for a No Deal Brexit from it.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    JackW said:

    HoC - Dominic Grieve will VONC if Conservative government forces a no deal.

    His association can't re-adopt him in those circumstances. surely?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,113
    Somebody clearly thought it in their interests to cut the debate and spring the vote on the chamber. Wonder whether any MPs will be caught out...
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 40,742


    That is overthinking it. Is Corbyn going to say he would rather have a Tory Brexit than an election?

    He's spent the last two years working pretty hard towards it.
    He's spent 2 years saying "I want another election, I want another election". If the PM calls for an election the idea he could say "actually no thanks" is ludicrous.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 2,993

    JackW said:

    HoC - Dominic Grieve will VONC if Conservative government forces a no deal.

    Funny then that he stood on a no deal is better than a bad deal manifesto.

    If he wont be a Tory at an ensuing election. If he defects to Lib Dems do you think he would hold his seat or would the Tories regain it?
    I've not read the whole thing in detail, but I can't see that the 2017 manifesto addressed no deal directly. Just says the Tories will negotiate the best deal and pass it.

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/2017-conservative-manifesto-in-full/

    As for whether he would hold his seat or not, it entirely depends on the vote shares of all 4 main parties. Unknowable at this point, but I'd like the Tories chances or maybe Labour if TBP split the Leave vote. Grieve as an independent or LD would be underdogs imho.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 5,617
    TOPPING said:

    JackW said:

    HoC - Dominic Grieve will VONC if Conservative government forces a no deal.

    Funny then that he stood on a no deal is better than a bad deal manifesto.

    If he wont be a Tory at an ensuing election. If he defects to Lib Dems do you think he would hold his seat or would the Tories regain it?
    Country before Party? Alien for a Leaver the concept but it does happen.
    In the minds of Leavers every MP should be part of the groupspeak, where everyone is as moronic as Mark Francois. they conveniently forget that all the headbangers defied their party leaders for years, but now the jackboot is on the other foot...
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    HoC - Dominic Grieve will VONC if Conservative government forces a no deal.

    Funny then that he stood on a no deal is better than a bad deal manifesto.

    If he wont be a Tory at an ensuing election. If he defects to Lib Dems do you think he would hold his seat or would the Tories regain it?
    He may not stand. With the present electoral maelstrom it's difficult to determine save to say that Beaconsfield is one of the safest Tory seats in the country.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,620
    TOPPING said:

    JackW said:

    HoC - Dominic Grieve will VONC if Conservative government forces a no deal.

    Funny then that he stood on a no deal is better than a bad deal manifesto.

    If he wont be a Tory at an ensuing election. If he defects to Lib Dems do you think he would hold his seat or would the Tories regain it?
    Country before Party? Alien for a Leaver the concept but it does happen.
    People on both sides of the divide are capable of having principles. The constant smearing helps no-one.

    Grieve seems to be enjoying grandstanding rather too much for my liking. I don't care for anyone who postures in that way.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 40,742
    eek said:



    That is overthinking it. Is Corbyn going to say he would rather have a Tory Brexit than an election?

    What do you think today's Opposition debate is working towards...
    Regardless of how today's vote goes Corbyn can not turn down an election.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    AndyJS said:

    JackW said:

    HoC - Dominic Grieve will VONC if Conservative government forces a no deal.

    His association can't re-adopt him in those circumstances. surely?
    Indeed. It's the start of the end game for such MP's.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,113

    TOPPING said:

    JackW said:

    HoC - Dominic Grieve will VONC if Conservative government forces a no deal.

    Funny then that he stood on a no deal is better than a bad deal manifesto.

    If he wont be a Tory at an ensuing election. If he defects to Lib Dems do you think he would hold his seat or would the Tories regain it?
    Country before Party? Alien for a Leaver the concept but it does happen.
    People on both sides of the divide are capable of having principles. The constant smearing helps no-one.

    Grieve seems to be enjoying grandstanding rather too much for my liking. I don't care for anyone who postures in that way.
    Anyone who is prepared to put their career on the line for the national interest deserves our respect, whether you agree with him or not.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 14,876

    Looks plausible:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/12/boris-johnson-brexit-general-election

    Boris may well think his best shot is a honeymoon election, running against the supposed spectres of the Commission on the one hand and Corbyn on the other.
    Then he gets his majority of 170 and is free to do...

    what?

    It's a huge risk for him. Not least because Labour would undoubtedly include a referendum with a Remain option in its manifesto if Johnson was looking to get a a mandate for No Deal.

    Quite so. (smile)
This discussion has been closed.