If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
Which I don't dispute, but please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting a great many of those insisting on a new referendum ever had any intention of doing otherwise - the reasoning of many of them that any deal is not as good as the deal we have, or that the referendum was unfair, or the public have changed their minds, apply regardless, showing their true intention. And it is an ok position to hold, but they were dishonest about it for a long time.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
Cheadle gain from CON : Mary Robinson Cheltenham gain from CON : Alex Chalk Chippenham gain from CON : Michelle Donelan Colchester gain from CON : Will Quince Cornwall North gain from CON : Scott Mann Devon North gain from CON : Peter Heaton-Jones Eastleigh gain from CON : Mims Davies Hazel Grove gain from CON : William Wragg Lewes gain from CON : Maria Caulfield Richmond Park gain from CON : Zac Goldsmith Sheffield Hallam gain from LAB : Jared O Mara Southport gain from CON : Damien Moore St Albans gain from CON : Anne Main St Austell and Newquay gain from CON : Steve Double St Ives gain from CON : Derek Thomas Sutton and Cheam gain from CON : Paul Scully Taunton Deane gain from CON : Rebecca Pow Thornbury and Yate gain from CON : Luke Hall Torbay gain from CON : Kevin Foster Truro and Falmouth gain from CON : Sarah Newton Wells gain from CON : James Heappey Wimbledon gain from CON : Stephen Hammond Winchester gain from CON : Steve Brine Yeovil gain from CON : Marcus Fysh
Of the 23 projected LibDem gains, 22 are from the Tories. 11 are in the South West.
Want to bet a gold sovereign on Kevin Foster losing Torbay to the LibDems?
In Colchester and Wimbledon Labour are the main challengers based on the 2017 results.
Not based on the Euros though!
The EU elections have never been taken seriously. Last week's Peterborough by election came up with a very different result to what had been implied but two weeks earlier. Some were even predicting that Labour would finish in third place!
Careful. The constituency boundaries were not congruent, as some here pointed out. The mismatch favored Labour, quite possibly crucially so in the event.
Jenks, like many of us on here, thinks that Boris's Brexit plan is to hoodwink everyone into accepting Theresa's deal:
Come October, the odds are on Britain being desperate for no more posturing, no more economic machismo and no more fantasies about new trade deals. It will need one almighty climbdown, in favour of some version of May’s Brexit deal. If Johnson can deploy his charm to persuade the nation and its parliament to follow where common sense and circumstance force him to go, I will be the first to cheer. That is as far as my optimism can go.
I might have believed that, but he's tied himself to the mast on the exit date.Yes May was firm and then folded, but she had so much more time to play with, things were not as frantic as now, and the polling position not so weak before the recantation of position. Posturing, leading to a GE, which is the one situation I see the main body of Tories accepting an extension for, is the plan I think.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
No but they will very starkly be the ones ensuring no deal. No ERG cover; just Lab driving us off the cliff.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
What are the stats? I thought the Soubry lot going had been counted in the three seat majority. So that's Grieve plus who else? I think every other Tory plus the DUP vote yes plus what, a handful (no more) Lab MPs? I think it passes.
I suspect the ten who voted for the Labour motion yesterday would be with Grieve.
That was to prevent no deal. This would be a deal.
It opens quite clearly that 'the prorogation of parliament is a prerogative act of the Crown.
In terms of procedure this is either by a commission (preceded by a proclamation) or by a proclamation alone. The Queen may issue a proclamation giving notice of her intention that parliament shall meet for the dispatch of business on any date afte rthe date of the proclmation, and parliament then stands prorogued to that day, notwithstanding the previous prorogation.
Those are just random snippets (which, regretfully, now everyone will be able to view) but in any case I don't think the main objection is the legality of any prorogation.
We seem to be assuming a GE too easily. At such an unpredictable time for both the main parties and the ever shifting geography of support, there will be a lot of opposition.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
Cheadle gain from CON : Mary Robinson Cheltenham gain from CON : Alex Chalk Chippenham gain from CON : Michelle Donelan Colchester gain from CON : Will Quince Cornwall North gain from CON : Scott Mann Devon North gain from CON : Peter Heaton-Jones Eastleigh gain from CON : Mims Davies Hazel Grove gain from CON : William Wragg Lewes gain from CON : Maria Caulfield Richmond Park gain from CON : Zac Goldsmith Sheffield Hallam gain from LAB : Jared O Mara Southport gain from CON : Damien Moore St Albans gain from CON : Anne Main St Austell and Newquay gain from CON : Steve Double St Ives gain from CON : Derek Thomas Sutton and Cheam gain from CON : Paul Scully Taunton Deane gain from CON : Rebecca Pow Thornbury and Yate gain from CON : Luke Hall Torbay gain from CON : Kevin Foster Truro and Falmouth gain from CON : Sarah Newton Wells gain from CON : James Heappey Wimbledon gain from CON : Stephen Hammond Winchester gain from CON : Steve Brine Yeovil gain from CON : Marcus Fysh
Of the 23 projected LibDem gains, 22 are from the Tories. 11 are in the South West.
Want to bet a gold sovereign on Kevin Foster losing Torbay to the LibDems?
In Colchester and Wimbledon Labour are the main challengers based on the 2017 results.
Not based on the Euros though!
The EU elections have never been taken seriously. Last week's Peterborough by election came up with a very different result to what had been implied but two weeks earlier. Some were even predicting that Labour would finish in third place!
Careful. The constituency boundaries were not congruent, as some here pointed out. The mismatch favored Labour, quite possibly crucially so in the event.
I am well aware of that - but estimates of Labour's share in the Peterborough constituency on 23rd May - as distinct from the local authority boundaries - came up with 22%. Last week Labour polled 31%.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
Which I don't dispute, but please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting a great many of those insisting on a new referendum ever had any intention of doing otherwise - the reasoning of many of them that any deal is not as good as the deal we have, or that the referendum was unfair, or the public have changed their minds, apply regardless, showing their true intention. And it is an ok position to hold, but they were dishonest about it for a long time.
In the early weeks and months following the referendum there was, I think, a decent amount of support amongst Remainers for the implementation of the democratic decision. This dwindled as the incoherence of the Leave side became increasingly apparent.
You'd have to be a pretty indulgent remainer now though to tolerate the planless pantomime that Brexit has become.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
No but they will very starkly be the ones ensuring no deal. No ERG cover; just Lab driving us off the cliff.
What Deal are the EU going to agree that ERG are also going to vote for? No such deal exists, nor is ever likely to.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
Which I don't dispute, but please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting a great many of those insisting on a new referendum ever had any intention of doing otherwise - the reasoning of many of them that any deal is not as good as the deal we have, or that the referendum was unfair, or the public have changed their minds, apply regardless, showing their true intention. And it is an ok position to hold, but they were dishonest about it for a long time.
In the early weeks and months following the referendum there was, I think, a decent amount of support amongst Remainers for the implementation of the democratic decision. This dwindled as the incoherence of the Leave side became increasingly apparent.
You'd have to be a pretty indulgent remainer now though to tolerate the planless pantomime that Brexit has become.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
Cheadle gain from CON : Mary Robinson Cheltenham gain from CON : Alex Chalk Chippenham gain from CON : Michelle Donelan Colchester gain from CON : Will Quince Cornwall North gain from CON : Scott Mann Devon North gain from CON : Peter Heaton-Jones Eastleigh gain from CON : Mims Davies Hazel Grove gain from CON : William Wragg Lewes gain from CON : Maria Caulfield Richmond Park gain from CON : Zac Goldsmith Sheffield Hallam gain from LAB : Jared O Mara Southport gain from CON : Damien Moore St Albans gain from CON : Anne Main St Austell and Newquay gain from CON : Steve Double St Ives gain from CON : Derek Thomas Sutton and Cheam gain from CON : Paul Scully Taunton Deane gain from CON : Rebecca Pow Thornbury and Yate gain from CON : Luke Hall Torbay gain from CON : Kevin Foster Truro and Falmouth gain from CON : Sarah Newton Wells gain from CON : James Heappey Wimbledon gain from CON : Stephen Hammond Winchester gain from CON : Steve Brine Yeovil gain from CON : Marcus Fysh
Of the 23 projected LibDem gains, 22 are from the Tories. 11 are in the South West.
Want to bet a gold sovereign on Kevin Foster losing Torbay to the LibDems?
In Colchester and Wimbledon Labour are the main challengers based on the 2017 results.
Not based on the Euros though!
The EU elections have never been taken seriously. Last week's Peterborough by election came up with a very different result to what had been implied but two weeks earlier. Some were even predicting that Labour would finish in third place!
Careful. The constituency boundaries were not congruent, as some here pointed out. The mismatch favored Labour, quite possibly crucially so in the event.
I am well aware of that - but estimates of Labour's share in the Peterborough constituency on 23rd May - as distinct from the local authority boundaries - came up with 22%. Last week Labour polled 31%.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
Which I don't dispute, but please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting a great many of those insisting on a new referendum ever had any intention of doing otherwise - the reasoning of many of them that any deal is not as good as the deal we have, or that the referendum was unfair, or the public have changed their minds, apply regardless, showing their true intention. And it is an ok position to hold, but they were dishonest about it for a long time.
In the early weeks and months following the referendum there was, I think, a decent amount of support amongst Remainers for the implementation of the democratic decision. This dwindled as the incoherence of the Leave side became increasingly apparent.
You'd have to be a pretty indulgent remainer now though to tolerate the planless pantomime that Brexit has become.
I think the word is honorable.
If you like. Let's all go and honorably jump off the cliff together.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
Which I don't dispute, but please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting a great many of those insisting on a new referendum ever had any intention of doing otherwise - the reasoning of many of them that any deal is not as good as the deal we have, or that the referendum was unfair, or the public have changed their minds, apply regardless, showing their true intention. And it is an ok position to hold, but they were dishonest about it for a long time.
In the early weeks and months following the referendum there was, I think, a decent amount of support amongst Remainers for the implementation of the democratic decision. This dwindled as the incoherence of the Leave side became increasingly apparent.
You'd have to be a pretty indulgent remainer now though to tolerate the planless pantomime that Brexit has become.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Agreed. Even in the Euros, the Lib Dems's performance in Devon and Cornwall was pretty poor, whereas it was very strong in the Stockbroker Belt. They've lost the eurosceptic radicals of the South West, but gained the wealthy who hate Brexit.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
No but they will very starkly be the ones ensuring no deal. No ERG cover; just Lab driving us off the cliff.
Do you expect the ERG and DUP to vote for May's Deal, repacked as Boris's?
We seem to be assuming a GE too easily. At such an unpredictable time for both the main parties and the ever shifting geography of support, there will be a lot of opposition.
Oh, it's not technically easy, but it is one of the outcomes that can come about simply because they cannot come to agreement and some people, it doesn't have to be many, are pushed too far. Rather than something they specifically agree upon.
Tories pivot to no deal, enough Tory MPs say they will support a VONC. No one else can form a government, so GE occurs. Unless one thinks that even though they know it is a risk right now Labour would not support a VONC in the government, it seems relatively plausible. Or simply if, however boldly, PM Boris thinks he would win and says he wants one, as others have noted can Labour dare say they don't want one?
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
Which I don't dispute, but please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting a great many of those insisting on a new referendum ever had any intention of doing otherwise - the reasoning of many of them that any deal is not as good as the deal we have, or that the referendum was unfair, or the public have changed their minds, apply regardless, showing their true intention. And it is an ok position to hold, but they were dishonest about it for a long time.
In the early weeks and months following the referendum there was, I think, a decent amount of support amongst Remainers for the implementation of the democratic decision. This dwindled as the incoherence of the Leave side became increasingly apparent.
You'd have to be a pretty indulgent remainer now though to tolerate the planless pantomime that Brexit has become.
Many remainers have voted for the deal, undoubtedly. Many times, and if not for some few leavers we would have left now as a result, the lion's share of the blame must fall on them. But the reasoning of many about how it was fundamentally always the wrong decision, how any deal is not worth it, these arguments are refighting the decision to Brexit at all, they clearly would have applied even if Labour had been given the opportunity to negotiate its own deal, and therefore give the lie to the idea those using those arguments would ever, in a million years, have voted to Brexit.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
Which I don't dispute, but please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting a great many of those insisting on a new referendum ever had any intention of doing otherwise - the reasoning of many of them that any deal is not as good as the deal we have, or that the referendum was unfair, or the public have changed their minds, apply regardless, showing their true intention. And it is an ok position to hold, but they were dishonest about it for a long time.
In the early weeks and months following the referendum there was, I think, a decent amount of support amongst Remainers for the implementation of the democratic decision. This dwindled as the incoherence of the Leave side became increasingly apparent.
You'd have to be a pretty indulgent remainer now though to tolerate the planless pantomime that Brexit has become.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
No but they will very starkly be the ones ensuring no deal. No ERG cover; just Lab driving us off the cliff.
Do you expect the ERG and DUP to vote for May's Deal, repacked as Boris's?
I cannot see it myself.
That's a different matter. Probably not but possibly. But if they do, then Lab would be in a very different and difficult position.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Agreed. Even in the Euros, the Lib Dems's performance in Devon and Cornwall was pretty poor, whereas it was very strong in the Stockbroker Belt. They've lost the eurosceptic radicals of the South West, but gained the wealthy who hate Brexit.
It depends what you mean by SW. I expect the LDs to do well in the proximal SW. 50 seats seems a reasonable target.
I am off to see Swinson and Davey at the East Midlands husings on Saturday, shall report back.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
Which I don't dispute, but please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting a great many of those insisting on a new referendum ever had any intention of doing otherwise - the reasoning of many of them that any deal is not as good as the deal we have, or that the referendum was unfair, or the public have changed their minds, apply regardless, showing their true intention. And it is an ok position to hold, but they were dishonest about it for a long time.
In the early weeks and months following the referendum there was, I think, a decent amount of support amongst Remainers for the implementation of the democratic decision. This dwindled as the incoherence of the Leave side became increasingly apparent.
You'd have to be a pretty indulgent remainer now though to tolerate the planless pantomime that Brexit has become.
I think the word is honorable.
You're definitely not British.
Honorable? WITHOUT A U?
Pre 18th century English.
We've moved on.
I know you Leavers like to live the past but we're in the 21sr century.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
Which I don't dispute, but please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting a great many of those insisting on a new referendum ever had any intention of doing otherwise - the reasoning of many of them that any deal is not as good as the deal we have, or that the referendum was unfair, or the public have changed their minds, apply regardless, showing their true intention. And it is an ok position to hold, but they were dishonest about it for a long time.
In the early weeks and months following the referendum there was, I think, a decent amount of support amongst Remainers for the implementation of the democratic decision. This dwindled as the incoherence of the Leave side became increasingly apparent.
You'd have to be a pretty indulgent remainer now though to tolerate the planless pantomime that Brexit has become.
Many remainers have voted for the deal, undoubtedly. Many times, and if not for some few leavers we would have left now as a result, the lion's share of the blame must fall on them. But the reasoning of many about how it was fundamentally always the wrong decision, how any deal is not worth it, these arguments are refighting the decision to Brexit at all, they clearly would have applied even if Labour had been given the opportunity to negotiate its own deal, and therefore give the lie to the idea those using those arguments would ever, in a million years, have voted to Brexit.
Many of the ERG have acted like arseholes. But, they do have their equivalents on the other side of the argument.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
No but they will very starkly be the ones ensuring no deal. No ERG cover; just Lab driving us off the cliff.
Do you expect the ERG and DUP to vote for May's Deal, repacked as Boris's?
I cannot see it myself.
There are supposedly something like 80-90 members of the ERG I believe. Most of the ERG therefore backed the deal. But the self proclaimed spartans clearly won't shift, their identity is now focused on rejecting it, and there's no way to repackage it without them noticing.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Some seats like St Albans, that they've never won, look like pretty nailed-on gains.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
Which I don't dispute, but please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting a great many of those insisting on a new referendum ever had any intention of doing otherwise - the reasoning of many of them that any deal is not as good as the deal we have, or that the referendum was unfair, or the public have changed their minds, apply regardless, showing their true intention. And it is an ok position to hold, but they were dishonest about it for a long time.
In the early weeks and months following the referendum there was, I think, a decent amount of support amongst Remainers for the implementation of the democratic decision. This dwindled as the incoherence of the Leave side became increasingly apparent.
You'd have to be a pretty indulgent remainer now though to tolerate the planless pantomime that Brexit has become.
Many remainers have voted for the deal, undoubtedly. Many times, and if not for some few leavers we would have left now as a result, the lion's share of the blame must fall on them. But the reasoning of many about how it was fundamentally always the wrong decision, how any deal is not worth it, these arguments are refighting the decision to Brexit at all, they clearly would have applied even if Labour had been given the opportunity to negotiate its own deal, and therefore give the lie to the idea those using those arguments would ever, in a million years, have voted to Brexit.
Many of the ERG have acted like arseholes. But, they do have their equivalents on the other side of the argument.
I have never held back my scorn of the Grievers and likeminded sorts, who escape criticism because they are more intelligent and effective, while being at least as fanatical and willing to damn all in pursuit of their goals.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
No but they will very starkly be the ones ensuring no deal. No ERG cover; just Lab driving us off the cliff.
Do you expect the ERG and DUP to vote for May's Deal, repacked as Boris's?
I cannot see it myself.
That's a different matter. Probably not but possibly. But if they do, then Lab would be in a very different and difficult position.
The Lab vote and whip have been very effective in previous votes.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Some seats like St Albans, that they've never won, look like pretty nailed-on gains.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
Which I don't dispute, but please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting a great many of those insisting on a new referendum ever had any intention of doing otherwise - the reasoning of many of them that any deal is not as good as the deal we have, or that the referendum was unfair, or the public have changed their minds, apply regardless, showing their true intention. And it is an ok position to hold, but they were dishonest about it for a long time.
In the early weeks and months following the referendum there was, I think, a decent amount of support amongst Remainers for the implementation of the democratic decision. This dwindled as the incoherence of the Leave side became increasingly apparent.
You'd have to be a pretty indulgent remainer now though to tolerate the planless pantomime that Brexit has become.
Many remainers have voted for the deal, undoubtedly. Many times, and if not for some few leavers we would have left now as a result, the lion's share of the blame must fall on them. But the reasoning of many about how it was fundamentally always the wrong decision, how any deal is not worth it, these arguments are refighting the decision to Brexit at all, they clearly would have applied even if Labour had been given the opportunity to negotiate its own deal, and therefore give the lie to the idea those using those arguments would ever, in a million years, have voted to Brexit.
Many of the ERG have acted like arseholes. But, they do have their equivalents on the other side of the argument.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
No but they will very starkly be the ones ensuring no deal. No ERG cover; just Lab driving us off the cliff.
Do you expect the ERG and DUP to vote for May's Deal, repacked as Boris's?
I cannot see it myself.
That's a different matter. Probably not but possibly. But if they do, then Lab would be in a very different and difficult position.
The Lab vote and whip have been very effective in previous votes.
Would only need a few which is all it has ever been. But that few would do it.
Must say The Saj underwhelmed a bit in the initial vote - does he have a shot at overhauling Hunt, Give and Raab in the race to see who can lose to Boris?
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
Which I don't dispute, but please don't insult our intelligence by suggesting a great many of those insisting on a new referendum ever had any intention of doing otherwise - the reasoning of many of them that any deal is not as good as the deal we have, or that the referendum was unfair, or the public have changed their minds, apply regardless, showing their true intention. And it is an ok position to hold, but they were dishonest about it for a long time.
In the early weeks and months following the referendum there was, I think, a decent amount of support amongst Remainers for the implementation of the democratic decision. This dwindled as the incoherence of the Leave side became increasingly apparent.
You'd have to be a pretty indulgent remainer now though to tolerate the planless pantomime that Brexit has become.
I think the word is honorable.
You're definitely not British.
Honorable? WITHOUT A U?
Pre 18th century English.
We've moved on.
I know you Leavers like to live the past but we're in the 21sr century.
If Johnson tries to get a deal through before October, the ERG all vote for it but Grieve, Labour, whatever Chuka and Soubry’s bunch of no marks are called and the others who were elected in 2017 on a mandate to deliver Brexit don’t and it doesn’t pass, whose fault will it be?
Opposition parties are not obliged to support a Brexit that involves leaving a CU. That is the basis that Lab were elected. Obviously the SNP and Libs have even higher requirements.
Even with a CU most of Labour are demanding a referendum in which they would campaign to remain. It demonstrates the falsity of objections to any other deal, since clearly they would never have gone for anything.
Well, opinions change!
The point remains, Labour are not obliged to support a Tory designed Brexit.
No but they will very starkly be the ones ensuring no deal. No ERG cover; just Lab driving us off the cliff.
Do you expect the ERG and DUP to vote for May's Deal, repacked as Boris's?
I cannot see it myself.
I think the DUP might, if they got assurances from Boris that he would abrogate the treaty in the event that the EU failed to follow through on their obligations. (The genuine threat of No Deal might well be enough to push them that way.)
That might also assuage some of the Spartans - "Hey, the DUP are on board, we now have cover."
We seem to be assuming a GE too easily. At such an unpredictable time for both the main parties and the ever shifting geography of support, there will be a lot of opposition.
Oh, it's not technically easy, but it is one of the outcomes that can come about simply because they cannot come to agreement and some people, it doesn't have to be many, are pushed too far. Rather than something they specifically agree upon.
Tories pivot to no deal, enough Tory MPs say they will support a VONC. No one else can form a government, so GE occurs. Unless one thinks that even though they know it is a risk right now Labour would not support a VONC in the government, it seems relatively plausible. Or simply if, however boldly, PM Boris thinks he would win and says he wants one, as others have noted can Labour dare say they don't want one?
They could and probably would insist on a short extension first.
We seem to be assuming a GE too easily. At such an unpredictable time for both the main parties and the ever shifting geography of support, there will be a lot of opposition.
Oh, it's not technically easy, but it is one of the outcomes that can come about simply because they cannot come to agreement and some people, it doesn't have to be many, are pushed too far. Rather than something they specifically agree upon.
Tories pivot to no deal, enough Tory MPs say they will support a VONC. No one else can form a government, so GE occurs. Unless one thinks that even though they know it is a risk right now Labour would not support a VONC in the government, it seems relatively plausible. Or simply if, however boldly, PM Boris thinks he would win and says he wants one, as others have noted can Labour dare say they don't want one?
They could and probably would insist on a short extension first.
I think that would be an inevitable consequence regardless - we could not do no deal prep legislation while we were busy fighting a GE. So if we get one, the PM asks the EU for one on that basis.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Agreed. Even in the Euros, the Lib Dems's performance in Devon and Cornwall was pretty poor, whereas it was very strong in the Stockbroker Belt. They've lost the eurosceptic radicals of the South West, but gained the wealthy who hate Brexit.
It depends what you mean by SW. I expect the LDs to do well in the proximal SW. 50 seats seems a reasonable target.
I am off to see Swinson and Davey at the East Midlands husings on Saturday, shall report back.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Some seats like St Albans, that they've never won, look like pretty nailed-on gains.
I doubt that - the anti-Tory vote is again likely to be split . The seat was Labour -held from 1997 -2005 and is an example - like Watford -of where the LibDems outperform at local elections.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Some seats like St Albans, that they've never won, look like pretty nailed-on gains.
IMHO, St. Alban's (a constituency I know very well) will flatter to deceive. They just can't turn their support at local level in St. Alban's, Watford, SW Herts, into support at Parliamentary level. And, in the case of St. Alban's and Watford, they've never been ever able to persuade Labour voters to back them tactically. The Asian voters of Watford, and the white working class voters of London Colney simply won't support them.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Agreed. Even in the Euros, the Lib Dems's performance in Devon and Cornwall was pretty poor, whereas it was very strong in the Stockbroker Belt. They've lost the eurosceptic radicals of the South West, but gained the wealthy who hate Brexit.
It depends what you mean by SW. I expect the LDs to do well in the proximal SW. 50 seats seems a reasonable target.
I am off to see Swinson and Davey at the East Midlands husings on Saturday, shall report back.
When is the LD vote held and result expected?
Hah - day after we should expect the new PM I think - 23 July
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Some seats like St Albans, that they've never won, look like pretty nailed-on gains.
We seem to be assuming a GE too easily. At such an unpredictable time for both the main parties and the ever shifting geography of support, there will be a lot of opposition.
Oh, it's not technically easy, but it is one of the outcomes that can come about simply because they cannot come to agreement and some people, it doesn't have to be many, are pushed too far. Rather than something they specifically agree upon.
Tories pivot to no deal, enough Tory MPs say they will support a VONC. No one else can form a government, so GE occurs. Unless one thinks that even though they know it is a risk right now Labour would not support a VONC in the government, it seems relatively plausible. Or simply if, however boldly, PM Boris thinks he would win and says he wants one, as others have noted can Labour dare say they don't want one?
They could and probably would insist on a short extension first.
I think that would be an inevitable consequence regardless - we could not do no deal prep legislation while we were busy fighting a GE. So if we get one, the PM asks the EU for one on that basis.
And Nigel plays all the clips of Boris saying we are leaving on October 31st on a loop throughout the campaign...
My summary on this market is Backed BoJo at average odds of @4.09, Laid him @3.18 Backed Hunt @24.89, Laid at @14.77 Backed Sajid @30, Laid @29.27 Backed Mogg @ 8.37, Laid @7.93 Backed Hammond @ 6.6 (sob), Laid @ some ungodly high number when I cashed out at one point. (85)
I have successfully picked up the pennies in front of the steamroller. I am green on all the remaining contenders bar Sajid. A huge slice of luck for me I think rather than skill.
Please don't ask me about my Next Labour Leader book.
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
Fake news.
I don't want to punish leave voters.
I want to punish and humiliate leave voters. I want them to see their leave vote is ultimately responsible for the UK joining a USE.
A true victory is to make your enemy see they were wrong to oppose you in the first place. To force them to acknowledge your greatness.
I stand corrected.
For the avoidance of doubt and before a new PB meme is created I really don't want that to happen.
I'd love for us to leave with a deal, I just think we've exhausted the EU's patience and we won't get an extension in October and we'll leave without a deal.
That's when the shit hits the fan, and unfortunately it isn't a Dyson bladeless fan.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Agreed. Even in the Euros, the Lib Dems's performance in Devon and Cornwall was pretty poor, whereas it was very strong in the Stockbroker Belt. They've lost the eurosceptic radicals of the South West, but gained the wealthy who hate Brexit.
It depends what you mean by SW. I expect the LDs to do well in the proximal SW. 50 seats seems a reasonable target.
I am off to see Swinson and Davey at the East Midlands husings on Saturday, shall report back.
That's fair: the LibDems are likely to do reasonably well in towns like Wells, even as they struggle in Corwall and Devon.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Agreed. Even in the Euros, the Lib Dems's performance in Devon and Cornwall was pretty poor, whereas it was very strong in the Stockbroker Belt. They've lost the eurosceptic radicals of the South West, but gained the wealthy who hate Brexit.
It depends what you mean by SW. I expect the LDs to do well in the proximal SW. 50 seats seems a reasonable target.
I am off to see Swinson and Davey at the East Midlands husings on Saturday, shall report back.
When is the LD vote held and result expected?
Hah - day after we should expect the new PM I think - 23 July
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Some seats like St Albans, that they've never won, look like pretty nailed-on gains.
IMHO, St. Alban's (a constituency I know very well) will flatter to deceive. They just can't turn their support at local level in St. Alban's, Watford, SW Herts, into support at Parliamentary level. And, in the case of St. Alban's and Watford, they've never been ever able to persuade Labour voters to back them tactically. The Asian voters of Watford, and the white working class voters of London Colney simply won't support them.
I think that before the Euro elections you would be correct (and given the usual caveats) but the numbers from St Albans were astonishing and arch Brexiteer Ann Main is in one of the worst seats given the present climate :
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Some seats like St Albans, that they've never won, look like pretty nailed-on gains.
IMHO, St. Alban's (a constituency I know very well) will flatter to deceive. They just can't turn their support at local level in St. Alban's, Watford, SW Herts, into support at Parliamentary level. And, in the case of St. Alban's and Watford, they've never been ever able to persuade Labour voters to back them tactically. The Asian voters of Watford, and the white working class voters of London Colney simply won't support them.
I think in places like St Albans it will be Tory -> Lib Dem switchers that are decisive, rather than Labour tactical votes.
We seem to be assuming a GE too easily. At such an unpredictable time for both the main parties and the ever shifting geography of support, there will be a lot of opposition.
Oh, it's not technically easy, but it is one of the outcomes that can come about simply because they cannot come to agreement and some people, it doesn't have to be many, are pushed too far. Rather than something they specifically agree upon.
Tories pivot to no deal, enough Tory MPs say they will support a VONC. No one else can form a government, so GE occurs. Unless one thinks that even though they know it is a risk right now Labour would not support a VONC in the government, it seems relatively plausible. Or simply if, however boldly, PM Boris thinks he would win and says he wants one, as others have noted can Labour dare say they don't want one?
They could and probably would insist on a short extension first.
I think that would be an inevitable consequence regardless - we could not do no deal prep legislation while we were busy fighting a GE. So if we get one, the PM asks the EU for one on that basis.
And Nigel plays all the clips of Boris saying we are leaving on October 31st on a loop throughout the campaign...
Perhaps - but how much he does so, and campaigns against him, surely will be contingent on if Boris is openly campaigning on a no deal platform and was forced into this route by parliament trying to block that.
While I don't think Boris would win such an election it does seem likely that the BXP effect would be blunted and Tories would be far far larger, so the only effect such a move by Farage would have is to ensure a Labour led government which sees us to Remain.
Farage may not really care about exiting, he sure objects to anybody trying to do so, and perhaps he does want to replace the Tory party, but a Tory party fighting a no deal campaign would be large enough to not be about to be replaced, even though I think they would lose.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Some seats like St Albans, that they've never won, look like pretty nailed-on gains.
Look out for North Devon and Battersea
I've not heard of that constiuency. What was the result there last time?
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
I don’t want no deal particularly, I just want the people who are trying to stop Brexit to be punished for their lies and cowardice
And you seem to be struggling with cognitive dissonance because many of them are ostensibly committed Brexiteers.
Not at all. I think the ERG should have voted for the deal, but they were elected as hard brexiteers, so it wasn’t a surprise they weren’t satisfied with it. The Labour and TIG MPs were elected as Remainers who had accepted and would honour the result, but used the ERGs idealism as a shield to connive to prevent us leaving at all.
There is one man who will always serve under any Tory PM no matter how different his private opinions may be. Behold ladies and gentlemen, the most cuckolded wet Tory ever...... David Mundell.
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
I don’t want no deal particularly, I just want the people who are trying to stop Brexit to be punished for their lies and cowardice
And you seem to be struggling with cognitive dissonance because many of them are ostensibly committed Brexiteers.
Not at all. I think the ERG should have voted for the deal, but they were elected as hard brexiteers, so it wasn’t a surprise they weren’t satisfied with it. The Labour and TIG MPs were elected as Remainers who had accepted the result, but used the ERGs idealism as a shield while working to prevent us leaving at all
Labour MPs were elected on a manifesto commitment to oppose the Tories' Brexit approach and retain the benefits of the SM/CU, so they had every justification to vote against it.
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
I don’t want no deal particularly, I just want the people who are trying to stop Brexit to be punished for their lies and cowardice
And you seem to be struggling with cognitive dissonance because many of them are ostensibly committed Brexiteers.
Not at all. I think the ERG should have voted for the deal, but they were elected as hard brexiteers, so it wasn’t a surprise they weren’t satisfied with it. The Labour and TIG MPs were elected as Remainers who had accepted the result, but used the ERGs idealism as a shield while working to prevent us leaving at all
Labour MPs were elected on a manifesto commitment to oppose the Tories' Brexit approach and retain the benefits of the SM/CU, so they had every justification to vote against it.
So why do we hear that they would have voted for it had the ERG done so? That has been the excuse given for them
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
Fake news.
I don't want to punish leave voters.
I want to punish and humiliate leave voters. I want them to see their leave vote is ultimately responsible for the UK joining a USE.
A true victory is to make your enemy see they were wrong to oppose you in the first place. To force them to acknowledge your greatness.
A USE is not going to happen now, with strong eurosceptics in government in Italy, Hungary, Poland, and, for different reasons, across the Hanseatic League.
Britain might have left EU at the very moment it begins changing into something we could tolerate.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Some seats like St Albans, that they've never won, look like pretty nailed-on gains.
Look out for North Devon and Battersea
I've not heard of that constiuency. What was the result there last time?
It’s the new Boundary Commission initiative to bring the country back together. In future all English constituencies will consist of one part London & SE commuterland and one part rural.
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
I don’t want no deal particularly, I just want the people who are trying to stop Brexit to be punished for their lies and cowardice
And you seem to be struggling with cognitive dissonance because many of them are ostensibly committed Brexiteers.
Not at all. I think the ERG should have voted for the deal, but they were elected as hard brexiteers, so it wasn’t a surprise they weren’t satisfied with it. The Labour and TIG MPs were elected as Remainers who had accepted the result, but used the ERGs idealism as a shield while working to prevent us leaving at all
Labour MPs were elected on a manifesto commitment to oppose the Tories' Brexit approach and retain the benefits of the SM/CU, so they had every justification to vote against it.
So why do we hear that they would have voted for it had the ERG done so? That has been the excuse given for them
That's only a handful of potential rebels. Labour would still have whipped against it.
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
Fake news.
I don't want to punish leave voters.
I want to punish and humiliate leave voters. I want them to see their leave vote is ultimately responsible for the UK joining a USE.
A true victory is to make your enemy see they were wrong to oppose you in the first place. To force them to acknowledge your greatness.
A USE is not going to happen now, with strong eurosceptics in government in Italy, Hungary, Poland, and, for different reasons, across the Hanseatic League.
Britain might have left EU at the very moment it begins changing into something we could tolerate.
You’re not the first PB’er to proffer that thought.
My view is that if Boris becomes PM he will gain TBP voters and win seats in large parts of non metropolitan England but excluding parts of the South. The Lid Dems are likely to decimate labour and the conservatives in London and the South West
Boris is popular in the SW. And the LibDems still have a long way to claw back voters who have returned to Labour here.
I think St Ives will fill to the Yellow Peril, almost irrespective. They might also hold/gain Totnes if Sarah Wollaston is the candidate.
Beyond those, gains look tough, unless the Brexit vote is split between Con and BXP.
The LDs, though, look set to gain back many of their wealthy metropolitan and market town seats in the South East. While I think suggestions they'd get to 60 seats are fanciful, a Boris Brexit election would likely see them get somewhere north of 25 seats, and possibly as many as 40.
Some seats like St Albans, that they've never won, look like pretty nailed-on gains.
IMHO, St. Alban's (a constituency I know very well) will flatter to deceive. They just can't turn their support at local level in St. Alban's, Watford, SW Herts, into support at Parliamentary level. And, in the case of St. Alban's and Watford, they've never been ever able to persuade Labour voters to back them tactically. The Asian voters of Watford, and the white working class voters of London Colney simply won't support them.
I think that before the Euro elections you would be correct (and given the usual caveats) but the numbers from St Albans were astonishing and arch Brexiteer Ann Main is in one of the worst seats given the present climate :
There's still quite a large rural hinterland to St. Alban's constituency, which will deliver a large and loyal Conservative vote at a general election. I'm not saying the Lib Dems can't do it, but I think it will be tough for them.
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
I don’t want no deal particularly, I just want the people who are trying to stop Brexit to be punished for their lies and cowardice
And you seem to be struggling with cognitive dissonance because many of them are ostensibly committed Brexiteers.
Not at all. I think the ERG should have voted for the deal, but they were elected as hard brexiteers, so it wasn’t a surprise they weren’t satisfied with it. The Labour and TIG MPs were elected as Remainers who had accepted the result, but used the ERGs idealism as a shield while working to prevent us leaving at all
Labour MPs were elected on a manifesto commitment to oppose the Tories' Brexit approach and retain the benefits of the SM/CU, so they had every justification to vote against it.
So why do we hear that they would have voted for it had the ERG done so? That has been the excuse given for them
That's only a handful of potential rebels. Labour would still have whipped against it.
So it never really was the ERGs fault. I thought as much
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
Fake news.
I don't want to punish leave voters.
I want to punish and humiliate leave voters. I want them to see their leave vote is ultimately responsible for the UK joining a USE.
A true victory is to make your enemy see they were wrong to oppose you in the first place. To force them to acknowledge your greatness.
A USE is not going to happen now, with strong eurosceptics in government in Italy, Hungary, Poland, and, for different reasons, across the Hanseatic League.
Britain might have left EU at the very moment it begins changing into something we could tolerate.
You’re not the first PB’er to proffer that thought.
Frustratingly, I don't know that the EU would change into something Britain was more able to tolerate unless we left (or sought to leave at any rate).
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
I don’t want no deal particularly, I just want the people who are trying to stop Brexit to be punished for their lies and cowardice
And you seem to be struggling with cognitive dissonance because many of them are ostensibly committed Brexiteers.
Not at all. I think the ERG should have voted for the deal, but they were elected as hard brexiteers, so it wasn’t a surprise they weren’t satisfied with it. The Labour and TIG MPs were elected as Remainers who had accepted the result, but used the ERGs idealism as a shield while working to prevent us leaving at all
Labour MPs were elected on a manifesto commitment to oppose the Tories' Brexit approach and retain the benefits of the SM/CU, so they had every justification to vote against it.
So why do we hear that they would have voted for it had the ERG done so? That has been the excuse given for them
It's my view. Take away the cover of the ERG opposing the deal ("if she can't even convince her own party...") and it makes it very difficult or at least very much more difficult for Lab to oppose. Albeit I accept that is their job.
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
I don’t want no deal particularly, I just want the people who are trying to stop Brexit to be punished for their lies and cowardice
And you seem to be struggling with cognitive dissonance because many of them are ostensibly committed Brexiteers.
Not at all. I think the ERG should have voted for the deal, but they were elected as hard brexiteers, so it wasn’t a surprise they weren’t satisfied with it. The Labour and TIG MPs were elected as Remainers who had accepted the result, but used the ERGs idealism as a shield while working to prevent us leaving at all
Labour MPs were elected on a manifesto commitment to oppose the Tories' Brexit approach and retain the benefits of the SM/CU, so they had every justification to vote against it.
So why do we hear that they would have voted for it had the ERG done so? That has been the excuse given for them
That's only a handful of potential rebels. Labour would still have whipped against it.
So it never really was the ERGs fault. I thought as much
The Conservatives and DUP have a majority so what Labour do is irrelevant if they support the government.
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
I don’t want no deal particularly, I just want the people who are trying to stop Brexit to be punished for their lies and cowardice
And you seem to be struggling with cognitive dissonance because many of them are ostensibly committed Brexiteers.
Not at all. I think the ERG should have voted for the deal, but they were elected as hard brexiteers, so it wasn’t a surprise they weren’t satisfied with it. The Labour and TIG MPs were elected as Remainers who had accepted the result, but used the ERGs idealism as a shield while working to prevent us leaving at all
Labour MPs were elected on a manifesto commitment to oppose the Tories' Brexit approach and retain the benefits of the SM/CU, so they had every justification to vote against it.
So why do we hear that they would have voted for it had the ERG done so? That has been the excuse given for them
It's my view. Take away the cover of the ERG opposing the deal ("if she can't even convince her own party...") and it makes it very difficult or at least very much more difficult for Lab to oppose. Albeit I accept that is their job.
Every time an ERGer said Mrs May's deal was worse than remaining they gave cover for others to oppose the deal.
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
I don’t want no deal particularly, I just want the people who are trying to stop Brexit to be punished for their lies and cowardice
And you seem to be struggling with cognitive dissonance because many of them are ostensibly committed Brexiteers.
Not at all. I think the ERG should have voted for the deal, but they were elected as hard brexiteers, so it wasn’t a surprise they weren’t satisfied with it. The Labour and TIG MPs were elected as Remainers who had accepted the result, but used the ERGs idealism as a shield while working to prevent us leaving at all
Labour MPs were elected on a manifesto commitment to oppose the Tories' Brexit approach and retain the benefits of the SM/CU, so they had every justification to vote against it.
So why do we hear that they would have voted for it had the ERG done so? That has been the excuse given for them
That's only a handful of potential rebels. Labour would still have whipped against it.
So it never really was the ERGs fault. I thought as much
The Conservatives and DUP have a majority so what Labour do is irrelevant if they support the government.
I never said it was only Labour that were to blame. Grieve, TIG too
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
Fake news.
I don't want to punish leave voters.
I want to punish and humiliate leave voters. I want them to see their leave vote is ultimately responsible for the UK joining a USE.
A true victory is to make your enemy see they were wrong to oppose you in the first place. To force them to acknowledge your greatness.
A USE is not going to happen now, with strong eurosceptics in government in Italy, Hungary, Poland, and, for different reasons, across the Hanseatic League.
Britain might have left EU at the very moment it begins changing into something we could tolerate.
You’re not the first PB’er to proffer that thought.
Frustratingly, I don't know that the EU would change into something Britain was more able to tolerate unless we left (or sought to leave at any rate).
Time to accept that your Leave vote has done its job and start campaigning to Remain?
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
I don’t want no deal particularly, I just want the people who are trying to stop Brexit to be punished for their lies and cowardice
And you seem to be struggling with cognitive dissonance because many of them are ostensibly committed Brexiteers.
Not at all. I think the ERG should have voted for the deal, but they were elected as hard brexiteers, so it wasn’t a surprise they weren’t satisfied with it. The Labour and TIG MPs were elected as Remainers who had accepted the result, but used the ERGs idealism as a shield while working to prevent us leaving at all
Labour MPs were elected on a manifesto commitment to oppose the Tories' Brexit approach and retain the benefits of the SM/CU, so they had every justification to vote against it.
So why do we hear that they would have voted for it had the ERG done so? That has been the excuse given for them
It's my view. Take away the cover of the ERG opposing the deal ("if she can't even convince her own party...") and it makes it very difficult or at least very much more difficult for Lab to oppose. Albeit I accept that is their job.
Every time an ERGer said Mrs May's deal was worse than remaining they gave cover for others to oppose the deal.
Didn't our PM-in-waiting Boris say the very same thing?
Watching episode 3 of the Thatcher documentary which shows a brief clip of the 1984 Tory conference. On the stage behind Thatcher both the union flag and EU flags are displayed, side by side. Just imagine that now.
It would be great if we left on No Deal after the ERG had voted for a deal that the Remain and Revokers had rejected. As it always should have been.
You're falling into the same trap as rich remainers who want to see no deal to punish leave voters.
*cough* TSE *cough*
I don’t want no deal particularly, I just want the people who are trying to stop Brexit to be punished for their lies and cowardice
And you seem to be struggling with cognitive dissonance because many of them are ostensibly committed Brexiteers.
Not at all. I think the ERG should have voted for the deal, but they were elected as hard brexiteers, so it wasn’t a surprise they weren’t satisfied with it. The Labour and TIG MPs were elected as Remainers who had accepted the result, but used the ERGs idealism as a shield while working to prevent us leaving at all
Labour MPs were elected on a manifesto commitment to oppose the Tories' Brexit approach and retain the benefits of the SM/CU, so they had every justification to vote against it.
So why do we hear that they would have voted for it had the ERG done so? That has been the excuse given for them
That's only a handful of potential rebels. Labour would still have whipped against it.
So it never really was the ERGs fault. I thought as much
The Conservatives and DUP have a majority so what Labour do is irrelevant if they support the government.
I never said it was only Labour that were to blame. Grieve, TIG too
Really it’s the ERG, not only on the numbers but for having poisoned the water for their own governments deal before the ink was dry.
Comments
That was to prevent no deal. This would be a deal.
You'd have to be a pretty indulgent remainer now though to tolerate the planless pantomime that Brexit has become.
Honorable? WITHOUT A U?
I cannot see it myself.
Tories pivot to no deal, enough Tory MPs say they will support a VONC. No one else can form a government, so GE occurs. Unless one thinks that even though they know it is a risk right now Labour would not support a VONC in the government, it seems relatively plausible. Or simply if, however boldly, PM Boris thinks he would win and says he wants one, as others have noted can Labour dare say they don't want one?
I am off to see Swinson and Davey at the East Midlands husings on Saturday, shall report back.
I know you Leavers like to live the past but we're in the 21sr century.
Do you also use 'V' for 'U'?
*cough* TSE *cough*
If the EU were called the European Alliance (EA) instead, and not committed to ever closer union, we'd never have left.
And the New Bastards.
That might also assuage some of the Spartans - "Hey, the DUP are on board, we now have cover."
But the truth is that no-one knows. I
I don't want to punish leave voters.
I want to punish and humiliate leave voters. I want them to see their leave vote is ultimately responsible for the UK joining a USE.
A true victory is to make your enemy see they were wrong to oppose you in the first place. To force them to acknowledge your greatness.
https://www.libdems.org.uk/leadership-timetable
Backed BoJo at average odds of @4.09, Laid him @3.18
Backed Hunt @24.89, Laid at @14.77
Backed Sajid @30, Laid @29.27
Backed Mogg @ 8.37, Laid @7.93
Backed Hammond @ 6.6 (sob), Laid @ some ungodly high number when I cashed out at one point. (85)
Naked Lays on Leadsom @10.62 and Gove @10
I have successfully picked up the pennies in front of the steamroller. I am green on all the remaining contenders bar Sajid. A huge slice of luck for me I think rather than skill.
Please don't ask me about my Next Labour Leader book.
I'd love for us to leave with a deal, I just think we've exhausted the EU's patience and we won't get an extension in October and we'll leave without a deal.
That's when the shit hits the fan, and unfortunately it isn't a Dyson bladeless fan.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/13/sarah-sanders-donald-trumps-second-press-secretary-leaving-white-house/3515928002/
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1139263781144596486
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1139263782142787585
https://www.stalbans.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/elections/EU2019/
While I don't think Boris would win such an election it does seem likely that the BXP effect would be blunted and Tories would be far far larger, so the only effect such a move by Farage would have is to ensure a Labour led government which sees us to Remain.
Farage may not really care about exiting, he sure objects to anybody trying to do so, and perhaps he does want to replace the Tory party, but a Tory party fighting a no deal campaign would be large enough to not be about to be replaced, even though I think they would lose.
Behold ladies and gentlemen, the most cuckolded wet Tory ever...... David Mundell.
Is one of the great ironies of Brexit that the UK is now home to one of the largest Pro EU movements in Europe.
Britain might have left EU at the very moment it begins changing into something we could tolerate.
* just to be clear, I am joking.