As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
Surely all it would need is a dozen Tory MPs, who oppose Boris on No Deal, to indicate informally that they will not support him? May could not then in all honesty tell the Queen that Boris should be invited as he is highly likely to be able to command the House.
There is a limited number of people Theresa May can suggest as PM who would command a majority: herself, Boris, and Jeremy Corbyn, because Boris has already shown he has the support of far more Conservative MPs than anyone else.
Nobody yet. But to go with a No Deal Brexit I would expect this to be the direction of travel for either or both of the Cons and the BP.
There's a 'libertarian pirate island' fringe in the Conservatives but there's sod all votes for it in reality.
Lots of people, across the political spectrum, are in favour of making the state smaller in certain areas ie when its to the detriment of 'people like them' but they're all happy to make the state bigger when its to the benefit of 'people like us'.
It would have my vote.
I have you, the Vicerory of Orange and Isam in a similar politicalbetting extreme right wing fringe group
There's undoubtedly a lot of you about in the country, although less than the white noise would have us believe.
It's worth bearing in mind that more than 1/3rd of Conservative voters were pro Remaining in the EU.
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
Surely all it would need is a dozen Tory MPs, who oppose Boris on No Deal, to indicate informally that they will not support him? May could not then in all honesty tell the Queen that Boris should be invited as he is highly likely to be able to command the House.
There is a limited number of people Theresa May can suggest as PM who would command a majority: herself, Boris, and Jeremy Corbyn, because Boris has already shown he has the support of far more Conservative MPs than anyone else.
Starmer might get a majority with SNP, LD, CUK, Plaid, Green and diehard Tory Remainers like Grieve backing him as the Commons is now. Corbyn won't without winning most seats at an election
In a seat like Cambridge with a vigorous Labour Remainer as an MP, would the Labour vote get hammered? My guess is no.
So right there is our difference of view. I think in a general election, if the Lib Dems are the only main party (in England) offering the chance to cancel Brexit, the votes of those people for whom cancelling Brexit is a priority will go in great numbers (many millions) to that party. With Leavers split between Tory and BP, this spells annihilation for Labour. Don't see how they can take that risk. There is a risk the other way, of course, but IMO it is much smaller.
IMHO, if we had a general election now, support for the Conservatives and Labour would move towards the high twenties, and for Lib Dems and TBP, down towards the low teens. Not because of any love for either the Conservatives or Labour, but simply to keep the other one out.
I agree with that. In a general election , I would be surprised if the combined vote share for the Tories and Labour ended up below 65% - ie similar to 2015 and 2010.
You've just no evidence for the guess though. The polling indicates you're wrong.
BXP and LibDems could very readily poll over 50%. That's what the evidence currently suggests.
“Here's what it comes down to for me: Conservatives vs. Tories.
“I'm a conservative. I believe in marriage and the family, a small state, the right to life. I believe that marriage is the lifelong union of a man and a woman. I believe in free enterprise, liberty and democracy. I believe in meritocracy. I believe in law and order.
“I'm ashamed that my party thinks that Boris Johnson, a man who in so many ways embodies the opposite of those virtues and values is the right man to lead our party and our country.
…
“There can only be one explanation for that: The Tories run our party. Tories: plutocratic liberals and moral pygmies.”
I suspect the overnight story about the row between Boris and Carrie will blow over. To a large extent questions in the mind of most Party members about his moral fibre have already been priced in.
But if it doesn’t blow over quickly, I just wonder if doubts might begin to set in. And in particular, I’m not aware that Marina Wheeler has made any further public comment since the announcement of their separation and divorce. If she for any reason was tempted to intervene, I do think that could seriously derail Boris with the “Conservatives” (as opposed to “Tories”) referred to above.
“Hell hath no fury …” and all that?
It won't and if It did the main beneficiary would be Farage not Hunt
“Here's what it comes down to for me: Conservatives vs. Tories.
“I'm a conservative. I believe in marriage and the family, a small state, the right to life. I believe that marriage is the lifelong union of a man and a woman. I believe in free enterprise, liberty and democracy. I believe in meritocracy. I believe in law and order.
“I'm ashamed that my party thinks that Boris Johnson, a man who in so many ways embodies the opposite of those virtues and values is the right man to lead our party and our country.
…
“There can only be one explanation for that: The Tories run our party. Tories: plutocratic liberals and moral pygmies.”
I suspect the overnight story about the row between Boris and Carrie will blow over. To a large extent questions in the mind of most Party members about his moral fibre have already been priced in.
But if it doesn’t blow over quickly, I just wonder if doubts might begin to set in. And in particular, I’m not aware that Marina Wheeler has made any further public comment since the announcement of their separation and divorce. If she for any reason was tempted to intervene, I do think that could seriously derail Boris with the “Conservatives” (as opposed to “Tories”) referred to above.
“Hell hath no fury …” and all that?
I think this is rather old hat.
The great libertarian revolutions of this country came in the 1960's and then again economically and financially in the 1980's. They were then followed by the immensely libertarian 1997 New Labour agenda, when the country moved forward dramatically. As a nation we breathed a collective sigh of relief and the hypocritical shambles of the Major Gov't, both Tory and Conservative, was booted out.
It's not moral pygmy-ism* to want libertarian social values such as equal rights, gay marriage, maternity protection etc. It's cultured, educated, refined, elegant and advanced.
I am so reminded at the moment of the Major years. From the empty Conservative benches to the moral deceptitude it's the last vestiges of a decade-long run in office. You're on the way out. I feel it in my bones.
*Pygmy as a pejorative terms is really not on, either. I use in response.
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
People don’t elect prime ministers they elect MPs, party groupings amongst MPs choose their leaders and if they have a majority or can form a government or a majority with other parties they can form a minority government or coalition government.The leader becomes prime minister. People seem to think we are electing a president the way they moan about the party process for changing leaders
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
Fine, then Boris either wins a snap general election or becomes Leader of the Opposition and still leader of the largest party with Starmer becoming PM propped up by the SNP and LDs and Plaid and Greens and CUK and Grieve and Lee and Greening etc.
We'd be better off losing seats to the LibDems, Greens and SNP than to the Tories or Brexit Party. The next election will be all about building an anti-Tory alliance - a Labour majority is wishful thinking.
Therefore going full-on Remain would be a bad strategy.
I'm not thinking full-on Remain necessarily.
"We will seek to negotiate a better deal with the EU. One that protects jobs and workers' rights and ...
We will then put that deal to the British people in a confirmatory referendum with the other option being to Remain.
We will allow Labour members and MPs to campaign for whichever option they personally support."
Yes, that's where I expect us to end up. It's a perfectly reasonable position IMO (much better than "we'll try to negotiate a deal and then we'll campaign against it in a referendum", which is just ridiculous), though it may suffer from not being an extreme position in a polarised country.
It would be reasonable if there were a minority of Labour MPs/members who would support remain. It's ludicrous when it is an overwhelming majority, including people like Emily Thornberry and Keir Starmer who would be negoitating it. Essentially it's the same as the first policy, except it allows the likes of Lisa Nandy to not have to go against a manifesto committment.
But would it be so very different to what happened in June 1975 when the Labour Government recommended staying in the Common Market - and the Labour Party campaigned to leave?
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
As I said previously, if there were serious doubt whether the new Conservative leader could command a majority, I would expect Theresa May to remain in place until either that doubt was resolved or a different person appeared likely to do so or a vote of no confidence in Theresa May was passed and a general election ensued.
Interesting question is, if Labour win as largest party needing SNP and LD support to govern, would they be able to anything of much significance EXCEPT cancel Brexit? Certainly much of the Corbynite agenda would be seem to be off limits.
Socialism deferred indefinitely?
The immediate problem for such a government is how to restrain the immediate rise in the value of the pound that follows the election of Jeremy Corbyn. (Imagine reading that sentence 10 years ago...)
So they could, and would need to, print and spend a load of money on public services, which is pretty much half the agenda done. Then if they wanted to nationalize the railways I doubt the LibDems or the SNP would care much either way. I think Corbyn fans would be reasonably happy with that - what else do they want, specifically?
We'd be better off losing seats to the LibDems, Greens and SNP than to the Tories or Brexit Party. The next election will be all about building an anti-Tory alliance - a Labour majority is wishful thinking.
Therefore going full-on Remain would be a bad strategy.
I'm not thinking full-on Remain necessarily.
"We will seek to negotiate a better deal with the EU. One that protects jobs and workers' rights and ...
We will then put that deal to the British people in a confirmatory referendum with the other option being to Remain.
We will allow Labour members and MPs to campaign for whichever option they personally support."
Yes, that's where I expect us to end up. It's a perfectly reasonable position IMO (much better than "we'll try to negotiate a deal and then we'll campaign against it in a referendum", which is just ridiculous), though it may suffer from not being an extreme position in a polarised country.
It would be reasonable if there were a minority of Labour MPs/members who would support remain. It's ludicrous when it is an overwhelming majority, including people like Emily Thornberry and Keir Starmer who would be negoitating it. Essentially it's the same as the first policy, except it allows the likes of Lisa Nandy to not have to go against a manifesto committment.
But would it be so very different to what happened in June 1975 when the Labour Government recommended staying in the Common Market - and the Labour Party campaigned to leave?
Did the Labour Party campaign to leave? I thought it was quite remarkably split not overwhelmingly one or the other?
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
As I said previously, if there were serious doubt whether the new Conservative leader could command a majority, I would expect Theresa May to remain in place until either that doubt was resolved or a different person appeared likely to do so or a vote of no confidence in Theresa May was passed and a general election ensued.
Is it possible May could end up staying PM as a Ramsay MacDonald or Lloyd George type figure because of opposition votes if the alternative is PM Boris and hard Brexit?
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
If this is true, and it has a degree of plausibility about it, then we need to watch the market definitions very carefully. Just as there has been a dispute over Theresa May's departure so there could be with what is about to come.
Just for starters: are you on with 'next tory leader' or 'next Prime Minister'? The two may not be one and the same.
As I mentioned before, the BBC were jumping the gun by calling their (execrable) debate 'Britain's Next Prime Minister'.
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
As I said previously, if there were serious doubt whether the new Conservative leader could command a majority, I would expect Theresa May to remain in place until either that doubt was resolved or a different person appeared likely to do so or a vote of no confidence in Theresa May was passed and a general election ensued.
Is it possible May could end up staying PM as a Ramsay MacDonald or Lloyd George type figure because of opposition votes if the alternative is PM Boris and hard Brexit?
"This traineeship is only open to candidates from a BAME or lower socio-economic background"
Is there something difficult to understand about the above?
If the traineeship is paying the London Living Wage, in effect it is only open to a rather small group of people ... probably with parents/friends (or at least free accommodation) available in London.
Tough if you are Scottish/Welsh/N Irish from the North or Midlands.
Why doesn't the Guardian foot the accommodation bill?
It would not be a huge amount of money to put 7 interns up in a reasonable London hostel for 6 weeks.
By the way, another thought which has been growing on me is that Hunt has a much better chance of defeating Johnson than Gove did. Gove is loathed by Boris supporters, and most Conservatives, for what happened in 2016. Jeremy Hunt isn't disliked inside the party it seems. In fact, I think he's rather respected.
We've been saying on here that this is Boris' to lose and that he is his own worst enemy. As his epic character flaws are increasingly exposed, Hunt stands tall as a serious and safe alternative prospect.
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
As I said previously, if there were serious doubt whether the new Conservative leader could command a majority, I would expect Theresa May to remain in place until either that doubt was resolved or a different person appeared likely to do so or a vote of no confidence in Theresa May was passed and a general election ensued.
Is it possible May could end up staying PM as a Ramsay MacDonald or Lloyd George type figure because of opposition votes if the alternative is PM Boris and hard Brexit?
That would be wild.
It would indeed, Greening, Rudd, Hammond, Grieve etc to Leave the Tories and become Mayite 'National Tories' like McDonald's 'National Labour'? Would require May to be propped up by Labour as MacDonald was propped up by the Tories between 1931 and 1935
Nobody yet. But to go with a No Deal Brexit I would expect this to be the direction of travel for either or both of the Cons and the BP.
There's a 'libertarian pirate island' fringe in the Conservatives but there's sod all votes for it in reality.
Lots of people, across the political spectrum, are in favour of making the state smaller in certain areas ie when its to the detriment of 'people like them' but they're all happy to make the state bigger when its to the benefit of 'people like us'.
It would have my vote.
I have you, the Vicerory of Orange and Isam in a similar politicalbetting extreme right wing fringe group
There's undoubtedly a lot of you about in the country, although less than the white noise would have us believe.
It's worth bearing in mind that more than 1/3rd of Conservative voters were pro Remaining in the EU.
Typical of the modern fashion of compartmentalising individuals into groups then treating them as they’ve decided people in those groups of their creation should be
In a seat like Cambridge with a vigorous Labour Remainer as an MP, would the Labour vote get hammered? My guess is no.
So right there is our difference of view. I think in a general election, if the Lib Dems are the only main party (in England) offering the chance to cancel Brexit, the votes of those people for whom cancelling Brexit is a priority will go in great numbers (many millions) to that party. With Leavers split between Tory and BP, this spells annihilation for Labour. Don't see how they can take that risk. There is a risk the other way, of course, but IMO it is much smaller.
IMHO, if we had a general election now, support for the Conservatives and Labour would move towards the high twenties, and for Lib Dems and TBP, down towards the low teens. Not because of any love for either the Conservatives or Labour, but simply to keep the other one out.
I agree with that. In a general election , I would be surprised if the combined vote share for the Tories and Labour ended up below 65% - ie similar to 2015 and 2010.
You've just no evidence for the guess though. The polling indicates you're wrong.
BXP and LibDems could very readily poll over 50%. That's what the evidence currently suggests.
There is the striking evidence of what happened to the Labour vote in the 2017 campaign - and to an extent the recovery by the Tories of UKIP switchers during the 2015 election. Two non-Yougov polls have put Labour on 27% and we saw a significantly higher Labour - and Tory - vote at the Peterborough by election than implied by the EU election. I am making a judgement that in the event of a GE voters will polarise again - though not to the same extent as 2017. Much of the Green /LD surge would be reversed to Labour's advantage with the Tories being boosted by a significant drop in Brexit Party support. Moreover, other issues would come to the fore of the campaign , and that would reinforce what I have referred to.
By the way, another thought which has been growing on me is that Hunt has a much better chance of defeating Johnson than Gove did. Gove is loathed by Boris supporters, and most Conservatives, for what happened in 2016. Jeremy Hunt isn't disliked inside the party it seems. In fact, I think he's rather respected.
We've been saying on here that this is Boris' to lose and that he is his own worst enemy. As his epic character flaws are increasingly exposed, Hunt stands tall as a serious and safe alternative prospect.
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
Not really, being a Remainer and willing to extend beyond October rules out Hunt for most Tory members regardless of what Boris does or how good the Hunt campaign
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
As I said previously, if there were serious doubt whether the new Conservative leader could command a majority, I would expect Theresa May to remain in place until either that doubt was resolved or a different person appeared likely to do so or a vote of no confidence in Theresa May was passed and a general election ensued.
By the way, another thought which has been growing on me is that Hunt has a much better chance of defeating Johnson than Gove did. Gove is loathed by Boris supporters, and most Conservatives, for what happened in 2016. Jeremy Hunt isn't disliked inside the party it seems. In fact, I think he's rather respected.
We've been saying on here that this is Boris' to lose and that he is his own worst enemy. As his epic character flaws are increasingly exposed, Hunt stands tall as a serious and safe alternative prospect.
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
Not really, being a Remainer and willing to extend beyond October rules out Hunt for most Tory members regardless of what Boris does or how good the Hunt campaign
It depends whether they're prepared to face the truth over the next month.
We won't be leaving the EU in October unless there's a General Election beforehand to deliver a No Deal Brexit mandate.
The current HoC won't permit No Deal and there's no chance of a new WA. Even if there was, it won't get through the Commons.
So it's up to Hunt to make them engage with the truth.
Personally I don't massively care. I'm really looking forward to Election night, whenever it comes, and seeing the demise of this shambolic Conservative Government.
We'd be better off losing seats to the LibDems, Greens and SNP than to the Tories or Brexit Party. The next election will be all about building an anti-Tory alliance - a Labour majority is wishful thinking.
Therefore going full-on Remain would be a bad strategy.
I'm not thinking full-on Remain necessarily.
"We will seek to negotiate a better deal with the EU. One that protects jobs and workers' rights and ...
We will then put that deal to the British people in a confirmatory referendum with the other option being to Remain.
We will allow Labour members and MPs to campaign for whichever option they personally support."
Yes, that's where I expect us to end up. It's a perfectly reasonable position IMO (much better than "we'll try to negotiate a deal and then we'll campaign against it in a referendum", which is just ridiculous), though it may suffer from not being an extreme position in a polarised country.
It would be reasonable if there were a minority of Labour MPs/members who would support remain. It's ludicrous when it is an overwhelming majority, including people like Emily Thornberry and Keir Starmer who would be negoitating it. Essentially it's the same as the first policy, except it allows the likes of Lisa Nandy to not have to go against a manifesto committment.
But would it be so very different to what happened in June 1975 when the Labour Government recommended staying in the Common Market - and the Labour Party campaigned to leave?
Did the Labour Party campaign to leave? I thought it was quite remarkably split not overwhelmingly one or the other?
It did indeed - the party's official policy was to leave the Common Market in the 1975 Referendum campaign.
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
If this is true, and it has a degree of plausibility about it, then we need to watch the market definitions very carefully. Just as there has been a dispute over Theresa May's departure so there could be with what is about to come.
Just for starters: are you on with 'next tory leader' or 'next Prime Minister'? The two may not be one and the same.
As I mentioned before, the BBC were jumping the gun by calling their (execrable) debate 'Britain's Next Prime Minister'.
In a seat like Cambridge with a vigorous Labour Remainer as an MP, would the Labour vote get hammered? My guess is no.
So right there is our difference of view. I think in a general election, if the Lib Dems are the only main party (in England) offering the chance to cancel Brexit, the votes of those people for whom cancelling Brexit is a priority will go in great numbers (many millions) to that party. With Leavers split between Tory and BP, this spells annihilation for Labour. Don't see how they can take that risk. There is a risk the other way, of course, but IMO it is much smaller.
IMHO, if we had a general election now, support for the Conservatives and Labour would move towards the high twenties, and for Lib Dems and TBP, down towards the low teens. Not because of any love for either the Conservatives or Labour, but simply to keep the other one out.
I agree with that. In a general election , I would be surprised if the combined vote share for the Tories and Labour ended up below 65% - ie similar to 2015 and 2010.
You've just no evidence for the guess though. The polling indicates you're wrong.
BXP and LibDems could very readily poll over 50%. That's what the evidence currently suggests.
There is the striking evidence of what happened to the Labour vote in the 2017 campaign - and to an extent the recovery by the Tories of UKIP switchers during the 2015 e
This is neither 2015 nor 2017.
I don't see any evidence that the LibDem surge will subside and I think it's wishful, myopic, thinking to vanish it away simply because it doesn't fit your meme.
The voters actually voted for Brexit in 2016 James Melville in case you forgot, just Parliament refuses to deliver it
The same voters who actually elected that same Parliament a year later. This constant insinuation that the Commons is somehow an undemocratic institution is simultaneously baffling and terrifying.
Agreed. Also it's 'Remainers' who get blamed whereas it's the ERG who stopped us leaving
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
As I said previously, if there were serious doubt whether the new Conservative leader could command a majority, I would expect Theresa May to remain in place until either that doubt was resolved or a different person appeared likely to do so or a vote of no confidence in Theresa May was passed and a general election ensued.
Yes. Theresa May must make the great sacrifice required of her, and remain prime minister.
The obvious comparison, of course, would be the period when Winston Churchill was prime minister, while Neville Chamberlain remained leader of the Conservative Party.
By the way, another thought which has been growing on me is that Hunt has a much better chance of defeating Johnson than Gove did. Gove is loathed by Boris supporters, and most Conservatives, for what happened in 2016. Jeremy Hunt isn't disliked inside the party it seems. In fact, I think he's rather respected.
We've been saying on here that this is Boris' to lose and that he is his own worst enemy. As his epic character flaws are increasingly exposed, Hunt stands tall as a serious and safe alternative prospect.
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
Not really, being a Remainer and willing to extend beyond October rules out Hunt for most Tory members regardless of what Boris does or how good the Hunt campaign
It depends whether they're prepared to face the truth over the next month.
We won't be leaving the EU in October unless there's a General Election beforehand to deliver a No Deal Brexit mandate.
The current HoC won't permit No Deal and there's no chance of a new WA. Even if there was, it won't get through the Commons.
So it's up to Hunt to make them engage with the truth.
Personally I don't massively care. I'm really looking forward to Election night, whenever it comes, and seeing the demise of this shambolic Conservative Government.
If the Tories do not deliver Brexit by October as Yougov showed yesterday election night will bring PM Farage to power so either way Brexit will be delivered whether by the Tories or if not the Brexit Party.
Of course if there is a general election before October then if Boris wins it as has been reported he gets a mandate and can deliver a FTA for GB with a referendum on the backstop in NI.
If Brexit is not delivered by October then the Brexit Party win the next general election and Farage gets a majority for No Deal
We'd be better off losing seats to the LibDems, Greens and SNP than to the Tories or Brexit Party. The next election will be all about building an anti-Tory alliance - a Labour majority is wishful thinking.
Therefore going full-on Remain would be a bad strategy.
I'm not thinking full-on Remain necessarily.
"We will seek to negotiate a better deal with the EU. One that protects jobs and workers' rights and ...
We will then put that deal to the British people in a confirmatory referendum with the other option being to Remain.
We will allow Labour members and MPs to campaign for whichever option they personally support."
Yes, that's where I expect us to end up. It's a perfectly reasonable position IMO (much better than "we'll try to negotiate a deal and then we'll campaign against it in a referendum", which is just ridiculous), though it may suffer from not being an extreme position in a polarised country.
It would be reasonable if there were a minority of Labour MPs/members who would support remain. It's ludicrous when it is an overwhelming majority, including people like Emily Thornberry and Keir Starmer who would be negoitating it. Essentially it's the same as the first policy, except it allows the likes of Lisa Nandy to not have to go against a manifesto committment.
But would it be so very different to what happened in June 1975 when the Labour Government recommended staying in the Common Market - and the Labour Party campaigned to leave?
Oh I think it would be. In 1975 Wilson/Jenkins campaigned to stay, and the majority of members campaigned to leave. It would be more similar to 1975 if say Corbyn and Lavery negotiated a deal and then went around the country enthusiastically campaigning for it, but allowed others like Thornberry to advocate remain.
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
As I said previously, if there were serious doubt whether the new Conservative leader could command a majority, I would expect Theresa May to remain in place until either that doubt was resolved or a different person appeared likely to do so or a vote of no confidence in Theresa May was passed and a general election ensued.
Is it possible May could end up staying PM as a Ramsay MacDonald or Lloyd George type figure because of opposition votes if the alternative is PM Boris and hard Brexit?
As Alastair has implied, much more likely that she would remain PM in a caretaker capacity until an election has been held.
By the way, another thought which has been growing on me is that Hunt has a much better chance of defeating Johnson than Gove did. Gove is loathed by Boris supporters, and most Conservatives, for what happened in 2016. Jeremy Hunt isn't disliked inside the party it seems. In fact, I think he's rather respected.
We've been saying on here that this is Boris' to lose and that he is his own worst enemy. As his epic character flaws are increasingly exposed, Hunt stands tall as a serious and safe alternative prospect.
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
Not really, being a Remainer and willing to extend beyond October rules out Hunt for most Tory members regardless of what Boris does or how good the Hunt campaign
It depends whether they're prepared to face the truth over the next month.
We won't be leaving the EU in October unless there's a General Election beforehand to deliver a No Deal Brexit mandate.
The current HoC won't permit No Deal and there's no chance of a new WA. Even if there was, it won't get through the Commons.
So it's up to Hunt to make them engage with the truth.
Personally I don't massively care. I'm really looking forward to Election night, whenever it comes, and seeing the demise of this shambolic Conservative Government.
If the Tories do not deliver Brexit by October as Yougov showed yesterday election night will bring PM Farage to power so either way Brexit will be delivered whether by the Tories or not
Farage would probably leave the country rather than accepting any reponsibility!
By the way, another thought which has been growing on me is that Hunt has a much better chance of defeating Johnson than Gove did. Gove is loathed by Boris supporters, and most Conservatives, for what happened in 2016. Jeremy Hunt isn't disliked inside the party it seems. In fact, I think he's rather respected.
We've been saying on here that this is Boris' to lose and that he is his own worst enemy. As his epic character flaws are increasingly exposed, Hunt stands tall as a serious and safe alternative prospect.
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
Not really, being a Remainer and willing to extend beyond October rules out Hunt for most Tory members regardless of what Boris does or how good the Hunt campaign
It depends whether they're prepared to face the truth over the next month.
We won't be leaving the EU in October unless there's a General Election beforehand to deliver a No Deal Brexit mandate.
The current HoC won't permit No Deal and there's no chance of a new WA. Even if there was, it won't get through the Commons.
So it's up to Hunt to make them engage with the truth.
Personally I don't massively care. I'm really looking forward to Election night, whenever it comes, and seeing the demise of this shambolic Conservative Government.
If the Tories do not deliver Brexit by October as Yougov showed yesterday election night will bring PM Farage to power so either way Brexit will be delivered whether by the Tories or not
Look, trotting out the withered mantra about 'delivering Brexit by October' does absolutely nothing to make it happen.
HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW?
No one in your party is answering that except, ironically, Dominic Raab.
1. You will not get No Deal through Parliament
2. You're not going to get away with Prorogation
3. There is NO chance the EU will alter the Withdrawal Agreement by Oct 31st with a new PM
4. The House of Commons has already rejected the current Withdrawal Agreement three times.
Rather than repeating the same old mantra, just stop and (genuinely I mean this politely) engage brain and think about it, then give some concrete solutions to the above.
By the way, another thought which has been growing on me is that Hunt has a much better chance of defeating Johnson than Gove did. Gove is loathed by Boris supporters, and most Conservatives, for what happened in 2016. Jeremy Hunt isn't disliked inside the party it seems. In fact, I think he's rather respected.
We've been saying on here that this is Boris' to lose and that he is his own worst enemy. As his epic character flaws are increasingly exposed, Hunt stands tall as a serious and safe alternative prospect.
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
Not really, being a Remainer and willing to extend beyond October rules out Hunt for most Tory members regardless of what Boris does or how good the Hunt campaign
It depends whether they're prepared to face the truth over the next month.
We won't be leaving the EU in October unless there's a General Election beforehand to deliver a No Deal Brexit mandate.
The current HoC won't permit No Deal and there's no chance of a new WA. Even if there was, it won't get through the Commons.
So it's up to Hunt to make them engage with the truth.
Personally I don't massively care. I'm really looking forward to Election night, whenever it comes, and seeing the demise of this shambolic Conservative Government.
If the Tories do not deliver Brexit by October as Yougov showed yesterday election night will bring PM Farage to power so either way Brexit will be delivered whether by the Tories or not
No guarantees that Farage will succeed where others fail. Reality is reality.
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
It still seems to me the right course would be for Johnson to become PM, and then for a motion of no confidence to be put to the House. People saying they'll vote against their own party is not the same as actually doing it.
In a seat like Cambridge with a vigorous Labour Remainer as an MP, would the Labour vote get hammered? My guess is no.
So right there is our difference of view. I think in a general election, if the Lib Dems are the only main party (in England) offering the chance to cancel Brexit, the votes of those people for whom cancelling Brexit is a priority will go in great numbers (many millions) to that party. With Leavers split between Tory and BP, this spells annihilation for Labour. Don't see how they can take that risk. There is a risk the other way, of course, but IMO it is much smaller.
IMHO, if we had a general election now, support for the Conservatives and Labour would move towards the high twenties, and for Lib Dems and TBP, down towards the low teens. Not because of any love for either the Conservatives or Labour, but simply to keep the other one out.
I agree with that. In a general election , I would be surprised if the combined vote share for the Tories and Labour ended up below 65% - ie similar to 2015 and 2010.
You've just no evidence for the guess though. The polling indicates you're wrong.
BXP and LibDems could very readily poll over 50%. That's what the evidence currently suggests.
There is the striking evidence of what happened to the Labour vote in the 2017 campaign - and to an extent the recovery by the Tories of UKIP switchers during the 2015 e
This is neither 2015 nor 2017.
I don't see any evidence that the LibDem surge will subside and I think it's wishful, myopic, thinking to vanish it away simply because it doesn't fit your meme.
I will be spoiling my ballot paper for unrelated reasons and am not being partisan here. I am simply giving my own opinion as to what - psephologically - is most likely to happen. Of course, I may be proved wrong.
By the way, another thought which has been growing on me is that Hunt has a much better chance of defeating Johnson than Gove did. Gove is loathed by Boris supporters, and most Conservatives, for what happened in 2016. Jeremy Hunt isn't disliked inside the party it seems. In fact, I think he's rather respected.
We've been saying on here that this is Boris' to lose and that he is his own worst enemy. As his epic character flaws are increasingly exposed, Hunt stands tall as a serious and safe alternative prospect.
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
Not really, being a Remainer and willing to extend beyond October rules out Hunt for most Tory members regardless of what Boris does or how good the Hunt campaign
It depends whether they're prepared to face the truth over the next month.
We won't be leaving the EU in October unless there's a General Election beforehand to deliver a No Deal Brexit mandate.
The current HoC won't permit No Deal and there's no chance of a new WA. Even if there was, it won't get through the Commons.
So it's up to Hunt to make them engage with the truth.
Personally I don't massively care. I'm really looking forward to Election night, whenever it comes, and seeing the demise of this shambolic Conservative Government.
If the Tories do not deliver Brexit by October as Yougov showed yesterday election night will bring PM Farage to power so either way Brexit will be delivered whether by the Tories or not
No guarantees that Farage will succeed where others fail. Reality is reality.
Remember Farage’s parties have always been total rubbish at first past the post elections and there are no indications that have yet to improve.
We'd be better off losing seats to the LibDems, Greens and SNP than to the Tories or Brexit Party. The next election will be all about building an anti-Tory alliance - a Labour majority is wishful thinking.
Therefore going full-on Remain would be a bad strategy.
I'm not thinking full-on Remain necessarily.
"We will seek to negotiate a better deal with the EU. One that protects jobs and workers' rights and ...
We will then put that deal to the British people in a confirmatory referendum with the other option being to Remain.
We will allow Labour members and MPs to campaign for whichever option they personally support."
Yes, that's where I expect us to end up. It's a perfectly reasonable position IMO (much better than "we'll try to negotiate a deal and then we'll campaign against it in a referendum", which is just ridiculous), though it may suffer from not being an extreme position in a polarised country.
It would be reasonable if there were a minority of Labour MPs/members who would support remain. It's ludicrous when it is an overwhelming majority, including people like Emily Thornberry and Keir Starmer who would be negoitating it. Essentially it's the same as the first policy, except it allows the likes of Lisa Nandy to not have to go against a manifesto committment.
But would it be so very different to what happened in June 1975 when the Labour Government recommended staying in the Common Market - and the Labour Party campaigned to leave?
Did the Labour Party campaign to leave? I thought it was quite remarkably split not overwhelmingly one or the other?
Harold Wilson chose to not get involved one way or the other as I recall.
We'd be better off losing seats to the LibDems, Greens and SNP than to the Tories or Brexit Party. The next election will be all about building an anti-Tory alliance - a Labour majority is wishful thinking.
Therefore going full-on Remain would be a bad strategy.
I'm not thinking full-on Remain necessarily.
"We will seek to negotiate a better deal with the EU. One that protects jobs and workers' rights and ...
We will then put that deal to the British people in a confirmatory referendum with the other option being to Remain.
We will allow Labour members and MPs to campaign for whichever option they personally support."
Yes, that's where I expect us to end up. It's a perfectly reasonable position IMO (much better than "we'll try to negotiate a deal and then we'll campaign against it in a referendum", which is just ridiculous), though it may suffer from not being an extreme position in a polarised country.
It would be reasonable if there were a minority of Labour MPs/members who would support remain. It's ludicrous when it is an overwhelming majority, including people like Emily Thornberry and Keir Starmer who would be negoitating it. Essentially it's the same as the first policy, except it allows the likes of Lisa Nandy to not have to go against a manifesto committment.
But would it be so very different to what happened in June 1975 when the Labour Government recommended staying in the Common Market - and the Labour Party campaigned to leave?
Oh I think it would be. In 1975 Wilson/Jenkins campaigned to stay, and the majority of members campaigned to leave. It would be more similar to 1975 if say Corbyn and Lavery negotiated a deal and then went around the country enthusiastically campaigning for it, but allowed others like Thornberry to advocate remain.
Wilson actually did not have a leading role in the Referendum Campaign , and effectively took a back seat beyond the Government's official recommendation.Jenkins, Williams,Owen & Hattersley were the leading Labour campaigners on the pro- Common Market side opposed by Foot, Benn, Castle, Shore & Silkin as the anti- Marketeers.
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
It still seems to me the right course would be for Johnson to become PM, and then for a motion of no confidence to be put to the House. People saying they'll vote against their own party is not the same as actually doing it.
This entire thread today is your regular reminder that the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 is one of the most ill thought out pieces of legislation ever. If old rules applied a Johnson government would face several votes of confidence through the budget and a Queen's speech. Furthermore May could have made her deal a vote of confidence and I suspect it probably would have got through like Major and the bastards.
By the way, another thought which has been growing on me is that Hunt has a much better chance of defeating Johnson than Gove did. Gove is loathed by Boris supporters, and most Conservatives, for what happened in 2016. Jeremy Hunt isn't disliked inside the party it seems. In fact, I think he's rather respected.
We've been saying on here that this is Boris' to lose and that he is his own worst enemy. As his epic character flaws are increasingly exposed, Hunt stands tall as a serious and safe alternative prospect.
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
Not really, being a Remainer and willing to extend beyond October rules out Hunt for most Tory members regardless of what Boris does or how good the Hunt campaign
It depends whether they're prepared to face the truth over the next month.
We won't be leaving the EU in October unless there's a General Election beforehand to deliver a No Deal Brexit mandate.
The current HoC won't permit No Deal and there's no chance of a new WA. Even if there was, it won't get through the Commons.
So it's up to Hunt to make them engage with the truth.
Personally I don't massively care. I'm really looking forward to Election night, whenever it comes, and seeing the demise of this shambolic Conservative Government.
If the Tories do not deliver Brexit by October as Yougov showed yesterday election night will bring PM Farage to power so either way Brexit will be delivered whether by the Tories or not
No guarantees that Farage will succeed where others fail. Reality is reality.
Remember Farage’s parties have always been total rubbish at first past the post elections and there are no indications that have yet to improve.
And a single issue Ltd company would de too much of a blank cheque
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
It still seems to me the right course would be for Johnson to become PM, and then for a motion of no confidence to be put to the House. People saying they'll vote against their own party is not the same as actually doing it.
For the constitutional experts here, do the political parties have any standing at all in the constitution? Or do they exist purely as groupings of MPs who offer confidence?
By the way, another thought which has been growing on me is that Hunt has a much better chance of defeating Johnson than Gove did. Gove is loathed by Boris supporters, and most Conservatives, for what happened in 2016. Jeremy Hunt isn't disliked inside the party it seems. In fact, I think he's rather respected.
We've been saying on here that this is Boris' to lose and that he is his own worst enemy. As his epic character flaws are increasingly exposed, Hunt stands tall as a serious and safe alternative prospect.
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
Not really, being a Remainer and willing to extend beyond October rules out Hunt for most Tory members regardless of what Boris does or how good the Hunt campaign
It depends whether they're prepared to face the truth over the next month.
We won't be leaving the EU in October unless there's a General Election beforehand to deliver a No Deal Brexit mandate.
The current HoC won't permit No Deal and there's no chance of a new WA. Even if there was, it won't get through the Commons.
So it's up to Hunt to make them engage with the truth.
Personally I don't massively care. I'm really looking forward to Election night, whenever it comes, and seeing the demise of this shambolic Conservative Government.
If the Tories do not deliver Brexit by October as Yougov showed yesterday election night will bring PM Farage to power so either way Brexit will be delivered whether by the Tories or not
No guarantees that Farage will succeed where others fail. Reality is reality.
Remember Farage’s parties have always been total rubbish at first past the post elections and there are no indications that have yet to improve.
On 12% yes, on 27% as Yougov showed they would be on if we have not Brexited by October a totally different story
By the way, another thought which has been growing on me is that Hunt has a much better chance of defeating Johnson than Gove did. Gove is loathed by Boris supporters, and most Conservatives, for what happened in 2016. Jeremy Hunt isn't disliked inside the party it seems. In fact, I think he's rather respected.
We've been saying on here that this is Boris' to lose and that he is his own worst enemy. As his epic character flaws are increasingly exposed, Hunt stands tall as a serious and safe alternative prospect.
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
Not really, being a Remainer and willing to extend beyond October rules out Hunt for most Tory members regardless of what Boris does or how good the Hunt campaign
It depends whether they're prepared to face the truth over the next month.
We won't be leaving the EU in October unless there's a General Election beforehand to deliver a No Deal Brexit mandate.
The current HoC won't permit No Deal and there's no chance of a new WA. Even if there was, it won't get through the Commons.
So it's up to Hunt to make them engage with the truth.
Personally I don't massively care. I'm really looking forward to Election night, whenever it comes, and seeing the demise of this shambolic Conservative Government.
If the Tories do not deliver Brexit by October as Yougov showed yesterday election night will bring PM Farage to power so either way Brexit will be delivered whether by the Tories or not
Look, trotting out the withered mantra about 'delivering Brexit by October' does absolutely nothing to make it happen.
HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW?
No one in your party is answering that except, ironically, Dominic Raab.
1. You will not get No Deal through Parliament
2. You're not going to get away with Prorogation
3. There is NO chance the EU will alter the Withdrawal Agreement by Oct 31st with a new PM
4. The House of Commons has already rejected the current Withdrawal Agreement three times.
Rather than repeating the same old mantra, just stop and (genuinely I mean this politely) engage brain and think about it, then give some concrete solutions to the above.
It's not going to happen.
It will, either with a majority for a Boris led Tory Party or the Brexit Party
By the way, another thought which has been growing on me is that Hunt has a much better chance of defeating Johnson than Gove did. Gove is loathed by Boris supporters, and most Conservatives, for what happened in 2016. Jeremy Hunt isn't disliked inside the party it seems. In fact, I think he's rather respected.
We've been saying on here that this is Boris' to lose and that he is his own worst enemy. As his epic character flaws are increasingly exposed, Hunt stands tall as a serious and safe alternative prospect.
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
Not really, being a Remainer and willing to extend beyond October rules out Hunt for most Tory members regardless of what Boris does or how good the Hunt campaign
It depends whether they're prepared to face the truth over the next month.
We won't be leaving the EU in October unless there's a General Election beforehand to deliver a No Deal Brexit mandate.
The current HoC won't permit No Deal and there's no chance of a new WA. Even if there was, it won't get through the Commons.
So it's up to Hunt to make them engage with the truth.
Personally I don't massively care. I'm really looking forward to Election night, whenever it comes, and seeing the demise of this shambolic Conservative Government.
If the Tories do not deliver Brexit by October as Yougov showed yesterday election night will bring PM Farage to power so either way Brexit will be delivered whether by the Tories or not
No guarantees that Farage will succeed where others fail. Reality is reality.
Remember Farage’s parties have always been total rubbish at first past the post elections and there are no indications that have yet to improve.
And a single issue Ltd company would de too much of a blank cheque
If four parties are on 20%, they'll all pick up a bunch of seats under FPTP, regardless of the quality of their ground game.
The voters actually voted for Brexit in 2016 James Melville in case you forgot, just Parliament refuses to deliver it
The same voters who actually elected that same Parliament a year later. This constant insinuation that the Commons is somehow an undemocratic institution is simultaneously baffling and terrifying.
Agreed. Also it's 'Remainers' who get blamed whereas it's the ERG who stopped us leaving
Even if all the ERG had voted in favour it wouldn’t have passed
And claiming the ERG created “cover” doesn’t was. It might be a good excuse, but Remainers still bear the responsibility for their votes.
This entire thread today is your regular reminder that the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 is one of the most ill thought out pieces of legislation ever. If old rules applied a Johnson government would face several votes of confidence through the budget and a Queen's speech. Furthermore May could have made her deal a vote of confidence and I suspect it probably would have got through like Major and the bastards.
If TMay had made her deal a vote of confidence the DUP would have voted against, so she wouldn't have made her deal a vote of confidence.
By the way, another thought which has been growing on me is that Hunt has a much better chance of defeating Johnson than Gove did. Gove is loathed by Boris supporters, and most Conservatives, for what happened in 2016. Jeremy Hunt isn't disliked inside the party it seems. In fact, I think he's rather respected
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
Not really, being a Remainer and willing to extend beyond October rules out Hunt for most Tory members regardless of what Boris does or how good the Hunt campaign
It depends whether they're prepared to face the truth over the next month.
We won't be leaving the EU in October unless there's a General Election beforehand to deliver a No Deal Brexit mandate.
The current HoC won't permit No Deal and there's no chance of a new WA. Even if there was, it won't get through the Commons.
So it's up to Hunt to make them engage with the truth.
Personally I don't massively care. I'm really looking forward to Election night, whenever it comes, and seeing the demise of this shambolic Conservative Government.
If the Tories do not deliver Brexit by October as Yougov showed yesterday election night will bring PM Farage to power so either way Brexit will be delivered whether by the Tories or not
Look, trotting out the withered mantra about 'delivering Brexit by October' does absolutely nothing to make it happen.
HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW?
No one in your party is answering that except, ironically, Dominic Raab.
1. You will not get No Deal through Parliament
2. You're not going to get away with Prorogation
3. There is NO chance the EU will alter the Withdrawal Agreement by Oct 31st with a new PM
4. The House of Commons has already rejected the current Withdrawal Agreement three times.
Rather than repeating the same old mantra, just stop and (genuinely I mean this politely) engage brain and think about it, then give some concrete solutions to the above.
It's not going to happen.
Question for the brain trust:
1. Pass a law saying that if the WA is a matter of confidence and if doesn’t pass by X date there will be an immediate dissolution
2. Put the WA up again - Tories I doubt will vote against on a matter of confidence. The DUP would probably breach their agreement to vote on matters of confidence (are their any consequences of breach of s signed agreement?)
Would that work? I’d expect that the opposition would find it difficult to vote against 1
Interesting question is, if Labour win as largest party needing SNP and LD support to govern, would they be able to anything of much significance EXCEPT cancel Brexit? Certainly much of the Corbynite agenda would be seem to be off limits.
Socialism deferred indefinitely?
The immediate problem for such a government is how to restrain the immediate rise in the value of the pound that follows the election of Jeremy Corbyn. (Imagine reading that sentence 10 years ago...)
So they could, and would need to, print and spend a load of money on public services, which is pretty much half the agenda done. Then if they wanted to nationalize the railways I doubt the LibDems or the SNP would care much either way. I think Corbyn fans would be reasonably happy with that - what else do they want, specifically?
Sounds like a good basis to be getting on with. Not getting involved in any new wars would be nice too, and something for which I imagine Corbyn would be trusted even by people who otherwise dislike him.
This entire thread today is your regular reminder that the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 is one of the most ill thought out pieces of legislation ever. If old rules applied a Johnson government would face several votes of confidence through the budget and a Queen's speech. Furthermore May could have made her deal a vote of confidence and I suspect it probably would have got through like Major and the bastards.
If TMay had made her deal a vote of confidence the DUP would have voted against, so she wouldn't have made her deal a vote of confidence.
It would have given them a harder choice I suspect. Vote down the deal and risk losing their influence, and also risk Corbyn in Downing Street. If they did vote it down it would not have been an easy decision and I think they may have chosen the deal if the ERG were forced into it through a vote of confidence.
By the way, another thought which has been growing on me is that Hunt has a much better chance of defeating Johnson than Gove did. Gove is loathed by Boris supporters, and most Conservatives, for what happened in 2016. Jeremy Hunt isn't disliked inside the party it seems. In fact, I think he's rather respected.
We've been saying on here that this is Boris' to lose and that he is his own worst enemy. As his epic character flaws are increasingly exposed, Hunt stands tall as a serious and safe alternative prospect.
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
Not really, being a Remainer and willing to extend beyond October rules out Hunt for most Tory members regardless of what Boris does or how good the Hunt campaign
It depends whether they're prepared to face the truth over the next month.
We won't be leaving the EU in October unless there's a General Election beforehand to deliver a No Deal Brexit mandate.
The current HoC won't permit No Deal and there's no chance of a new WA. Even if there was, it won't get through the Commons.
So it's up to Hunt to make them engage with the truth.
Personally I don't massively care. I'm really looking forward to Election night, whenever it comes, and seeing the demise of this shambolic Conservative Government.
If the Tories do not deliver Brexit by October as Yougov showed yesterday election night will bring PM Farage to power so either way Brexit will be delivered whether by the Tories or not
No guarantees that Farage will succeed where others fail. Reality is reality.
Remember Farage’s parties have always been total rubbish at first past the post elections and there are no indications that have yet to improve.
True. The only note of caution is that he was pretty effective in getting BXP set up from a standing start. Is there someone in the background performing a COO role?
Interesting question is, if Labour win as largest party needing SNP and LD support to govern, would they be able to anything of much significance EXCEPT cancel Brexit? Certainly much of the Corbynite agenda would be seem to be off limits.
Socialism deferred indefinitely?
The immediate problem for such a government is how to restrain the immediate rise in the value of the pound that follows the election of Jeremy Corbyn. (Imagine reading that sentence 10 years ago...)
So they could, and would need to, print and spend a load of money on public services, which is pretty much half the agenda done. Then if they wanted to nationalize the railways I doubt the LibDems or the SNP would care much either way. I think Corbyn fans would be reasonably happy with that - what else do they want, specifically?
Sounds like a good basis to be getting on with. Not getting involved in any new wars would be nice too, and something for which I imagine Corbyn would be trusted even by people who otherwise dislike him.
So he wouldn’t intervene if, say, Maduro started shooting people in the street?
As we discussed at the start of the thread, this is nonsense unless John Bercow invents indicative votes of confidence. Otherwise Boris will need to become Prime Minister before we find out if he can command a majority. Likewise Corbyn.
If half a dozen Tory MPs declare in public that they are not prepared to support a Boris-led Government, that will surely generate serious doubts as to whether he can muster a majority in the Commons. The Press is already starting to pick this up from comments made by Grieve etc. By late July it might seem unlikely that he can command a majority, and in those circumstances it would be difficult for May to offer a different opinion to the Queen.
It still seems to me the right course would be for Johnson to become PM, and then for a motion of no confidence to be put to the House. People saying they'll vote against their own party is not the same as actually doing it.
For the constitutional experts here, do the political parties have any standing at all in the constitution? Or do they exist purely as groupings of MPs who offer confidence?
I think they are legally mentioned in the rules deciding who should be designated as Leader of the Opposition. Plus the rules on electoral funding include "party" as a category. Otherwise, no. Happy to be contradicted on this.
Look, trotting out the withered mantra about 'delivering Brexit by October' does absolutely nothing to make it happen.
HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW?
No one in your party is answering that except, ironically, Dominic Raab.
1. You will not get No Deal through Parliament
2. You're not going to get away with Prorogation
3. There is NO chance the EU will alter the Withdrawal Agreement by Oct 31st with a new PM
4. The House of Commons has already rejected the current Withdrawal Agreement three times.
Rather than repeating the same old mantra, just stop and (genuinely I mean this politely) engage brain and think about it, then give some concrete solutions to the above.
It's not going to happen.
Rule 1: Tory Remainers Have No Stones. When push comes to shove, they will fold like cheap deckchairs and not vote in legislation that instructs another extension. They were bloody lucky to get it thru last time and that isn't happening again.
So. Parliament will not enforce another extension. Boris is perfectly happy with No Deal because only little people suffah, darlink. (Nobody here remember Leona Helmsley? Geez, tough crowd). We hit Oct31st and splat. Boris shovels funds at Tory voters whilst the others die. Election afterwards, landslide as per polls. That's how it happens.
Has anyone famous ever followed through with a threat to "quit" the country if someone they don't like becomes PM?
Kevin Spacey moved to London when George W Bush was elected, Tom Jones moved to California during the 1970s Labour government
I think David McCallum (Illya Kuryakin, NCIS Duckie) moved to the US because he disdained UK left-wing politics, and David Soul (Starsky and Hutch...look, ask your grandmother) moved to the UK because he disdained US right-wing politics.
If we're going back to the 50's, then Sam Wanamaker came to the UK becauseof the witch-hunts.
Comments
There's undoubtedly a lot of you about in the country, although less than the white noise would have us believe.
It's worth bearing in mind that more than 1/3rd of Conservative voters were pro Remaining in the EU.
BXP and LibDems could very readily poll over 50%. That's what the evidence currently suggests.
The great libertarian revolutions of this country came in the 1960's and then again economically and financially in the 1980's. They were then followed by the immensely libertarian 1997 New Labour agenda, when the country moved forward dramatically. As a nation we breathed a collective sigh of relief and the hypocritical shambles of the Major Gov't, both Tory and Conservative, was booted out.
It's not moral pygmy-ism* to want libertarian social values such as equal rights, gay marriage, maternity protection etc. It's cultured, educated, refined, elegant and advanced.
I am so reminded at the moment of the Major years. From the empty Conservative benches to the moral deceptitude it's the last vestiges of a decade-long run in office. You're on the way out. I feel it in my bones.
*Pygmy as a pejorative terms is really not on, either. I use in response.
So they could, and would need to, print and spend a load of money on public services, which is pretty much half the agenda done. Then if they wanted to nationalize the railways I doubt the LibDems or the SNP would care much either way. I think Corbyn fans would be reasonably happy with that - what else do they want, specifically?
Just for starters: are you on with 'next tory leader' or 'next Prime Minister'? The two may not be one and the same.
As I mentioned before, the BBC were jumping the gun by calling their (execrable) debate 'Britain's Next Prime Minister'.
We've been saying on here that this is Boris' to lose and that he is his own worst enemy. As his epic character flaws are increasingly exposed, Hunt stands tall as a serious and safe alternative prospect.
I'm talking about as tory leader. The question about whether that's synonymous with next PM is another issue.
October please 🤞🏻
We won't be leaving the EU in October unless there's a General Election beforehand to deliver a No Deal Brexit mandate.
The current HoC won't permit No Deal and there's no chance of a new WA. Even if there was, it won't get through the Commons.
So it's up to Hunt to make them engage with the truth.
Personally I don't massively care. I'm really looking forward to Election night, whenever it comes, and seeing the demise of this shambolic Conservative Government.
I don't see any evidence that the LibDem surge will subside and I think it's wishful, myopic, thinking to vanish it away simply because it doesn't fit your meme.
The obvious comparison, of course, would be the period when Winston Churchill was prime minister, while Neville Chamberlain remained leader of the Conservative Party.
Of course if there is a general election before October then if Boris wins it as has been reported he gets a mandate and can deliver a FTA for GB with a referendum on the backstop in NI.
If Brexit is not delivered by October then the Brexit Party win the next general election and Farage gets a majority for No Deal
HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW?
No one in your party is answering that except, ironically, Dominic Raab.
1. You will not get No Deal through Parliament
2. You're not going to get away with Prorogation
3. There is NO chance the EU will alter the Withdrawal Agreement by Oct 31st with a new PM
4. The House of Commons has already rejected the current Withdrawal Agreement three times.
Rather than repeating the same old mantra, just stop and (genuinely I mean this politely) engage brain and think about it, then give some concrete solutions to the above.
It's not going to happen.
https://twitter.com/jeremy_hunt/status/1142381141351120898?s=21
And claiming the ERG created “cover” doesn’t was. It might be a good excuse, but Remainers still bear the responsibility for their votes.
1. Pass a law saying that if the WA is a matter of confidence and if doesn’t pass by X date there will be an immediate dissolution
2. Put the WA up again - Tories I doubt will vote against on a matter of confidence. The DUP would probably breach their agreement to vote on matters of confidence (are their any consequences of breach of s signed agreement?)
Would that work? I’d expect that the opposition would find it difficult to vote against 1
So. Parliament will not enforce another extension. Boris is perfectly happy with No Deal because only little people suffah, darlink. (Nobody here remember Leona Helmsley? Geez, tough crowd). We hit Oct31st and splat. Boris shovels funds at Tory voters whilst the others die. Election afterwards, landslide as per polls. That's how it happens.
If we're going back to the 50's, then Sam Wanamaker came to the UK becauseof the witch-hunts.