Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov finds just 28% wanting a no deal against 43% wanting to

245

Comments

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 36,673

    Hilarious the number of alternative spins that can be put on those numbers. Only HYUFD (aka Comical Ali) thinks there is only one interpretation. Compromise is needed. I think Brexit is pointless, but I can live with us leaving if is done under a proper deal that preserves our economy and some vestige of our international reputation.

    Indeed. Remain is my preferred option, but I am in the 66% who would take Leave and ongoing CU and SM membership as a first or second option.

  • Animal_pbAnimal_pb Posts: 604

    Animal_pb said:

    So, cumulative first and second choices ("this is what I want" plus "okay, I'll accept this"; noting third is "Oh, God, if you absolutely must" and fourth is "No, nay, never"):

    SM+CU ("Brexit in Name Only"): 66%
    Remain: 50%
    Withdrawal Agreement: 45%
    No Deal: 39%

    Yet we can see which of those the Tory minority would prefer to inflict upon the majority. Compromise, healing, coming together... all concepts completely irrelevant, it appears. One of those options would be acceptable to a supermajority of the country, a clear majority of Leavers and a clear majority of Remainers alike.

    But no, we have to crash out, lose all our agreements and interactions, damage our supply lines and businesses, and end up needing to spend decades picking up the pieces, just because the Blond Bumbler needs to get us out by Hallowe'en this year, come what may, and the Leaver persecution narrative is that we have to do it now or "they" will "take our Brexit away"

    With respect, the ongoing uncertainty is at least - if not more - damaging to business investment than the impact of a no deal Brexit. The City is already having to adjust to this reality, but significant investment is on hold until we see exactly which way we go (and no, it will not all vanish in the wake of even a hard Brexit). Either way, resolution is necessary, and soon, as a practical imperative.

    No Deal is not resolution.

    In practical terms, it creates a more stable state. The UK becomes a third party country, operating on full external tariff basis (to the extent these are ameliorated by agreements or otherwise this is more of a nuance); supply chains must be re-wrought on this basis. Business planning can operate on this basis.

    Yes, there will be ongoing negotiations, and political flux, but the base state is defined. You are a clever and experienced enough chap to realise this.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 10,754

    Animal_pb said:

    So, cumulative first and second choices ("this is what I want" plus "okay, I'll accept this"; noting third is "Oh, God, if you absolutely must" and fourth is "No, nay, never"):

    SM+CU ("Brexit in Name Only"): 66%
    Remain: 50%
    Withdrawal Agreement: 45%
    No Deal: 39%

    Yet we can see which of those the Tory minority would prefer to inflict upon the majority. Compromise, healing, coming together... all concepts completely irrelevant, it appears. One of those options would be acceptable to a supermajority of the country, a clear majority of Leavers and a clear majority of Remainers alike.

    But no, we have to crash out, lose all our agreements and interactions, damage our supply lines and businesses, and end up needing to spend decades picking up the pieces, just because the Blond Bumbler needs to get us out by Hallowe'en this year, come what may, and the Leaver persecution narrative is that we have to do it now or "they" will "take our Brexit away"

    With respect, the ongoing uncertainty is at least - if not more - damaging to business investment than the impact of a no deal Brexit. The City is already having to adjust to this reality, but significant investment is on hold until we see exactly which way we go (and no, it will not all vanish in the wake of even a hard Brexit). Either way, resolution is necessary, and soon, as a practical imperative.

    No Deal is not resolution.

    No deal is to business uncertainty what nuclear Armageddon is to winning a war.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 10,754
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Very funny poll. Nigel Farage cementing his position as one of if not the most effective politician of the last 50 years.

    My every fibre makes me think that when it comes to it, in a real election, far fewer people will vote for BXP than say they will or than did at the euros but we are in very, very strange times.

    Politics, bloody hell.

    You could probably put Putin and Trump alongside Farage as most effective politicians since a certain Austrian corporal. Interesting they are all admirers of each other, but most of all themselves
    PS, I wonder what Putin thinks of Boris?
    That all his Christmases have come? Boris, as a person who agrees with whoever is in front of him, would be welcomed by Putin.
    and as the man most likely to break up the UK as well as EU. He despises both.
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 1,095

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    BREX: 22% (-1)
    CON: 22% (+2)
    LAB: 20% (-)
    LDEM: 19% (-2)
    GRN: 10% (+1)

    A Green-Lib Dem remain pact could do well here.

    How the hell FPTP would cope with that who know...
    I suspect a LD-Green pact would do a lot worse in reality than in projection. They're quite different parties with different traditions, policies and attitudes. Much of the Green share has come from Lab and in the absence of a Green candidate, might well go back there or abstain, rather than transfer to the LDs.

    Note also that YouGov routinely reports higher Green and lower Lab shares (by about 4%) than other pollsters.
    Those are good points. On the other hand, tactical voting by remain supporters would be very effective in a GE scenario with those numbers. I have a feeling that Brexit Party supporters might be less inclined to sacrifice their vote to help the Conservatives - but even if they are there isn't the track record to spot which leave party has the best chances in your particular constituency.
    Whilst LD / Green platforms are different, the demos of our voters are pretty similar; well off white middle class lefties. Arguably the Greens are more lefty and the LDs more willing to support the current system, but I don't think the average voter considers the finer points of policy positions. I know where I am (St Albans) lots of local LD activists (let alone voters) think the LD / Greens should merge because "they are so similar", whereas I abhor the idea because the LDs are far too pro capitalism for me and mine.

    Although I did vote LD in an attempt to unseat Anne Main last time, and would do so again.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 70,193
    May's deal is a very light uncoupling to transition where everything runs the same as it is/was. The deal is to be agreed once we're out in transition and can be anything from WTO to CM 2.0.
    You can't get to CM 2.0 outwith the WA ! Or any other form outside the absolute hardest Brexit/remain.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,433

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    BREX: 22% (-1)
    CON: 22% (+2)
    LAB: 20% (-)
    LDEM: 19% (-2)
    GRN: 10% (+1)

    A Green-Lib Dem remain pact could do well here.

    How the hell FPTP would cope with that who know...
    I suspect a LD-Green pact would do a lot worse in reality than in projection. They're quite different parties with different traditions, policies and attitudes. Much of the Green share has come from Lab and in the absence of a Green candidate, might well go back there or abstain, rather than transfer to the LDs.

    Note also that YouGov routinely reports higher Green and lower Lab shares (by about 4%) than other pollsters.
    Spot on Mr H. It is very lazy thinking to lump Green and LD voters together merely because of similar Brexit policies.

    Watermellons are not yellow in the middle!
    You're entirely right in principle, but you've clearly never looked properly at a watermelon cross section.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,003
    The most revealing intervention in the leadership hustings in Birmingham .. was the growl of dissent that rose out of the audience when Johnson was pressed to clarify the circumstances of an argument with his partner. The reaction was reminiscent of the way Jeremy Corbyn’s activist audiences reprimand the media for disrespecting their icon. But there is a difference. Corbyn’s crowd believes he is beyond reproach and being maligned by wicked journalists. Johnson’s fans know he is flawed but don’t care, or don’t want to be reminded that they should care. Tugging at the mask spoils the fun.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/25/jeremy-hunt-tory-party-boris-johnson-conservatives

    ”One former Downing Street adviser told me that May only put Johnson in the Foreign Office to accelerate exposure of his feckless incompetence, and thereby hasten his disqualification from any higher office. Only the first half of that plan seems to have worked.”
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,003
    nico67 said:

    The latest guff from Leave .

    Let’s give business certainty by crashing out with no deal . Business want Brexit ditched not a no deal certainty .

    Death is the only certainty; but who would volunteer?
  • glwglw Posts: 8,319

    So, cumulative first and second choices ("this is what I want" plus "okay, I'll accept this"; noting third is "Oh, God, if you absolutely must" and fourth is "No, nay, never"):

    SM+CU ("Brexit in Name Only"): 66%
    Remain: 50%
    Withdrawal Agreement: 45%
    No Deal: 39%

    Yet we can see which of those the Tory minority would prefer to inflict upon the majority. Compromise, healing, coming together... all concepts completely irrelevant, it appears. One of those options would be acceptable to a supermajority of the country, a clear majority of Leavers and a clear majority of Remainers alike.

    But no, we have to crash out, lose all our agreements and interactions, damage our supply lines and businesses, and end up needing to spend decades picking up the pieces, just because the Blond Bumbler needs to get us out by Hallowe'en this year, come what may, and the Leaver persecution narrative is that we have to do it now or "they" will "take our Brexit away"

    I think you can simplify that further to conclude that EFTA plus a customs arrangement would satisy a large swathe of the country. It would be Brexit (as we'd be out of the EU, anf free of most of the "annoying" stuff), would honour the referendum, and allow for a very smooth transition. Currently there's about 1 MP in Parliament proposing such an outcome.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 8,313
    The referendum offered one concrete option (remaining in the EU) versus a whole set of different concrete options disguised as one nebulous option ("leaving the EU"). The one concrete option did quite well considering, getting almost half the vote, and would easily beat any of the concrete Leave options in a head to head and would win a first past the post contest in which all options were available.
    An analogy would be to fight a general election on a question of Tory or Not Tory, and then after the Tory candidate gets 48% of the vote, decide that what people really voted for was the Socialist Workers Party.
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    Scott_P said:
    As most of the Tory membership are of the 52% leavers group , he has basically just told the people who he needs a vote from to become PM :- you are Little Englanders , Boris Johnson nailed on now !
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,467
    IanB2 said:

    The most revealing intervention in the leadership hustings in Birmingham .. was the growl of dissent that rose out of the audience when Johnson was pressed to clarify the circumstances of an argument with his partner. The reaction was reminiscent of the way Jeremy Corbyn’s activist audiences reprimand the media for disrespecting their icon. But there is a difference. Corbyn’s crowd believes he is beyond reproach and being maligned by wicked journalists. Johnson’s fans know he is flawed but don’t care, or don’t want to be reminded that they should care. Tugging at the mask spoils the fun.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/25/jeremy-hunt-tory-party-boris-johnson-conservatives

    ”One former Downing Street adviser told me that May only put Johnson in the Foreign Office to accelerate exposure of his feckless incompetence, and thereby hasten his disqualification from any higher office. Only the first half of that plan seems to have worked.”

    Well putting him in No10 ought to complete the process, I suppose.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 3,386
    edited June 2019
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    BREX: 22% (-1)
    CON: 22% (+2)
    LAB: 20% (-)
    LDEM: 19% (-2)
    GRN: 10% (+1)

    A Green-Lib Dem remain pact could do well here.

    How the hell FPTP would cope with that who know...
    I suspect a LD-Green pact would do a lot worse in reality than in projection. They're quite different parties with different traditions, policies and attitudes. Much of the Green share has come from Lab and in the absence of a Green candidate, might well go back there or abstain, rather than transfer to the LDs.

    Note also that YouGov routinely reports higher Green and lower Lab shares (by about 4%) than other pollsters.
    Spot on Mr H. It is very lazy thinking to lump Green and LD voters together merely because of similar Brexit policies.

    Watermellons are not yellow in the middle!
    Nevertheless if they had a formal deal, in the context of an election that would decide the future of Brexit, on a common platform of Remain, Reform and Climate, with Labour still wobbly on its fence, I reckon they could do quite well.
    Perhaps. But there is a reason why people are choosing to back the Greens (who have very little chance of winning more than the smallest handful of seats), over the Lib Dems (who would be in contention in scores of them).
    In the majority of seats neither of them are in contention, and it’s simply a matter of preference. The question is what proportion would transfer.
    The top Rata rule. Any proposal starting 'If everyone .. then...' should be instantly dismissed.

    Any proposal starting 'If enough..then....' can have my ear. I would ask how much is enough and is that achievable?

    Thus it is with Green / LD / Plaid transfers.

    And, I suppose the answer would be, every little helps but big would help more. I can't see that pacts would be actively unhelpful to the immediate situation.

    Even if no pacts are formed, I suggest there will be very active third party couponeering beyond any seen in living memory. It was, after all, quite effective at minimising split vote damage in the Euros.
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 1,095
    Would be useful to know how this would actually work in an STV system; does the data show that? I imagine Remain or Leaving with SM and CU wins, but I could be wrong. It would mean EVERY person who ranked some kind of leave would rank No Deal above Remain, which I doubt massively.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 57,306

    The referendum offered one concrete option (remaining in the EU) versus a whole set of different concrete options disguised as one nebulous option ("leaving the EU"). The one concrete option did quite well considering, getting almost half the vote, and would easily beat any of the concrete Leave options in a head to head and would win a first past the post contest in which all options were available.
    An analogy would be to fight a general election on a question of Tory or Not Tory, and then after the Tory candidate gets 48% of the vote, decide that what people really voted for was the Socialist Workers Party.

    Was remaining really a concrete option? The EU is hardly going to remain unchanged over the next few decades.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    kjohnw said:

    Scott_P said:
    As most of the Tory membership are of the 52% leavers group , he has basically just told the people who he needs a vote from to become PM :- you are Little Englanders , Boris Johnson nailed on now !
    He said nothing of the sort . He wasn’t saying the 52% were little Englanders but that he wants an open Britain not pulling up the drawbridge . I don’t support Hunt but really the spin in what he said is just desperate .
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 5,410

    The referendum offered one concrete option (remaining in the EU) versus a whole set of different concrete options disguised as one nebulous option ("leaving the EU"). The one concrete option did quite well considering, getting almost half the vote, and would easily beat any of the concrete Leave options in a head to head and would win a first past the post contest in which all options were available.
    An analogy would be to fight a general election on a question of Tory or Not Tory, and then after the Tory candidate gets 48% of the vote, decide that what people really voted for was the Socialist Workers Party.

    Remain is only a single concrete option once you accept that there are no choices for us to make within it. There are all sorts of possible 'Remain' visions diverging on issues like Euro, Schengen, freedom of movement, tax harmonisation, fiscal authority, political union, defence and I don't suppose any of them would get a majority. It is a totally artificial contest to see Remain as a single block.

    Parliament set out the terms and conditions of the question after lot of thought. Parliament's job is to make sense of what it started.

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 13,596
    Article on how the Brexit options stack up head to head. Remain is the favoured option by two methods: May's Deal and Soft Brexit by other methods. No Deal is not favoured by any method. The comments are worth reading too. April polling.

    https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2019/04/23/the-crazy-polling-of-soft-brexit
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 5,410
    Pulpstar said:

    May's deal is a very light uncoupling to transition where everything runs the same as it is/was. The deal is to be agreed once we're out in transition and can be anything from WTO to CM 2.0.
    You can't get to CM 2.0 outwith the WA ! Or any other form outside the absolute hardest Brexit/remain.

    +1. Agree. Parliament and the Tory party seem a little slow in working this out. I suspect Boris quietly thinks it's his best chance of survival to dress up this in fancy words and do it, and that all the 31 Oct stuff is to cheer on the troops and get the EU to do some just in time cosmetic changes.

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    The European heatwave hasn't reached Edgbaston. 15 degrees there.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 13,596
    Animal_pb said:

    Animal_pb said:

    So, cumulative first and second choices ("this is what I want" plus "okay, I'll accept this"; noting third is "Oh, God, if you absolutely must" and fourth is "No, nay, never"):

    SM+CU ("Brexit in Name Only"): 66%
    Remain: 50%
    Withdrawal Agreement: 45%
    No Deal: 39%

    Yet we can see which of those the Tory minority would prefer to inflict upon the majority. Compromise, healing, coming together... all concepts completely irrelevant, it appears. One of those options would be acceptable to a supermajority of the country, a clear majority of Leavers and a clear majority of Remainers alike.

    But no, we have to crash out, lose all our agreements and interactions, damage our supply lines and businesses, and end up needing to spend decades picking up the pieces, just because the Blond Bumbler needs to get us out by Hallowe'en this year, come what may, and the Leaver persecution narrative is that we have to do it now or "they" will "take our Brexit away"

    With respect, the ongoing uncertainty is at least - if not more - damaging to business investment than the impact of a no deal Brexit. The City is already having to adjust to this reality, but significant investment is on hold until we see exactly which way we go (and no, it will not all vanish in the wake of even a hard Brexit). Either way, resolution is necessary, and soon, as a practical imperative.

    No Deal is not resolution.

    In practical terms, it creates a more stable state. The UK becomes a third party country, operating on full external tariff basis (to the extent these are ameliorated by agreements or otherwise this is more of a nuance); supply chains must be re-wrought on this basis. Business planning can operate on this basis.

    Yes, there will be ongoing negotiations, and political flux, but the base state is defined. You are a clever and experienced enough chap to realise this.
    A reductionist argument, I would say. The base state is that we're dead. It's also a stable state.
  • eekeek Posts: 19,210
    AndyJS said:

    The European heatwave hasn't reached Edgbaston. 15 degrees there.

    It's bypassed this part of Bulgaria as well. It's only 28 here in Sofia...
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 22,236
    edited June 2019
    algarkirk said:

    Pulpstar said:

    May's deal is a very light uncoupling to transition where everything runs the same as it is/was. The deal is to be agreed once we're out in transition and can be anything from WTO to CM 2.0.
    You can't get to CM 2.0 outwith the WA ! Or any other form outside the absolute hardest Brexit/remain.

    +1. Agree. Parliament and the Tory party seem a little slow in working this out. I suspect Boris quietly thinks it's his best chance of survival to dress up this in fancy words and do it, and that all the 31 Oct stuff is to cheer on the troops and get the EU to do some just in time cosmetic changes.

    And why would the hard Brexiteers accept cosmetic changes? They’ll simply demand a No Deal exit as they have been doing for months now.

    Also why would the EU offer cosmetic changes? They can have no certainty that Boris can get these through Parliament.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,475
    dixiedean said:

    IanB2 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Nigelb said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    BREX: 22% (-1)
    CON: 22% (+2)
    LAB: 20% (-)
    LDEM: 19% (-2)
    GRN: 10% (+1)

    A Green-Lib Dem remain pact could do well here.

    How the hell FPTP would cope with that who know...
    We'll probably find out.

    Electoral Calculus suggests Brexit Party Brexit Party largest party on 208 seats short 118 of a majority.

    Con are on 128 seats with Lab 181 seats and Lib-Dems on 71 seats.

    Brexit Con would have a majority.

    Could it be the case of NFICIPM ??? :open_mouth:
    The Tories would be willing to be junior coalition partners to a far right party? Yeah, right. That isn’t the way things tend to pan out in the rest of Europe.
    Not to mention who the heck Farage would put in his Cabinet?
    PM Nigel Farage.
    DPM. Nige F Arage.
    CoE Mr N Farage
    HS N Farage, esq.
    Leader of H of L Lord Farage of the Red Lion.
    FS no time for foreigners...
    Education Prof. Farage
    Equalities Anne Widdecombe.
    Surely Paul Nuttall could perform a few Cabinet roles, via Skype from the Large Hadron Collider and when Wimbledon isn't on of course.
  • Animal_pbAnimal_pb Posts: 604
    FF43 said:

    Animal_pb said:

    Animal_pb said:

    So, cumulative first and second choices ("this is what I want" plus "okay, I'll accept this"; noting third is "Oh, God, if you absolutely must" and fourth is "No, nay, never"):

    SM+CU ("Brexit in Name Only"): 66%
    Remain: 50%
    Withdrawal Agreement: 45%
    No Deal: 39%

    Yet we can see which of those the Tory minority would prefer to inflict upon the majority. Compromise, healing, coming together... all concepts completely irrelevant, it appears. One of those options would be acceptable to a supermajority of the country, a clear majority of Leavers and a clear majority of Remainers alike.

    But no, we have to crash out, lose all our agreements and interactions, damage our supply lines and businesses, and end up needing to spend decades picking up the pieces, just because the Blond Bumbler needs to get us out by Hallowe'en this year, come what may, and the Leaver persecution narrative is that we have to do it now or "they" will "take our Brexit away"

    With respect, the ongoing uncertainty is at least - if not more - damaging to business investment than the impact of a no deal Brexit. The City is already having to adjust to this reality, but significant investment is on hold until we see exactly which way we go (and no, it will not all vanish in the wake of even a hard Brexit). Either way, resolution is necessary, and soon, as a practical imperative.

    No Deal is not resolution.

    In practical terms, it creates a more stable state. The UK becomes a third party country, operating on full external tariff basis (to the extent these are ameliorated by agreements or otherwise this is more of a nuance); supply chains must be re-wrought on this basis. Business planning can operate on this basis.

    Yes, there will be ongoing negotiations, and political flux, but the base state is defined. You are a clever and experienced enough chap to realise this.
    A reductionist argument, I would say. The base state is that we're dead. It's also a stable state.
    So, we have posters comparing a change in tariff arrangements to death, and nuclear winter. Could there be just a scintilla of hyperbole affecting these comments, perhaps?
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,414

    148grss said:

    I mean, this poll pretty much tells us what we knew. I've said from the beginning, as a Remainer, if May had done a charm offensive towards fellow Remainers for her Brexit plan (maybe keep FoM or CU or something else), it would have happened and would have 66% of people behind it. That half think leaving whilst remaining in the SM and CU is the 2nd best option shows that would have been the best point to head towards from the beginning, and had more political will been put to reach across that divide, more Remainers would probably have willingly backed it. By going for the hardest of Brexits, many Remainers have also entrenched themselves to staying. On a 52/48 margin that was always going to be the case.

    Agreed. Compromise will need to be found in the end. I hope so anyway. The problem with Brexit is that there has been massive mission creep. Most of those in favour of it never explicitly said it would be outside the CU at the time of the referendum for fear of scaring the horses . Brexiters have simply made their position more and more extreme.
    Unfortunately I think the debate has now become so polarised (thanks mostly to Theresa May) that a compromise solution is no longer possible. It will end only when one side wins and the other side accepts defeat.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 70,193
    148grss said:

    Would be useful to know how this would actually work in an STV system; does the data show that? I imagine Remain or Leaving with SM and CU wins, but I could be wrong. It would mean EVERY person who ranked some kind of leave would rank No Deal above Remain, which I doubt massively.

    Unfortunately Yougov does not publish the full 4 order tables. There are only 24 ways to arrange the choices in total, which could be put in in a table so we can work out the IRV etc winner.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 22,236
    eek said:



    AndyJS said:

    The European heatwave hasn't reached Edgbaston. 15 degrees there.

    It's bypassed this part of Bulgaria as well. It's only 28 here in Sofia...
    My brother is in Paris. 35 degrees at 11 pm last night...... ooof!
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 8,313
    algarkirk said:

    The referendum offered one concrete option (remaining in the EU) versus a whole set of different concrete options disguised as one nebulous option ("leaving the EU"). The one concrete option did quite well considering, getting almost half the vote, and would easily beat any of the concrete Leave options in a head to head and would win a first past the post contest in which all options were available.
    An analogy would be to fight a general election on a question of Tory or Not Tory, and then after the Tory candidate gets 48% of the vote, decide that what people really voted for was the Socialist Workers Party.

    Remain is only a single concrete option once you accept that there are no choices for us to make within it. There are all sorts of possible 'Remain' visions diverging on issues like Euro, Schengen, freedom of movement, tax harmonisation, fiscal authority, political union, defence and I don't suppose any of them would get a majority. It is a totally artificial contest to see Remain as a single block.

    Parliament set out the terms and conditions of the question after lot of thought. Parliament's job is to make sense of what it started.

    If Remain had won by 52‰ do you think Cameron would have immediately signed us up to Shengen and the Euro? Unlikely. I think everyone on this forum would have taken a Remain win as a vote for our existing arrangements, subject to the usual slow and painful evolution as per the EU norm. To try to spin a narrow rejection of the status quo into a mandate for the most extreme alternative is absurd and an affront to democracy far greater than putting the available concrete options to the voters.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,112
    148grss said:

    I mean, this poll pretty much tells us what we knew. I've said from the beginning, as a Remainer, if May had done a charm offensive towards fellow Remainers for her Brexit plan (maybe keep FoM or CU or something else), it would have happened and would have 66% of people behind it. That half think leaving whilst remaining in the SM and CU is the 2nd best option shows that would have been the best point to head towards from the beginning, and had more political will been put to reach across that divide, more Remainers would probably have willingly backed it. By going for the hardest of Brexits, many Remainers have also entrenched themselves to staying. On a 52/48 margin that was always going to be the case.

    She'd have killed Remain stone dead.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    It will end only when one side wins and the other side accepts defeat.

    That won't happen either.

    If we crash out with no deal, the "winning" side in that case will never accept that the consequences of the win were their fault...
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 36,673
    Animal_pb said:

    Animal_pb said:

    So, cumulative first and second choices ("this is what I want" plus "okay, I'll accept this"; noting third is "Oh, God, if you absolutely must" and fourth is "No, nay, never"):

    SM+CU ("Brexit in Name Only"): 66%
    Remain: 50%
    Withdrawal Agreement: 45%
    No Deal: 39%

    Yet we can see which of those the Tory minority would prefer to inflict upon the majority. Compromise, healing, coming together... all concepts completely irrelevant, it appears. One of those options would be acceptable to a supermajority of the country, a clear majority of Leavers and a clear majority of Remainers alike.

    But no, we have to crash out, lose all our agreements and interactions, damage our supply lines and businesses, and end up needing to spend decades picking up the pieces, just because the Blond Bumbler needs to get us out by Hallowe'en this year, come what may, and the Leaver persecution narrative is that we have to do it now or "they" will "take our Brexit away"

    With respect, the ongoing uncertainty is at least - if not more - damaging to business investment than the impact of a no deal Brexit. The City is already having to adjust to this reality, but significant investment is on hold until we see exactly which way we go (and no, it will not all vanish in the wake of even a hard Brexit). Either way, resolution is necessary, and soon, as a practical imperative.

    No Deal is not resolution.

    In practical terms, it creates a more stable state. The UK becomes a third party country, operating on full external tariff basis (to the extent these are ameliorated by agreements or otherwise this is more of a nuance); supply chains must be re-wrought on this basis. Business planning can operate on this basis.

    Yes, there will be ongoing negotiations, and political flux, but the base state is defined. You are a clever and experienced enough chap to realise this.

    I am clever and experienced enough to know that the public will not tolerate a No Deal Brexit over a sustained period so any planning done on the basis that it is a final outcome would be largely worthless, as well as immensely damaging (see reactions to supply chains being closed down on a permanent basis, for example).
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 13,596
    Animal_pb said:

    FF43 said:

    Animal_pb said:

    Animal_pb said:

    So, cumulative first and second choices ("this is what I want" plus "okay, I'll accept this"; noting third is "Oh, God, if you absolutely must" and fourth is "No, nay, never"):

    SM+CU ("Brexit in Name Only"): 66%
    Remain: 50%
    Withdrawal Agreement: 45%
    No Deal: 39%

    Yet we can see which of those the Tory minority would prefer to inflict upon the majority. Compromise, healing, coming together... all concepts completely irrelevant, it appears. One of those options would be acceptable to a supermajority of the country, a clear majority of Leavers and a clear majority of Remainers alike.

    But no, we have to crash out, lose all our agreements and interactions, damage our supply lines and businesses, and end up needing to spend decades picking up the pieces, just because the Blond Bumbler needs to get us out by Hallowe'en this year, come what may, and the Leaver persecution narrative is that we have to do it now or "they" will "take our Brexit away"

    With respect, the ongoing uncertainty is at least - if not more - damaging to business investment than the impact of a no deal Brexit. The City is already having to adjust to this reality, but significant investment is on hold until we see exactly which way we go (and no, it will not all vanish in the wake of even a hard Brexit). Either way, resolution is necessary, and soon, as a practical imperative.

    No Deal is not resolution.

    In practical terms, it creates a more stable state. The UK becomes a third party country, operating on full external tariff basis (to the extent these are ameliorated by agreements or otherwise this is more of a nuance); supply chains must be re-wrought on this basis. Business planning can operate on this basis.

    Yes, there will be ongoing negotiations, and political flux, but the base state is defined. You are a clever and experienced enough chap to realise this.
    A reductionist argument, I would say. The base state is that we're dead. It's also a stable state.
    So, we have posters comparing a change in tariff arrangements to death, and nuclear winter. Could there be just a scintilla of hyperbole affecting these comments, perhaps?
    I disagree with your argument. The evidence suggests the uncertainty around No Deal causes the lack of investment. ie the problem is the lack of a deal such as we already have with the EU.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited June 2019

    algarkirk said:

    The referendum offered one concrete option (remaining in the EU) versus a whole set of different concrete options disguised as one nebulous option ("leaving the EU"). The one concrete option did quite well considering, getting almost half the vote, and would easily beat any of the concrete Leave options in a head to head and would win a first past the post contest in which all options were available.
    An analogy would be to fight a general election on a question of Tory or Not Tory, and then after the Tory candidate gets 48% of the vote, decide that what people really voted for was the Socialist Workers Party.

    Remain is only a single concrete option once you accept that there are no choices for us to make within it. There are all sorts of possible 'Remain' visions diverging on issues like Euro, Schengen, freedom of movement, tax harmonisation, fiscal authority, political union, defence and I don't suppose any of them would get a majority. It is a totally artificial contest to see Remain as a single block.

    Parliament set out the terms and conditions of the question after lot of thought. Parliament's job is to make sense of what it started.

    If Remain had won by 52‰ do you think Cameron would have immediately signed us up to Shengen and the Euro? Unlikely. I think everyone on this forum would have taken a Remain win as a vote for our existing arrangements, subject to the usual slow and painful evolution as per the EU norm. To try to spin a narrow rejection of the status quo into a mandate for the most extreme alternative is absurd and an affront to democracy far greater than putting the available concrete options to the voters.
    We aren't going for an extreme alternative. What has been negotiated is a very soft Brexit within the parameters of the debate that had happened pre Referendum. Of course Remainers and harder Brexiteers rejected the negotiated soft Brexit so now we will likely get something harder.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 10,251
    Afternoon all :)

    Another very tight 4-way split in the current poll and the Conservatives doubtless benefitting from all the publicity they have enjoyed in the past week or so. That poll shows a 17% swing from Conservative to LDs so, with TBP in the mix, that should help a bit.

    On other things, Ed Davey mentioned the notion of a GNU at the LD leadership election hustings on Monday night. I don't think Jo Swinson was convinced and I'm not sure I was either. I think the theory was if No Deal seemed to be the only option, a majority of anti-No Deal MPs could come together and force a second referendum and perhaps function as a caretaker Government pending a new GE.

    IF Boris means what he says (and he's made an enormous hostage to fortune here), even if the EU offer us another extension it will be refused by the Government.

    As for the thread topic, taking it the other way round 46% are most opposed to us leaving without a Deal and 42% most opposed to us remaining. Interestingly, 19% of Conservative voters are most opposed to us leaving without a Deal while 19% of LD voters are most opposed to us remaining in the EU so for all the apparent polarisation there are small but significant minorities supporting a party diametrically opposed to their personal belief on the EU - Labour's split is about 2/3 in favour of remaining a quarter for leaving.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 13,596
    edited June 2019
    Pulpstar said:

    148grss said:

    Would be useful to know how this would actually work in an STV system; does the data show that? I imagine Remain or Leaving with SM and CU wins, but I could be wrong. It would mean EVERY person who ranked some kind of leave would rank No Deal above Remain, which I doubt massively.

    Unfortunately Yougov does not publish the full 4 order tables. There are only 24 ways to arrange the choices in total, which could be put in in a table so we can work out the IRV etc winner.
    There is research on this in the paper I linked down thread.

    Edit: https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2019/04/23/the-crazy-polling-of-soft-brexit
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Cyclefree said:

    eek said:



    AndyJS said:

    The European heatwave hasn't reached Edgbaston. 15 degrees there.

    It's bypassed this part of Bulgaria as well. It's only 28 here in Sofia...
    My brother is in Paris. 35 degrees at 11 pm last night...... ooof!
    27 feels like 32 on the southern costa Blanca
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,155
    Fenster said:

    An interesting poll question would be:

    Would you prefer No Deal or another three years of uncertainty.

    This is a leading question. Good polling companies go out of their way to avoid leading questions.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 40,414
    Animal_pb said:

    In practical terms, it creates a more stable state. The UK becomes a third party country, operating on full external tariff basis (to the extent these are ameliorated by agreements or otherwise this is more of a nuance); supply chains must be re-wrought on this basis. Business planning can operate on this basis.

    Yes, there will be ongoing negotiations, and political flux, but the base state is defined. You are a clever and experienced enough chap to realise this.

    Do you really think supply chains on the island of Ireland will be re-wrought on the basis of cross-border tariffs and regulatory divergence? If not, then there is a problem with your thesis that no deal creates a more stable state.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,252
    dixiedean said:

    IanB2 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Nigelb said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    BREX: 22% (-1)
    CON: 22% (+2)
    LAB: 20% (-)
    LDEM: 19% (-2)
    GRN: 10% (+1)

    A Green-Lib Dem remain pact could do well here.

    How the hell FPTP would cope with that who know...
    We'll probably find out.

    Electoral Calculus suggests Brexit Party Brexit Party largest party on 208 seats short 118 of a majority.

    Con are on 128 seats with Lab 181 seats and Lib-Dems on 71 seats.

    Brexit Con would have a majority.

    Could it be the case of NFICIPM ??? :open_mouth:
    The Tories would be willing to be junior coalition partners to a far right party? Yeah, right. That isn’t the way things tend to pan out in the rest of Europe.
    Not to mention who the heck Farage would put in his Cabinet?
    PM Nigel Farage.
    DPM. Nige F Arage.
    CoE Mr N Farage
    HS N Farage, esq.
    Leader of H of L Lord Farage of the Red Lion.
    FS no time for foreigners...
    Education Prof. Farage
    Equalities Anne Widdecombe.
    Well, why not? If it was good enough for the Duke of Wellington ...
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Brilliant recovery by New Zealand.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/cricket/47483268
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Animal_pb said:

    FF43 said:

    Animal_pb said:

    Animal_pb said:

    So, cumulative first and second choices ("this is what I want" plus "okay, I'll accept this"; noting third is "Oh, God, if you absolutely must" and fourth is "No, nay, never"):

    SM+CU ("Brexit in Name Only"): 66%
    Remain: 50%
    Withdrawal Agreement: 45%
    No Deal: 39%

    Yet we can see which of those the Tory minority would prefer to inflict upon the majority. Compromise, healing, coming together... all concepts completely irrelevant, it appears. One of those options would be acceptable to a supermajority of the country, a clear majority of Leavers and a clear majority of Remainers alike.

    But no, we have to crash out, lose all our agreements and interactions, damage our supply lines and businesses, and end up needing to spend decades picking up the pieces, just because the Blond Bumbler needs to get us out by Hallowe'en this year, come what may, and the Leaver persecution narrative is that we have to do it now or "they" will "take our Brexit away"

    With respect, the ongoing uncertainty is at least - if not more - damaging to business investment than the impact of a no deal Brexit. The City is already having to adjust to this reality, but significant investment is on hold until we see exactly which way we go (and no, it will not all vanish in the wake of even a hard Brexit). Either way, resolution is necessary, and soon, as a practical imperative.

    No Deal is not resolution.

    In practical terms, it creates a more stable state. The UK becomes a third party country, operating on full external tariff basis (to the extent these are ameliorated by agreements or otherwise this is more of a nuance); supply chains must be re-wrought on this basis. Business planning can operate on this basis.

    Yes, there will be ongoing negotiations, and political flux, but the base state is defined. You are a clever and experienced enough chap to realise this.
    A reductionist argument, I would say. The base state is that we're dead. It's also a stable state.
    So, we have posters comparing a change in tariff arrangements to death, and nuclear winter. Could there be just a scintilla of hyperbole affecting these comments, perhaps?
    I don’t know why I was worried, it’s only a change in tariff arrangements apparently which means everything will be hunky dory. Who ever have guessed.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 5,410

    algarkirk said:

    The referendum offered one concrete option (remaining in the EU) versus a whole set of different concrete options disguised as one nebulous option ("leaving the EU"). The one concrete option did quite well considering, getting almost half the vote, and would easily beat any of the concrete Leave options in a head to head and would win a first past the post contest in which all options were available.
    An analogy would be to fight a general election on a question of Tory or Not Tory, and then after the Tory candidate gets 48% of the vote, decide that what people really voted for was the Socialist Workers Party.

    Remain is only a single concrete option once you accept that there are no choices for us to make within it. There are all sorts of possible 'Remain' visions diverging on issues like Euro, Schengen, freedom of movement, tax harmonisation, fiscal authority, political union, defence and I don't suppose any of them would get a majority. It is a totally artificial contest to see Remain as a single block.

    Parliament set out the terms and conditions of the question after lot of thought. Parliament's job is to make sense of what it started.

    If Remain had won by 52‰ do you think Cameron would have immediately signed us up to Shengen and the Euro? Unlikely. I think everyone on this forum would have taken a Remain win as a vote for our existing arrangements, subject to the usual slow and painful evolution as per the EU norm. To try to spin a narrow rejection of the status quo into a mandate for the most extreme alternative is absurd and an affront to democracy far greater than putting the available concrete options to the voters.
    Thank you. Very interesting, but bears no relation to what I said.

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    eek said:



    AndyJS said:

    The European heatwave hasn't reached Edgbaston. 15 degrees there.

    It's bypassed this part of Bulgaria as well. It's only 28 here in Sofia...
    Is that about average for that area?
  • 148grss148grss Posts: 1,095
    edited June 2019
    FF43 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    148grss said:

    Would be useful to know how this would actually work in an STV system; does the data show that? I imagine Remain or Leaving with SM and CU wins, but I could be wrong. It would mean EVERY person who ranked some kind of leave would rank No Deal above Remain, which I doubt massively.

    Unfortunately Yougov does not publish the full 4 order tables. There are only 24 ways to arrange the choices in total, which could be put in in a table so we can work out the IRV etc winner.
    There is research on this in the paper I linked down thread.

    Edit: https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2019/04/23/the-crazy-polling-of-soft-brexit
    But that data is from April, not this data.

    Although interesting in and of itself.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    IanB2 said:

    nico67 said:

    The latest guff from Leave .

    Let’s give business certainty by crashing out with no deal . Business want Brexit ditched not a no deal certainty .

    Death is the only certainty; but who would volunteer?
    Political Death - A Dickens of a quote ....

    “It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known.”

    A Tale Of Two Political Parties - Labour and Conservatives
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Freggles said:

    dixiedean said:

    IanB2 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Nigelb said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    BREX: 22% (-1)
    CON: 22% (+2)
    LAB: 20% (-)
    LDEM: 19% (-2)
    GRN: 10% (+1)

    A Green-Lib Dem remain pact could do well here.

    How the hell FPTP would cope with that who know...
    We'll probably find out.

    Electoral Calculus suggests Brexit Party Brexit Party largest party on 208 seats short 118 of a majority.

    Con are on 128 seats with Lab 181 seats and Lib-Dems on 71 seats.

    Brexit Con would have a majority.

    Could it be the case of NFICIPM ??? :open_mouth:
    The Tories would be willing to be junior coalition partners to a far right party? Yeah, right. That isn’t the way things tend to pan out in the rest of Europe.
    Not to mention who the heck Farage would put in his Cabinet?
    PM Nigel Farage.
    DPM. Nige F Arage.
    CoE Mr N Farage
    HS N Farage, esq.
    Leader of H of L Lord Farage of the Red Lion.
    FS no time for foreigners...
    Education Prof. Farage
    Equalities Anne Widdecombe.
    Surely Paul Nuttall could perform a few Cabinet roles, via Skype from the Large Hadron Collider and when Wimbledon isn't on of course.

    Minister for ensuring situations that cause opportunities to make money JRM
  • eekeek Posts: 19,210
    AndyJS said:

    eek said:



    AndyJS said:

    The European heatwave hasn't reached Edgbaston. 15 degrees there.

    It's bypassed this part of Bulgaria as well. It's only 28 here in Sofia...
    Is that about average for that area?
    Yep - asking around (I'm not local) nothing special for the end of this month
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,467

    148grss said:

    I mean, this poll pretty much tells us what we knew. I've said from the beginning, as a Remainer, if May had done a charm offensive towards fellow Remainers for her Brexit plan (maybe keep FoM or CU or something else), it would have happened and would have 66% of people behind it. That half think leaving whilst remaining in the SM and CU is the 2nd best option shows that would have been the best point to head towards from the beginning, and had more political will been put to reach across that divide, more Remainers would probably have willingly backed it. By going for the hardest of Brexits, many Remainers have also entrenched themselves to staying. On a 52/48 margin that was always going to be the case.

    She'd have killed Remain stone dead.
    Agreed.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 40,414
    algarkirk said:

    Remain is only a single concrete option once you accept that there are no choices for us to make within it. There are all sorts of possible 'Remain' visions diverging on issues like Euro, Schengen, freedom of movement, tax harmonisation, fiscal authority, political union, defence and I don't suppose any of them would get a majority. It is a totally artificial contest to see Remain as a single block.

    Parliament set out the terms and conditions of the question after lot of thought. Parliament's job is to make sense of what it started.

    Where is the evidence that parliament put a lot of thought into framing the question in 2016? I would suggest it was all done in a rush, with no meaningful scrutiny from Labour because Harriet Harman was in full "respect the will of the people for Tory majority government" mode.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32863749
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,467
    JackW said:

    IanB2 said:

    nico67 said:

    The latest guff from Leave .

    Let’s give business certainty by crashing out with no deal . Business want Brexit ditched not a no deal certainty .

    Death is the only certainty; but who would volunteer?
    Political Death - A Dickens of a quote ....

    “It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known.”

    A Tale Of Two Political Parties - Labour and Conservatives
    A good choice, not without some contemporary resonance-

    "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way..."
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 13,596
    148grss said:

    FF43 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    148grss said:

    Would be useful to know how this would actually work in an STV system; does the data show that? I imagine Remain or Leaving with SM and CU wins, but I could be wrong. It would mean EVERY person who ranked some kind of leave would rank No Deal above Remain, which I doubt massively.

    Unfortunately Yougov does not publish the full 4 order tables. There are only 24 ways to arrange the choices in total, which could be put in in a table so we can work out the IRV etc winner.
    There is research on this in the paper I linked down thread.

    Edit: https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2019/04/23/the-crazy-polling-of-soft-brexit
    But that data is from April, not this data.

    Although interesting in and of itself.
    The headline results aren't hugely different in the latest poll. Remain and No Deal up a bit; May's Deal down a bit. I would expect the results with other methodologies to be fairly similar to the April results, with predictable adjustments. The point is, you can get very different outcomes depending on your chosen methodology
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 36,673

    algarkirk said:

    The referendum offered one concrete option (remaining in the EU) versus a whole set of different concrete options disguised as one nebulous option ("leaving the EU"). The one concrete option did quite well considering, getting almost half the vote, and would easily beat any of the concrete Leave options in a head to head and would win a first past the post contest in which all options were available.
    An analogy would be to fight a general election on a question of Tory or Not Tory, and then after the Tory candidate gets 48% of the vote, decide that what people really voted for was the Socialist Workers Party.

    Remain is only a single concrete option once you accept that there are no choices for us to make within it. There are all sorts of possible 'Remain' visions diverging on issues like Euro, Schengen, freedom of movement, tax harmonisation, fiscal authority, political union, defence and I don't suppose any of them would get a majority. It is a totally artificial contest to see Remain as a single block.

    Parliament set out the terms and conditions of the question after lot of thought. Parliament's job is to make sense of what it started.

    If Remain had won by 52‰ do you think Cameron would have immediately signed us up to Shengen and the Euro? Unlikely. I think everyone on this forum would have taken a Remain win as a vote for our existing arrangements, subject to the usual slow and painful evolution as per the EU norm. To try to spin a narrow rejection of the status quo into a mandate for the most extreme alternative is absurd and an affront to democracy far greater than putting the available concrete options to the voters.
    We aren't going for an extreme alternative. What has been negotiated is a very soft Brexit within the parameters of the debate that had happened pre Referendum. Of course Remainers and harder Brexiteers rejected the negotiated soft Brexit so now we will likely get something harder.

    The Conservative party will not accept the top three most popular options identified by YouGov. The problem is the Conservative party. It is determined to offer voters the least popular, most damaging option. If the top option had ever been available we would now be out of the EU and talking about other things.

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 71,216
    I think i have found something more tedious and wastes as much time as ongoing discussions of brexit...building tensorflow from source...
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 58,550
    Good afternoon, my fellow galactic travellers.

    Roughly when will the Democrat nominee be decided?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 5,410
    Cyclefree said:

    algarkirk said:

    Pulpstar said:

    May's deal is a very light uncoupling to transition where everything runs the same as it is/was. The deal is to be agreed once we're out in transition and can be anything from WTO to CM 2.0.
    You can't get to CM 2.0 outwith the WA ! Or any other form outside the absolute hardest Brexit/remain.

    +1. Agree. Parliament and the Tory party seem a little slow in working this out. I suspect Boris quietly thinks it's his best chance of survival to dress up this in fancy words and do it, and that all the 31 Oct stuff is to cheer on the troops and get the EU to do some just in time cosmetic changes.

    And why would the hard Brexiteers accept cosmetic changes? They’ll simply demand a No Deal exit as they have been doing for months now.

    Also why would the EU offer cosmetic changes? They can have no certainty that Boris can get these through Parliament.
    This indeed could all be true and very good questions. If the middle course I suggest Boris may go for fails, then this is all correct. Not all problems have solutions. The alternative to a middle course is No Deal or Remain/Revoke. These have the difficulties of being likely impossible and/or divisive beyond measure.

    Boris of course says he wants a deal. What sort could it be unless it is TMs dressed up a bit?

    To get what TM could not he relies on charisma.

  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,155
    algarkirk said:

    Pulpstar said:

    May's deal is a very light uncoupling to transition where everything runs the same as it is/was. The deal is to be agreed once we're out in transition and can be anything from WTO to CM 2.0.
    You can't get to CM 2.0 outwith the WA ! Or any other form outside the absolute hardest Brexit/remain.

    +1. Agree. Parliament and the Tory party seem a little slow in working this out. I suspect Boris quietly thinks it's his best chance of survival to dress up this in fancy words and do it, and that all the 31 Oct stuff is to cheer on the troops and get the EU to do some just in time cosmetic changes.

    I suspect Boris thinks "Those good chaps in the Civil Service will think up something in the last week of October, wotwot snort."
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 70,193

    Good afternoon, my fellow galactic travellers.

    Roughly when will the Democrat nominee be decided?

    We'll have a good idea by April 2020.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,840
    JackW said:

    IanB2 said:

    nico67 said:

    The latest guff from Leave .

    Let’s give business certainty by crashing out with no deal . Business want Brexit ditched not a no deal certainty .

    Death is the only certainty; but who would volunteer?
    Political Death - A Dickens of a quote ....

    “It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known.”

    A Tale Of Two Political Parties - Labour and Conservatives
    People analysing how many votes TBP would get in a GE may like to consider the effect of having Lab & Con parties led by Mr Corbyn and Mr B Johnson. Does one vote for an MP supporting one of those two, or might one consider 'wasting' a vote elsewhere? OMRLP anyone?

    Good afternoon, everyone.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 8,313
    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    The referendum offered one concrete option (remaining in the EU) versus a whole set of different concrete options disguised as one nebulous option ("leaving the EU"). The one concrete option did quite well considering, getting almost half the vote, and would easily beat any of the concrete Leave options in a head to head and would win a first past the post contest in which all options were available.
    An analogy would be to fight a general election on a question of Tory or Not Tory, and then after the Tory candidate gets 48% of the vote, decide that what people really voted for was the Socialist Workers Party.

    Remain is only a single concrete option once you accept that there are no choices for us to make within it. There are all sorts of possible 'Remain' visions diverging on issues like Euro, Schengen, freedom of movement, tax harmonisation, fiscal authority, political union, defence and I don't suppose any of them would get a majority. It is a totally artificial contest to see Remain as a single block.

    Parliament set out the terms and conditions of the question after lot of thought. Parliament's job is to make sense of what it started.

    If Remain had won by 52‰ do you think Cameron would have immediately signed us up to Shengen and the Euro? Unlikely. I think everyone on this forum would have taken a Remain win as a vote for our existing arrangements, subject to the usual slow and painful evolution as per the EU norm. To try to spin a narrow rejection of the status quo into a mandate for the most extreme alternative is absurd and an affront to democracy far greater than putting the available concrete options to the voters.
    Thank you. Very interesting, but bears no relation to what I said.

    Er, you said "remain" could have been interpreted to mean joining the euro or Shengen, among other things, rather than a well defined status quo of our existing relationship. I pointed out that that was unlikely, as nobody would have used a remain win as an excuse for changing our existing relationship. I think that answers the point you were making, apologies if I am being thick.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 5,410

    algarkirk said:

    The referendum offered one concrete option (remaining in the EU) versus a whole set of different concrete options disguised as one nebulous option ("leaving the EU"). The one concrete option did quite well considering, getting almost half the vote, and would easily beat any of the concrete Leave options in a head to head and would win a first past the post contest in which all options were available.
    An analogy would be to fight a general election on a question of Tory or Not Tory, and then after the Tory candidate gets 48% of the vote, decide that what people really voted for was the Socialist Workers Party.

    Remain is only a single concrete option once you accept that there are no choices for us to make within it. There are all sorts of possible 'Remain' visions diverging on issues like Euro, Schengen, freedom of movement, tax harmonisation, fiscal authority, political union, defence and I don't suppose any of them would get a majority. It is a totally artificial contest to see Remain as a single block.

    Parliament set out the terms and conditions of the question after lot of thought. Parliament's job is to make sense of what it started.

    If Remain had won by 52‰ do you think Cameron would have immediately signed us up to Shengen and the Euro? Unlikely. I think everyone on this forum would have taken a Remain win as a vote for our existing arrangements, subject to the usual slow and painful evolution as per the EU norm. To try to spin a narrow rejection of the status quo into a mandate for the most extreme alternative is absurd and an affront to democracy far greater than putting the available concrete options to the voters.
    We aren't going for an extreme alternative. What has been negotiated is a very soft Brexit within the parameters of the debate that had happened pre Referendum. Of course Remainers and harder Brexiteers rejected the negotiated soft Brexit so now we will likely get something harder.

    The Conservative party will not accept the top three most popular options identified by YouGov. The problem is the Conservative party. It is determined to offer voters the least popular, most damaging option. If the top option had ever been available we would now be out of the EU and talking about other things.

    The top option among voters was Remain, so out we would not be. The top option among Tory voters only was to leave without a deal. The best we can say about that outcome is we have not got a clue how it would pan out, so either way your optimism is creditable and cheering but maybe slightly OTT.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 13,596
    edited June 2019
    148grss said:

    I mean, this poll pretty much tells us what we knew. I've said from the beginning, as a Remainer, if May had done a charm offensive towards fellow Remainers for her Brexit plan (maybe keep FoM or CU or something else), it would have happened and would have 66% of people behind it. That half think leaving whilst remaining in the SM and CU is the 2nd best option shows that would have been the best point to head towards from the beginning, and had more political will been put to reach across that divide, more Remainers would probably have willingly backed it. By going for the hardest of Brexits, many Remainers have also entrenched themselves to staying. On a 52/48 margin that was always going to be the case.

    While true, this is a Remainer perspective (I don't know if you personally voted Remain - EDIT, just saw that you said you were a Remain voter). Remain voters - like myself - can intellectually accept, we lost the vote, which must be respected, and therefore we will go for the softest least damaging way of respecting the vote. No-one voted Leave to limit damage. But you can't limit the damage without first accepting there is damage to be limited. Hence May's red lines. If Leavers now do accept a damage limited Brexit, it's because they implicitly understand Brexit to have failed.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,003
    Pro_Rata said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    BREX: 22% (-1)
    CON: 22% (+2)
    LAB: 20% (-)
    LDEM: 19% (-2)
    GRN: 10% (+1)

    A Green-Lib Dem remain pact could do well here.

    How the hell FPTP would cope with that who know...
    I suspect a LD-Green pact would do a lot worse in reality than in projection. They're quite different parties with different traditions, policies and attitudes. Much of the Green share has come from Lab and in the absence of a Green candidate, might well go back there or abstain, rather than transfer to the LDs.

    Note also that YouGov routinely reports higher Green and lower Lab shares (by about 4%) than other pollsters.
    Spot on Mr H. It is very lazy thinking to lump Green and LD voters together merely because of similar Brexit policies.

    Watermellons are not yellow in the middle!
    Nevertheless if they had a formal deal, in the context of an election that would decide the future of Brexit, on a common platform of Remain, Reform and Climate, with Labour still wobbly on its fence, I reckon they could do quite well.
    Perhaps. But there is a reason why people are choosing to back the Greens (who have very little chance of winning more than the smallest handful of seats), over the Lib Dems (who would be in contention in scores of them).
    In the majority of seats neither of them are in contention, and it’s simply a matter of preference. The question is what proportion would transfer.
    The top Rata rule. Any proposal starting 'If everyone .. then...' should be instantly dismissed.

    Any proposal starting 'If enough..then....' can have my ear. I would ask how much is enough and is that achievable?

    Thus it is with Green / LD / Plaid transfers.

    And, I suppose the answer would be, every little helps but big would help more. I can't see that pacts would be actively unhelpful to the immediate situation.

    Even if no pacts are formed, I suggest there will be very active third party couponeering beyond any seen in living memory. It was, after all, quite effective at minimising split vote damage in the Euros.
    I agree.

    I also think a well publicised co-ordinated platform from the Greens and LDs would make it easier to win support from Labour especially in the southern seats where they need it.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 8,313

    algarkirk said:

    The referendum offered one concrete option (remaining in the EU) versus a whole set of different concrete options disguised as one nebulous option ("leaving the EU"). The one concrete option did quite well considering, getting almost half the vote, and would easily beat any of the concrete Leave options in a head to head and would win a first past the post contest in which all options were available.
    An analogy would be to fight a general election on a question of Tory or Not Tory, and then after the Tory candidate gets 48% of the vote, decide that what people really voted for was the Socialist Workers Party.

    Remain is only a single concrete option once you accept that there are no choices for us to make within it. There are all sorts of possible 'Remain' visions diverging on issues like Euro, Schengen, freedom of movement, tax harmonisation, fiscal authority, political union, defence and I don't suppose any of them would get a majority. It is a totally artificial contest to see Remain as a single block.

    Parliament set out the terms and conditions of the question after lot of thought. Parliament's job is to make sense of what it started.

    If Remain had won by 52‰ do you think Cameron would have immediately signed us up to Shengen and the Euro? Unlikely. I think everyone on this forum would have taken a Remain win as a vote for our existing arrangements, subject to the usual slow and painful evolution as per the EU norm. To try to spin a narrow rejection of the status quo into a mandate for the most extreme alternative is absurd and an affront to democracy far greater than putting the available concrete options to the voters.
    We aren't going for an extreme alternative. What has been negotiated is a very soft Brexit within the parameters of the debate that had happened pre Referendum. Of course Remainers and harder Brexiteers rejected the negotiated soft Brexit so now we will likely get something harder.
    I wouldn't call leaving the SM and CU a soft Brexit. If Tories had accepted Labour's CU plan and accepted the backstop - the only feasible solution to the Irish border issue that Brexiteers pretended didn't exist during the referendum - then we would have left by now. Brexiteers wanted to twist at 15 and now regret it because the next card up was a 7.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 5,410
    Nigelb said:
    Is there anyone at all who can put in clear words what non-contradictory arrangement would satisfy Arlene Foster and friends? It seems clear to me that all their actions so far compel the view that in fact they want to Remain but someone else to decide it for them. The words don't have any helpful meanings at all.
  • PendduPenddu Posts: 265
    Pushing 40 in Milan. Weather is OK but the short skirts are making me sweat....
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Nigelb said:

    JackW said:

    IanB2 said:

    nico67 said:

    The latest guff from Leave .

    Let’s give business certainty by crashing out with no deal . Business want Brexit ditched not a no deal certainty .

    Death is the only certainty; but who would volunteer?
    Political Death - A Dickens of a quote ....

    “It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known.”

    A Tale Of Two Political Parties - Labour and Conservatives
    A good choice, not without some contemporary resonance-

    "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way..."
    Are you a Spurs supporter too?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 58,550
    Mr. Penddu, well, nobody's making you wear more than one.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Nigelb said:
    So even without a deal which would be a catastrophe for NI. She really is a vile woman .

    No deal for NI would be much worse than for the rest of the UK. She’s completely ignored all the desperate pleas from business there , especially farmers who would be devastated . Utterly despicable.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 70,193
    Penddu said:

    Pushing 40 in Milan. Weather is OK but the short skirts are making me sweat....

    Weather looks similiar in Munich/Bavaria, where we've just returned from holiday. Sends the missus into a foul mood when it is that hot !
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 5,410

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    The referendum offered one concrete option (remaining in the EU) versus a whole set of different concrete options disguised as one nebulous option ("leaving the EU"). The one concrete option did quite well considering, getting almost half the vote, and would easily beat any of the concrete Leave options in a head to head and would win a first past the post contest in which all options were available.
    An analogy would be to fight a general election on a question of Tory or Not Tory, and then after the Tory candidate gets 48% of the vote, decide that what people really voted for was the Socialist Workers Party.

    Remain is only a single concrete option once you accept that there are no choices for us to make within it. There are all sorts of possible 'Remain' visions diverging on issues like Euro, Schengen, freedom of movement, tax harmonisation, fiscal authority, political union, defence and I don't suppose any of them would get a majority. It is a totally artificial contest to see Remain as a single block.

    Parliament set out the terms and conditions of the question after lot of thought. Parliament's job is to make sense of what it started.

    If Remain had won by 52‰ do you think Cameron would have immediately signed us up to Shengen and the Euro? Unlikely. I think everyone on this forum would have taken a Remain win as a vote for our existing arrangements, subject to the usual slow and painful evolution as per the EU norm. To try to spin a narrow rejection of the status quo into a mandate for the most extreme alternative is absurd and an affront to democracy far greater than putting the available concrete options to the voters.
    Thank you. Very interesting, but bears no relation to what I said.

    Er, you said "remain" could have been interpreted to mean joining the euro or Shengen, among other things, rather than a well defined status quo of our existing relationship. I pointed out that that was unlikely, as nobody would have used a remain win as an excuse for changing our existing relationship. I think that answers the point you were making, apologies if I am being thick.
    Just as there are lots of alternatives things we could aim for by leaving, there are lots of different, and incompatible, things we could aim for by being in the EU. supporters of Remain may well have different and incompatible wishes about its development, just like leavers. That's about all.

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,734
    TGOHF said:

    Lead the Labour Party.

    We have no truck with Political Correctness in the Labour Party. It's the best comrade for the job every time. Just so happens that thus far it has always been a brother.

    The sisters' time will come.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Penddu said:

    Pushing 40 in Milan. Weather is OK but the short skirts are making me sweat....

    Take your skirt off and slip on some speedos ....
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,467
    JackW said:

    Nigelb said:

    JackW said:

    IanB2 said:

    nico67 said:

    The latest guff from Leave .

    Let’s give business certainty by crashing out with no deal . Business want Brexit ditched not a no deal certainty .

    Death is the only certainty; but who would volunteer?
    Political Death - A Dickens of a quote ....

    “It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known.”

    A Tale Of Two Political Parties - Labour and Conservatives
    A good choice, not without some contemporary resonance-

    "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way..."
    Are you a Spurs supporter too?
    No - there are limits to my masochism.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,080
    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    The referendum offered one concrete option (remaining in the EU) versus a whole set of different concrete options disguised as one nebulous option ("leaving the EU"). The one concrete option did quite well considering, getting almost half the vote, and would easily beat any of the concrete Leave options in a head to head and would win a first past the post contest in which all options were available.
    An analogy would be to fight a general election on a question of Tory or Not Tory, and then after the Tory candidate gets 48% of the vote, decide that what people really voted for was the Socialist Workers Party.

    Remain is only a single concrete option once you accept that there are no choices for us to make within it. There are all sorts of possible 'Remain' visions diverging on issues like Euro, Schengen, freedom of movement, tax harmonisation, fiscal authority, political union, defence and I don't suppose any of them would get a majority. It is a totally artificial contest to see Remain as a single block.

    Parliament set out the terms and conditions of the question after lot of thought. Parliament's job is to make sense of what it started.

    If Remain had won by 52‰ do you think Cameron would have immediately signed us up to Shengen and the Euro? Unlikely. I think everyone on this forum would have taken a Remain win as a vote for our existing arrangements, subject to the usual slow and painful evolution as per the EU norm. To try to spin a narrow rejection of the status quo into a mandate for the most extreme alternative is absurd and an affront to democracy far greater than putting the available concrete options to the voters.
    Thank you. Very interesting, but bears no relation to what I said.

    Er, you said "remain" could have been interpreted to mean joining the euro or Shengen, among other things, rather than a well defined status quo of our existing relationship. I pointed out that that was unlikely, as nobody would have used a remain win as an excuse for changing our existing relationship. I think that answers the point you were making, apologies if I am being thick.
    Just as there are lots of alternatives things we could aim for by leaving, there are lots of different, and incompatible, things we could aim for by being in the EU. supporters of Remain may well have different and incompatible wishes about its development, just like leavers. That's about all.

    No, Remain meant the Status Quo. Leave meant whatever you wanted it to mean.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,414
    nico67 said:

    Nigelb said:
    So even without a deal which would be a catastrophe for NI. She really is a vile woman .

    No deal for NI would be much worse than for the rest of the UK. She’s completely ignored all the desperate pleas from business there , especially farmers who would be devastated . Utterly despicable.
    I doubt the DUP want to see no deal. They know as well as anyone that it's a short cut to a united Ireland. The union trumps Brexit for them.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 5,410

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    The referendum offered one concrete option (remaining in the EU) versus a whole set of different concrete options disguised as one nebulous option ("leaving the EU"). The one concrete option did quite well considering, getting almost half the vote, and would easily beat any of the concrete Leave options in a head to head and would win a first past the post contest in which all options were available.
    An analogy would be to fight a general election on a question of Tory or Not Tory, and then after the Tory candidate gets 48% of the vote, decide that what people really voted for was the Socialist Workers Party.

    Remain is only a single concrete option once you accept that there are no choices for us to make within it. There are all sorts of possible 'Remain' visions diverging on issues like Euro, Schengen, freedom of movement, tax harmonisation, fiscal authority, political union, defence and I don't suppose any of them would get a majority. It is a totally artificial contest to see Remain as a single block.

    Parliament set out the terms and conditions of the question after lot of thought. Parliament's job is to make sense of what it started.

    If Remain had won by 52‰ do you think Cameron would have immediately signed us up to Shengen and the Euro? Unlikely. I think everyone on this forum would have taken a Remain win as a vote for our existing arrangements, subject to the usual slow and painful evolution as per the EU norm. To try to spin a narrow rejection of the status quo into a mandate for the most extreme alternative is absurd and an affront to democracy far greater than putting the available concrete options to the voters.
    Thank you. Very interesting, but bears no relation to what I said.

    Er, you said "remain" could have been interpreted to mean joining the euro or Shengen, among other things, rather than a well defined status quo of our existing relationship. I pointed out that that was unlikely, as nobody would have used a remain win as an excuse for changing our existing relationship. I think that answers the point you were making, apologies if I am being thick.
    Just as there are lots of alternatives things we could aim for by leaving, there are lots of different, and incompatible, things we could aim for by being in the EU. supporters of Remain may well have different and incompatible wishes about its development, just like leavers. That's about all.

    No, Remain meant the Status Quo. Leave meant whatever you wanted it to mean.
    The EU is constantly evolving and has choices as to how.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,155

    nico67 said:

    Nigelb said:
    So even without a deal which would be a catastrophe for NI. She really is a vile woman .

    No deal for NI would be much worse than for the rest of the UK. She’s completely ignored all the desperate pleas from business there , especially farmers who would be devastated . Utterly despicable.
    I doubt the DUP want to see no deal. They know as well as anyone that it's a short cut to a united Ireland. The union trumps Brexit for them.
    Perhaps the word "Unionist" is the the clue here. Maybe the "Conservative and Unionist Party" should take note.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,155
    Pulpstar said:

    Penddu said:

    Pushing 40 in Milan. Weather is OK but the short skirts are making me sweat....

    Weather looks similiar in Munich/Bavaria, where we've just returned from holiday. Sends the missus into a foul mood when it is that hot !
    37 Here in Berlin. It's like being in Sydney in January. Too hot to do anything.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 5,410
    eristdoof said:

    nico67 said:

    Nigelb said:
    So even without a deal which would be a catastrophe for NI. She really is a vile woman .

    No deal for NI would be much worse than for the rest of the UK. She’s completely ignored all the desperate pleas from business there , especially farmers who would be devastated . Utterly despicable.
    I doubt the DUP want to see no deal. They know as well as anyone that it's a short cut to a united Ireland. The union trumps Brexit for them.
    Perhaps the word "Unionist" is the the clue here. Maybe the "Conservative and Unionist Party" should take note.
    The DUP want to Remain but don't want to say so. Look at what they do, not what they say.

  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 26,074



    No, Remain meant the Status Quo. Leave meant whatever you wanted it to mean.

    The one thing that Remain definitely didn't mean was the status quo. The EU is changing and there is nothing we can do about that either inside or outside. At least outside we don't have to get dragged along with it.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,414
    algarkirk said:

    eristdoof said:

    nico67 said:

    Nigelb said:
    So even without a deal which would be a catastrophe for NI. She really is a vile woman .

    No deal for NI would be much worse than for the rest of the UK. She’s completely ignored all the desperate pleas from business there , especially farmers who would be devastated . Utterly despicable.
    I doubt the DUP want to see no deal. They know as well as anyone that it's a short cut to a united Ireland. The union trumps Brexit for them.
    Perhaps the word "Unionist" is the the clue here. Maybe the "Conservative and Unionist Party" should take note.
    The DUP want to Remain but don't want to say so. Look at what they do, not what they say.

    Precisely. They will only appear to support a no deal position as long as they know other parties are going to prevent it from happening.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 26,074
    FF43 said:

    148grss said:

    I mean, this poll pretty much tells us what we knew. I've said from the beginning, as a Remainer, if May had done a charm offensive towards fellow Remainers for her Brexit plan (maybe keep FoM or CU or something else), it would have happened and would have 66% of people behind it. That half think leaving whilst remaining in the SM and CU is the 2nd best option shows that would have been the best point to head towards from the beginning, and had more political will been put to reach across that divide, more Remainers would probably have willingly backed it. By going for the hardest of Brexits, many Remainers have also entrenched themselves to staying. On a 52/48 margin that was always going to be the case.

    While true, this is a Remainer perspective (I don't know if you personally voted Remain - EDIT, just saw that you said you were a Remain voter). Remain voters - like myself - can intellectually accept, we lost the vote, which must be respected, and therefore we will go for the softest least damaging way of respecting the vote. No-one voted Leave to limit damage. But you can't limit the damage without first accepting there is damage to be limited. Hence May's red lines. If Leavers now do accept a damage limited Brexit, it's because they implicitly understand Brexit to have failed.
    Or because they always wanted what you would regard as a damage limited Brexit in the first place. Ignoring the utter lunacy of staying in a CU (which 90% of people do not seem to understand the problems with) the sort of Brexit that people like myself and RCS were hoping for with the Single Market and freedom of movement is very close to what you would accept as 'damage limitation'. But we saw it as better than any other option including Remain.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,080

    FF43 said:

    148grss said:

    I mean, this poll pretty much tells us what we knew. I've said from the beginning, as a Remainer, if May had done a charm offensive towards fellow Remainers for her Brexit plan (maybe keep FoM or CU or something else), it would have happened and would have 66% of people behind it. That half think leaving whilst remaining in the SM and CU is the 2nd best option shows that would have been the best point to head towards from the beginning, and had more political will been put to reach across that divide, more Remainers would probably have willingly backed it. By going for the hardest of Brexits, many Remainers have also entrenched themselves to staying. On a 52/48 margin that was always going to be the case.

    While true, this is a Remainer perspective (I don't know if you personally voted Remain - EDIT, just saw that you said you were a Remain voter). Remain voters - like myself - can intellectually accept, we lost the vote, which must be respected, and therefore we will go for the softest least damaging way of respecting the vote. No-one voted Leave to limit damage. But you can't limit the damage without first accepting there is damage to be limited. Hence May's red lines. If Leavers now do accept a damage limited Brexit, it's because they implicitly understand Brexit to have failed.
    Or because they always wanted what you would regard as a damage limited Brexit in the first place. Ignoring the utter lunacy of staying in a CU (which 90% of people do not seem to understand the problems with) the sort of Brexit that people like myself and RCS were hoping for with the Single Market and freedom of movement is very close to what you would accept as 'damage limitation'. But we saw it as better than any other option including Remain.
    So now the options seem to have been narrowed down to No Deal or Remain, which would you choose.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    BREX: 22% (-1)
    CON: 22% (+2)
    LAB: 20% (-)
    LDEM: 19% (-2)
    GRN: 10% (+1)

    A Green-Lib Dem remain pact could do well here.

    How the hell FPTP would cope with that who know...
    I suspect a LD-Green pact would do a lot worse in reality than in projection. They're quite different parties with different traditions, policies and attitudes. Much of the Green share has come from Lab and in the absence of a Green candidate, might well go back there or abstain, rather than transfer to the LDs.

    Note also that YouGov routinely reports higher Green and lower Lab shares (by about 4%) than other pollsters.
    Spot on Mr H. It is very lazy thinking to lump Green and LD voters together merely because of similar Brexit policies.

    Watermellons are not yellow in the middle!
    Very true. Though tomatoes often start off green but end up red.
    In a GE the Greens will be much closer to 2% than 10%. LDs would probably be circa 12%.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 13,596



    No, Remain meant the Status Quo. Leave meant whatever you wanted it to mean.

    The one thing that Remain definitely didn't mean was the status quo. The EU is changing and there is nothing we can do about that either inside or outside. At least outside we don't have to get dragged along with it.
    The EU is not changing that fast. A more normal criticism is that the EU is resistant to charge. The EU has changed very significantly since the UK decided to join in the 1970s, and the second vote fifty years later was about a very different beast. Nevertheless the latest referendum was about the EU that exists now, not the 1970s version.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,080



    No, Remain meant the Status Quo. Leave meant whatever you wanted it to mean.

    The one thing that Remain definitely didn't mean was the status quo. The EU is changing and there is nothing we can do about that either inside or outside. At least outside we don't have to get dragged along with it.
    Well it did mean the Status Quo, at that time. What happened from that point onwards we could have decided.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 26,074

    FF43 said:

    148grss said:

    I mean, this poll pretty much tells us what we knew. I've said from the beginning, as a Remainer, if May had done a charm offensive towards fellow Remainers for her Brexit plan (maybe keep FoM or CU or something else), it would have happened and would have 66% of people behind it. That half think leaving whilst remaining in the SM and CU is the 2nd best option shows that would have been the best point to head towards from the beginning, and had more political will been put to reach across that divide, more Remainers would probably have willingly backed it. By going for the hardest of Brexits, many Remainers have also entrenched themselves to staying. On a 52/48 margin that was always going to be the case.

    While true, this is a Remainer perspective (I don't know if you personally voted Remain - EDIT, just saw that you said you were a Remain voter). Remain voters - like myself - can intellectually accept, we lost the vote, which must be respected, and therefore we will go for the softest least damaging way of respecting the vote. No-one voted Leave to limit damage. But you can't limit the damage without first accepting there is damage to be limited. Hence May's red lines. If Leavers now do accept a damage limited Brexit, it's because they implicitly understand Brexit to have failed.
    Or because they always wanted what you would regard as a damage limited Brexit in the first place. Ignoring the utter lunacy of staying in a CU (which 90% of people do not seem to understand the problems with) the sort of Brexit that people like myself and RCS were hoping for with the Single Market and freedom of movement is very close to what you would accept as 'damage limitation'. But we saw it as better than any other option including Remain.
    So now the options seem to have been narrowed down to No Deal or Remain, which would you choose.
    No Deal. No question for me.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 26,074



    No, Remain meant the Status Quo. Leave meant whatever you wanted it to mean.

    The one thing that Remain definitely didn't mean was the status quo. The EU is changing and there is nothing we can do about that either inside or outside. At least outside we don't have to get dragged along with it.
    Well it did mean the Status Quo, at that time. What happened from that point onwards we could have decided.
    No we couldn't. We were losing influence and power in the EU continuously and at the same time the ability to leave was being more and more eroded.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 45,326
    justin124 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    BREX: 22% (-1)
    CON: 22% (+2)
    LAB: 20% (-)
    LDEM: 19% (-2)
    GRN: 10% (+1)

    A Green-Lib Dem remain pact could do well here.

    How the hell FPTP would cope with that who know...
    I suspect a LD-Green pact would do a lot worse in reality than in projection. They're quite different parties with different traditions, policies and attitudes. Much of the Green share has come from Lab and in the absence of a Green candidate, might well go back there or abstain, rather than transfer to the LDs.

    Note also that YouGov routinely reports higher Green and lower Lab shares (by about 4%) than other pollsters.
    Spot on Mr H. It is very lazy thinking to lump Green and LD voters together merely because of similar Brexit policies.

    Watermellons are not yellow in the middle!
    Very true. Though tomatoes often start off green but end up red.
    In a GE the Greens will be much closer to 2% than 10%. LDs would probably be circa 12%.
    That might happen. (It happened in 2017.)

    But if you look over the results of the last 40 years, third parties usually rise in the polls over the course of an election campaign.

    And you're also relying on hardcore remainers (who seem finally to have tired of Corbyn's prevarication) voting Labour because...
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 26,074
    FF43 said:



    No, Remain meant the Status Quo. Leave meant whatever you wanted it to mean.

    The one thing that Remain definitely didn't mean was the status quo. The EU is changing and there is nothing we can do about that either inside or outside. At least outside we don't have to get dragged along with it.
    The EU is not changing that fast. A more normal criticism is that the EU is resistant to charge. The EU has changed very significantly since the UK decided to join in the 1970s, and the second vote fifty years later was about a very different beast. Nevertheless the latest referendum was about the EU that exists now, not the 1970s version.
    It is not about the speed of change it is about the direction and our inability to influence that.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 32,244
    justin124 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    BREX: 22% (-1)
    CON: 22% (+2)
    LAB: 20% (-)
    LDEM: 19% (-2)
    GRN: 10% (+1)

    A Green-Lib Dem remain pact could do well here.

    How the hell FPTP would cope with that who know...
    I suspect a LD-Green pact would do a lot worse in reality than in projection. They're quite different parties with different traditions, policies and attitudes. Much of the Green share has come from Lab and in the absence of a Green candidate, might well go back there or abstain, rather than transfer to the LDs.

    Note also that YouGov routinely reports higher Green and lower Lab shares (by about 4%) than other pollsters.
    Spot on Mr H. It is very lazy thinking to lump Green and LD voters together merely because of similar Brexit policies.

    Watermellons are not yellow in the middle!
    Very true. Though tomatoes often start off green but end up red.
    In a GE the Greens will be much closer to 2% than 10%. LDs would probably be circa 12%.
    In your dreams!

    The shine has worn off Corbynism, Labour will lose seats in any GE now. The only question is whether the Tories will lose even more.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    BREX: 22% (-1)
    CON: 22% (+2)
    LAB: 20% (-)
    LDEM: 19% (-2)
    GRN: 10% (+1)

    A Green-Lib Dem remain pact could do well here.

    How the hell FPTP would cope with that who know...
    I suspect a LD-Green pact would do a lot worse in reality than in projection. They're quite different parties with different traditions, policies and attitudes. Much of the Green share has come from Lab and in the absence of a Green candidate, might well go back there or abstain, rather than transfer to the LDs.

    Note also that YouGov routinely reports higher Green and lower Lab shares (by about 4%) than other pollsters.
    Spot on Mr H. It is very lazy thinking to lump Green and LD voters together merely because of similar Brexit policies.

    Watermellons are not yellow in the middle!
    Very true. Though tomatoes often start off green but end up red.
    In a GE the Greens will be much closer to 2% than 10%. LDs would probably be circa 12%.
    In your dreams!

    The shine has worn off Corbynism, Labour will lose seats in any GE now. The only question is whether the Tories will lose even more.
    Well some people predicted third place for Labour at Peterborough - rather than the slightly increased majority. Most polls now have Labour at circa 26% - already well up on the EU elections. I would be surprised if they failed to poll 35% in a GE.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 34,705
    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    BREX: 22% (-1)
    CON: 22% (+2)
    LAB: 20% (-)
    LDEM: 19% (-2)
    GRN: 10% (+1)

    A Green-Lib Dem remain pact could do well here.

    How the hell FPTP would cope with that who know...
    I suspect a LD-Green pact would do a lot worse in reality than in projection. They're quite different parties with different traditions, policies and attitudes. Much of the Green share has come from Lab and in the absence of a Green candidate, might well go back there or abstain, rather than transfer to the LDs.

    Note also that YouGov routinely reports higher Green and lower Lab shares (by about 4%) than other pollsters.
    Spot on Mr H. It is very lazy thinking to lump Green and LD voters together merely because of similar Brexit policies.

    Watermellons are not yellow in the middle!
    Very true. Though tomatoes often start off green but end up red.
    In a GE the Greens will be much closer to 2% than 10%. LDs would probably be circa 12%.
    In your dreams!

    The shine has worn off Corbynism, Labour will lose seats in any GE now. The only question is whether the Tories will lose even more.
    Well some people predicted third place for Labour at Peterborough - rather than the slightly increased majority. Most polls now have Labour at circa 26% - already well up on the EU elections. I would be surprised if they failed to poll 35% in a GE.
    Just as well we don't live in a world of constant surprises.
This discussion has been closed.