Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nothing up my sleeve

1235

Comments

  • ChrisChris Posts: 9,073

    Sandpit said:

    If Boris loses a VONC by a couple of votes he has every right to try to persuade the house again to support his government. If he loses by many dozens that will be a more challenging scenario.

    The idea the HMQEII is sitting on a hair trigger waiting to send for Corbyn, irrespective of the advice of her PM is another unicorn...

    There’s two conventions at play:

    1. There is always a government.
    2. The outgoing PM gives HM the name of his successor, to avoid drawing the Queen into politics.

    Johnson won’t resign as PM until someone else clearly has a majority, if no-one can form that majority within 14 days and he can’t assemble one himself, then Parliament is dissolved for an election 25 days later - which may or may not be after Brexit occurs!
    No, there is no mechanism for anyone to demonstrate their hypothetical government can survive a hypothetical confidence vote.

    Boris has three choices on losing a VONC.

    1) Try again and lose again, leading to 2 or 3:
    2) Recommend Jeremy Corbyn
    3) Recommend a different Conservative

    So it must be Corbyn. Boris can then win a general election called by JC and be back in Downing Street in time for Christmas, whereas if he recommends another Conservative, Boris will have to stand down as party leader.
    The trouble is that we're in realm of convention here, and convention by definition depends on everyone behaving as they conventionally should.

    Supposing that after a VONC Johnson decides he is going to hang on come what may, regardless of what the House of Commons wants, and go for a general election - as Mike Smithson suggested last night that he might. So he refuses to recommend another prime minister regardless of his conventional duty.

    Convention would have broken down. The Queen would have to rely on the best advice she could be given. An appalling position to put her in, but what do Johnson and the rest of that self-seeking, duplicitous crew care about that? They are out only for their own self-interest, and that often on a ludicrously narrow assessment.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 43,344
    HYUFD said:

    So the LDs, not the Tories, are the new party of the middle class, Labour and the Brexit Party are battling to be the party of the working class and the Tories under Boris are classless

    The Tories under Boris are rudderless and lacking in class.

    The first part of your post makes my own point that the strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    Its them jews, i mean zionists, again...
    I've not read the tweet let alone the thread but just from the part you posted here, Dunt's claim that not a single word is true is, erm, false. It clearly is an attempt at censorship.

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 32,976
    No Deal in 2019 is rated a 33% chance in the betting - a 1 in 3 chance.

    This is a fantastic opportunity for all punters with a view.

    If (like me) you feel No Deal this year is highly unlikely on every level, including politically, and therefore ought to be a 10% chance at best - LAY it like a demon.

    But if you go with the logic that seems to be taking us there with no obvious way out, then it ought to be well over 50% - so BACK it like a demon.

    It's that type of market - the best type.

    It's definitely mis-priced, but which way?
  • Its them jews, i mean zionists, again...
    I've not read the tweet let alone the thread but just from the part you posted here, Dunt's claim that not a single word is true is, erm, false. It clearly is an attempt at censorship.

    The canary themselves blamed the zionists.
  • malcolmg said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Can someone remind me what the minimum timescale would be for a GE? I don't agree about the Commons being unlikely to vote 2/3rds for one. So, suppose the VONC succeeds, during the 14 day cooling off period, or immediately thereafter, it's presumably also possible to enforce a 2/3rds vote for an election?

    My question, free of the Cummings guff, is how quickly might it happen under those circs? 3 weeks?

    So an election early October is still possible or even end September?

    Five weeks between Dissolution and Polling Day - so no September election.
    September could only happen if Parliament is recalled early. Not impossible but unlikely.

    In more important news, a wave of undocumented North African migrants has arrived in my garden!

    https://twitter.com/UofGlasgow/status/1157311982934077440?s=19
    Amazing , we have loads of them , some journey from Africa.
    Blown up here on those same winds that have brought the higher temperatures.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 9,073
    edited August 2019
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    If Boris loses a VONC by a couple of votes he has every right to try to persuade the house again to support his government. If he loses by many dozens that will be a more challenging scenario.

    The idea the HMQEII is sitting on a hair trigger waiting to send for Corbyn, irrespective of the advice of her PM is another unicorn...

    There’s two conventions at play:

    1. There is always a government.
    2. The outgoing PM gives HM the name of his successor, to avoid drawing the Queen into politics.

    Johnson won’t resign as PM until someone else clearly has a majority, if no-one can form that majority within 14 days and he can’t assemble one himself, then Parliament is dissolved for an election 25 days later - which may or may not be after Brexit occurs!
    No, there is no mechanism for anyone to demonstrate their hypothetical government can survive a hypothetical confidence vote.

    Boris has three choices on losing a VONC.

    1) Try again and lose again, leading to 2 or 3:
    2) Recommend Jeremy Corbyn
    3) Recommend a different Conservative

    So it must be Corbyn. Boris can then win a general election called by JC and be back in Downing Street in time for Christmas, whereas if he recommends another Conservative, Boris will have to stand down as party leader.
    He can’t resign until it’s clear someone has a majority to replace him. See Gordon Brown after the 2010 election for an example. How this would work in practice is that parties representing more than half the MPs in Parliament make an announcement that they wish to form a government.
    But it's nowhere near that simple, because one can well believe that the Conservative Party and the DUP made "made an announcement" that they would support the current government, but individual MPs voted otherwise.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    wrt FTPA 14-days cooling-off period after VNOC.

    If this is a de facto purdah period, so HMG can do nothing "big", does that rule out revocation, extension and crashing out?

    Yes, but I don't think extension can be considered big as it simply continues the status quo. Why should a 3 or 6 month extension be controversial except to some Loonies.
    As further extension would mean the Brexit Party overtaking the Tories again, probably this time for good, with the Tories falling behind both Labour and Farage's Party. Boris has to deliver Brexit on October 31st or the Tory Party may not only lost power but cease to be the main party of the right in UK politics too.
    If we went back to the political alignment of the early 80s before the SDP breakaway, the Brexit Party would be Foot's Labour, not Maggie's Conservatives. Your reading of them as a potential replacement for the Tories is very wide of the mark. The real threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems.
    The likelihood is that both the Conservatives and TBP attract support from some of the groups that would have voted Labour in 1983, because support for right wing parties comes more from the working classes, and less from the middle classes, than in 1983.

    The Lib Dems are a real threat to the Conservatives along the M3 and M4 corridors, but not along the M1, M2, M5, or M6, IMHO.
    I have a theory that the Lib Dems could win any seat south of the Thames outside of London if they focused on it.
    Sounds more like a fantasy
    They certainly won't win Thanet or Hastings
    They controlled Hastings council in the 80s and had a big name candidate, by Lib Dem standards, of Westminster. I think he was within a few thousand of getting in. I can't actually remember his name. That doesn't help my case I know. But he still pops up from time to time.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 38,072

    malcolmg said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Can someone remind me what the minimum timescale would be for a GE? I don't agree about the Commons being unlikely to vote 2/3rds for one. So, suppose the VONC succeeds, during the 14 day cooling off period, or immediately thereafter, it's presumably also possible to enforce a 2/3rds vote for an election?

    My question, free of the Cummings guff, is how quickly might it happen under those circs? 3 weeks?

    So an election early October is still possible or even end September?

    Five weeks between Dissolution and Polling Day - so no September election.
    September could only happen if Parliament is recalled early. Not impossible but unlikely.

    In more important news, a wave of undocumented North African migrants has arrived in my garden!

    https://twitter.com/UofGlasgow/status/1157311982934077440?s=19
    Amazing , we have loads of them , some journey from Africa.
    Blown up here on those same winds that have brought the higher temperatures.
    LOL, not many would be here if was due to higher temperatures Richard, afraid most of that did not reach us.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Some Lab members have been radicalised by Corbyn into becoming anti-Semitic says report:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/04/jeremy-corbyns-leadership-has-radicalised-labour-members-attacking/

    This has actually happened to a friend of mine. He's gone from being a jolly, Old Left kind of guy, frustrated by Blairites but generally good-natured, to a weird ultra-lefty who, after three pints, will rant about Jews and Zionists, in the most vile way. And all this has happened since Corbyn. And he's a big fan of Corbyn.

    His anti-Semitism is so bad his brother has stopped talking to him, and won't have him in the house. Very very sad. And odd.
  • Why has woakes not bowled yet this morning? Its his home ground after all.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756

    Its them jews, i mean zionists, again...
    I've not read the tweet let alone the thread but just from the part you posted here, Dunt's claim that not a single word is true is, erm, false. It clearly is an attempt at censorship.

    It is certainly not however an attempt to close them down because they speak the truth!

    The Canary hasn't deliberately published a word of truth in its entire existence. It's a slightly better written version of Skwawkbox or Breitbart.

    On more important matters, England are more buggered than a reluctant Turkish conscript here. And one of these two will be officially Australian captain by October. There simply isn't a way past them.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756
    edited August 2019
    ydoethur said:



    On more important matters, England are more buggered than a reluctant Turkish conscript here. And one of these two will be officially Australian captain by October. There simply isn't a way past them.

    I am just a legend.

    But I fear in this case I was somewhat too late.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    Head goes! Get in.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 73,473
    edited August 2019
    dixiedean said:

    Head goes! Get in.

    Said boris....followed by haazzzzzzzzzzahhhh.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 24,023
    Lol. My dad just said "this Travis Head is doing well."
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 32,309
    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    wrt FTPA 14-days cooling-off period after VNOC.

    If this is a de facto purdah period, so HMG can do nothing "big", does that rule out revocation, extension and crashing out?

    Yes, but I don't think extension can be considered big as it simply continues the status quo. Why should a 3 or 6 month extension be controversial except to some Loonies.
    As further extension would mean the Brexit Party overtaking the Tories again, probably this time for good, with the Tories falling behind both Labour and Farage's Party. Boris has to deliver Brexit on October 31st or the Tory Party may not only lost power but cease to be the main party of the right in UK politics too.
    If we went back to the political alignment of the early 80s before the SDP breakaway, the Brexit Party would be Foot's Labour, not Maggie's Conservatives. Your reading of them as a potential replacement for the Tories is very wide of the mark. The real threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems.
    The likelihood is that both the Conservatives and TBP attract support from some of the groups that would have voted Labour in 1983, because support for right wing parties comes more from the working classes, and less from the middle classes, than in 1983.

    The Lib Dems are a real threat to the Conservatives along the M3 and M4 corridors, but not along the M1, M2, M5, or M6, IMHO.
    Indeed, YouGov now has the Tories on 32% with both ABC1s and C2DEs, so the Boris led Tories do equally as well with the middle classes and the working classes.


    The LDs though are on 23% with ABC1s but only 13% with C2DEs, while Labour are on 25% with C2DEs and 21% with ABC1s and the Brexit Party are on 18% with C2DEs but only 10% with ABC1s.


    So the LDs, not the Tories, are the new party of the middle class, Labour and the Brexit Party are battling to be the party of the working class and the Tories under Boris are classless


    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/twa1h7mn6m/TimesResults_190730_VI_Trackers_w.pdf
    And even among well-off voters in the Home Counties, there are plenty who do support Brexit. TBP topped the poll in Hertsmere, for example.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756
    tlg86 said:

    Lol. My dad just said "this Travis Head is doing well."

    Would he be interested in a joint application to TMS as highly partisan commentators?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,682
    The just announced BXP candidate for Sunderland Cent. is apparently already a Conservative councillor in Chichester.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103
    ydoethur said:

    Its them jews, i mean zionists, again...
    I've not read the tweet let alone the thread but just from the part you posted here, Dunt's claim that not a single word is true is, erm, false. It clearly is an attempt at censorship.

    It is certainly not however an attempt to close them down because they speak the truth!

    The Canary hasn't deliberately published a word of truth in its entire existence. It's a slightly better written version of Skwawkbox or Breitbart.

    On more important matters, England are more buggered than a reluctant Turkish conscript here. And one of these two will be officially Australian captain by October. There simply isn't a way past them.
    Canary now plans to become a "campaigning journalism" outfit using subscriptions.

  • There is something very wrong with cricviz model. That wicket hasnt reduced Australias chance of winning at all, it just reduced the chance of the draw.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 9,073

    If Boris loses a VONC by a couple of votes he has every right to try to persuade the house again to support his government. If he loses by many dozens that will be a more challenging scenario.

    The idea the HMQEII is sitting on a hair trigger waiting to send for Corbyn, irrespective of the advice of her PM is another unicorn...

    No one has suggested the Queen is "sitting on a hair trigger."

    But let's be sensible. This is all about Brexit. If Johnson loses a VONC it will probably be because a majority want to block a No Deal Brexit above all. In those circumstances prima facie it is quite reasonable that a majority would be willing to back an alternative government which would request an extension.

    The point is that if the House of Commons wants strongly enough that a request should be made for an extension, it can achieve that very easily:
    (1) VONC in the present government
    (2) Make it clear in some way that it would support an alternative government
    (3) VOC in the alternative governement.

    As easy as 1-2-3.
  • eekeek Posts: 22,078
    IanB2 said:

    The just announced BXP candidate for Sunderland Cent. is apparently already a Conservative councillor in Chichester.

    Surely they could find someone local - it's almost as if they don't want to win..
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,503
    edited August 2019
    Chris said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    If Boris loses a VONC by a couple of votes he has every right to try to persuade the house again to support his government. If he loses by many dozens that will be a more challenging scenario.

    The idea the HMQEII is sitting on a hair trigger waiting to send for Corbyn, irrespective of the advice of her PM is another unicorn...

    There’s two conventions at play:

    1. There is always a government.
    2. The outgoing PM gives HM the name of his successor, to avoid drawing the Queen into politics.

    Johnson won’t resign as PM until someone else clearly has a majority, if no-one can form that majority within 14 days and he can’t assemble one himself, then Parliament is dissolved for an election 25 days later - which may or may not be after Brexit occurs!
    No, there is no mechanism for anyone to demonstrate their hypothetical government can survive a hypothetical confidence vote.

    Boris has three choices on losing a VONC.

    1) Try again and lose again, leading to 2 or 3:
    2) Recommend Jeremy Corbyn
    3) Recommend a different Conservative

    So it must be Corbyn. Boris can then win a general election called by JC and be back in Downing Street in time for Christmas, whereas if he recommends another Conservative, Boris will have to stand down as party leader.
    He can’t resign until it’s clear someone has a majority to replace him. See Gordon Brown after the 2010 election for an example. How this would work in practice is that parties representing more than half the MPs in Parliament make an announcement that they wish to form a government.
    But it's nowhere near that simple, because one can well believe that the Conservative Party and the DUP made "made an announcement" that they would support the current government, but individual MPs voted otherwise.
    They’re the incumbents, it’s up to someone wanting to form a government to show that they have the numbers. And Corbyn doesn’t have the numbers unless every single non-Tory and non-DUP MP votes for him.

    Unless of course a dozen Tories resign the whip and cross the floor.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756
    edited August 2019

    ydoethur said:

    Its them jews, i mean zionists, again...
    I've not read the tweet let alone the thread but just from the part you posted here, Dunt's claim that not a single word is true is, erm, false. It clearly is an attempt at censorship.

    It is certainly not however an attempt to close them down because they speak the truth!

    The Canary hasn't deliberately published a word of truth in its entire existence. It's a slightly better written version of Skwawkbox or Breitbart.

    On more important matters, England are more buggered than a reluctant Turkish conscript here. And one of these two will be officially Australian captain by October. There simply isn't a way past them.
    Canary now plans to become a "campaigning journalism" outfit using subscriptions.

    Or a fully fledged conspiracy nutcase website, funded by true believers? It worked for the Raelians and Scientologists.

    Although it would be quite hard to tell the difference from what they do now, in fairness.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,316
    Naturally there is selection bias, but the views from abroad of both Johnson, and more alarmingly Britain itself, are incredibly negative:
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/04/how-does-the-rest-of-the-world-currently-view-the-uk-brexit-boris-johnson
  • Joe denly is getting a lot of turn. Lyon is going to be hard to play.
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469
    eek said:

    IanB2 said:

    The just announced BXP candidate for Sunderland Cent. is apparently already a Conservative councillor in Chichester.

    Surely they could find someone local - it's almost as if they don't want to win..
    What are the chances that he will be expelled ?
  • ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Its them jews, i mean zionists, again...
    I've not read the tweet let alone the thread but just from the part you posted here, Dunt's claim that not a single word is true is, erm, false. It clearly is an attempt at censorship.

    It is certainly not however an attempt to close them down because they speak the truth!

    The Canary hasn't deliberately published a word of truth in its entire existence. It's a slightly better written version of Skwawkbox or Breitbart.

    On more important matters, England are more buggered than a reluctant Turkish conscript here. And one of these two will be officially Australian captain by October. There simply isn't a way past them.
    Canary now plans to become a "campaigning journalism" outfit using subscriptions.

    Or a fully fledged conspiracy nutcase website, funded by true believers? It worked for the Raelians and Scientologists.

    Although it would be quite hard to tell the difference from what they do now, in fairness.
    Left wing infowars...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756

    Joe denly is getting a lot of turn. Lyon is going to be hard to play.

    Denly won't take a wicket though unless Smith actually treads on his stumps.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    IanB2 said:

    The just announced BXP candidate for Sunderland Cent. is apparently already a Conservative councillor in Chichester.

    So, committed to the Party, then. And with the finger on the pulse of local needs?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,503
    tlg86 said:

    Lol. My dad just said "this Travis Head is doing well."

    Can he be persuaded of a trip to the bookies’ to back the convicts?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,356
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    wrt FTPA 14-days cooling-off period after VNOC.

    If this is a de facto purdah period, so HMG can do nothing "big", does that rule out revocation, extension and crashing out?

    Yes, but I don't think extension can be considered big as it simply continues the status quo. Why should a 3 or 6 month extension be controversial except to some Loonies.
    As further extension would mean the Brexit Party overtaking the Tories again, probably this time for good, with the Tories falling behind both Labour and Farage's Party. Boris has to deliver Brexit on October 31st or the Tory Party may not only lost power but cease to be the main party of the right in UK politics too.
    If we went back to the political alignment of the early 80s before the SDP breakaway, the Brexit Party would be Foot's Labour, not Maggie's Conservatives. Your reading of them as a potential replacement for the Tories is very wide of the mark. The real threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems.
    The likelihood is that both the Conservatives and TBP attract support from some of the groups that would have voted Labour in 1983, because support for right wing parties comes more from the working classes, and less from the middle classes, than in 1983.

    The Lib Dems are a real threat to the Conservatives along the M3 and M4 corridors, but not along the M1, M2, M5, or M6, IMHO.
    Indeed, YouGov now has the Tories on 32% with both ABC1s and C2DEs, so the Boris led Tories do equally as well with the middle classes and the working classes.


    The LDs though are on 23% with ABC1s but only 13% with C2DEs, while Labour are on 25% with C2DEs and 21% with ABC1s and the Brexit Party are on 18% with C2DEs but only 10% with ABC1s.


    So the LDs, not the Tories, are the new party of the middle class, Labour and the Brexit Party are battling to be the party of the working class and the Tories under Boris are classless


    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/twa1h7mn6m/TimesResults_190730_VI_Trackers_w.pdf
    And even among well-off voters in the Home Counties, there are plenty who do support Brexit. TBP topped the poll in Hertsmere, for example.
    True but most of those will now be voting Tory again under Boris, the core Brexit Party vote is mainly working class
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,682
    dixiedean said:

    IanB2 said:

    The just announced BXP candidate for Sunderland Cent. is apparently already a Conservative councillor in Chichester.

    So, committed to the Party, then. And with the finger on the pulse of local needs?
    And one wonders what questions or research the BXP Ltd. did before choosing them?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 9,073
    edited August 2019
    Sandpit said:

    Chris said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    If Boris loses a VONC by a couple of votes he has every right to try to persuade the house again to support his government. If he loses by many dozens that will be a more challenging scenario.

    The idea the HMQEII is sitting on a hair trigger waiting to send for Corbyn, irrespective of the advice of her PM is another unicorn...

    There’s two conventions at play:

    1. There is always a government.
    2. The outgoing PM gives HM the name of his successor, to avoid drawing the Queen into politics.

    Johnson won’t resign as PM until someone else clearly has a majority, if no-one can form that majority within 14 days and he can’t assemble one himself, then Parliament is dissolved for an election 25 days later - which may or may not be after Brexit occurs!
    No, there is no mechanism for anyone to demonstrate their hypothetical government can survive a hypothetical confidence vote.

    Boris has three choices on losing a VONC.

    1) Try again and lose again, leading to 2 or 3:
    2) Recommend Jeremy Corbyn
    3) Recommend a different Conservative

    So it must be Corbyn. Boris can then win a general election called by JC and be back in Downing Street in time for Christmas, whereas if he recommends another Conservative, Boris will have to stand down as party leader.
    He can’t resign until it’s clear someone has a majority to replace him. See Gordon Brown after the 2010 election for an example. How this would work in practice is that parties representing more than half the MPs in Parliament make an announcement that they wish to form a government.
    But it's nowhere near that simple, because one can well believe that the Conservative Party and the DUP made "made an announcement" that they would support the current government, but individual MPs voted otherwise.
    They’re the incumbents, it’s up to someone wanting to form a government to show that they have the numbers. And Corbyn doesn’t have the numbers unless every single non-Tory and non-DUP MP votes for him.

    Unless of course a dozen Tories resign the whip and cross the floor.
    Of course all this depends on some number of Tory MPs being willing to put the avoidance of collective suicide above party loyalty.

    We're talking about whether the government could frustrate their wish, if they were willing to do that, . Clearly it couldn't.

    Whether the EU will agree to an extension is another matter.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,825
    IanB2 said:

    The just announced BXP candidate for Sunderland Cent. is apparently already a Conservative councillor in Chichester.

    Yesh, just the candidate to put the wind up the Southern establishment...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,503
    Chris said:

    If Boris loses a VONC by a couple of votes he has every right to try to persuade the house again to support his government. If he loses by many dozens that will be a more challenging scenario.

    The idea the HMQEII is sitting on a hair trigger waiting to send for Corbyn, irrespective of the advice of her PM is another unicorn...

    No one has suggested the Queen is "sitting on a hair trigger."

    But let's be sensible. This is all about Brexit. If Johnson loses a VONC it will probably be because a majority want to block a No Deal Brexit above all. In those circumstances prima facie it is quite reasonable that a majority would be willing to back an alternative government which would request an extension.

    The point is that if the House of Commons wants strongly enough that a request should be made for an extension, it can achieve that very easily:
    (1) VONC in the present government
    (2) Make it clear in some way that it would support an alternative government
    (3) VOC in the alternative governement.

    As easy as 1-2-3.
    You mean it’s as easy as starting from your desired outcome and working backwards, as opposed to starting from where we are now and looking at ways forward?

    Impartial view of all this, as posted above:
    https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/assume-that-johnson-is-set-on-no-deal-how-do-mps-stop-him-parliament-westminster-brexit
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,356
    edited August 2019
    mwadams said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    wrt FTPA 14-days cooling-off period after VNOC.

    If this is a de facto purdah period, so HMG can do nothing "big", does that rule out revocation, extension and crashing out?

    Yes, but I don't think extension can be considered big as it simply continues the status quo. Why should a 3 or 6 month extension be controversial except to some Loonies.
    As further extension would mean the Brexit Party overtaking the Tories again, probably this time for good, with the Tories falling behind both Labour and Farage's Party. Boris has to deliver Brexit on October 31st or the Tory Party may not only lost power but cease to be the main party of the right in UK politics too.
    If we went back to the political alignment of the early 80s before the SDP breakaway, the Brexit Party would be Foot's Labour, not Maggie's Conservatives. Your reading of them as a potential replacement for the Tories is very wide of the mark. The real threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems.
    Complete and utD, 21% of 2017 Labour voters are voting LD though but only 7% Brexit Party.


    The real threat to the Tories comes from the Brexit Party, the real threat to Labour comes from the LDs


    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/twa1h7mn6m/TimesResults_190730_VI_Trackers_w.pdf
    Existentially, I don't think that is true. The Tory electoral success over the last century is based on their wide coalition spanning from the far rightr all the way to the center left. The left only wins during those periods when it coalesces around Labour.

    The Tories could survive sloughing off the far right. But they will be destroyed if they permanently lose the center right and center, which is a far larger proportion of the electorate.

    We haven't seen an election that has tested that yet.
    Even in 1997 the Tories still remained second to Labour and the main party of the right despite the centre, the centre left and even a few of the centre right voting for New Labour under Blair.


    If the Tories do not deliver Brexit though and lose the right to the Brexit Party they would no longer be even in second place but be replaced by the Brexit Party as the main party of the right and Farage would become leader of the Opposition not Boris or whoever replaced him as Tory leader after a Tory defeat.


    May's European Parliament elections where the Tories were 5th behind the Brexit Party, the LDs, the Labour Party and the Greens showed what the core vote for an anti hard Brexit Tory Party would be, 9%. Even in 1997 the Tories got 31%
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    edited August 2019
    eek said:

    IanB2 said:

    The just announced BXP candidate for Sunderland Cent. is apparently already a Conservative councillor in Chichester.

    Surely they could find someone local - it's almost as if they don't want to win..
    Maybe Farage has no mates, or business contacts in Sunderland? That seems to be the way it works.
    Which brings up a point. With no members, local Parties, or equivalent of the NEC, what are the selection criteria?
    And who is selecting?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,682
    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    wrt FTPA 14-days cooling-off period after VNOC.

    If this is a de facto purdah period, so HMG can do nothing "big", does that rule out revocation, extension and crashing out?

    Yes, but I don't think extension can be considered big as it simply continues the status quo. Why should a 3 or 6 month extension be controversial except to some Loonies.
    As further extension would mean the Brexit Party overtaking the Tories again, probably this time for good, with the Tories falling behind both Labour and Farage's Party. Boris has to deliver Brexit on October 31st or the Tory Party may not only lost power but cease to be the main party of the right in UK politics too.
    If we went back to the political alignment of the early 80s before the SDP breakaway, the Brexit Party would be Foot's Labour, not Maggie's Conservatives. Your reading of them as a potential replacement for the Tories is very wide of the mark. The real threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems.
    The likelihood is that both the Conservatives and TBP attract support from some of the groups that would have voted Labour in 1983, because support for right wing parties comes more from the working classes, and less from the middle classes, than in 1983.

    The Lib Dems are a real threat to the Conservatives along the M3 and M4 corridors, but not along the M1, M2, M5, or M6, IMHO.
    Indeed, YouGov now has the Tories on 32% with both ABC1s and C2DEs, so the Boris led Tories do equally as well with the middle classes and the working classes.


    The LDs though are on 23% with ABC1s but only 13% with C2DEs, while Labour are on 25% with C2DEs and 21% with ABC1s and the Brexit Party are on 18% with C2DEs but only 10% with ABC1s.


    So the LDs, not the Tories, are the new party of the middle class, Labour and the Brexit Party are battling to be the party of the working class and the Tories under Boris are classless


    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/twa1h7mn6m/TimesResults_190730_VI_Trackers_w.pdf
    But not ageless.
  • Australia going to be out of sight by tea.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    Nigelb said:

    Naturally there is selection bias, but the views from abroad of both Johnson, and more alarmingly Britain itself, are incredibly negative:
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/04/how-does-the-rest-of-the-world-currently-view-the-uk-brexit-boris-johnson

    Enormous selection bias. Ask Davos man around the world what they think of a threat to the Davosian liberal order? You get the answer you'd expect.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,682
    edited August 2019
    kinabalu said:

    No Deal in 2019 is rated a 33% chance in the betting - a 1 in 3 chance.

    This is a fantastic opportunity for all punters with a view.

    If (like me) you feel No Deal this year is highly unlikely on every level, including politically, and therefore ought to be a 10% chance at best - LAY it like a demon.

    But if you go with the logic that seems to be taking us there with no obvious way out, then it ought to be well over 50% - so BACK it like a demon.

    It's that type of market - the best type.

    It's definitely mis-priced, but which way?


    Sorry to state the obvious, but if a mix of punters don’t know whether to bet up or bet down, isn’t the price about right?

    FWIW I would still bet on unlikely.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    Foxy said:

    IanB2 said:

    The just announced BXP candidate for Sunderland Cent. is apparently already a Conservative councillor in Chichester.

    Yesh, just the candidate to put the wind up the Southern establishment...
    Couldn't design a better profile for a Sunderland candidate. Southern, Tory. Perfect. For Labour.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Australia going to be out of sight by tea.

    I remember my posts from yesterday, pointing out the EXTREMELY generous odds against a draw, and against an Australian win.

    A draw is now 4/1 (down from 15/1) and an Australian win is now 7/5 (down from 7/1).
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Sandpit said:

    Chris said:

    Sandpit said:


    No, there is no mechanism for anyone to demonstrate their hypothetical government can survive a hypothetical confidence vote.

    Boris has three choices on losing a VONC.

    1) Try again and lose again, leading to 2 or 3:
    2) Recommend Jeremy Corbyn
    3) Recommend a different Conservative

    So it must be Corbyn. Boris can then win a general election called by JC and be back in Downing Street in time for Christmas, whereas if he recommends another Conservative, Boris will have to stand down as party leader.

    He can’t resign until it’s clear someone has a majority to replace him. See Gordon Brown after the 2010 election for an example. How this would work in practice is that parties representing more than half the MPs in Parliament make an announcement that they wish to form a government.
    But it's nowhere near that simple, because one can well believe that the Conservative Party and the DUP made "made an announcement" that they would support the current government, but individual MPs voted otherwise.
    They’re the incumbents, it’s up to someone wanting to form a government to show that they have the numbers. And Corbyn doesn’t have the numbers unless every single non-Tory and non-DUP MP votes for him.

    Unless of course a dozen Tories resign the whip and cross the floor.
    Yes but we will not know that for definite until after Corbyn has become prime minister and formed a government which can then be VNOC'd.

    That's the point. A VNOC is something that happens to a government, not to a putative prime minister.

    Boris will recommend Corbyn. But suppose for a minute he recommends Clarke or Starmer instead, to form a GONU. It is immediately apparent that whether that GONU can command cross-party support depends on who is in it, not just who leads it. If Clarke or Starmer tries to pack the important ministries with their own backbenchers, you can see it will be less stable than if the parties share them equally. It is the government that is important here, not just the PM.

    Boris will recommend Corbyn, indeed hoping that Corbyn will himself be compelled to call an election which Boris will hope to win.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 9,073
    Sandpit said:

    Chris said:

    If Boris loses a VONC by a couple of votes he has every right to try to persuade the house again to support his government. If he loses by many dozens that will be a more challenging scenario.

    The idea the HMQEII is sitting on a hair trigger waiting to send for Corbyn, irrespective of the advice of her PM is another unicorn...

    No one has suggested the Queen is "sitting on a hair trigger."

    But let's be sensible. This is all about Brexit. If Johnson loses a VONC it will probably be because a majority want to block a No Deal Brexit above all. In those circumstances prima facie it is quite reasonable that a majority would be willing to back an alternative government which would request an extension.

    The point is that if the House of Commons wants strongly enough that a request should be made for an extension, it can achieve that very easily:
    (1) VONC in the present government
    (2) Make it clear in some way that it would support an alternative government
    (3) VOC in the alternative governement.

    As easy as 1-2-3.
    You mean it’s as easy as starting from your desired outcome and working backwards, as opposed to starting from where we are now and looking at ways forward?

    Impartial view of all this, as posted above:
    https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/assume-that-johnson-is-set-on-no-deal-how-do-mps-stop-him-parliament-westminster-brexit
    If you're saying that procedure wouldn't work, you need to specify which stage of the three you think would fail, and why you think that.

    Remember - just in case you didn't understand what I wrote - I am talking about a situation in which "the House of Commons wants strongly enough that a request should be made for an extension." That is, I mean that a majority of the House wants to avoid No Deal more strongly than it wants anything else - including the furtherance of their own careers.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,682
    Byronic said:

    TOPPING said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    eek said:



    EU workers will hold the EU and their governments to blame no matter that you could not have any critism of the wonderful EU in your eyes

    I take it you don't work in Europe and therefore aren't seeing it from the European viewpoint (I do weekly and spend a lot of time chatting to people in airport and hotel lounges)..

    We are literally a laughing stock at the moment and most people cannot understand how Boris has become the new PM even when you explain it to them.

    When we leave without a deal everyone will know who to blame and trust me it won't be the EU nor local governments...
    Agree complete laughing stock , Europeans cannot believe what is happening and think UK has gone mad.
    God forbid any european nations ever have political crises, its amazing they've all collectively avoided such an event in all their histories, and certainly recent histories. No government collapses or multiple elections a year or over successive years or separatist regions or extremist parties getting huge votes or having head of state candidates, or economic chaos or...

    How lucky they all have been
    The point, borne out by discussions on visits to many European countries over the past couple of months, is that the other European countries always had their crises. And we never did; we were the island of sanity in Europe. No longer.

    For them it's dog bites man; for us it's man bites dog.
    In Britain we get.... Jacob Rees Mogg and son, walking around Brecon in identical tweet suits.

    ... we are still the island of sanity.

    Right.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,356

    HYUFD said:

    So the LDs, not the Tories, are the new party of the middle class, Labour and the Brexit Party are battling to be the party of the working class and the Tories under Boris are classless

    The Tories under Boris are rudderless and lacking in class.

    The first part of your post makes my own point that the strategic threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems.
    No it doesn't, the Tories lead the LDs with the middle class and the Tories lead Labour with the working class on that poll. Indeed with working class voters the LDs are 4th behind the Brexit Party.


    The threat the LDs pose is to Labour, not the Tories, as the poll shows the LDs have now even overtaken Labour amongst middle class voters as the Tories main rivals.

    Do not forget in the 19th century the main battle was between the Tories and the Liberals, it was only in the 20th century after universal suffrage the main battle was between the Tories and Labour as the working class got the vote
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    Tbf. The Brexit candidate went to Sunderland Uni., and apparently worked there, and in Hartlepool (attention Roger!).
    More on him here.
    https://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/politics/sunderland-brexit-party-candidate-viral-parikh-announced-while-he-is-still-a-conservative-councillor-in-west-sussex-488094
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756
    Byronic said:

    Australia going to be out of sight by tea.

    I remember my posts from yesterday, pointing out the EXTREMELY generous odds against a draw, and against an Australian win.

    A draw is now 4/1 (down from 15/1) and an Australian win is now 7/5 (down from 7/1).
    My powers have deserted me.

    Smith is Smith and Wade is doing far too well.

    I shall retire in a huff.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,356
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    wrt FTPA 14-days cooling-off period after VNOC.

    If this is a de facto purdah period, so HMG can do nothing "big", does that rule out revocation, extension and crashing out?

    Yes, but I don't think extension can be considered big as it simply continues the status quo. Why should a 3 or 6 month extension be controversial except to some Loonies.
    As further extension would mean the Brexit Party overtaking the Tories again, probably this time for good, with the Tories falling behind both Labour and Farage's Party. Boris has to deliver Brexit on October 31st or the Tory Party may not only lost power but cease to be the main party of the right in UK politics too.
    If we went back to the political alignment of the early 80s before the SDP breakaway, the Brexit Party would be Foot's Labour, not Maggie's Conservatives. Your reading of them as a potential replacement for the Tories is very wide of the mark. The real threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems.
    The likelihood is that both the Conservatives and TBP attract support from some of the groups that would have voted Labour in 1983, because support for right wing parties comes more from the working classes, and less from the middle classes, than in 1983.

    The Lib Dems are a real threat to the Conservatives along the M3 and M4 corridors, but not along the M1, M2, M5, or M6, IMHO.
    Indeed, YouGov now has the Tories on 32% with both ABC1s and C2DEs, so the Boris led Tories do equally as well with the middle classes and the working classes.


    The LDs though are on 23% with ABC1s but only 13% with C2DEs, while Labour are on 25% with C2DEs and 21% with ABC1s and the Brexit Party are on 18% with C2DEs but only 10% with ABC1s.


    So the LDs, not the Tories, are the new party of the middle class, Labour and the Brexit Party are battling to be the party of the working class and the Tories under Boris are classless


    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/twa1h7mn6m/TimesResults_190730_VI_Trackers_w.pdf
    But not ageless.
    The Tories have always been the party of older voters so no change there, indeed you have to go back to 1983 to find the last time the Tories won under 30s and 1997 to find the last time Labour won over 65s
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,682
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    wrt FTPA 14-days cooling-off period after VNOC.

    If this is a de facto purdah period, so HMG can do nothing "big", does that rule out revocation, extension and crashing out?

    Yes, but I don't think extension can be considered big as it simply continues the status quo. Why should a 3 or 6 month extension be controversial except to some Loonies.
    As further extension would mean the Brexit Party overtaking the Tories again, probably this time for good, with the Tories falling behind both Labour and Farage's Party. Boris has to deliver Brexit on October 31st or the Tory Party may not only lost power but cease to be the main party of the right in UK politics too.
    If we went back to the political alignment of the early 80s before the SDP breakaway, the Brexit Party would be Foot's Labour, not Maggie's Conservatives. Your reading of them as a potential replacement for the Tories is very wide of the mark. The real threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems.
    The likelihood is that both the Conservatives and TBP attract support from some of the groups that would have voted Labour in 1983, because support for right wing parties comes more from the working classes, and less from the middle classes, than in 1983.

    The Lib Dems are a real threat to the Conservatives along the M3 and M4 corridors, but not along the M1, M2, M5, or M6, IMHO.
    I have a theory that the Lib Dems could win any seat south of the Thames outside of London if they focused on it.
    I think the New Forest constituencies, Portsmouth North, Southampton Itchen, almost anything in Kent, Hastings & Rye, Spelthorne, almost anything in Dorset, Gosport, Fareham, the Bognors, Crawley, would be unwinnable for the Lib Dems.
    Casting the net far too wide. The LDs could extend their dominance in Portsmouth S to the N, given resources and time. Tunbridge Wells and Maidstone are just two possibilities in Kent. They’ve had recent MPs in Dorset. The Libs were once strong in Gosport, until the falling out with Chegwyn.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,682
    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    wrt FTPA 14-days cooling-off period after VNOC.

    If this is a de facto purdah period, so HMG can do nothing "big", does that rule out revocation, extension and crashing out?

    Yes, but I don't think extension can be considered big as it simply continues the status quo. Why should a 3 or 6 month extension be controversial except to some Loonies.
    As further extension would mean the Brexit Party overtaking the Tories again, probably this time for good, with the Tories falling behind both Labour and Farage's Party. Boris has to deliver Brexit on October 31st or the Tory Party may not only lost power but cease to be the main party of the right in UK politics too.
    If we went back to the political alignment of the early 80s before the SDP breakaway, the Brexit Party would be Foot's Labour, not Maggie's Conservatives. Your reading of them as a potential replacement for the Tories is very wide of the mark. The real threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems.
    The likelihood is that both the Conservatives and TBP attract support from some of the groups that would have voted Labour in 1983, because support for right wing parties comes more from the working classes, and less from the middle classes, than in 1983.

    The Lib Dems are a real threat to the Conservatives along the M3 and M4 corridors, but not along the M1, M2, M5, or M6, IMHO.
    Indeed, YouGov now has the Tories on 32% with both ABC1s and C2DEs, so the Boris led Tories do equally as well with the middle classes and the working classes.


    The LDs though are on 23% with ABC1s but only 13% with C2DEs, while Labour are on 25% with C2DEs and 21% with ABC1s and the Brexit Party are on 18% with C2DEs but only 10% with ABC1s.


    So the LDs, not the Tories, are the new party of the middle class, Labour and the Brexit Party are battling to be the party of the working class and the Tories under Boris are classless


    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/twa1h7mn6m/TimesResults_190730_VI_Trackers_w.pdf
    But not ageless.
    The Tories have always been the party of older voters so no change there, indeed you have to go back to 1983 to find the last time the Tories won under 30s and 1997 to find the last time Labour won over 65s
    Actually there has been a big change; it has got far worse.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,503
    Chris said:

    Sandpit said:

    Chris said:

    If Boris loses a VONC by a couple of votes he has every right to try to persuade the house again to support his government. If he loses by many dozens that will be a more challenging scenario.

    The idea the HMQEII is sitting on a hair trigger waiting to send for Corbyn, irrespective of the advice of her PM is another unicorn...

    No one has suggested the Queen is "sitting on a hair trigger."

    But let's be sensible. This is all about Brexit. If Johnson loses a VONC it will probably be because a majority want to block a No Deal Brexit above all. In those circumstances prima facie it is quite reasonable that a majority would be willing to back an alternative government which would request an extension.

    The point is that if the House of Commons wants strongly enough that a request should be made for an extension, it can achieve that very easily:
    (1) VONC in the present government
    (2) Make it clear in some way that it would support an alternative government
    (3) VOC in the alternative governement.

    As easy as 1-2-3.
    You mean it’s as easy as starting from your desired outcome and working backwards, as opposed to starting from where we are now and looking at ways forward?

    Impartial view of all this, as posted above:
    https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/assume-that-johnson-is-set-on-no-deal-how-do-mps-stop-him-parliament-westminster-brexit
    If you're saying that procedure wouldn't work, you need to specify which stage of the three you think would fail, and why you think that.

    Remember - just in case you didn't understand what I wrote - I am talking about a situation in which "the House of Commons wants strongly enough that a request should be made for an extension." That is, I mean that a majority of the House wants to avoid No Deal more strongly than it wants anything else - including the furtherance of their own careers.
    The House can ‘want’ anything it wants. The only questions available are whether or not they have confidence in the government, and whether or not they wish to dissolve themselves for an election.

    Your scenario of ‘an alternative govenment’ Is certainly not impossible, but it requires *hundreds* of Con and Lab MPs to resign the whip and be kicked out of their respective parties.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    ydoethur said:

    Byronic said:

    Australia going to be out of sight by tea.

    I remember my posts from yesterday, pointing out the EXTREMELY generous odds against a draw, and against an Australian win.

    A draw is now 4/1 (down from 15/1) and an Australian win is now 7/5 (down from 7/1).
    My powers have deserted me.

    Smith is Smith and Wade is doing far too well.

    I shall retire in a huff.
    Australia are now, rightly, firm favourites. The odds yesterday were insane.

    The worst of this is that Smith is going to do this all through the series. I don't see any reason why he shouldn't. He is too good. Maybe Archer could challenge him?

    As for this match, maybe our best hope is now a lot of rain and a draw.

  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    IanB2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    No Deal in 2019 is rated a 33% chance in the betting - a 1 in 3 chance.

    This is a fantastic opportunity for all punters with a view.

    If (like me) you feel No Deal this year is highly unlikely on every level, including politically, and therefore ought to be a 10% chance at best - LAY it like a demon.

    But if you go with the logic that seems to be taking us there with no obvious way out, then it ought to be well over 50% - so BACK it like a demon.

    It's that type of market - the best type.

    It's definitely mis-priced, but which way?


    Sorry to state the obvious, but if a mix of punters don’t know whether to bet up or bet down, isn’t the price about right?

    FWIW I would still bet on unlikely.
    That is an important philosophical problem. Are the chances 50/50 because we know absolutely nothing, or because we know everything and can be certain the sides are finely balanced? Or, as in most cases, somewhere in between? If the first, then anyone with new information is in a powerful position.

    But how does this help in real life? I am not a smartypants statistician but when faced with a horse whose odds I think are wildly wrong, before plunging in, I try to work out why. What does everyone else know that I don't, or what do I know that everyone else does not?

    Invariably it is something I missed but every now and again it is because the crowd has overvalued factor A but I know that A does not apply or will be overwhelmed by factor B.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Byronic said:

    ydoethur said:

    Byronic said:

    Australia going to be out of sight by tea.

    I remember my posts from yesterday, pointing out the EXTREMELY generous odds against a draw, and against an Australian win.

    A draw is now 4/1 (down from 15/1) and an Australian win is now 7/5 (down from 7/1).
    My powers have deserted me.

    Smith is Smith and Wade is doing far too well.

    I shall retire in a huff.
    Australia are now, rightly, firm favourites. The odds yesterday were insane.

    The worst of this is that Smith is going to do this all through the series. I don't see any reason why he shouldn't. He is too good. Maybe Archer could challenge him?

    As for this match, maybe our best hope is now a lot of rain and a draw.

    We batted for the whole of day two. I know the fourth innings is harder, but there's still a chance that we can bar out the draw without rain assistance.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    edited August 2019
    No Anderson, no Woakes really exposes Stokes as not a front line Test bowler. Wonderful fielder, useful, destructive batsman, but he really is an extra, bonus bowler.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756
    Byronic said:

    ydoethur said:

    Byronic said:

    Australia going to be out of sight by tea.

    I remember my posts from yesterday, pointing out the EXTREMELY generous odds against a draw, and against an Australian win.

    A draw is now 4/1 (down from 15/1) and an Australian win is now 7/5 (down from 7/1).
    My powers have deserted me.

    Smith is Smith and Wade is doing far too well.

    I shall retire in a huff.
    Australia are now, rightly, firm favourites. The odds yesterday were insane.

    The worst of this is that Smith is going to do this all through the series. I don't see any reason why he shouldn't. He is too good. Maybe Archer could challenge him?

    As for this match, maybe our best hope is now a lot of rain and a draw.

    If they bat all afternoon, we are in big trouble. The record of them having won here once in 30 years (2001) looks to be under very severe threat.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 73,473
    edited August 2019
    ydoethur said:

    Byronic said:

    Australia going to be out of sight by tea.

    I remember my posts from yesterday, pointing out the EXTREMELY generous odds against a draw, and against an Australian win.

    A draw is now 4/1 (down from 15/1) and an Australian win is now 7/5 (down from 7/1).
    My powers have deserted me.

    Smith is Smith and Wade is doing far too well.

    I shall retire in a huff.
    Very strange that a whole session and Woakes didn't bowl (especially given Anderson isn't either).
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    IanB2 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    wrt FTPA 14-days cooling-off period after VNOC.

    If this is a de facto purdah period, so HMG can do nothing "big", does that rule out revocation, extension and crashing out?

    Yes, but I don't think extension can be considered big as it simply continues the status quo. Why should a 3 or 6 month extension be controversial except to some Loonies.
    As further extension would mean the Brexit Party overtaking the Tories again, probably this time for good, with the Tories falling behind both Labour and Farage's Party. Boris has to deliver Brexit on October 31st or the Tory Party may not only lost power but cease to be the main party of the right in UK politics too.
    If we went back to the political alignment of the early 80s before the SDP breakaway, the Brexit Party would be Foot's Labour, not Maggie's Conservatives. Your reading of them as a potential replacement for the Tories is very wide of the mark. The real threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems.
    The likelihood is that both the Conservatives and TBP attract support from some of the groups that would have voted Labour in 1983, because support for right wing parties comes more from the working classes, and less from the middle classes, than in 1983.

    The Lib Dems are a real threat to the Conservatives along the M3 and M4 corridors, but not along the M1, M2, M5, or M6, IMHO.
    I have a theory that the Lib Dems could win any seat south of the Thames outside of London if they focused on it.
    I think the New Forest constituencies, Portsmouth North, Southampton Itchen, almost anything in Kent, Hastings & Rye, Spelthorne, almost anything in Dorset, Gosport, Fareham, the Bognors, Crawley, would be unwinnable for the Lib Dems.
    Casting the net far too wide. The LDs could extend their dominance in Portsmouth S to the N, given resources and time. Tunbridge Wells and Maidstone are just two possibilities in Kent. They’ve had recent MPs in Dorset. The Libs were once strong in Gosport, until the falling out with Chegwyn.
    Both Eastbourne and Lewes are pretty much Tory seats that the Lib Dems have established themselves in by dint of hard work. It's really just a case of getting enough activists engaged. Labour can do much the same but is more limited in that their brand repels as many as it attracts in the south.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    edited August 2019

    IanB2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    No Deal in 2019 is rated a 33% chance in the betting - a 1 in 3 chance.

    This is a fantastic opportunity for all punters with a view.

    If (like me) you feel No Deal this year is highly unlikely on every level, including politically, and therefore ought to be a 10% chance at best - LAY it like a demon.

    But if you go with the logic that seems to be taking us there with no obvious way out, then it ought to be well over 50% - so BACK it like a demon.

    It's that type of market - the best type.

    It's definitely mis-priced, but which way?


    Sorry to state the obvious, but if a mix of punters don’t know whether to bet up or bet down, isn’t the price about right?

    FWIW I would still bet on unlikely.
    That is an important philosophical problem. Are the chances 50/50 because we know absolutely nothing, or because we know everything and can be certain the sides are finely balanced? Or, as in most cases, somewhere in between? If the first, then anyone with new information is in a powerful position.

    But how does this help in real life? I am not a smartypants statistician but when faced with a horse whose odds I think are wildly wrong, before plunging in, I try to work out why. What does everyone else know that I don't, or what do I know that everyone else does not?

    Invariably it is something I missed but every now and again it is because the crowd has overvalued factor A but I know that A does not apply or will be overwhelmed by factor B.
    The odds yesterday on the cricket are a great example of this (to tie the two threads together). I kept looking at the odds for a draw and an Aussie win and then frowning, nonplussed. To me they were stupidly generous. The weather forecast was there for all to see; suggesting that a draw was much likelier than 15/1 (!!)

    Likewise, with Anderson crocked and Smith in imperious, best-batsman-in-the-world form, Australia had a much better chance than 7/1 and then 5/1.

    It seems that I was right and the odds were wrong, there WEREN'T people out there with better information than me. So maybe you should bet what you feel. You are quite possibly right.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 73,473
    edited August 2019
    Byronic said:

    ydoethur said:

    Byronic said:

    Australia going to be out of sight by tea.

    I remember my posts from yesterday, pointing out the EXTREMELY generous odds against a draw, and against an Australian win.

    A draw is now 4/1 (down from 15/1) and an Australian win is now 7/5 (down from 7/1).
    My powers have deserted me.

    Smith is Smith and Wade is doing far too well.

    I shall retire in a huff.
    Australia are now, rightly, firm favourites. The odds yesterday were insane.

    The worst of this is that Smith is going to do this all through the series. I don't see any reason why he shouldn't. He is too good. Maybe Archer could challenge him?

    As for this match, maybe our best hope is now a lot of rain and a draw.

    One thing England can't do is think just having 4 right arm medium fast seam bowlers is going to challenge Smith. It just isn't going to get him out.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    IanB2 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    wrt FTPA 14-days cooling-off period after VNOC.

    If this is a de facto purdah period, so HMG can do nothing "big", does that rule out revocation, extension and crashing out?

    Yes, but I don't think extension can be considered big as it simply continues the status quo. Why should a 3 or 6 month extension be controversial except to some Loonies.
    As further extension would mean the Brexit Party overtaking the Tories again, probably this time for good, with the Tories falling behind both Labour and Farage's Party. Boris has to deliver Brexit on October 31st or the Tory Party may not only lost power but cease to be the main party of the right in UK politics too.
    If we went back to the political alignment of the early 80s before the SDP breakaway, the Brexit Party would be Foot's Labour, not Maggie's Conservatives. Your reading of them as a potential replacement for the Tories is very wide of the mark. The real threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems.
    The likelihood is that both the Conservatives and TBP attract support from some of the groups that would have voted Labour in 1983, because support for right wing parties comes more from the working classes, and less from the middle classes, than in 1983.

    The Lib Dems are a real threat to the Conservatives along the M3 and M4 corridors, but not along the M1, M2, M5, or M6, IMHO.
    I have a theory that the Lib Dems could win any seat south of the Thames outside of London if they focused on it.
    I think the New Forest constituencies, Portsmouth North, Southampton Itchen, almost anything in Kent, Hastings & Rye, Spelthorne, almost anything in Dorset, Gosport, Fareham, the Bognors, Crawley, would be unwinnable for the Lib Dems.
    Casting the net far too wide. The LDs could extend their dominance in Portsmouth S to the N, given resources and time. Tunbridge Wells and Maidstone are just two possibilities in Kent. They’ve had recent MPs in Dorset. The Libs were once strong in Gosport, until the falling out with Chegwyn.
    Labour will now be seen as the anti- Tory alternative in Portsmouth South and will enjoy a first term incumbency bonus. LibDem hopes there effectively died with the departure of Mike Hancock.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,212
    Byronic said:

    TOPPING said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    eek said:



    EU workers will hold the EU and their governments to blame no matter that you could not have any critism of the wonderful EU in your eyes

    I take it you don't work in Europe and therefore aren't seeing it from the European viewpoint (I do weekly and spend a lot of time chatting to people in airport and hotel lounges)..

    We are literally a laughing stock at the moment and most people cannot understand how Boris has become the new PM even when you explain it to them.

    When we leave without a deal everyone will know who to blame and trust me it won't be the EU nor local governments...
    Agree complete laughing stock , Europeans cannot believe what is happening and think UK has gone mad.
    God forbid any european nations ever have political crises, its amazing they've all collectively avoided such an event in all their histories, and certainly recent histories. No government collapses or multiple elections a year or over successive years or separatist regions or extremist parties getting huge votes or having head of state candidates, or economic chaos or...

    How lucky they all have been
    The point, borne out by discussions on visits to many European countries over the past couple of months, is that the other European countries always had their crises. And we never did; we were the island of sanity in Europe. No longer.

    For them it's dog bites man; for us it's man bites dog.
    And yet, when they have their crises, you get war, Fascism, riots, murder in the streets, Hitler, Franco, les soixante huitards, communism, Mussolini, and the Holocaust. In Britain we get.... Jacob Rees Mogg and son, walking around Brecon in identical tweet suits.
    There’s a typo in your penultimate word.

    I think you meant “identical twat suits”. (Though poor young JRM Jr has had twatness thrust upon him.)
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Byronic said:

    TOPPING said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    eek said:



    EU workers will hold the EU and their governments to blame no matter that you could not have any critism of the wonderful EU in your eyes

    I take it you don't work in Europe and therefore aren't seeing it from the European viewpoint (I do weekly and spend a lot of time chatting to people in airport and hotel lounges)..

    We are literally a laughing stock at the moment and most people cannot understand how Boris has become the new PM even when you explain it to them.

    When we leave without a deal everyone will know who to blame and trust me it won't be the EU nor local governments...
    Agree complete laughing stock , Europeans cannot believe what is happening and think UK has gone mad.
    God f

    How lucky they all have been
    The point, borne out by discussions on visits to many European countries over the past couple of months, is that the other European countries always had their crises. And we never did; we were the island of sanity in Europe. No longer.

    For them it's dog bites man; for us it's man bites dog.
    And yet, when they have their crises, you get war, Fascism, riots, murder in the streets, Hitler, Franco, les soixante huitards, communism, Mussolini, and the Holocaust. In Britain we get.... Jacob Rees Mogg and son, walking around Brecon in identical tweet suits.
    There’s a typo in your penultimate word.

    I think you meant “identical twat suits”. (Though poor young JRM Jr has had twatness thrust upon him.)
    "Tweet suits" is quite a nice Freudian typo
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,316
    Byronic said:

    Nigelb said:

    Naturally there is selection bias, but the views from abroad of both Johnson, and more alarmingly Britain itself, are incredibly negative:
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/04/how-does-the-rest-of-the-world-currently-view-the-uk-brexit-boris-johnson

    Enormous selection bias. Ask Davos man around the world what they think of a threat to the Davosian liberal order? You get the answer you'd expect.
    I rather expected it to be dismissed in that manner.
    But really, if you look at the change in attitudes, particularly outside of Europe and the US, it’s little to do with ‘Davosian liberal order’ and more that they just don’t recognise or respect us any more.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,356
    edited August 2019
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    wrt FTPA 14-days cooling-off period after VNOC.

    If this is a de facto purdah period, so HMG can do nothing "big", does that rule out revocation, extension and crashing out?

    Yes, but I don't think extension can be considered big as it simply continues the status quo. Why should a 3 or 6 month extension be controversial except to some Loonies.
    As further extension would to be the main party of the right in UK politics too.
    If we went back to the political alignment of the early 80s before the SDP breakaway, the Brexit Party would be Foot's Labour, not Maggie's Conservatives. Your reading of them as a potential replacement for the Tories is very wide of the mark. The real threat to the Tories comes from the Lib Dems.
    The likelihood is that both the Conservatives and TBP attract support from some of the groups that would have voted Labour in 1983, because support for right wing parties comes more from the working classes, and less from the middle classes, than in 1983.

    The Lib Dems are a real threat to the Conservatives along the M3 and M4 corridors, but not along the M1, M2, M5, or M6, IMHO.
    Indeed, YouGov now has the Tories on 32% with both ABC1s and C2DEs, so the Boris led Tories do equally as well with the middle classes and the working classes.


    The LDs though are on 23% with ABC1s but only 13% with C2DEs, while Labour are on 25% with C2DEs and 21% with ABC1s and the Brexit Party are on 18% with C2DEs but only 10% with ABC1s.


    So the LDs, not the Tories, are the new party of the middle class, Labour and the Brexit Party are battling to be the party of the working class and the Tories under Boris are classless


    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/twa1h7mn6m/TimesResults_190730_VI_Trackers_w.pdf
    But not ageless.
    The Tories have always been the party ver 65s
    Actually there has been a big change; it has got far worse.
    In 1997 Labour led the Tories 49% to 27% ie by 22% with 18 to 24s and Labour even led the Tories 41% to 36% with over 65s ie 5%.

    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-1997

    On the latest YouGov Labour lead the Tories by a smaller 37% to 18% margin ie 19% with 18 to 24s and the Tories lead Labour by a huge 32% margin with over 65s 44% to 12% having trailed Labour with over 65s in 1997


    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/twa1h7mn6m/TimesResults_190730_VI_Trackers_w.pdf
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,316
    Byronic said:

    IanB2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    No Deal in 2019 is rated a 33% chance in the betting - a 1 in 3 chance.

    This is a fantastic opportunity for all punters with a view.

    If (like me) you feel No Deal this year is highly unlikely on every level, including politically, and therefore ought to be a 10% chance at best - LAY it like a demon.

    But if you go with the logic that seems to be taking us there with no obvious way out, then it ought to be well over 50% - so BACK it like a demon.

    It's that type of market - the best type.

    It's definitely mis-priced, but which way?


    Sorry to state the obvious, but if a mix of punters don’t know whether to bet up or bet down, isn’t the price about right?

    FWIW I would still bet on unlikely.
    That is an important philosophical problem. Are the chances 50/50 because we know absolutely nothing, or because we know everything and can be certain the sides are finely balanced? Or, as in most cases, somewhere in between? If the first, then anyone with new information is in a powerful position.

    But how does this help in real life? I am not a smartypants statistician but when faced with a horse whose odds I think are wildly wrong, before plunging in, I try to work out why. What does everyone else know that I don't, or what do I know that everyone else does not?

    Invariably it is something I missed but every now and again it is because the crowd has overvalued factor A but I know that A does not apply or will be overwhelmed by factor B.
    The odds yesterday on the cricket are a great example of this (to tie the two threads together). I kept looking at the odds for a draw and an Aussie win and then frowning, nonplussed. To me they were stupidly generous. The weather forecast was there for all to see; suggesting that a draw was much likelier than 15/1 (!!)

    Likewise, with Anderson crocked and Smith in imperious, best-batsman-in-the-world form, Australia had a much better chance than 7/1 and then 5/1.

    It seems that I was right and the odds were wrong, there WEREN'T people out there with better information than me. So maybe you should bet what you feel. You are quite possibly right.
    It was an excellent tip, irrespective off your feelings. Had I not been busy yesterday, I’d probably have followed it.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    edited August 2019

    Sandpit said:

    Chris said:

    Sandpit said:


    No, there is no mechanism for anyone to demonstrate their hypothetical government can survive a hypothetical confidence vote.

    But it's nowhere near that simple, because one can well believe that the Conservative Party and the DUP made "made an announcement" that they would support the current government, but individual MPs voted otherwise.
    They’re the incumbents, it’s up to someone wanting to form a government to show that they have the numbers. And Corbyn doesn’t have the numbers unless every single non-Tory and non-DUP MP votes for him.

    Unless of course a dozen Tories resign the whip and cross the floor.
    Yes but we will not know that for definite until after Corbyn has become prime minister and formed a government which can then be VNOC'd.

    That's the point. A VNOC is something that happens to a government, not to a putative prime minister.

    Boris will recommend Corbyn. But suppose for a minute he recommends Clarke or Starmer instead, to form a GONU. It is immediately apparent that whether that GONU can command cross-party support depends on who is in it, not just who leads it. If Clarke or Starmer tries to pack the important ministries with their own backbenchers, you can see it will be less stable than if the parties share them equally. It is the government that is important here, not just the PM.

    Boris will recommend Corbyn, indeed hoping that Corbyn will himself be compelled to call an election which Boris will hope to win.
    As a British Jew, I would be completely disgusted if parliament supports Jeremy Corbym as Prime Minister. This is a man who invited to parlaiment Hamas and Hezbollah, two groups who have long wanted to push Jews into the sea. This is a man who happily attended a remembrance service for the killers of eleven innocent Jewish athletes. This is a man who has allowed his office to time and time again interfere in Labour party investigations to keep anti-Semites in the party.

    If another government is to be formed this side of an election it has to be Grieve, or Watson, or Starmer. Putting in Corbyn would be announcing a loud message that MPs care more about their preferred European policy ahead of solidarity with their Jewish fellow citizens. It would be the one thing that would make me feel no longer welcome in my own country.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,682
    If a clear majority of our elected representatives, with the sympathies of the Speaker and backed by a majority of the public and an even larger majority of the Lords, can’t find some way of stopping something hugely damaging happening given three months to do it, then either there is something wrong with the system and/or they are incompetents of the first order.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,316

    Byronic said:

    ydoethur said:

    Byronic said:

    Australia going to be out of sight by tea.

    I remember my posts from yesterday, pointing out the EXTREMELY generous odds against a draw, and against an Australian win.

    A draw is now 4/1 (down from 15/1) and an Australian win is now 7/5 (down from 7/1).
    My powers have deserted me.

    Smith is Smith and Wade is doing far too well.

    I shall retire in a huff.
    Australia are now, rightly, firm favourites. The odds yesterday were insane.

    The worst of this is that Smith is going to do this all through the series. I don't see any reason why he shouldn't. He is too good. Maybe Archer could challenge him?

    As for this match, maybe our best hope is now a lot of rain and a draw.

    One thing England can't do is think just having 4 right arm medium fast seam bowlers is going to challenge Smith. It just isn't going to get him out.
    That wasn’t the plan - but injuries to Wood and Archer left the pace cupboard a bit bare.
    Picking Anderson was just stupid, as his fitness was a sheer gamble.
    How much more useful might (eg) Leach have been than a non batsman who can’t bowl ?
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    Nigelb said:

    Byronic said:

    Nigelb said:

    Naturally there is selection bias, but the views from abroad of both Johnson, and more alarmingly Britain itself, are incredibly negative:
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/04/how-does-the-rest-of-the-world-currently-view-the-uk-brexit-boris-johnson

    Enormous selection bias. Ask Davos man around the world what they think of a threat to the Davosian liberal order? You get the answer you'd expect.
    I rather expected it to be dismissed in that manner.
    But really, if you look at the change in attitudes, particularly outside of Europe and the US, it’s little to do with ‘Davosian liberal order’ and more that they just don’t recognise or respect us any more.
    I've no doubt that Britain's image has taken a knock. I hear it on my travels. However, it is more passing bemusement and confusion, rather than the ridiculous contempt and anger seen here: and that IS because of the people the Guardian have selected. Loads of left liberal journalists and pundits, editors of Vox, FFS, and the Asian elite who love London. Colour me unsurprised by their sneering.

    Imagine if you'd travelled the royal courts of Asia and Europe in 1649, and asked them what they thought of the execution of Charles 1, and its challenge to the global order. The reaction of global aristocrats and courtiers would have been identical to the reaction of Vox, Die Zeit and Le Monde to Brexit.


  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 73,473
    edited August 2019
    Nigelb said:

    Byronic said:

    ydoethur said:

    Byronic said:

    Australia going to be out of sight by tea.

    I remember my posts from yesterday, pointing out the EXTREMELY generous odds against a draw, and against an Australian win.

    A draw is now 4/1 (down from 15/1) and an Australian win is now 7/5 (down from 7/1).
    My powers have deserted me.

    Smith is Smith and Wade is doing far too well.

    I shall retire in a huff.
    Australia are now, rightly, firm favourites. The odds yesterday were insane.

    The worst of this is that Smith is going to do this all through the series. I don't see any reason why he shouldn't. He is too good. Maybe Archer could challenge him?

    As for this match, maybe our best hope is now a lot of rain and a draw.

    One thing England can't do is think just having 4 right arm medium fast seam bowlers is going to challenge Smith. It just isn't going to get him out.
    That wasn’t the plan - but injuries to Wood and Archer left the pace cupboard a bit bare.
    Picking Anderson was just stupid, as his fitness was a sheer gamble.
    How much more useful might (eg) Leach have been than a non batsman who can’t bowl ?
    I think England had to go with at least a pace option e.g. Stone or a specialist spinner. It is a shame we don't have any left arm bowlers*, as that is a huge advantage to be able to mix things up.

    * What Tymal Mills could have been if his back wasn't screwed. 95mph left armer is useful in any conditions.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756
    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    TOPPING said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    eek said:



    EU workers will hold the EU and their governments to blame no matter that you could not have any critism of the wonderful EU in your eyes

    I take it you don't work in Europe and therefore aren't seeing it from the European viewpoint (I do weekly and spend a lot of time chatting to people in airport and hotel lounges)..

    We are literally a laughing stock at the moment and most people cannot understand how Boris has become the new PM even when you explain it to them.

    When we leave without a deal everyone will know who to blame and trust me it won't be the EU nor local governments...
    Agree complete laughing stock , Europeans cannot believe what is happening and think UK has gone mad.
    God f

    How lucky they all have been
    The point, borne out by discussions on visits to many European countries over the past couple of months, is that the other European countries always had their crises. And we never did; we were the island of sanity in Europe. No longer.

    For them it's dog bites man; for us it's man bites dog.
    And yet, when they have their crises, you get war, Fascism, riots, murder in the streets, Hitler, Franco, les soixante huitards, communism, Mussolini, and the Holocaust. In Britain we get.... Jacob Rees Mogg and son, walking around Brecon in identical tweet suits.
    There’s a typo in your penultimate word.

    I think you meant “identical twat suits”. (Though poor young JRM Jr has had twatness thrust upon him.)
    "Tweet suits" is quite a nice Freudian typo
    That idea is for the birds.

    But perhaps the Canary will print it.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,316
    Gabs2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Chris said:

    Sandpit said:


    No, there is no mechanism for anyone to demonstrate their hypothetical government can survive a hypothetical confidence vote.

    But it's nowhere near that simple, because one can well believe that the Conservative Party and the DUP made "made an announcement" that they would support the current government, but individual MPs voted otherwise.
    They’re the incumbents, it’s up to someone wanting to form a government to show that they have the numbers. And Corbyn doesn’t have the numbers unless every single non-Tory and non-DUP MP votes for him.

    Unless of course a dozen Tories resign the whip and cross the floor.
    Yes but we will not know that for definite until after Corbyn has become prime minister and formed a government which can then be VNOC'd.

    That's the point. A VNOC is something that happens to a government, not to a putative prime minister.

    Boris will recommend Corbyn. But suppose for a minute he recommends Clarke or Starmer instead, to form a GONU. It is immediately apparent that whether that GONU can command cross-party support depends on who is in it, not just who leads it. If Clarke or Starmer tries to pack the important ministries with their own backbenchers, you can see it will be less stable than if the parties share them equally. It is the government that is important here, not just the PM.

    Boris will recommend Corbyn, indeed hoping that Corbyn will himself be compelled to call an election which Boris will hope to win.
    As a British Jew, I would be completely disgusted if parliament supports Jeremy Corbym as Prime Minister. This is a man who invited to parlaiment Hamas and Hezbollah, two groups who have long wanted to push Jews into the sea. This is a man who happily attended a remembrance service for the killers of eleven innocent Jewish athletes. This is a man who has allowed his office to time and time again interfere in Labour party investigations to keep anti-Semites in the party.

    If another government is to be formed this side of an election it has to be Grieve, or Watson, or Starmer. Putting in Corbyn would be announcing a loud message that MPs care more about their preferred European policy ahead of solidarity with their Jewish fellow citizens. It would be the one thing that would make me feel no longer welcome in my own country.
    I think it would have to be Labour, so Starmer.
    Corbyn, I don’t think could get a majority anyway.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    IanB2 said:

    If a clear majority of our elected representatives, with the sympathies of the Speaker and backed by a majority of the public and an even larger majority of the Lords, can’t find some way of stopping something hugely damaging happening given three months to do it, then either there is something wrong with the system and/or they are incompetents of the first order.

    It is fairly clear, to Leavers and Remainers alike, that something is wrong with the system. Whatever the result of Brexit, our constitution needs retooling.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756
    Gabs2 said:

    As a British Jew, I would be completely disgusted if parliament supports Jeremy Corbym as Prime Minister. This is a man who invited to parlaiment Hamas and Hezbollah, two groups who have long wanted to push Jews into the sea. This is a man who happily attended a remembrance service for the killers of eleven innocent Jewish athletes. This is a man who has allowed his office to time and time again interfere in Labour party investigations to keep anti-Semites in the party.

    If another government is to be formed this side of an election it has to be Grieve, or Watson, or Starmer. Putting in Corbyn would be announcing a loud message that MPs care more about their preferred European policy ahead of solidarity with their Jewish fellow citizens. It would be the one thing that would make me feel no longer welcome in my own country.

    Welcome.

    I have considerable sympathy with your views.

    The problem is Corbyn is currently the leader of one of only two groups in Parliament with more than 50 MPs in it. It is therefore difficult to see how he can be overlooked if the Conservatives cannot form or sustain a government.

    The key thing is to remove him from that post so he can no longer be a threat. But that is proving extremely tough, even though most of the more intelligent Labour members, even some highly tribal ones, know he's a disaster.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,356
    IanB2 said:

    If a clear majority of our elected representatives, with the sympathies of the Speaker and backed by a majority of the public and an even larger majority of the Lords, can’t find some way of stopping something hugely damaging happening given three months to do it, then either there is something wrong with the system and/or they are incompetents of the first order.

    52% of voters voted for Brexit and the latest Opinium has 45% of voters wanting to go ahead with Brexit even with No Deal, only 28% wanting to cancel Brexit and Remain in the EU and 13% wanting to Delay Brexit until a Deal can be negotiated that can pass the Commons.

    https://www.opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Opinium-Political-Report-24th-July-2019.pdf

    ORB today also has 46% of voters backing Leaving the EU with No Deal if no new Deal can be renegotiated by October 31st.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/03/boris-johnsons-brexit-stance-winning-back-public-confidence/

    What is wrong with the system is the failure of Parliamentarians to respect the Leave vote by either voting for the Withdrawal Agreement or No Deal
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    Gabs2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Chris said:

    Sandpit said:


    No, there is no mechanism for anyone to demonstrate their hypothetical government can survive a hypothetical confidence vote.

    But it's nowhere near that simple, because one can well believe that the Conservative Party and the DUP made "made an announcement" that they would support the current government, but individual MPs voted otherwise.
    They’re the incumbents, it’s up to someone wanting to form a government to show that they have the numbers. And Corbyn doesn’t have the numbers unless every single non-Tory and non-DUP MP votes for him.

    Unless of course a dozen Tories resign the whip and cross the floor.
    Yes but we will not know that for definite until after Corbyn has become prime minister and formed a government which can then be VNOC'd.

    That's the point. A VNOC is something that happens to a government, not to a putative prime minister.

    Boris will recommend Corbyn, indeed hoping that Corbyn will himself be compelled to call an election which Boris will hope to win.
    As a British Jew, I would be completely disgusted if parliament supports Jeremy Corbym as Prime Minister. This is a man who invited to parlaiment Hamas and Hezbollah, two groups who have long wanted to push Jews into the sea. This is a man who happily attended a remembrance service for the killers of eleven innocent Jewish athletes. This is a man who has allowed his office to time and time again interfere in Labour party investigations to keep anti-Semites in the party.

    If another government is to be formed this side of an election it has to be Grieve, or Watson, or Starmer. Putting in Corbyn would be announcing a loud message that MPs care more about their preferred European policy ahead of solidarity with their Jewish fellow citizens. It would be the one thing that would make me feel no longer welcome in my own country.
    This occurred to me last night. Corbyn's opinions on Jews, Israel, terror, foreign policy in general, are just too unsavoury and repulsive for him to command confidence, even in these urgent times. Too many MPs would feel unable to vote for him, even if they are desperate to stop No Deal Brexit.

    So Corbyn is now an obstacle in that way, too. He would prevent a VONC working.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,316
    ydoethur said:

    Gabs2 said:

    As a British Jew, I would be completely disgusted if parliament supports Jeremy Corbym as Prime Minister. This is a man who invited to parlaiment Hamas and Hezbollah, two groups who have long wanted to push Jews into the sea. This is a man who happily attended a remembrance service for the killers of eleven innocent Jewish athletes. This is a man who has allowed his office to time and time again interfere in Labour party investigations to keep anti-Semites in the party.

    If another government is to be formed this side of an election it has to be Grieve, or Watson, or Starmer. Putting in Corbyn would be announcing a loud message that MPs care more about their preferred European policy ahead of solidarity with their Jewish fellow citizens. It would be the one thing that would make me feel no longer welcome in my own country.

    Welcome.

    I have considerable sympathy with your views.

    The problem is Corbyn is currently the leader of one of only two groups in Parliament with more than 50 MPs in it. It is therefore difficult to see how he can be overlooked if the Conservatives cannot form or sustain a government.

    The key thing is to remove him from that post so he can no longer be a threat. But that is proving extremely tough, even though most of the more intelligent Labour members, even some highly tribal ones, know he's a disaster.
    Corbyn can’t be overlooked, but the chance of his actually commanding a majority, even for the limited purpose of preventing No Deal, is I think nil.
    For a start, would anyone apart from his acolytes trust him ?
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    ydoethur said:

    Gabs2 said:

    As a British Jew, I would be completely disgusted if parliament supports Jeremy Corbym as Prime Minister. This is a man who invited to parlaiment Hamas and Hezbollah, two groups who have long wanted to push Jews into the sea. This is a man who happily attended a remembrance service for the killers of eleven innocent Jewish athletes. This is a man who has allowed his office to time and time again interfere in Labour party investigations to keep anti-Semites in the party.

    If another government is to be formed this side of an election it has to be Grieve, or Watson, or Starmer. Putting in Corbyn would be announcing a loud message that MPs care more about their preferred European policy ahead of solidarity with their Jewish fellow citizens. It would be the one thing that would make me feel no longer welcome in my own country.

    Welcome.

    I have considerable sympathy with your views.

    The problem is Corbyn is currently the leader of one of only two groups in Parliament with more than 50 MPs in it. It is therefore difficult to see how he can be overlooked if the Conservatives cannot form or sustain a government.

    The key thing is to remove him from that post so he can no longer be a threat. But that is proving extremely tough, even though most of the more intelligent Labour members, even some highly tribal ones, know he's a disaster.
    After a VONC, parliament has several ways it can make clear Corbyn has no majority in the House, that he does not represent who we are as the British people, and that conscientious decent MPs will stand with us Jews. Whether they do or not will depend on how craven they are about selling us out for their own political ends.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 20,506
    Byronic said:

    Gabs2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Chris said:

    Sandpit said:


    No, there is no mechanism for anyone to demonstrate their hypothetical government can survive a hypothetical confidence vote.

    But it's nowhere near that simple, because one can well believe that the Conservative Party and the DUP made "made an announcement" that they would support the current government, but individual MPs voted otherwise.
    They’re the incumbents, it’s up to someone wanting to form a government to show that they have the numbers. And Corbyn doesn’t have the numbers unless every single non-Tory and non-DUP MP votes for him.

    Unless of course a dozen Tories resign the whip and cross the floor.
    Yes but we will not know that for definite until after Corbyn has become prime minister and formed a government which can then be VNOC'd.

    That's the point. A VNOC is something that happens to a government, not to a putative prime minister.

    Boris will recommend Corbyn, indeed hoping that Corbyn will himself be compelled to call an election which Boris will hope to win.
    As a British Jew, I would be completely disgusted if parliament supports Jeremy Corbym as Prime Minister. This is a man who invited to parlaiment Hamas and Hezbollah, two groups who have long wanted to push Jews into the sea. This is a man who happily attended a remembrance service for the killers of eleven innocent Jewish athletes. This is a man who has allowed his office to time and time again interfere in Labour party investigations to keep anti-Semites in the party.

    If another government is to be formed this side of an election it has to be Grieve, or Watson, or Starmer. Putting in Corbyn would be announcing a loud message that MPs care more about their preferred European policy ahead of solidarity with their Jewish fellow citizens. It would be the one thing that would make me feel no longer welcome in my own country.
    This occurred to me last night. Corbyn's opinions on Jews, Israel, terror, foreign policy in general, are just too unsavoury and repulsive for him to command confidence, even in these urgent times. Too many MPs would feel unable to vote for him, even if they are desperate to stop No Deal Brexit.

    So Corbyn is now an obstacle in that way, too. He would prevent a VONC working.
    I think we should be careful in claiming that Corbyn holds antisemitic views.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 28,188
    edited August 2019
    IanB2 said:

    If a clear majority of our elected representatives, with the sympathies of the Speaker and backed by a majority of the public and an even larger majority of the Lords, can’t find some way of stopping something hugely damaging happening given three months to do it, then either there is something wrong with the system and/or they are incompetents of the first order.

    I think that is entirely the wrong way of looking at it.

    The MPs have had multiple chances to avoid this outcome. They could have voted for the Withdrawal Agreement, they could have No Confidenced the Government at any time, they could have agreed an alternative way forward. The trouble is that for most MPs they are more concerned with making sure they keep their seats than with preventing No Deal Brexit.

    Tory Remain MPs wouldn't vote down their own government because they knew it would be the end of their political careers. Labour MPs wouldn't back a Remain option because they fear their own Labour supporting constituents, some of whom would have then voted against them at a subsequent GE. Plus they were more interested in playing internal politics then in dealing with the national issues at hand.

    And now that they are being told it might be too late to stop No Deal people are blaming the system instead of blaming the MPs who have had years to get this sorted out but have put their own personal survival ahead of resolving this issue in a reasonable way.

    We don't need a better system. We need better MPs.

    Edit: Which is I think a long winded way of me saying your second suggestion is in fact correct. They are self serving incompetents.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,316
    Sounds as though the BBC has read Alastair’s article.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49225906
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Byronic said:

    Gabs2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Chris said:

    Sandpit said:


    No, there is no mechanism for anyone to demonstrate their hypothetical government can survive a hypothetical confidence vote.

    But it's nowhere near that simple, because one can well believe that the Conservative Party and the DUP made "made an announcement" that they would support the current government, but individual MPs voted otherwise.
    They’re the incumbents, it’s up to someone wanting to form a government to show that they have the numbers. And Corbyn doesn’t have the numbers unless every single non-Tory and non-DUP MP votes for him.

    Unless of course a dozen Tories resign the whip and cross the floor.
    Yes but we will not know that for definite until after Corbyn has become prime minister and formed a government which can then be VNOC'd.

    That's the point. A VNOC is something that happens to a government, not to a putative prime minister.

    Boris will recommend Corbyn, indeed hoping that Corbyn will himself be compelled to call an election which Boris will hope to win.
    As a British Jew, I would be completely disgusted if parliament supports Jeremy Corbym as Prime Minister. This is a man who invited to parlaiment Hamas and Hezbollah, two groups who have long wanted to push Jews into the sea. This is a man who happily attended a remembrance service for the killers of eleven innocent Jewish athletes. This is a man who has allowed his office to time and time again interfere in Labour party investigations to keep anti-Semites in the party.

    If another government is to be formed this side of an election it has to be Grieve, or Watson, or Starmer. Putting in Corbyn would be announcing a loud message that MPs care more about their preferred European policy ahead of solidarity with their Jewish fellow citizens. It would be the one thing that would make me feel no longer welcome in my own country.
    This occurred to me last night. Corbyn's opinions on Jews, Israel, terror, foreign policy in general, are just too unsavoury and repulsive for him to command confidence, even in these urgent times. Too many MPs would feel unable to vote for him, even if they are desperate to stop No Deal Brexit.

    So Corbyn is now an obstacle in that way, too. He would prevent a VONC working.
    I think we should be careful in claiming that Corbyn holds antisemitic views.
    I don't. He does.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,825
    IanB2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    No Deal in 2019 is rated a 33% chance in the betting - a 1 in 3 chance.

    This is a fantastic opportunity for all punters with a view.

    If (like me) you feel No Deal this year is highly unlikely on every level, including politically, and therefore ought to be a 10% chance at best - LAY it like a demon.

    But if you go with the logic that seems to be taking us there with no obvious way out, then it ought to be well over 50% - so BACK it like a demon.

    It's that type of market - the best type.

    It's definitely mis-priced, but which way?


    Sorry to state the obvious, but if a mix of punters don’t know whether to bet up or bet down, isn’t the price about right?

    FWIW I would still bet on unlikely.
    The wide spread surely highlights the vast uncertainty. I reckon that No Deal is value, but will hold off for now.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    IanB2 said:

    If a clear majority of our elected representatives, with the sympathies of the Speaker and backed by a majority of the public and an even larger majority of the Lords, can’t find some way of stopping something hugely damaging happening given three months to do it, then either there is something wrong with the system and/or they are incompetents of the first order.

    Imagine everything was the same, except that the leader of the Labour Party was Ed Miliband, or a similar mainstream figure. I think it is certain that a number of Conservative MPs would have crossed the floor and the government would have fallen, at any one of many moments over the last year or so.

    While Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the Labour Party potential Tory rebels face having to pay a higher political price to prevent no deal. I am not surprised that they are reluctant to pay that price, but I do wish that they would be honest and stop posturing over being prepared to do anything to stop Brexit, when they clearly are not prepared to do what is necessary.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 29,308
    Nigelb said:

    Byronic said:

    ydoethur said:

    Byronic said:

    Australia going to be out of sight by tea.

    I remember my posts from yesterday, pointing out the EXTREMELY generous odds against a draw, and against an Australian win.

    A draw is now 4/1 (down from 15/1) and an Australian win is now 7/5 (down from 7/1).
    My powers have deserted me.

    Smith is Smith and Wade is doing far too well.

    I shall retire in a huff.
    Australia are now, rightly, firm favourites. The odds yesterday were insane.

    The worst of this is that Smith is going to do this all through the series. I don't see any reason why he shouldn't. He is too good. Maybe Archer could challenge him?

    As for this match, maybe our best hope is now a lot of rain and a draw.

    One thing England can't do is think just having 4 right arm medium fast seam bowlers is going to challenge Smith. It just isn't going to get him out.
    That wasn’t the plan - but injuries to Wood and Archer left the pace cupboard a bit bare.
    Picking Anderson was just stupid, as his fitness was a sheer gamble.
    How much more useful might (eg) Leach have been than a non batsman who can’t bowl ?
    Nigelb said:

    Byronic said:

    ydoethur said:

    Byronic said:

    Australia going to be out of sight by tea.

    I remember my posts from yesterday, pointing out the EXTREMELY generous odds against a draw, and against an Australian win.

    A draw is now 4/1 (down from 15/1) and an Australian win is now 7/5 (down from 7/1).
    My powers have deserted me.

    Smith is Smith and Wade is doing far too well.

    I shall retire in a huff.
    Australia are now, rightly, firm favourites. The odds yesterday were insane.

    The worst of this is that Smith is going to do this all through the series. I don't see any reason why he shouldn't. He is too good. Maybe Archer could challenge him?

    As for this match, maybe our best hope is now a lot of rain and a draw.

    One thing England can't do is think just having 4 right arm medium fast seam bowlers is going to challenge Smith. It just isn't going to get him out.
    That wasn’t the plan - but injuries to Wood and Archer left the pace cupboard a bit bare.
    Picking Anderson was just stupid, as his fitness was a sheer gamble.
    How much more useful might (eg) Leach have been than a non batsman who can’t bowl ?
    Porter would have been a reasonable replacement
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,682
    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    wrt FTPA 14-days cooling-off period after VNOC.

    If this is a de facto purdah period, so HMG can do nothing "big", does that rule out revocation, extension and crashing out?

    Yes, but I don't think extension can be considered big as it simply continues the status quo. Why should a 3 or 6 month extension be controversial except to some Loonies.
    As further extension would to be the main party of the right in UK politics too.
    If we went back to the political alignment of the early 80s before the SDP breakaway, the Brexit Party would be Foot's Labour, not Maggie's Conservatives. Your reading
    The likelihood is that both the Conservatives and TBP attract support from some of the groups that would have voted Labour in 1983, because support for right wing parties comes more from the working classes, and less from the middle classes, than in 1983.

    The Lib Dems are a real threat to the Conservatives along the M3 and M4 corridors, but not along the M1, M2, M5, or M6, IMHO.
    Indeed, YouGov now has the Tories on 32% with both ABC1s and C2DEs, so the Boris led Tories do equally as well with the middle classes and the working classes.


    The LDs though are on 23% with ABC1s but only 13% with C2DEs, while Labour are on 25% with C2DEs and 21% with ABC1s and the Brexit Party are on 18% with C2DEs but only 10% with ABC1s.


    So the LDs, not the Tories, are the new party of the middle class, Labour and the Brexit Party are battling to be the party of the working class and the Tories under Boris are classless


    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/twa1h7mn6m/TimesResults_190730_VI_Trackers_w.pdf
    But not ageless.
    The Tories have always been the party ver 65s
    Actually there has been a big change; it has got far worse.
    In 1997 Labour led the Tories 49% to 27% ie by 22% with 18 to 24s and Labour even led the Tories 41% to 36% with over 65s ie 5%.

    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-1997

    On the latest YouGov Labour lead the Tories by a smaller 37% to 18% margin ie 19% with 18 to 24s and the Tories lead Labour by a huge 32% margin with over 65s 44% to 12% having trailed Labour with over 65s in 1997


    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/twa1h7mn6m/TimesResults_190730_VI_Trackers_w.pdf
    At I said, it’s got worse. We didn’t need the Esther Pigeon tribute act to prove it.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    Gabs2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Chris said:

    Sandpit said:


    No, there is no mechanism for anyone to demonstrate their hypothetical government can survive a hypothetical confidence vote.

    But it's nowhere near that simple, because one can well believe that the Conservative Party and the DUP made "made an announcement" that they would support the current government, but individual MPs voted otherwise.
    They’re the incumbents, it’s up to someone wanting to form a government to show that they have the numbers. And Corbyn doesn’t have the numbers unless every single non-Tory and non-DUP MP votes for him.

    Unless of course a dozen Tories resign the whip and cross the floor.
    Yes but we will not know that for definite until after Corbyn has become prime minister and formed a government which can then be VNOC'd.

    That's the point. A VNOC is something that happens to a government, not to a putative prime minister.

    Boris will recommend Corbyn, indeed hoping that Corbyn will himself be compelled to call an election which Boris will hope to win.
    As a British Jew, I would be completely disgusted if parliament supports Jeremy Corbym as Prime Minister. This is a man who invited to parlaiment Hamas and Hezbollah, two groups who have long wanted to push Jews into the sea. This is a man who happily attended a remembrance service for the killers of eleven innocent Jewish athletes. This is a man who has allowed his office to time and time again interfere in Labour party investigations to keep anti-Semites in the party.

    If another government is to be formed this side of an election it has to be Grieve, or Watson, or Starmer. Putting in Corbyn would be announcing a loud message that MPs care more about their preferred European policy ahead of solidarity with their Jewish fellow citizens. It would be the one thing that would make me feel no longer welcome in my own country.
    This occurred to me last night. Corbyn's opinions on Jews, Israel, terror, foreign policy in general, are just too unsavoury and repulsive for him to command confidence, even in these urgent times. Too many MPs would feel unable to vote for him, even if they are desperate to stop No Deal Brexit.

    So Corbyn is now an obstacle in that way, too. He would prevent a VONC working.
    I think we should be careful in claiming that Corbyn holds antisemitic views.
    I don't. He does.
    When someone shows you are, believe them. Corbyn has had a long history of allying, supporting and protecting anti-Semites. He has shown us who he is.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,356
    45 US Republican Senators sign a letter pledging to back a trade deal with the UK whether it leaves with or without a trade deal with the EU. They also pledge to continue cooperation through NATO and the 'Five Eyes' alliance with the UK.

    'The letter, which was put together by Senator Tom Cotton from Arkansas, congratulates Johnson on his election as leader and openly compares him to his hero Winston Churchill, urging him to “roar” for Britain as Churchill did during the Second World War.'

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/republican-senators-pledge-to-back-boris-johnson-in-us-trade-deal-after-brexit-p8xxgsvmt
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    Australia are a one man team. So, all that has to happen is that Steve Smith has to get *cough* food poisoning, followed by thrombosed piles, and we'll win.

    We must pray for a VERY dodgy curry.

    And now I'm gonna think about something other than politics or cricket. Later.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,356
    edited August 2019
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    wrt FTPA 14-days cooling-off period after VNOC.

    If this is a de facto purdah period, so HMG can do nothing "big", does that rule out revocation, extension and crashing out?

    Yes, but I don't think extension can be considered big as it simply continues the status quo. Why should a 3 or 6 month extension be controversial except to some Loonies.
    As further extension would to be the main party of the right in UK politics too.
    If we went back to the political alignment of the early 80s before the SDP breakaway, the Brexit Party would be Foot's Labour, not Maggie's Conservatives. Your reading
    The likelihood is that both the Conservatives and TBP attract support from some of the groups that would have voted Labour in 1983, because support for right wing parties comes more from the working classes, and less from the middle classes, than in 1983.

    The Lib Dems are a real threat to the Conservatives along the M3 and M4 corridors, but not along the M1, M2, M5, or M6, IMHO.
    Indeed, YouGov now has the Tories on 32% with both ABC1s and C2DEs, so the Boris led Tories dults_190730_VI_Trackers_w.pdf
    But not ageless.
    The Tories have always been the party ver 65s
    Actually there has been a big change; it has got far worse.
    In 1997 Labour led the Tories 49% to 27% ie by 22% with 18 to 24s and Labour even led the Tories 41% to 36% with over 65s ie 5%.

    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-1997

    On the latest YouGov Labour lead the Tories by a smaller 37% to 18% margin ie 19% with 18 to 24s and the Tories lead Labour by a huge 32% margin with over 65s 44% to 12% having trailed Labour with over 65s in 1997


    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/twa1h7mn6m/TimesResults_190730_VI_Trackers_w.pdf
    At I said, it’s got worse. We didn’t need the Esther Pigeon tribute act to prove it.
    In 1997 the Tories trailed Labour by a bigger margin with young voters than they do now and Labour led even with pensioners, the Tories now have a big lead with pensioners
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 11,447
    edited August 2019
    The standard of discussion on this August Forum which is seldom indifferent has soared to new heights in the past day or so with the Admirable Alastair leading a thoughtful and generally well-informed debate. Thanks to all contributors. I personally have contributed little, partly because of feeling a little out of my depth. I have lurked diligently however in an attempt to get my head around the psychodrama of Brexit and I think I am able to assess now the overall state of play as it now stands. Would I be right in thinking it can be summarised pretty much as follows.....

    Nobody is entirely sure what happens next because a) nobody can be entirely sure about the intentions of many of the key players and b) the Parliamentary and constitutional rules under which the drama is to be played out are themselves unclear in certain important areas.

    The best guess as to what happens next goes along the lines that....
    i) Boris is VONC'd
    ii) Parliament tries to form a Government
    iii) It probably succeeds, if only on a temporary basis and for a limited period
    iv) It probably has Corbyn at its Head, but possibly someone else
    v) Boris resigns and Corbyn becomes PM, probably with a limited mandate
    vi) He asks the EU for an extension and it is probably granted
    vii) He seeks Parliament's consent for a GE, and obtains it
    viii) There is a General Election.

    There are so many conditionals in the above scenario that countless others have to be countenanced, but that seems to me the most likely way forward, and perhaps about the least damaging in a situation in which no outcomes are good, but some are a lot worse than others.

    Sorry if others have gone over this all already but just how far out am I?

    OK, back to lurking.....and the cricket. (I think the Aussies are going to win.)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,825
    Nigelb said:

    Sounds as though the BBC has read Alastair’s article.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49225906

    Dominic Grieve as PM in a GNU? The Tories own Ramsey McDonald is not completely implausible.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    edited August 2019

    IanB2 said:

    If a clear majority of our elected representatives, with the sympathies of the Speaker and backed by a majority of the public and an even larger majority of the Lords, can’t find some way of stopping something hugely damaging happening given three months to do it, then either there is something wrong with the system and/or they are incompetents of the first order.

    Imagine everything was the same, except that the leader of the Labour Party was Ed Miliband, or a similar mainstream figure. I think it is certain that a number of Conservative MPs would have crossed the floor and the government would have fallen, at any one of many moments over the last year or so.

    While Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the Labour Party potential Tory rebels face having to pay a higher political price to prevent no deal. I am not surprised that they are reluctant to pay that price, but I do wish that they would be honest and stop posturing over being prepared to do anything to stop Brexit, when they clearly are not prepared to do what is necessary.
    The problem with that is that EdM was regarded by the Tories as a far from mainstream figure. Indeed, he was a Marxist with a dangerous far left Socialist agenda. Of energy price caps, more police and a pay rise for the public sector, and other anti business stuff worthy of the Soviet Union.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 17,634
    edited August 2019
    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    Gabs2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Chris said:

    Sandpit said:


    No, there is no mechanism for anyone to demonstrate their hypothetical government can survive a hypothetical confidence vote.

    They’re the incumbents, it’s up to someone wanting to form a government to show that they have the numbers. And Corbyn doesn’t have the numbers unless every single non-Tory and non-DUP MP votes for him.

    Unless of course a dozen Tories resign the whip and cross the floor.
    Yes but we will not know that for definite until after Corbyn has become prime minister and formed a government which can then be VNOC'd.

    That's the point. A VNOC is something that happens to a government, not to a putative prime minister.

    Boris will recommend Corbyn, indeed hoping that Corbyn will himself be compelled to call an election which Boris will hope to win.
    As a British Jew, I would be completely disgusted if parliament supports Jeremy Corbym as Prime Minister. This is a man who invited to parlaiment Hamas and Hezbollah, two groups who have long wanted to push Jews into the sea. This is a man who happily attended a remembrance service for the killers of eleven innocent Jewish athletes. This is a man who has allowed his office to time and time again interfere in Labour party investigations to keep anti-Semites in the party.

    If another government is to be formed this side of an election it has to be Grieve, or Watson, or Starmer. Putting in Corbyn would be announcing a loud message that MPs care more about their preferred European policy ahead of solidarity with their Jewish fellow citizens. It would be the one thing that would make me feel no longer welcome in my own country.
    This occurred to me last night. Corbyn's opinions on Jews, Israel, terror, foreign policy in general, are just too unsavoury and repulsive for him to command confidence, even in these urgent times. Too many MPs would feel unable to vote for him, even if they are desperate to stop No Deal Brexit.

    So Corbyn is now an obstacle in that way, too. He would prevent a VONC working.
    I think we should be careful in claiming that Corbyn holds antisemitic views.
    I don't. He does.
    I kept a post by your doppelganger SeanT during Israel's invasion of Gaza when 2200 Gazeans were killed by the Israelis. I kept it because it was very well described and full of righteous anger. Had Corbyn written it using the same criteria he would at this moment be the ex leader of the Labour Party and damned for ever as an anti-semite.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,268
    Roger said:

    I kept a quote by your doppelganger SeanT during Israel's invasion of Gaza when 2200 Gazeans were killed by the Israelis. I kept it because it was very well described and full of righteous anger. Had Corbyn written it using the same criteria he would at this moment be the ex leader of the Labour Party and damned for ever as an anti-semite.

    An ex-leader, but enjoying his seven-figure income from fiction? Although I can't see the Labour Party manifesto is ever going to make him that sort of money....
This discussion has been closed.