The interesting take in the limited sub sample that are by elections is the growing trend for voters to change allegiance to try to ensure a particular objective is achieved. So that even in so called leave voting seats the most likely to win remain candidate comes through. Brecon was an example on a larger scale.
Miss Cyclefree, we agree on the totemic nature of 31 October.
There's a big psychological problem with changing the deal/red lines, though. It's what Machiavelli wrote about when he told of the difficulties new regimes or potential new regimes face.
All those who stand to lose out will be dead against you, whereas those who *might* be advantaged by your victory will be lukewarm allies, because they cannot guarantee you will win or honour your promises whereas the incumbent prince will most certainly destroy them if he wins.
If Boris changes, what does he change? If it's more pro-EU that flies in the face of all he's said and could precipitate (justified, given his stance) outrage. If he's more anti-EU/distant then that is unlikely to persuade those holding out on backing a deal, who are mostly pro-EU.
It's a caricature that will work well in Michigan and Pennsylvania though.
Exactly and the Trump machine will press it relentlessly
A lower middle class self-made woman, who waited tables in school, and made her political reputation campaigning against finance companies ripping off poor debtors... running against a fat billionaire who inherited his wealth ?
Yeah, it will go down really well.
The other thing people forget about Warren is she was a registered Republican until she started studying these issues. Her ideological move started when presented with the reality of what happened when certain things were left for the market to decide. She can sell to soft republicans / working republicans the idea of being left behind and that government can help.
From a DNC pov, she is much better placed to unify Biden and Bernie voters, as well. Biden is the establishment candidate, Bernie is still the renegade, and she is perfectly placed (better than Harris, IMHO) to capitalise on that.
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
That would involve Boris having been consistent during the referendum campaign and in the time since.
Consistency - or even coherence - or knowledge of the relevant law (see the nonsense he promulgated over GATT rules) are not one of Johnson's characteristics.
Mr. Thompson, I don't believe Johnson does want no deal. He said what he thought would get him elected. Now he's unable to try anything.
A sincere attempt to change things would actually involve proposing a credible alternative to the backstop as it stands, rather than just saying 'not this'.
Of course, the EU's highly principled stance of saying "We're ready to talk but nothing can be changed" isn't great either.
The backstop is not the issue as the PM's envoy to Brussels made clear the other day. The EU hypothetically asked whether the WA would be acceptable if the backstop was removed and David Frost replied no.
Johnson is tearing everything up and proposing nothing in its place.
There was once a reasonable Eurosceptic case. But the Brexiteers have no coherent case at all: it is about saying no, hatred and pulling things down rather than creating things and resolving problems. It is entirely negative.
The only positive vision Brexiteers seem to have is to ally themselves with a President who thinks nothing of posing with a baby whose parents were shot trying to protect him, while grinning like a booby and giving a thumbs up signal.
Leavers would have more credibility all round if they openly supported the UK adopting the EU Financial Transparency rules due in 2020 even if we have left.
Miss Cyclefree, we agree on the totemic nature of 31 October.
There's a big psychological problem with changing the deal/red lines, though. It's what Machiavelli wrote about when he told of the difficulties new regimes or potential new regimes face.
All those who stand to lose out will be dead against you, whereas those who *might* be advantaged by your victory will be lukewarm allies, because they cannot guarantee you will win or honour your promises whereas the incumbent prince will most certainly destroy them if he wins.
If Boris changes, what does he change? If it's more pro-EU that flies in the face of all he's said and could precipitate (justified, given his stance) outrage. If he's more anti-EU/distant then that is unlikely to persuade those holding out on backing a deal, who are mostly pro-EU.
More broadly, it'd also help keep BP doing well.
That's the problem of leadership. He should have thought of that when applying to be Tory leader and PM.
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
As he campaigned on a fiction, a bit of rewriting ought not to be beyond his capabilities.
Though I’ve got to admit, ‘Boris Johnson, paragon of consistency’, has a novel ring to it.
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
Freedom of Movement. Boris is pro-immigration.
Boris is liberalising our non-EU migration system. He's dropped the ludicrous tens of thousands pledge, he's liberalised migration for scientists and doctors and others.
But ending free movement was a key part of the campaign. Controlled but liberal migration is a good thing.
Mr. Thompson, I don't believe Johnson does want no deal. He said what he thought would get him elected. Now he's unable to try anything.
A sincere attempt to change things would actually involve proposing a credible alternative to the backstop as it stands, rather than just saying 'not this'.
Of course, the EU's highly principled stance of saying "We're ready to talk but nothing can be changed" isn't great either.
There is no need for an alternative to the backstop.
The backstop only kicks in years from now anyway, so why does it need to be agreed now? The alternative is no backstop, we enter the transition and negotiate what happens at the end of the transition during the transition.
The backstop is a reward for the EU negotiating in bad faith.
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
That would involve Boris having been consistent during the referendum campaign and in the time since.
Consistency - or even coherence - or knowledge of the relevant law (see the nonsense he promulgated over GATT rules) are not one of Johnson's characteristics.
What was he inconsistent over regarding the red lines?
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
As he campaigned on a fiction, a bit of rewriting ought not to be beyond his capabilities.
Though I’ve got to admit, ‘Boris Johnson, paragon of consistency’, has a novel ring to it.
Well, since "conservative" now means "revolutionary" it should be possible to give "consistency" a completely different meaning to the one it has had up to now.
Miss Cyclefree, we agree on the totemic nature of 31 October.
There's a big psychological problem with changing the deal/red lines, though. It's what Machiavelli wrote about when he told of the difficulties new regimes or potential new regimes face.
All those who stand to lose out will be dead against you, whereas those who *might* be advantaged by your victory will be lukewarm allies, because they cannot guarantee you will win or honour your promises whereas the incumbent prince will most certainly destroy them if he wins.
If Boris changes, what does he change? If it's more pro-EU that flies in the face of all he's said and could precipitate (justified, given his stance) outrage. If he's more anti-EU/distant then that is unlikely to persuade those holding out on backing a deal, who are mostly pro-EU.
More broadly, it'd also help keep BP doing well.
That's the problem of leadership. He should have thought of that when applying to be Tory leader and PM.
What, and forgo climbing momentarily to the top of the greasy pole?
What todays slight reduction in GDP shows is how remarkable the economy has been over the last 9 years. Year on year growth, huge rises in employment and very low unemployment. A massive reduction in the deficit during that period. Its a shame none of that made the BBC headlines like the "guess" at todays GDP figure has.
- "I'll tell you a riddle. You're waiting for a Brexit Deal, a Brexit Deal that you will take you far away. You know where you hope the Brexit Deal will take you, but you can't know for sure. Yet it doesn't matter. Now, tell me why?"
- "Because we'll be Better Together."
Scots are now very significantly poorer than the Irish, the Norwegians, the Swedes, the Danes, the Icelanders or any of their obvious comparators. Every one of those nations is in the top 10 of the UN Human Development Index. The UK is not, and Scotland is below the mean for the UK. It is not because Scots are stupid or feckless, it not because of climate and it is certainly not a lack of natural resources. It is because of the draining away of human and physical resource by London over centuries.
Goes for much of the rest of the UK.
That may be true Nigel but for us to be even worse is a travesty and the reason lies in Westminster.
- “In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?” (net wrong to leave)
Scotland +42 London +24 Rest of South England +7 Midlands and Wales -5 North of England-6
GB +8
BJ is trying to grab the North while chucking away the South + Scotland. They’ll probably tell him to get stuffed: the North cos they hate his party, the South cos they hate him, and Scots cos we hate both.
(YouGov / The Times Survey Results Sample Size: 1628 GB Adults Fieldwork: 5th - 6th August 2019)
Boris leads Corbyn by a huge 45% to 15% margin as preferred PM in the South in the same poll, he leads Corbyn too 38% to 21% in the North, 41% to 16% in the Midlands and Wales.
Boris even leads Corbyn 31% to 28% in Scotland and 30% to 24% in London
But doesn't much of the SE prefer Ms Swinson to either...
In a few places like Guildford and Lewes and St Albans maybe buy not enough to reverse the huge Tory majority in the SE especially with fear of Corbyn trumping fear of No Deal (and the SE narrowly voted Leave anyway)
You either missed or didn’t understand the Worcester by-election result, then.
Worcester is a Tory v Labour marginal which saw a Labour to Tory swing last night yes
Do you understand the concept of tactical voting? In by-elections in Cambridge and Worcester the Lib Dems won but you prattle on about the meaningless Labour to Tory swing.
In East Northants where there was no Lib Dem candidate anti-Tories got behind Labour and there was a 7% swing from Tory to Labour.
I genuinely do not understand whether your mission in life is simply to put a pro-Tory spin, however ludicrous, on every event or you really don't get it.
If the anti Tory vote gets behind the best placed candidate as they did in Peterborough and Brecon then Johnson is in trouble.
I do not believe the fuel crisis in 2000 will be as big as this. Best example will be the 3 day week emergency in the early 1970s when Ted Heath went to the country. Wilson narrowly won. Boris is lucky as he no one opposite him like Tony Blair, Harold Wilson etc. Corbyn on the lowest polling in UK history of Labour Party might be his savior.
As those of us who after a lifetime have left the Labour Party since 2015 in our thousands JC is the gift that keeps giving to Tory Man. McCluskey should be charged for getting the Labour Party in a state when even the third parties dismiss the idea of Corbyn the unpopular as being an alternative leader. A third force of Lib Dems and SNP etc is now inevitable in Remain Seats etc.,
A dire Labour performance may not save BJ. If people flock to the Lib Dems, the SNP and Plaid Cymru then the duopoly could break. And when it breaks, it’ll be broken for good.
- “In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?” (net wrong to leave)
Scotland +42 London +24 Rest of South England +7 Midlands and Wales -5 North of England-6
GB +8
BJ is trying to grab the North while chucking away the South + Scotland. They’ll probably tell him to get stuffed: the North cos they hate his party, the South cos they hate him, and Scots cos we hate both.
(YouGov / The Times Survey Results Sample Size: 1628 GB Adults Fieldwork: 5th - 6th August 2019)
Boris leads Corbyn by a huge 45% to 15% margin as preferred PM in the South in the same poll, he leads Corbyn too 38% to 21% in the North, 41% to 16% in the Midlands and Wales.
Boris even leads Corbyn 31% to 28% in Scotland and 30% to 24% in London
But doesn't much of the SE prefer Ms Swinson to either...
In a few places like Guildford and Lewes and St Albans maybe buy not enough to reverse the huge Tory majority in the SE especially with fear of Corbyn trumping fear of No Deal (and the SE narrowly voted Leave anyway)
You either missed or didn’t understand the Worcester by-election result, then.
Worcester is a Tory v Labour marginal which saw a Labour to Tory swing last night yes
Idiotic comments like that simply establish that it is the latter.
If anyone is making idiotic comments it is you, Worcester was 48% Tory, 43% Labour and 3% LD at the last general election, the LDs have no chance there, the only swing that matters at national level in Worcester is the Tory v Labour one
Not if the people who voted Lib Dem to defeat the tories at the council evelare prepared to do the same to defeat the Tories at Westminster.
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
All the mood music from Brussels is that they're refusing to negotiate - and it would make sense to send the message to other countries thinking of leaving that they best they can get is No Deal.
The punishment beating that Bozo himself warned of is on it's way
- “In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?” (net wrong to leave)
Scotland +42 London +24 Rest of South England +7 Midlands and Wales -5 North of England-6
GB +8
BJ is trying to grab the North while chucking away the South + Scotland. They’ll probably tell him to get stuffed: the North cos they hate his party, the South cos they hate him, and Scots cos we hate both.
(YouGov / The Times Survey Results Sample Size: 1628 GB Adults Fieldwork: 5th - 6th August 2019)
Boris leads Corbyn by a huge 45% to 15% margin as preferred PM in the South in the same poll, he leads Corbyn too 38% to 21% in the North, 41% to 16% in the Midlands and Wales.
Boris even leads Corbyn 31% to 28% in Scotland and 30% to 24% in London
But doesn't much of the SE prefer Ms Swinson to either...
In a few places like Guildford and Lewes and St Albans maybe buy not enough to reverse the huge Tory majority in the SE especially with fear of Corbyn trumping fear of No Deal (and the SE narrowly voted Leave anyway)
You either missed or didn’t understand the Worcester by-election result, then.
Worcester is a Tory v Labour marginal which saw a Labour to Tory swing last night yes
Idiotic comments like that simply establish that it is the latter.
If anyone is making idiotic comments it is you, Worcester was 48% Tory, 43% Labour and 3% LD at the last general election, the LDs have no chance there, the only swing that matters at national level in Worcester is the Tory v Labour one
Why do you bother posting here if you are so incapable of engaging on any sort of intelligent basis?
As someone says below, it’s not worth it.
Ian, if you look at the figures, the Tory vote in that by-election held up surprisingly well (it actually went up) in a ward that has returned LibDems in the past.
Lib Dem 47.6 (+8,2) Con 45.6 (+3) Green 4.6 ( -3.7) Lab 2.2 (-2.7)
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
As he campaigned on a fiction, a bit of rewriting ought not to be beyond his capabilities.
Though I’ve got to admit, ‘Boris Johnson, paragon of consistency’, has a novel ring to it.
Well, since "conservative" now means "revolutionary" it should be possible to give "consistency" a completely different meaning to the one it has had up to now.
The greatest Conservative Prime Ministers have all had revolutionary streaks through them.
Disraeli, Peel, Churchill and Thatcher were all pretty revolutionary in their own ways.
How long before we hear the following? 'The Remain campaign made it abundantly clear that Brexit might cause a recession, so the voters knew perfectly well that they were voting for that possibility.'
Well, we’ve already heard that thoroughly dishonest argument being made by Raab - and some posters on here - about the possibility of a No Deal Brexit. So yes I expect to hear that pretty soon.
The dishonesty of some of the No Deal Brexiteers is astonishing.
Is it any worse than the Remainers ?
Yes it is.
If the Remainers are wrong, Brexit will not do any damage.
If the Leavers are wrong, we are all stuffed.
The two are not comparable.
"we are all stuffed" I'm afraid that no one believe this apocalyptic rubbish anymore.
Fine. Do not believe it. See if I care. See if reality cares either...
Well seeing as you say 'I'm stuffed' then maybe I will care. Most of us really won't be stuffed, but obviously those like yourself who spend every day worrying on politics forums rather than enjoying life and working hard might see some difficulty. The kneejerk reactions on this forum to every bit of news and opinion really can be something else! Does make me smile.
You may have noticed that I post rarely these days. That is because I am busy enjoying my Brexit-proof life. Whilst I regard Brexit as a supreme act of folly and self-harm, it is a popcorn show as far as I am concerned.
I one way, I do hope for a No Deal Brexit just to see if Brexiteers will stop blaming everyone but themselves, but it is more of a whim than a burning, fanatical desire
Yesterday you were lamenting that Brexit had halved one of your pensions but today you're Brexit proof. Have you sacked your financial adviser?
Yes it has halved one of my pension plans, but I do not depend on it. It would be nice to have the full amount but I have:
- No debts - No mortgages - No loan agreements - No credit card bills - Savings (apart from pensions) tucked away in various places
Average UK debt per adult is £31,000 but Brexit will not affect me or my family or my property, car or other possessions.
If the anti Tory vote gets behind the best placed candidate as they did in Peterborough and Brecon then Johnson is in trouble.
How many bloody times?
There is no history of tactical voting in Brecon and that will not be why the Liberal Democrats won the seat. Indeed Tory switchers seem to have been decisive in the end.
What there was was evidence that even very tribal Labour voters are willing to vote for alternative parties. In that seat, with that electorate, that will not have been for tactical reasons.
I'm beginning to conclude that Brecon and Radnor was a disaster for pundits and punters. They simply don't understand what was happening and they're making fools of themselves by trying to do so.
Mr. Thompson, I don't believe Johnson does want no deal. He said what he thought would get him elected. Now he's unable to try anything.
A sincere attempt to change things would actually involve proposing a credible alternative to the backstop as it stands, rather than just saying 'not this'.
Of course, the EU's highly principled stance of saying "We're ready to talk but nothing can be changed" isn't great either.
There is no need for an alternative to the backstop.
The backstop only kicks in years from now anyway, so why does it need to be agreed now? The alternative is no backstop, we enter the transition and negotiate what happens at the end of the transition during the transition.
The backstop is a reward for the EU negotiating in bad faith.
Absolutely. What's going to happen with the Irish border in the future?
Who knows should be the answer. Lets start talking about our future relationship and THEN we can talk about borders. Putting the cart before the horse in trying to sort out the border first, then talk about the future is nonsense.
- “In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?” (net wrong to leave)
Scotland +42 London +24 Rest of South England +7 Midlands and Wales -5 North of England-6
GB +8
BJ is trying to grab the North while chucking away the South + Scotland. They’ll probably tell him to get stuffed: the North cos they hate his party, the South cos they hate him, and Scots cos we hate both.
(YouGov / The Times Survey Results Sample Size: 1628 GB Adults Fieldwork: 5th - 6th August 2019)
Boris leads Corbyn by a huge 45% to 15% margin as preferred PM in the South in the same poll, he leads Corbyn too 38% to 21% in the North, 41% to 16% in the Midlands and Wales.
Boris even leads Corbyn 31% to 28% in Scotland and 30% to 24% in London
But doesn't much of the SE prefer Ms Swinson to either...
In a few places like Guildford and Lewes and St Albans maybe buy not enough to reverse the huge Tory majority in the SE especially with fear of Corbyn trumping fear of No Deal (and the SE narrowly voted Leave anyway)
You either missed or didn’t understand the Worcester by-election result, then.
Worcester is a Tory v Labour marginal which saw a Labour to Tory swing last night yes
Do you understand the concept of tactical voting? In by-elections in Cambridge and Worcester the Lib Dems won but you prattle on about the meaningless Labour to Tory swing.
In East Northants where there was no Lib Dem candidate anti-Tories got behind Labour and there was a 7% swing from Tory to Labour.
I genuinely do not understand whether your mission in life is simply to put a pro-Tory spin, however ludicrous, on every event or you really don't get it.
If the anti Tory vote gets behind the best placed candidate as they did in Peterborough and Brecon then Johnson is in trouble.
I think the anti-Tory vote is going to do exactly that. Of course identifying the best placed candidate isn't going to be easy. And there are still plenty of pro-Brexit voters around who still regard the Tories as the people who are going to deliver Brexit. So Johnson may not be as much trouble as he should be.
Miss Cyclefree, we agree on the totemic nature of 31 October.
There's a big psychological problem with changing the deal/red lines, though. It's what Machiavelli wrote about when he told of the difficulties new regimes or potential new regimes face.
All those who stand to lose out will be dead against you, whereas those who *might* be advantaged by your victory will be lukewarm allies, because they cannot guarantee you will win or honour your promises whereas the incumbent prince will most certainly destroy them if he wins.
If Boris changes, what does he change? If it's more pro-EU that flies in the face of all he's said and could precipitate (justified, given his stance) outrage. If he's more anti-EU/distant then that is unlikely to persuade those holding out on backing a deal, who are mostly pro-EU.
More broadly, it'd also help keep BP doing well.
That's the problem of leadership. He should have thought of that when applying to be Tory leader and PM.
What, and forgo climbing momentarily to the top of the greasy pole?
I know. Silly me. I keep thinking of leadership as something important involving character and responsibility.
Whereas these days it's just about winning one of those TV contests for singing or being ignorant in public or being able to survive in a room without intellectual stimulation or going to the lavatory or whatever. Being PM is just another version of those, only with flags, a car and nice weekend home.
If the anti Tory vote gets behind the best placed candidate as they did in Peterborough and Brecon then Johnson is in trouble.
What there was was evidence that even very tribal Labour voters are willing to vote for alternative parties. In that seat, with that electorate, that will not have been for tactical reasons.
EH???? Tribal labour voters voted for alternative parties but it wasn't tactical - I think you're on a haver.
I'd be amazed if they manage to return an MP other than Ian Murray at the next GE.
There was an opportunity post 2016 to position themselves as pro Europe and pro Union, to court the unionist vote, but they've botched it with incompetent leadership in Westminster and Edinburgh.
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
Freedom of Movement. Boris is pro-immigration.
Boris is liberalising our non-EU migration system. He's dropped the ludicrous tens of thousands pledge, he's liberalised migration for scientists and doctors and others.
But ending free movement was a key part of the campaign. Controlled but liberal migration is a good thing.
Before posting, I ran a quick search but could not find Boris saying anything at all about Freedom of Movement in the months before the referendum. Of course, my google-fu may be waning.
Sterling probably going to hit a 35-year low today.
And that's with the betting markets still making No Deal only a 40% chance.
Sterling has lost about 16% of its value against the dollar since the referendum.
What do people thing will happen if we go all the way and make No Deal an accomplished fact? Parity with the dollar? One pound = 0.8 Euros?
I’m feeling pretty sick already stop rubbing it in!
We've been told on good authority that it won't matter a bit, because we eat food, not money. (Is that right? It was something like that.)
No its that we earn our income in sterling and as consumers pay our bills [even for imports] in sterling. Currency fluctuations are just not that big of a deal.
Pound could go less than parity it still wouldn't be anything to hyperventilate over. Sterling is a natural shock absorber.
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
As he campaigned on a fiction, a bit of rewriting ought not to be beyond his capabilities.
Though I’ve got to admit, ‘Boris Johnson, paragon of consistency’, has a novel ring to it.
Well, since "conservative" now means "revolutionary" it should be possible to give "consistency" a completely different meaning to the one it has had up to now.
The greatest Conservative Prime Ministers have all had revolutionary streaks through them.
Disraeli, Peel, Churchill and Thatcher were all pretty revolutionary in their own ways.
They were also responsible leaders and could create coherent policies that put the good of the nation ahead of the party. Peel caused a massive upset in the Tory party that took decades to get over because he put the nation first.
As for the Tory party, it is gone. It is just another branch of UKIP these days.
If the anti Tory vote gets behind the best placed candidate as they did in Peterborough and Brecon then Johnson is in trouble.
How many bloody times?
There is no history of tactical voting in Brecon and that will not be why the Liberal Democrats won the seat. Indeed Tory switchers seem to have been decisive in the end.
What there was was evidence that even very tribal Labour voters are willing to vote for alternative parties. In that seat, with that electorate, that will not have been for tactical reasons.
I'm beginning to conclude that Brecon and Radnor was a disaster for pundits and punters. They simply don't understand what was happening and they're making fools of themselves by trying to do so.
So your saying that those labour switchers deserted labour for more fundamental reasons?
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
Freedom of Movement. Boris is pro-immigration.
Boris is liberalising our non-EU migration system. He's dropped the ludicrous tens of thousands pledge, he's liberalised migration for scientists and doctors and others.
But ending free movement was a key part of the campaign. Controlled but liberal migration is a good thing.
Before posting, I ran a quick search but could not find Boris saying anything at all about Freedom of Movement in the months before the referendum. Of course, my google-fu may be waning.
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
As he campaigned on a fiction, a bit of rewriting ought not to be beyond his capabilities.
Though I’ve got to admit, ‘Boris Johnson, paragon of consistency’, has a novel ring to it.
Well, since "conservative" now means "revolutionary" it should be possible to give "consistency" a completely different meaning to the one it has had up to now.
The greatest Conservative Prime Ministers have all had revolutionary streaks through them.
Disraeli, Peel, Churchill and Thatcher were all pretty revolutionary in their own ways.
Yes - of course. Thatcher was famous for wanting to put up trade barriers and make life more difficult for those wanting to invest in Britain. I remember all her visits to Japanese car manufacturers telling them to piss off out of Britain. Those were the days!
Why is anyone even talking about a GE on Fri 1st Nov?
We are due to leave at 11pm on Thur 31 Oct.
So if the GE was on Thur 31 Oct, none of the results would have been declared by the time we leave - so we would still definitely be out before a new PM could intervene.
It would also be better for Boris as there would probably be less disruption that day than the following day.
Sterling probably going to hit a 35-year low today.
And that's with the betting markets still making No Deal only a 40% chance.
Sterling has lost about 16% of its value against the dollar since the referendum.
What do people thing will happen if we go all the way and make No Deal an accomplished fact? Parity with the dollar? One pound = 0.8 Euros?
I’m feeling pretty sick already stop rubbing it in!
We've been told on good authority that it won't matter a bit, because we eat food, not money. (Is that right? It was something like that.)
No its that we earn our income in sterling and as consumers pay our bills [even for imports] in sterling. Currency fluctuations are just not that big of a deal.
Thanks. I knew it was something like that.
So prices won't increase if the pound drops to parity with the dollar, or goes down to 0.8 Euros, because we spend pounds in the shops, not dollars or Euros. And there won't be any goods in the shops from abroad anyway. So the exchange rate really doesn't make any difference.
I had trouble understanding that before, but it seems much clearer now.
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
As he campaigned on a fiction, a bit of rewriting ought not to be beyond his capabilities.
Though I’ve got to admit, ‘Boris Johnson, paragon of consistency’, has a novel ring to it.
Well, since "conservative" now means "revolutionary" it should be possible to give "consistency" a completely different meaning to the one it has had up to now.
The greatest Conservative Prime Ministers have all had revolutionary streaks through them.
Disraeli, Peel, Churchill and Thatcher were all pretty revolutionary in their own ways.
They were also responsible leaders and could create coherent policies that put the good of the nation ahead of the party. Peel caused a massive upset in the Tory party that took decades to get over because he put the nation first.
As for the Tory party, it is gone. It is just another branch of UKIP these days.
Boris is putting the country first and causing a massive upset in the party - which is why TSE, Herdson, Nabavi and BigG have left - because they're upset with what he is doing.
Boris pushing ahead with Brexit is a modern day repeal of the corn laws. People like the quad I mentioned who liked the old laws are not happy.
You recently asked a fair and rather important question about people who post here a lot and how they find the time.
I began posting exactly a year from the day the site started. I was in full time work then and found I could drop in and out of conversations easily without undue disruption to the work. By degrees I went into semi- and then permanent retirement and now have plenty of time available, although I probaby post less now because like many retired people I find plenty of other interesting things to do.
The Site has always had its trolls and posters with a hidden agenda. You may remember Plato. I always suspected she was being put up to it, if not actually being paid. I understand her Twitter account was closed for trolling, which suggests my suspicions were correct. I certainly think it's reasonable to assume that there are always some posters who are paid to propagandise, or at the very least receive some sort of reward, pecuniary or otherwise, for their postings.
This might help explain how some find the time to do it.
There would not in my opinion be many such posters. They tend to stand out through both the volume and superficiality of the posts, and of course their imperviousness to reasonable debate. Personally they bother me little. They are easy to skip past and I rarely engage, except to poke a little fun at them from time to time. You might like to adopt the same policy. Feeding them only helps feather their nest and if fewer did it, the rewards would diminish and they would clutter up the Site less.
It remains an excellent Site though, trolls etc notwithstanding, and I trust you will continue to give it the benefit of your own excellent contributions.
Sterling probably going to hit a 35-year low today.
And that's with the betting markets still making No Deal only a 40% chance.
Sterling has lost about 16% of its value against the dollar since the referendum.
What do people thing will happen if we go all the way and make No Deal an accomplished fact? Parity with the dollar? One pound = 0.8 Euros?
Hit the nail on the head there. A No Deal Brexit is still not fully priced in. Those with pension funds or savings funds have reason to be extremely concerned.
Sterling probably going to hit a 35-year low today.
And that's with the betting markets still making No Deal only a 40% chance.
Sterling has lost about 16% of its value against the dollar since the referendum.
What do people thing will happen if we go all the way and make No Deal an accomplished fact? Parity with the dollar? One pound = 0.8 Euros?
I’m feeling pretty sick already stop rubbing it in!
We've been told on good authority that it won't matter a bit, because we eat food, not money. (Is that right? It was something like that.)
No its that we earn our income in sterling and as consumers pay our bills [even for imports] in sterling. Currency fluctuations are just not that big of a deal.
Thanks. I knew it was something like that.
So prices won't increase if the pound drops to parity with the dollar, or goes down to 0.8 Euros, because we spend pounds in the shops, not dollars or Euros. And there won't be any goods in the shops from abroad anyway. So the exchange rate really doesn't make any difference.
I had trouble understanding that before, but it seems much clearer now.
Prices will increase, marginally, which we can measure as inflation.
It is inflation that measures price changes, not sterling.
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
As he campaigned on a fiction, a bit of rewriting ought not to be beyond his capabilities.
Though I’ve got to admit, ‘Boris Johnson, paragon of consistency’, has a novel ring to it.
Well, since "conservative" now means "revolutionary" it should be possible to give "consistency" a completely different meaning to the one it has had up to now.
The greatest Conservative Prime Ministers have all had revolutionary streaks through them.
Disraeli, Peel, Churchill and Thatcher were all pretty revolutionary in their own ways.
Yes - of course. Thatcher was famous for wanting to put up trade barriers and make life more difficult for those wanting to invest in Britain. I remember all her visits to Japanese car manufacturers telling them to piss off out of Britain. Those were the days!
Thatcher was happy to tear up the status quo and tackle shibboleths. So was Peel and Churchill.
The idea we should grip the status quo and never change is not what "Conservatives" have ever done.
Why is anyone even talking about a GE on Fri 1st Nov?
We are due to leave at 11pm on Thur 31 Oct.
So if the GE was on Thur 31 Oct, none of the results would have been declared by the time we leave - so we would still definitely be out before a new PM could intervene.
It would also be better for Boris as there would probably be less disruption that day than the following day.
Can I ask you to read yesterday’s threads for a variety of answers, take your pick to save the rest of the day being another edition of Groundhog Day!
If the anti Tory vote gets behind the best placed candidate as they did in Peterborough and Brecon then Johnson is in trouble.
How many bloody times?
There is no history of tactical voting in Brecon and that will not be why the Liberal Democrats won the seat. Indeed Tory switchers seem to have been decisive in the end.
What there was was evidence that even very tribal Labour voters are willing to vote for alternative parties. In that seat, with that electorate, that will not have been for tactical reasons.
I'm beginning to conclude that Brecon and Radnor was a disaster for pundits and punters. They simply don't understand what was happening and they're making fools of themselves by trying to do so.
Your interpretation is not sacrosanct. There are local factors at play in any constituency, the fact is what happened in Brecon conforms to what we are seeing elsewhere. The best placed anti-Tory picked up tactical votes from other parties. The Labour vote dropped 12%, the Lib Dems rose 14%. It is quite reasonable to conclude that most of that Labour vote went tactically to the Lib Dems. Where else are you suggesting those Labour votes went?
First game of the premier league season tonight - and Liverpool are 1.16 - not much fun to be had there
have you considered the PB Fantasy league instead?
Yes I have considered - but I'm crap at remembering players names and such-like so I'd be rubbish. I do enjoy watching the games though. Hopefully once we're out of the EU there'll be no BT/Sky splitting (There's a benefit of leaving the EU for you lot!!!!)
Who exactly forced Mrs May to request an extension? And by which means? Did Mr Hammond point a gun at her head? Or Mr Juncker perhaps?
May foolishly chose to let MPs decide whether to extend and rather that choose one of the 3 available end states they chose to drag on this madness.
Thankfully Boris isn't making the same mistake.
Thanks goodness he's finding original ways to cock things up ?
Yes. If we are going to cock things up at least do it in an original manner. Its how evolution works to make things better.
Phillip, The other day when I suggested the EU could stop the clock until we sorted out say a GE you said that was not possible. Professor Bogdanor whom I am guessing you would agree knows more about this than you or me begs to differ. He has just said precisely that.
I said that it was unlawful under the EU Constitution.
Professor Bogdanor has said [to my knowledge, only read snippets quoted here] that it would be lawful under UK law to do a retroactive change. That I agree with. EU law and UK law are not identical and UK law is more open to fudge.
He also seemed quite happy that the EU could do it. That was the point of what he was saying, that it could be done. It was a suggested solution. In fact the more challenging aspect seemed to be the retrospective change by the UK for which he gave an example (war crimes). He did not say or imply there would be any issues on the EU side. If there were you would have thought he would have mentioned them as otherwise the whole point of him bringing it up would have been, well pointless. He thought the EU would be quite keen in fact.
He's wrong. Article 50(5) is explicit that a state that has left must rejoin according to the normal accession process.
With goodwill all round (an optimistic assumption), an Accession Treaty could be agreed on status quo ante terms and signed off very quickly. The UK is in full accordance with the acquis, after all. However, the implementation of such a treaty would require ratification in all 27 EU member states and the EP, as well as in the UK; not just a vote in the European Council.
David, I could be misrepresenting what he said, but it didn't sound ambiguous. Did you hear him?
I think the key point was they (the EU) from their point of view delays the leaving date if we wish to take advantage of that i.e stop the clock.
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
As he campaigned on a fiction, a bit of rewriting ought not to be beyond his capabilities.
Though I’ve got to admit, ‘Boris Johnson, paragon of consistency’, has a novel ring to it.
Well, since "conservative" now means "revolutionary" it should be possible to give "consistency" a completely different meaning to the one it has had up to now.
The greatest Conservative Prime Ministers have all had revolutionary streaks through them.
Disraeli, Peel, Churchill and Thatcher were all pretty revolutionary in their own ways.
They were also responsible leaders and could create coherent policies that put the good of the nation ahead of the party. Peel caused a massive upset in the Tory party that took decades to get over because he put the nation first.
As for the Tory party, it is gone. It is just another branch of UKIP these days.
Boris is putting the country first and causing a massive upset in the party - which is why TSE, Herdson, Nabavi and BigG have left - because they're upset with what he is doing.
Boris pushing ahead with Brexit is a modern day repeal of the corn laws. People like the quad I mentioned who liked the old laws are not happy.
Oh yes - the country is gagging for No Deal Brexit.....
TSE et al can answer for themselves, but the flight of Tories like them just hands the entryist kippers and nationalists more control.
The Conservative Party is dead, the corpse has just not stopped twitching yet.
First game of the premier league season tonight - and Liverpool are 1.16 - not much fun to be had there
have you considered the PB Fantasy league instead?
Yes I have considered - but I'm crap at remembering players names and such-like so I'd be rubbish. I do enjoy watching the games though. Hopefully once we're out of the EU there'll be no BT/Sky splitting (There's a benefit of leaving the EU for you lot!!!!)
I'd be amazed if they manage to return an MP other than Ian Murray at the next GE.
There was an opportunity post 2016 to position themselves as pro Europe and pro Union, to court the unionist vote, but they've botched it with incompetent leadership in Westminster and Edinburgh.
The SLDs totally dominate that sector now. The next election could be great for them. They’re only in the running to win 5 seats, but they could have a surprisingly long list of decent 2nd places.
You recently asked a fair and rather important question about people who post here a lot and how they find the time.
I began posting exactly a year from the day the site started. I was in full time work then and found I could drop in and out of conversations easily without undue disruption to the work. By degrees I went into semi- and then permanent retirement and now have plenty of time available, although I probaby post less now because like many retired people I find plenty of other interesting things to do.
The Site has always had its trolls and posters with a hidden agenda. You may remember Plato. I always suspected she was being put up to it, if not actually being paid. I understand her Twitter account was closed for trolling, which suggests my suspicions were correct. I certainly think it's reasonable to assume that there are always some posters who are paid to propagandise, or at the very least receive some sort of reward, pecuniary or otherwise, for their postings.
This might help explain how some find the time to do it.
There would not in my opinion be many such posters. They tend to stand out through both the volume and superficiality of the posts, and of course their imperviousness to reasonable debate. Personally they bother me little. They are easy to skip past and I rarely engage, except to poke a little fun at them from time to time. You might like to adopt the same policy. Feeding them only helps feather their nest and if fewer did it, the rewards would diminish and they would clutter up the Site less.
It remains an excellent Site though, trolls etc notwithstanding, and I trust you will continue to give it the benefit of your own excellent contributions.
Atb
PtP
Thank you. You're far too kind about my contributions, and apart from anything else I do far too much troll-feeding.
I have to say I find it a disturbing thought that some of the more prolific posters here might actually being paid for what they're doing. It would almost make me feel sorry for the people paying them.
First game of the premier league season tonight - and Liverpool are 1.16 - not much fun to be had there
have you considered the PB Fantasy league instead?
Yes I have considered - but I'm crap at remembering players names and such-like so I'd be rubbish. I do enjoy watching the games though. Hopefully once we're out of the EU there'll be no BT/Sky splitting (There's a benefit of leaving the EU for you lot!!!!)
Boris leads Corbyn by a huge 45% to 15% margin as preferred PM in the South in the same poll, he leads Corbyn too 38% to 21% in the North, 41% to 16% in the Midlands and Wales.
Boris even leads Corbyn 31% to 28% in Scotland and 30% to 24% in London
But doesn't much of the SE prefer Ms Swinson to either...
In a few places like Guildford and Lewes and St Albans maybe buy not enough to reverse the huge Tory majority in the SE especially with fear of Corbyn trumping fear of No Deal (and the SE narrowly voted Leave anyway)
You either missed or didn’t understand the Worcester by-election result, then.
Worcester is a Tory v Labour marginal which saw a Labour to Tory swing last night yes
Do you understand the concept of tactical voting? In by-elections in Cambridge and Worcester the Lib Dems won but you prattle on about the meaningless Labour to Tory swing.
In East Northants where there was no Lib Dem candidate anti-Tories got behind Labour and there was a 7% swing from Tory to Labour.
I genuinely do not understand whether your mission in life is simply to put a pro-Tory spin, however ludicrous, on every event or you really don't get it.
If the anti Tory vote gets behind the best placed candidate as they did in Peterborough and Brecon then Johnson is in trouble.
I think the anti-Tory vote is going to do exactly that. Of course identifying the best placed candidate isn't going to be easy. And there are still plenty of pro-Brexit voters around who still regard the Tories as the people who are going to deliver Brexit. So Johnson may not be as much trouble as he should be.
Yet.
LibDem voters getting behind Labour candidates cannot be guaranteed to the extent it was in 2017. Corbyn is even less popular than he was then, plus some Remain voters have made the decision not to vote Labour again. This is bound to lead to some Labour losses, unless Farage's party stands and splits the Brexiter vote.
If you're a brave and clever man or woman, now is the time to head into the betting markets. For the life of me, I can't predict what September and October will bring. Anyone who can predict it will deserve every penny they win.
If the anti Tory vote gets behind the best placed candidate as they did in Peterborough and Brecon then Johnson is in trouble.
How many bloody times?
There is no history of tactical voting in Brecon and that will not be why the Liberal Democrats won the seat. Indeed Tory switchers seem to have been decisive in the end.
What there was was evidence that even very tribal Labour voters are willing to vote for alternative parties. In that seat, with that electorate, that will not have been for tactical reasons.
I'm beginning to conclude that Brecon and Radnor was a disaster for pundits and punters. They simply don't understand what was happening and they're making fools of themselves by trying to do so.
Your interpretation is not sacrosanct. There are local factors at play in any constituency, the fact is what happened in Brecon conforms to what we are seeing elsewhere. The best placed anti-Tory picked up tactical votes from other parties. The Labour vote dropped 12%, the Lib Dems rose 14%. It is quite reasonable to conclude that most of that Labour vote went tactically to the Lib Dems. Where else are you suggesting those Labour votes went?
You are entirely misunderstanding, and so are several other posters. If these Labour voters that I called 'very tribal' are deserting the party, they will not be doing it for tactical reasons. As @nichomar has correctly grasped, I am saying this is much more likely a sign of a much more fundamental and damaging shift for Labour - that is, their traditional supporters are simply deserting them because they no longer feel the party represents them.
Tactical voting has never been a thing in Wales, for a number of reasons. But that's too long for a BTL comment.
If I have time I will write a thread header on it for OGH to consider. Because it is obviously important.
Why would anyone who eats meat blink an eyelid at "mass slaughters [of] British farm animals" which would amount to a small fraction of the numbers slaughtered annually for food?
Miss Cyclefree, the PM et al. are behaving foolishly, but it's worth repeating that there was a deal to vote for, and those MPs who voted to have a say on it then voted thrice against the deal. That wasn't the Conservatives' doing.
If Labour refuses to back a deal, the only alternatives are leaving without one, or remaining in (or another referendum). All are very politically contentious.
Of course, I'd have more sympathy for Boris Johnson if he hadn't painted himself into a corner, but there we are.
No - there's an obvious other choice you've ignored.
Change May's red lines and negotiate a fresh deal, taking the time to do so, to learn from the mistakes May made and ensuring that you do so in a way which gets your party / Parliament behind it. Of course that would involve getting an extension. But of all the things to make a red line, an arbitrary date imposed by the EU is by far the stupidest.
Can you name one red line to change that would be consistent with what Boris argued during the referendum?
As he campaigned on a fiction, a bit of rewriting ought not to be beyond his capabilities.
Though I’ve got to admit, ‘Boris Johnson, paragon of consistency’, has a novel ring to it.
Well, since "conservative" now means "revolutionary" it should be possible to give "consistency" a completely different meaning to the one it has had up to now.
The greatest Conservative Prime Ministers have all had revolutionary streaks through them.
Disraeli, Peel, Churchill and Thatcher were all pretty revolutionary in their own ways.
Yes - of course. Thatcher was famous for wanting to put up trade barriers and make life more difficult for those wanting to invest in Britain. I remember all her visits to Japanese car manufacturers telling them to piss off out of Britain. Those were the days!
Thatcher was happy to tear up the status quo and tackle shibboleths. So was Peel and Churchill.
The idea we should grip the status quo and never change is not what "Conservatives" have ever done.
Brexit is just about the biggest shibboleth going. One based on ignorance and nostalgia.
Change for the better is worthwhile. Change for the worse never is. It helps if those shouting about change have some idea as to how to distinguish between the two.
You recently asked a fair and rather important question about people who post here a lot and how they find the time.
I began posting exactly a year from the day the site started. I was in full time work then and found I could drop in and out of conversations easily without undue disruption to the work. By degrees I went into semi- and then permanent retirement and now have plenty of time available, although I probaby post less now because like many retired people I find plenty of other interesting things to do.
The Site has always had its trolls and posters with a hidden agenda. You may remember Plato. I always suspected she was being put up to it, if not actually being paid. I understand her Twitter account was closed for trolling, which suggests my suspicions were correct. I certainly think it's reasonable to assume that there are always some posters who are paid to propagandise, or at the very least receive some sort of reward, pecuniary or otherwise, for their postings.
This might help explain how some find the time to do it.
There would not in my opinion be many such posters. They tend to stand out through both the volume and superficiality of the posts, and of course their imperviousness to reasonable debate. Personally they bother me little. They are easy to skip past and I rarely engage, except to poke a little fun at them from time to time. You might like to adopt the same policy. Feeding them only helps feather their nest and if fewer did it, the rewards would diminish and they would clutter up the Site less.
It remains an excellent Site though, trolls etc notwithstanding, and I trust you will continue to give it the benefit of your own excellent contributions.
Atb
PtP
Thank you. You're far too kind about my contributions, and apart from anything else I do far too much troll-feeding.
I have to say I find it a disturbing thought that some of the more prolific posters here might actually being paid for what they're doing. It would almost make me feel sorry for the people paying them.
HYUFD’s controller is a swivel-eyed balding chap in Chingford. Keeps very quiet, most of the time.
Sterling probably going to hit a 35-year low today.
And that's with the betting markets still making No Deal only a 40% chance.
Sterling has lost about 16% of its value against the dollar since the referendum.
What do people thing will happen if we go all the way and make No Deal an accomplished fact? Parity with the dollar? One pound = 0.8 Euros?
I’m feeling pretty sick already stop rubbing it in!
We've been told on good authority that it won't matter a bit, because we eat food, not money. (Is that right? It was something like that.)
No its that we earn our income in sterling and as consumers pay our bills [even for imports] in sterling. Currency fluctuations are just not that big of a deal.
Thanks. I knew it was something like that.
So prices won't increase if the pound drops to parity with the dollar, or goes down to 0.8 Euros, because we spend pounds in the shops, not dollars or Euros. And there won't be any goods in the shops from abroad anyway. So the exchange rate really doesn't make any difference.
I had trouble understanding that before, but it seems much clearer now.
Prices will increase, marginally, which we can measure as inflation.
It is inflation that measures price changes, not sterling.
Thank you. We're so lucky to have people here who can explain such technical matters as what inflation is.
And also to assure us authoritatively that prices will increase only "marginally." Just so that we can profit from your prophetic abilities to the full, perhaps you could also tell us just how low sterling is going to go.
First game of the premier league season tonight - and Liverpool are 1.16 - not much fun to be had there
have you considered the PB Fantasy league instead?
Yes I have considered - but I'm crap at remembering players names and such-like so I'd be rubbish. I do enjoy watching the games though. Hopefully once we're out of the EU there'll be no BT/Sky splitting (There's a benefit of leaving the EU for you lot!!!!)
Why do you think that?
The PL split between BT/Sky was initiated by EU anti-monopoly laws
You recently asked a fair and rather important question about people who post here a lot and how they find the time.
I began posting exactly a year from the day the site started. I was in full time work then and found I could drop in and out of conversations easily without undue disruption to the work. By degrees I went into semi- and then permanent retirement and now have plenty of time available, although I probaby post less now because like many retired people I find plenty of other interesting things to do.
The Site has always had its trolls and posters with a hidden agenda. You may remember Plato. I always suspected she was being put up to it, if not actually being paid. I understand her Twitter account was closed for trolling, which suggests my suspicions were correct. I certainly think it's reasonable to assume that there are always some posters who are paid to propagandise, or at the very least receive some sort of reward, pecuniary or otherwise, for their postings.
This might help explain how some find the time to do it.
There would not in my opinion be many such posters. They tend to stand out through both the volume and superficiality of the posts, and of course their imperviousness to reasonable debate. Personally they bother me little. They are easy to skip past and I rarely engage, except to poke a little fun at them from time to time. You might like to adopt the same policy. Feeding them only helps feather their nest and if fewer did it, the rewards would diminish and they would clutter up the Site less.
It remains an excellent Site though, trolls etc notwithstanding, and I trust you will continue to give it the benefit of your own excellent contributions.
Atb
PtP
Thank you. You're far too kind about my contributions, and apart from anything else I do far too much troll-feeding.
I have to say I find it a disturbing thought that some of the more prolific posters here might actually being paid for what they're doing. It would almost make me feel sorry for the people paying them.
It’s actually quite good fun to see if you can identify them in real life from the information they give away!
Boris is putting the country first and causing a massive upset in the party - which is why TSE, Herdson, Nabavi and BigG have left - because they're upset with what he is doing.
Boris pushing ahead with Brexit is a modern day repeal of the corn laws. People like the quad I mentioned who liked the old laws are not happy.
Oh yes - the country is gagging for No Deal Brexit.....
TSE et al can answer for themselves, but the flight of Tories like them just hands the entryist kippers and nationalists more control.
The Conservative Party is dead, the corpse has just not stopped twitching yet.
That's what people said about Thatcher, Peel and Disraeli [Churchill is an exception]. Boris is in good company then.
Why is anyone even talking about a GE on Fri 1st Nov?
We are due to leave at 11pm on Thur 31 Oct.
So if the GE was on Thur 31 Oct, none of the results would have been declared by the time we leave - so we would still definitely be out before a new PM could intervene.
It would also be better for Boris as there would probably be less disruption that day than the following day.
Aiui 1/11 came from the Saj saying they'd be ready for an election. I imagine he meant any time after we'd left, rather than the 1st itself.
If the anti Tory vote gets behind the best placed candidate as they did in Peterborough and Brecon then Johnson is in trouble.
How many bloody times?
There is no history of tactical voting in Brecon and that will not be why the Liberal Democrats won the seat. Indeed Tory switchers seem to have been decisive in the end.
What there was was evidence that even very tribal Labour voters are willing to vote for alternative parties. In that seat, with that electorate, that will not have been for tactical reasons.
I'm beginning to conclude that Brecon and Radnor was a disaster for pundits and punters. They simply don't understand what was happening and they're making fools of themselves by trying to do so.
Your interpretation is not sacrosanct. There are local factors at play in any constituency, the fact is what happened in Brecon conforms to what we are seeing elsewhere. The best placed anti-Tory picked up tactical votes from other parties. The Labour vote dropped 12%, the Lib Dems rose 14%. It is quite reasonable to conclude that most of that Labour vote went tactically to the Lib Dems. Where else are you suggesting those Labour votes went?
You are entirely misunderstanding, and so are several other posters. If these Labour voters that I called 'very tribal' are deserting the party, they will not be doing it for tactical reasons. As @nichomar has correctly grasped, I am saying this is much more likely a sign of a much more fundamental and damaging shift for Labour - that is, their traditional supporters are simply deserting them because they no longer feel the party represents them.
Tactical voting has never been a thing in Wales, for a number of reasons. But that's too long for a BTL comment.
If I have time I will write a thread header on it for OGH to consider. Because it is obviously important.
You should do that.
I rather suspect that we are seeing the slow collapse of Labour in Wales, with Plaid Cymru taking some of that, and the rest going to the Brexit Party.
Sterling probably going to hit a 35-year low today.
And that's with the betting markets still making No Deal only a 40% chance.
Sterling has lost about 16% of its value against the dollar since the referendum.
What do people thing will happen if we go all the way and make No Deal an accomplished fact? Parity with the dollar? One pound = 0.8 Euros?
I’m feeling pretty sick already stop rubbing it in!
We've been told on good authority that it won't matter a bit, because we eat food, not money. (Is that right? It was something like that.)
No its that we earn our income in sterling and as consumers pay our bills [even for imports] in sterling. Currency fluctuations are just not that big of a deal.
Thanks. I knew it was something like that.
So prices won't increase if the pound drops to parity with the dollar, or goes down to 0.8 Euros, because we spend pounds in the shops, not dollars or Euros. And there won't be any goods in the shops from abroad anyway. So the exchange rate really doesn't make any difference.
I had trouble understanding that before, but it seems much clearer now.
Prices will increase, marginally, which we can measure as inflation.
It is inflation that measures price changes, not sterling.
Thank you. We're so lucky to have people here who can explain such technical matters as what inflation is.
And also to assure us authoritatively that prices will increase only "marginally." Just so that we can profit from your prophetic abilities to the full, perhaps you could also tell us just how low sterling is going to go.
It will, that's how it works. Show me the massive spike we got in inflation last time the pound fell please?
Sterling has lost about 40% of its value in the last decade, but we have had consistently under control and low inflation over that decade. Because sterling is not a measure of inflation you idiot.
Sterling probably going to hit a 35-year low today.
And that's with the betting markets still making No Deal only a 40% chance.
Sterling has lost about 16% of its value against the dollar since the referendum.
What do people thing will happen if we go all the way and make No Deal an accomplished fact? Parity with the dollar? One pound = 0.8 Euros?
I’m feeling pretty sick already stop rubbing it in!
We've been told on good authority that it won't matter a bit, because we eat food, not money. (Is that right? It was something like that.)
No its that we earn our income in sterling and as consumers pay our bills [even for imports] in sterling. Currency fluctuations are just not that big of a deal.
Thanks. I knew it was something like that.
So prices won't increase if the pound drops to parity with the dollar, or goes down to 0.8 Euros, because we spend pounds in the shops, not dollars or Euros. And there won't be any goods in the shops from abroad anyway. So the exchange rate really doesn't make any difference.
I had trouble understanding that before, but it seems much clearer now.
Prices will increase, marginally, which we can measure as inflation.
It is inflation that measures price changes, not sterling.
Thank you. We're so lucky to have people here who can explain such technical matters as what inflation is.
And also to assure us authoritatively that prices will increase only "marginally." Just so that we can profit from your prophetic abilities to the full, perhaps you could also tell us just how low sterling is going to go.
It will, that's how it works. Show me the massive spike we got in inflation last time the pound fell please?
Sterling has lost about 40% of its value in the last decade, but we have had consistently under control and low inflation over that decade. Because sterling is not a measure of inflation you idiot.
Temper, temper!
But what I asked you for wasn't another of your predictions about the past, but one about the future.
How low are you assuming sterling will go after a No Deal Brexit, when you give us your authoritative assurance that prices will increase only "marginally"?
First game of the premier league season tonight - and Liverpool are 1.16 - not much fun to be had there
have you considered the PB Fantasy league instead?
Yes I have considered - but I'm crap at remembering players names and such-like so I'd be rubbish. I do enjoy watching the games though. Hopefully once we're out of the EU there'll be no BT/Sky splitting (There's a benefit of leaving the EU for you lot!!!!)
Why do you think that?
The PL split between BT/Sky was initiated by EU anti-monopoly laws
And the split has helped produce far greater revenue for the PL. The requirement for more than one broadcaster to win live rights is not going to change post-Brexit.
Why are people worried about the value of the pound when there’ll be nothing to buy in the shops anyway come October 31st.
“Only lily-livered Southern Softies are worried about the economy anyway. My pension is triple-locked, mate.”
I finally concluded that must be the point. That prices of imported goods are nothing to worry about, because there will be no imported goods.
My dear old Dad ate nothing but spam and dripping when he was growing up and he’s still going strong at 85.
Mind you, he emigrated the fuck out of post-war Britain as soon as he could and is now quite happy in Auckland drinking the kind of coffee PBers wouldn’t allow him to have since he’s WWC.
First game of the premier league season tonight - and Liverpool are 1.16 - not much fun to be had there
have you considered the PB Fantasy league instead?
Yes I have considered - but I'm crap at remembering players names and such-like so I'd be rubbish. I do enjoy watching the games though. Hopefully once we're out of the EU there'll be no BT/Sky splitting (There's a benefit of leaving the EU for you lot!!!!)
Why do you think that?
The PL split between BT/Sky was initiated by EU anti-monopoly laws
And the split has helped produce far greater revenue for the PL. The requirement for more than one broadcaster to win live rights is not going to change post-Brexit.
A boost for the PL for sure. A blow for consumers where they have to pay double to watch all the matches. I think Bozo and Gove should look into this now that we're close to leaving.
Sterling probably going to hit a 35-year low today.
And that's with the betting markets still making No Deal only a 40% chance.
Sterling has lost about 16% of its value against the dollar since the referendum.
What do people thing will happen if we go all the way and make No Deal an accomplished fact? Parity with the dollar? One pound = 0.8 Euros?
I’m feeling pretty sick already stop rubbing it in!
We've been told on good authority that it won't matter a bit, because we eat food, not money. (Is that right? It was something like that.)
No its that we earn our income in sterling and as consumers pay our bills [even for imports] in sterling. Currency fluctuations are just not that big of a deal.
Thanks. I knew it was something like that.
So prices won't increase if the pound drops to parity with the dollar, or goes down to 0.8 Euros, because we spend pounds in the shops, not dollars or Euros. And there won't be any goods in the shops from abroad anyway. So the exchange rate really doesn't make any difference.
I had trouble understanding that before, but it seems much clearer now.
Prices will increase, marginally, which we can measure as inflation.
It is inflation that measures price changes, not sterling.
Thank you. We're so lucky to have people here who can explain such technical matters as what inflation is.
And also to assure us authoritatively that prices will increase only "marginally." Just so that we can profit from your prophetic abilities to the full, perhaps you could also tell us just how low sterling is going to go.
It will, that's how it works. Show me the massive spike we got in inflation last time the pound fell please?
Sterling has lost about 40% of its value in the last decade, but we have had consistently under control and low inflation over that decade. Because sterling is not a measure of inflation you idiot.
Temper, temper!
But what I asked you for wasn't another of your predictions about the past, but one about the future.
How low are you assuming sterling will go after a No Deal Brexit, when you give us your authoritative assurance that prices will increase only "marginally"?
Possible about 90 cents to the dollar, about 80 cents to the Euro.
I think the key point was they (the EU) from their point of view delays the leaving date if we wish to take advantage of that i.e stop the clock.
There is no mechanism for a delay without a new PM. As an EU member, we get a blocking vote in deciding to stop the clock. Until we have left. Then the provisions of Article 50(5) kick in - we join from scratch.
Boris is putting the country first and causing a massive upset in the party - which is why TSE, Herdson, Nabavi and BigG have left - because they're upset with what he is doing.
Boris pushing ahead with Brexit is a modern day repeal of the corn laws. People like the quad I mentioned who liked the old laws are not happy.
Oh yes - the country is gagging for No Deal Brexit.....
TSE et al can answer for themselves, but the flight of Tories like them just hands the entryist kippers and nationalists more control.
The Conservative Party is dead, the corpse has just not stopped twitching yet.
That's what people said about Thatcher, Peel and Disraeli [Churchill is an exception]. Boris is in good company then.
No it isn't. You have so little understanding of politics and history it is really quite painful to watch.
I know that HYUFD can be irritating for his over-reliance on polls as predictors of the future. However, it's amusing to see numbers of his harshest critics citing polling evidence from a local by-election in Worcester as evidence that can be instantly translated to a GE LD landslide not only there but throughout the nation. They may be right but really, is this the level of psephological analysis Brexititis has driven us to?
First game of the premier league season tonight - and Liverpool are 1.16 - not much fun to be had there
have you considered the PB Fantasy league instead?
Yes I have considered - but I'm crap at remembering players names and such-like so I'd be rubbish. I do enjoy watching the games though. Hopefully once we're out of the EU there'll be no BT/Sky splitting (There's a benefit of leaving the EU for you lot!!!!)
Why do you think that?
The PL split between BT/Sky was initiated by EU anti-monopoly laws
And the split has helped produce far greater revenue for the PL. The requirement for more than one broadcaster to win live rights is not going to change post-Brexit.
A boost for the PL for sure. A blow for consumers where they have to pay double to watch all the matches. I think Bozo and Gove should look into this now that we're close to leaving.
Absolutely it was a moronic decision. It hasn't produced competition for consumers between Sky and BT because if you want to watch football you don't get a choice you have to pay for both. If you want to watch tonight's Liverpool game you don't get to pick between Sky and BT which is what competition is.
Sterling probably going to hit a 35-year low today.
And that's with the betting markets still making No Deal only a 40% chance.
Sterling has lost about 16% of its value against the dollar since the referendum.
What do people thing will happen if we go all the way and make No Deal an accomplished fact? Parity with the dollar? One pound = 0.8 Euros?
I’m feeling pretty sick already stop rubbing it in!
We've been told on good authority that it won't matter a bit, because we eat food, not money. (Is that right? It was something like that.)
No its that we earn our income in sterling and as consumers pay our bills [even for imports] in sterling. Currency fluctuations are just not that big of a deal.
Thanks. I knew it was something like that.
So prices won't increase if the pound drops to parity with the dollar, or goes down to 0.8 Euros, because we spend pounds in the shops, not dollars or Euros. And there won't be any goods in the shops from abroad anyway. So the exchange rate really doesn't make any difference.
I had trouble understanding that before, but it seems much clearer now.
Prices will increase, marginally, which we can measure as inflation.
It is inflation that measures price changes, not sterling.
Thank you. We're so lucky to have people here who can explain such technical matters as what inflation is.
And also to assure us authoritatively that prices will increase only "marginally." Just so that we can profit from your prophetic abilities to the full, perhaps you could also tell us just how low sterling is going to go.
It will, that's how it works. Show me the massive spike we got in inflation last time the pound fell please?
Sterling has lost about 40% of its value in the last decade, but we have had consistently under control and low inflation over that decade. Because sterling is not a measure of inflation you idiot.
Temper, temper!
But what I asked you for wasn't another of your predictions about the past, but one about the future.
How low are you assuming sterling will go after a No Deal Brexit, when you give us your authoritative assurance that prices will increase only "marginally"?
Possible about 90 cents to the dollar, about 80 cents to the Euro.
Just catching up, god help me. Of course inflation did spike after the VOTE.
You recently asked a fair and rather important question about people who post here a lot and how they find the time.
I began posting exactly a year from the day the site started. I was in full time work then and found I could drop in and out of conversations easily without undue disruption to the work. By degrees I went into semi- and then permanent retirement and now have plenty of time available, although I probaby post less now because like many retired people I find plenty of other interesting things to do.
The Site has always had its trolls and posters with a hidden agenda. You may remember Plato. I always suspected she was being put up to it, if not actually being paid. I understand her Twitter account was closed for trolling, which suggests my suspicions were correct. I certainly think it's reasonable to assume that there are always some posters who are paid to propagandise, or at the very least receive some sort of reward, pecuniary or otherwise, for their postings.
This might help explain how some find the time to do it.
There would not in my opinion be many such posters. They tend to stand out through both the volume and superficiality of the posts, and of course their imperviousness to reasonable debate. Personally they bother me little. They are easy to skip past and I rarely engage, except to poke a little fun at them from time to time. You might like to adopt the same policy. Feeding them only helps feather their nest and if fewer did it, the rewards would diminish and they would clutter up the Site less.
It remains an excellent Site though, trolls etc notwithstanding, and I trust you will continue to give it the benefit of your own excellent contributions.
Atb
PtP
Thank you. You're far too kind about my contributions, and apart from anything else I do far too much troll-feeding.
I have to say I find it a disturbing thought that some of the more prolific posters here might actually being paid for what they're doing. It would almost make me feel sorry for the people paying them.
HYUFD’s controller is a swivel-eyed balding chap in Chingford. Keeps very quiet, most of the time.
Nobody should assume who I think the trolls are here. If I wanted to 'out' them, I'd confront them directly.
Boris is putting the country first and causing a massive upset in the party - which is why TSE, Herdson, Nabavi and BigG have left - because they're upset with what he is doing.
Boris pushing ahead with Brexit is a modern day repeal of the corn laws. People like the quad I mentioned who liked the old laws are not happy.
Oh yes - the country is gagging for No Deal Brexit.....
TSE et al can answer for themselves, but the flight of Tories like them just hands the entryist kippers and nationalists more control.
The Conservative Party is dead, the corpse has just not stopped twitching yet.
That's what people said about Thatcher, Peel and Disraeli [Churchill is an exception]. Boris is in good company then.
No it isn't. You have so little understanding of politics and history it is really quite painful to watch.
Anyway, I'm off. Have a good day.
Nobody said Peel was divisive? He didn't upset anyone?
Why is anyone even talking about a GE on Fri 1st Nov?
We are due to leave at 11pm on Thur 31 Oct.
So if the GE was on Thur 31 Oct, none of the results would have been declared by the time we leave - so we would still definitely be out before a new PM could intervene.
It would also be better for Boris as there would probably be less disruption that day than the following day.
Can I ask you to read yesterday’s threads for a variety of answers, take your pick to save the rest of the day being another edition of Groundhog Day!
Surely, the single best argument for No Deal Brexit on 31st October is that it woud break pb.com out of groundhog day?
Comments
There's a big psychological problem with changing the deal/red lines, though. It's what Machiavelli wrote about when he told of the difficulties new regimes or potential new regimes face.
All those who stand to lose out will be dead against you, whereas those who *might* be advantaged by your victory will be lukewarm allies, because they cannot guarantee you will win or honour your promises whereas the incumbent prince will most certainly destroy them if he wins.
If Boris changes, what does he change? If it's more pro-EU that flies in the face of all he's said and could precipitate (justified, given his stance) outrage. If he's more anti-EU/distant then that is unlikely to persuade those holding out on backing a deal, who are mostly pro-EU.
More broadly, it'd also help keep BP doing well.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/04/12/elizabeth-warren-profile-young-republican-2020-president-226613
From a DNC pov, she is much better placed to unify Biden and Bernie voters, as well. Biden is the establishment candidate, Bernie is still the renegade, and she is perfectly placed (better than Harris, IMHO) to capitalise on that.
That would involve Boris having been consistent during the referendum campaign and in the time since.
Consistency - or even coherence - or knowledge of the relevant law (see the nonsense he promulgated over GATT rules) are not one of Johnson's characteristics.
https://twitter.com/kezdugdale/status/1159807553284579328
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1159807497865220096
Though I’ve got to admit, ‘Boris Johnson, paragon of consistency’, has a novel ring to it.
But ending free movement was a key part of the campaign. Controlled but liberal migration is a good thing.
The red lines didn't come from nowhere.
Year on year growth, huge rises in employment and very low unemployment.
A massive reduction in the deficit during that period.
Its a shame none of that made the BBC headlines like the "guess" at todays GDP figure has.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/vladimir-poutine-vingt-ans-de-pouvoir-en-images-20190809
In East Northants where there was no Lib Dem candidate anti-Tories got behind Labour and there was a 7% swing from Tory to Labour.
I genuinely do not understand whether your mission in life is simply to put a pro-Tory spin, however ludicrous, on every event or you really don't get it.
If the anti Tory vote gets behind the best placed candidate as they did in Peterborough and Brecon then Johnson is in trouble.
Sterling has lost about 16% of its value against the dollar since the referendum.
What do people thing will happen if we go all the way and make No Deal an accomplished fact? Parity with the dollar? One pound = 0.8 Euros?
Not if the people who voted Lib Dem to defeat the tories at the council evelare prepared to do the same to defeat the Tories at Westminster.
I've just had another munch on this market.
All the mood music from Brussels is that they're refusing to negotiate - and it would make sense to send the message to other countries thinking of leaving that they best they can get is No Deal.
The punishment beating that Bozo himself warned of is on it's way
Value at 8/5 still
Lib Dem 47.6 (+8,2)
Con 45.6 (+3)
Green 4.6 ( -3.7)
Lab 2.2 (-2.7)
Disraeli, Peel, Churchill and Thatcher were all pretty revolutionary in their own ways.
- No debts
- No mortgages
- No loan agreements
- No credit card bills
- Savings (apart from pensions) tucked away in various places
Average UK debt per adult is £31,000 but Brexit will not affect me or my family or my property, car or other possessions.
There is no history of tactical voting in Brecon and that will not be why the Liberal Democrats won the seat. Indeed Tory switchers seem to have been decisive in the end.
What there was was evidence that even very tribal Labour voters are willing to vote for alternative parties. In that seat, with that electorate, that will not have been for tactical reasons.
I'm beginning to conclude that Brecon and Radnor was a disaster for pundits and punters. They simply don't understand what was happening and they're making fools of themselves by trying to do so.
Who knows should be the answer. Lets start talking about our future relationship and THEN we can talk about borders. Putting the cart before the horse in trying to sort out the border first, then talk about the future is nonsense.
Yet.
Whereas these days it's just about winning one of those TV contests for singing or being ignorant in public or being able to survive in a room without intellectual stimulation or going to the lavatory or whatever. Being PM is just another version of those, only with flags, a car and nice weekend home.
There was an opportunity post 2016 to position themselves as pro Europe and pro Union, to court the unionist vote, but they've botched it with incompetent leadership in Westminster and Edinburgh.
Pound could go less than parity it still wouldn't be anything to hyperventilate over. Sterling is a natural shock absorber.
Almost.
As for the Tory party, it is gone. It is just another branch of UKIP these days.
So your saying that those labour switchers deserted labour for more fundamental reasons?
We are due to leave at 11pm on Thur 31 Oct.
So if the GE was on Thur 31 Oct, none of the results would have been declared by the time we leave - so we would still definitely be out before a new PM could intervene.
It would also be better for Boris as there would probably be less disruption that day than the following day.
So prices won't increase if the pound drops to parity with the dollar, or goes down to 0.8 Euros, because we spend pounds in the shops, not dollars or Euros. And there won't be any goods in the shops from abroad anyway. So the exchange rate really doesn't make any difference.
I had trouble understanding that before, but it seems much clearer now.
Boris pushing ahead with Brexit is a modern day repeal of the corn laws. People like the quad I mentioned who liked the old laws are not happy.
You recently asked a fair and rather important question about people who post here a lot and how they find the time.
I began posting exactly a year from the day the site started. I was in full time work then and found I could drop in and out of conversations easily without undue disruption to the work. By degrees I went into semi- and then permanent retirement and now have plenty of time available, although I probaby post less now because like many retired people I find plenty of other interesting things to do.
The Site has always had its trolls and posters with a hidden agenda. You may remember Plato. I always suspected she was being put up to it, if not actually being paid. I understand her Twitter account was closed for trolling, which suggests my suspicions were correct. I certainly think it's reasonable to assume that there are always some posters who are paid to propagandise, or at the very least receive some sort of reward, pecuniary or otherwise, for their postings.
This might help explain how some find the time to do it.
There would not in my opinion be many such posters. They tend to stand out through both the volume and superficiality of the posts, and of course their imperviousness to reasonable debate. Personally they bother me little. They are easy to skip past and I rarely engage, except to poke a little fun at them from time to time. You might like to adopt the same policy. Feeding them only helps feather their nest and if fewer did it, the rewards would diminish and they would clutter up the Site less.
It remains an excellent Site though, trolls etc notwithstanding, and I trust you will continue to give it the benefit of your own excellent contributions.
Atb
PtP
It is inflation that measures price changes, not sterling.
The idea we should grip the status quo and never change is not what "Conservatives" have ever done.
Your interpretation is not sacrosanct. There are local factors at play in any constituency, the fact is what happened in Brecon conforms to what we are seeing elsewhere. The best placed anti-Tory picked up tactical votes from other parties. The Labour vote dropped 12%, the Lib Dems rose 14%. It is quite reasonable to conclude that most of that Labour vote went tactically to the Lib Dems. Where else are you suggesting those Labour votes went?
I think the key point was they (the EU) from their point of view delays the leaving date if we wish to take advantage of that i.e stop the clock.
TSE et al can answer for themselves, but the flight of Tories like them just hands the entryist kippers and nationalists more control.
The Conservative Party is dead, the corpse has just not stopped twitching yet.
I have to say I find it a disturbing thought that some of the more prolific posters here might actually being paid for what they're doing. It would almost make me feel sorry for the people paying them.
https://twitter.com/KateEMcCann/status/1159815590321762306
“Only lily-livered Southern Softies are worried about the economy anyway. My pension is triple-locked, mate.”
If you're a brave and clever man or woman, now is the time to head into the betting markets. For the life of me, I can't predict what September and October will bring. Anyone who can predict it will deserve every penny they win.
Tactical voting has never been a thing in Wales, for a number of reasons. But that's too long for a BTL comment.
If I have time I will write a thread header on it for OGH to consider. Because it is obviously important.
Change for the better is worthwhile. Change for the worse never is. It helps if those shouting about change have some idea as to how to distinguish between the two.
And also to assure us authoritatively that prices will increase only "marginally." Just so that we can profit from your prophetic abilities to the full, perhaps you could also tell us just how low sterling is going to go.
I rather suspect that we are seeing the slow collapse of Labour in Wales, with Plaid Cymru taking some of that, and the rest going to the Brexit Party.
Sterling has lost about 40% of its value in the last decade, but we have had consistently under control and low inflation over that decade. Because sterling is not a measure of inflation you idiot.
But what I asked you for wasn't another of your predictions about the past, but one about the future.
How low are you assuming sterling will go after a No Deal Brexit, when you give us your authoritative assurance that prices will increase only "marginally"?
That would change everything...
Mind you, he emigrated the fuck out of post-war Britain as soon as he could and is now quite happy in Auckland drinking the kind of coffee PBers wouldn’t allow him to have since he’s WWC.
Perhaps he can explain how long we have to wait for the economic bounce he is predicting from Brexit?
Anyway, I'm off. Have a good day.
I expect after a no deal Brexit sterling will go past parity and it will spike marginally again.
*Punxsutawney Phil waves*