My quick and dirty is that when I add up SNP/LDs/TIG/Indys/Tory Remain ultras and Labour’s Watson wing I only get to 180-190 very reliable MPs to stop No Deal.
Where do the other 130-140 MPs come from if Corbyn and Johnson aren’t playing ball?
Similiar numbers for those who might now pass the WA in extremis now.
Polls like those are akin to those in the United States that pit a 'generic Democrat' against Trump. In almost every case, the 'generic Democrat' does better than any actual named candidate, because actual human beings are flawed and their flaws be usually be easily exploited by their opponents.
The trouble with this sort of polling is that people project their own preferred new Labour leader when they answer the poll. The person who switched to Labour thinking of Starmer may be a bit more hesitant to give their support to a Piddock-led party.
Exactly. While the Corbyn rating numbers are truly atrocious polls along the lines of "If X was different (how, unspecified) would you do something else?" - Can't see the Labour selectariat selecting someone fundamentally different from Magic Grandpa. What a mess, one party led by a knave, the other by a fool.
On OGH point:
All this means is that there are no downsides for Jo Swinson when she snubs Corbyn’s latest opportunistic initiatives.
I'm not so sure. "Get lost Grandpa" may be remembered (and certainly will be presented by some) as "Lib Dems refused to help stop Brexit".
Yep, there's nothing that shouts out willingness to cooperate & work together than immediately dismissing out of hand an offer to cooperate & work together.
If the Lib Dems really think that stopping Brexit is paramount then all other objectives are, by definition, secondary and they should be prepared to work with anyone and everyone.
Are they really saying that they will sit idly by and allow no deal because of their personal antipathy to Corbyn?
This plan is designed to set up a winnable (in theory) election for Labour, not to stop No Deal. The Tories would be split because many MPs would have a problem standing on a No Deal manifesto, and Corbyn thinks that would benefit him.
The trouble with this sort of polling is that people project their own preferred new Labour leader when they answer the poll. The person who switched to Labour thinking of Starmer may be a bit more hesitant to give their support to a Piddock-led party.
Exactly. While the Corbyn rating numbers are truly atrocious polls along the lines of "If X was different (how, unspecified) would you do something else?" - Can't see the Labour selectariat selecting someone fundamentally different from Magic Grandpa. What a mess, one party led by a knave, the other by a fool.
On OGH point:
All this means is that there are no downsides for Jo Swinson when she snubs Corbyn’s latest opportunistic initiatives.
I'm not so sure. "Get lost Grandpa" may be remembered (and certainly will be presented by some) as "Lib Dems refused to help stop Brexit".
Yep, there's nothing that shouts out willingness to cooperate & work together than immediately dismissing out of hand an offer to cooperate & work together.
If the Lib Dems really think that stopping Brexit is paramount then all other objectives are, by definition, secondary and they should be prepared to work with anyone and everyone.
Are they really saying that they will sit idly by and allow no deal because of their personal antipathy to Corbyn?
Is Jeremy Corbyn really saying that he will allow no deal because he regards the role as Prime Minister as reserved to him?
She's not rejecting up to 200 of them out of hand. She's rejecting Jeremy Corbyn's claim to lead such a government. Given that he is monumentally unpopular, has shown all the leadership on Brexit of a damp dishcloth and does not even lead his own party in Parliament effectively, why should he and only he occupy that position?
Since this thing involves mortal enemies agreeing on one person the only way to make it work is if you tell everyone that it doesn't matter who the caretaker is, because all they're going to do is turn the lights off when everyone's gone home.
The way she should be playing it is to say, "The caretaker doesn't matter, we're not Jeremy Corbyn fans but we need to stop No Deal, if you can find enough Tory votes then you'll have ours". That makes the $GRANDEE option easier to sell to Labour MPs in the event that it turns out that Jeremy Corbyn is unable to attract the support of lifelong Conservative MPs.
She's also looking to pick up the votes of erstwhile Conservative Remainers. There is an alternate universe out there where David Herdson and Richard Nabavi are voting Lib Dem at the next election. It is not one where Jo Swinson has entertained for a second the idea of backing Jeremy Corbyn, even temporarily.
Well does she want to stop Brexit or not? Does she think that will happen without compromising something? Or does she care more about a GE than stopping Brexit?
That's fine, but it means she has no high ground vs Johnson and Corbyn.
I think the lib dems may have- what's that phrase I keep reading here? Ah right- overplayed their hand. Like Mike they're assuming all these switchers are now die-hard Corbyn haters. Actually I suspect many of them are just driven remainers. How happy are they going to be about their party choosing No Deal with Boris over People's Vote with Corbyn? The LDs have been slumping in the polls since just after Euros, and Swinson isn't doing much to stop the trend.
The trouble with this sort of polling is that people project their own preferred new Labour leader when they answer the poll. The person who switched to Labour thinking of Starmer may be a bit more hesitant to give their support to a Piddock-led party.
Exactly. While the Corbyn rating numbers are truly atrocious polls along the lines of "If X was different (how, unspecified) would you do something else?" - Can't see the Labour selectariat selecting someone fundamentally different from Magic Grandpa. What a mess, one party led by a knave, the other by a fool.
On OGH point:
All this means is that there are no downsides for Jo Swinson when she snubs Corbyn’s latest opportunistic initiatives.
I'm not so sure. "Get lost Grandpa" may be remembered (and certainly will be presented by some) as "Lib Dems refused to help stop Brexit".
Yep, there's nothing that shouts out willingness to cooperate & work together than immediately dismissing out of hand an offer to cooperate & work together.
If the Lib Dems really think that stopping Brexit is paramount then all other objectives are, by definition, secondary and they should be prepared to work with anyone and everyone.
Are they really saying that they will sit idly by and allow no deal because of their personal antipathy to Corbyn?
Is Jeremy Corbyn really saying that he will allow no deal because he regards the role as Prime Minister as reserved to him?
Again we get to the massive impass that no one is really prepared to compromise their position.
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
The whole point of this government would be a single-item government. If it ever happened, the person would need to be seen to be dragged to the chair like the Speaker.
To satisfy everyone that person is going to need to be reasonably non-threatening to all parts of the coalition. The likeliest is a Labour grandee (Margaret Beckett is a good call).
But you could easily see how it ends up being someone like Caroline Lucas, Ian Blackford or Liz Saville-Roberts.
There's one other leftfield option, and I've no idea if she is at 1000, but Theresa May being brought back as PM for a day and getting her WA passed at attempt 4 has crossed my mind
The problem is that they had three chances to back it and failed. I don't see how it can now come back to be voted on again. Sarah Vine made a great point being annoyed with those MPs who voted against the WDA now complaining about no deal. It was always going to be the result of those votes. Their stupidity is beyond belief.
Sarah Vine is married to the Leader of the House. Perhaps she does know something.
The trouble with this sort of polling is that people project their own preferred new Labour leader when they answer the poll. The person who switched to Labour thinking of Starmer may be a bit more hesitant to give their support to a Piddock-led party.
Exactly. While the Corbyn rating numbers are truly atrocious polls along the lines of "If X was different (how, unspecified) would you do something else?" - Can't see the Labour selectariat selecting someone fundamentally different from Magic Grandpa. What a mess, one party led by a knave, the other by a fool.
On OGH point:
All this means is that there are no downsides for Jo Swinson when she snubs Corbyn’s latest opportunistic initiatives.
I'm not so sure. "Get lost Grandpa" may be remembered (and certainly will be presented by some) as "Lib Dems refused to help stop Brexit".
Yep, there's nothing that shouts out willingness to cooperate & work together than immediately dismissing out of hand an offer to cooperate & work together.
If the Lib Dems really think that stopping Brexit is paramount then all other objectives are, by definition, secondary and they should be prepared to work with anyone and everyone.
Are they really saying that they will sit idly by and allow no deal because of their personal antipathy to Corbyn?
Is Jeremy Corbyn really saying that he will allow no deal because he regards the role as Prime Minister as reserved to him?
Perhaps. For all his weaknesses he still has way more MPs provably backing him than any other opposition mp, so is in a stronger position than his enemies think.
Totally agree with Mike's thread. As ever, 100% on the money.
I'm quite glad Corbyn raised the prospect of himself as caretaker now rather than in a fortnight. It gives everyone an opportunity to spit out the poison before its too late, and to move on to something more palatable.
I continue to hold the tentative view that the only caretaker solution will be a remainer tory. Why? Because Corbyn's cronies simply won't countenance another Labour MP as PM. Perhaps his would-be successor Rebecca Long-Bailey might but it would effectively be Corbyn standing down. Plus I think she's useless. A more serious prospect would be Yvette Cooper or Keir Starmer. However, the same first part applies. They're serious long-term candidates and once in position won't give up easily.
Corbyn is also stubborn enough not to want any of the alternative opposition, such as Jo Swinson. He's probably right not to give them any more oxygen than his own toxicity already is.
Ken Clarke remains the real option. He's the least threatening to Corbyn or indeed any Labour member. He's the most likely to win over remainer Tories. And, most importantly of all, he clearly has no long-term ambitions left. He has held major offices of State: Chancellor of the Exchequer, Home Secretary, Health Secretary, Justice Secretary and Education Secretary. He is the Father of the House, thus commanding immense stature in Parliament and with the Palace.
I got on him at 130/1 with Ladbrokes (and I tipped on here). That's now come in to 25/1 and even the Telegraph have picked up on the idea:
The trouble with this sort of polling is that people project their own preferred new Labour leader when they answer the poll. The person who switched to Labour thinking of Starmer may be a bit more hesitant to give their support to a Piddock-led party.
Exactly. While the Corbyn rating numbers are truly atrocious polls along the lines of "If X was different (how, unspecified) would you do something else?" - Can't see the Labour selectariat selecting someone fundamentally different from Magic Grandpa. What a mess, one party led by a knave, the other by a fool.
On OGH point:
All this means is that there are no downsides for Jo Swinson when she snubs Corbyn’s latest opportunistic initiatives.
I'm not so sure. "Get lost Grandpa" may be remembered (and certainly will be presented by some) as "Lib Dems refused to help stop Brexit".
Yep, there's nothing that shouts out willingness to cooperate & work together than immediately dismissing out of hand an offer to cooperate & work together.
If the Lib Dems really think that stopping Brexit is paramount then all other objectives are, by definition, secondary and they should be prepared to work with anyone and everyone.
Are they really saying that they will sit idly by and allow no deal because of their personal antipathy to Corbyn?
A PM has enormous powers, even if he or she is there for a short time, especially in relation to national security matters, and can exercise those powers without reference to Parliament. There are very very good reasons - other than personal antipathy to Corbyn - for not wanting Corbyn, Milne, McDonnell or Murray anywhere near the levers of power, even for a short time.
And if it is purely a caretaker role then why is it so important for Corbyn to do it? He could propose Ed Milliband for instance to do all the Art 50 stuff.
Polls like those are akin to those in the United States that pit a 'generic Democrat' against Trump. In almost every case, the 'generic Democrat' does better than any actual named candidate, because actual human beings are flawed and their flaws be usually be easily exploited by their opponents.
So they key is for someone to rename themselves as Mr/Mrs Generic Democrat. Problem solved .
Polls like those are akin to those in the United States that pit a 'generic Democrat' against Trump. In almost every case, the 'generic Democrat' does better than any actual named candidate, because actual human beings are flawed and their flaws be usually be easily exploited by their opponents.
It is slight but Biden is outperforming the congressional ballot margin in H2H vs Trump.
Overemphasing tactical voting is also not wise as most voters are not that politically astute, they will vote for the party they support or have always supported, only a minority of geneally highly educated voters will tactically vote
I probably agree with your point re tactical voting, but haven't you missed the whole point of the article otherwise.
He simply posts whatever factoid best suits his preconceptions without thinking about the article or preceding arguments at all.
Patronising as ever, not that your 'superior analysis' has ever proved of much use
What is the point in a discussion if you just ignore what others are saying.
HYUFD is only interested in spinning for the Conservative Party, unconnected factoids as Ian says. He does not seem interested in engaging That's fair enough, plenty do that if not with quite the same zeal but it doesn't often make for an interesting discussion.
Advertising doesn't require giving equal weight to your competitor's product. It's hard enough finding a USP let alone one a day. I think HYUFD is making a good fist of selling a very testing product. Of course he'd prefer to be doing a sun lotion-wouldn't we all.
Thanks for that. He's right that advertising should be at the cutting edge of the of the time but he's wrong to think that to day's zeitgeist is right wing populism. In fact the mood of the age is extreme political correctness and these are our new parameters. If you look at ads from as recently as five years ago some of the sexism makes you wince.
That Saatchi arrived on the scene at the same time as Thatcher and both profited by promoting rampant consumerism tells you nothing other than Saatchis knew how to reflect the the mores of the age not that advertising is a promoter of right wing Thatcherite values.
OT. The other day I posted this in reply to geoffw's article on advertising from the Spectator.
Yesterday I noticed these two rulings under the new ASA code on gender stereotyping
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
The whole point of this government would be a single-item government. If it ever happened, the person would need to be seen to be dragged to the chair like the Speaker.
To satisfy everyone that person is going to need to be reasonably non-threatening to all parts of the coalition. The likeliest is a Labour grandee (Margaret Beckett is a good call).
But you could easily see how it ends up being someone like Caroline Lucas, Ian Blackford or Liz Saville-Roberts.
There's one other leftfield option, and I've no idea if she is at 1000, but Theresa May being brought back as PM for a day and getting her WA passed at attempt 4 has crossed my mind
Get bloody Cameron back and let him finish what he started.
IMO Mike is fundamentally wrong - I live in the sort of seat where the LibDems really need Labour tactical votes and could well win. Up to recently I've known half a dozen Labour voters (two of them members) who were quietly going to do it. None of them are Corbyn fans. They are all alienated by Swinson's tactics, which seem to them to be putting party realignment (which they are at best ambiguous about) before stopping No Deal Brexit (which they are passionate about). She needs to at least seem to be open to a deal with all the Stop No Deal MPs, and when she rejects up to 200 of them out of hand, she is throwing away tactical "Bollocks to Brexit" votes in any election by the bucketload.
It's yet another game of who blinks. Things might look very different as deadline day approaches.
The other side of the coin is that - if Labour is determined to stop no deal and if they accept the GOMOO is simply a letter-writing government - it shouldn't need to be Corbyn (who has hardly been leading the charge) as PM. The Tories supporting such an arrangement are making the biggest sacrifice, and the Tories achieved the biggest minority vote in the last GE, so some elder Tory who is leaving politics would be a reasonable choice.
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
I’m not sure the Lib Dems would support the man who defenestrated Charles Kennedy.
Margaret Beckett would be candidate to appeal to the maximum possible spread of the selectorate - but I doubt anyone can do it to be honest.
Election now please.
Margaret Beckett - who single-handedly allowed Corbyn on to the ballot for "aw, bless..." reasons. And thereby gave us a Labour Party with an (at best) abiguous Remainer leader with his luke-warm involvement in the Referendum. And so, Brexit.
Yes, I can think of nobody better placed to undo the mess of her own making....
The trouble with this sort of polling is that people project their own preferred new Labour leader when they answer the poll. The person who switched to Labour thinking of Starmer may be a bit more hesitant to give their support to a Piddock-led party.
Exactly. While the Corbyn rating numbers are truly atrocious polls along the lines of "If X was different (how, unspecified) would you do something else?" - Can't see the Labour selectariat selecting someone fundamentally different from Magic Grandpa. What a mess, one party led by a knave, the other by a fool.
On OGH point:
All this means is that there are no downsides for Jo Swinson when she snubs Corbyn’s latest opportunistic initiatives.
I'm not so sure. "Get lost Grandpa" may be remembered (and certainly will be presented by some) as "Lib Dems refused to help stop Brexit".
Yep, there's nothing that shouts out willingness to cooperate & work together than immediately dismissing out of hand an offer to cooperate & work together.
If the Lib Dems really think that stopping Brexit is paramount then all other objectives are, by definition, secondary and they should be prepared to work with anyone and everyone.
Are they really saying that they will sit idly by and allow no deal because of their personal antipathy to Corbyn?
Is Jeremy Corbyn really saying that he will allow no deal because he regards the role as Prime Minister as reserved to him?
Perhaps. For all his weaknesses he still has way more MPs provably backing him than any other opposition mp, so is in a stronger position than his enemies think.
Thats exactly the reason why it shouldn't be him. they're party political support, not support for the purposes of the caretaker role.
Listening to Jo Swinson she seems to have the view that an extension to A50 should be requested to enable a peoples vote. It is clear she does not want a GE and to be honest it is the better way forward to stop a no deal
She also rejects Corbyn and named Ken Clarke or Harriet Harman to head a GONU
However, it could just be that those wanting to stop no deal divide over their message and let no deal through
Corbyn has been found out and cannot get support to win a vonc with him as PM
Who has been found out is Jo Swinson.
The Lib Dem priority is not stopping Brexit but replacing Labour as the main opposition party to the Tories. This is clear.
Fair enough - political party in "putting party before country and lying about it" shocker - but let's not the rest of us pretend that it is otherwise.
To be honest, the deal isn't looking too bad now, and it never did.
However bad no deal is it is still greatly preferable to the continuing existence of the dark malignancy that is the tory party. It would be criminal insanity to let them off the hook and vote for the WDA now.
I dont see how it would let them off the hook. On the contrary theyd still have alienated any of their remain voters and infuriated no deal supporters even if it passed by a mass rebellion against BoJo's wishes theyd be screwed . No deal preserves a hard core of the party to rise again, that's why they are pursuing it.
I think you're letting hatred of them blind you to the fact that they believe no deal is best for the party. Sure they might be wrong but they seek no deal for a reason n
The trouble with this sort of polling is that people project their own preferred new Labour leader when they answer the poll. The person who switched to Labour thinking of Starmer may be a bit more hesitant to give their support to a Piddock-led party.
Exactly. While the Corbyn rating numbers are truly atrocious polls along the lines of "If X was different (how, unspecified) would you do something else?" - Can't see the Labour selectariat selecting someone fundamentally different from Magic Grandpa. What a mess, one party led by a knave, the other by a fool.
On OGH point:
All this means is that there are no downsides for Jo Swinson when she snubs Corbyn’s latest opportunistic initiatives.
I'm not so sure. "Get lost Grandpa" may be remembered (and certainly will be presented by some) as "Lib Dems refused to help stop Brexit".
Yep, there's nothing that shouts out willingness to cooperate & work together than immediately dismissing out of hand an offer to cooperate & work together.
If the Lib Dems really think that stopping Brexit is paramount then all other objectives are, by definition, secondary and they should be prepared to work with anyone and everyone.
Are they really saying that they will sit idly by and allow no deal because of their personal antipathy to Corbyn?
Is Jeremy Corbyn really saying that he will allow no deal because he regards the role as Prime Minister as reserved to him?
Given that he wants both no deal and to be PM it seems like a logical position.
IMO Mike is fundamentally wrong - I live in the sort of seat where the LibDems really need Labour tactical votes and could well win. Up to recently I've known half a dozen Labour voters (two of them members) who were quietly going to do it. None of them are Corbyn fans. They are all alienated by Swinson's tactics, which seem to them to be putting party realignment (which they are at best ambiguous about) before stopping No Deal Brexit (which they are passionate about). She needs to at least seem to be open to a deal with all the Stop No Deal MPs, and when she rejects up to 200 of them out of hand, she is throwing away tactical "Bollocks to Brexit" votes in any election by the bucketload.
It's yet another game of who blinks. Things might look very different as deadline day approaches.
The other side of the coin is that - if Labour is determined to stop no deal and if they accept the GOMOO is simply a letter-writing government - it shouldn't need to be Corbyn (who has hardly been leading the charge) as PM. The Tories supporting such an arrangement are making the biggest sacrifice, and the Tories achieved the biggest minority vote in the last GE, so some elder Tory who is leaving politics would be a reasonable choice.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
I’m not sure the Lib Dems would support the man who defenestrated Charles Kennedy.
Margaret Beckett would be candidate to appeal to the maximum possible spread of the selectorate - but I doubt anyone can do it to be honest.
Election now please.
Margaret Beckett - who single-handedly allowed Corbyn on to the ballot for "aw, bless..." reasons. And thereby gave us a Labour Party with an (at best) abiguous Remainer leader with his luke-warm involvement in the Referendum. And so, Brexit.
Yes, I can think of nobody better placed to undo the mess of her own making....
There is another senior Labour figure who could give her a run for her money on that front.
Delurking to state my disappoint with Jo Swinson. Her comments were not constructive today. At some point, if she is to achieve her aims, she will have to work with Corbyn. She made that harder.
From my point of view the LDs need to manage their excitement at rising from the mortuary slab. They look like they are using Brexit for party ends. As such, contrary to Mike, they have a lot to lose.
The trouble with this sort of polling is that people project their own preferred new Labour leader when they answer the poll. The person who switched to Labour thinking of Starmer may be a bit more hesitant to give their support to a Piddock-led party.
The person is also not right in the head if they think Starmer is PM material.
The trouble with this sort of polling is that people project their own preferred new Labour leader when they answer the poll. The person who switched to Labour thinking of Starmer may be a bit more hesitant to give their support to a Piddock-led party.
Exactly. While the Corbyn rating numbers are truly atrocious polls along the lines of "If X was different (how, unspecified) would you do something else?" - Can't see the Labour selectariat selecting someone fundamentally different from Magic Grandpa. What a mess, one party led by a knave, the other by a fool.
On OGH point:
All this means is that there are no downsides for Jo Swinson when she snubs Corbyn’s latest opportunistic initiatives.
I'm not so sure. "Get lost Grandpa" may be remembered (and certainly will be presented by some) as "Lib Dems refused to help stop Brexit".
Yep, there's nothing that shouts out willingness to cooperate & work together than immediately dismissing out of hand an offer to cooperate & work together.
If the Lib Dems really think that stopping Brexit is paramount then all other objectives are, by definition, secondary and they should be prepared to work with anyone and everyone.
Are they really saying that they will sit idly by and allow no deal because of their personal antipathy to Corbyn?
Is Jeremy Corbyn really saying that he will allow no deal because he regards the role as Prime Minister as reserved to him?
Given that he wants both no deal and to be PM it seems like a logical position.
Perhaps. But is he actually going to say that out loud?
This just demonstrates that everything around Brexit is a blame game. You may not like him but at least Boris is doing something positive. Everyone else just wants to talk about what they are not prepared to do to get Brexit through.
The trouble with this sort of polling is that people project their own preferred new Labour leader when they answer the poll. The person who switched to Labour thinking of Starmer may be a bit more hesitant to give their support to a Piddock-led party.
Exactly. While the Corbyn rating numbers are truly atrocious polls along the lines of "If X was different (how, unspecified) would you do something else?" - Can't see the Labour selectariat selecting someone fundamentally different from Magic Grandpa. What a mess, one party led by a knave, the other by a fool.
On OGH point:
All this means is that there are no downsides for Jo Swinson when she snubs Corbyn’s latest opportunistic initiatives.
I'm not so sure. "Get lost Grandpa" may be remembered (and certainly will be presented by some) as "Lib Dems refused to help stop Brexit".
Yep, there's nothing that shouts out willingness to cooperate & work together than immediately dismissing out of hand an offer to cooperate & work together.
If the Lib Dems really think that stopping Brexit is paramount then all other objectives are, by definition, secondary and they should be prepared to work with anyone and everyone.
Are they really saying that they will sit idly by and allow no deal because of their personal antipathy to Corbyn?
Is Jeremy Corbyn really saying that he will allow no deal because he regards the role as Prime Minister as reserved to him?
That is a valid question but the ball is currently at the feet of the Lib Dems. They have said time and time again that avoiding no deal is the most important priority for them. If that was the case they should not reject out of hand an overture which might, perhaps, offer a way forward. It would be wiser for them to set conditions, eg that Corbyn must legislate for a second referendum rather than an immediate GE. Or even that he legislate for PR - they have an opportunity here to be the grown ups in a Parliament full of political toddlers and they appear reluctant to take it.
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
The whole point of this government would be a single-item government. If it ever happened, the person would need to be seen to be dragged to the chair like the Speaker.
To satisfy everyone that person is going to need to be reasonably non-threatening to all parts of the coalition. The likeliest is a Labour grandee (Margaret Beckett is a good call).
But you could easily see how it ends up being someone like Caroline Lucas, Ian Blackford or Liz Saville-Roberts.
For three years, we have had single-item government. Brexit.
Totally agree with Mike's thread. As ever, 100% on the money.
I'm quite glad Corbyn raised the prospect of himself as caretaker now rather than in a fortnight. It gives everyone an opportunity to spit out the poison before its too late, and to move on to something more palatable.
I continue to hold the tentative view that the only caretaker solution will be a remainer tory. Why? Because Corbyn's cronies simply won't countenance another Labour MP as PM. Perhaps his would-be successor Rebecca Long-Bailey might but it would effectively be Corbyn standing down. Plus I think she's useless. A more serious prospect would be Yvette Cooper or Keir Starmer. However, the same first part applies. They're serious long-term candidates and once in position won't give up easily.
Corbyn is also stubborn enough not to want any of the alternative opposition, such as Jo Swinson. He's probably right not to give them any more oxygen than his own toxicity already is.
Ken Clarke remains the real option. He's the least threatening to Corbyn or indeed any Labour member. He's the most likely to win over remainer Tories. And, most importantly of all, he clearly has no long-term ambitions left. He has held major offices of State: Chancellor of the Exchequer, Home Secretary, Health Secretary, Justice Secretary and Education Secretary. He is the Father of the House, thus commanding immense stature in Parliament and with the Palace.
I got on him at 130/1 with Ladbrokes (and I tipped on here). That's now come in to 25/1 and even the Telegraph have picked up on the idea:
IMO Mike is fundamentally wrong - I live in the sort of seat where the LibDems really need Labour tactical votes and could well win. Up to recently I've known half a dozen Labour voters (two of them members) who were quietly going to do it. None of them are Corbyn fans. They are all alienated by Swinson's tactics, which seem to them to be putting party realignment (which they are at best ambiguous about) before stopping No Deal Brexit (which they are passionate about). She needs to at least seem to be open to a deal with all the Stop No Deal MPs, and when she rejects up to 200 of them out of hand, she is throwing away tactical "Bollocks to Brexit" votes in any election by the bucketload.
It's yet another game of who blinks. Things might look very different as deadline day approaches.
The other side of the coin is that - if Labour is determined to stop no deal and if they accept the GOMOO is simply a letter-writing government - it shouldn't need to be Corbyn (who has hardly been leading the charge) as PM. The Tories supporting such an arrangement are making the biggest sacrifice, and the Tories achieved the biggest minority vote in the last GE, so some elder Tory who is leaving politics would be a reasonable choice.
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I believe the PM doesn't have to be an MP? Or even in Parliament.
Overemphasing tactical voting is also not wise as most voters are not that politically astute, they will vote for the party they support or have always supported, only a minority of generally highly educated voters will tactically vote
I probably agree with your point re tactical voting, but haven't you missed the whole point of the article otherwise.
He simply posts whatever factoid best suits his preconceptions without thinking about the article or preceding arguments at all.
Patronising as ever, not that your 'superior analysis' has ever proved of much use
What is the point in a discussion if you just ignore what others are saying.
Thanks for that. He's right that advertising should be at the cutting edge of the of the time but he's wrong to think that to day's zeitgeist is right wing populism. In fact the mood of the age is extreme political correctness and these are our new parameters. If you look at ads from as recently as five years ago some of the sexism makes you wince.
That Saatchi arrived on the scene at the same time as Thatcher and both profited by promoting rampant consumerism tells you nothing other than Saatchis knew how to reflect the the mores of the age not that advertising is a promoter of right wing Thatcherite values.
OT. The other day I posted this in reply to geoffw.
Yesterday I noticed these two rulings under the new ASA code on gender stereotyping
IMO Mike is fundamentally wrong - I live in the sort of seat where the LibDems really need Labour tactical votes and could well win. Up to recently I've known half a dozen Labour voters (two of them members) who were quietly going to do it. None of them are Corbyn fans. They are all alienated by Swinson's tactics, which seem to them to be putting party realignment (which they are at best ambiguous about) before stopping No Deal Brexit (which they are passionate about). She needs to at least seem to be open to a deal with all the Stop No Deal MPs, and when she rejects up to 200 of them out of hand, she is throwing away tactical "Bollocks to Brexit" votes in any election by the bucketload.
It's yet another game of who blinks. Things might look very different as deadline day approaches.
The other side of the coin is that - if Labour is determined to stop no deal and if they accept the GOMOO is simply a letter-writing government - it shouldn't need to be Corbyn (who has hardly been leading the charge) as PM. The Tories supporting such an arrangement are making the biggest sacrifice, and the Tories achieved the biggest minority vote in the last GE, so some elder Tory who is leaving politics would be a reasonable choice.
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
Plenty do in Scotland, it is the cheats and liars we dislike up here, in order of hate , Tories, Lib Dems , labour.
The trouble with this sort of polling is that people project their own preferred new Labour leader when they answer the poll. The person who switched to Labour thinking of Starmer may be a bit more hesitant to give their support to a Piddock-led party.
Exactly. While the Corbyn rating numbers are truly atrocious polls along the lines of "If X was different (how, unspecified) would you do something else?" - Can't see the Labour selectariat selecting someone fundamentally different from Magic Grandpa. What a mess, one party led by a knave, the other by a fool.
On OGH point:
All this means is that there are no downsides for Jo Swinson when she snubs Corbyn’s latest opportunistic initiatives.
I'm not so sure. "Get lost Grandpa" may be remembered (and certainly will be presented by some) as "Lib Dems refused to help stop Brexit".
Yep, there's nothing that shouts out willingness to cooperate & work together than immediately dismissing out of hand an offer to cooperate & work together.
If the Lib Dems really think that stopping Brexit is paramount then all other objectives are, by definition, secondary and they should be prepared to work with anyone and everyone.
Are they really saying that they will sit idly by and allow no deal because of their personal antipathy to Corbyn?
A PM has enormous powers, even if he or she is there for a short time, especially in relation to national security matters, and can exercise those powers without reference to Parliament. There are very very good reasons - other than personal antipathy to Corbyn - for not wanting Corbyn, Milne, McDonnell or Murray anywhere near the levers of power, even for a short time.
And if it is purely a caretaker role then why is it so important for Corbyn to do it? He could propose Ed Milliband for instance to do all the Art 50 stuff.
Yes there are good reasons even in the short term but this is going in circles - if it's not worth letting him even for a short time even at the cost of no deal it is an admission no deal is not as bad as they say. Yes the argument is on him too, why does he demand it as the price of stopping no deal, but theres no getting away from if X is too high a price to stop no deal then no deal must not be that vital to stop.
Can I just say that, dreary as the rain is for those wanting summer skies, it is a marvel for my garden which is flourishing. I have planted lots of bananas and cannas and other exotics and they are going gangbusters!
It is all roses and peonies and English cottage garden in the first half of the year. Then I get into my sultry Mediterranean mood which keeps everything going until the first frosts.
Corbyn has been found out and cannot get support to win a vonc with him as PM
Who has been found out is Jo Swinson.
The Lib Dem priority is not stopping Brexit but replacing Labour as the main opposition party to the Tories. This is clear.
Fair enough - political party in "putting party before country and lying about it" shocker - but let's not the rest of us pretend that it is otherwise.
I dont see how that is them being 'found out' . It was the official policy of the last LD manifesto to replace Labour as the main opposition.
This just demonstrates that everything around Brexit is a blame game. You may not like him but at least Boris is doing something positive. Everyone else just wants to talk about what they are not prepared to do to get Brexit through.
Johnson’s positive contribution being to blame the EU?
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
The whole point of this government would be a single-item government. If it ever happened, the person would need to be seen to be dragged to the chair like the Speaker.
To satisfy everyone that person is going to need to be reasonably non-threatening to all parts of the coalition. The likeliest is a Labour grandee (Margaret Beckett is a good call).
But you could easily see how it ends up being someone like Caroline Lucas, Ian Blackford or Liz Saville-Roberts.
For three years, we have had single-item government. Brexit.
You want more of that?
It's not going to stop any time soon. The death cult are making sure of that.
IMO Mike is fundamentally wrong - I live in the sort of seat where the LibDems really need Labour tactical votes and could well win. Up to recently I've known half a dozen Labour voters (two of them members) who were quietly going to do it. None of them are Corbyn fans. They are all alienated by Swinson's tactics, which seem to them to be putting party realignment (which they are at best ambiguous about) before stopping No Deal Brexit (which they are passionate about). She needs to at least seem to be open to a deal with all the Stop No Deal MPs, and when she rejects up to 200 of them out of hand, she is throwing away tactical "Bollocks to Brexit" votes in any election by the bucketload.
It's yet another game of who blinks. Things might look very different as deadline day approaches.
The other side of the coin is that - if Labour is determined to stop no deal and if they accept the GOMOO is simply a letter-writing government - it shouldn't need to be Corbyn (who has hardly been leading the charge) as PM. The Tories supporting such an arrangement are making the biggest sacrifice, and the Tories achieved the biggest minority vote in the last GE, so some elder Tory who is leaving politics would be a reasonable choice.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
I’m not sure the Lib Dems would support the man who defenestrated Charles Kennedy.
Margaret Beckett would be candidate to appeal to the maximum possible spread of the selectorate - but I doubt anyone can do it to be honest.
Election now please.
Margaret Beckett - who single-handedly allowed Corbyn on to the ballot for "aw, bless..." reasons. And thereby gave us a Labour Party with an (at best) abiguous Remainer leader with his luke-warm involvement in the Referendum. And so, Brexit.
Yes, I can think of nobody better placed to undo the mess of her own making....
There is another senior Labour figure who could give her a run for her money on that front.
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
The whole point of this government would be a single-item government. If it ever happened, the person would need to be seen to be dragged to the chair like the Speaker.
To satisfy everyone that person is going to need to be reasonably non-threatening to all parts of the coalition. The likeliest is a Labour grandee (Margaret Beckett is a good call).
But you could easily see how it ends up being someone like Caroline Lucas, Ian Blackford or Liz Saville-Roberts.
For three years, we have had single-item government. Brexit.
You want more of that?
Also, the concept of a 'caretaker' government, which if it oversees a refendum would be around for 6-7 months at least (more likely a year) is a nonsense. Are we really going to think any PM isn't going to push through a few other policies.
Take Lucas, if she was PM do you not think she would be under pressure to bring in some new green policies. If there's a 'climate emergency' isn't that just as , if not more important than Brexit to deal with?
IMO Mike is fundamentally wrong - I live in the sort of seat where the LibDems really need Labour tactical votes and could well win. Up to recently I've known half a dozen Labour voters (two of them members) who were quietly going to do it. None of them are Corbyn fans. They are all alienated by Swinson's tactics, which seem to them to be putting party realignment (which they are at best ambiguous about) before stopping No Deal Brexit (which they are passionate about). She needs to at least seem to be open to a deal with all the Stop No Deal MPs, and when she rejects up to 200 of them out of hand, she is throwing away tactical "Bollocks to Brexit" votes in any election by the bucketload.
It's yet another game of who blinks. Things might look very different as deadline day approaches.
The other side of the coin is that - if Labour is determined to stop no deal and if they accept the GOMOO is simply a letter-writing government - it shouldn't need to be Corbyn (who has hardly been leading the charge) as PM. The Tories supporting such an arrangement are making the biggest sacrifice, and the Tories achieved the biggest minority vote in the last GE, so some elder Tory who is leaving politics would be a reasonable choice.
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
Plenty do in Scotland, it is the cheats and liars we dislike up here, in order of hate , Tories, Lib Dems , labour.
If you hate them in that order why are the proportions of unionist mps not in that order? I know the situation is in flux but which is hated more seems less clear than say 15 years ago.
This just demonstrates that everything around Brexit is a blame game. You may not like him but at least Boris is doing something positive. Everyone else just wants to talk about what they are not prepared to do to get Brexit through.
Johnson’s positive contribution being to blame the EU?
No he is at least prepared to do Brexit and therefore implement the referendum result. Corbyn, Swinson etc just want to ignore it
Jo Swinson is right. It's better to be crystal clear about what is not palatable now rather than in 3 weeks time.
Corbyn is not someone you want negotiating or dealing with anything to do with Brexit. The man has vacillated so much on Brexit that the very dictionary definition of the word 'dither' needs to be re-written.
But the stunt is about maximum publicity, and whether you approve or not, has succeeded in that aim - we've been dissecting it continuously on here in a manner far beyond anything a single boot trip justifies.
I think the argument is that "day to day green measures", while not an irrelevance, go nowhere near what is required to address the continuing rise in atmospheric CO2. Assuming the scientists are correct (or even assuming a 20% probability they are, given the consequences), we have scant decades to completely re-engineer the globe's energy systems. That is simply not going to happen without the governments of world's largest economies adopting it as a priority, and directing the spending 2-3% of GDP every year for the next three decades to fund it.
That political will is not going to come from within the existing system, absent some very heavy prodding.
+ 1
I sense the anti-Greta sentiment is driven by a feeling that she is a jumped up teenager getting beyond her station.
"Young people speaking their minds" is fine - so long as they don't.
This just demonstrates that everything around Brexit is a blame game. You may not like him but at least Boris is doing something positive. Everyone else just wants to talk about what they are not prepared to do to get Brexit through.
Johnson’s positive contribution being to blame the EU?
No he is at least prepared to do Brexit and therefore implement the referendum result. Corbyn, Swinson etc just want to ignore it
Totally agree with Mike's thread. As ever, 100% on the money.
I'm quite glad Corbyn raised the prospect of himself as caretaker now rather than in a fortnight. It gives everyone an opportunity to spit out the poison before its too late, and to move on to something more palatable.
I continue to hold the tentative view that the only caretaker solution will be a remainer tory. Why? Because Corbyn's cronies simply won't countenance another Labour MP as PM. Perhaps his would-be successor Rebecca Long-Bailey might but it would effectively be Corbyn standing down. Plus I think she's useless. A more serious prospect would be Yvette Cooper or Keir Starmer. However, the same first part applies. They're serious long-term candidates and once in position won't give up easily.
Corbyn is also stubborn enough not to want any of the alternative opposition, such as Jo Swinson. He's probably right not to give them any more oxygen than his own toxicity already is.
Ken Clarke remains the real option. He's the least threatening to Corbyn or indeed any Labour member. He's the most likely to win over remainer Tories. And, most importantly of all, he clearly has no long-term ambitions left. He has held major offices of State: Chancellor of the Exchequer, Home Secretary, Health Secretary, Justice Secretary and Education Secretary. He is the Father of the House, thus commanding immense stature in Parliament and with the Palace.
I got on him at 130/1 with Ladbrokes (and I tipped on here). That's now come in to 25/1 and even the Telegraph have picked up on the idea:
Delurking to state my disappoint with Jo Swinson. Her comments were not constructive today. At some point, if she is to achieve her aims, she will have to work with Corbyn. She made that harder.
From my point of view the LDs need to manage their excitement at rising from the mortuary slab. They look like they are using Brexit for party ends. As such, contrary to Mike, they have a lot to lose.
Goes back to lurking.
Quite.
The Lib Dems need to be mindful that they very nearly destroyed themselves by making a high-profile promise and then immediately breaking it for political advantage.
If it now turns out that the line they've been feeding us over the past couple of years about stopping Brexit being paramount is just self-seeking baloney, and again political advantage is their real priority, then a lot of people really aren't going to forgive them.
As George W. Bush once tried to say, "Fool me once ..."
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
The whole point of this government would be a single-item government. If it ever happened, the person would need to be seen to be dragged to the chair like the Speaker.
To satisfy everyone that person is going to need to be reasonably non-threatening to all parts of the coalition. The likeliest is a Labour grandee (Margaret Beckett is a good call).
But you could easily see how it ends up being someone like Caroline Lucas, Ian Blackford or Liz Saville-Roberts.
For three years, we have had single-item government. Brexit.
You want more of that?
Also, the concept of a 'caretaker' government, which if it oversees a refendum would be around for 6-7 months at least (more likely a year) is a nonsense. Are we really going to think any PM isn't going to push through a few other policies.
Take Lucas, if she was PM do you not think she would be under pressure to bring in some new green policies. If there's a 'climate emergency' isn't that just as , if not more important than Brexit to deal with?
Which is a point grasped at least by Corbyn, who is offering Article 50 extension and an immediate election with purdah. Alternative suggestions that involve hanging around to run referenda can't fly.
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
The whole point of this government would be a single-item government. If it ever happened, the person would need to be seen to be dragged to the chair like the Speaker.
To satisfy everyone that person is going to need to be reasonably non-threatening to all parts of the coalition. The likeliest is a Labour grandee (Margaret Beckett is a good call).
But you could easily see how it ends up being someone like Caroline Lucas, Ian Blackford or Liz Saville-Roberts.
For three years, we have had single-item government. Brexit.
You want more of that?
Also, the concept of a 'caretaker' government, which if it oversees a refendum would be around for 6-7 months at least (more likely a year) is a nonsense. Are we really going to think any PM isn't going to push through a few other policies.
Take Lucas, if she was PM do you not think she would be under pressure to bring in some new green policies. If there's a 'climate emergency' isn't that just as , if not more important than Brexit to deal with?
Obviously that's precisely why it's a good idea for the caretaker government to have just two jobs: (1) Request an extension (2) Bring about an election.
Jo Swinson is right. It's better to be crystal clear about what is not palatable now rather than in 3 weeks time.
Corbyn is not someone you want negotiating or dealing with anything to do with Brexit. The man has vacillated so much on Brexit that the very dictionary definition of the word 'dither' needs to be re-written.
So if it was either agree to a temporary Corbyn premiership, with LD conditions attached, or watch Johnson push through no deal which would it be?
Delurking to state my disappoint with Jo Swinson. Her comments were not constructive today. At some point, if she is to achieve her aims, she will have to work with Corbyn. She made that harder.
From my point of view the LDs need to manage their excitement at rising from the mortuary slab. They look like they are using Brexit for party ends. As such, contrary to Mike, they have a lot to lose.
Goes back to lurking.
Quite.
The Lib Dems need to be mindful that they very nearly destroyed themselves by making a high-profile promise and then immediately breaking it for political advantage.
If it now turns out that the line they've been feeding us over the past couple of years about stopping Brexit being paramount is just self-seeking baloney, and again political advantage is their real priority, then a lot of people really aren't going to forgive them.
As George W. Bush once tried to say, "Fool me once ..."
Why do people think stopping Brexit is somehow ok??? We live in a democratic country and we voted for Brexit.
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
T
For three years, we have had single-item government. Brexit.
You want more of that?
Also, the concept of a 'caretaker' government, which if it oversees a refendum would be around for 6-7 months at least (more likely a year) is a nonsense. Are we really going to think any PM isn't going to push through a few other policies.
Take Lucas, if she was PM do you not think she would be under pressure to bring in some new green policies. If there's a 'climate emergency' isn't that just as , if not more important than Brexit to deal with?
Which is a point grasped at least by Corbyn, who is offering Article 50 extension and an immediate election with purdah. Alternative suggestions that involve hanging around to run referenda can't fly.
Yes but there's no reason why an alternative caretaker (Ken Clarke for example) can't do exactly the same. Extension then Election.
However, taking a step back and thinking about the long-term future of this country, perhaps a 6 month hiatus with a GONU wouldn't be such a bad thing in advance of a 2nd referendum. With carefully chosen options on the ballot it's just-about-possible that we could lance the Brexit boil and move on.
I could, under such circumstances, see a Ken Clarke led GONU commanding a sufficient majority in the House in order to pass sufficient other business. Many Labour MPs would be only-too-delighted not to have to support Corbyn. The LibDems would be on board. The question would be whether Ken could muster enough Tories. I suspect he might.
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
The whole point of this government would be a single-item government. If it ever happened, the person would need to be seen to be dragged to the chair like the Speaker.
To satisfy everyone that person is going to need to be reasonably non-threatening to all parts of the coalition. The likeliest is a Labour grandee (Margaret Beckett is a good call).
But you could easily see how it ends up being someone like Caroline Lucas, Ian Blackford or Liz Saville-Roberts.
For three years, we have had single-item government. Brexit.
You want more of that?
Also, the concept of a 'caretaker' government, which if it oversees a refendum would be around for 6-7 months at least (more likely a year) is a nonsense. Are we really going to think any PM isn't going to push through a few other policies.
Take Lucas, if she was PM do you not think she would be under pressure to bring in some new green policies. If there's a 'climate emergency' isn't that just as , if not more important than Brexit to deal with?
Obviously that's precisely why it's a good idea for the caretaker government to have just two jobs: (1) Request an extension (2) Bring about an election.
If it’s led by someone who won’t be a factor in the election then you wouldn’t need to artificially restrict the remit like that. Maybe the caretaker leader could slay some other sacred cows while they’re at it.
Delurking to state my disappoint with Jo Swinson. Her comments were not constructive today. At some point, if she is to achieve her aims, she will have to work with Corbyn. She made that harder.
From my point of view the LDs need to manage their excitement at rising from the mortuary slab. They look like they are using Brexit for party ends. As such, contrary to Mike, they have a lot to lose.
Goes back to lurking.
Quite.
The Lib Dems need to be mindful that they very nearly destroyed themselves by making a high-profile promise and then immediately breaking it for political advantage.
If it now turns out that the line they've been feeding us over the past couple of years about stopping Brexit being paramount is just self-seeking baloney, and again political advantage is their real priority, then a lot of people really aren't going to forgive them.
As George W. Bush once tried to say, "Fool me once ..."
Why do people think stopping Brexit is somehow ok??? We live in a democratic country and we voted for Brexit.
It is the Illiberal and Undemocratic Party you are talking about here.
Jo Swinson is right. It's better to be crystal clear about what is not palatable now rather than in 3 weeks time.
Corbyn is not someone you want negotiating or dealing with anything to do with Brexit. The man has vacillated so much on Brexit that the very dictionary definition of the word 'dither' needs to be re-written.
So if it was either agree to a temporary Corbyn premiership, with LD conditions attached, or watch Johnson push through no deal which would it be?
It's only a choice if Jeremy Corbyn refuses to help stop a no deal Brexit under a different temporary Prime Minister. Why would he?
In the attempt to diss Jo's position on Corbyn, it's perhaps worth pointing out that many Labour MPs feel exactly the same as her!!!!! Obviously he's also totally unpalatable to every Tory MP.
I think it's good she's said this right now. It forces everyone to focus on something viable to the House.
Delurking to state my disappoint with Jo Swinson. Her comments were not constructive today. At some point, if she is to achieve her aims, she will have to work with Corbyn. She made that harder.
From my point of view the LDs need to manage their excitement at rising from the mortuary slab. They look like they are using Brexit for party ends. As such, contrary to Mike, they have a lot to lose.
Goes back to lurking.
Quite.
The Lib Dems need to be mindful that they very nearly destroyed themselves by making a high-profile promise and then immediately breaking it for political advantage.
If it now turns out that the line they've been feeding us over the past couple of years about stopping Brexit being paramount is just self-seeking baloney, and again political advantage is their real priority, then a lot of people really aren't going to forgive them.
As George W. Bush once tried to say, "Fool me once ..."
Why do people think stopping Brexit is somehow ok??? We live in a democratic country and we voted for Brexit.
Depends how it is done. Parliament can do as it likes, that is our system and why referendums are not binding unless parliament says so which it did not, and we have democratic means to punish them if they do things we do not like. If they do not get punished, or even get rewarded for stopping Brexit, that's still democracy. I'd have much rather we had Brexited already, but I'm not feeling the democratic outrate when those who claim to want Brexit the most were the ones stopping us from leaving, hand in hand with the Grievers. More to the point, if a political party wishes to advance a particular position such as stopping Brexit entirely why is not ok for them to advance that position? It's a free country.
She's not rejecting up to 200 of them out of hand. She's rejecting Jeremy Corbyn's claim to lead such a government. Given that he is monumentally unpopular, has shown all the leadership on Brexit of a damp dishcloth and does not even lead his own party in Parliament effectively, why should he and only he occupy that position?
Since this thing involves mortal enemies agreeing on one person the only way to make it work is if you tell everyone that it doesn't matter who the caretaker is, because all they're going to do is turn the lights off when everyone's gone home.
The way she should be playing it is to say, "The caretaker doesn't matter, we're not Jeremy Corbyn fans but we need to stop No Deal, if you can find enough Tory votes then you'll have ours". That makes the $GRANDEE option easier to sell to Labour MPs in the event that it turns out that Jeremy Corbyn is unable to attract the support of lifelong Conservative MPs.
The problem is that it’s simply not true and everyone knows it. The office of the PM has immense executive authority and carries a lot of prestige. Even if you promise not to legislate it’s a very significant role
For once I agree with you, Charles.
Given the numbers involved, and the very brief time window available, putting together a confidence vote for even an ideal candidate for temporary PM would be a difficult exercise. Doing so for anyone not trusted implicitly by MPs across several different parties is simply impossible. Corbyn might think himself entitled to the post by virtue of leading the largest opposition party, but that is not going to fly for any number of reasons.
Jo Swinson is right. It's better to be crystal clear about what is not palatable now rather than in 3 weeks time.
Corbyn is not someone you want negotiating or dealing with anything to do with Brexit. The man has vacillated so much on Brexit that the very dictionary definition of the word 'dither' needs to be re-written.
So if it was either agree to a temporary Corbyn premiership, with LD conditions attached, or watch Johnson push through no deal which would it be?
It's only a choice if Jeremy Corbyn refuses to help stop a no deal Brexit under a different temporary Prime Minister. Why would he?
And so ad infinitum.
An endless procession of third-rate politicians, saying "No, you compromise," to one another, until 11pm on 31 October.
IMO Mike is fundamentally wrong - I live in the sort of seat where the LibDems really need Labour tactical votes and could well win. Up to recently I've known half a dozen Labour voters (two of them members) who were quietly going to do it. None of them are Corbyn fans. They are all alienated by Swinson's tactics, which seem to them to be putting party realignment (which they are at best ambiguous about) before stopping No Deal Brexit (which they are passionate about). She needs to at least seem to be open to a deal with all the Stop No Deal MPs, and when she rejects up to 200 of them out of hand, she is throwing away tactical "Bollocks to Brexit" votes in any election by the bucketload.
It's yet another game of who blinks. Things might look very different as deadline day approaches.
The other side of the coin is that - if Labour is determined to stop no deal and if they accept the GOMOO is simply a letter-writing government - it shouldn't need to be Corbyn (who has hardly been leading the charge) as PM. The Tories supporting such an arrangement are making the biggest sacrifice, and the Tories achieved the biggest minority vote in the last GE, so some elder Tory who is leaving politics would be a reasonable choice.
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
Plenty do in Scotland, it is the cheats and liars we dislike up here, in order of hate , Tories, Lib Dems , labour.
I think Malc is conflating Glasgow with the rest of Scotland. The order would be different in the Highlands, NE, Borders etc. In some parts if you hear a reference to "that bloody woman" it isn't Maggie they are referring to. There's a lot of variety in the northern kingdom and a one-size-fits-all approach (ie, we all hate the tories) will no longer do. Just ask Eck and Angus.
At this point, what is clear is that Boris and No Deal are stoppable. If they fail to be stopped it will be because Labour and Lib Dems failed to compromise with each other (SNP and PC are less of an issue here).
I think it's quite obvious Swinson isn't going to throw her lot in with Corbyn at this stage. Likewise Corbyn isn't going to agree now to standing aside for a Gonu.
But if push comes to shove, one will have to back down. Swinson has less to lose by backing down - she will be punished at the ballot box more by not stopping no deal than by propping up Corbyn (although it will potentially cost them a lot of tory remainer votes at an upcoming election). Corbyn has less incentive to back down - brexit happens on someone else's watch. Yet if he is seen as the reason it happened he risks being blamed as much as the tories for the chaos.
Swinson has the slight advantage though, in that her test comes first. Once she VONCs Corbyn and a Gonu figure is proposed, Corbyn vetoing it will be seen as an act of petty spite. Hard to predict final outcome though.
Jo Swinson is right. It's better to be crystal clear about what is not palatable now rather than in 3 weeks time.
Corbyn is not someone you want negotiating or dealing with anything to do with Brexit. The man has vacillated so much on Brexit that the very dictionary definition of the word 'dither' needs to be re-written.
So if it was either agree to a temporary Corbyn premiership, with LD conditions attached, or watch Johnson push through no deal which would it be?
It's only a choice if Jeremy Corbyn refuses to help stop a no deal Brexit under a different temporary Prime Minister. Why would he?
And so ad infinitum.
An endless procession of third-rate politicians, saying "No, you compromise," to one another, until 11pm on 31 October.
Not sure I would describe Ken Clarke as 'third-rate' There are very few in his league inside the House of Commons.
Jo Swinson is right. It's better to be crystal clear about what is not palatable now rather than in 3 weeks time.
Corbyn is not someone you want negotiating or dealing with anything to do with Brexit. The man has vacillated so much on Brexit that the very dictionary definition of the word 'dither' needs to be re-written.
So if it was either agree to a temporary Corbyn premiership, with LD conditions attached, or watch Johnson push through no deal which would it be?
It's only a choice if Jeremy Corbyn refuses to help stop a no deal Brexit under a different temporary Prime Minister. Why would he?
And so ad infinitum.
An endless procession of third-rate politicians, saying "No, you compromise," to one another, until 11pm on 31 October.
Possibly so. I feel like there is a slight hope some of them will wake up in the next 2-3 weeks, but at the moment it is as you say, everyone still thinking they will win the day with their plan, and insisting others do that. Funny, people used to criticise May for doing the same thing.
In the attempt to diss Jo's position on Corbyn, it's perhaps worth pointing out that many Labour MPs feel exactly the same as her!!!!! Obviously he's also totally unpalatable to every Tory MP.
I think it's good she's said this right now. It forces everyone to focus on something viable to the House.
That may be the case for many Labour MPs, but I doubt they're going to be won over by Megaphone Jo telling them who would be suitable candidates in their own party for a GNU PM. There are ways of doing these things where folk might actually be persuaded..
I dont see how that is them being 'found out' . It was the official policy of the last LD manifesto to replace Labour as the main opposition.
Exactly. And this is more important to them than stopping Brexit.
So to the extent that people had not previously realized this, the Lib Dems have been 'found out'.
That's what I meant.
I think you are missing the point, already people are queuing up to say it can’t be corbyn as interim pm and what Swinson is saying he won’t command the confidence of the house and therefore they need to work together to find out who would. This is the opening play in what is going to be an interesting next ten to fifteen days which hopefully achieves the stated objectives. Swinson will probably have to drop her referendum first line unless she can show it can be completed in a matter of weeks.
In the attempt to diss Jo's position on Corbyn, it's perhaps worth pointing out that many Labour MPs feel exactly the same as her!!!!! Obviously he's also totally unpalatable to every Tory MP.
I think it's good she's said this right now. It forces everyone to focus on something viable to the House.
That may be the case for many Labour MPs, but I doubt they're going to be won over by Megaphone Jo telling them who would be suitable candidates in their own party for a GNU PM. There are ways of doing these things where folk might actually be persuaded..
It worked in 2010 for the Lib Dems.
Brown quit at the insistence of Clegg and the Lib Dems.
At this point, what is clear is that Boris and No Deal are stoppable. If they fail to be stopped it will be because Labour and Lib Dems failed to compromise with each other (SNP and PC are less of an issue here).
I think it's quite obvious Swinson isn't going to throw her lot in with Corbyn at this stage. Likewise Corbyn isn't going to agree now to standing aside for a Gonu.
But if push comes to shove, one will have to back down. Swinson has less to lose by backing down - she will be punished at the ballot box more by not stopping no deal than by propping up Corbyn (although it will potentially cost them a lot of tory remainer votes at an upcoming election). Corbyn has less incentive to back down - brexit happens on someone else's watch. Yet if he is seen as the reason it happened he risks being blamed as much as the tories for the chaos.
Swinson has the slight advantage though, in that her test comes first. Once she VONCs Corbyn and a Gonu figure is proposed, Corbyn vetoing it will be seen as an act of petty spite. Hard to predict final outcome though.
This is exactly why the option has to be a Remainer tory, in my view. Someone they can both stomach without it threatening their position. There are various candidates other than Ken Clarke. Oliver Letwin, Nick Boles for example. Justine Greening would be great. But Clarke is the standout for me, not least because he's in the sunset of his career. He's not a long term threat to anyone. He can do the job and stand down. What a way to go!
IMO Mike is fundamentally wrong - I live in the sort of seat where the LibDems really need Labour tactical votes and could well win. Up to recently I've known half a dozen Labour voters (two of them members) who were quietly going to do it. None of them are Corbyn fans. They are all alienated by Swinson's tactics, which seem to them to be putting party realignment (which they are at best ambiguous about) before stopping No Deal Brexit (which they are passionate about). She needs to at least seem to be open to a deal with all the Stop No Deal MPs, and when she rejects up to 200 of them out of hand, she is throwing away tactical "Bollocks to Brexit" votes in any election by the bucketload.
It's yet another game of who blinks. Things might look very different as deadline day approaches.
The other side of the coin is that - if Labour is determined to stop no deal and if they accept the GOMOO is simply a letter-writing government - it shouldn't need to be Corbyn (who has hardly been leading the charge) as PM. The Tories supporting such an arrangement are making the biggest sacrifice, and the Tories achieved the biggest minority vote in the last GE, so some elder Tory who is leaving politics would be a reasonable choice.
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
I’m not sure the Lib Dems would support the man who defenestrated Charles Kennedy.
The Lib Dems can't be too picky. They can reasonably oppose Jeremy Corbyn. They need to show a lot of flexibility after that.
They are absolutely furious that the SNP defeated Kennedy. In fact many SLab people share their fury. He is a non starter.
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
The whole point of this government would be a single-item government. If it ever happened, the person would need to be seen to be dragged to the chair like the Speaker.
To satisfy everyone that person is going to need to be reasonably non-threatening to all parts of the coalition. The likeliest is a Labour grandee (Margaret Beckett is a good call).
But you could easily see how it ends up being someone like Caroline Lucas, Ian Blackford or Liz Saville-Roberts.
For three years, we have had single-item government. Brexit.
You want more of that?
Also, the concept of a 'caretaker' government, which if it oversees a refendum would be around for 6-7 months at least (more likely a year) is a nonsense. Are we really going to think any PM isn't going to push through a few other policies.
Take Lucas, if she was PM do you not think she would be under pressure to bring in some new green policies. If there's a 'climate emergency' isn't that just as , if not more important than Brexit to deal with?
Obviously that's precisely why it's a good idea for the caretaker government to have just two jobs: (1) Request an extension (2) Bring about an election.
If it’s led by someone who won’t be a factor in the election then you wouldn’t need to artificially restrict the remit like that. Maybe the caretaker leader could slay some other sacred cows while they’re at it.
The more cow-slaying there is in prospect, the less likely everyone is to agree. The more minimal the programme and the shorter the timescale, the less there will be for people to object to.
But it's been apparent for so long that the House of Commons couldn't organise the proverbial. Why should anyone expect things to change now?
Jo Swinson is right. It's better to be crystal clear about what is not palatable now rather than in 3 weeks time.
Corbyn is not someone you want negotiating or dealing with anything to do with Brexit. The man has vacillated so much on Brexit that the very dictionary definition of the word 'dither' needs to be re-written.
So if it was either agree to a temporary Corbyn premiership, with LD conditions attached, or watch Johnson push through no deal which would it be?
It's only a choice if Jeremy Corbyn refuses to help stop a no deal Brexit under a different temporary Prime Minister. Why would he?
And so ad infinitum.
An endless procession of third-rate politicians, saying "No, you compromise," to one another, until 11pm on 31 October.
It's not circular. There's a big difference between regarding one potential candidate as unacceptable and regarding it as imperative that only one candidate (yourself) is chosen.
Listening to Jo Swinson she seems to have the view that an extension to A50 should be requested to enable a peoples vote. It is clear she does not want a GE and to be honest it is the better way forward to stop a no deal
She also rejects Corbyn and named Ken Clarke or Harriet Harman to head a GONU
However, it could just be that those wanting to stop no deal divide over their message and let no deal through
Clarke's best I think as he's nominally a member of the governing party and has 50 years experience; even Corbyn only has 36 y and 32 y of that was on the backbenches.
BTW the wartime GONU passed some legislation as well as standing up to Hitler. One item was the 1944 Education Act. Rab Butler produced that one, I think, but Attlee would have been in the cabinet.
So something similar today lasts as long as needed to hold whatever parliament considers will 'resolve' the problem, such as a public vote or a GE.
Unless the GE is held under PR, though, it could be worse than a referendum. FPTP GEs can produce 'majorities' which only have the support of 35% of voters.
As you say, it shouldn't really matter who it is. It's all very well saying the Tories are making the biggest sacrifice, but those Tory MPs and the minor parties have been loudly telling us for months that No Deal will be catastrophic and must be averted. If they really want to stop it, they can. But they are going to need the support of Labour MPs who may be more ambivalent. That's the advantage of Corbyn.
But they need to coalesce behind someone. Anyone. Sylvia Hermon?
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
The whole point of this government would be a single-item government. If it ever happened, the person would need to be seen to be dragged to the chair like the Speaker.
To satisfy everyone that person is going to need to be reasonably non-threatening to all parts of the coalition. The likeliest is a Labour grandee (Margaret Beckett is a good call).
But you could easily see how it ends up being someone like Caroline Lucas, Ian Blackford or Liz Saville-Roberts.
For three years, we have had single-item government. Brexit.
You want more of that?
Another few days to kickstart the process of getting rid of it would be hugely preferable to years of dealing with the crashout and its aftermath
Jo Swinson is right. It's better to be crystal clear about what is not palatable now rather than in 3 weeks time.
Corbyn is not someone you want negotiating or dealing with anything to do with Brexit. The man has vacillated so much on Brexit that the very dictionary definition of the word 'dither' needs to be re-written.
So if it was either agree to a temporary Corbyn premiership, with LD conditions attached, or watch Johnson push through no deal which would it be?
It's only a choice if Jeremy Corbyn refuses to help stop a no deal Brexit under a different temporary Prime Minister. Why would he?
And so ad infinitum.
An endless procession of third-rate politicians, saying "No, you compromise," to one another, until 11pm on 31 October.
In the attempt to diss Jo's position on Corbyn, it's perhaps worth pointing out that many Labour MPs feel exactly the same as her!!!!! Obviously he's also totally unpalatable to every Tory MP.
I think it's good she's said this right now. It forces everyone to focus on something viable to the House.
That may be the case for many Labour MPs, but I doubt they're going to be won over by Megaphone Jo telling them who would be suitable candidates in their own party for a GNU PM. There are ways of doing these things where folk might actually be persuaded..
And surely it's a huge political misjudgment to do it so swiftly - especially if there's the prospect of others doing it first.
But of course that was the story of the Lib Dem calamity in 2010-2015. An inexperienced leader blissfully unaware of his limitations.
This just demonstrates that everything around Brexit is a blame game. You may not like him but at least Boris is doing something positive. Everyone else just wants to talk about what they are not prepared to do to get Brexit through.
LOL! The arsonist accusing the building of being made of wood!
IMO Mike is fundamentally wrong - I live in the sort of seat where the LibDems really need Labour tactical votes and could well win. Up to recently I've known half a dozen Labour voters (two of them members) who were quietly going to do it. None of them are Corbyn fans. They are all alienated by Swinson's tactics, which seem to them to be putting party realignment (which they are at best ambiguous about) before stopping No Deal Brexit (which they are passionate about). She needs to at least seem to be open to a deal with all the Stop No Deal MPs, and when she rejects up to 200 of them out of hand, she is throwing away tactical "Bollocks to Brexit" votes in any election by the bucketload.
It's yet another game of who blinks. Things might look very different as deadline day approaches.
The other side of the coin is that - if Labour is determined to stop no deal and if they accept the GOMOO is simply a letter-writing government - it shouldn't need to be Corbyn (who has hardly been leading the charge) as PM. The Tories supporting such an arrangement are making the biggest sacrifice, and the Tories achieved the biggest minority vote in the last GE, so some elder Tory who is leaving politics would be a reasonable choice.
I had Lady Sylvia Hermon added to the Betfair market for exactly this reason. Sadly no one has laid her at 1000 for me yet.
A more serious proposition is Ian Blackford.
Why? No-one likes or trusts the SNP and he’d be under enormous pressure to introduce a new independence bill as a quid pro quo.
Plenty do in Scotland, it is the cheats and liars we dislike up here, in order of hate , Tories, Lib Dems , labour.
I think Malc is conflating Glasgow with the rest of Scotland. The order would be different in the Highlands, NE, Borders etc. In some parts if you hear a reference to "that bloody woman" it isn't Maggie they are referring to. There's a lot of variety in the northern kingdom and a one-size-fits-all approach (ie, we all hate the tories) will no longer do. Just ask Eck and Angus.
For majority it it those 3 in whatever order you choose but they are the unpopular ones as voting shows. Fact that the rigged voting system gives the duffers a share of the seats is neither here nor there. Given I do not live in Glasgow your initial supposition is completely wrong headed to start with. Apart from the border area where population is mixed and a few anomalies I am correct. They should be selecting from the official 3rd opposition party , not a minnow party like the Lib Dems with their handful of pygmies.
Comments
It’s... um.... a view?
https://twitter.com/holyroodmandy/status/1161910808005238786?s=20
That's fine, but it means she has no high ground vs Johnson and Corbyn.
I'm quite glad Corbyn raised the prospect of himself as caretaker now rather than in a fortnight. It gives everyone an opportunity to spit out the poison before its too late, and to move on to something more palatable.
I continue to hold the tentative view that the only caretaker solution will be a remainer tory. Why? Because Corbyn's cronies simply won't countenance another Labour MP as PM. Perhaps his would-be successor Rebecca Long-Bailey might but it would effectively be Corbyn standing down. Plus I think she's useless. A more serious prospect would be Yvette Cooper or Keir Starmer. However, the same first part applies. They're serious long-term candidates and once in position won't give up easily.
Corbyn is also stubborn enough not to want any of the alternative opposition, such as Jo Swinson. He's probably right not to give them any more oxygen than his own toxicity already is.
Ken Clarke remains the real option. He's the least threatening to Corbyn or indeed any Labour member. He's the most likely to win over remainer Tories. And, most importantly of all, he clearly has no long-term ambitions left. He has held major offices of State: Chancellor of the Exchequer, Home Secretary, Health Secretary, Justice Secretary and Education Secretary. He is the Father of the House, thus commanding immense stature in Parliament and with the Palace.
I got on him at 130/1 with Ladbrokes (and I tipped on here). That's now come in to 25/1 and even the Telegraph have picked up on the idea:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/06/peoples-boris-cant-beat-parliament-prepare-prime-minister-ken/
And if it is purely a caretaker role then why is it so important for Corbyn to do it? He could propose Ed Milliband for instance to do all the Art 50 stuff.
Yesterday I noticed these two rulings under the new ASA code on gender stereotyping
https://metro.co.uk/2019/08/14/first-adverts-banned-under-new-gender-stereotype-rules-10562595/
Get bloody Cameron back and let him finish what he started.
Yes, I can think of nobody better placed to undo the mess of her own making....
She also rejects Corbyn and named Ken Clarke or Harriet Harman to head a GONU
However, it could just be that those wanting to stop no deal divide over their message and let no deal through
The Lib Dem priority is not stopping Brexit but replacing Labour as the main opposition party to the Tories. This is clear.
Fair enough - political party in "putting party before country and lying about it" shocker - but let's not the rest of us pretend that it is otherwise.
I think you're letting hatred of them blind you to the fact that they believe no deal is best for the party. Sure they might be wrong but they seek no deal for a reason n
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32863749
From my point of view the LDs need to manage their excitement at rising from the mortuary slab. They look like they are using Brexit for party ends. As such, contrary to Mike, they have a lot to lose.
Goes back to lurking.
You want more of that?
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/the-cost-of-gillettes-wokeness-revealed-a-noncash-writedown-of-12-billion/news-story/0338fd150d366ca2c759f6889f4bbc33
It is all roses and peonies and English cottage garden in the first half of the year. Then I get into my sultry Mediterranean mood which keeps everything going until the first frosts.
There - I’m sure that’s cheered everyone up
And now, work.
Take Lucas, if she was PM do you not think she would be under pressure to bring in some new green policies. If there's a 'climate emergency' isn't that just as , if not more important than Brexit to deal with?
Corbyn is not someone you want negotiating or dealing with anything to do with Brexit. The man has vacillated so much on Brexit that the very dictionary definition of the word 'dither' needs to be re-written.
I sense the anti-Greta sentiment is driven by a feeling that she is a jumped up teenager getting beyond her station.
"Young people speaking their minds" is fine - so long as they don't.
The Lib Dems need to be mindful that they very nearly destroyed themselves by making a high-profile promise and then immediately breaking it for political advantage.
If it now turns out that the line they've been feeding us over the past couple of years about stopping Brexit being paramount is just self-seeking baloney, and again political advantage is their real priority, then a lot of people really aren't going to forgive them.
As George W. Bush once tried to say, "Fool me once ..."
https://twitter.com/ukhomeoffice/status/1161629920856084481?s=20
(1) Request an extension
(2) Bring about an election.
We live in a democratic country and we voted for Brexit.
However, taking a step back and thinking about the long-term future of this country, perhaps a 6 month hiatus with a GONU wouldn't be such a bad thing in advance of a 2nd referendum. With carefully chosen options on the ballot it's just-about-possible that we could lance the Brexit boil and move on.
I could, under such circumstances, see a Ken Clarke led GONU commanding a sufficient majority in the House in order to pass sufficient other business. Many Labour MPs would be only-too-delighted not to have to support Corbyn. The LibDems would be on board. The question would be whether Ken could muster enough Tories. I suspect he might.
So to the extent that people had not previously realized this, the Lib Dems have been 'found out'.
That's what I meant.
Obviously he's also totally unpalatable to every Tory MP.
I think it's good she's said this right now. It forces everyone to focus on something viable to the House.
Given the numbers involved, and the very brief time window available, putting together a confidence vote for even an ideal candidate for temporary PM would be a difficult exercise.
Doing so for anyone not trusted implicitly by MPs across several different parties is simply impossible. Corbyn might think himself entitled to the post by virtue of leading the largest opposition party, but that is not going to fly for any number of reasons.
An endless procession of third-rate politicians, saying "No, you compromise," to one another, until 11pm on 31 October.
I think it's quite obvious Swinson isn't going to throw her lot in with Corbyn at this stage. Likewise Corbyn isn't going to agree now to standing aside for a Gonu.
But if push comes to shove, one will have to back down. Swinson has less to lose by backing down - she will be punished at the ballot box more by not stopping no deal than by propping up Corbyn (although it will potentially cost them a lot of tory remainer votes at an upcoming election). Corbyn has less incentive to back down - brexit happens on someone else's watch. Yet if he is seen as the reason it happened he risks being blamed as much as the tories for the chaos.
Swinson has the slight advantage though, in that her test comes first. Once she VONCs Corbyn and a Gonu figure is proposed, Corbyn vetoing it will be seen as an act of petty spite. Hard to predict final outcome though.
Brown quit at the insistence of Clegg and the Lib Dems.
But it's been apparent for so long that the House of Commons couldn't organise the proverbial. Why should anyone expect things to change now?
BTW the wartime GONU passed some legislation as well as standing up to Hitler. One item was the 1944 Education Act. Rab Butler produced that one, I think, but Attlee would have been in the cabinet.
So something similar today lasts as long as needed to hold whatever parliament considers will 'resolve' the problem, such as a public vote or a GE.
Unless the GE is held under PR, though, it could be worse than a referendum. FPTP GEs can produce 'majorities' which only have the support of 35% of voters.
Do chicken boxes usually come with knives? Seems a bit unnecessary...
But of course that was the story of the Lib Dem calamity in 2010-2015. An inexperienced leader blissfully unaware of his limitations.
Apart from the border area where population is mixed and a few anomalies I am correct.
They should be selecting from the official 3rd opposition party , not a minnow party like the Lib Dems with their handful of pygmies.