The purging bit is going very well. Not so sure about the rest.
As someone who purged herself I'm curious why Heidi objects to the word?
The use of "purge" in political history has deeply unpleasant and indeed bloody undertones.
And Heidi Allen presumably regrets that political parties are evolving from broad churches into sects, as do I.
Judging by his comment, Philip is down with the project.
Just because a word occassionally has bloody undertones in the past doesn't mean it is a word that has no meaning or appropriate uses. It is appropriate here.
I'm fine with parties having principles and people who can't agree to those principles going to other parties, yes. The Tory Party agreed to respect the referendum result, anyone who isn't prepared to do that [which doesn't mean Rudd or HYUFD for Topping's benefit] should go. Had the result been Remain and had Francois still been causing nuisance I'd have said the same for him too.
If there was a group of MPs campaigning hardcore to abolish the NHS and bring in American healthcare I'd be OK with them being purged because they're not aligned with the parties principles. I imagine that Labour Party voters would think the same about any MPs in the Labour Party campaigning hardcore to abolish the NHS.
Except in this case, the issue is one which cuts across party lines, and previously the Tory party has not been an ideological party, tolerating several mutually contradictory sets of beliefs.
Purge, even divorced from its more than occasionally bloody past, as a political term is inextricably bound up with ideology.
You are wrong.
The Tory Party in 1993 made it an ideological issue. Major made passing Maastricht a Confidence motion, any MP who was not willing to vote through Maastricht would have been expelled from the Party. IDS and all the other "bastards" of the time held their nose and voted for Maastricht, despite hating it.
The shoe is on the other foot now, but there is no difference between today and then. This is now a matter of Confidence, if you can't toe the party line you will be expelled - as any MP who voted against Maastricht in 1993 once Major made it a Confidence matter would have been.
Rupert Allason abstained on the VOC and had the Whip withdrawn - though it was later restored.
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
Indeed. Corbyn still playing the same game he's played for years.
No, Jo has called this right - Corbyn needs to stand aside and allow Harman or Clarke to lead the GoNU and give the greatest chance of gaining the widest range of support in the Commons and the country.
This comes down to Realpolitik.
There are 14 LD MPs. There are 247 Labour MPs.
Swinson does not have the numbers to demand anything.
End of argument.
This comes down to Realpolitik. There are 643 MPs in Parliament, 322 [including Speaker as a Tory, deputy speakers as their own parties] are needed for a majority.
There are 14 LD MPs. There are 247 Labour MPs.
Neither party can do it on their own. Both need each other or they fail.
End of argument.
Williamson and Hopkins would vote with Labour - as did Field in the January VNOC.SNP , Plaid & Green would support him . That gives 290 MPs. LibDems on board would take that to 304. Bebb and Philip Lee maybe pushes that to 306. Key votes would then be ChangeUK and Independent group who both have 5 MPs.
Yes, but that requires the Lib Dems on board.
YBarddCwsc claimed Realpolitik meant that Swinson doesn't have the numbers to demand anything, fact is she does. Without Swinson, there is no majority, that is all the numbers she needs.
Also would O'Mara be there to vote? Then there is the former LD MP for Eastbourne now sitting as an Independent.
I suspect O'Mara will delay his application for Chiltern Hundreds (if he ever intended to make it). Lloyd said he'd support a negotiated deal (and hence resigned to back May's deal) but doesn't support no deal - doubt he'd be a problem on this one.
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
I don't think so. The only way that Corbyn has a chance to win even the most seats at the next GE is to lure voters back from the LibDems and others. He won't get those votes if he is believed to have facilitated No Deal - and he will be seen to have done that if he refuses to accept that anyone else but him could lead a government designed to prevent it. Thger eis still a fair amoiunt of time for that to be shown to be the case and he starts from a position where he is widely disliked by every demographic in every part of the country.
The size of Britain's armed forces has fallen for the ninth consecutive year, new Ministry of Defence figures show. The Army, the RAF and the Royal Navy have all seen a decline in the number of fully-trained personnel - with the Army experiencing the biggest fall.
Yet another reason why the Conservative Party is no longer conservative :
1. Failure to maintain the defences of the nation. 2. Law and order gone missing in action. 3. Fiscal prudence has become the magic money tree. 4. "Fuck Business" Prime Minister installed. 5 . Unionist traditions undermined by membership. 6. Worldwide reputation for good governance in the gutter. 7. Willing to drag the Queen into party politics. 8. Undermining the conventions of the constitution.
Recruitment numbers seem to be pretty good. The problem is retention.
And, who would want to be a soldier, when your political masters are quite prepared to throw you under the bus to placate the people you fought against?
My client used to be director of army recruitment and he says the big problem is outsourcing to the anonymous and robotic Capita.
You used to have a retired army sergeant who’d form a personal connection with each recruit and stay in touch with them throughout the process.
It does feel that way. But at the same time the parliamentary arithmetic just does not work. Parliament will not allow No Deal. Sure they have to act, in tandem, to prevent it, but No Deal is not possible without Parliament's backing.
WTF at 38% thinking Corbyn doesn't have strong principles?
He has the wrong principles IMO, but he absolutely has strong ones. Not over Brexit, but over other stuff absolutely.
Voted against welfare cuts, defying the party whip, to show he was a man of principle, which won him the leadership.
Said he would keep all those welfare cuts in order to pay for free school meals and university tuition for millionaires, in order to become Prime Minister.
Obviously a man of iron principle.
More than Swinson , she makes the Tories look like commies
Except in this case, the issue is one which cuts across party lines, and previously the Tory party has not been an ideological party, tolerating several mutually contradictory sets of beliefs.
Purge, even divorced from its more than occasionally bloody past, as a political term is inextricably bound up with ideology.
You are wrong.
The Tory Party in 1993 made it an ideological issue. Major made passing Maastricht a Confidence motion, any MP who was not willing to vote through Maastricht would have been expelled from the Party. IDS and all the other "bastards" of the time held their nose and voted for Maastricht, despite hating it.
The shoe is on the other foot now, but there is no difference between today and then. This is now a matter of Confidence, if you can't toe the party line you will be expelled - as any MP who voted against Maastricht in 1993 once Major made it a Confidence matter would have been.
Rupert Allason abstained on the VOC and had the Whip withdrawn - though it was later restored.
Precisely. And he claimed his abstention was an accident too as he couldn't get back to the country in time [convenient] didn't he?
Did the Allen's of the day object to that withdrawal of the Whip? Would they have objected had Allason in fact metaphorically crossed the floor to vote against and had the Whip withdrawn?
The size of Britain's armed forces has fallen for the ninth consecutive year, new Ministry of Defence figures show. The Army, the RAF and the Royal Navy have all seen a decline in the number of fully-trained personnel - with the Army experiencing the biggest fall.
Yet another reason why the Conservative Party is no longer conservative :
1. Failure to maintain the defences of the nation. 2. Law and order gone missing in action. 3. Fiscal prudence has become the magic money tree. 4. "Fuck Business" Prime Minister installed. 5 . Unionist traditions undermined by membership. 6. Worldwide reputation for good governance in the gutter. 7. Willing to drag the Queen into party politics. 8. Undermining the conventions of the constitution.
BiB - When have the Tories ever been anything other than soft on crime?
I must be one of the few who isn’t in favour of recruiting 20,000 new police officers.
I have no confidence they’ll be on my side.
There are no guarantees they’ll actually fight crime as opposed to harassing motorists more frequently, policing speech on Facebook or twitter, and seem to be more interested in political debate these days.
And yet the public would, according to Survation, vote 55:45 Remain in a fresh referendum. Leavers are still failing to convince those who already thought they were nuts.
Most of UK jobs outside London are low value ones in basic service industries. We have smart graduates working in call centres taking home less than £20k a year.
Yet recruitment of 'smart graduates' for engineering jobs at £25k or £30k is far from easy.
Its yet another thing which makes me suspect that much of UK higher education is not fit for purpose.
An awful lot of graduate recruitment is no more sophisticated than checking an applicant's alma mater. The reason a degree from Scumbag College is worth less than the same degree from Footlights College Oxbridge is the brand, not because the teaching is worse or they use a different speed of light in their physics equations.
My experience is that especially in engineering quality of teaching is poor even from top universities. Science is a bit better but not great. The capacity and work effort of many graduates however is good and with some training they can become productive quickly
One company owner told me he favoured chemistry graduates for any role because of the strong work ethic inculcated by having to perform and write up four experiments every week for three years.
Interesting how people view some degrees. Chemistry grads are good because they can read write and interpret very challenging texts and have problem solving powers biologists can only dream of! I'm not sure where the writing up four experiments a week comes from, this is not the case but certainly they do write up demanding experiments and the work ethic is very strong amongst chemists and scientists in general. Such a shame Boris wants to remove the cap on importing scientists. British science really loses out with BREXIT
No, Jo has called this right - Corbyn needs to stand aside and allow Harman or Clarke to lead the GoNU and give the greatest chance of gaining the widest range of support in the Commons and the country.
This comes down to Realpolitik.
There are 14 LD MPs. There are 247 Labour MPs.
Swinson does not have the numbers to demand anything.
End of argument.
This comes down to Realpolitik. There are 643 MPs in Parliament, 322 [including Speaker as a Tory, deputy speakers as their own parties] are needed for a majority.
There are 14 LD MPs. There are 247 Labour MPs.
Neither party can do it on their own. Both need each other or they fail.
End of argument.
Williamson and Hopkins would vote with Labour - as did Field in the January VNOC.SNP , Plaid & Green would support him . That gives 290 MPs. LibDems on board would take that to 304. Bebb and Philip Lee maybe pushes that to 306. Key votes would then be ChangeUK and Independent group who both have 5 MPs.
Yes, but that requires the Lib Dems on board.
YBarddCwsc claimed Realpolitik meant that Swinson doesn't have the numbers to demand anything, fact is she does. Without Swinson, there is no majority, that is all the numbers she needs.
Also would O'Mara be there to vote? Then there is the former LD MP for Eastbourne now sitting as an Independent.
I suspect O'Mara will delay his application for Chiltern Hundreds (if he ever intended to make it). Lloyd said he'd support a negotiated deal (and hence resigned to back May's deal) but doesn't support no deal - doubt he'd be a problem on this one.
If so, that might bring Corbyn's total to 308. Lady Hermon might well now be inclined to vote against both Corbyn and Johnson. I still think it would be difficult for Change UK and the Independent group to not support a VNOC in Johnson - even though they could subsequently refuse to vote for Corbyn.
Mr. Alex, I believe a credulous person called Guto Bebb [apologies if I misremembered the name] is a Conservative MP who supported the idea of Corbyn as a temporary PM, before apparently recanting his lunacy.
Guto Bebb vies with Mark Francois to be the most stupid member of the Parliamentary Conservative party.
Not while Andrew Bridgen is around.
Bill Wiggin says "hold my beer."
The quality all round is well below par, but who’d want to be an MP?
I mean, LDs can always VONC Tories to prevent no deal and then VONC JC to get a GE. It makes them look bad, but it works...
The issue with that is that Boris remains PM until the GE. that works into the tories hands fine.
My thought process was this:
1) VONC Tories 2) Allow PM Corbyn 3) Allow one action by JC - extending Brexit deadline 4) Either allow JC to call GE on own terms or VONC him if he refuses 5a) GE is called by JC - unleash the dogs of war 5b) No gov can be formed in 14 days, so default is GE - unleash the dogs of war
NB: It would be a bad look for JC to be VONCd so I assume he'd call a GE before a VONC went through if he'd already extended Brexit deadline - I assume BJ would try and call a GE before a VONC so deadline cannot be extended (so if I were Lab or LD I would refuse to vote for a GE over a VONC until BJ extended Brexit deadline)
Corbyn would still be in Downing Street and controlling executive actions for 2 whole months in that scenario.
I mean, he can't do anything in those 2 months. It takes 2 months to sort out what the hell everyone's portfolio is. There would be FA he could do.
Also, guess what, he is the LOTO, democratically elected by his party members to lead Labour alongside MPs democratically elected by their constituents. If MPs have no faith in the government, the LOTO has a right and duty to try and form a government. If the other parties don't like that, don't let him, but then they don't get deadline extended. Johnson has refused to extend the Brexit deadline. Labour has refused a GNU that replaces their democratically elected leader. LDs and other Remainers have to pick what they prefer.
The LOTO does not have a right and duty to form a government. He can try, but the other parties have no responsibility to let him and if he doesn't get the numbers he needs to wait until after winning a GE to get in Downing Street and that is entirely appropriate.
I entirely agree Remainers have to decide what they prefer. Corbyn is well within his rights to say he is the only option, to say it is him or No Deal. Remainers have the rights to reluctantly say No Deal is preferable.
And yet the public would, according to Survation, vote 55:45 Remain in a fresh referendum. Leavers are still failing to convince those who already thought they were nuts.
The bottom line is probably that the Tories stand the better chance of getting it done, but will pay a heavy and possibly long term political price down the line.
The purging bit is going very well. Not so sure about the rest.
As someone who purged herself I'm curious why Heidi objects to the word?
The use of "purge" in political history has deeply unpleasant and indeed bloody undertones.
And Heidi Allen presumably regrets that political parties are evolving from broad churches into sects, as do I.
Judging by his comment, Philip is down with the project.
I'm less interested in the purges, and more interested in the show trials that should follow any no deal Brexit and the premeditated damage it will cause the country.
Who will be first against the wall when the Revolution comes?
Not sure, but I imagine HYUFD will be posting less.....
I mean, LDs can always VONC Tories to prevent no deal and then VONC JC to get a GE. It makes them look bad, but it works...
Which date does the VONC need to take place in order for the GE to be before October 31st though ?
13th or 14th September.
That's not right is it?
A VONC on 14 September can still be a GE afterwards if Boris chooses a date afterwards. Unless an extension is agreed but then its moot, that can occur even in October.
I assumed Pulpstar was referring to the latest date for a VONC that will allow a GE before 31st October. That is 14 days for failing to fnd an alternative and then 25 working days or about 33 calendar days for the campaign.
I assumed he meant to ensure it will be. That date has already passed.
Though I think even theoretically 13th is too late. Don't forget we need to hold the election before the 31st, have the votes counted and a new PM kiss hands with the Queen prior to the 31st.
The lack of prescription in the timing of an election triggered under FTPA is an interesting one (" the polling day for the election is to be the day appointed by Her Majesty by proclamation on the recommendation of the Prime Minister").
While I can't imagine HMQ allowing an incumbent to take the piss with six months... the potential ability to lurk for weeks longer than necessary is quite a power, given FTPA's raison d'etre was reducing that benefit of incumbency.
WTF at 38% thinking Corbyn doesn't have strong principles?
He has the wrong principles IMO, but he absolutely has strong ones. Not over Brexit, but over other stuff absolutely.
Voted against welfare cuts, defying the party whip, to show he was a man of principle, which won him the leadership.
Said he would keep all those welfare cuts in order to pay for free school meals and university tuition for millionaires, in order to become Prime Minister.
Obviously a man of iron principle.
More than Swinson , she makes the Tories look like commies
Since when were Communists people of principle? I give you the former General Secretary of the Uzbek SSR who is thought to have made around one million roubles a day in bribes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharof_Rashidov
I mean, LDs can always VONC Tories to prevent no deal and then VONC JC to get a GE. It makes them look bad, but it works...
Which date does the VONC need to take place in order for the GE to be before October 31st though ?
13th or 14th September.
That's not right is it?
A VONC on 14 September can still be a GE afterwards if Boris chooses a date afterwards. Unless an extension is agreed but then its moot, that can occur even in October.
I assumed Pulpstar was referring to the latest date for a VONC that will allow a GE before 31st October. That is 14 days for failing to fnd an alternative and then 25 working days or about 33 calendar days for the campaign.
I assumed he meant to ensure it will be. That date has already passed.
Though I think even theoretically 13th is too late. Don't forget we need to hold the election before the 31st, have the votes counted and a new PM kiss hands with the Queen prior to the 31st.
The lack of prescription in the timing of an election triggered under FTPA is an interesting one (" the polling day for the election is to be the day appointed by Her Majesty by proclamation on the recommendation of the Prime Minister").
While I can't imagine HMQ allowing an incumbent to take the piss with six months... the potential ability to lurk for weeks longer than necessary is quite a power, given FTPA's raison d'etre was reducing that benefit of incumbency.
To be fair its rarely time sensitive like this. And even here MPs have known the time issues for months, so could have acted sooner had they wanted to do so.
And yet the public would, according to Survation, vote 55:45 Remain in a fresh referendum. Leavers are still failing to convince those who already thought they were nuts.
The irony is, that with a 55:45 Remain/Leave split, "Respecting the result" is not a good idea. Respecting it with a No Deal is just plain bad politics, nay, bonkers.
And yet the public would, according to Survation, vote 55:45 Remain in a fresh referendum. Leavers are still failing to convince those who already thought they were nuts.
The bottom line is probably that the Tories stand the better chance of getting it done, but will pay a heavy and possibly long term political price down the line.
Yep - that's the way I see it. No Deal is nailed on. Johnson probably scrapes home in the subsequent election. Then reality hits.
I have a feeling that as the GNU debate develops, the Corbyn letter that yesterday seemed so smart to me and many others might turn out to have been a major error. It's interesting that, yet again, Keir Starmer does not seem to be around for a Corbyn Brexit trip off-piste.
Starmer is a numpty nobody , he will do nothing as per the last few years. These people have no backbone or principles other than supping at the trough. No Deal coming up fast.
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
I don't think so. The only way that Corbyn has a chance to win even the most seats at the next GE is to lure voters back from the LibDems and others. He won't get those votes if he is believed to have facilitated No Deal - and he will be seen to have done that if he refuses to accept that anyone else but him could lead a government designed to prevent it. Thger eis still a fair amoiunt of time for that to be shown to be the case and he starts from a position where he is widely disliked by every demographic in every part of the country.
Hypothetically there is another possibility, whereby Labour pulls back its leavers from the BXP and Tories whilst Tory remainers desert in large numbers to the LibDems. Given its edge in the voting system that could deliver Labour most seats.
The size of Britain's armed forces has fallen for the ninth consecutive year, new Ministry of Defence figures show. The Army, the RAF and the Royal Navy have all seen a decline in the number of fully-trained personnel - with the Army experiencing the biggest fall.
Yet another reason why the Conservative Party is no longer conservative :
1. Failure to maintain the defences of the nation. 2. Law and order gone missing in action. 3. Fiscal prudence has become the magic money tree. 4. "Fuck Business" Prime Minister installed. 5 . Unionist traditions undermined by membership. 6. Worldwide reputation for good governance in the gutter. 7. Willing to drag the Queen into party politics. 8. Undermining the conventions of the constitution.
BiB - When have the Tories ever been anything other than soft on crime?
I must be one of the few who isn’t in favour of recruiting 20,000 new police officers.
I have no confidence they’ll be on my side.
There are no guarantees they’ll actually fight crime as opposed to harassing motorists more frequently, policing speech on Facebook or twitter, and seem to be more interested in political debate these days.
No doubt they will soon be recruiting networks of Stasi-like informers ...
It does feel that way. But at the same time the parliamentary arithmetic just does not work. Parliament will not allow No Deal. Sure they have to act, in tandem, to prevent it, but No Deal is not possible without Parliament's backing.
It happens willy nilly. That's what the fuss is about.
I mean, LDs can always VONC Tories to prevent no deal and then VONC JC to get a GE. It makes them look bad, but it works...
The issue with that is that Boris remains PM until the GE. that works into the tories hands fine.
My thought process was this:
1) VONC Tories 2) Allow PM Corbyn 3) Allow one action by JC - extending Brexit deadline 4) Either allow JC to call GE on own terms or VONC him if he refuses 5a) GE is called by JC - unleash the dogs of war 5b) No gov can be formed in 14 days, so default is GE - unleash the dogs of war
NB: It would be a bad look for JC to be VONCd so I assume he'd call a GE before a VONC went through if he'd already extended Brexit deadline - I assume BJ would try and call a GE before a VONC so deadline cannot be extended (so if I were Lab or LD I would refuse to vote for a GE over a VONC until BJ extended Brexit deadline)
Corbyn would still be in Downing Street and controlling executive actions for 2 whole months in that scenario.
I mean, he can't do anything in those 2 months. It takes 2 months to sort out what the hell everyone's portfolio is. There would be FA he could do.
Also, guess what, he is the LOTO, democratically elected by his party members to lead Labour alongside MPs democratically elected by their constituents. If MPs have no faith in the government, the LOTO has a right and duty to try and form a government. If the other parties don't like that, don't let him, but then they don't get deadline extended. Johnson has refused to extend the Brexit deadline. Labour has refused a GNU that replaces their democratically elected leader. LDs and other Remainers have to pick what they prefer.
The LOTO does not have a right and duty to form a government. He can try, but the other parties have no responsibility to let him and if he doesn't get the numbers he needs to wait until after winning a GE to get in Downing Street and that is entirely appropriate.
I entirely agree Remainers have to decide what they prefer. Corbyn is well within his rights to say he is the only option, to say it is him or No Deal. Remainers have the rights to reluctantly say No Deal is preferable.
Why is Corbyn "within his rights" to present a false choice when there are other alternatives who would be more palatable than either?
It's like saying chef is within his rights to insist you have a sh1t sausage or a turd casserole.
The size of Britain's armed forces has fallen for the ninth consecutive year, new Ministry of Defence figures show. The Army, the RAF and the Royal Navy have all seen a decline in the number of fully-trained personnel - with the Army experiencing the biggest fall.
Yet another reason why the Conservative Party is no longer conservative :
1. Failure to maintain the defences of the nation. 2. Law and order gone missing in action. 3. Fiscal prudence has become the magic money tree. 4. "Fuck Business" Prime Minister installed. 5 . Unionist traditions undermined by membership. 6. Worldwide reputation for good governance in the gutter. 7. Willing to drag the Queen into party politics. 8. Undermining the conventions of the constitution.
BiB - When have the Tories ever been anything other than soft on crime?
I must be one of the few who isn’t in favour of recruiting 20,000 new police officers.
I have no confidence they’ll be on my side.
There are no guarantees they’ll actually fight crime as opposed to harassing motorists more frequently, policing speech on Facebook or twitter, and seem to be more interested in political debate these days.
Maybe. But sometimes, as we’ve just learnt, policemen do get killed in the line of duty while trying to do their job. Whatever criticisms one might make, they put themselves at risk for the rest of us and, sadly, some pay the ultimate price.
The purging bit is going very well. Not so sure about the rest.
As someone who purged herself I'm curious why Heidi objects to the word?
The use of "purge" in political history has deeply unpleasant and indeed bloody undertones.
And Heidi Allen presumably regrets that political parties are evolving from broad churches into sects, as do I.
Judging by his comment, Philip is down with the project.
I'm less interested in the purges, and more interested in the show trials that should follow any no deal Brexit and the premeditated damage it will cause the country.
Who will be first against the wall when the Revolution comes?
Not sure, but I imagine HYUFD will be posting less.....
Or he will be telling everyone he voted Remain and urging that the diehard leavers be dragged to the scaffold.
YBarddCwsc claimed Realpolitik meant that Swinson doesn't have the numbers to demand anything, fact is she does. Without Swinson, there is no majority, that is all the numbers she needs.
Yes, but if every one-trick pony who joins the VoNC/VoC invokes conditions, then there is a big, big problem.
What are the SNP getting out of of this, if Jo gets to name the Caretaker PM. What do the Independents get?
And why should the person who controls the biggest block give way without getting something big in return?
If both Clarke and Harman are willing (and have the numbers) to be PM, who stands down?
I wonder if we might get the PM determined by drawing straws or tossing a coin.
I very much doubt either have the numbers, as Corbyn will scupper it.
Harman is most credible of those two - there are enough Labour (and possibly SNP) MPs who don't want "supporting a Tory PM" (even Clarke and even for special reasons) on their CVs. The number of Tories needing to be held together to make Harman PM is far smaller.
If Corbyn backed Harman I think Grieve would be prepared to back Harman.
Corbyn won't though. We see PMs refuse to promote rivals, the notion of someone as petty and ideological as Corbyn promoting an arch-rival for leadership of the Labour Party to being Prime Minister is utterly unthinkable. He will never do that.
It's one reason why I suspect we end up with Beckett - who Corbyn could support as she put him where he is.
What I suspect we will end up with is:-
VoNC Boris Corbyn comes in VoNC Corbyn someone else
General election although a second referendum to put things to bed would be a far saner idea.
MPs cannot agree on a caretaker for a few days to extend A50 and call an election. They will never agree on one who will be in office for six months or so to conduct a referendum. For a start, all those fake concerns about what Corbyn or Clarke might get up to in the mean time would suddenly be genuine: you simply cannot maintain purdah for long enough.
As @YBarddCwsc noted earlier on this thread, this process is bedevilled by unicorns. We are still in the EU because Leave MPs insisted on their unicorn Brexits and voted against the agreement to leave in March. We will crash out because Remain MPs insist on their unicorn makeshift prime minister.
YBarddCwsc claimed Realpolitik meant that Swinson doesn't have the numbers to demand anything, fact is she does. Without Swinson, there is no majority, that is all the numbers she needs.
Yes, but if ever one-trick pony who joins the VoNC/VoC invokes conditions, then there is a big, big problem.
What are the SNP getting out of of this, if Jo gets to name the Caretaker PM. What do the Independents get?
And why should the person who controls the biggest block give way without getting something big in return?
This is politics, everyone wants something.
What Corbyn gets is to bring down the Government and guarantee an election this year. That's big enough for an old man in a hurry.
The problem with this is that only a few weeks ago some were complaining that Boris became PM only having been elected by 150k Con members. Someone like Harman would have no legitimacy at all. I don't think it will happen, but if it did it would look like a parliamentary coup.
That is what we need. The crisis approaches and it is the Tories and Corbyn who are causing it.
Note that I said "Corbyn" and not "Labour"
Not sure there is such a thing as a "parliamentary coup". In our system the executive only govern because they have the confidence of the HoC.
There is a first time for everything. Surely the point of Brexit was to make Parliament sovereign? I cannot remember Brexiteers mentioning the cabinet being sovereign...
I mean, LDs can always VONC Tories to prevent no deal and then VONC JC to get a GE. It makes them look bad, but it works...
The issue with that is that Boris remains PM until the GE. that works into the tories hands fine.
My thought process was this:
1) VONC Tories 2) Allow PM Corbyn 3) Allow one action by JC - extending Brexit deadline 4) Either allow JC to call GE on own terms or VONC him if he refuses 5a) GE is called by JC - unleash the dogs of war 5b) No gov can be formed in 14 days, so default is GE - unleash the dogs of war
NB: It would be a bad look for JC to be VONCd so I assume he'd call a GE before a VONC went through if he'd already extended Brexit deadline - I assume BJ would try and call a GE before a VONC so deadline cannot be extended (so if I were Lab or LD I would refuse to vote for a GE over a VONC until BJ extended Brexit deadline)
Corbyn would still be in Downing Street and controlling executive actions for 2 whole months in that scenario.
I mean, he can't do anything in those 2 months. It takes 2 months to sort out what the hell everyone's portfolio is. There would be FA he could do.
Also, guess what, he is the LOTO, democratically elected by his party members to lead Labour alongside MPs democratically elected by their constituents. If MPs have no faith in the government, the LOTO has a right and duty to try and form a government. If the other parties don't like that, don't let him, but then they don't get deadline extended. Johnson has refused to extend the Brexit deadline. Labour has refused a GNU that replaces their democratically elected leader. LDs and other Remainers have to pick what they prefer.
The LOTO does not have a right and duty to form a government. He can try, but the other parties have no responsibility to let him and if he doesn't get the numbers he needs to wait until after winning a GE to get in Downing Street and that is entirely appropriate.
I entirely agree Remainers have to decide what they prefer. Corbyn is well within his rights to say he is the only option, to say it is him or No Deal. Remainers have the rights to reluctantly say No Deal is preferable.
Why is Corbyn "within his rights" to present a false choice when there are other alternatives who would be more palatable than either?
It's like saying chef is within his rights to insist you have a sh1t sausage or a turd casserole.
You don't think a chef is within his rights to offer you a menu where you don't like any of the options?
The LOTO does not have a right and duty to form a government. He can try, but the other parties have no responsibility to let him and if he doesn't get the numbers he needs to wait until after winning a GE to get in Downing Street and that is entirely appropriate.
I entirely agree Remainers have to decide what they prefer. Corbyn is well within his rights to say he is the only option, to say it is him or No Deal. Remainers have the rights to reluctantly say No Deal is preferable.
Why is Corbyn "within his rights" to present a false choice when there are other alternatives who would be more palatable than either?
It's like saying chef is within his rights to insist you have a sh1t sausage or a turd casserole.
The other options aren't more palatable to him.
It's like a chef saying you can have a meal from the menu he has designed or not have a meal in his restaurant.
Some restaurants will let you order a meal not on the menu but many won't.
If you want Chicken Kung Po don't expect the chef at an Indian restaurant to make it for you and be indignant when he says no.
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
I don't think so. The only way that Corbyn has a chance to win even the most seats at the next GE is to lure voters back from the LibDems and others. He won't get those votes if he is believed to have facilitated No Deal - and he will be seen to have done that if he refuses to accept that anyone else but him could lead a government designed to prevent it. Thger eis still a fair amoiunt of time for that to be shown to be the case and he starts from a position where he is widely disliked by every demographic in every part of the country.
No the Bollox to Brexit lot
Who turned down stopping No Deal by becoming the BOLLOX to stopping BREXIT lot
YBarddCwsc claimed Realpolitik meant that Swinson doesn't have the numbers to demand anything, fact is she does. Without Swinson, there is no majority, that is all the numbers she needs.
Yes, but if ever one-trick pony who joins the VoNC/VoC invokes conditions, then there is a big, big problem.
What are the SNP getting out of of this, if Jo gets to name the Caretaker PM. What do the Independents get?
And why should the person who controls the biggest block give way without getting something big in return?
This is politics, everyone wants something.
What Corbyn gets is to bring down the Government and guarantee an election this year. That's big enough for an old man in a hurry.
That is not enough.
Everyone knows there is an election coming this year. Boris + DUP have a majority of epsilon.
The problem with this is that only a few weeks ago some were complaining that Boris became PM only having been elected by 150k Con members. Someone like Harman would have no legitimacy at all. I don't think it will happen, but if it did it would look like a parliamentary coup.
That is what we need. The crisis approaches and it is the Tories and Corbyn who are causing it.
Note that I said "Corbyn" and not "Labour"
You did,however it was most Labour Mps , that voted against Mays deal. They imo should have voted for it. To easy not to take personal responsibility.
And yet the public would, according to Survation, vote 55:45 Remain in a fresh referendum. Leavers are still failing to convince those who already thought they were nuts.
What price was Remain at 10pm on Referendum day????
The LOTO does not have a right and duty to form a government. He can try, but the other parties have no responsibility to let him and if he doesn't get the numbers he needs to wait until after winning a GE to get in Downing Street and that is entirely appropriate.
I entirely agree Remainers have to decide what they prefer. Corbyn is well within his rights to say he is the only option, to say it is him or No Deal. Remainers have the rights to reluctantly say No Deal is preferable.
Why is Corbyn "within his rights" to present a false choice when there are other alternatives who would be more palatable than either?
It's like saying chef is within his rights to insist you have a sh1t sausage or a turd casserole.
The other options aren't more palatable to him.
It's like a chef saying you can have a meal from the menu he has designed or not have a meal in his restaurant.
Some restaurants will let you order a meal not on the menu but many won't.
If you want Chicken Kung Po don't expect the chef at an Indian restaurant to make it for you and be indignant when he says no.
Harman and Clarke are plainly far more palatable in terms of the people that need to be got onside for this.
For Tory moderates, those who left Labour over antisemitism, Sylvia Hermon etc, they can't go back to their constituencies and say they made Corbyn PM.
They're not more palatable to Corbyn, of course, but he doesn't have the numbers, and this way he gets his General Election in short order, gets credit from Remainers for "doing the right thing", isn't personally the PM who stopped Brexit... it's got a lot going for it.
And yet the public would, according to Survation, vote 55:45 Remain in a fresh referendum. Leavers are still failing to convince those who already thought they were nuts.
What price was Remain at 10pm on Referendum day????
Don't believe polls
This is a substantial swing from Leave in Survation’s last poll before the referendum.
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
I don't think so. The only way that Corbyn has a chance to win even the most seats at the next GE is to lure voters back from the LibDems and others. He won't get those votes if he is believed to have facilitated No Deal - and he will be seen to have done that if he refuses to accept that anyone else but him could lead a government designed to prevent it. Thger eis still a fair amoiunt of time for that to be shown to be the case and he starts from a position where he is widely disliked by every demographic in every part of the country.
No the Bollox to Brexit lot
Who turned down stopping No Deal by becoming the BOLLOX to stopping BREXIT lot
Will be blamed
Yes, you and the diminishing number of Labour supporters will blame them. The rest of the country will see that Corbyn rejected any opportunity to stop a No Deal Brexit that did not involve him being Prime Minister and they will hold him in even greater contempt than they do at the moment.
Consider what happens if we leave. All those who are very pro-EU lose the division over revoke, referendum, extension, EFTA etc. They either accept our departure or move to rejoining.
The LOTO does not have a right and duty to form a government. He can try, but the other parties have no responsibility to let him and if he doesn't get the numbers he needs to wait until after winning a GE to get in Downing Street and that is entirely appropriate.
I entirely agree Remainers have to decide what they prefer. Corbyn is well within his rights to say he is the only option, to say it is him or No Deal. Remainers have the rights to reluctantly say No Deal is preferable.
Why is Corbyn "within his rights" to present a false choice when there are other alternatives who would be more palatable than either?
It's like saying chef is within his rights to insist you have a sh1t sausage or a turd casserole.
The other options aren't more palatable to him.
It's like a chef saying you can have a meal from the menu he has designed or not have a meal in his restaurant.
Some restaurants will let you order a meal not on the menu but many won't.
If you want Chicken Kung Po don't expect the chef at an Indian restaurant to make it for you and be indignant when he says no.
Harman and Clarke are plainly far more palatable in terms of the people that need to be got onside for this.
For Tory moderates, those who left Labour over antisemitism, Sylvia Hermon etc, they can't go back to their constituencies and say they made Corbyn PM.
They're not more palatable to Corbyn, of course, but he doesn't have the numbers, and this way he gets his General Election in short order, gets credit from Remainers for "doing the right thing", isn't personally the PM who stopped Brexit... it's got a lot going for it.
Consider what happens if we leave. All those who are very pro-EU lose the division over revoke, referendum, extension, EFTA etc. They either accept our departure or move to rejoining.
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
I don't think so. The only way that Corbyn has a chance to win even the most seats at the next GE is to lure voters back from the LibDems and others. He won't get those votes if he is believed to have facilitated No Deal - and he will be seen to have done that if he refuses to accept that anyone else but him could lead a government designed to prevent it. Thger eis still a fair amoiunt of time for that to be shown to be the case and he starts from a position where he is widely disliked by every demographic in every part of the country.
Hypothetically there is another possibility, whereby Labour pulls back its leavers from the BXP and Tories whilst Tory remainers desert in large numbers to the LibDems. Given its edge in the voting system that could deliver Labour most seats.
Labour has lost 3/4 times more voters to the LDs and Greens than it has to BXP -and the seats where returning Leave voters will tip the balance are few and far between. The vast majority of Labour Leave voters voted Labour in 2017.
The problem with this is that only a few weeks ago some were complaining that Boris became PM only having been elected by 150k Con members. Someone like Harman would have no legitimacy at all. I don't think it will happen, but if it did it would look like a parliamentary coup.
That is what we need. The crisis approaches and it is the Tories and Corbyn who are causing it.
Note that I said "Corbyn" and not "Labour"
You did,however it was most Labour Mps , that voted against Mays deal. They imo should have voted for it. To easy not to take personal responsibility.
Labour MPs should have supported the Conservative proposal that was completely different to the one they were elected on while Tory MPs voted for their own preferred option according to their personal taste?
The problem with this is that only a few weeks ago some were complaining that Boris became PM only having been elected by 150k Con members. Someone like Harman would have no legitimacy at all. I don't think it will happen, but if it did it would look like a parliamentary coup.
That is what we need. The crisis approaches and it is the Tories and Corbyn who are causing it.
Note that I said "Corbyn" and not "Labour"
You did,however it was most Labour Mps , that voted against Mays deal. They imo should have voted for it. To easy not to take personal responsibility.
YBarddCwsc claimed Realpolitik meant that Swinson doesn't have the numbers to demand anything, fact is she does. Without Swinson, there is no majority, that is all the numbers she needs.
Yes, but if ever one-trick pony who joins the VoNC/VoC invokes conditions, then there is a big, big problem.
What are the SNP getting out of of this, if Jo gets to name the Caretaker PM. What do the Independents get?
And why should the person who controls the biggest block give way without getting something big in return?
This is politics, everyone wants something.
What Corbyn gets is to bring down the Government and guarantee an election this year. That's big enough for an old man in a hurry.
That is not enough.
Everyone knows there is an election coming this year. Boris + DUP have a majority of epsilon.
You are giving him something he has already taken
The betting markets are giving around a 30% chance of it NOT happening. And that chance is partly based on the Government falling pre-31 October. If the VONC move fails, the chances of Parliament running to term increase markedly - it's not so much the lack of a majority that makes a General Election likely (Major and Callaghan both stumbled on without one for some considerable time) but the absence of a majority and a huge looming deadline.
Labour has lost 3/4 times more voters to the LDs and Greens than it has to BXP -and the seats where returning Leave voters will tip the balance are few and far between. The vast majority of Labour Leave voters voted Labour in 2017.
They're probably amongst the most tribal of the lot if they're STILL voting Labour. Corbyn could do schengen, Euro, the whole nine yards. They'd still stick the X in the Labour box.
The purging bit is going very well. Not so sure about the rest.
As someone who purged herself I'm curious why Heidi objects to the word?
The use of "purge" in political history has deeply unpleasant and indeed bloody undertones.
And Heidi Allen presumably regrets that political parties are evolving from broad churches into sects, as do I.
Judging by his comment, Philip is down with the project.
I'm less interested in the purges, and more interested in the show trials that should follow any no deal Brexit and the premeditated damage it will cause the country.
Who will be first against the wall when the Revolution comes?
Not sure, but I imagine HYUFD will be posting less.....
Candidate for the head of the Ministry of Truth surely? His unswerving loyalty should bring some form of reward...
YBarddCwsc claimed Realpolitik meant that Swinson doesn't have the numbers to demand anything, fact is she does. Without Swinson, there is no majority, that is all the numbers she needs.
Yes, but if ever one-trick pony who joins the VoNC/VoC invokes conditions, then there is a big, big problem.
What are the SNP getting out of of this, if Jo gets to name the Caretaker PM. What do the Independents get?
And why should the person who controls the biggest block give way without getting something big in return?
This is politics, everyone wants something.
What Corbyn gets is to bring down the Government and guarantee an election this year. That's big enough for an old man in a hurry.
That is not enough.
Everyone knows there is an election coming this year. Boris + DUP have a majority of epsilon.
You are giving him something he has already taken
The betting markets are giving around a 30% chance of it NOT happening. And that chance is partly based on the Government falling pre-31 October. If the VONC move fails, the chances of Parliament running to term increase markedly - it's not so much the lack of a majority that makes a General Election likely (Major and Callaghan both stumbled on without one for some considerable time) but the absence of a majority and a huge looming deadline.
Major only lacked a majority for a few weeks - ie it did not evaporate until Feb 1997!
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
I don't think so. The only way that Corbyn has a chance to win even the most seats at the next GE is to lure voters back from the LibDems and others. He won't get those votes if he is believed to have facilitated No Deal - and he will be seen to have done that if he refuses to accept that anyone else but him could lead a government designed to prevent it. Thger eis still a fair amoiunt of time for that to be shown to be the case and he starts from a position where he is widely disliked by every demographic in every part of the country.
Hypothetically there is another possibility, whereby Labour pulls back its leavers from the BXP and Tories whilst Tory remainers desert in large numbers to the LibDems. Given its edge in the voting system that could deliver Labour most seats.
Labour has lost 3/4 times more voters to the LDs and Greens than it has to BXP -and the seats where returning Leave voters will tip the balance are few and far between. The vast majority of Labour Leave voters voted Labour in 2017.
Yes, but it depends on where those voters are. In very many Tory held seats it is better that they vote LibDem.
The purging bit is going very well. Not so sure about the rest.
As someone who purged herself I'm curious why Heidi objects to the word?
The use of "purge" in political history has deeply unpleasant and indeed bloody undertones.
And Heidi Allen presumably regrets that political parties are evolving from broad churches into sects, as do I.
Judging by his comment, Philip is down with the project.
I'm less interested in the purges, and more interested in the show trials that should follow any no deal Brexit and the premeditated damage it will cause the country.
Who will be first against the wall when the Revolution comes?
Not sure, but I imagine HYUFD will be posting less.....
Or he will be telling everyone he voted Remain and urging that the diehard leavers be dragged to the scaffold.
I don't want anyone dragged to the scaffold or shot by firing squad, I just want the Leave vote respected Deal or No Deal
And yet the public would, according to Survation, vote 55:45 Remain in a fresh referendum. Leavers are still failing to convince those who already thought they were nuts.
What price was Remain at 10pm on Referendum day????
Don't believe polls
On a betting Site, you recommend ignoring form? That's a bit like a mariner ignoring weather forecasts. They're not always right either, but....
Labour has lost 3/4 times more voters to the LDs and Greens than it has to BXP -and the seats where returning Leave voters will tip the balance are few and far between. The vast majority of Labour Leave voters voted Labour in 2017.
They're probably amongst the most tribal of the lot if they're STILL voting Labour. Corbyn could do schengen, Euro, the whole nine yards. They'd still stick the X in the Labour box.
Correct Socialism is a million % more important than BREXIT
And yet the public would, according to Survation, vote 55:45 Remain in a fresh referendum. Leavers are still failing to convince those who already thought they were nuts.
What price was Remain at 10pm on Referendum day????
Don't believe polls
Polling on Referenda is different from polling on elections - estimating the turnout is difficult.
To answer the question you asked, I think Leave hit 4/1 before the polls closed at 10pm, then at some point between Farage's "concession" and the Newcastle/Sunderland declarations (between 10:30pm and 1:30am) Leave hit 10/1, then apart for a few fits and jerks (most notably when London came in) it was downhill all the way from there. Allegedly @Dromedary of this parish won around a million that night
However all this is from memory: the correct figures are available on betdata.io and apols for any errors.
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
I don't think so. The only way that Corbyn has a chance to win even the most seats at the next GE is to lure voters back from the LibDems and others. He won't get those votes if he is believed to have facilitated No Deal - and he will be seen to have done that if he refuses to accept that anyone else but him could lead a government designed to prevent it. Thger eis still a fair amoiunt of time for that to be shown to be the case and he starts from a position where he is widely disliked by every demographic in every part of the country.
Hypothetically there is another possibility, whereby Labour pulls back its leavers from the BXP and Tories whilst Tory remainers desert in large numbers to the LibDems. Given its edge in the voting system that could deliver Labour most seats.
Labour has lost 3/4 times more voters to the LDs and Greens than it has to BXP -and the seats where returning Leave voters will tip the balance are few and far between. The vast majority of Labour Leave voters voted Labour in 2017.
To some extent that is true, the next general election could well be won on whether the Tories lose more voters to the Brexit Party or Labour lose more voters to the LDs and Greens, at the moment Boris has stopped most of the leak from the Tories but Corbyn is still leaking to the yellows and greens
The LOTO does not have a right and duty to form a government. He can try, but the other parties have no responsibility to let him and if he doesn't get the numbers he needs to wait until after winning a GE to get in Downing Street and that is entirely appropriate.
I entirely agree Remainers have to decide what they prefer. Corbyn is well within his rights to say he is the only option, to say it is him or No Deal. Remainers have the rights to reluctantly say No Deal is preferable.
Why is Corbyn "within his rights" to present a false choice when there are other alternatives who would be more palatable than either?
It's like saying chef is within his rights to insist you have a sh1t sausage or a turd casserole.
The other options aren't more palatable to him.
It's like a chef saying you can have a meal from the menu he has designed or not have a meal in his restaurant.
Some restaurants will let you order a meal not on the menu but many won't.
If you want Chicken Kung Po don't expect the chef at an Indian restaurant to make it for you and be indignant when he says no.
Harman and Clarke are plainly far more palatable in terms of the people that need to be got onside for this.
For Tory moderates, those who left Labour over antisemitism, Sylvia Hermon etc, they can't go back to their constituencies and say they made Corbyn PM.
They're not more palatable to Corbyn, of course, but he doesn't have the numbers, and this way he gets his General Election in short order, gets credit from Remainers for "doing the right thing", isn't personally the PM who stopped Brexit... it's got a lot going for it.
If Tory rebels, the SNP, Plaid Cymru, the LibDems and all other anti-No Deal MPs would back a government of national unity led by, say, Harriet Harman, why wouldn’t the Labour Party - if it is genuinely opposed to a No Deal Brexit?
But we all know that the Labour leadership will not support anyone apart from Jeremy Corbyn leading a GNU. That tells us all we need to know about the Labour leadership's commitment to stopping a No Deal Brexit.
The purging bit is going very well. Not so sure about the rest.
As someone who purged herself I'm curious why Heidi objects to the word?
The use of "purge" in political history has deeply unpleasant and indeed bloody undertones.
And Heidi Allen presumably regrets that political parties are evolving from broad churches into sects, as do I.
Judging by his comment, Philip is down with the project.
I'm less interested in the purges, and more interested in the show trials that should follow any no deal Brexit and the premeditated damage it will cause the country.
Who will be first against the wall when the Revolution comes?
Not sure, but I imagine HYUFD will be posting less.....
Or he will be telling everyone he voted Remain and urging that the diehard leavers be dragged to the scaffold.
I don't want anyone dragged to the scaffold or shot by firing squad, I just want the Leave vote respected Deal or No Deal
If we had a 2nd ref - Leave with No Deal or Remain - how would you vote?
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
I don't think so. The only way that Corbyn has a chance to win even the most seats at the next GE is to lure voters back from the LibDems and others. He won't get those votes if he is believed to have facilitated No Deal - and he will be seen to have done that if he refuses to accept that anyone else but him could lead a government designed to prevent it. Thger eis still a fair amoiunt of time for that to be shown to be the case and he starts from a position where he is widely disliked by every demographic in every part of the country.
Hypothetically there is another possibility, whereby Labour pulls back its leavers from the BXP and Tories whilst Tory remainers desert in large numbers to the LibDems. Given its edge in the voting system that could deliver Labour most seats.
Labour has lost 3/4 times more voters to the LDs and Greens than it has to BXP -and the seats where returning Leave voters will tip the balance are few and far between. The vast majority of Labour Leave voters voted Labour in 2017.
Yes, but it depends on where those voters are. In very many Tory held seats it is better that they vote LibDem.
My point is that any returning BXP voters are not going to help Labour win many seats given that they are likely to have voted labour in 2017. The very few seats where they might make a difference will be countered by those where votes lost to the LDs and Greens (and the SNP and Plaid in Scotland and Wales) are likely to cost Labour. If Labour ends up with anything close to the seats it holds now at the next GE it will be an extraordinary achievement. It would require huge LD gains in Tory seats for that to leave Labour the biggest party.
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
I don't think so. The only way that Corbyn has a chance to win even the most seats at the next GE is to lure voters back from the LibDems and others. He won't get those votes if he is believed to have facilitated No Deal - and he will be seen to have done that if he refuses to accept that anyone else but him could lead a government designed to prevent it. Thger eis still a fair amoiunt of time for that to be shown to be the case and he starts from a position where he is widely disliked by every demographic in every part of the country.
No the Bollox to Brexit lot
Who turned down stopping No Deal by becoming the BOLLOX to stopping BREXIT lot
Will be blamed
Yes, you and the diminishing number of Labour supporters will blame them. The rest of the country will see that Corbyn rejected any opportunity to stop a No Deal Brexit that did not involve him being Prime Minister and they will hold him in even greater contempt than they do at the moment.
No chance and Corbyn is the only Remaining opportunity.
Even Wes Streeting understands that.
Even a number of Tory Remainer MPs understand that
Not Tory Swinson though.
LDs on a downward spiral since Tory Swinson took over
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
I don't think so. The only way that Corbyn has a chance to win even the most seats at the next GE is to lure voters back from the LibDems and others. He won't get those votes if he is believed to have facilitated No Deal - and he will be seen to have done that if he refuses to accept that anyone else but him could lead a government designed to prevent it. Thger eis still a fair amoiunt of time for that to be shown to be the case and he starts from a position where he is widely disliked by every demographic in every part of the country.
No the Bollox to Brexit lot
Who turned down stopping No Deal by becoming the BOLLOX to stopping BREXIT lot
Will be blamed
Yes, you and the diminishing number of Labour supporters will blame them. The rest of the country will see that Corbyn rejected any opportunity to stop a No Deal Brexit that did not involve him being Prime Minister and they will hold him in even greater contempt than they do at the moment.
No chance and Corbyn is the only Remaining opportunity.
Even Wes Streeting understands that.
Even a number of Tory Remainer MPs understand that
Not Tory Swinson though.
LDs on a downward spiral since Tory Swinson took over
Good luck with that!
I will bet you whatever sum you want that Labour gets fewer votes and seats at the next general election than it got in 2017, and that the LibDems will get more.
Labour has lost 3/4 times more voters to the LDs and Greens than it has to BXP -and the seats where returning Leave voters will tip the balance are few and far between. The vast majority of Labour Leave voters voted Labour in 2017.
They're probably amongst the most tribal of the lot if they're STILL voting Labour. Corbyn could do schengen, Euro, the whole nine yards. They'd still stick the X in the Labour box.
Correct Socialism is a million % more important than BREXIT
Beat me to it. I think this is something that a lot of Remainers fail to grasp. They come from the mushy centre-ground of politics, with no strong opinions on most issues. Suddenly up pops Brexit, and for them it is the most important thing in the world, and they assume this is the case for everyone.
However, if you have strong lefty convictions, Brexit is a 2nd order issue, and you can take it or leave it as long as our destination is a fairer society (and theTories suffer).
The problem with this is that only a few weeks ago some were complaining that Boris became PM only having been elected by 150k Con members. Someone like Harman would have no legitimacy at all. I don't think it will happen, but if it did it would look like a parliamentary coup.
That is what we need. The crisis approaches and it is the Tories and Corbyn who are causing it.
Note that I said "Corbyn" and not "Labour"
You did,however it was most Labour Mps , that voted against Mays deal. They imo should have voted for it. To easy not to take personal responsibility.
Labour MPs should have supported the Conservative proposal that was completely different to the one they were elected on while Tory MPs voted for their own preferred option according to their personal taste?
To prevent no deal , yes imo , for the good of the country. I voted remain after many doubts. Nevertheless I was on the losing side, I respect the result but prefer a deal,than no deal. You have to compromise at times like this. That is what disappointed me yesterday with Swinson.
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
I don't think so. The only way that Corbyn has a chance to win even the most seats at the next GE is to lure voters back from the LibDems and others. He won't get those votes if he is believed to have facilitated No Deal - and he will be seen to have done that if he refuses to accept that anyone else but him could lead a government designed to prevent it. Thger eis still a fair amoiunt of time for that to be shown to be the case and he starts from a position where he is widely disliked by every demographic in every part of the country.
Hypothetically there is another possibility, whereby Labour pulls back its leavers from the BXP and Tories whilst Tory remainers desert in large numbers to the LibDems. Given its edge in the voting system that could deliver Labour most seats.
Labour has lost 3/4 times more voters to the LDs and Greens than it has to BXP -and the seats where returning Leave voters will tip the balance are few and far between. The vast majority of Labour Leave voters voted Labour in 2017.
Yes, but it depends on where those voters are. In very many Tory held seats it is better that they vote LibDem.
My point is that any returning BXP voters are not going to help Labour win many seats given that they are likely to have voted labour in 2017. The very few seats where they might make a difference will be countered by those where votes lost to the LDs and Greens (and the SNP and Plaid in Scotland and Wales) are likely to cost Labour. If Labour ends up with anything close to the seats it holds now at the next GE it will be an extraordinary achievement. It would require huge LD gains in Tory seats for that to leave Labour the biggest party.
If by win you mean gain, Labour won’t be gaining any seats on current polling or anything like it. The point I was making is that there are still scenarios where they finish with the most seats, if the Tories lose a bunch to the LibDems and Labour holds most of its own.
For example, on Flavible national shares of Con 28, Lab 27, LibDem 24, BXP 12 makes Labour the largest party, just.
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
I don't think so. The only way that Corbyn has a chance to win even the most seats at the next GE is to lure voters back from the LibDems and others. He won't get those votes if he is believed to have facilitated No Deal - and he will be seen to have done that if he refuses to accept that anyone else but him could lead a government designed to prevent it. Thger eis still a fair amoiunt of time for that to be shown to be the case and he starts from a position where he is widely disliked by every demographic in every part of the country.
No the Bollox to Brexit lot
Who turned down stopping No Deal by becoming the BOLLOX to stopping BREXIT lot
Will be blamed
Yes, you and the diminishing number of Labour supporters will blame them. The rest of the country will see that Corbyn rejected any opportunity to stop a No Deal Brexit that did not involve him being Prime Minister and they will hold him in even greater contempt than they do at the moment.
No chance and Corbyn is the only Remaining opportunity.
Even Wes Streeting understands that.
Even a number of Tory Remainer MPs understand that
Not Tory Swinson though.
LDs on a downward spiral since Tory Swinson took over
Swinson is really proving to be a complete Amateur here.
diehard leavers will do anything to secure brexit. diehard remainers aren't troubled by such determination to achieve their goal.
The purging bit is going very well. Not so sure about the rest.
As someone who purged herself I'm curious why Heidi objects to the word?
The use of "purge" in political history has deeply unpleasant and indeed bloody undertones.
And Heidi Allen presumably regrets that political parties are evolving from broad churches into sects, as do I.
Judging by his comment, Philip is down with the project.
I'm less interested in the purges, and more interested in the show trials that should follow any no deal Brexit and the premeditated damage it will cause the country.
Who will be first against the wall when the Revolution comes?
Not sure, but I imagine HYUFD will be posting less.....
Or he will be telling everyone he voted Remain and urging that the diehard leavers be dragged to the scaffold.
I don't want anyone dragged to the scaffold or shot by firing squad, I just want the Leave vote respected Deal or No Deal
If we had a 2nd ref - Leave with No Deal or Remain - how would you vote?
Leave, we have to try Brexit first.
At most I would now back EEA in a decade not full Remain
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
I don't think so. The only way that Corbyn has a chance to win even the most seats at the next GE is to lure voters back from the LibDems and others. He won't get those votes if he is believed to have facilitated No Deal - and he will be seen to have done that if he refuses to accept that anyone else but him could lead a government designed to prevent it. Thger eis still a fair amoiunt of time for that to be shown to be the case and he starts from a position where he is widely disliked by every demographic in every part of the country.
Hypothetically there is another possibility, whereby Labour pulls back its leavers from the BXP and Tories whilst Tory remainers desert in large numbers to the LibDems. Given its edge in the voting system that could deliver Labour most seats.
Labour has lost 3/4 times more voters to the LDs and Greens than it has to BXP -and the seats where returning Leave voters will tip the balance are few and far between. The vast majority of Labour Leave voters voted Labour in 2017.
Yes, but it depends on where those voters are. In very many Tory held seats it is better that they vote LibDem.
My point is that any returning BXP voters are not going to help Labour win many seats given that they are likely to have voted labour in 2017. The very few seats where they might make a difference will be countered by those where votes lost to the LDs and Greens (and the SNP and Plaid in Scotland and Wales) are likely to cost Labour. If Labour ends up with anything close to the seats it holds now at the next GE it will be an extraordinary achievement. It would require huge LD gains in Tory seats for that to leave Labour the biggest party.
If by win you mean gain, Labour won’t be gaining any seats on current polling or anything like it. The point I was making is that there are still scenarios where they finish with the most seats, if the Tories lose a bunch to the LibDems and Labour holds most of its own.
For example, on Flavible national shares of Con 28, Lab 27, LibDem 24, BXP 12 makes Labour the largest party, just.
Oh dear. She really is hopeless. Frank Spencer would do a better job in charge.
This really is far too important an issue for this student level politics from this rank amateur. If Corbyn is the only deal in town to stop Brexit then do it.
Oh dear. She really is hopeless. Frank Spencer would do a better job in charge.
This really is far too important an issue for this student level politics from this rank amateur. If Corbyn is the only deal in town to stop Brexit then do it.
The touching faith among certain posters that Corbyn would do as he says and not do many disastrous things as well illustrates why our politics has become broken.
Oh dear. She really is hopeless. Frank Spencer would do a better job in charge.
This really is far too important an issue for this student level politics from this rank amateur. If Corbyn is the only deal in town to stop Brexit then do it.
Stop Brexit?? Have we changed into a communist country?
Labour has lost 3/4 times more voters to the LDs and Greens than it has to BXP -and the seats where returning Leave voters will tip the balance are few and far between. The vast majority of Labour Leave voters voted Labour in 2017.
They're probably amongst the most tribal of the lot if they're STILL voting Labour. Corbyn could do schengen, Euro, the whole nine yards. They'd still stick the X in the Labour box.
Correct Socialism is a million % more important than BREXIT
Beat me to it. I think this is something that a lot of Remainers fail to grasp. They come from the mushy centre-ground of politics, with no strong opinions on most issues. Suddenly up pops Brexit, and for them it is the most important thing in the world, and they assume this is the case for everyone.
However, if you have strong lefty convictions, Brexit is a 2nd order issue, and you can take it or leave it as long as our destination is a fairer society (and theTories suffer).
You're not going to get a fairer society with a Brexit presided over by the friends of hedge fund multi-millionaires, white supermacists and Putinists.
A record that will be swiftly beaten by his successor if we have a one-trick GONU.
Would it? Johnson would have been PM for about two months, and Harman (for 'tis she) may well last a little longer once she's done the necessary (bearing in mind she'd remain PM for the General Election campaign). It may be quite tight, but I'd expect she'd outlast him.
The size of Britain's armed forces has fallen for the ninth consecutive year, new Ministry of Defence figures show. The Army, the RAF and the Royal Navy have all seen a decline in the number of fully-trained personnel - with the Army experiencing the biggest fall.
Yet another reason why the Conservative Party is no longer conservative :
1. Failure to maintain the defences of the nation. 2. Law and order gone missing in action. 3. Fiscal prudence has become the magic money tree. 4. "Fuck Business" Prime Minister installed. 5 . Unionist traditions undermined by membership. 6. Worldwide reputation for good governance in the gutter. 7. Willing to drag the Queen into party politics. 8. Undermining the conventions of the constitution.
BiB - When have the Tories ever been anything other than soft on crime?
I must be one of the few who isn’t in favour of recruiting 20,000 new police officers.
I have no confidence they’ll be on my side.
There are no guarantees they’ll actually fight crime as opposed to harassing motorists more frequently, policing speech on Facebook or twitter, and seem to be more interested in political debate these days.
Maybe. But sometimes, as we’ve just learnt, policemen do get killed in the line of duty while trying to do their job. Whatever criticisms one might make, they put themselves at risk for the rest of us and, sadly, some pay the ultimate price.
Mr. Observer, depends. If Corbyn wants us to leave, and for no deal, and for the Conservatives to pay an electoral price, whilst looking like he can claim he wanted to remain, the letter's rather clever.
I don't think so. The only way that Corbyn has a chance to win even the most seats at the next GE is to lure voters back from the LibDems and others. He won't get those votes if he is believed to have facilitated No Deal - and he will be seen to have done that if he refuses to accept that anyone else but him could lead a government designed to prevent it. Thger eis still a fair amoiunt of time for that to be shown to be the case and he starts from a position where he is widely disliked by every demographic in every part of the country.
Hypothetically there is another possibility, whereby Labour pulls back its leavers from the BXP and Tories whilst Tory remainers desert in large numbers to the LibDems. Given its edge in the voting system that could deliver Labour most seats.
Labour has lost 3/4 times more voters to the LDs and Greens than it has to BXP -and the seats where returning Leave voters will tip the balance are few and far between. The vast majority of Labour Leave voters voted Labour in 2017.
Yes, but it depends on where those voters are. In very many Tory held seats it is better that they vote LibDem.
My point is that any returning BXP voters are not going to help Labour win many seats given that they are likely to have voted labour in 2017. The very few seats where they might make a difference will be countered by those where votes lost to the LDs and Greens (and the SNP and Plaid in Scotland and Wales) are likely to cost Labour. If Labour ends up with anything close to the seats it holds now at the next GE it will be an extraordinary achievement. It would require huge LD gains in Tory seats for that to leave Labour the biggest party.
If by win you mean gain, Labour won’t be gaining any seats on current polling or anything like it. The point I was making is that there are still scenarios where they finish with the most seats, if the Tories lose a bunch to the LibDems and Labour holds most of its own.
For example, on Flavible national shares of Con 28, Lab 27, LibDem 24, BXP 12 makes Labour the largest party, just.
Except Labour is on just 24% in the latest Survation and 22% in the latest Yougov, the most accurate pollsters from GE17
Oh dear. She really is hopeless. Frank Spencer would do a better job in charge.
This really is far too important an issue for this student level politics from this rank amateur. If Corbyn is the only deal in town to stop Brexit then do it.
Oh dear. She really is hopeless. Frank Spencer would do a better job in charge.
This really is far too important an issue for this student level politics from this rank amateur. If Corbyn is the only deal in town to stop Brexit then do it.
Oh dear. She really is hopeless. Frank Spencer would do a better job in charge.
This really is far too important an issue for this student level politics from this rank amateur. If Corbyn is the only deal in town to stop Brexit then do it.
Why is corbyn the only deal in town? Because he says so? Well I’ve news for you and him there are numerous far better choices than corbyn.
Deep thought: If the Tories are by accident or design doing a big old purge of Remainer candidates, and until a few years ago most of their MPs were remainers, there could be quite a few seats where they lose their incumbency bonus. Isn't incumbency supposed to be worth like 5% or something?
Oh dear. She really is hopeless. Frank Spencer would do a better job in charge.
This really is far too important an issue for this student level politics from this rank amateur. If Corbyn is the only deal in town to stop Brexit then do it.
The touching faith among certain posters that Corbyn would do as he says and not do many disastrous things as well illustrates why our politics has become broken.
To be fair, even as A Tory, I could easily imagine Corbyn be mired in disaster from day 1, unable to "achieve" much. Although I guess that depends on how he has become PM and the extent of his support in the HoC.
Harman and Clarke are plainly far more palatable in terms of the people that need to be got onside for this.
For Tory moderates, those who left Labour over antisemitism, Sylvia Hermon etc, they can't go back to their constituencies and say they made Corbyn PM.
They're not more palatable to Corbyn, of course, but he doesn't have the numbers, and this way he gets his General Election in short order, gets credit from Remainers for "doing the right thing", isn't personally the PM who stopped Brexit... it's got a lot going for it.
Your last paragraph contradicts your first.
If they're not more palatable to Corbyn and his MP supporters then they're not more palatable to the people who need to be onside for this.
This is like the indicative votes all over again. We don't have a binary choice and Parliament may be against every single option. To win you need a majority of the [potentially 635] voting MPs onside. Short of that and it doesn't matter how close you get you are too short.
Comments
He isn't an ideological Remainer.
https://twitter.com/JamesERothwell/status/1162309846949081088
You used to have a retired army sergeant who’d form a personal connection with each recruit and stay in touch with them throughout the process.
Did the Allen's of the day object to that withdrawal of the Whip? Would they have objected had Allason in fact metaphorically crossed the floor to vote against and had the Whip withdrawn?
The precedence is there.
I have no confidence they’ll be on my side.
There are no guarantees they’ll actually fight crime as opposed to harassing motorists more frequently, policing speech on Facebook or twitter, and seem to be more interested in political debate these days.
I'm not sure where the writing up four experiments a week comes from, this is not the case but certainly they do write up demanding experiments and the work ethic is very strong amongst chemists and scientists in general.
Such a shame Boris wants to remove the cap on importing scientists. British science really loses out with BREXIT
I still think it would be difficult for Change UK and the Independent group to not support a VNOC in Johnson - even though they could subsequently refuse to vote for Corbyn.
The quality all round is well below par, but who’d want to be an MP?
I entirely agree Remainers have to decide what they prefer. Corbyn is well within his rights to say he is the only option, to say it is him or No Deal. Remainers have the rights to reluctantly say No Deal is preferable.
While I can't imagine HMQ allowing an incumbent to take the piss with six months... the potential ability to lurk for weeks longer than necessary is quite a power, given FTPA's raison d'etre was reducing that benefit of incumbency.
No Deal coming up fast.
Their journey to the Dark Side will be complete
It's like saying chef is within his rights to insist you have a sh1t sausage or a turd casserole.
What are the SNP getting out of of this, if Jo gets to name the Caretaker PM. What do the Independents get?
And why should the person who controls the biggest block give way without getting something big in return?
This is politics, everyone wants something.
[doing my bit]
As @YBarddCwsc noted earlier on this thread, this process is bedevilled by unicorns. We are still in the EU because Leave MPs insisted on their unicorn Brexits and voted against the agreement to leave in March. We will crash out because Remain MPs insist on their unicorn makeshift prime minister.
It's like a chef saying you can have a meal from the menu he has designed or not have a meal in his restaurant.
Some restaurants will let you order a meal not on the menu but many won't.
If you want Chicken Kung Po don't expect the chef at an Indian restaurant to make it for you and be indignant when he says no.
Who turned down stopping No Deal by becoming the BOLLOX to stopping BREXIT lot
Will be blamed
Everyone knows there is an election coming this year. Boris + DUP have a majority of epsilon.
You are giving him something he has already taken
They imo should have voted for it.
To easy not to take personal responsibility.
Don't believe polls
For Tory moderates, those who left Labour over antisemitism, Sylvia Hermon etc, they can't go back to their constituencies and say they made Corbyn PM.
They're not more palatable to Corbyn, of course, but he doesn't have the numbers, and this way he gets his General Election in short order, gets credit from Remainers for "doing the right thing", isn't personally the PM who stopped Brexit... it's got a lot going for it.
I'd look a bit more down the line, though.
Consider what happens if we leave. All those who are very pro-EU lose the division over revoke, referendum, extension, EFTA etc. They either accept our departure or move to rejoining.
https://www.borisherrmannracing.com/a-race-we-must-win/
To answer the question you asked, I think Leave hit 4/1 before the polls closed at 10pm, then at some point between Farage's "concession" and the Newcastle/Sunderland declarations (between 10:30pm and 1:30am) Leave hit 10/1, then apart for a few fits and jerks (most notably when London came in) it was downhill all the way from there. Allegedly @Dromedary of this parish won around a million that night
However all this is from memory: the correct figures are available on betdata.io and apols for any errors.
But we all know that the Labour leadership will not support anyone apart from Jeremy Corbyn leading a GNU. That tells us all we need to know about the Labour leadership's commitment to stopping a No Deal Brexit.
Next up, this Wade lad looks v secure
Your sterling support is appreciated.
Woakes bowling pies though.
Even Wes Streeting understands that.
Even a number of Tory Remainer MPs understand that
Not Tory Swinson though.
LDs on a downward spiral since Tory Swinson took over
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49367612
I will bet you whatever sum you want that Labour gets fewer votes and seats at the next general election than it got in 2017, and that the LibDems will get more.
However, if you have strong lefty convictions, Brexit is a 2nd order issue, and you can take it or leave it as long as our destination is a fairer society (and theTories suffer).
I voted remain after many doubts.
Nevertheless I was on the losing side, I respect the result but prefer a deal,than no deal.
You have to compromise at times like this.
That is what disappointed me yesterday with Swinson.
For example, on Flavible national shares of Con 28, Lab 27, LibDem 24, BXP 12 makes Labour the largest party, just.
diehard leavers will do anything to secure brexit. diehard remainers aren't troubled by such determination to achieve their goal.
At most I would now back EEA in a decade not full Remain
This really is far too important an issue for this student level politics from this rank amateur. If Corbyn is the only deal in town to stop Brexit then do it.
And Smith, of course, is invincible.
Have we changed into a communist country?
That's an amazing record. England will never get past a batsman of that level of skill.
I’m well aware of the risks they face.
If they're not more palatable to Corbyn and his MP supporters then they're not more palatable to the people who need to be onside for this.
This is like the indicative votes all over again. We don't have a binary choice and Parliament may be against every single option. To win you need a majority of the [potentially 635] voting MPs onside. Short of that and it doesn't matter how close you get you are too short.