I feel like the most advantageous thing Corbyn could do- assuming that he can't actually become caretaker PM himself- is hold firm for a while longer, then eventually nominate somebody acceptible. Ideally somebody Labour who's clearly not in his inner circle but who's been loyal, like Cooper. His support would be on the condition that there's a GE immediately after the deadline has been extended.
I think that is very, very dangerous for him.
He is promoting a rival.
Once someone is PM, it is much easier for them to look & sound Prime Ministerial.
I just don't see any of this happening. Too many agendas, too many tribalists, too many conflicting game plans.
How on earth is switching the tax to sellers, a tax on "owning" your own home?
And anyone selling to buy, simply gets the "benefit" on their subsequent purchase.
Anyone selling not to buy gets taxed twice. They already paid stamp duty once.
The elderly, selling their home to pay for care (key Tory demographic) now get taxed on that transaction.
Genius...
And so they increase the price they are willing to sell for by the tax amount. Paid for by the amount that the buyer has saved. And it's not as if many elderly sellers haven't made huge sums on their property over the purchase price anyway.
Corbyn wants an election and he'd like to Brexit but isn't really that bothered about Europe. Boris wants to remain as PM and he's personally not really that bothered about Europe. But both need to take positions as it's the most important and difficult issue today.
Now if we could have a short technocratic government that did just two things:
1. Arrange a referendum on how people want to proceed NOW on Brexit. 2. Following the referendum, call a General Election.
Then we might be able to deal with other issues in this country. No doubt some will say this is treason, but the people should be allowed to tell us what they thing NOW, rather than rely on politicians to determine what they meant 3 years ago.
How on earth is switching the tax to sellers, a tax on "owning" your own home?
And anyone selling to buy, simply gets the "benefit" on their subsequent purchase.
Anyone selling not to buy gets taxed twice. They already paid stamp duty once.
The elderly, selling their home to pay for care (key Tory demographic) now get taxed on that transaction.
Genius...
And so they increase the price they are willing to sell for by the tax amount. Paid for by the amount that the buyer has saved. And it's not as if many elderly sellers haven't made huge sums on their property over the purchase price anyway.
So how does it work for second homes?
Maybe keep the Stamp Duty surcharge on Second Home buyers?
So seller pays stamp duty as standard.
Buyer pays stamp duty as well if they are buying a second home.
Like National Insurance being charged to both employees and employers, but only second home buys are penalised.
Ultimately, I don't think the Cummings threat of Brexit during an election campaign really works. The EU will most likely say, "We will behave as if you have not left until the day after election day. If Johnson returns as PM, we will respect that and behave as if you've left with no deal on the Friday morning. If someone else comes in, we will extend to 31 March (or whatever) and behave as if you never left on 31 October."
That's not how the law works, and the EU will stick to the law
There are plenty of precedents for the EU resetting the clock. Where there's a will there's a way in hese things.
Mr corbyns thought process may be that after seeing what happened to the Greek government when it tried to run a socialist policy that he will have much more ability to pursue his own policies, particularly renationalisation, after winning a post- no deal election.
I feel like the most advantageous thing Corbyn could do- assuming that he can't actually become caretaker PM himself- is hold firm for a while longer, then eventually nominate somebody acceptible. Ideally somebody Labour who's clearly not in his inner circle but who's been loyal, like Cooper. His support would be on the condition that there's a GE immediately after the deadline has been extended.
I think that is very, very dangerous for him.
He is promoting a rival.
Once someone is PM, it is much easier for them to look & sound Prime Ministerial.
I disagree with David in that I don't see that it much matter who is PM for 2-3 months max with no majority. For that reason I think Corbyn should give way if needed and go for a Lab figure who he trusts.
But ultimately to get Ref2, it's pretty obvious that a non-tory govt will be required for a reasonably long period (minimum 6 months).
Unless the Lib Dems do spectacularly well in the next GE, that govt must be led by Corbyn.
So at some point the other parties are going to have to choose between Corbyn or No Deal.
To get to Ref2, Corbyn needs a deal to hold a referendum on. He has no need to rush that. Indeed, if Remain votes are keeping him in place pending that referendum, he has every reason to drag it out as long as possible.
It took May 20 months from A50 notification to reaching a deal, or 28 months from the referendum if you prefer. It took Cameron 13 months from introducing the legislation to holding the referendum.
Corbyn could say that going on precedent, 3 years would be the minimum required to see the policy through. This might be stretching a truth as - assuming the EU was willing to reopen the WA, though they probably would in this situation - much of the existing deal could be copied across. The referendum could also be legislated for during the talks. Even so, that's what *could* be done by a government in a hurry on the issue; Corbyn's wouldn't be.
I'm unconvinced. I fear you are falling into the "I don't like Corbyn, so he will do what I don't like" trap.
There are loads of reasons why it would happen much sooner. We already have done most of WA work, Corbyn dragging his feet looks bad, WA2 and Ref 2 can happen in parallel etc etc.
But ultimately the clincher is the EU aren't going to agree a 3 year extension. No way.
If Corbyn wins the next GE I would expect ref 2 to come within a year of taking office, and expect him to promise a timescale during the campaign.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
Anyone who isn't struggling to save for their deposit so can pay for stamp duty up-front rather than loading it onto the property price [which is what this measure will do]
Seller paying Stamp Duty is not going to happen. There are many many more home owners than homebuyers. Every home owner will calculate what it would cost them to sell, even if they have no intention of selling.
Corbyn wants an election and he'd like to Brexit but isn't really that bothered about Europe. Boris wants to remain as PM and he's personally not really that bothered about Europe. But both need to take positions as it's the most important and difficult issue today.
Now if we could have a short technocratic government that did just two things:
1. Arrange a referendum on how people want to proceed NOW on Brexit. 2. Following the referendum, call a General Election.
Then we might be able to deal with other issues in this country. No doubt some will say this is treason, but the people should be allowed to tell us what they thing NOW, rather than rely on politicians to determine what they meant 3 years ago.
The people chose to live in a country that is not in the EU. That is an outcome, not a process. And it is a perfectly valid and sensible outcome - most of the world isn't in the EU and does very well.
For politicians to deny the chosen outcome, based on the fact that they themselves have fucked up the process, has no validity whatsoever. And it goes right back to the fact that remain politicians, and their deluded followers, have never accepted the referendum result.
Seller paying Stamp Duty is not going to happen. There are many many more home owners than homebuyers. Every home owner will calculate what it would cost them to sell, even if they have no intention of selling.
Alternatively if sellers stamp duty increases house prices, homeowners will feel richer [as their homes are worth more] without thinking through stamp duty.
People tend to not always think about things like stamp duty until they're ready to move.
Seller paying Stamp Duty is not going to happen. There are many many more home owners than homebuyers. Every home owner will calculate what it would cost them to sell, even if they have no intention of selling.
Bluntly, I would have said the smart move would be to abolish Stamp duty entirely on main dwellings and business premises, keeping it only for BTL and second homes, and ramping it up substantially on the latter at least.
Smith's now looking very, very dangerous. He seems to have come to terms with the pitch and is just unfussily accumulating runs. This partnership could easily hold until the Aussies have a lead.
Earlier our Turnip master in the north repeated a much vaunted Nat claim that before the SindyRef campaign support for independence was at 20% and they put on 24 points during the campaign. I decided to do a wee fact check.
Average 'No' Lead:
2013: 16.6% 2014 - Before campaign:11.6% Result: 10.6%
So rather than "putting on 24 points" it looks like the Campaign put on "1" point in the year it was held.
I suspect the "we started on 20" claim comes from one poll from 2011.....
In 2011 when the campaign started it was at around 20% when it finished it was at 45% and that after the bribes at the end, which the fools fell for and as usual were duped by perfidious Albion
I see after one policy that wasn't totally bonkers on post A-Level result applications to uni (albeit nicked from Michael Gove *), Labour are back to seizing means of production stuff....
Very good article, David, thank you. It's hard nowadays to see where one fits into the spectrum of wanting to leave/remain. I still want to leave, I still want to do it in a sensible, gradual fashion, but the politicians of whatever stripe seem bent upon making that impossible.
The net result is that they are stripping the sensible options away and leaving only the desire to leave. I can see that most of them are doing it in the hope of converting the desire to leave into a hopeless acceptance of being forced to remain, but just because I haven't yet been pushed into that position, why should I and others like me be labelled as Leave-at-any-cost ?
What is unusual about this match - to be serious for a moment - is how partisan the Lord's crowd is. They're really getting behind England and digging into Australia, particularly Warner. That's not usual at Lord's and it says a lot about how Cape Town damaged their reputation.
Punting nutjobs now Harry , how desperate can you losers get. If her granny had wheels she could have been a wheelbarrow. Wetting your pants as you know what is coming.
I see after one policy that wasn't totally bonkers on post A-Level result applications to uni (albeit nicked from Michael Gove *), Labour are back to seizing means of production stuff....
* Funny how the Grauardian are now fully in support of this.
Labour actually has some excellent policies on lifelong learning that have clearly been carefully put together and would be groundbreaking and important if put in place.
What they haven't done is costed them properly. For example, I see no evidence that they understand the key financial challenge facing post-16 institutions - they are not VAT exempt.
Earlier our Turnip master in the north repeated a much vaunted Nat claim that before the SindyRef campaign support for independence was at 20% and they put on 24 points during the campaign. I decided to do a wee fact check.
Average 'No' Lead:
2013: 16.6% 2014 - Before campaign:11.6% Result: 10.6%
So rather than "putting on 24 points" it looks like the Campaign put on "1" point in the year it was held.
I suspect the "we started on 20" claim comes from one poll from 2011.....
In 2011 when the campaign started it was at around 20% when it finished it was at 45% and that after the bribes at the end, which the fools fell for and as usual were duped by perfidious Albion
At the risk of indulging the psychologically notable Unionist desire to refight old battles, Yes Scotland was set up in May 2012, Better Ttogether in June 2012. The average polling from Jun-Dec 2013 was a 21% No lead. I wonder who had the more successful subsequent campaign?
Very good article, David, thank you. It's hard nowadays to see where one fits into the spectrum of wanting to leave/remain. I still want to leave, I still want to do it in a sensible, gradual fashion, but the politicians of whatever stripe seem bent upon making that impossible.
The net result is that they are stripping the sensible options away and leaving only the desire to leave. I can see that most of them are doing it in the hope of converting the desire to leave into a hopeless acceptance of being forced to remain, but just because I haven't yet been pushed into that position, why should I and others like me be labelled as Leave-at-any-cost ?
Good afternoon, everyone.
I meant to add, I'm glad to find that a few people are recognising that a GNU is impossible because there's no NU.
I see after one policy that wasn't totally bonkers on post A-Level result applications to uni (albeit nicked from Michael Gove *), Labour are back to seizing means of production stuff....
* Funny how the Grauardian are now fully in support of this.
Labour actually has some excellent policies on lifelong learning that have clearly been carefully put together and would be groundbreaking and important if put in place.
What they haven't done is costed them properly. For example, I see no evidence that they understand the key financial challenge facing post-16 institutions - they are not VAT exempt.
Are we in a post-truth, I mean post-costed policy world these days....
Earlier our Turnip master in the north repeated a much vaunted Nat claim that before the SindyRef campaign support for independence was at 20% and they put on 24 points during the campaign. I decided to do a wee fact check.
Average 'No' Lead:
2013: 16.6% 2014 - Before campaign:11.6% Result: 10.6%
So rather than "putting on 24 points" it looks like the Campaign put on "1" point in the year it was held.
I suspect the "we started on 20" claim comes from one poll from 2011.....
In 2011 when the campaign started it was at around 20% when it finished it was at 45% and that after the bribes at the end, which the fools fell for and as usual were duped by perfidious Albion
At the risk of indulging the psychologically notable Unionist desire to refight old battles, Yes Scotland was set up in May 2012, Better Ttogether in June 2012. The average polling from Jun-Dec 2013 was a 21% No lead. I wonder who had the more successful subsequent campaign?
TUD they just make up any old crap and punt it as fact, desperate losers. Failed in Scotland and having had to emigrate they cannot get over the shame of it.
The charge that Labour's position is confused or deceitful or impractical arises not from dispassionate analysis of what the position is but from paranoid, Gypsy Rose Lee notions about what "Corbyn really wants". The normally excellent Matthew Paris succumbs to this in the Times today, rather disappointingly.
TBF it was confused and shady-sounding for quite a long time, what with that thing about having a referendum on somebody else's deal, but not their own and so forth. But the current line is coherent, albeit unicornish.
I see after one policy that wasn't totally bonkers on post A-Level result applications to uni (albeit nicked from Michael Gove *), Labour are back to seizing means of production stuff....
* Funny how the Grauardian are now fully in support of this.
Labour actually has some excellent policies on lifelong learning that have clearly been carefully put together and would be groundbreaking and important if put in place.
What they haven't done is costed them properly. For example, I see no evidence that they understand the key financial challenge facing post-16 institutions - they are not VAT exempt.
Are we in a post-truth, I mean post-costed policy world these days....
Well, in fairness they have only just published an interim report, so it's not altogether surprising it isn't fully costed. But if they miss the 20% black hole in FE funding it doesn't inspire confidence their final costings will match the needs (especially as over tuition fees and free school meals they have form for uncosted policies).
But the idea of integrating all education vertically definitely has merits, as does the idea of reforming the benefits system to support those who are retraining, as does getting employers to sponsor and co-provide apprenticeships.
Corbyn wants an election and he'd like to Brexit but isn't really that bothered about Europe. Boris wants to remain as PM and he's personally not really that bothered about Europe. But both need to take positions as it's the most important and difficult issue today.
Now if we could have a short technocratic government that did just two things:
1. Arrange a referendum on how people want to proceed NOW on Brexit. 2. Following the referendum, call a General Election.
Then we might be able to deal with other issues in this country. No doubt some will say this is treason, but the people should be allowed to tell us what they thing NOW, rather than rely on politicians to determine what they meant 3 years ago.
The people chose to live in a country that is not in the EU. That is an outcome, not a process. And it is a perfectly valid and sensible outcome - most of the world isn't in the EU and does very well.
For politicians to deny the chosen outcome, based on the fact that they themselves have fucked up the process, has no validity whatsoever. And it goes right back to the fact that remain politicians, and their deluded followers, have never accepted the referendum result.
The result was (marginally) to Leave. Leave politicians voted against the WA, which meant that we could not take the quite hard Brexit negotiated and be out in March. The UK population is having to rely on politicians' interpretation of a three year old decision, it makes sense to ask them if they still want Brexit now that it has become a 'No Deal' Brexit.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
Yep, US farmers are absolutely not a vested interest!
Earlier our Turnip master in the north repeated a much vaunted Nat claim that before the SindyRef campaign support for independence was at 20% and they put on 24 points during the campaign. I decided to do a wee fact check.
Average 'No' Lead:
2013: 16.6% 2014 - Before campaign:11.6% Result: 10.6%
So rather than "putting on 24 points" it looks like the Campaign put on "1" point in the year it was held.
I suspect the "we started on 20" claim comes from one poll from 2011.....
In 2011 when the campaign started it was at around 20% when it finished it was at 45% and that after the bribes at the end, which the fools fell for and as usual were duped by perfidious Albion
At the risk of indulging the psychologically notable Unionist desire to refight old battles, Yes Scotland was set up in May 2012, Better Ttogether in June 2012. The average polling from Jun-Dec 2013 was a 21% No lead. I wonder who had the more successful subsequent campaign?
TUD they just make up any old crap and punt it as fact, desperate losers. Failed in Scotland and having had to emigrate they cannot get over the shame of it.
Seems a real nerve is touched when the still dear leader Eck is slighted.
Still better touching a nerve than an employee of Edinburgh airport.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
If you really think that the Miners Strike was just a bit of drama and a lot of noise you need to do a lot of learning about what happened and what it meant. The indifference to the difficulties being put deliberately in the way of businesses, to the possibility of them going bust, to the possible loss of jobs is utterly chilling.
One reason for the closure of the mines was that they were unprofitable.
No Deal Brexit risks deliberately making profitable businesses and sectors unprofitable, as a matter of government policy. It is in some ways even worse than the Miners Strike and that was quite bad enough. No decent government would deliberately seek to inflict something like that on its people. And for what? Because it does not want to lose a little bit of face in getting an extension so that it can try and negotiate a better transitional deal.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
Yep, US farmers are absolutely not a vested interest!
The Germans would tell you that's wrong, the majority of American farmers are in the vest, especially the mid-vest.
Punting nutjobs now Harry , how desperate can you losers get. If her granny had wheels she could have been a wheelbarrow. Wetting your pants as you know what is coming.
Careful malc, the new woke Harry will object to terms like nutjobs, especially directed at a laydee.
Interesting that 23% of Remain voters back No Deal provided it means no Corbyn but only 10% of Leave voters back PM Corbyn and EUref2.
Shows that for almost a quarter of Remain voters stopping Corbyn is the key priority rather than stopping Brexit
Who are presumably mainly Tory remainers, and are the reason why Swinson was right to treat Corbyn PM as a non-starter (even if she can be criticised for the way in which she went about rejecting the idea). The LibDem position is not just about rejecting nodeal Brexit, it is opposing Brexit full stop - and therefore what happens in an election following an extension is very important. The LibDems can clean up with Tory remainers in such an election and probably retain (at a minimum) an immovable block to Brexit. If the Tory remainers believe she will prop up Corbyn as PM then that all goes out of the window. So they have to find another way.
Certainly the LDs cannot get too close to Corbyn if they want to pick up Tory seats in the South, agreed
But to win those Tory seats the LDs need tactical Labour votes. I suspect Swinson has alienated many of them this week.
Earlier our Turnip master in the north repeated a much vaunted Nat claim that before the SindyRef campaign support for independence was at 20% and they put on 24 points during the campaign. I decided to do a wee fact check.
Average 'No' Lead:
2013: 16.6% 2014 - Before campaign:11.6% Result: 10.6%
So rather than "putting on 24 points" it looks like the Campaign put on "1" point in the year it was held.
I suspect the "we started on 20" claim comes from one poll from 2011.....
In 2011 when the campaign started it was at around 20% when it finished it was at 45% and that after the bribes at the end, which the fools fell for and as usual were duped by perfidious Albion
At the risk of indulging the psychologically notable Unionist desire to refight old battles, Yes Scotland was set up in May 2012, Better Ttogether in June 2012. The average polling from Jun-Dec 2013 was a 21% No lead. I wonder who had the more successful subsequent campaign?
TUD they just make up any old crap and punt it as fact, desperate losers. Failed in Scotland and having had to emigrate they cannot get over the shame of it.
Seems a real nerve is touched when the still dear leader Eck is slighted.
Still better touching a nerve than an employee of Edinburgh airport.
We will find out when it comes to court who is guilty and who is not , at present all we know is that the participants in the process were found to be in wrong and the courts have awarded Salmond £512K. Hope they made a better job of their complaints. Luckily in this country you are still seen to be innocent till found guilty in a court of law.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
If you really think that the Miners Strike was just a bit of drama and a lot of noise you need to do a lot of learning about what happened and what it meant. The indifference to the difficulties being put deliberately in the way of businesses, to the possibility of them going bust, to the possible loss of jobs is utterly chilling.
One reason for the closure of the mines was that they were unprofitable.
No Deal Brexit risks deliberately making profitable businesses and sectors unprofitable, as a matter of government policy. It is in some ways even worse than the Miners Strike and that was quite bad enough. No decent government would deliberately seek to inflict something like that on its people. And for what? Because it does not want to lose a little bit of face in getting an extension so that it can try and negotiate a better transitional deal.
No, Cyclefree, it's all OK. The government has said it will use taxpayers' money to prop-up businesses adversely affected by government policy. It's going to do that instead of collecting tax money from those businesses. Yes, in Brexit-land this makes sense, as I am sure that Philip will explain.
This wouldn't technically be a "temporary" anti-no deal admin, i.e. something which is merely expected to come to an end, fairly soon. It would be designed explicitly as time-limited, and tasked to do one thing, at which point it falls. It would be, of course, a PROVISIONAL anti no-deal administration
This wouldn't technically be a "temporary" anti-no deal admin, i.e. something which is merely expected to come to an end, fairly soon. It would be designed explicitly as time-limited, and tasked to do one thing, at which point it falls. It would be, of course, a PROVISIONAL anti no-deal administration
A PANDA
That would be apt given what it really wants is a big paws.
This wouldn't technically be a "temporary" anti-no deal admin, i.e. something which is merely expected to come to an end, fairly soon. It would be designed explicitly as time-limited, and tasked to do one thing, at which point it falls. It would be, of course, a PROVISIONAL anti no-deal administration
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
If you really think that the Miners Strike was just a bit of drama and a lot of noise you need to do a lot of learning about what happened and what it meant. The indifference to the difficulties being put deliberately in the way of businesses, to the possibility of them going bust, to the possible loss of jobs is utterly chilling.
One reason for the closure of the mines was that they were unprofitable.
No Deal Brexit risks deliberately making profitable businesses and sectors unprofitable, as a matter of government policy. It is in some ways even worse than the Miners Strike and that was quite bad enough. No decent government would deliberately seek to inflict something like that on its people. And for what? Because it does not want to lose a little bit of face in getting an extension so that it can try and negotiate a better transitional deal.
No, Cyclefree, it's all OK. The government has said it will use taxpayers' money to prop-up businesses adversely affected by government policy. It's going to do that instead of collecting tax money from those businesses. Yes, in Brexit-land this makes sense, as I am sure that Philip will explain.
If you believe that, then I have a bridge you might be interested in.
This wouldn't technically be a "temporary" anti-no deal admin, i.e. something which is merely expected to come to an end, fairly soon. It would be designed explicitly as time-limited, and tasked to do one thing, at which point it falls. It would be, of course, a PROVISIONAL anti no-deal administration
A PANDA
The eyes have it. The eyes have it.
I also like the choice falling between a PANDA or a GNU. It sums up the surreality of our politics.
Earlier our Turnip master in the north repeated a much vaunted Nat claim that before the SindyRef campaign support for independence was at 20% and they put on 24 points during the campaign. I decided to do a wee fact check.
Average 'No' Lead:
2013: 16.6% 2014 - Before campaign:11.6% Result: 10.6%
So rather than "putting on 24 points" it looks like the Campaign put on "1" point in the year it was held.
I suspect the "we started on 20" claim comes from one poll from 2011.....
In 2011 when the campaign started it was at around 20% when it finished it was at 45% and that after the bribes at the end, which the fools fell for and as usual were duped by perfidious Albion
At the risk of indulging the psychologically notable Unionist desire to refight old battles, Yes Scotland was set up in May 2012, Better Ttogether in June 2012. The average polling from Jun-Dec 2013 was a 21% No lead. I wonder who had the more successful subsequent campaign?
Which averages at 16. Of course that includes the SNP/Panelbase poll which showed Yes ahead - which got people very excited at the time. Of course once the official campaign started in May 2014, Yes put on a whole point.....but if that what you call a "successful campaign", I'm happy for you....
This wouldn't technically be a "temporary" anti-no deal admin, i.e. something which is merely expected to come to an end, fairly soon. It would be designed explicitly as time-limited, and tasked to do one thing, at which point it falls. It would be, of course, a PROVISIONAL anti no-deal administration
A PANDA
The eyes have it. The eyes have it.
I also like the choice falling between a PANDA or a GNU. It sums up the surreality of our politics.
Might one say the PM was making a Do Or Die Offer (DODO)? So it’s PANDA or DODO?
Earlier our Turnip master in the north repeated a much vaunted Nat claim that before the SindyRef campaign support for independence was at 20% and they put on 24 points during the campaign. I decided to do a wee fact check.
Average 'No' Lead:
2013: 16.6% 2014 - Before campaign:11.6% Result: 10.6%
So rather than "putting on 24 points" it looks like the Campaign put on "1" point in the year it was held.
I suspect the "we started on 20" claim comes from one poll from 2011.....
In 2011 when the campaign started it was at around 20% when it finished it was at 45% and that after the bribes at the end, which the fools fell for and as usual were duped by perfidious Albion
The polls conducted in 2011 showed Yes on 34, 39, 35, 37 and 28 - which averages 35, not 'around 20%'.
This wouldn't technically be a "temporary" anti-no deal admin, i.e. something which is merely expected to come to an end, fairly soon. It would be designed explicitly as time-limited, and tasked to do one thing, at which point it falls. It would be, of course, a PROVISIONAL anti no-deal administration
A PANDA
The eyes have it. The eyes have it.
I also like the choice falling between a PANDA or a GNU. It sums up the surreality of our politics.
Might one say the PM was making a Do Or Die Offer (DODO)? So it’s PANDA or DODO?
Interesting that 23% of Remain voters back No Deal provided it means no Corbyn but only 10% of Leave voters back PM Corbyn and EUref2.
Shows that for almost a quarter of Remain voters stopping Corbyn is the key priority rather than stopping Brexit
Who are presumably mainly Tory remainers, and are the reason why Swinson was right to treat Corbyn PM as a non-starter (even if she can be criticised for the way in which she went about rejecting the idea). The LibDem position is not just about rejecting nodeal Brexit, it is opposing Brexit full stop - and therefore what happens in an election following an extension is very important. The LibDems can clean up with Tory remainers in such an election and probably retain (at a minimum) an immovable block to Brexit. If the Tory remainers believe she will prop up Corbyn as PM then that all goes out of the window. So they have to find another way.
Certainly the LDs cannot get too close to Corbyn if they want to pick up Tory seats in the South, agreed
But to win those Tory seats the LDs need tactical Labour votes. I suspect Swinson has alienated many of them this week.
She also needs straight Tory to Lib Dem switchers (indeed, they are twice as valuable) and supporting Corbyn as PM is hardly going to help that.
Additionally, Corbyn is extremely personally unpopular, including with a high proportion of 2017 Labour voters. We're just not in "Oh Jeremy Corbyn" land any more.
Excellent piece by Parris in Times today. Outlining the Seamus Strategy in detail. Facilitate a No Deal Brexit delivered by Johnson and then win a GE in the resulting economic chaos, all the while appearing is if Labour are trying to block Johnson.
Are Lab MPs stupid enough to fall for this old Lenist trick?
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
Absolutely. And I don't recall being asked for a phytosanitary certificate when we landed at Omaha in '44.
Smith looking very precarious. Every ball I kind of expect him to be out.
Deeply dispiriting from an England point of view. They just can't get him out.
I've said it before. If you take out Smith, these sides are well matched, and it would be a close, cracking series, if the weather permits. I'd have England as modest favourites in that scenario.
But you can't take out Smith. He's a sporting freak.
He reminds me of Maradona and Argentina. The presence of Maradona turned a good but not exceptional Argentine side into world-beaters.
It is amazing what one phenomenal player can do, even in a team sport.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
If you really think that the Miners Strike was just a bit of drama and a lot of noise you need to do a lot of learning about what happened and what it meant. The indifference to the difficulties being put deliberately in the way of businesses, to the possibility of them going bust, to the possible loss of jobs is utterly chilling.
One reason for the closure of the mines was that they were unprofitable.
No Deal Brexit risks deliberately making profitable businesses and sectors unprofitable, as a matter of government policy. It is in some ways even worse than the Miners Strike and that was quite bad enough. No decent government would deliberately seek to inflict something like that on its people. And for what? Because it does not want to lose a little bit of face in getting an extension so that it can try and negotiate a better transitional deal.
Not just that. The Thatcher government spent years preparing for the strike. Loads of coal was stockpiled, what with how you can stockpile coal. And that was dislocation in one supply chain. And the NUM weren't a smart opponent. And it was a remarkably close-run thing. Apart from that Halloween Brexit will be just like the minersm strike.
"The second, and more important factor is that if Remainers’ main plan to stop no deal is a government of national unity, you can safely assume that we will leave the European Union on 31 October – with the only question being who gets the blame."
"The second, and more important factor is that if Remainers’ main plan to stop no deal is a government of national unity, you can safely assume that we will leave the European Union on 31 October – with the only question being who gets the blame."
I find it hard to believe anyone seriously think swe are not going to No Deal. Johnson, of course, will be blamed, but I suspect that Corbyn's little wheeze is going to end up backfiring on him.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
If you really think that the Miners Strike was just a bit of drama and a lot of noise you need to do a lot of learning about what happened and what it meant. The indifference to the difficulties being put deliberately in the way of businesses, to the possibility of them going bust, to the possible loss of jobs is utterly chilling.
One reason for the closure of the mines was that they were unprofitable.
No Deal Brexit risks deliberately making profitable businesses and sectors unprofitable, as a matter of government policy. It is in some ways even worse than the Miners Strike and that was quite bad enough. No decent government would deliberately seek to inflict something like that on its people. And for what? Because it does not want to lose a little bit of face in getting an extension so that it can try and negotiate a better transitional deal.
Not just that. The Thatcher government spent years preparing for the strike. Loads of coal was stockpiled, what with how you can stockpile coal. And that was dislocation in one supply chain. And the NUM weren't a smart opponent. And it was a remarkably close-run thing. Apart from that Halloween Brexit will be just like the minersm strike.
Millions of people who have been suckered in by snake oil are about to get a massive dose of reality.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
Absolutely. And I don't recall being asked for a phytosanitary certificate when we landed at Omaha in '44.
Jo Swinson’s fate lies in the hands of the thousands of Tories in her constituency. If they can stomach her “Bollocks to Brexit” campaign, some might still lend her a tactical vote. Others won’t.
Nobody can tell from national polls.
They'll do anything to keep the SNP out
That’s how some voters behave Mike: against a candidate.
Others prefer to vote for the candidate closest to their own views: for a candidate.
Swinson will undeniably attract *some* Tories by being anti-independence. However, she will repel *some* Tories by being anti-Brexit.
Neither you nor I can tell how those proportions will play out in East Dunbartonshire by looking at national polls (assuming we had a few to look at).
The local Tories are key. Swinson’s fate lies entirely in their hands. Hence her backing off on going for Johnson’s throat.
Yes, but Scots do seem particularly keen on a party when it appoints a Scottish leader. Brown, Kennedy, Steel, etc.
Absolutely. I do not dispute that. I certainly think that that pattern gives Swinson a wee edge. But only a wee one, and that might not be enough.
Here’s the result last time: UK GE 17 - East Dunbartonshire
SLD (Jo Swinson) 21,023 SNP 15,684 SCon 7,563 SLab 7,531
Now, the level of anti-SNP tactical voting in 2017 was *immense*, not least in East Dunbartonshire. And turnout among SNP supporters was somewhat suppressed. This remember is a former Tory seat, and my guesstimate of the true “honest” electoral preferences of these voters, in a fully motivated, high turnout GE (which is what we expect) is as follows:
SNP 20,000 SCon 15,000 SLD 15,000 SLab 5,000
In other words, if we saw zero tactical-voting then East Dunbartonshire would be a three-way marginal under FPTP, with the SNP in pole position.
Now, obviously, we are still going to see a lot of tactical voting, but with a dramatically different Brexit background now. We will see:
- SCon supporters voting SLD to keep the SNP out (as last time). Fewer, but still significant. - SLab supporters voting SNP to give former Tory-minister Swinson a kick up the erse. - SCon supporters voting “honestly” Tory for the first time in years, cos pissed off with “Bollocks to Brexit” Swinson. - Higher, more motivated SNP turnout.
Now, Swinson might still squeak it, but I don’t much fancy the job of her agent and door-knockers this time around. They are going to have to be *extremely* careful that they say the right things to the right voter groups.
"The second, and more important factor is that if Remainers’ main plan to stop no deal is a government of national unity, you can safely assume that we will leave the European Union on 31 October – with the only question being who gets the blame."
I find it hard to believe anyone seriously think swe are not going to No Deal. Johnson, of course, will be blamed, but I suspect that Corbyn's little wheeze is going to end up backfiring on him.
I don't think Corbyn's wheeze was intended to succeed ... though if it did he would be delighted.
It's designed as a smokescreen. Labour supporters who oppose Brexit will blame the Lib Dems, Lib Dem supporters will blame Labour. Ultimately it will be a wash and people can blame who they want rather than think their own side is at fault.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
If you really think that the Miners Strike was just a bit of drama and a lot of noise you need to do a lot of learning about what happened and what it meant. The indifference to the difficulties being put deliberately in the way of businesses, to the possibility of them going bust, to the possible loss of jobs is utterly chilling.
One reason for the closure of the mines was that they were unprofitable.
No Deal Brexit risks deliberately making profitable businesses and sectors unprofitable, as a matter of government policy. It is in some ways even worse than the Miners Strike and that was quite bad enough. No decent government would deliberately seek to inflict something like that on its people. And for what? Because it does not want to lose a little bit of face in getting an extension so that it can try and negotiate a better transitional deal.
Not just that. The Thatcher government spent years preparing for the strike. Loads of coal was stockpiled, what with how you can stockpile coal. And that was dislocation in one supply chain. And the NUM weren't a smart opponent. And it was a remarkably close-run thing. Apart from that Halloween Brexit will be just like the minersm strike.
What intrigues me is this: if No Deal really is going to be a national trauma, the people who would truly know this are inside the Cabinet. They get the briefings and the intel.
Yet still they steer the boat towards that cliff-edge. It's a puzzle.
There are three possible answers to the puzzle.
1. They don't expect No Deal to happen, they expect the EU to blink or the government to be VONC'd
2. They genuinely believe, having read the advice, that No Deal will not be so bad.
Interesting that 23% of Remain voters back No Deal provided it means no Corbyn but only 10% of Leave voters back PM Corbyn and EUref2.
Shows that for almost a quarter of Remain voters stopping Corbyn is the key priority rather than stopping Brexit
Who are presumably mainly Tory remainers, and are the reason why Swinson was right to treat Corbyn PM as a non-starter (even if she can be criticised for the way in which she went about rejecting the idea). The LibDem position is not just about rejecting nodeal Brexit, it is opposing Brexit full stop - and therefore what happens in an election following an extension is very important. The LibDems can clean up with Tory remainers in such an election and probably retain (at a minimum) an immovable block to Brexit. If the Tory remainers believe she will prop up Corbyn as PM then that all goes out of the window. So they have to find another way.
Certainly the LDs cannot get too close to Corbyn if they want to pick up Tory seats in the South, agreed
But to win those Tory seats the LDs need tactical Labour votes. I suspect Swinson has alienated many of them this week.
She also needs straight Tory to Lib Dem switchers (indeed, they are twice as valuable) and supporting Corbyn as PM is hardly going to help that.
Additionally, Corbyn is extremely personally unpopular, including with a high proportion of 2017 Labour voters. We're just not in "Oh Jeremy Corbyn" land any more.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
Absolutely. And I don't recall being asked for a phytosanitary certificate when we landed at Omaha in '44.
‘We’? ‘Recall’? Were you there in person?
Whereabouts would you place yourself on the IQ bell curve, if you don't mind my asking?
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
If you really think that the Miners Strike was just a bit of drama and a lot of noise you need to do a lot of learning about what happened and what it meant. The indifference to the difficulties being put deliberately in the way of businesses, to the possibility of them going bust, to the possible loss of jobs is utterly chilling.
One reason for the closure of the mines was that they were unprofitable.
No Deal Brexit risks deliberately making profitable businesses and sectors unprofitable, as a matter of government policy. It is in some ways even worse than the Miners Strike and that was quite bad enough. No decent government would deliberately seek to inflict something like that on its people. And for what? Because it does not want to lose a little bit of face in getting an extension so that it can try and negotiate a better transitional deal.
Not just that. The Thatcher government spent years preparing for the strike. Loads of coal was stockpiled, what with how you can stockpile coal. And that was dislocation in one supply chain. And the NUM weren't a smart opponent. And it was a remarkably close-run thing. Apart from that Halloween Brexit will be just like the minersm strike.
The dislocation and turmoil the miners strike and its aftermath caused in the areas affected by it are still very evident today. The main lesson the decommissioning of coal and other heavy industries teach is that if a major employer around which an entire community is built closes down the consequences can be devastating, multiple, long-term and extremely expensive.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
If you really think that the Miners Strike was just a bit of drama and a lot of noise you need to do a lot of learning about what happened and what it meant. The indifference to the difficulties being put deliberately in the way of businesses, to the possibility of them going bust, to the possible loss of jobs is utterly chilling.
One reason for the closure of the mines was that they were unprofitable.
No Deal Brexit risks deliberately making profitable businesses and sectors unprofitable, as a matter of government policy. It is in some ways even worse than the Miners Strike and that was quite bad enough. No decent government would deliberately seek to inflict something like that on its people. And for what? Because it does not want to lose a little bit of face in getting an extension so that it can try and negotiate a better transitional deal.
Not just that. The Thatcher government spent years preparing for the strike. Loads of coal was stockpiled, what with how you can stockpile coal. And that was dislocation in one supply chain. And the NUM weren't a smart opponent. And it was a remarkably close-run thing. Apart from that Halloween Brexit will be just like the minersm strike.
What intrigues me is this: if No Deal really is going to be a national trauma, the people who would truly know this are inside the Cabinet. They get the briefings and the intel.
Yet still they steer the boat towards that cliff-edge. It's a puzzle.
There are three possible answers to the puzzle.
1. They don't expect No Deal to happen, they expect the EU to blink or the government to be VONC'd
2. They genuinely believe, having read the advice, that No Deal will not be so bad.
3. They are insane.
1 and 2 are mutually exclusive. But it's perfectly possible that they are in fact 1 and 3.
Excellent piece by Parris in Times today. Outlining the Seamus Strategy in detail. Facilitate a No Deal Brexit delivered by Johnson and then win a GE in the resulting economic chaos, all the while appearing is if Labour are trying to block Johnson.
Are Lab MPs stupid enough to fall for this old Lenist trick?
I worry greatly that they are.
Isn't that also the Boris/Cummings plan? A no deal Brexit (while feigning opposition) and then win a general election?
"The second, and more important factor is that if Remainers’ main plan to stop no deal is a government of national unity, you can safely assume that we will leave the European Union on 31 October – with the only question being who gets the blame."
I find it hard to believe anyone seriously think swe are not going to No Deal. Johnson, of course, will be blamed, but I suspect that Corbyn's little wheeze is going to end up backfiring on him.
I don't think Corbyn's wheeze was intended to succeed ... though if it did he would be delighted.
It's designed as a smokescreen. Labour supporters who oppose Brexit will blame the Lib Dems, Lib Dem supporters will blame Labour. Ultimately it will be a wash and people can blame who they want rather than think their own side is at fault.
I agree. But I think the wheeze was designed ot win back support for Labour from the LDs and the Greens. It won't work - and could actually drive more Remain supporters away from Labour when they see that the party's position is no compromise: Corbyn or No Deal.
Excellent piece by Parris in Times today. Outlining the Seamus Strategy in detail. Facilitate a No Deal Brexit delivered by Johnson and then win a GE in the resulting economic chaos, all the while appearing is if Labour are trying to block Johnson.
Are Lab MPs stupid enough to fall for this old Lenist trick?
I worry greatly that they are.
As you know I do not buy this. I think the truth is quite the opposite. The only way that Corbyn can win a GE is on the back of Remainer tactical voting. Therefore they need the GE to be BEFORE Brexit.
Also please ask yourself this. If Corbyn would be best placed to win a GE in the aftermath of a No Deal Brexit, why is this supposedly the Johnson plan?
Remainers are a broad church, so a "grand strategy" isn't really possible. Most importantly, we're split between the ones who want another referendum and those who don't. The latter group are mainly de facto Soft Brexiters (respect the 2016 referendum result, a 2nd referendum might not solve anything etc.), although there are also some pure Revoke-and-Remainers.
As far as delaying Brexit is concerned, the reason that unites us at the moment is the avoidance of a No Deal Brexit. It's difficult to put much mental energy into What Next? until the top priority is dealt with.
"The second, and more important factor is that if Remainers’ main plan to stop no deal is a government of national unity, you can safely assume that we will leave the European Union on 31 October – with the only question being who gets the blame."
I find it hard to believe anyone seriously think swe are not going to No Deal. Johnson, of course, will be blamed, but I suspect that Corbyn's little wheeze is going to end up backfiring on him.
I don't think Corbyn's wheeze was intended to succeed ... though if it did he would be delighted.
It's designed as a smokescreen. Labour supporters who oppose Brexit will blame the Lib Dems, Lib Dem supporters will blame Labour. Ultimately it will be a wash and people can blame who they want rather than think their own side is at fault.
I agree. But I think the wheeze was designed ot win back support for Labour from the LDs and the Greens. It won't work - and could actually drive more Remain supporters away from Labour when they see that the party's position is no compromise: Corbyn or No Deal.
It's a sticking plaster. It's a trick move by Corbyn which does take the pressure off him, and puts it on the Libs and others.
But it is temporary. By mid September, as you imply, the move will have clearly failed and the pressure will be on Labour, again, to come up with something - anything - that can unite the Remain/Soft Brexit forces into a PANDA.
By then it will be too late. In which case it's time to stockpile Roquefort, fine ports, and hand-carved Jamon Iberico de Bellota.
Has anyone considered that for once in his miserable life Corbyn played a blinder last week, and Ms. Swinson walked into the trap?
That is correct.
The LibDems' position is that if there is No Deal. we will have apocalyptic scenes of people dying for lack of medicine, food riots, civil strife in Northern Ireland, the break-up of the United Kingdom with the secession of Scotland, a holocaust of sheep and cattle, mass redundancies & catastrophic failure of British industries.
The alternative is Jeremy Corbyn. A rather scruffy & incompetent allotment holder.
Apparently, the LibDems have decided that whatever will happen under Jeremy is actually worse than their truly eschatological vision of No Deal.
In fact, it is an astonishing achievement by the ERG. They are getting their way, with a Parliamentary strength of perhaps 60 MPs.
A Remainer-dominated Parliament has failed & failed & failed & failed.
The Remainers need to vent their fury on their incompetent Remainer MPs -- comprehensively out-thought and out-witted and out-played by Jacob Rees-Mogg & Mark Francois & Co.
I am not sure any MP in this rotten Parliament deserves to ever be returned in a General Election again.
Geopolitically, it is better for the EU if the U.K. is inside the Union.
I think that goes for each of them EU 27 too, with the possible exception of France where I could argue it either way.
I read yesterday that the UK is soon to be relegated to 7th richest country in the world. The much vaunted 5th to be taken by India or france. I can't find the reference now. I imagine without Scotland we could slip even lower. Not a good look for the empirists nor for the PM who presided over it.
Surely with the repatriation of £350m a week plus being rid of the suppurating sore of benefit junky Scotia, Wangland will be moving UP the rich list?
Earlier our Turnip master in the north repeated a much vaunted Nat claim that before the SindyRef campaign support for independence was at 20% and they put on 24 points during the campaign. I decided to do a wee fact check.
Average 'No' Lead:
2013: 16.6% 2014 - Before campaign:11.6% Result: 10.6%
So rather than "putting on 24 points" it looks like the Campaign put on "1" point in the year it was held.
I suspect the "we started on 20" claim comes from one poll from 2011.....
In 2011 when the campaign started it was at around 20% when it finished it was at 45% and that after the bribes at the end, which the fools fell for and as usual were duped by perfidious Albion
At the risk of indulging the psychologically notable Unionist desire to refight old battles, Yes Scotland was set up in May 2012, Better Ttogether in June 2012. The average polling from Jun-Dec 2013 was a 21% No lead. I wonder who had the more successful subsequent campaign?
Which averages at 16. Of course that includes the SNP/Panelbase poll which showed Yes ahead - which got people very excited at the time. Of course once the official campaign started in May 2014, Yes put on a whole point.....but if that what you call a "successful campaign", I'm happy for you....
Sorry, I meant Jun-Dec 2012. The Yes campaign's effectiveness was obviously beginning to bite in 2013.
Of course this obsessing over Project Fear I's achievement of managing not to bleed out in 2014 rather begs the question of what you are hoping for from Project 'We can't go on about EU membership or stable currency this time'?
Excellent piece by Parris in Times today. Outlining the Seamus Strategy in detail. Facilitate a No Deal Brexit delivered by Johnson and then win a GE in the resulting economic chaos, all the while appearing is if Labour are trying to block Johnson.
Are Lab MPs stupid enough to fall for this old Lenist trick?
I worry greatly that they are.
As you know I do not buy this. I think the truth is quite the opposite. The only way that Corbyn can win a GE is on the back of Remainer tactical voting. Therefore they need the GE to be BEFORE Brexit.
Also please ask yourself this. If Corbyn would be best placed to win a GE in the aftermath of a No Deal Brexit, why is this supposedly the Johnson plan?
If we No Deal Brexit, there won't be a GE for a long time. Corbyn will face at least 1 more formal challenge, and I guarantee his challenger will blame him for Brexit.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
If you really think that the Miners Strike was just a bit of drama and a lot of noise you need to do a lot of learning about what happened and what it meant. The indifference to the difficulties being put deliberately in the way of businesses, to the possibility of them going bust, to the possible loss of jobs is utterly chilling.
One reason for the closure of the mines was that they were unprofitable.
No Deal Brexit risks deliberately making profitable businesses and sectors unprofitable, as a matter of government policy. It is in some ways even worse than the Miners Strike and that was quite bad enough. No decent government would deliberately seek to inflict something like that on its people. And for what? Because it does not want to lose a little bit of face in getting an extension so that it can try and negotiate a better transitional deal.
No, Cyclefree, it's all OK. The government has said it will use taxpayers' money to prop-up businesses adversely affected by government policy. It's going to do that instead of collecting tax money from those businesses. Yes, in Brexit-land this makes sense, as I am sure that Philip will explain.
Actually the government hasn't said that. They say they will support businesses through "short term bumps in the road". What they mean in actual policy is to keep high profile businesses wiped out by Brexit on life support for just long enough to get through the next election.
What intrigues me is this: if No Deal really is going to be a national trauma, the people who would truly know this are inside the Cabinet. They get the briefings and the intel.
Yet still they steer the boat towards that cliff-edge. It's a puzzle.
There are three possible answers to the puzzle.
1. They don't expect No Deal to happen, they expect the EU to blink or the government to be VONC'd
2. They genuinely believe, having read the advice, that No Deal will not be so bad.
3. They are insane.
Have you seen the Ken Burns documentary on the Vietnam War? The interesting thing about it is that the people who got the US embroiled in that disaster knew from the start that they didn't have a workable plan and it wasn't likely to go right. But in the short term, each individual step made *political* sense, and each one drew them deeper in, to another point where it was hard to move backwards, and easy to move forwards.
Put it another way. Let's imagine you're Boris Johnson. To win the leadership, you drew a line on the deadline, and another one on doing No Deal if the EU wouldn't move on the backstop. After you won you didn't have a good way to walk that back, you needed BXP votes, and you hoped that the EU might move, so you doubled down. But you think actually doing No Deal is going to end very badly. What do you do next?
That’s how some voters behave Mike: against a candidate.
Others prefer to vote for the candidate closest to their own views: for a candidate.
Swinson will undeniably attract *some* Tories by being anti-independence. However, she will repel *some* Tories by being anti-Brexit.
Neither you nor I can tell how those proportions will play out in East Dunbartonshire by looking at national polls (assuming we had a few to look at).
The local Tories are key. Swinson’s fate lies entirely in their hands. Hence her backing off on going for Johnson’s throat.
Yes, but Scots do seem particularly keen on a party when it appoints a Scottish leader. Brown, Kennedy, Steel, etc.
Absolutely. I do not dispute that. I certainly think that that pattern gives Swinson a wee edge. But only a wee one, and that might not be enough.
Here’s the result last time: UK GE 17 - East Dunbartonshire
SLD (Jo Swinson) 21,023 SNP 15,684 SCon 7,563 SLab 7,531
Now, the level of anti-SNP tactical voting in 2017 was *immense*, not least in East Dunbartonshire. And turnout among SNP supporters was somewhat suppressed. This remember is a former Tory seat, and my guesstimate of the true “honest” electoral preferences of these voters, in a fully motivated, high turnout GE (which is what we expect) is as follows:
SNP 20,000 SCon 15,000 SLD 15,000 SLab 5,000
In other words, if we saw zero tactical-voting then East Dunbartonshire would be a three-way marginal under FPTP, with the SNP in pole position.
Now, obviously, we are still going to see a lot of tactical voting, but with a dramatically different Brexit background now. We will see:
- SCon supporters voting SLD to keep the SNP out (as last time). Fewer, but still significant. - SLab supporters voting SNP to give former Tory-minister Swinson a kick up the erse. - SCon supporters voting “honestly” Tory for the first time in years, cos pissed off with “Bollocks to Brexit” Swinson. - Higher, more motivated SNP turnout.
Now, Swinson might still squeak it, but I don’t much fancy the job of her agent and door-knockers this time around. They are going to have to be *extremely* careful that they say the right things to the right voter groups.
It is also a former Labour seat . Labour voters have shifted around a lot there - to LD in 2005 then SNP in 2015 before reverting to LD in 2017. Under the right circumstances the seat could be a four -way contest.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
Absolutely. And I don't recall being asked for a phytosanitary certificate when we landed at Omaha in '44.
‘We’? ‘Recall’? Were you there in person?
Whereabouts would you place yourself on the IQ bell curve, if you don't mind my asking?
85th percentile give or take, about a standard deviation above the mean.
Given you must be at least 93, based on your distinguished service in Normandy, I’d guess you’re not quite at that level any more.
Text 81111 SMS Message: Not to sound bitter but Steve Smith is ruining this series for me. It's one thing to watch a classical dominating batsman like Ricky Ponting or Michael Clarke bat for a couple of days. But watching Smith twitch and fidget all day while walking across his stumps and working everything to leg is just mind numbing. from Felix in Oxford'
What intrigues me is this: if No Deal really is going to be a national trauma, the people who would truly know this are inside the Cabinet. They get the briefings and the intel.
Yet still they steer the boat towards that cliff-edge. It's a puzzle.
There are three possible answers to the puzzle.
1. They don't expect No Deal to happen, they expect the EU to blink or the government to be VONC'd
2. They genuinely believe, having read the advice, that No Deal will not be so bad.
3. They are insane.
Have you seen the Ken Burns documentary on the Vietnam War? The interesting thing about it is that the people who got the US embroiled in that disaster knew from the start that they didn't have a workable plan and it wasn't likely to go right. But in the short term, each individual step made *political* sense, and each one drew them deeper in, to another point where it was hard to move backwards, and easy to move forwards.
Put it another way. Let's imagine you're Boris Johnson. To win the leadership, you drew a line on the deadline, and another one on doing No Deal if the EU wouldn't move on the backstop. After you won you didn't have a good way to walk that back, you needed BXP votes, and you hoped that the EU might move, so you doubled down. But you think actually doing No Deal is going to end very badly. What do you do next?
Yes, that is my fear. It's a Guns of August situation. Almost no one wanted the Great War, many felt it would be calamitous, but every incremental move towards it made it harder to pull back, or admit error, or accept blame, and once the troops were on the trains it was too late.
I have a faint, forlorn hope that brainbox Cummings realises this, and has a card up his sleeve. But what?!?
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
Absolutely. And I don't recall being asked for a phytosanitary certificate when we landed at Omaha in '44.
‘We’? ‘Recall’? Were you there in person?
Whereabouts would you place yourself on the IQ bell curve, if you don't mind my asking?
85th percentile give or take, about a standard deviation above the mean.
Given you must be at least 93, based on your distinguished service in Normandy, I’d guess you’re not quite at that level any more.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
If you really think that the Miners Strike was just a bit of drama and a lot of noise you need to do a lot of learning about what happened and what it meant. The indifference to the difficulties being put deliberately in the way of businesses, to the possibility of them going bust, to the possible loss of jobs is utterly chilling.
One reason for the closure of the mines was that they were unprofitable.
No Deal Brexit risks deliberately making profitable businesses and sectors unprofitable, as a matter of government policy. It is in some ways even worse than the Miners Strike and that was quite bad enough. No decent government would deliberately seek to inflict something like that on its people. And for what? Because it does not want to lose a little bit of face in getting an extension so that it can try and negotiate a better transitional deal.
Not just that. The Thatcher government spent years preparing for the strike. Loads of coal was stockpiled, what with how you can stockpile coal. And that was dislocation in one supply chain. And the NUM weren't a smart opponent. And it was a remarkably close-run thing. Apart from that Halloween Brexit will be just like the minersm strike.
What intrigues me is this: if No Deal really is going to be a national trauma, the people who would truly know this are inside the Cabinet. They get the briefings and the intel.
Yet still they steer the boat towards that cliff-edge. It's a puzzle.
There are three possible answers to the puzzle.
1. They don't expect No Deal to happen, they expect the EU to blink or the government to be VONC'd
2. They genuinely believe, having read the advice, that No Deal will not be so bad.
3. They are insane.
Not insane. They are trapped into supporting No Deal because it's the only Brexit outcome that hasn't been tried so far and found wanting. So they wishfully think/hope the EU will save them or worst case it won't be so bad after all.
The Scottish Labour Party is in crisis, and the Westminster mothership isn’t helping
What the hell is happening to the Scottish Labour Party? Its crisis – this abject and sustained collapse into near-obsolescence – is real and deep and profound and not obviously fixable. The party at Holyrood is in the hands of third-raters.
The Labour leadership are clearly happy to sell their Scottish colleagues down the river if it gets them into No 10. The further suspicion is that they anyway hold no great attachment to the integrity of the UK, regarding its make-up as an imperial hangover. A united Ireland and an independent Scotland would mean an end to all that.
A former Blair-era cabinet minister had his head in his hands recently when discussing the state of the Scottish party. “I just don’t know how we come back from this,” he said. Leonard has been a catastrophically poor choice of leader, nervy, pink-faced, lacking charisma, with no pitch to mainstream Scotland, unable to land a punch on either of the formidable women leading his main rivals. Even then, it’s not clear who could replace him and make much of a difference. Talent has scarpered from both the candidates’ list and even the parliamentary party.
In the end, it is the collapse of Scottish Labour that may well prove to be the midwife of independence. But it’s hard to believe Jeremy Corbyn cares all that much.
What intrigues me is this: if No Deal really is going to be a national trauma, the people who would truly know this are inside the Cabinet. They get the briefings and the intel.
Yet still they steer the boat towards that cliff-edge. It's a puzzle.
There are three possible answers to the puzzle.
1. They don't expect No Deal to happen, they expect the EU to blink or the government to be VONC'd
2. They genuinely believe, having read the advice, that No Deal will not be so bad.
3. They are insane.
Have you seen the Ken Burns documentary on the Vietnam War? The interesting thing about it is that the people who got the US embroiled in that disaster knew from the start that they didn't have a workable plan and it wasn't likely to go right. But in the short term, each individual step made *political* sense, and each one drew them deeper in, to another point where it was hard to move backwards, and easy to move forwards.
Put it another way. Let's imagine you're Boris Johnson. To win the leadership, you drew a line on the deadline, and another one on doing No Deal if the EU wouldn't move on the backstop. After you won you didn't have a good way to walk that back, you needed BXP votes, and you hoped that the EU might move, so you doubled down. But you think actually doing No Deal is going to end very badly. What do you do next?
Yes, that is my fear. It's a Guns of August situation. Almost no one wanted the Great War, many felt it would be calamitous, but every incremental move towards it made it harder to pull back, or admit error, or accept blame, and once the troops were on the trains it was too late.
I have a faint, forlorn hope that brainbox Cummings realises this, and has a card up his sleeve. But what?!?
Ironically, Boris/Cummings might now be praying for Corbyn to succeed and stop Brexit before calling an election which Boris can then fight on behalf of the people against the politicians.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
Absolutely. And I don't recall being asked for a phytosanitary certificate when we landed at Omaha in '44.
‘We’? ‘Recall’? Were you there in person?
Whereabouts would you place yourself on the IQ bell curve, if you don't mind my asking?
85th percentile give or take, about a standard deviation above the mean.
Given you must be at least 93, based on your distinguished service in Normandy, I’d guess you’re not quite at that level any more.
The Tories will be out of power for five decades when this insanity is all over.
*Yawn*
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
If you really think that the Miners Strike was just a bit of drama and a lot of noise you need to do a lot of learning about what happened and what it meant. The indifference to the difficulties being put deliberately in the way of businesses, to the possibility of them going bust, to the possible loss of jobs is utterly chilling.
One reason for the closure of the mines was that they were unprofitable.
No Deal Brexit risks deliberately making profitable businesses and sectors unprofitable, as a matter of government policy. It is in some ways even worse than the Miners Strike and that was quite bad enough. No decent government would deliberately seek to inflict something like that on its people. And for what? Because it does not want to lose a little bit of face in getting an extension so that it can try and negotiate a better transitional deal.
Not just that. The Thatcher government spent years preparing for the strike. Loads of coal was stockpiled, what with how you can stockpile coal. And that was dislocation in one supply chain. And the NUM weren't a smart opponent. And it was a remarkably close-run thing. Apart from that Halloween Brexit will be just like the minersm strike.
What intrigues me is this: if No Deal really is going to be a national trauma, the people who would truly know this are inside the Cabinet. They get the briefings and the intel.
Yet still they steer the boat towards that cliff-edge. It's a puzzle.
There are three possible answers to the puzzle.
1. They don't expect No Deal to happen, they expect the EU to blink or the government to be VONC'd
2. They genuinely believe, having read the advice, that No Deal will not be so bad.
3. They are insane.
The economic and social impact of No Deal Brexit isn't a matter on which secret intelligence has much bearing.
Since it's not happened before, you pay your advisor and you take your choice. The Government doesn't have access to some much better stash of secret economists hidden in a bunker somewhere.
As mentioned, the big danger is groupthink. Very possible to talk yourself into believing one thing when the internal challenge isn't there, and the critical mass within the "in group" is such that doubts can be silenced.
Comments
Boris wants to remain as PM and he's personally not really that bothered about Europe.
But both need to take positions as it's the most important and difficult issue today.
Now if we could have a short technocratic government that did just two things:
1. Arrange a referendum on how people want to proceed NOW on Brexit.
2. Following the referendum, call a General Election.
Then we might be able to deal with other issues in this country.
No doubt some will say this is treason, but the people should be allowed to tell us what they thing NOW, rather than rely on politicians to determine what they meant 3 years ago.
So seller pays stamp duty as standard.
Buyer pays stamp duty as well if they are buying a second home.
Like National Insurance being charged to both employees and employers, but only second home buys are penalised.
There are loads of reasons why it would happen much sooner. We already have done most of WA work, Corbyn dragging his feet looks bad, WA2 and Ref 2 can happen in parallel etc etc.
But ultimately the clincher is the EU aren't going to agree a 3 year extension. No way.
If Corbyn wins the next GE I would expect ref 2 to come within a year of taking office, and expect him to promise a timescale during the campaign.
There is another course Remainers could take - accept the result of the referendum and get on with leaving the EU.
But that would involve listening outside their bubbles.
When this is over it will be like the Miners Strike. Some drama, a lot of noise but ultimately we'll be better off and free to act accordingly without being held back by vested interests.
Anyone who isn't struggling to save for their deposit so can pay for stamp duty up-front rather than loading it onto the property price [which is what this measure will do]
Adonis can't think things through can he?
For politicians to deny the chosen outcome, based on the fact that they themselves have fucked up the process, has no validity whatsoever. And it goes right back to the fact that remain politicians, and their deluded followers, have never accepted the referendum result.
People tend to not always think about things like stamp duty until they're ready to move.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/16/labour-to-give-councils-power-to-seize-boarded-up-shops
* Funny how the Grauardian are now fully in support of this.
https://www.effiedeans.com/2019/08/all-first-ministers-men.html
The net result is that they are stripping the sensible options away and leaving only the desire to leave. I can see that most of them are doing it in the hope of converting the desire to leave into a hopeless acceptance of being forced to remain, but just because I haven't yet been pushed into that position, why should I and others like me be labelled as Leave-at-any-cost ?
Good afternoon, everyone.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49380280
What they haven't done is costed them properly. For example, I see no evidence that they understand the key financial challenge facing post-16 institutions - they are not VAT exempt.
But the idea of integrating all education vertically definitely has merits, as does the idea of reforming the benefits system to support those who are retraining, as does getting employers to sponsor and co-provide apprenticeships.
Leave politicians voted against the WA, which meant that we could not take the quite hard Brexit negotiated and be out in March.
The UK population is having to rely on politicians' interpretation of a three year old decision, it makes sense to ask them if they still want Brexit now that it has become a 'No Deal' Brexit.
Still better touching a nerve than an employee of Edinburgh airport.
One reason for the closure of the mines was that they were unprofitable.
No Deal Brexit risks deliberately making profitable businesses and sectors unprofitable, as a matter of government policy. It is in some ways even worse than the Miners Strike and that was quite bad enough. No decent government would deliberately seek to inflict something like that on its people. And for what? Because it does not want to lose a little bit of face in getting an extension so that it can try and negotiate a better transitional deal.
Luckily in this country you are still seen to be innocent till found guilty in a court of law.
This wouldn't technically be a "temporary" anti-no deal admin, i.e. something which is merely expected to come to an end, fairly soon. It would be designed explicitly as time-limited, and tasked to do one thing, at which point it falls. It would be, of course, a PROVISIONAL anti no-deal administration
A PANDA
4, 19, 23, 16, 9, 18, 8, 19, 20, 28, 17, 10, -1, 22, 30, 13, 9
Which averages at 16. Of course that includes the SNP/Panelbase poll which showed Yes ahead - which got people very excited at the time. Of course once the official campaign started in May 2014, Yes put on a whole point.....but if that what you call a "successful campaign", I'm happy for you....
The polls conducted in 2011 showed Yes on 34, 39, 35, 37 and 28 - which averages 35, not 'around 20%'.
Additionally, Corbyn is extremely personally unpopular, including with a high proportion of 2017 Labour voters. We're just not in "Oh Jeremy Corbyn" land any more.
Are Lab MPs stupid enough to fall for this old Lenist trick?
I worry greatly that they are.
Same applies if England win the Ashes this summer.
But you can't take out Smith. He's a sporting freak.
He reminds me of Maradona and Argentina. The presence of Maradona turned a good but not exceptional Argentine side into world-beaters.
It is amazing what one phenomenal player can do, even in a team sport.
Loads of coal was stockpiled, what with how you can stockpile coal.
And that was dislocation in one supply chain.
And the NUM weren't a smart opponent.
And it was a remarkably close-run thing.
Apart from that Halloween Brexit will be just like the minersm strike.
"The second, and more important factor is that if Remainers’ main plan to stop no deal is a government of national unity, you can safely assume that we will leave the European Union on 31 October – with the only question being who gets the blame."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/15/pointless-row-caretaker-government-just-highlights-labour-lib/
Imagine dropping him at 2nd slip.
Could one carry on?
Here’s the result last time:
UK GE 17 - East Dunbartonshire
SLD (Jo Swinson) 21,023
SNP 15,684
SCon 7,563
SLab 7,531
Now, the level of anti-SNP tactical voting in 2017 was *immense*, not least in East Dunbartonshire. And turnout among SNP supporters was somewhat suppressed. This remember is a former Tory seat, and my guesstimate of the true “honest” electoral preferences of these voters, in a fully motivated, high turnout GE (which is what we expect) is as follows:
SNP 20,000
SCon 15,000
SLD 15,000
SLab 5,000
In other words, if we saw zero tactical-voting then East Dunbartonshire would be a three-way marginal under FPTP, with the SNP in pole position.
Now, obviously, we are still going to see a lot of tactical voting, but with a dramatically different Brexit background now. We will see:
- SCon supporters voting SLD to keep the SNP out (as last time). Fewer, but still significant.
- SLab supporters voting SNP to give former Tory-minister Swinson a kick up the erse.
- SCon supporters voting “honestly” Tory for the first time in years, cos pissed off with “Bollocks to Brexit” Swinson.
- Higher, more motivated SNP turnout.
Now, Swinson might still squeak it, but I don’t much fancy the job of her agent and door-knockers this time around. They are going to have to be *extremely* careful that they say the right things to the right voter groups.
It's designed as a smokescreen. Labour supporters who oppose Brexit will blame the Lib Dems, Lib Dem supporters will blame Labour. Ultimately it will be a wash and people can blame who they want rather than think their own side is at fault.
Yet still they steer the boat towards that cliff-edge. It's a puzzle.
There are three possible answers to the puzzle.
1. They don't expect No Deal to happen, they expect the EU to blink or the government to be VONC'd
2. They genuinely believe, having read the advice, that No Deal will not be so bad.
3. They are insane.
Also please ask yourself this. If Corbyn would be best placed to win a GE in the aftermath of a No Deal Brexit, why is this supposedly the Johnson plan?
As far as delaying Brexit is concerned, the reason that unites us at the moment is the avoidance of a No Deal Brexit. It's difficult to put much mental energy into What Next? until the top priority is dealt with.
But it is temporary. By mid September, as you imply, the move will have clearly failed and the pressure will be on Labour, again, to come up with something - anything - that can unite the Remain/Soft Brexit forces into a PANDA.
By then it will be too late. In which case it's time to stockpile Roquefort, fine ports, and hand-carved Jamon Iberico de Bellota.
Unionists like to have their cake, and eat it.
Sorry, I meant Jun-Dec 2012. The Yes campaign's effectiveness was obviously beginning to bite in 2013.
Of course this obsessing over Project Fear I's achievement of managing not to bleed out in 2014 rather begs the question of what you are hoping for from Project 'We can't go on about EU membership or stable currency this time'?
And that makes plenty of sense to the government.
Put it another way. Let's imagine you're Boris Johnson. To win the leadership, you drew a line on the deadline, and another one on doing No Deal if the EU wouldn't move on the backstop. After you won you didn't have a good way to walk that back, you needed BXP votes, and you hoped that the EU might move, so you doubled down. But you think actually doing No Deal is going to end very badly. What do you do next?
Given you must be at least 93, based on your distinguished service in Normandy, I’d guess you’re not quite at that level any more.
Text 81111
SMS Message: Not to sound bitter but Steve Smith is ruining this series for me. It's one thing to watch a classical dominating batsman like Ricky Ponting or Michael Clarke bat for a couple of days. But watching Smith twitch and fidget all day while walking across his stumps and working everything to leg is just mind numbing. from Felix in Oxford'
You sound bitter, Felix.
I have a faint, forlorn hope that brainbox Cummings realises this, and has a card up his sleeve. But what?!?
I think you should have stuck with 85.
What the hell is happening to the Scottish Labour Party? Its crisis – this abject and sustained collapse into near-obsolescence – is real and deep and profound and not obviously fixable. The party at Holyrood is in the hands of third-raters.
The Labour leadership are clearly happy to sell their Scottish colleagues down the river if it gets them into No 10. The further suspicion is that they anyway hold no great attachment to the integrity of the UK, regarding its make-up as an imperial hangover. A united Ireland and an independent Scotland would mean an end to all that.
A former Blair-era cabinet minister had his head in his hands recently when discussing the state of the Scottish party. “I just don’t know how we come back from this,” he said. Leonard has been a catastrophically poor choice of leader, nervy, pink-faced, lacking charisma, with no pitch to mainstream Scotland, unable to land a punch on either of the formidable women leading his main rivals. Even then, it’s not clear who could replace him and make much of a difference. Talent has scarpered from both the candidates’ list and even the parliamentary party.
In the end, it is the collapse of Scottish Labour that may well prove to be the midwife of independence. But it’s hard to believe Jeremy Corbyn cares all that much.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/scotland/2019/08/scottish-labour-party-crisis-and-westminster-mothership-isnt-helping
It's a bluff. There is no intention to No Deal.
Either VONC and extension for election.
Or if no VONC, extension for fresh talks and no election. Roll this into 2020.
2nd being plan A and the 1st plan B.
Since it's not happened before, you pay your advisor and you take your choice. The Government doesn't have access to some much better stash of secret economists hidden in a bunker somewhere.
As mentioned, the big danger is groupthink. Very possible to talk yourself into believing one thing when the internal challenge isn't there, and the critical mass within the "in group" is such that doubts can be silenced.