I see this as a bit of a win win for Boris. If Labour go remain they fish in the same waters as the Lib Dems, just with a bit less credibility. They will lose some of their traditional support, probably to TBP rather than the Tories, and a swathe of seats will become vulnerable. They might even win back some tactical voters who were going to vote Lib Dem and help remove a Tory as well.
If they continue their current "policy" then they will continue to bleed loud mouthed supporters like AC to the Lib Dems. Either way the 50% of the country that cares and that wants to remain will be split. The 50% that cares and want to leave are split too of course but Boris will fancy his chances of a much less even split of that vote.
The interesting thing is how many are in the middle, people who stopped caring about Brexit months or even years ago because it is boring and confusing and they no longer believe a word that anyone says on the subject. My guess is that that number is (a) bigger than we think and (b) growing. How will they vote?
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
The death of that Labour Leave vote since 2017 is the most remarkable political change in decades.
Yes Labour is now being squeezed with Remainers by the LDs and with Leavers by the Brexit Party, while the Tories are hold much more steady with both Remainers and Leavers, especially after Boris has reversed most of the loss of Tory Leavers to the Brexit Party that happened under May
The official policy may still be something of a fudge but in the eyes of the public are Labour anything but clearly a remain party now? Corbyn may equivocate slightly but vast majority of its members and MPs go around telling people they are a remain party, so on practice the policy is irrelevant isnt it? Labour backbencher no. 98 or whomever is going to campaign for remain and resist any suggestion of a renegotiated deal even if it is policy. We can be confident of that because even members were getting mad at corbyn for sticking to policy earlier this year.
My guess is that Labour believes stop Johnson will win it votes come election time.
My own view is that any election will lead to a Parliament even more hung and useless than this one.
If that's possible to imagine.
Can it be even more hung? The Government has a working majority of one.
But of course. You could have proportions which mean no one could cobble up a majority - it's no guarantee that agreement could be reached between the various parties.
Mr. Observer, you keep going on about English nationalism (a loose definition must be used, as it includes Wales...). If it has arisen, major factors driving it have been Labour's self-interested and short-sighted devolution for Everywhere But England, the open borders policy with accompanying race card, and the reneging upon manifesto commitments.
The polarisation of current politics is the crop grown by complacent 'centrist' politicians who took for granted that they'd always be the ones in charge and that if the electorate had the temerity to disagree they could simply be ignored. If a return from the fringes is to happen, that requires politicians to take account of the legitimate concerns the electorate has. Unfortunately, the habit of throwing around terms like 'traitor', 'xenophobe' and so on has made the middle ground harder to stand in (No Man's Land, if you will, in the current trench warfare).
The Tories’ decision to embrace hard-right, populist, English nationalism is entirely the responsibility of the Tory Party.
That's one view. Another is that you need to do some SERIOUS work on your definitions....
Most Tory members believe Brexit is more important than the continued existence of the UK. They are English nationalists.
That's not what a nationalist is.
I am an English nationalist, I want the breakup of the UK, just as a Scottish nationalist wants the same.
Someone who doesn't want the breakup of the UK but is prepared to see it happen isn't a nationalist.
Someone who believes the Union is only worth preserving if England gets its way and is happy for the Union to dissolve if that doesn’t happen is an English nationalist.
Brexit isn't happening because England voted for it. Brexit is happening because the union voted for it.
Believing the union getting its way is more important than the union being preserved but not getting its way has nothing to do with English nationalism.
But you agree something has changed in English nationalism? The English now take flag of st George to major sporting events, not the jack, and that surely shows change in their state of mind how they value the union these days?
Mr. Charles, got to admit, your Three Kingdoms comment made me think Wu, Wei, and Shu.
If Cao Cao were in charge of negotiations, they would've gone rather better.
I’m given to understand that the term “Civil War” in no longer the approved nomenclature.
Something to do with Scotland and Ireland being separate Kingdoms 🤔
I think it's the term English Civil War that's no longer approved, due to being ahistorically parochial.
The English civil war bits refers to specific parts of the overall conflict across the period, not the overall conflict itself.
That may be the case now, but I'm pretty sure when I first took a childish interest in history that it was a catch all term for the whole mess.
Well it must have changed in the last 30 years or so since the 10-20 year old books used when I was at uni 14 years ago mostly used such terms (british civil wars being more common). Recent in historical terms but not exactly overnight.
More than anything else it's just plain useful to help identify distinct elements, though theres definitely overlap.
I see this as a bit of a win win for Boris. If Labour go remain they fish in the same waters as the Lib Dems, just with a bit less credibility. They will lose some of their traditional support, probably to TBP rather than the Tories, and a swathe of seats will become vulnerable. They might even win back some tactical voters who were going to vote Lib Dem and help remove a Tory as well.
If they continue their current "policy" then they will continue to bleed loud mouthed supporters like AC to the Lib Dems. Either way the 50% of the country that cares and that wants to remain will be split. The 50% that cares and want to leave are split too of course but Boris will fancy his chances of a much less even split of that vote.
The interesting thing is how many are in the middle, people who stopped caring about Brexit months or even years ago because it is boring and confusing and they no longer believe a word that anyone says on the subject. My guess is that that number is (a) bigger than we think and (b) growing. How will they vote?
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
What seems interesting in that chart is how the blue Remainers have stayed much more consistent than the red Leavers.
Johnson has the easier job. He just has to win over Brexit Party supporters to be bigger than anyone else in a first post the post system. Corbyn has to decide whether he is better to focus on stopping further drift to the Lib Dems and Greens, or to try to persuade Leavers to come back to his party.
The official policy may still be something of a fudge but in the eyes of the public are Labour anything but clearly a remain party now? Corbyn may equivocate slightly but vast majority of its members and MPs go around telling people they are a remain party, so on practice the policy is irrelevant isnt it? Labour backbencher no. 98 or whomever is going to campaign for remain and resist any suggestion of a renegotiated deal even if it is policy. We can be confident of that because even members were getting mad at corbyn for sticking to policy earlier this year.
My guess is that Labour believes stop Johnson will win it votes come election time.
My own view is that any election will lead to a Parliament even more hung and useless than this one.
If that's possible to imagine.
Can it be even more hung? The Government has a working majority of one.
But of course. You could have proportions which mean no one could cobble up a majority - it's no guarantee that agreement could be reached between the various parties.
I genuinely hope (forlornly) that we don't get a hung parliament next time. We need to get a full fat version of whatever party wins-be that Tory, Labour, Lib Dems, Brexit, Green, whatever. At least that way the country will have a direction to follow with a party that actually has a mandate to do what it campaigned for.
Mr. Observer, you keep going on about English nationalism (a loose definition must be used, as it includes Wales...). If it has arisen, major factors driving it have been Labour's self-interested and short-sighted devolution for Everywhere But England, the open borders policy with accompanying race card, and the reneging upon manifesto commitments.
The polarisation of current politics is the crop grown by complacent 'centrist' politicians who took for granted that they'd always be the ones in charge and that if the electorate had the temerity to disagree they could simply be ignored. If a return from the fringes is to happen, that requires politicians to take account of the legitimate concerns the electorate has. Unfortunately, the habit of throwing around terms like 'traitor', 'xenophobe' and so on has made the middle ground harder to stand in (No Man's Land, if you will, in the current trench warfare).
The Tories’ decision to embrace hard-right, populist, English nationalism is entirely the responsibility of the Tory Party.
That's one view. Another is that you need to do some SERIOUS work on your definitions....
Most Tory members believe Brexit is more important than the continued existence of the UK. They are English nationalists.
That's not what a nationalist is.
I am an English nationalist, I want the breakup of the UK, just as a Scottish nationalist wants the same.
Someone who doesn't want the breakup of the UK but is prepared to see it happen isn't a nationalist.
Someone who believes the Union is only worth preserving if England gets its way and is happy for the Union to dissolve if that doesn’t happen is an English nationalist.
Brexit isn't happening because England voted for it. Brexit is happening because the union voted for it.
Believing the union getting its way is more important than the union being preserved but not getting its way has nothing to do with English nationalism.
But you agree something has changed in English nationalism? The English now take flag of st George to major sporting events, not the jack, and that surely shows change in their state of mind how they value the union these days?
That change has been happening for decades and has nothing to do with Brexit.
I see this as a bit of a win win for Boris. If Labour go remain they fish in the same waters as the Lib Dems, just with a bit less credibility. They will lose some of their traditional support, probably to TBP rather than the Tories, and a swathe of seats will become vulnerable. They might even win back some tactical voters who were going to vote Lib Dem and help remove a Tory as well.
If they continue their current "policy" then they will continue to bleed loud mouthed supporters like AC to the Lib Dems. Either way the 50% of the country that cares and that wants to remain will be split. The 50% that cares and want to leave are split too of course but Boris will fancy his chances of a much less even split of that vote.
The interesting thing is how many are in the middle, people who stopped caring about Brexit months or even years ago because it is boring and confusing and they no longer believe a word that anyone says on the subject. My guess is that that number is (a) bigger than we think and (b) growing. How will they vote?
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Tory Remainers are solid Remainers but for different reasons to Labour/Liberal Democrat Remainers. That divide isn't heard often enough.
The ideal electoral trick for the Tories would be to retain most of them and the vast majority of Leavers, but leaving the extreme fringe to the BXP/UKIP.
Boris needs to be careful he doesn't go all in on the latter.
Tory Remainers are also firmly anti Corbyn, as increasingly are LD Remainers, I also think no matter how hard Boris goes for the extreme fringe Farage will always retain a core Brexit Party vote of about 10% of No Deal, anti immigration diehards. What he needs to do is ensure he keeps the majority of Leavers voting Tory while the majority of Remainers do not vote for Corbyn Labour under FPTP
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Yes, that's a really illuminating chart. What we don't know is how much of that Lab/Lib vote is transfer-friendly either way. I think very few LDs will tactically vote Tory, but probably only half will go Labour even where they see Labour as the main local challenger. About 60% of Labour would go LibDem in the reverse case - it was higher, but resentment of Swinson's tactics has squeezed it somewhat IMO. Will many Tories vote LibDem in a LD-Lab marginal? Doubtful, and there are few such places.
So, in the interest of getting a change of government, Swinson should become less overtly anti-Labour and Corbyn should stress the referendum part of the policy.
The official policy may still be something of a fudge but in the eyes of the public are Labour anything but clearly a remain party now? Corbyn may equivocate slightly but vast majority of its members and MPs go around telling people they are a remain party, so on practice the policy is irrelevant isnt it? Labour backbencher no. 98 or whomever is going to campaign for remain and resist any suggestion of a renegotiated deal even if it is policy. We can be confident of that because even members were getting mad at corbyn for sticking to policy earlier this year.
My guess is that Labour believes stop Johnson will win it votes come election time.
My own view is that any election will lead to a Parliament even more hung and useless than this one.
If that's possible to imagine.
Can it be even more hung? The Government has a working majority of one.
Yes. If there was a swing of one more MP there would be a working minority, ie a majority of minus one. But no alternative would get a majority either, so therefore it would be even more hung.
Mr. Observer, you keep going on about English nationalism (a loose definition must be used, as it includes Wales...). If it has arisen, major factors driving it have been Labour's self-interested and short-sighted devolution for Everywhere But England, the open borders policy with accompanying race card, and the reneging upon manifesto commitments.
The polarisation of current politics is the crop grown by complacent 'centrist' politicians who took for granted that they'd always be the ones in charge and that if the electorate had the temerity to disagree they could simply be ignored. If a return from the fringes is to happen, that requires politicians to take account of the legitimate concerns the electorate has. Unfortunately, the habit of throwing around terms like 'traitor', 'xenophobe' and so on has made the middle ground harder to stand in (No Man's Land, if you will, in the current trench warfare).
The Tories’ decision to embrace hard-right, populist, English nationalism is entirely the responsibility of the Tory Party.
That's one view. Another is that you need to do some SERIOUS work on your definitions....
Most Tory members believe Brexit is more important than the continued existence of the UK. They are English nationalists.
That's not what a nationalist is.
I am an English nationalist, I want the breakup of the UK, just as a Scottish nationalist wants the same.
Someone who doesn't want the breakup of the UK but is prepared to see it happen isn't a nationalist.
Someone who believes the Union is only worth preserving if England gets its way and is happy for the Union to dissolve if that doesn’t happen is an English nationalist.
Brexit isn't happening because England voted for it. Brexit is happening because the union voted for it.
Believing the union getting its way is more important than the union being preserved but not getting its way has nothing to do with English nationalism.
But you agree something has changed in English nationalism? The English now take flag of st George to major sporting events, not the jack, and that surely shows change in their state of mind how they value the union these days?
That's true but I'd say that's been happening since the 1990s.
Mr. Observer, you keep going on about English nationalism (a loose definition must be used, as it includes Wales...). If it has arisen, major factors driving it have been Labour's self-interested and short-sighted devolution for Everywhere But England, the open borders policy with accompanying race card, and the reneging upon manifesto commitments.
The polarisation of current politics is the crop grown by complacent 'centrist' politicians who took for granted that they'd always be the ones in charge and that if the electorate had the temerity to disagree they could simply be ignored. If a return from the fringes is to happen, that requires politicians to take account of the legitimate concerns the electorate has. Unfortunately, the habit of throwing around terms like 'traitor', 'xenophobe' and so on has made the middle ground harder to stand in (No Man's Land, if you will, in the current trench warfare).
The Tories’ decision to embrace hard-right, populist, English nationalism is entirely the responsibility of the Tory Party.
That's one view. Another is that you need to do some SERIOUS work on your definitions....
Most Tory members believe Brexit is more important than the continued existence of the UK. They are English nationalists.
That's not what a nationalist is.
I am an English nationalist, I want the breakup of the UK, just as a Scottish nationalist wants the same.
Someone who doesn't want the breakup of the UK but is prepared to see it happen isn't a nationalist.
Someone who believes the Union is only worth preserving if England gets its way and is happy for the Union to dissolve if that doesn’t happen is an English nationalist.
Brexit isn't happening because England voted for it. Brexit is happening because the union voted for it.
Believing the union getting its way is more important than the union being preserved but not getting its way has nothing to do with English nationalism.
But you agree something has changed in English nationalism? The English now take flag of st George to major sporting events, not the jack, and that surely shows change in their state of mind how they value the union these days?
If England are playing obviously you fly the cross of St George e.g. at football, rugby and cricket matches, when the UK is the team competing e.g. at the Olympics, then the Union Jack is the more appropriate flag to fly
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
It’s just a different set of lightweights, non-entities and fools. Only further to the right and much more English nationalist.
Sounds great. What's the problem? Unless you're a lefty England hater.
I truly detest your vision of England. It revolts me. It also means you’re not capable of reading first sentences!
The first sentence was moot. Your vision of them being lightweights, non-entities and fools says more about your partisan politics than it does about how capable or not the cabinet is.
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Yes, that's a really illuminating chart. What we don't know is how much of that Lab/Lib vote is transfer-friendly either way. I think very few LDs will tactically vote Tory, but probably only half will go Labour even where they see Labour as the main local challenger. About 60% of Labour would go LibDem in the reverse case - it was higher, but resentment of Swinson's tactics has squeezed it somewhat IMO. Will many Tories vote LibDem in a LD-Lab marginal? Doubtful, and there are few such places.
So, in the interest of getting a change of government, Swinson should become less overtly anti-Labour and Corbyn should stress the referendum part of the policy.
The key change since 2017 is fewer LDs will vote Labour in Tory Labour marginals even though most Labour voters will still vote LD in Tory LD marginals
Labour policy is not a fudge. People have got used to saying it because it was a fudge for a long, deeply ridiculous time, but it's not a fudge any more.
The policy is to renegotiate then have a referendum. This may be bullshit (renegotiation unicorns etc) but it's clear what it means. It's true that they're not being clear which side they would recommend voting for in the referendum, but that's not very important, and logically depends on what they've ended up negotiating.
Whether you can do a GoNAfaE doesn't depend on a change in Labour policy. There's no alternative Labour policy which, if they adopted it, would make a GoNAfaE more likely. There are two ways that Labour may prevent a GoNAfaE from happening when it otherwise would:
1) The leadership may refuse to accept a non-Corbyn option, which might otherwise be viable when Corbyn is not. This doesn't really turn on what the GoNAfaE would do, which is the easy part. (The clue's in the name.)
2) Lab-leave rebels may decline to back the GoNAfaE, or other anti-No-Deal measures. This becomes more likely not less if you tilt the party policy to be more anti-Leave, for example by advocating revoking without a referendum.
So I don't think anything in the short term turns on Labour policy, and I'd be surprised if Labour changed their policy, beyond making the leadership's shift from the last conference policy official.
The polling evidence suggests strongly two things I believe about Labour's Brexit policy:
1. The public think it is as clear as mud. 2. The public don't like it.
In addition the polling evidence is even stronger that the public do not want JCPM.
The public are wise.
But the public will never fear JC as much as is lazily believed they do, 2017 certainly proves that. Not being feared is far more important electorally than actually being loved.
Not that I am saying this is state of play, but hypothetically If Boris was better liked than Corbyn, for example, but feared he would do more damage such as trash the economy, Boris would be thrashed in an election.
Clearly I don’t think the poll of leadership ratings matters that much to a GE, it’s the fear factor within there that is crucial. Because Most often it’s the party that is feared (and smeared) as being dangerous whilst leaders can be quite popular, but their popularity torpedoed by the fear of letting that party in.
If England are playing obviously you fly the cross of St George e.g. at football, rugby and cricket matches, when the UK is the team competing e.g. at the Olympics, then the Union Jack is the more appropriate flag to fly
Surprised the people who normally leap on someone using less instead of fewer [despite that being disputed] aren't pointing out it should be Union Flag instead of Union Jack [equally disputed].
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Yes, that's a really illuminating chart. What we don't know is how much of that Lab/Lib vote is transfer-friendly either way. I think very few LDs will tactically vote Tory, but probably only half will go Labour even where they see Labour as the main local challenger. About 60% of Labour would go LibDem in the reverse case - it was higher, but resentment of Swinson's tactics has squeezed it somewhat IMO. Will many Tories vote LibDem in a LD-Lab marginal? Doubtful, and there are few such places.
So, in the interest of getting a change of government, Swinson should become less overtly anti-Labour and Corbyn should stress the referendum part of the policy.
The key change since 2017 is fewer LDs will vote Labour in Tory Labour marginals even though most Labour voters will still vote LD in Tory LD marginals
Absolutely spot on. Totally agree with HY.
However is that going to remain the same all the way up to real voting day?
I see this as a bit of a win win for Boris. If Labour go remain they fish in the same waters as the Lib Dems, just with a bit less credibility.
The interesting thing is how many are in the middle, people who stopped caring about Brexit months or even years ago because it is boring and confusing and they no longer believe a word that anyone says on the subject. My guess is that that number is (a) bigger than we think and (b) growing. How will they vote?
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Tory Remainers are solid Remainers but for different reasons to Labour/Liberal Democrat Remainers. That divide isn't heard often enough.
The ideal electoral trick for the Tories would be to retain most of them and the vast majority of Leavers, but leaving the extreme fringe to the BXP/UKIP.
Boris needs to be careful he doesn't go all in on the latter.
Tory Remainers are also firmly anti Corbyn, as increasingly are LD Remainers, I also think no matter how hard Boris goes for the extreme fringe Farage will always retain a core Brexit Party vote of about 10% of No Deal, anti immigration diehards. What he needs to do is ensure he keeps the majority of Leavers voting Tory while the majority of Remainers do not vote for Corbyn Labour under FPTP
It's more fundamental than that.
Tory Remainers are Remainers because they believe it's solidly in the British national interest to remain members to retain global influence.
Labour and LD Remainers are Remainers because they are ideological internationalists and believers in international governance, the more of which they think the better.
When the media talk about Remain you only ever hear about the latter which, coincidentally, tends to drive more Tory waverers into the arms of Leave.
Mr. Observer, you keep going on about English nationalism (a loose definition must be used, as it includes Wales...). If it has arisen, major factors driving it have been Labour's self-interested and short-sighted devolution for Everywhere But England, the open borders policy with accompanying race card, and the reneging upon manifesto commitments.
The polarisation of current politics is the crop grown by complacent 'centrist' politicians who took for granted that they'd always be the ones in charge and that if the electorate had the temerity to disagree they could simply be ignored. If a return from the fringes is to happen, that requires politicians to take account of the legitimate concerns the electorate
The Tories’ decision to embrace hard-right, populist, English nationalism is entirely the responsibility of the Tory Party.
That's one view. Another is that you need to do some SERIOUS work on your definitions....
Most Tory members believe Brexit is more important than the continued existence of the UK. They are English nationalists.
That's not what a nationalist is.
I am an English nationalist, I want the breakup of the UK, just as a Scottish nationalist wants the same.
Someone who doesn't want the breakup of the UK but is prepared to see it happen isn't a nationalist.
Someone who believes the Union is only worth preserving if England gets its way and is happy for the Union to dissolve if that doesn’t happen is an English nationalist.
Brexit isn't happening because England voted for it. Brexit is happening because the union voted for it.
Believing the union getting its way is more important than the union being preserved but not getting its way has nothing to do with English nationalism.
But you agree something has changed in English nationalism? The English now take flag of st George to major sporting events, not the jack, and that surely shows change in their state of mind how they value the union these days?
That's true but I'd say that's been happening since the 1990s.
I agree. If you look at old pre 90s footage of English sporting events, cricket finals, English FA cup finals, the difference is stark. But is what we are seeing tied in with a change in attitude to the union in turn impacting politics such as 2016 leave and 2019 no deal?
Mr. Charles, got to admit, your Three Kingdoms comment made me think Wu, Wei, and Shu.
If Cao Cao were in charge of negotiations, they would've gone rather better.
I’m given to understand that the term “Civil War” in no longer the approved nomenclature.
Something to do with Scotland and Ireland being separate Kingdoms 🤔
I think it's the term English Civil War that's no longer approved, due to being ahistorically parochial.
The English civil war bits refers to specific parts of the overall conflict across the period, not the overall conflict itself.
That may be the case now, but I'm pretty sure when I first took a childish interest in history that it was a catch all term for the whole mess.
Well it must have changed in the last 30 years or so since the 10-20 year old books used when I was at uni 14 years ago mostly used such terms (british civil wars being more common). Recent in historical terms but not exactly overnight.
More than anything else it's just plain useful to help identify distinct elements, though theres definitely overlap.
I honestly haven't come across the term British Civil Wars, though I admit my recent reading on the subject is sketchy.
Looking at Wiki under English Civil War, it has 'Location Kingdoms of England, Ireland and Scotland. North American colonies', so not everyone is as rigorous as you!
I agree with EiT's analysis, and I don't expect Brexit drama in Brighton, though I'm sure the media will predict it. The Remainers (including me) have got the most we can reasonably expect: to go further and say "Oh well, sod it, let's revoke" would just look silly at this point. The Leavers don't have the numbers to push back on the current policy.
Where I disagree with the leadership is that I think we should fight for our position instead of constantly trying to change the subject. Corbyn is entirely correct that No Deal is wrong but things like child poverty are more important than the exact details of a deal. But he's wrong to think that people will listen on child poverty or anything but Brexit. So we should be working to promote the position so that people other than EiT understand it - sure, hardcore Remainers and Leavers won't feel it's good enough, but the impression of shifty obscurity is not helped but hindered by talking about other things.
"Shifty obscurity" is quite a good way of summing up Corbyn and all his works, Mr NP.
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Yes, that's a really illuminating chart. What we don't know is how much of that Lab/Lib vote is transfer-friendly either way. I think very few LDs will tactically vote Tory, but probably only half will go Labour even where they see Labour as the main local challenger. About 60% of Labour would go LibDem in the reverse case - it was higher, but resentment of Swinson's tactics has squeezed it somewhat IMO. Will many Tories vote LibDem in a LD-Lab marginal? Doubtful, and there are few such places.
So, in the interest of getting a change of government, Swinson should become less overtly anti-Labour and Corbyn should stress the referendum part of the policy.
Corbyn needs to talk about nothing else but the referendum part for next few weeks. At moment, Remainers don't believe him.
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Yes, that's a really illuminating chart. What we don't know is how much of that Lab/Lib vote is transfer-friendly either way. I think very few LDs will tactically vote Tory, but probably only half will go Labour even where they see Labour as the main local challenger. About 60% of Labour would go LibDem in the reverse case - it was higher, but resentment of Swinson's tactics has squeezed it somewhat IMO. Will many Tories vote LibDem in a LD-Lab marginal? Doubtful, and there are few such places.
So, in the interest of getting a change of government, Swinson should become less overtly anti-Labour and Corbyn should stress the referendum part of the policy.
I doubt anything Swinson has done lately will have much of an impact. What will matter is her answer to the question (to be posed in the next GE campaign): will you support Jeremy Corbyn to get a second ref?
According to yougov, LDs prefer Corbyn to No Deal by 69% to 18%. That result, plus the 40% Lab share in 2017, makes me think there is at least plenty of potential for tactical voting next time.
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Yes, that's a really illuminating chart. What we don't know is how much of that Lab/Lib vote is transfer-friendly either way. I think very few LDs will tactically vote Tory, but probably only half will go Labour even where they see Labour as the main local challenger. About 60% of Labour would go LibDem in the reverse case - it was higher, but resentment of Swinson's tactics has squeezed it somewhat IMO. Will many Tories vote LibDem in a LD-Lab marginal? Doubtful, and there are few such places.
So, in the interest of getting a change of government, Swinson should become less overtly anti-Labour and Corbyn should stress the referendum part of the policy.
Corbyn needs to talk about nothing else but the referendum part for next few weeks. At moment, Remainers don't believe him.
If England are playing obviously you fly the cross of St George e.g. at football, rugby and cricket matches, when the UK is the team competing e.g. at the Olympics, then the Union Jack is the more appropriate flag to fly
I guess that must mean when Rangers play it's really the UK competing.
I see this as a bit of a win win for Boris. If Labour go remain they fish in the same waters as the Lib Dems, just with a bit less credibility.
The interesting thing is how many are in the middle, people who stopped caring about Brexit months or even years ago because it is boring and confusing and they no longer believe a word that anyone says on the subject. My guess is that that number is (a) bigger than we think and (b) growing. How will they vote?
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Tory Remainers are solid Remainers but for different reasons to Labour/Liberal Democrat Remainers. That divide isn't heard often enough.
The ideal electoral trick for the Tories would be to retain most of them and the vast majority of Leavers, but leaving the extreme fringe to the BXP/UKIP.
Boris needs to be careful he doesn't go all in on the latter.
Tory Remainers are also firmly anti Corbyn, as increasingly are LD Remainers, I also think no matter how hard Boris goes for the extreme fringe Farage will always retain a core Brexit Party vote of about 10% of No Deal, anti immigration diehards. What he needs to do is ensure he keeps the majority of Leavers voting Tory while the majority of Remainers do not vote for Corbyn Labour under FPTP
It's more fundamental than that.
Tory Remainers are Remainers because they believe it's solidly in the British national interest to remain members to retain global influence.
Labour and LD Remainers are Remainers because they are ideological internationalists and believers in international governance, the more of which they think the better.
When the media talk about Remain you only ever hear about the latter which, coincidentally, tends to drive more Tory waverers into the arms of Leave.
Neither of those caricatures really captures identity-based European unionism.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
It’s just a different set of lightweights, non-entities and fools. Only further to the right and much more English nationalist.
Sounds great. What's the problem? Unless you're a lefty England hater.
I truly detest your vision of England. It revolts me. It also means you’re not capable of reading first sentences!
The first sentence was moot. Your vision of them being lightweights, non-entities and fools says more about your partisan politics than it does about how capable or not the cabinet is.
What is revolting?
Vision of England.
Is all the shared history really that good? Was the union of the British Empire in fact a model of an English Empire, Welsh, Irish, Scots subjects of the English rather than in a union as commonwealth of nations? Maybe a commonwealth of nations would have been a better approach from the very start, (the fall of James) so the English Empire wouldn’t be messily unravelling right now leaving us with something less good, more petty nationalism than a union that is strong common wealth of nations?
I see this as a bit of a win win for Boris. If Labour go remain they fish in the same waters as the Lib Dems, just with a bit less credibility.
The interesting thing is how many are in the middle, people who stopped caring about Brexit months or even years ago because it is boring and confusing and they no longer believe a word that anyone says on the subject. My guess is that that number is (a) bigger than we think and (b) growing. How will they vote?
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Tory Remainers are solid Remainers but for different reasons to Labour/Liberal Democrat Remainers. That divide isn't heard often enough.
The ideal electoral trick for the Tories would be to retain most of them and the vast majority of Leavers, but leaving the extreme fringe to the BXP/UKIP.
Boris needs to be careful he doesn't go all in on the latter.
Tory Remainers are also firmly anti Corbyn, as increasingly are LD Remainers, I also think no matter how hard Boris goes for the extreme fringe Farage will always retain a core Brexit Party vote of about 10% of No Deal, anti immigration diehards. What he needs to do is ensure he keeps the majority of Leavers voting Tory while the majority of Remainers do not vote for Corbyn Labour under FPTP
It's more fundamental than that.
Tory Remainers are Remainers because they believe it's solidly in the British national interest to remain members to retain global influence.
Labour and LD Remainers are Remainers because they are ideological internationalists and believers in international governance, the more of which they think the better.
When the media talk about Remain you only ever hear about the latter which, coincidentally, tends to drive more Tory waverers into the arms of Leave.
Neither of those caricatures really captures identity-based European unionism.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
It’s just a different set of lightweights, non-entities and fools. Only further to the right and much more English nationalist.
Sounds great. What's the problem? Unless you're a lefty England hater.
I truly detest your vision of England. It revolts me. It also means you’re not capable of reading first sentences!
The first sentence was moot. Your vision of them being lightweights, non-entities and fools says more about your partisan politics than it does about how capable or not the cabinet is.
What is revolting?
Vision of England.
Is all the shared history really that good? Was the union of the British Empire in fact a model of an English Empire, Welsh, Irish, Scots subjects of the English rather than in a union as commonwealth of nations? Maybe a commonwealth of nations would have been a better approach from the very start, (the fall of James) so the English Empire wouldn’t be messily unravelling right now leaving us with something less good, more petty nationalism than a union that is strong common wealth of nations?
None of the people who secretly hope Ireland will one day rejoin the UK ever seem to do any thought how to reform the UK into a membership organisation that anyone would want to join.
In the post-imperial Europe of the EU, does the UK union serve any purpose anymore? Why would Scotland not be better off as a full member state of the EU in its own right?
Mr. Observer, you keep going on about English nationalism (a loose definition must be used, as it includes Wales...). If it has arisen, major factors driving it have been Labour's self-interested and short-sighted
The polarisation of current politics is the crop grown by complacent 'centrist' politicians who took for granted that they'd always be the ones in charge and that if the electorate had the temerity to disagree they could simply be ignored. If a return from the fringes is to happen, that requires politicians to take account of the legitimate concerns the electorate
The Tories’ decision to embrace hard-right, populist, English nationalism is entirely the responsibility of the Tory Party.
That's one view. Another is that you need to do some SERIOUS work on your definitions....
Most Tory members believe Brexit is more important than the continued existence of the UK. They are English nationalists.
That's not what a nationalist is.
I am an English nationalist, I want the breakup of the UK, just as a Scottish nationalist wants the same.
Someone who doesn't want the breakup of the UK but is prepared to see it happen isn't a nationalist.
Someone who believes the Union is only worth preserving if England gets its way and is happy for the Union to dissolve if that doesn’t happen is an English nationalist.
Brexit isn't happening because England voted for it. Brexit is happening because the union voted for it.
Believing the union getting its way is more important than the union being preserved but not getting its way has nothing to do with English nationalism.
But you agree something has changed in English nationalism? The English now take flag of st George to major sporting events, not the jack, and that surely shows change in their state of mind how they value the union these days?
That's true but I'd say that's been happening since the 1990s.
I agree. If you look at old pre 90s footage of English sporting events, cricket finals, English FA cup finals, the difference is stark. But is what we are seeing tied in with a change in attitude to the union in turn impacting politics such as 2016 leave and 2019 no deal?
I don't think so. It's probably more associated with the rise of Celtic nationalism.
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Yes, that's a really illuminating chart. What we don't know is how much of that Lab/Lib vote is transfer-friendly either way. I think very few LDs will tactically vote Tory, but probably only half will go Labour even where they see Labour as the main local challenger. About 60% of Labour would go LibDem in the reverse case - it was higher, but resentment of Swinson's tactics has squeezed it somewhat IMO. Will many Tories vote LibDem in a LD-Lab marginal? Doubtful, and there are few such places.
So, in the interest of getting a change of government, Swinson should become less overtly anti-Labour and Corbyn should stress the referendum part of the policy.
Corbyn needs to talk about nothing else but the referendum part for next few weeks. At moment, Remainers don't believe him.
Even if he does we still won’t believe him
Well, I certainly won't. He has been LEXIT since the last Ice Age and he isn't someone who changes.
Titanic pressures at the top though with Abbott and McDonnell now sounding like seriously pro new referendum.
Beautifully quiet and sunny here. And delighted to see that the vine I planted a few years back is producing a lovely lot of grapes. The figs are maturing nicely too.
The PM’s announcements about extra police do nothing to address these issues. If anything they will make matters worse, by raising expectations which cannot be fulfilled.
There again “Raising expectations which cannot be fulfilled” might serve as a mission statement for our political class.
I agree. If you look at old pre 90s footage of English sporting events, cricket finals, English FA cup finals, the difference is stark. But is what we are seeing tied in with a change in attitude to the union in turn impacting politics such as 2016 leave and 2019 no deal?
I don't think so. It's probably more associated with the rise of Celtic nationalism.
The increased visibility of Celtic nationalism makes it harder for English people to conflate English and British identities in the way that they used to.
I think the Labour party should be applauded for still using a traditional conference location in Brighton.
There was something unpleasant and non-conservative about the Conservatives choosing to alternate their conferences between Birmingham and Manchester.
Why?
Given the scale of these events and the security needs an easily accessible big city is to be preferred.
Both Birmingham and Manchester make more sense than Brighton or Blackpool
I believe that coastal resorts were used because they had plenty of accommodation. Now places like Manchester and Birmingham have built the necessary infrastructure.
Mr. Observer, you keep going on about English nationalism (a loose definition must be used, as it includes Wales...). If it has arisen, major factors driving it have been Labour's self-interested and short-sighted devolution for Everywhere But England, the open borders policy with accompanying race card, and the reneging upon manifesto commitments.
It didn't take a genius to predict that trying to fiddle with the constitution to create a perpetual fiefdom whilst actually embedding division in the political system might not be clever. Or that calling everyone a racist who disagreed with a policy to 'rub the right's face in diversity' might dilute the charge of 'racist' to very little. Or that telling the electorate one thing and doing the opposite doesn't engender trust.
The polarisation of current politics is the crop grown by complacent 'centrist' politicians who took for granted that they'd always be the ones in charge and that if the electorate had the temerity to disagree they could simply be ignored. If a return from the fringes is to happen, that requires politicians to take account of the legitimate concerns the electorate has. Unfortunately, the habit of throwing around terms like 'traitor', 'xenophobe' and so on has made the middle ground harder to stand in (No Man's Land, if you will, in the current trench warfare).
That's one view. Another is that most Tory members think Brexit has to be delivered, but that the case for the four countries remaining in the UK will then be much easier to make. They strongly believe that Brexit will not summon the Four Horsemen and the economic case for NI or Scotland leaving will then be much harder to make. We've made the case in Scotland once this decade. The SNP has shown it has no more answers on the economy than it did last time.
But this member is entirely sanguine. If Scotland or NI can't see those benefits, good luck to them. But in those divorce proceedings, expect London's team to make Barnier look like a plasticine pussycat.
Anyone looking at the shambles the UK is making of Scotland would need to be real stupid to not think they could not do at least as good as the current decline. Taking Scotland's cash and splashing it on bombs, embassies and London infrastructure is not good for Scotland. By then showing fake numbers etc to make it look like they are borrowing lots of cash for us to spend on what they want is supposed to make us think what? We are being robbed and conned.
Labour are a Remain party. Their position is Ref2 (and thus Remain) but expressed in prosaic muted language so as to not alienate their Leavers any more than is necessary. It is not fudge. It makes perfect sense. And if we do get a pre-Brexit GE, I think they are in with a good chance of achieving a minority government with Corbyn as PM. Whether they do or not depends on the extent and effectiveness of Remainer tactical voting.
But if the next GE comes AFTER Brexit - as I think it will, in 2020, after a Brexit deal has been passed - I give Labour under Corbyn little chance. I do not think there is appetite in this country for serious re-distributive economic reform. If that is the Labour offer, which shorn of the Brexit Ref2 angle it will be, I expect it to be turned down. Overall majority for Johnson and the Tories in such circumstances.
PM Johnson surely feels the same, hence why I am pretty sure that this - pass a Brexit deal followed by a GE in spring 2020 - is his Plan A.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
It’s just a different set of lightweights, non-entities and fools. Only further to the right and much more English nationalist.
Sounds great. What's the problem? Unless you're a lefty England hater.
I truly detest your vision of England. It revolts me. It also means you’re not capable of reading first sentences!
The first sentence was moot. Your vision of them being lightweights, non-entities and fools says more about your partisan politics than it does about how capable or not the cabinet is.
What is revolting?
Vision of England.
Is all the shared history really that good? Was the union of the British Empire in fact a model of an English Empire, Welsh, Irish, Scots subjects of the English rather than in a union as commonwealth of nations? Maybe a commonwealth of nations would have been a better approach from the very start, (the fall of James) so the English Empire wouldn’t be messily unravelling right now leaving us with something less good, more petty nationalism than a union that is strong common wealth of nations?
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Yes, that's a really illuminating chart. What we don't know is how much of that Lab/Lib vote is transfer-friendly either way. I think very few LDs will tactically vote Tory, but probably only half will go Labour even where they see Labour as the main local challenger. About 60% of Labour would go LibDem in the reverse case - it was higher, but resentment of Swinson's tactics has squeezed it somewhat IMO. Will many Tories vote LibDem in a LD-Lab marginal? Doubtful, and there are few such places.
So, in the interest of getting a change of government, Swinson should become less overtly anti-Labour and Corbyn should stress the referendum part of the policy.
Corbyn needs to talk about nothing else but the referendum part for next few weeks. At moment, Remainers don't believe him.
Even if he does we still won’t believe him
Well, I certainly won't. He has been LEXIT since the last Ice Age and he isn't someone who changes.
Titanic pressures at the top though with Abbott and McDonnell now sounding like seriously pro new referendum.
Labour are a Remain party. Their position is Ref2 (and thus Remain) but expressed in prosaic muted language so as to not alienate their Leavers any more than is necessary. It is not fudge. It makes perfect sense. And if we do get a pre-Brexit GE, I think they are in with a good chance of achieving a minority government with Corbyn as PM. Whether they do or not depends on the extent and effectiveness of Remainer tactical voting.
But if the next GE comes AFTER Brexit - as I think it will, in 2020, after a Brexit deal has been passed - I give Labour under Corbyn little chance. I do not think there is appetite in this country for serious re-distributive economic reform. If that is the Labour offer, which shorn of the Brexit Ref2 angle it will be, I expect it to be turned down. Overall majority for Johnson and the Tories in such circumstances.
PM Johnson surely feels the same, hence why I am pretty sure that this - pass a Brexit deal followed by a GE in spring 2020 - is his Plan A.
But hasn't Corbyn not committed to campaigning for Remain in a new referendum. He plans to put his own negotiated deal as the alternative.
Mr. Charles, got to admit, your Three Kingdoms comment made me think Wu, Wei, and Shu.
If Cao Cao were in charge of negotiations, they would've gone rather better.
I’m given to understand that the term “Civil War” in no longer the approved nomenclature.
Something to do with Scotland and Ireland being separate Kingdoms 🤔
I think it's the term English Civil War that's no longer approved, due to being ahistorically parochial.
The English civil war bits refers to specific parts of the overall conflict across the period, not the overall conflict itself.
That may be the case now, but I'm pretty sure when I first took a childish interest in history that it was a catch all term for the whole mess.
Well it must have changed in the last 30 years or so since the 10-20 year old books used when I was at uni 14 years ago mostly used such terms (british civil wars being more common). Recent in historical terms but not exactly overnight.
More than anything else it's just plain useful to help identify distinct elements, though theres definitely overlap.
I honestly haven't come across the term British Civil Wars, though I admit my recent reading on the subject is sketchy.
Looking at Wiki under English Civil War, it has 'Location Kingdoms of England, Ireland and Scotland. North American colonies', so not everyone is as rigorous as you!
The usual substitution of Britain/UK = England, BBC do it all the time
Mr. Charles, got to admit, your Three Kingdoms comment made me think Wu, Wei, and Shu.
If Cao Cao were in charge of negotiations, they would've gone rather better.
I’m given to understand that the term “Civil War” in no longer the approved nomenclature.
Something to do with Scotland and Ireland being separate Kingdoms 🤔
I think it's the term English Civil War that's no longer approved, due to being ahistorically parochial.
The English civil war bits refers to specific parts of the overall conflict across the period, not the overall conflict itself.
That may be the case now, but I'm pretty sure when I first took a childish interest in history that it was a catch all term for the whole mess.
Well it must have changed in the last 30 years or so since the 10-20 year old books used when I was at uni 14 years ago mostly used such terms (british civil wars being more common). Recent in historical terms but not exactly overnight.
More than anything else it's just plain useful to help identify distinct elements, though theres definitely overlap.
I honestly haven't come across the term British Civil Wars, though I admit my recent reading on the subject is sketchy.
Looking at Wiki under English Civil War, it has 'Location Kingdoms of England, Ireland and Scotland. North American colonies', so not everyone is as rigorous as you!
The usual substitution of Britain/UK = England, BBC do it all the time
One of the most pernicious ways in which this happens is due to asymmetric devolution. UK government ministers who are only responsible for England almost never actually say the word England. Instead policy announcements will use euphemisms like "this country".
Labour are a Remain party. Their position is Ref2 (and thus Remain) but expressed in prosaic muted language so as to not alienate their Leavers any more than is necessary. It is not fudge. It makes perfect sense. And if we do get a pre-Brexit GE, I think they are in with a good chance of achieving a minority government with Corbyn as PM. Whether they do or not depends on the extent and effectiveness of Remainer tactical voting.
But if the next GE comes AFTER Brexit - as I think it will, in 2020, after a Brexit deal has been passed - I give Labour under Corbyn little chance. I do not think there is appetite in this country for serious re-distributive economic reform. If that is the Labour offer, which shorn of the Brexit Ref2 angle it will be, I expect it to be turned down. Overall majority for Johnson and the Tories in such circumstances.
PM Johnson surely feels the same, hence why I am pretty sure that this - pass a Brexit deal followed by a GE in spring 2020 - is his Plan A.
Labour are a remain party?
On odd days of the week perhaps and only depending on who you talk to.
I think the Labour party should be applauded for still using a traditional conference location in Brighton.
There was something unpleasant and non-conservative about the Conservatives choosing to alternate their conferences between Birmingham and Manchester.
Why?
Given the scale of these events and the security needs an easily accessible big city is to be preferred.
Both Birmingham and Manchester make more sense than Brighton or Blackpool
I believe that coastal resorts were used because they had plenty of accommodation. Now places like Manchester and Birmingham have built the necessary infrastructure.
Yes - although I think conferences are bigger these days as well
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Yes, that's a really illuminating chart. What we don't know is how much of that Lab/Lib vote is transfer-friendly either way. I think very few LDs will tactically vote Tory, but probably only half will go Labour even where they see Labour as the main local challenger. About 60% of Labour would go LibDem in the reverse case - it was higher, but resentment of Swinson's tactics has squeezed it somewhat IMO. Will many Tories vote LibDem in a LD-Lab marginal? Doubtful, and there are few such places.
So, in the interest of getting a change of government, Swinson should become less overtly anti-Labour and Corbyn should stress the referendum part of the policy.
Corbyn needs to talk about nothing else but the referendum part for next few weeks. At moment, Remainers don't believe him.
Even if he does we still won’t believe him
Well, I certainly won't. He has been LEXIT since the last Ice Age and he isn't someone who changes.
Titanic pressures at the top though with Abbott and McDonnell now sounding like seriously pro new referendum.
They will say anything to get power.
Just look at the various statements made over the last 2 years.
If England are playing obviously you fly the cross of St George e.g. at football, rugby and cricket matches, when the UK is the team competing e.g. at the Olympics, then the Union Jack is the more appropriate flag to fly
Surprised the people who normally leap on someone using less instead of fewer [despite that being disputed] aren't pointing out it should be Union Flag instead of Union Jack [equally disputed].
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Yes, that's a really illuminating chart. What we don't know is how much of that Lab/Lib vote is transfer-friendly either way. I think very few LDs will tactically vote Tory, but probably only half will go Labour even where they see Labour as the main local challenger. About 60% of Labour would go LibDem in the reverse case - it was higher, but resentment of Swinson's tactics has squeezed it somewhat IMO. Will many Tories vote LibDem in a LD-Lab marginal? Doubtful, and there are few such places.
So, in the interest of getting a change of government, Swinson should become less overtly anti-Labour and Corbyn should stress the referendum part of the policy.
Corbyn needs to talk about nothing else but the referendum part for next few weeks. At moment, Remainers don't believe him.
Even if he does we still won’t believe him
Well, I certainly won't. He has been LEXIT since the last Ice Age and he isn't someone who changes.
Titanic pressures at the top though with Abbott and McDonnell now sounding like seriously pro new referendum.
You mean Abbott and Costello?
Thereby hangs the other problems if you decide to support corbyn you get Abbott Long Bailey et al not exactly an attractive image of competence although a pretty good fit with the current cabinet.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
It’s just a different set of lightweights, non-entities and fools. Only further to the right and much more English nationalist.
Sounds great. What's the problem? Unless you're a lefty England hater.
I truly detest your vision of England. It revolts me. It also means you’re not capable of reading first sentences!
The first sentence was moot. Your vision of them being lightweights, non-entities and fools says more about your partisan politics than it does about how capable or not the cabinet is.
What is revolting?
Vision of England.
Is all the shared history really that good? Was the union of the British Empire in fact a model of an English Empire, Welsh, Irish, Scots subjects of the English rather than in a union as commonwealth of nations? Maybe a commonwealth of nations would have been a better approach from the very start, (the fall of James) so the English Empire wouldn’t be messily unravelling right now leaving us with something less good, more petty nationalism than a union that is strong common wealth of nations?
None of the people who secretly hope Ireland will one day rejoin the UK ever seem to do any thought how to reform the UK into a membership organisation that anyone would want to join.
In the post-imperial Europe of the EU, does the UK union serve any purpose anymore? Why would Scotland not be better off as a full member state of the EU in its own right?
Such a troll.
Anyway Scot nats always tell us they want "Freeeedom" - yest strangely they willing to be subsumed into the EU.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
It’s just a different set of lightweights, non-entities and fools. Only further to the right and much more English nationalist.
Sounds great. What's the problem? Unless you're a lefty England hater.
I truly detest your vision of England. It revolts me. It also means you’re not capable of reading first sentences!
The first sentence was moot. Your vision of them being lightweights, non-entities and fools says more about your partisan politics than it does about how capable or not the cabinet is.
What is revolting?
Vision of England.
Is all the shared history really that good? Was the union of the British Empire in fact a model of an English Empire, Welsh, Irish, Scots subjects of the English rather than in a union as commonwealth of nations? Maybe a commonwealth of nations would have been a better approach from the very start, (the fall of James) so the English Empire wouldn’t be messily unravelling right now leaving us with something less good, more petty nationalism than a union that is strong common wealth of nations?
None of the people who secretly hope Ireland will one day rejoin the UK ever seem to do any thought how to reform the UK into a membership organisation that anyone would want to join.
In the post-imperial Europe of the EU, does the UK union serve any purpose anymore? Why would Scotland not be better off as a full member state of the EU in its own right?
Such a troll.
Anyway Scot nats always tell us they want "Freeeedom" - yest strangely they willing to be subsumed into the EU.
Why is that?
Because they don’t see pooled sovereignty as loss of freedom.
Labour are a Remain party. Their position is Ref2 (and thus Remain) but expressed in prosaic muted language so as to not alienate their Leavers any more than is necessary. It is not fudge. It makes perfect sense. And if we do get a pre-Brexit GE, I think they are in with a good chance of achieving a minority government with Corbyn as PM. Whether they do or not depends on the extent and effectiveness of Remainer tactical voting.
But if the next GE comes AFTER Brexit - as I think it will, in 2020, after a Brexit deal has been passed - I give Labour under Corbyn little chance. I do not think there is appetite in this country for serious re-distributive economic reform. If that is the Labour offer, which shorn of the Brexit Ref2 angle it will be, I expect it to be turned down. Overall majority for Johnson and the Tories in such circumstances.
PM Johnson surely feels the same, hence why I am pretty sure that this - pass a Brexit deal followed by a GE in spring 2020 - is his Plan A.
But hasn't Corbyn not committed to campaigning for Remain in a new referendum. He plans to put his own negotiated deal as the alternative.
Isn't the labour policy to negotiate a new deal for leaving which they will then put to the country and they may or may not support their own deal?
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
It’s just a different set of lightweights, non-entities and fools. Only further to the right and much more English nationalist.
Sounds great. What's the problem? Unless you're a lefty England hater.
I truly detest your vision of England. It revolts me. It also means you’re not capable of reading first sentences!
What is revolting?
Vision of England.
Is all the shared history really that good? Was the union of the British Empire in fact a model of an English Empire, Welsh, Irish, Scots subjects of the English rather than in a union as commonwealth of nations? Maybe a commonwealth of nations would have been a better approach from the very start, (the fall of James) so the English Empire wouldn’t be messily unravelling right now leaving us with something less good, more petty nationalism than a union that is strong common wealth of nations?
None of the people who secretly hope Ireland will one day rejoin the UK ever
Such a troll.
Anyway Scot nats always tell us they want "Freeeedom" - yest strangely they willing to be subsumed into the EU.
Why is that?
Nobody is subsumed into the EU and it does not take away any of your independence, it allows you into a trading block where there are some rules and you have a vote on those rules. Any normal country can leave it, with exception of xenophobic UK who think they are better than everyone else. EU does not take all your money and decide where to spend it like UK for example. Unfortunately I do not have all day to explain the differences to you. PS: Only English fools bemused by a Hollywood film seem to believe we all run about shouting "Freedom". Basing your opinions of Scotland on the fantasy film "Braveheart" says a lot about you.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
It’s just a different set of lightweights, non-entities and fools. Only further to the right and much more English nationalist.
Sounds great. What's the problem? Unless you're a lefty England hater.
I truly detest your vision of England. It revolts me. It also means you’re not capable of reading first sentences!
The first sentence was moot. Your vision of them being lightweights, non-entities and fools says more about your partisan politics than it does about how capable or not the cabinet is.
What is revolting?
Vision of England.
Is all the shared history really that good? Was the union of the British Empire in fact a model of an English Empire, Welsh, Irish, Scots subjects of the English rather than in a union as commonwealth of nations? Maybe a commonwealth of nations would have been a better approach from the very start, (the fall of James) so the English Empire wouldn’t be messily unravelling right now leaving us with something less good, more petty nationalism than a union that is strong common wealth of nations?
None of the people who secretly hope Ireland will one day rejoin the UK ever seem to do any thought how to reform the UK into a membership organisation that anyone would want to join.
In the post-imperial Europe of the EU, does the UK union serve any purpose anymore? Why would Scotland not be better off as a full member state of the EU in its own right?
Such a troll.
Anyway Scot nats always tell us they want "Freeeedom" - yest strangely they willing to be subsumed into the EU.
Why is that?
Because they don’t see pooled sovereignty as loss of freedom.
Nobody is subsumed into the EU and it does not take away any of your independence, it allows you into a trading block where there are some rules and you have a vote on those rules. Any normal country can leave it, with exception of xenophobic UK who think they are better than everyone else. EU does not take all your money and decide where to spend it like UK for example. Unfortunately I do not have all day to explain the differences to you. PS: Only English fools bemused by a Hollywood film seem to believe we all run about shouting "Freedom". Basing your opinions of Scotland on the fantasy film "Braveheart" says a lot about you.
Malcolm, this is another portion of balls from you, as you know fine well. I don't think you believe a single mealy mouthed word of it.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
It’s just a different set of lightweights, non-entities and fools. Only further to the right and much more English nationalist.
Sounds great. What's the problem? Unless you're a lefty England hater.
I truly detest your vision of England. It revolts me. It also means you’re not capable of reading first sentences!
Vision of England.
Is all the shared history really that good? Was the union of the British Empire in fact a model of an English Empire, Welsh, Irish, Scots subjects of the English rather than in a union as commonwealth of nations? Maybe a commonwealth of nations would have been a better approach from the very start, (the fall of James) so the English Empire wouldn’t be messily unravelling right now leaving us with something less good, more petty nationalism than a union that is strong common wealth of nations?
None of the people who secretly hope Ireland will one day rejoin the UK ever seem to do any thought how to reform the UK into a membership organisation that anyone would want to join.
In the post-imperial Europe of the EU, does the UK union serve any purpose anymore? Why would Scotland not be better off as a full member state of the EU in its own right?
Such a troll.
Anyway Scot nats always tell us they want "Freeeedom" - yest strangely they willing to be subsumed into the EU.
Why is that?
Because they don’t see pooled sovereignty as loss of freedom.
Except when it is pooled in the UK.
Hmmmmm. Put me down as not convinced.
There is no pooling in the UK, just look at current status, it is a dictatorship. Scotland voted for a second referendum , parliament majority and yet some balloon in Westminster says NO. Nothing pooled in the UK, it is a one way street.
Labour are a Remain party. Their position is Ref2 (and thus Remain) but expressed in prosaic muted language so as to not alienate their Leavers any more than is necessary. It is not fudge. It makes perfect sense. And if we do get a pre-Brexit GE, I think they are in with a good chance of achieving a minority government with Corbyn as PM. Whether they do or not depends on the extent and effectiveness of Remainer tactical voting.
But if the next GE comes AFTER Brexit - as I think it will, in 2020, after a Brexit deal has been passed - I give Labour under Corbyn little chance. I do not think there is appetite in this country for serious re-distributive economic reform. If that is the Labour offer, which shorn of the Brexit Ref2 angle it will be, I expect it to be turned down. Overall majority for Johnson and the Tories in such circumstances.
PM Johnson surely feels the same, hence why I am pretty sure that this - pass a Brexit deal followed by a GE in spring 2020 - is his Plan A.
But hasn't Corbyn not committed to campaigning for Remain in a new referendum. He plans to put his own negotiated deal as the alternative.
Isn't the labour policy to negotiate a new deal for leaving which they will then put to the country and they may or may not support their own deal?
Glad that's all clear then.
That's how I understand this week's position to be.
Nobody is subsumed into the EU and it does not take away any of your independence, it allows you into a trading block where there are some rules and you have a vote on those rules. Any normal country can leave it, with exception of xenophobic UK who think they are better than everyone else. EU does not take all your money and decide where to spend it like UK for example. Unfortunately I do not have all day to explain the differences to you. PS: Only English fools bemused by a Hollywood film seem to believe we all run about shouting "Freedom". Basing your opinions of Scotland on the fantasy film "Braveheart" says a lot about you.
Malcolm, this is another portion of balls from you, as you know fine well. I don't think you believe a single mealy mouthed word of it.
None of the people who secretly hope Ireland will one day rejoin the UK ever seem to do any thought how to reform the UK into a membership organisation that anyone would want to join.
In the post-imperial Europe of the EU, does the UK union serve any purpose anymore? Why would Scotland not be better off as a full member state of the EU in its own right?
Such a troll.
Anyway Scot nats always tell us they want "Freeeedom" - yest strangely they willing to be subsumed into the EU.
Why is that?
Because they don’t see pooled sovereignty as loss of freedom.
Except when it is pooled in the UK.
Hmmmmm. Put me down as not convinced.
In your nightmare vision of the EU superstate, will it involve the abolition of national parliaments like when the UK was formed?
There is no pooling in the UK, just look at current status, it is a dictatorship. Scotland voted for a second referendum , parliament majority and yet some balloon in Westminster says NO. Nothing pooled in the UK, it is a one way street.
Labour policy is not a fudge. People have got used to saying it because it was a fudge for a long, deeply ridiculous time, but it's not a fudge any more.
The policy is to renegotiate then have a referendum. This may be bullshit (renegotiation unicorns etc) but it's clear what it means. It's true that they're not being clear which side they would recommend voting for in the referendum, but that's not very important, and logically depends on what they've ended up negotiating.
Whether you can do a GoNAfaE doesn't depend on a change in Labour policy. There's no alternative Labour policy which, if they adopted it, would make a GoNAfaE more likely. There are two ways that Labour may prevent a GoNAfaE from happening when it otherwise would:
1) The leadership may refuse to accept a non-Corbyn option, which might otherwise be viable when Corbyn is not. This doesn't really turn on what the GoNAfaE would do, which is the easy part. (The clue's in the name.)
2) Lab-leave rebels may decline to back the GoNAfaE, or other anti-No-Deal measures. This becomes more likely not less if you tilt the party policy to be more anti-Leave, for example by advocating revoking without a referendum.
So I don't think anything in the short term turns on Labour policy, and I'd be surprised if Labour changed their policy, beyond making the leadership's shift from the last conference policy official.
Each of the separate bits of Labour's policy (if the Tories are in power; if they are in power) makes some sense on its own, I agree.
The problem is that, together, Labour has ended in the position of effectively being pro-Remain if the Tories are in power but pro-Leave if Labour wins power.
Explaining what logic there might be behind this is very difficult and to the public it presents a very confused message that doesn't appeal to either side.
Not so very different to Labour's position before the 1974 elections - reject the Heath terms - renegotiate - hold a Referendum.
Nobody is subsumed into the EU and it does not take away any of your independence, it allows you into a trading block where there are some rules and you have a vote on those rules. Any normal country can leave it, with exception of xenophobic UK who think they are better than everyone else. EU does not take all your money and decide where to spend it like UK for example. Unfortunately I do not have all day to explain the differences to you. PS: Only English fools bemused by a Hollywood film seem to believe we all run about shouting "Freedom". Basing your opinions of Scotland on the fantasy film "Braveheart" says a lot about you.
Malcolm, this is another portion of balls from you, as you know fine well. I don't think you believe a single mealy mouthed word of it.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
It’s just a different set of lightweights, non-entities and fools. Only further to the right and much more English nationalist.
Sounds great. What's the problem? Unless you're a lefty England hater.
I truly detest your vision of England. It revolts me. It also means you’re not capable of reading first sentences!
The first sentence was moot. Your vision of them being lightweights, non-entities and fools says more about your partisan politics than it does about how capable or not the cabinet is.
What is revolting?
Vision of England.
Is all the shared history really that good? Was the union of the British Empire in fact a model of an English Empire, Welsh, Irish, Scots subjects of the English rather than in a union as commonwealth of nations? Maybe a commonwealth of nations would have been a better approach from the very start, (the fall of James) so the English Empire wouldn’t be messily unravelling right now leaving us with something less good, more petty nationalism than a union that is strong common wealth of nations?
None of the people who secretly hope Ireland will one day rejoin the UK ever seem to do any thought how to reform the UK into a membership organisation that anyone would want to join.
In the post-imperial Europe of the EU, does the UK union serve any purpose anymore? Why would Scotland not be better off as a full member state of the EU in its own right?
Such a troll.
Anyway Scot nats always tell us they want "Freeeedom" - yest strangely they willing to be subsumed into the EU.
Why is that?
That's a killer point which I've never seen made before.
Diddies on the internet always tell us Nats want "Freeeedom". All it tells is that people who use the word "Freeeedom" are diddies.
On odd days of the week perhaps and only depending on who you talk to.
The policy is Ref2 and Ref2 means Remain.
Thus Labour are Remain. QED.
Of course the PARTY are split. But so what? That is just the way it is on this issue. There are members and supporters on both sides. Ditto with the Cons.
There is no pooling in the UK, just look at current status, it is a dictatorship. Scotland voted for a second referendum , parliament majority and yet some balloon in Westminster says NO. Nothing pooled in the UK, it is a one way street.
There is no pooling in the UK, just look at current status, it is a dictatorship. Scotland voted for a second referendum , parliament majority and yet some balloon in Westminster says NO. Nothing pooled in the UK, it is a one way street.
Scotland voted to be part of the UK.
The UK voted to leave.
QED Scotland leaves because of Scotland's votes.
If you [collectively] don't want to abide by UK decisions maybe you [collectively] should have voted to leave the UK when you had the choice.
I see this as a bit of a win win for Boris. If Labour go remain they fish in the same waters as the Lib Dems, just with a bit less credibility. They will lose some of their traditional support, probably to TBP rather than the Tories, and a swathe of seats will become vulnerable. They might even win back some tactical voters who were going to vote Lib Dem and help remove a Tory as well.
If they continue their current "policy" then they will continue to bleed loud mouthed supporters like AC to the Lib Dems. Either way the 50% of the country that cares and that wants to remain will be split. The 50% that cares and want to leave are split too of course but Boris will fancy his chances of a much less even split of that vote.
The interesting thing is how many are in the middle, people who stopped caring about Brexit months or even years ago because it is boring and confusing and they no longer believe a word that anyone says on the subject. My guess is that that number is (a) bigger than we think and (b) growing. How will they vote?
I agree with your last paragraph and have taken this view since before the 2017 election. Corbyn's electoral prospects depend on his ability to change the subject - as he managed to do in 2017. I sense a very receptive - and growing - audience to discuss other issues.
There is no pooling in the UK, just look at current status, it is a dictatorship. Scotland voted for a second referendum , parliament majority and yet some balloon in Westminster says NO. Nothing pooled in the UK, it is a one way street.
Back in London after my Fourth Scottish Expedition (phase 1). Added Ayr to Stranraer, Croy to Dundee via Perth, Perth to Aviemore, plus Strathspey Railway (Aviemore to Broomhill). Phase 2 to follow in a couple of weeks.
But hasn't Corbyn not committed to campaigning for Remain in a new referendum. He plans to put his own negotiated deal as the alternative.
Sure. Which makes sense. You cannot have Ref2 with just Remain on the ballot. You need an alternative.
As to which side (if any) he personally backs, I really do not think this matters much.
We are looking at a Referendum choice between (very) soft Brexit and Remain with almost all of Labour, LD, SNP, Green on one side, Remain, and on the other virtually nobody since Leavers will be unenthused to put it mildly.
That's a landslide for Remain. So much so that I fear it looks like a stitch up and therefore lacks legitimacy.
Will not be happening anyway. Next GE coming AFTER Brexit. Pity.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
Hitler's first cabinet was much more balanced.
What is the problem with the left and Hitler.
An utter nonsense and ridiculous comment
But on balance the left will tell you Mao was more good than bad.
I see this as a bit of a win win for Boris. If Labour go remain they fish in the same waters as the Lib Dems, just with a bit less credibility. They will lose some of their traditional support, probably to TBP rather than the Tories, and a swathe of seats will become vulnerable. They might even win back some tactical voters who were going to vote Lib Dem and help remove a Tory as well.
If they continue their current "policy" then they will continue to bleed loud mouthed supporters like AC to the Lib Dems. Either way the 50% of the country that cares and that wants to remain will be split. The 50% that cares and want to leave are split too of course but Boris will fancy his chances of a much less even split of that vote.
The interesting thing is how many are in the middle, people who stopped caring about Brexit months or even years ago because it is boring and confusing and they no longer believe a word that anyone says on the subject. My guess is that that number is (a) bigger than we think and (b) growing. How will they vote?
I agree with your last paragraph and have taken this view since before the 2017 election. Corbyn's electoral prospects depend on his ability to change the subject - as he managed to do in 2017. I sense a very receptive - and growing - audience to discuss other issues.
Anti semitism, the failure of Socialism and the lives it destroys for starters?
On odd days of the week perhaps and only depending on who you talk to.
The policy is Ref2 and Ref2 means Remain.
Thus Labour are Remain. QED.
Of course the PARTY are split. But so what? That is just the way it is on this issue. There are members and supporters on both sides. Ditto with the Cons.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
It’s just a different set of lightweights, non-entities and fools. Only further to the right and much more English nationalist.
Sounds great. What's the problem? Unless you're a lefty England hater.
I truly detest your vision of England. It revolts me. It also means you’re not capable of reading first sentences!
The first sentence was moot. Your vision of them being lightweights, non-entities and fools says more about your partisan politics than it does about how capable or not the cabinet is.
What is revolting?
Vision of England.
Is all the shared history really that good? Was the union of the British Empire in fact a model of an English Empire, Welsh, Irish, Scots subjects of the English rather th right now leaving us with something less good, more petty nationalism than a union that is strong common wealth of nations?
None of the people who secretly hope Ireland will one day rejoin the UK ever seem to do any thought how to reform the UK into a membership organisation that anyone would want to join.
In the post-imperial Europe of the EU, does the UK union serve any purpose anymore? Why would Scotland not be better off as a full member state of the EU in its own right?
Such a troll.
Anyway Scot nats always tell us they want "Freeeedom" - yest strangely they willing to be subsumed into the EU.
Why is that?
That's a killer point which I've never seen made before.
Diddies on the internet always tell us Nats want "Freeeedom". All it tells is that people who use the word "Freeeedom" are diddies.
what you actually mean is you can't square that particular circle can you.
Now your follow up is explain to us how us leaving the EU will be a disaster but Scotland leaving the UK will be a walk in the park.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
The official policy may still be something of a fudge but in the eyes of the public are Labour anything but clearly a remain party now? Corbyn may equivocate slightly but vast majority of its members and MPs go around telling people they are a remain party, so on practice the policy is irrelevant isnt it? Labour backbencher no. 98 or whomever is going to campaign for remain and resist any suggestion of a renegotiated deal even if it is policy. We can be confident of that because even members were getting mad at corbyn for sticking to policy earlier this year.
My guess is that Labour believes stop Johnson will win it votes come election time.
My own view is that any election will lead to a Parliament even more hung and useless than this one.
If that's possible to imagine.
Can it be even more hung? The Government has a working majority of one.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
It’s just a different set of lightweights, non-entities and fools. Only further to the right and much more English nationalist.
Sounds great. What's the problem? Unless you're a lefty England hater.
I truly detest your vision of England. It revolts me. It also means you’re not capable of reading first sentences!
The first sentence was moot. Your vision of them being lightweights, non-entities and fools says more about your partisan politics than it does about how capable or not the cabinet is.
What is revolting?
Vision of England.
Is all the shared history really that good? Was the union of the British Empire in fact a model of an English Empire, Welsh, Irish, Scots subjects of the English rather than in a union as commonwealth of nations? Maybe a commonwealth of nations would have been a better approach from the very start, (the fall of James) so the English Empire wouldn’t be messily unravelling right now leaving us with something less good, more petty nationalism than a union that is strong common wealth of nations?
None of the people who secretly hope Ireland will one day rejoin the UK ever seem to do any thought how to reform the UK into a membership organisation that anyone would want to join.
In the post-imperial Europe of the EU, does the UK union serve any purpose anymore? Why would Scotland not be better off as a full member state of the EU in its own right?
Such a troll.
Anyway Scot nats always tell us they want "Freeeedom" - yest strangely they willing to be subsumed into the EU.
Why is that?
Because they don’t see pooled sovereignty as loss of freedom.
There is a slight flaw in your argument, can you see it????
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Yes, that's a really illuminating chart. What we don't know is how much of that Lab/Lib vote is transfer-friendly either way. I think very few LDs will tactically vote Tory, but probably only half will go Labour even where they see Labour as the main local challenger. About 60% of Labour would go LibDem in the reverse case - it was higher, but resentment of Swinson's tactics has squeezed it somewhat IMO. Will many Tories vote LibDem in a LD-Lab marginal? Doubtful, and there are few such places.
So, in the interest of getting a change of government, Swinson should become less overtly anti-Labour and Corbyn should stress the referendum part of the policy.
In an election campaign I expect the vast majority of 2017 Labour voters who switched to the LDs and the Greens in the run up to the EU election to return to Labour.
The first sentence was moot. Your vision of them being lightweights, non-entities and fools says more about your partisan politics than it does about how capable or not the cabinet is.
What is revolting?
Vision of England.
Is all the shared history really that good? Was the union of the British Empire in fact a model of an English Empire, Welsh, Irish, Scots subjects of the English rather th right now leaving us with something less good, more petty nationalism than a union that is strong common wealth of nations?
None of the people who secretly hope Ireland will one day rejoin the UK ever seem to do any thought how to reform the UK into a membership organisation that anyone would want to join.
In the post-imperial Europe of the EU, does the UK union serve any purpose anymore? Why would Scotland not be better off as a full member state of the EU in its own right?
Such a troll.
Anyway Scot nats always tell us they want "Freeeedom" - yest strangely they willing to be subsumed into the EU.
Why is that?
That's a killer point which I've never seen made before.
Diddies on the internet always tell us Nats want "Freeeedom". All it tells is that people who use the word "Freeeedom" are diddies.
what you actually mean is you can't square that particular circle can you.
Now your follow up is explain to us how us leaving the EU will be a disaster but Scotland leaving the UK will be a walk in the park.
The UK isn’t a membership organisation that you can leave. Scottish independence is a transfer of sovereignty, which is conceptually totally different from Brexit in which there is no transfer of sovereignty.
The official policy may still be something of a fudge but in the eyes of the public are Labour anything but clearly a remain party now? Corbyn may equivocate slightly but vast majority of its members and MPs go around telling people they are a remain party, so on practice the policy is irrelevant isnt it? Labour backbencher no. 98 or whomever is going to campaign for remain and resist any suggestion of a renegotiated deal even if it is policy. We can be confident of that because even members were getting mad at corbyn for sticking to policy earlier this year.
My guess is that Labour believes stop Johnson will win it votes come election time.
My own view is that any election will lead to a Parliament even more hung and useless than this one.
If that's possible to imagine.
Can it be even more hung? The Government has a working majority of one.
But of course. You could have proportions which mean no one could cobble up a majority - it's no guarantee that agreement could be reached between the various parties.
I genuinely hope (forlornly) that we don't get a hung parliament next time. We need to get a full fat version of whatever party wins-be that Tory, Labour, Lib Dems, Brexit, Green, whatever. At least that way the country will have a direction to follow with a party that actually has a mandate to do what it campaigned for.
Any coalition which does not need DUP C&S is my least acceptable option. Then we can revert to a NI Poll to ask their wishes and enact. Two fingers to the DUP.
They are not for outright Revoke but are unequivocally for Ref2 which in practice almost certainly means Remain.
I think that will be good enough for most Remainers. It will not be good enough for those who are more anti Corbyn than anti Brexit - but nothing would be. Their priority is Corbyn gone.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
Hitler's first cabinet was much more balanced.
What is the problem with the left and Hitler.
An utter nonsense and ridiculous comment
Most of his first cabinet were non-Nazis - Von Papen, Von Neurath and Hugenberg being obvious examples.
The interesting non development, as it were, of Johnson's ascension is that he hasn't shifted the dial at all on that group if it exists in any great numbers. Con+BXP+UKIP vote share in the polls remain stuck at about 45% for at least a year I think. Johnson's pitch is entirely to Brexit Party supporters, while there is also fluidity amongst Remain parties:
Interesting that the LDs are now taking more of the Remainer vote than 2017 mainly from Labour with the Tories about the same but with the Leave vote the Tories are getting about the same vote as 2017 since Boris took over with Labour getting less, mainly because of the Brexit Party.
Yes, that's a really illuminating chart. What we don't know is how much of that Lab/Lib vote is transfer-friendly either way. I think very few LDs will tactically vote Tory, but probably only half will go Labour even where they see Labour as the main local challenger. About 60% of Labour would go LibDem in the reverse case - it was higher, but resentment of Swinson's tactics has squeezed it somewhat IMO. Will many Tories vote LibDem in a LD-Lab marginal? Doubtful, and there are few such places.
So, in the interest of getting a change of government, Swinson should become less overtly anti-Labour and Corbyn should stress the referendum part of the policy.
The key change since 2017 is fewer LDs will vote Labour in Tory Labour marginals even though most Labour voters will still vote LD in Tory LD marginals
Absolutely spot on. Totally agree with HY.
However is that going to remain the same all the way up to real voting day?
Hm. No one can know for sure can they?
Indeed - few of those voters would have voted Labour in February/March/April 2017
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
Hitler's first cabinet was much more balanced.
Between Nazis and non-Nazis? I should hope Hitler's was more balanced!
Hitler had some non-Nazis and some Nazis. Boris has zero Nazis and 100% non-Nazis.
So yes Hitler had more "balance" but I'm OK with that. I don't want a balance of Nazis in our cabinet thanks.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
Hitler's first cabinet was much more balanced.
Between Nazis and non-Nazis? I should hope Hitler's was more balanced!
Hitler had some non-Nazis and some Nazis. Boris has zero Nazis and 100% non-Nazis.
So yes Hitler had more "balance" but I'm OK with that. I don't want a balance of Nazis in our cabinet thanks.
Mr. Observer, the EU referendum result had a British electorate, not an English one.
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
I judge Johnson on the decisions he has taken. His cabinet tells you all you need to know.
Yes, its a good cabinet. Much better than May's.
No Grayling for starters.
Hitler's first cabinet was much more balanced.
This is why the country moves ever rightwards on immigration. Because the left keeps crying wolf.
"If even the tories are Nazi's, fuck me I'll start goose stepping to work".
Comments
More than anything else it's just plain useful to help identify distinct elements, though theres definitely overlap.
So, in the interest of getting a change of government, Swinson should become less overtly anti-Labour and Corbyn should stress the referendum part of the policy.
What is revolting?
There was something unpleasant and non-conservative about the Conservatives choosing to alternate their conferences between Birmingham and Manchester.
Not that I am saying this is state of play, but hypothetically If Boris was better liked than Corbyn, for example, but feared he would do more damage such as trash the economy, Boris would be thrashed in an election.
Clearly I don’t think the poll of leadership ratings matters that much to a GE, it’s the fear factor within there that is crucial. Because Most often it’s the party that is feared (and smeared) as being dangerous whilst leaders can be quite popular, but their popularity torpedoed by the fear of letting that party in.
However is that going to remain the same all the way up to real voting day?
Hm. No one can know for sure can they?
Tory Remainers are Remainers because they believe it's solidly in the British national interest to remain members to retain global influence.
Labour and LD Remainers are Remainers because they are ideological internationalists and believers in international governance, the more of which they think the better.
When the media talk about Remain you only ever hear about the latter which, coincidentally, tends to drive more Tory waverers into the arms of Leave.
Looking at Wiki under English Civil War, it has 'Location Kingdoms of England, Ireland and Scotland. North American colonies', so not everyone is as rigorous as you!
According to yougov, LDs prefer Corbyn to No Deal by 69% to 18%. That result, plus the 40% Lab share in 2017, makes me think there is at least plenty of potential for tactical voting next time.
Is all the shared history really that good? Was the union of the British Empire in fact a model of an English Empire, Welsh, Irish, Scots subjects of the English rather than in a union as commonwealth of nations? Maybe a commonwealth of nations would have been a better approach from the very start, (the fall of James) so the English Empire wouldn’t be messily unravelling right now leaving us with something less good, more petty nationalism than a union that is strong common wealth of nations?
Given the scale of these events and the security needs an easily accessible big city is to be preferred.
Both Birmingham and Manchester make more sense than Brighton or Blackpool
In the post-imperial Europe of the EU, does the UK union serve any purpose anymore? Why would Scotland not be better off as a full member state of the EU in its own right?
Titanic pressures at the top though with Abbott and McDonnell now sounding like seriously pro new referendum.
Beautifully quiet and sunny here. And delighted to see that the vine I planted a few years back is producing a lovely lot of grapes. The figs are maturing nicely too.
I mentioned in a recent thread header about the criminal justice system problems with our forensic system. More details here - https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/other/forensics-uk-britain-crisis-science-service - for anyone interested.
The PM’s announcements about extra police do nothing to address these issues. If anything they will make matters worse, by raising expectations which cannot be fulfilled.
There again “Raising expectations which cannot be fulfilled” might serve as a mission statement for our political class.
We are being robbed and conned.
That sounds deeply unlikely to me.
Perhaps its more the Conservatives now prefer their conferences to be in settings as similar to central London as they can find.
But if the next GE comes AFTER Brexit - as I think it will, in 2020, after a Brexit deal has been passed - I give Labour under Corbyn little chance. I do not think there is appetite in this country for serious re-distributive economic reform. If that is the Labour offer, which shorn of the Brexit Ref2 angle it will be, I expect it to be turned down. Overall majority for Johnson and the Tories in such circumstances.
PM Johnson surely feels the same, hence why I am pretty sure that this - pass a Brexit deal followed by a GE in spring 2020 - is his Plan A.
You mean Abbott and Costello?
Brighton and Bournemouth though seem to be pretty successful.
On odd days of the week perhaps and only depending on who you talk to.
Just look at the various statements made over the last 2 years.
What a political class we have.
https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-51st-absolute-state/
Anyway Scot nats always tell us they want "Freeeedom" - yest strangely they willing to be subsumed into the EU.
Why is that?
Glad that's all clear then.
EU does not take all your money and decide where to spend it like UK for example. Unfortunately I do not have all day to explain the differences to you.
PS: Only English fools bemused by a Hollywood film seem to believe we all run about shouting "Freedom". Basing your opinions of Scotland on the fantasy film "Braveheart" says a lot about you.
Hmmmmm. Put me down as not convinced.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-49457912
ROFL......
Diddies on the internet always tell us Nats want "Freeeedom". All it tells is that people who use the word "Freeeedom" are diddies.
"What shall we have for dinner today?", asked Mummy malc.
"Ooooh - haggis! Haggis haggis haggis!" said malc, in his normal determined way.
"Well dear, your two siblings are vegetarian, your daddy has an allergy to it and I don't like it. What else would you like instead?"
"WAAAAAAAAAAAAAH - I live in a DICTATORSHIP!!!!"
(to be continued.....)
Thus Labour are Remain. QED.
Of course the PARTY are split. But so what? That is just the way it is on this issue. There are members and supporters on both sides. Ditto with the Cons.
The UK voted to leave.
QED Scotland leaves because of Scotland's votes.
If you [collectively] don't want to abide by UK decisions maybe you [collectively] should have voted to leave the UK when you had the choice.
As to which side (if any) he personally backs, I really do not think this matters much.
We are looking at a Referendum choice between (very) soft Brexit and Remain with almost all of Labour, LD, SNP, Green on one side, Remain, and on the other virtually nobody since Leavers will be unenthused to put it mildly.
That's a landslide for Remain. So much so that I fear it looks like a stitch up and therefore lacks legitimacy.
Will not be happening anyway. Next GE coming AFTER Brexit. Pity.
An utter nonsense and ridiculous comment
And as for the old USSR......
What did I write that was inaccurate?
The "official" policy of the trots is a joke
Now your follow up is explain to us how us leaving the EU will be a disaster but Scotland leaving the UK will be a walk in the park.
I think that will be good enough for most Remainers. It will not be good enough for those who are more anti Corbyn than anti Brexit - but nothing would be. Their priority is Corbyn gone.
Hitler had some non-Nazis and some Nazis. Boris has zero Nazis and 100% non-Nazis.
So yes Hitler had more "balance" but I'm OK with that. I don't want a balance of Nazis in our cabinet thanks.
"If even the tories are Nazi's, fuck me I'll start goose stepping to work".