The Tories gaining seats from the SNP in Scotland. Hmmmm.
Though it has the SNP gaining Labour seats (I think it overestimates the LD gains from the Tories and underestimates SNP gains from the Tories)
On those Survation numbers, the Tories could not be confident of a majority. The need the YouGov ones. But the YouGov supplemental date much wise for them. It’s intriguing.
Either way Corbyn is screwed I think, either a Boris majority or Swinson Kingmaker only possible outcomes from YouGov and Survation and that almost certainly means Corbyn will not be PM either way
Yes, for as long as Corbyn is there Labour are buggered. Their only hope is holding onto seats in England and Wales as a result of tactical voting. It may help in some places, but not everywhere. I expect Labour to lose at least 30 seats at a minimum in E&W, plus 6 out of 7 in Scotland.
It would be interesting to see what happened if Labour was badly weakened in an election, but Lab+SNP+Lib Dem still equalled a majority. I wonder if the ensuing Labour minority Government would pursue a centre-left agenda, or go for full-fat socialism and dare the Lib Dems to vote it down and put the Tories back in?
The SNP would probably let Labour get away with anything short of gulags and killing fields if they were granted a second independence referendum, but the Libs could quickly find themselves in an impossible bind. Again.
Survation had the Cons 11% ahead at the start of the 2017 campaign. Doesn't look good for Johnson.
52% back a Deal minus the backstop, 52% back the Queen proroguing Parliament.
Opposition split down the middle with Swinson now overtaking Corbyn as best PM, looks very good for Johnson
There is going to be tactical voting on an epic scale so the Lib Dem / Labour split is irrelevant, it's their totals that matter. Also Labour vote will come up over any campaign and current don't knows will flood in just like in 2017.
There will be no deal without a backstop so irrelevant.
People think the Queen had to prorogue if the PM asks her to, they aren't condoning the act in the first place as we see by the fact only 39% think Johnson was right.
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
The youth vote for Labour, for Labour, has halved since 2017 and it aint coming back. Labour is going to be reduced to its inner City and university heartlands. Until you all grasp this fact there is no hope for Labour.
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
Even if the poll was correct (as I say the Tories were significantly further ahead with Survation at a roughly equivalent point last time) am I not wrong to say it would be the second worst Tory vote share of all time after 1997?
Maybe but the Tories would also win more seats than at any election in the last 27 years bar 2015, Labour would win fewer seats than at any time since 1983
So second lowest vote share for the Tories in history. That's what we're shooting for now. 'Historic'.
Survation had the Cons 11% ahead at the start of the 2017 campaign. Doesn't look good for Johnson.
52% back a Deal minus the backstop, 52% back the Queen proroguing Parliament.
Opposition split down the middle with Swinson now overtaking Corbyn as best PM, looks very good for Johnson
There is going to be tactical voting on an epic scale so the Lib Dem / Labour split is irrelevant, it's their totals that matter. Also Labour vote will come up over any campaign and current don't knows will flood in just like in 2017.
There will be no deal without a backstop so irrelevant.
People think the Queen had to prorogue if the PM asks her to, they aren't condoning the act in the first place as we see by the fact only 39% think Johnson was right.
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
The youth vote for Labour, for Labour, has halved since 2017 and it aint coming back. Labour is going to be reduced to its inner City and university heartlands. Until you all grasp this fact there is no hope for Labour.
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
And in 2017, even after the exit poll, Tory loyalists still believed Theresa May was heading for a majority.
Survation had just a 1% Tory lead on eve of poll 2017 compared to a 7% Tory lead tonight
It's not the eve of the election in case you hadn't noticed. At the start of the campaign the Tories were 11% ahead. They are significantly less ahead than that now and the campaign hasn't even started.
Boris is a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the dementia tax disaster.
Plus even in 2017 Labour was on 29% with Survation at the beginning of the campaign, they are on just 24% tonight with the same pollster
Survation had the Cons 11% ahead at the start of the 2017 campaign. Doesn't look good for Johnson.
52% back a Deal minus the backstop, 52% back the Queen proroguing Parliament.
Opposition split down the middle with Swinson now overtaking Corbyn as best PM, looks very good for Johnson
There is going to be tactical voting on an epic scale so the Lib Dem / Labour split is irrelevant, it's their totals that matter. Also Labour vote will come up over any campaign and current don't knows will flood in just like in 2017.
There will be no deal without a backstop so irrelevant.
People think the Queen had to prorogue if the PM asks her to, they aren't condoning the act in the first place as we see by the fact only 39% think Johnson was right.
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
The youth vote for Labour, for Labour, has halved since 2017 and it aint coming back. Labour is going to be reduced to its inner City and university heartlands. Until you all grasp this fact there is no hope for Labour.
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
Even if the poll was correct (as I say the Tories were significantly further ahead with Survation at a roughly equivalent point last time) am I not wrong to say it would be the second worst Tory vote share of all time after 1997?
Maybe but the Tories would also win more seats than at any election in the last 27 years bar 2015, Labour would win fewer seats than at any time since 1983
So second lowest vote share for the Tories in history. That's what we're shooting for now. 'Historic'.
In fairness to him the vote share doesnt matter so long as its sufficiently more than labour.
Tell you what lads, let’s put him in charge of the country (unelected).
"Psychotic" usually relates schizophrenia. I don't think Bad Al had schizophrenia as he clearly states his brother was schizophrenic and he was worried he had the same condition but did not. It is possible to have schizophrenia and depression, which is called schizo-effective disorder. It maybe that Bad Al made a mistake where it quotes him as saying he had a psychotic breakdown as the article repeatedly says depression. Some very gifted people have suffered psychotic breakdowns and I would not hold it against him. His attitude and arrogance is certainly something to hold against him but serious mental illness. No.
I am sympathetic to sufferers of mental illness, but don’t consider it to be holding it against someone who has admitted psychotic episode, nervous breakdowns and alcoholism when I say I don’t want them having as much of a say of when we bomb cities and how we run the country as Alastair Campbell did because of those issues
Alastair Campbell did not make the decisions, he did spin and advised on presentation. It was Blair who made the decision supported by cabinet and the H of C. Some cabinet ministers resigned over the issue. I think the iraq war wrong and the uk involvement shameful. We dont need to bring mental illness into the conduct of an unelected party hack.
The Tories gaining seats from the SNP in Scotland. Hmmmm.
Though it has the SNP gaining Labour seats (I think it overestimates the LD gains from the Tories and underestimates SNP gains from the Tories)
On those Survation numbers, the Tories could not be confident of a majority. The need the YouGov ones. But the YouGov supplemental date much wise for them. It’s intriguing.
Either way Corbyn is screwed I think, either a Boris majority or Swinson Kingmaker only possible outcomes from YouGov and Survation and that almost certainly means Corbyn will not be PM either way
Yes, for as long as Corbyn is there Labour are buggered. Their only hope is holding onto seats in England and Wales as a result of tactical voting. It may help in some places, but not everywhere. I expect Labour to lose at least 30 seats at a minimum in E&W, plus 6 out of 7 in Scotland.
It would be interesting to see what happened if Labour was badly weakened in an election, but Lab+SNP+Lib Dem still equalled a majority. I wonder if the ensuing Labour minority Government would pursue a centre-left agenda, or go for full-fat socialism and dare the Lib Dems to vote it down and put the Tories back in?
The SNP would probably let Labour get away with anything short of gulags and killing fields if they were granted a second independence referendum, but the Libs could quickly find themselves in an impossible bind. Again.
Most likely if the Tories were largest party (and more than Labour and SNP combined) it would be a Tory minority government again with the LDs abstaining
There is going to be tactical voting on an epic scale so the Lib Dem / Labour split is irrelevant, it's their totals that matter. Also Labour vote will come up over any campaign and current don't knows will flood in just like in 2017.
There will be no deal without a backstop so irrelevant.
People think the Queen had to prorogue if the PM asks her to, they aren't condoning the act in the first place as we see by the fact only 39% think Johnson was right.
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
And in 2017, even after the exit poll, Tory loyalists still believed Theresa May was heading for a majority.
Survation had just a 1% Tory lead on eve of poll 2017 compared to a 7% Tory lead tonight
It's not the eve of the election in case you hadn't noticed. At the start of the campaign the Tories were 11% ahead. They are significantly less ahead than that now and the campaign hasn't even started.
Boris is a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the dementia tax disaster.
Plus even in 2017 Labour was on 29% with Survation at the beginning of the campaign, they are on just 24% tonight with the same pollster
It's a total myth. May was crap. But the Tory campaign wasn't the issue, they got one of the highest vote shares in modern times (unlike Boris who is headed for one of the lowest Tory vote shares in history). It was the Labour surge that did for them. Don't understand how this self-serving myth gets bandied around the Westminster bubble so much, but I guess the clue is in the phrase 'self-serving'.
The Tories were on 40% with Survation, now they are on 31%.
There is going to be tactical voting on an epic scale so the Lib Dem / Labour split is irrelevant, it's their totals that matter. Also Labour vote will come up over any campaign and current don't knows will flood in just like in 2017.
There will be no deal without a backstop so irrelevant.
People think the Queen had to prorogue if the PM asks her to, they aren't condoning the act in the first place as we see by the fact only 39% think Johnson was right.
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
And in 2017, even after the exit poll, Tory loyalists still believed Theresa May was heading for a majority.
Survation had just a 1% Tory lead on eve of poll 2017 compared to a 7% Tory lead tonight
It's not the eve of the election in case you hadn't noticed. At the start of the campaign the Tories were 11% ahead. They are significantly less ahead than that now and the campaign hasn't even started.
Boris is a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the dementia tax disaster.
Plus even in 2017 Labour was on 29% with Survation at the beginning of the campaign, they are on just 24% tonight with the same pollster
It's a total myth. May was crap. But the Tory campaign wasn't the issue, they got one of the highest vote shares in modern times (unlike Boris who is headed for one of the lowest Tory vote shares in history). It was the Labour surge that did for them. Don't understand how this self-serving myth gets bandied around the Westminster bubble so much, but I guess the clue is in the phrase 'self-serving'.
The Tories were on 40% with Survation, now they are on 31%.
Utter rubbish, the biggest move over the campaign was after May's dementia tax announcement disaster. Minus that it would have been a small Tory majority
I'm very interested to see the red and yellow interactions this time. Vote yellow get blue would be the standard cry but the reds still need some of their supporters to back the yellows to take seats from the blues.
How closely can they align without undermining each other by aiding the Tories?
There's no room at all for an electoral alliance: Corbyn wouldn't be interested and association with Labour is toxic to the LibDems twice over, because of Labour's muddy positioning on Remain, and rather a lot of potential support amongst the small-c conservative middle classes who would rather that their homes weren't expropriated and their savings hyperinflated away to nothing under a Marxist government.
The Lib Dems can't be seen to consort with or prop up Corbyn or the Tories, because to get chummy with either would alienate the opposing half of their own support. So they will presumably have to run an election campaign in which they imagine themselves in a fantasy world in which they can actually win it and form a majority Government. In the meantime, the main question the media will be putting to them (and which will also be foremost in the minds of many of their potential voters) will be about the choices they'd make in a hung Parliament.
Either likely response - a flat refusal to answer, or an insistence that they won't get into bed with anyone under any circumstances - is likely to be met with scorn. As a consequence, they may very well not prosper to the extent that the polls suggest.
Survation had the Cons 11% ahead at the start of the 2017 campaign. Doesn't look good for Johnson.
52% back a Deal minus the backstop, 52% back the Queen proroguing Parliament.
Opposition split down the middle with Swinson now overtaking Corbyn as best PM, looks very good for Johnson
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
The youth vote for Labour, for Labour, has halved since 2017 and it aint coming back. Labour is going to be reduced to its inner City and university heartlands. Until you all grasp this fact there is no hope for Labour.
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
Even if the poll was correct (as I say the Tories were significantly further ahead with Survation at a roughly equivalent point last time) am I not wrong to say it would be the second worst Tory vote share of all time after 1997?
Maybe but the Tories would also win more seats than at any election in the last 27 years bar 2015, Labour would win fewer seats than at any time since 1983
So second lowest vote share for the Tories in history. That's what we're shooting for now. 'Historic'.
In fairness to him the vote share doesnt matter so long as its sufficiently more than labour.
No, I'm just taking aim at HYFUD's comically ludicrous rhetoric about 'historic fourth terms' and 'lowest labour vote share for 100 years' when the Tories have very little to crow about in reality. Guy has all the gravitas of Comical Ali. It's almost like he thinks if he repeats mad nonsense enough that he starts to believe it himself everyone else will magically start believing it and the fairies will make it come true.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
And in 2017, even after the exit poll, Tory loyalists still believed Theresa May was heading for a majority.
Survation had just a 1% Tory lead on eve of poll 2017 compared to a 7% Tory lead tonight
It's not the eve of the elecn't even started.
Boris is a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the dementia tax disaster.
Plus even in 2017 Labour was on 29% with Survation at the beginning of the campaign, they are on just 24% tonight with the same pollster
It's a total myth. May was crap. But the Tory campaign wasn't the issue, they got one of the highest vote shares in modern times (unlike Boris who is headed for one of the lowest Tory vote shares in history). It was the Labour surge that did for them. Don't understand how this self-serving myth gets bandied around the Westminster bubble so much, but I guess the clue is in the phrase 'self-serving'.
The Tories were on 40% with Survation, now they are on 31%.
The Tories did not have the Brexit Party to squeeze in 2017, however Labour still had the LDs but Boris can now likely squeeze the former more than Corbyn can squeeze the latter
I'm very interested to see the red and yellow interactions this time. Vote yellow get blue would be the standard cry but the reds still need some of their supporters to back the yellows to take seats from the blues.
How closely can they align without undermining each other by aiding the Tories?
There's no room at all for an electoral alliance: Corbyn wouldn't be interested and association with Labour is toxic to the LibDems twice over, because of Labour's muddy positioning on Remain, and rather a lot of potential support amongst the small-c conservative middle classes who would rather that their homes weren't expropriated and their savings hyperinflated away to nothing under a Marxist government.
The Lib Dems can't be seen to consort with or prop up Corbyn or the Tories, because to get chummy with either would alienate the opposing half of their own support. So they will presumably have to run an election campaign in which they imagine themselves in a fantasy world in which they can actually win it and form a majority Government. In the meantime, the main question the media will be putting to them (and which will also be foremost in the minds of many of their potential voters) will be about the choices they'd make in a hung Parliament.
Either likely response - a flat refusal to answer, or an insistence that they won't get into bed with anyone under any circumstances - is likely to be met with scorn. As a consequence, they may very well not prosper to the extent that the polls suggest.
The labour cannot win here leaflets may need to get creative, since theres lots of seats, like mine, where the LDs have not been second since 2010 and labour eclipsed them in 2017.
There is going to be tactical voting on an epic scale so the Lib Dem / Labour split
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
And in 2017, even after the exit poll, Tory loyalists still believed Theresa May was heading for a majority.
Survation had just a 1% Tory lead on eve of poll 2017 compared to a 7% Tory lead tonight
It's not the eve of the election in case you hadn't noticed. At the start of the campaign the Tories were 11% ahead. They are significantly less ahead than that now and the campaign hasn't even started.
Boris is a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the dementia tax disaster.
Plus even in 2017 Labour was on 29% with Survation at the beginning of the campaign, they are on just 24% tonight with the same pollster
It's a total myth. May was crap. But the Tory campaign wasn't the issue, they got one of the highest vote shares in modern times (unlike Boris who is headed for one of the lowest Tory vote shares in history). It was the Labour surge that did for them. Don't understand how this self-serving myth gets bandied around the Westminster bubble so much, but I guess the clue is in the phrase 'self-serving'.
The Tories were on 40% with Survation, now they are on 31%.
Utter rubbish, the biggest move over the campaign was after May's dementia tax announcement disaster. Minus that it would have been a small Tory majority
May got one of the highest votes in modern times, Johnson is headed for the second lowest Tory vote share in history. It wasn't about the campaign (well it was about the Labour campaign.)
I'm very interested to see the red and yellow interactions this time. Vote yellow get blue would be the standard cry but the reds still need some of their supporters to back the yellows to take seats from the blues.
How closely can they align without undermining each other by aiding the Tories?
There's no room at all for an electoral alliance: Corbyn wouldn't be interested and association with Labour is toxic to the LibDems twice over, because of Labour's muddy positioning on Remain, and rather a lot of potential support amongst the small-c conservative middle classes who would rather that their homes weren't expropriated and their savings hyperinflated away to nothing under a Marxist government.
The Lib Dems can't be seen to consort with or prop up Corbyn or the Tories, because to get chummy with either would alienate the opposing half of their own support. So they will presumably have to run an election campaign in which they imagine themselves in a fantasy world in which they can actually win it and form a majority Government. In the meantime, the main question the media will be putting to them (and which will also be foremost in the minds of many of their potential voters) will be about the choices they'd make in a hung Parliament.
Either likely response - a flat refusal to answer, or an insistence that they won't get into bed with anyone under any circumstances - is likely to be met with scorn. As a consequence, they may very well not prosper to the extent that the polls suggest.
The labour cannot win here leaflets may need to get creative, since theres lots of seats, like mine, where the LDs have not been second since 2010 and labour eclipsed them in 2017.
I think a lot depends on how Swinson does in the debates, assuming Corbyn wants them this time. Boris will have little choice.
I'm very interested to see the red and yellow interactions this time. Vote yellow get blue would be the standard cry but the reds still need some of their supporters to back the yellows to take seats from the blues.
How closely can they align without undermining each other by aiding the Tories?
There's no room at all for an electoral alliance: Corbyn wouldn't be interested and association with Labour is toxic to the LibDems twice over, because of Labour's muddy positioning on Remain, and rather a lot of potential support amongst the small-c conservative middle classes who would rather that their homes weren't expropriated and their savings hyperinflated away to nothing under a Marxist government.
The Lib Dems can't be seen to consort with or prop up Corbyn or the Tories, because to get chummy with either would alienate the opposing half of their own support. So they will presumably have to run an election campaign in which they imagine themselves in a fantasy world in which they can actually win it and form a majority Government. In the meantime, the main question the media will be putting to them (and which will also be foremost in the minds of many of their potential voters) will be about the choices they'd make in a hung Parliament.
Either likely response - a flat refusal to answer, or an insistence that they won't get into bed with anyone under any circumstances - is likely to be met with scorn. As a consequence, they may very well not prosper to the extent that the polls suggest.
The labour cannot win here leaflets may need to get creative, since theres lots of seats, like mine, where the LDs have not been second since 2010 and labour eclipsed them in 2017.
I think a lot depends on how Swinson does in the debates, assuming Corbyn wants them this time. Boris will have little choice.
Arlene Foster will have more rights to be in the debates than Swinson. Certainly Sturgeon.
I wonder if Survation gave Farage as a choice. 45% is equal to Tory and BXP share. So no surprise there.
Yes, just a split opposition. Doesn't tell us much when it comes to the reality of tactical voting. It was commissioned by the Mail so no surprise the thing is full of dodgy decisions like that.
The labour cannot win here leaflets may need to get creative, since theres lots of seats, like mine, where the LDs have not been second since 2010 and labour eclipsed them in 2017.
Indeed. Even if the Lib Dems, along with the Greens, could forge some kind of Remain alliance with Labour, it would be overwhelmingly to Labour's advantage: the number of seats where the Lib Dems are in second place and reasonably close to unseating a Tory are very much smaller that the number of Lab-Con marginals in which vote lending by minor party backers might prove vital in helping Labour to win.
Then, beyond that, we have to consider (a) how many Lib Dem or potential Lib Dem backers would trust Jeremy Corbyn to give them what they want, over Brexit or anything else, and (b) the extent to which the Lib Dem leadership would want to risk creating a scenario in which they would not only place Jeremy Corbyn into office, but perhaps also give him an overall majority (or a result close enough to one that he could govern with the backing of the SNP alone.) We know that the Lib Dems do not view the prospect of Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister with equanimity, and if they hadn't the numbers to have real influence over him it would be so much the worse for them.
But I don't think it will come to that anyway. There's no history of which I'm aware of Labour agreeing not to field candidates in significant numbers of seats as part of an electoral pact under any leader, let alone one such as they presently have.
There is going to be tactical voting on an epic scale so the Lib Dem / Labour split
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
And in 2017, even after the exit poll, Tory loyalists still believed Theresa May was heading for a majority.
Survation had just a 1% Tory lead on eve of poll 2017 compared to a 7% Tory lead tonight
It's not the eve of the election in case you hadn't noticed. At the start of the campaign the Tories were 11% ahead. They are significantly less ahead than that now and the campaign hasn't even started.
Boris is a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the dementia tax disaster.
Plus even in 2017 Labour was on 29% with Survation at the beginning of the campaign, they are on just 24% tonight with the same pollster
It's a total myth. May was crap. But the Tory campaign wasn't the issue, they got one of the highest vote shares in modern times (unlike Boris who is headed for one of the lowest Tory vote shares in history). It was the Labour surge that did for them. Don't understand how this self-serving myth gets bandied around the Westminster bubble so much, but I guess the clue is in the phrase 'self-serving'.
The Tories were on 40% with Survation, now they are on 31%.
Utter rubbish, the biggest move over the campaign was after May's dementia tax announcement disaster. Minus that it would have been a small Tory majority
May got one of the highest votes in modern times, Johnson is headed for the second lowest Tory vote share in history. It wasn't about the campaign (well it was about the Labour campaign.)
It was about the dementia tax mainly.
The last Survation before the Tory manifesto launch and dementia tax announcement on 18th May 2017 had it Tories 48%, Labour 30%.
The next Survation had it Tories 43% Labour 34%. That was the biggest swing of the campaign with the rest done by squeezing other parties.
The labour cannot win here leaflets may need to get creative, since theres lots of seats, like mine, where the LDs have not been second since 2010 and labour eclipsed them in 2017.
Indeed. Even if the Lib Dems, along with the Greens, could forge some kind of Remain alliance with Labour, it would be overwhelmingly to Labour's advantage: the number of seats where the Lib Dems are in second place and reasonably close to unseating a Tory are very much smaller that the number of Lab-Con marginals in which vote lending by minor party backers might prove vital in helping Labour to win.
Then, beyond that, we have to consider (a) how many Lib Dem or potential Lib Dem backers would trust Jeremy Corbyn to give them what they want, over Brexit or anything else, and (b) the extent to which the Lib Dem leadership would want to risk creating a scenario in which they would not only place Jeremy Corbyn into office, but perhaps also give him an overall majority (or a result close enough to one that he could govern with the backing of the SNP alone.) We know that the Lib Dems do not view the prospect of Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister with equanimity, and if they hadn't the numbers to have real influence over him it would be so much the worse for them.
But I don't think it will come to that anyway. There's no history of which I'm aware of Labour agreeing not to field candidates in significant numbers of seats as part of an electoral pact under any leader, let alone one such as they presently have.
There will be no official pact. But plenty of tacit soft-pedalling and a lot of effort to make it known who the main anti-hard-right candidate is in any given seat.
Hmmm, but I was told Boris made a huge mistake by suspending Parliament.
No deal, here we come.
You do realise Johnson really desperately doesn't want no deal because it would see him go down as one of the worst Prime Ministers in history, don't you?
Survation had the Cons 11% ahead at the start of the 2017 campaign. Doesn't look good for Johnson.
52% back a Deal minus the backstop, 52% back the Queen proroguing Parliament.
Opposition split down the middle with Swinson now overtaking Corbyn as best PM, looks very good for Johnson
There is going to be tactical voting on an epic scale so the Lib Dem / Labour split is irrelevant, it's their totals that matter. Also Labour vote will come up over any campaign and current don't knows will flood in just like in 2017.
There will be no deal without a backstop so irrelevant.
People think the Queen had to prorogue if the PM asks her to, they aren't condoning the act in the first place as we see by the fact only 39% think Johnson was right.
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
The youth vote for Labour, for Labour, has halved since 2017 and it aint coming back. Labour is going to be reduced to its inner City and university heartlands. Until you all grasp this fact there is no hope for Labour.
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
And in 2017, even after the exit poll, Tory loyalists still believed Theresa May was heading for a majority.
Survation had just a 1% Tory lead on eve of poll 2017 compared to a 7% Tory lead tonight
It's not the eve of the election in case you hadn't noticed. At the start of the campaign the Tories were 11% ahead. They are significantly less ahead than that now and the campaign hasn't even started.
Boris is a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the dementia tax disaster.
Plus even in 2017 Labour was on 29% with Survation at the beginning of the campaign, they are on just 24% tonight with the same pollster
Do you ever stop to think how laughably wrong the drivel you've been spouting here has been?
The utter tripe about a Northern Ireland referendum followed by a renegotiation of the Withdrawal Agreement?
Everyone could see the whole thing was sheer fantasy, but you kept spouting it regardless, just as you keep spouting your new collection of drivel.
More fool anyone who wastes a moment on your nonsense. More fool me for even bothering to point it out.
From a LD perspective it's irritating how they keep getting within one or two points of Labour without actually overtaking them, with the exception of a couple of polls a few weeks ago.
The Tories gaining seats from the SNP in Scotland. Hmmmm.
Though it has the SNP gaining Labour seats (I think it overestimates the LD gains from the Tories and underestimates SNP gains from the Tories)
On those Survation numbers, the Tories could not be confident of a majority. The need the YouGov ones. But the YouGov supplemental date much wise for them. It’s intriguing.
Either way Corbyn is screwed I think, either a Boris majority or Swinson Kingmaker only possible outcomes from YouGov and Survation and that almost certainly means Corbyn will not be PM either way
Yes, for as long as Corbyn is there Labour are buggered. Their only hope is holding onto seats in England and Wales as a result of tactical voting. It may help in some places, but not everywhere. I expect Labour to lose at least 30 seats at a minimum in E&W, plus 6 out of 7 in Scotland.
It would be interesting to see what happened if Labour was badly weakened in an election, but Lab+SNP+Lib Dem still equalled a majority. I wonder if the ensuing Labour minority Government would pursue a centre-left agenda, or go for full-fat socialism and dare the Lib Dems to vote it down and put the Tories back in?
The SNP would probably let Labour get away with anything short of gulags and killing fields if they were granted a second independence referendum, but the Libs could quickly find themselves in an impossible bind. Again.
The hard left manifesto last time was so hard left that large chunks of the domestic policy is now Tory policy. In fact, Boris is promising spending that would make Red Ed blush.
52% back a Deal minus the backstop, 52% back the Queen proroguing Parliament.
Opposition split down the middle with Swinson now overtaking Corbyn as best PM, looks very good for Johnson
There is going to be tactical voting on an epic scale so the Lib Dem / Labour split is irrelevant, it's their totals that matter. Also Labour vote will come up over any campaign and current don't knows will flood in just like in 2017.
There will be no deal without a backstop so irrelevant.
People think the Queen had to prorogue if the PM asks her to, they aren't condoning the act in the first place as we see by the fact only 39% think Johnson was right.
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
The youth vote for Labour, for Labour, has halved since 2017 and it aint coming back. Labour is going to be reduced to its inner City and university heartlands. Until you all grasp this fact there is no hope for Labour.
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
And in 2017, even after the exit poll, Tory loyalists still believed Theresa May was heading for a majority.
Survation had just a 1% Tory lead on eve of poll 2017 compared to a 7% Tory lead tonight
It's not the eve of thehasn't even started.
Boris is a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the dementia tax disaster.
Plus even in 2017 Labour was on 29% with Survation at the beginning of the campaign, they are on just 24% tonight with the same pollster
Do you ever stop to think how laughably wrong the drivel you've been spouting here has been?
The utter tripe about a Northern Ireland referendum followed by a renegotiation of the Withdrawal Agreement?
Everyone could see the whole thing was sheer fantasy, but you kept spouting it regardless, just as you keep spouting your new collection of drivel.
More fool anyone who wastes a moment on your nonsense. More fool me for even bothering to point it out.
I seem to remember I was also one of the only ones on here who said Boris would be next PM and Boris would prorogue Parliament if necessary.
However I could not give a toss what you think anyway so will keep posting regardless and if it annoys you all the better!
There is going to be tactical voting on an epic scale so the Lib Dem / Labour split
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
And in 2017, even after the exit poll, Tory loyalists still believed Theresa May was heading for a majority.
Survation had just a 1% Tory lead on eve of poll 2017 compared to a 7% Tory lead tonight
Boris is a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the dementia tax disaster.
Plus even in 2017 Labour was on 29% with Survation at the beginning of the campaign, they are on just 24% tonight with the same pollster
I
The Tories were on 40% with Survation, now they are on 31%.
Utter rubbish, the biggest move over the campaign was after May's dementia tax announcement disaster. Minus that it would have been a small Tory majority
May got one of the highest votes in modern times, Johnson is headed for the second lowest Tory vote share in history. It wasn't about the campaign (well it was about the Labour campaign.)
It was about the dementia tax mainly.
The last Survation before the Tory manifesto launch and dementia tax announcement on 18th May 2017 had it Tories 48%, Labour 30%.
The next Survation had it Tories 43% Labour 34%. That was the biggest swing of the campaign with the rest done by squeezing other parties.
The Labour manifesto was launched in that period between Survations too. If you mean was the Labour manifesto better than the Tory manifesto, then, yes, I agree with you. (And you can't just handwave away the fact that the GB Labour vote increased by another 7% after that, whereas the Tory vote barely changed).
Hmmm, but I was told Boris made a huge mistake by suspending Parliament.
No deal, here we come.
You do realise Johnson really desperately doesn't want no deal because it would see him go down as one of the worst Prime Ministers in history, don't you?
There is going to be tactical voting on an epic scale so the Lib Dem / Labour split
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
And in 2017, even after the exit poll, Tory loyalists still believed Theresa May was heading for a majority.
Survation had just a 1% Tory lead on eve of poll 2017 compared to a 7% Tory lead tonight
Boris is a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the dementia tax disaster.
Plus even in 2017 Labour was on 29% with Survation at the beginning of the campaign, they are on just 24% tonight with the same pollster
I
The Tories were on 40% with Survation, now they are on 31%.
Utter rubbish, the biggest move over the campaign was after May's dementia tax announcement disaster. Minus that it would have been a small Tory majority
May got one of thmpaign.)
It was about the dementia tax mainly.
The last Survation before the Tory manifesto launch and dementia tax announcement on 18th May 2017 had it Tories 48%, Labour 30%.
The next Survation had it Tories 43% Labour 34%. That was the biggest swing of the campaign with the rest done by squeezing other parties.
The Labour manifesto was launched in that period between Survations too. If you mean was the Labour manifesto better than the Tory manifesto, then, yes, I agree with you. (And you can't just handwave away the fact that the GB Labour vote increased by another 7% after that, whereas the Tory vote barely changed).
I can point out that the Tories now have the Brexit Party to squeeze too which they did not in 2017, whereas in 2017 Labour had the LD and Green vote to squeeze except now LD voters are far less sympathetic to Corbyn than they were then
The labour cannot win here leaflets may need to get creative, since theres lots of seats, like mine, where the LDs have not been second since 2010 and labour eclipsed them in 2017.
Indeed. Even if the Lib Dems, along with the Greens, could forge some kind of Remain alliance with Labour, it would be overwhelmingly to Labour's advantage: the number of seats where the Lib Dems are in second place and reasonably close to unseating a Tory are very much smaller that the number of Lab-Con marginals in which vote lending by minor party backers might prove vital in helping Labour to win.
Then, beyond that, we have to consider (a) how many Lib Dem or potential Lib Dem backers would trust Jeremy Corbyn to give them what they want, over Brexit or anything else, and (b) the extent to which the Lib Dem leadership would want to risk creating a scenario in which they would not only place Jeremy Corbyn into office, but perhaps also give him an overall majority (or a result close enough to one that he could govern with the backing of the SNP alone.) We know that the Lib Dems do not view the prospect of Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister with equanimity, and if they hadn't the numbers to have real influence over him it would be so much the worse for them.
But I don't think it will come to that anyway. There's no history of which I'm aware of Labour agreeing not to field candidates in significant numbers of seats as part of an electoral pact under any leader, let alone one such as they presently have.
There will be no official pact. But plenty of tacit soft-pedalling and a lot of effort to make it known who the main anti-hard-right candidate is in any given seat.
And people tend to be pretty well informed these days. They mostly do not require leading by the nose.
Survation had the Cons 11% ahead at the start of the 2017 campaign. Doesn't look good for Johnson.
52% back a Deal minus the backstop, 52% back the Queen proroguing Parliament.
Opposition split down the middle with Swinson now overtaking Corbyn as best PM, looks very good for Johnson
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
The youth vote for Labour, for Labour, has halved since 2017 and it aint coming back. Labour is going to be reduced to its inner City and university heartlands. Until you all grasp this fact there is no hope for Labour.
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
And in 2017, even after the exit poll, Tory loyalists still believed Theresa May was heading for a majority.
Survation had just a 1% Tory lead on eve of poll 2017 compared to a 7% Tory lead tonight
It's not the eve of the election in case you hadn't noticed. At the start of the campaign the Tories were 11% ahead. They are significantly less ahead than that now and the campaign hasn't even started.
Boris is a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the dementia tax disaster.
Plus even in 2017 Labour was on 29% with Survation at the beginning of the campaign, they are on just 24% tonight with the same pollster
Do you ever stop to think how laughably wrong the drivel you've been spouting here has been?
The utter tripe about a Northern Ireland referendum followed by a renegotiation of the Withdrawal Agreement?
Everyone could see the whole thing was sheer fantasy, but you kept spouting it regardless, just as you keep spouting your new collection of drivel.
More fool anyone who wastes a moment on your nonsense. More fool me for even bothering to point it out.
Thanks for the sobering reality check. Couple of hours down the drain.
Hmmm, but I was told Boris made a huge mistake by suspending Parliament.
No deal, here we come.
You do realise Johnson really desperately doesn't want no deal because it would see him go down as one of the worst Prime Ministers in history, don't you?
That's you projecting.
You feel no deal will be bad, so you're projecting that on him.
I'm very interested to see the red and yellow interactions this time. Vote yellow get blue would be the standard cry but the reds still need some of their supporters to back the yellows to take seats from the blues.
How closely can they align without undermining each other by aiding the Tories?
There's no room at all for an electoral alliance: Corbyn wouldn't be interested and association with Labour is toxic to the LibDems twice over, because of Labour's muddy positioning on Remain, and rather a lot of potential support amongst the small-c conservative middle classes who would rather that their homes weren't expropriated and their savings hyperinflated away to nothing under a Marxist government.
The Lib Dems can't be seen to consort with or prop up Corbyn or the Tories, because to get chummy with either would alienate the opposing half of their own support. So they will presumably have to run an election campaign in which they imagine themselves in a fantasy world in which they can actually win it and form a majority Government. In the meantime, the main question the media will be putting to them (and which will also be foremost in the minds of many of their potential voters) will be about the choices they'd make in a hung Parliament.
Either likely response - a flat refusal to answer, or an insistence that they won't get into bed with anyone under any circumstances - is likely to be met with scorn. As a consequence, they may very well not prosper to the extent that the polls suggest.
The labour cannot win here leaflets may need to get creative, since theres lots of seats, like mine, where the LDs have not been second since 2010 and labour eclipsed them in 2017.
I think a lot depends on how Swinson does in the debates, assuming Corbyn wants them this time. Boris will have little choice.
Arlene Foster will have more rights to be in the debates than Swinson. Certainly Sturgeon.
Sturgeon maybe, but I think the problem is that the SNP are not represented across the UK and could never form a Government. I'd like to see it myself because I've heard her speak and she is a top performer, but not sure she will get the platform she deserves.
Doubt Arlene will feature. Hard to see why she should.
I'm very interested to see the red and yellow interactions this time. Vote yellow get blue would be the standard cry but the reds still need some of their supporters to back the yellows to take seats from the blues.
How closely can they align without undermining each other by aiding the Tories?
There's no room at all for an electoral alliance: Corbyn wouldn't be interested and association with Labour is toxic to the LibDems twice over, because of Labour's muddy positioning on Remain, and rather a lot of potential support amongst the small-c conservative middle classes who would rather that their homes weren't expropriated and their savings hyperinflated away to nothing under a Marxist government.
The Lib Dems can't be seen to consort with or prop up Corbyn or the Tories, because to get chummy with either would alienate the opposing half of their own support. So they will presumably have to run an election campaign in which they imagine themselves in a fantasy world in which they can actually win it and form a majority Government. In the meantime, the main question the media will be putting to them (and which will also be foremost in the minds of many of their potential voters) will be about the choices they'd make in a hung Parliament.
Either likely response - a flat refusal to answer, or an insistence that they won't get into bed with anyone under any circumstances - is likely to be met with scorn. As a consequence, they may very well not prosper to the extent that the polls suggest.
The labour cannot win here leaflets may need to get creative, since theres lots of seats, like mine, where the LDs have not been second since 2010 and labour eclipsed them in 2017.
I think a lot depends on how Swinson does in the debates, assuming Corbyn wants them this time. Boris will have little choice.
Arlene Foster will have more rights to be in the debates than Swinson. Certainly Sturgeon.
Sturgeon maybe, but I think the problem is that the SNP are not represented across the UK and could never form a Government. I'd like to see it myself because I've heard her speak and she is a top performer, but not sure she will get the platform she deserves.
Doubt Arlene will feature. Hard to see why she should.
If asked, Arlene would say no. Loudly and repeatedly.
Hmmm, but I was told Boris made a huge mistake by suspending Parliament.
No deal, here we come.
You do realise Johnson really desperately doesn't want no deal because it would see him go down as one of the worst Prime Ministers in history, don't you?
People said he doesn't really support LEAVE.
I think we should take him at face value.
The problems we will see with NO Deal will be minor.
Hmmm, but I was told Boris made a huge mistake by suspending Parliament.
No deal, here we come.
You do realise Johnson really desperately doesn't want no deal because it would see him go down as one of the worst Prime Ministers in history, don't you?
People said he doesn't really support LEAVE.
I think we should take him at face value.
The problems we will see with NO Deal will be minor.
Hmmm, but I was told Boris made a huge mistake by suspending Parliament.
No deal, here we come.
You do realise Johnson really desperately doesn't want no deal because it would see him go down as one of the worst Prime Ministers in history, don't you?
That's you projecting.
You feel no deal will be bad, so you're projecting that on him.
Johnson thinks that no deal won't be as bad as people make out. But I think he has enough self awareness to know that he is totally innumerate and has no real concept of economics, so is probably shit scared that he is wrong. The first part is based on him telling me, the second part is based on what I took to be the frightened look in his eyes as he told me. But perhaps it's all projection.
Hmmm, but I was told Boris made a huge mistake by suspending Parliament.
No deal, here we come.
You do realise Johnson really desperately doesn't want no deal because it would see him go down as one of the worst Prime Ministers in history, don't you?
That's you projecting.
You feel no deal will be bad, so you're projecting that on him.
Johnson thinks that no deal won't be as bad as people make out. But I think he has enough self awareness to know that he is totally innumerate and has no real concept of economics, so is probably shit scared that he is wrong. The first part is based on him telling me, the second part is based on what I took to be the frightened look in his eyes as he told me. But perhaps it's all projection.
Nobody knows how bad No Deal will be. We are all guessing.
Some guesses will be better than others. By all accounts the Civil Service briefings are pretty scary; they certainly seemed to scare May.
Does Boris care though? My assessment is that he really doesn't. This makes him dangerous. He really would do it.
Perversely he might also suddenly Revoke. He has done u-turns before. I;m not expecting it but it wouldn't be out of character.
Were you at Balliol with him? I have a friend who was and wrote a very good article about the man a few years back,
Hmmm, but I was told Boris made a huge mistake by suspending Parliament.
No deal, here we come.
You do realise Johnson really desperately doesn't want no deal because it would see him go down as one of the worst Prime Ministers in history, don't you?
People said he doesn't really support LEAVE.
I think we should take him at face value.
The problems we will see with NO Deal will be minor.
Hmmm, but I was told Boris made a huge mistake by suspending Parliament.
No deal, here we come.
You do realise Johnson really desperately doesn't want no deal because it would see him go down as one of the worst Prime Ministers in history, don't you?
That's you projecting.
You feel no deal will be bad, so you're projecting that on him.
Johnson thinks that no deal won't be as bad as people make out. But I think he has enough self awareness to know that he is totally innumerate and has no real concept of economics, so is probably shit scared that he is wrong. The first part is based on him telling me, the second part is based on what I took to be the frightened look in his eyes as he told me. But perhaps it's all projection.
Nobody knows how bad No Deal will be. We are all guessing.
Some guesses will be better than others. By all accounts the Civil Service briefings are pretty scary; they certainly seemed to scare May.
Does Boris care though? My assessment is that he really doesn't. This makes him dangerous. He really would do it.
Perversely he might also suddenly Revoke. He has done u-turns before. I;m not expecting it but it wouldn't be out of character.
Were you at Balliol with him? I have a friend who was and wrote a very good article about the man a few years back,
No, I met him at an event through work. I had the impression of someone with a lot of apparent self confidence but who knew he was a charlatan. I don't think he will revoke. He is betting on either someone else stopping no deal or it being not as bad as people imagine. As you say, nobody really knows what it will be like. I am an economic forecaster, and I have no idea - nobody has ever done anything this crazy before. My guess is that it will be a disaster and Johnson is swept away. But who knows, maybe he is right.
I'm very interested to see the red and yellow interactions this time. Vote yellow get blue would be the standard cry but the reds still need some of their supporters to back the yellows to take seats from the blues.
How closely can they align without undermining each other by aiding the Tories?
There's no room at all for an electoral alliance: Corbyn wouldn't be interested and association with Labour is toxic to the LibDems twice over, because of Labour's muddy positioning on Remain, and rather a lot of potential support amongst the small-c conservative middle classes who would rather that their homes weren't expropriated and their savings hyperinflated away to nothing under a Marxist government.
The Lib Dems can't be seen to consort with or prop up Corbyn or the Tories, because to get chummy with either would alienate the opposing half of their own support. So they will presumably have to run an election campaign in which they imagine themselves in a fantasy world in which they can actually win it and form a majority Government. In the meantime, the main question the media will be putting to them (and which will also be foremost in the minds of many of their potential voters) will be about the choices they'd make in a hung Parliament.
Either likely response - a flat refusal to answer, or an insistence that they won't get into bed with anyone under any circumstances - is likely to be met with scorn. As a consequence, they may very well not prosper to the extent that the polls suggest.
The labour cannot win here leaflets may need to get creative, since theres lots of seats, like mine, where the LDs have not been second since 2010 and labour eclipsed them in 2017.
I think a lot depends on how Swinson does in the debates, assuming Corbyn wants them this time. Boris will have little choice.
Arlene Foster will have more rights to be in the debates than Swinson. Certainly Sturgeon.
Sturgeon maybe, but I think the problem is that the SNP are not represented across the UK and could never form a Government. I'd like to see it myself because I've heard her speak and she is a top performer, but not sure she will get the platform she deserves.
Doubt Arlene will feature. Hard to see why she should.
If asked, Arlene would say no. Loudly and repeatedly.
Ah for the good old days of Paisley Snr for some comic relief. Seeing the backstop rejected with “NEVER, NEVER, NEVER” would at least have been amusing.
I've signed up to one of their degree level modules. I want to know how they are when you have a question?
Yes - BA and MA. The quality of teaching was excellent and I enjoyed (nearly) all the modules. Depends on what your question is - if its general there are course discussion groups on the web, if its specific to your course you have an individually assigned tutor who should help.
Hmmm, but I was told Boris made a huge mistake by suspending Parliament.
No deal, here we come.
You do realise Johnson really desperately doesn't want no deal because it would see him go down as one of the worst Prime Ministers in history, don't you?
That's you projecting.
You feel no deal will be bad, so you're projecting that on him.
Johnson thinks that no deal won't be as bad as people make out. But I think he has enough self awareness to know that he is totally innumerate and has no real concept of economics, so is probably shit scared that he is wrong. The first part is based on him telling me, the second part is based on what I took to be the frightened look in his eyes as he told me. But perhaps it's all projection.
Nobody knows how bad No Deal will be. We are all guessing.
Some guesses will be better than others. By all accounts the Civil Service briefings are pretty scary; they certainly seemed to scare May.
Does Boris care though? My assessment is that he really doesn't. This makes him dangerous. He really would do it.
Perversely he might also suddenly Revoke. He has done u-turns before. I;m not expecting it but it wouldn't be out of character.
Were you at Balliol with him? I have a friend who was and wrote a very good article about the man a few years back,
No, I met him at an event through work. I had the impression of someone with a lot of apparent self confidence but who knew he was a charlatan. I don't think he will revoke. He is betting on either someone else stopping no deal or it being not as bad as people imagine. As you say, nobody really knows what it will be like. I am an economic forecaster, and I have no idea - nobody has ever done anything this crazy before. My guess is that it will be a disaster and Johnson is swept away. But who knows, maybe he is right.
Thanks, OLB.
I pretty much agree with all that except I think you have to distinguish short and long-term effects.
Apart from some immediate panics over stuff like medicines and border issues, I don't think the short-term problems will be too bad. Longer term the outlook looks very bad to me.
Hmmm, but I was told Boris made a huge mistake by suspending Parliament.
No deal, here we come.
You do realise Johnson really desperately doesn't want no deal because it would see him go down as one of the worst Prime Ministers in history, don't you?
That's you projecting.
You feel no deal will be bad, so you're projecting that on him.
Johnson thinks that no deal won't be as bad as people make out. But I think he has enough self awareness to know that he is totally innumerate and has no real concept of economics, so is probably shit scared that he is wrong. The first part is based on him telling me, the second part is based on what I took to be the frightened look in his eyes as he told me. But perhaps it's all projection.
Nobody knows how bad No Deal will be. We are all guessing.
Some guesses will be better than others. By all accounts the Civil Service briefings are pretty scary; they certainly seemed to scare May.
Does Boris care though? My assessment is that he really doesn't. This makes him dangerous. He really would do it.
Perversely he might also suddenly Revoke. He has done u-turns before. I;m not expecting it but it wouldn't be out of character.
Were you at Balliol with him? I have a friend who was and wrote a very good article about the man a few years back,
No, I met him at an event through work. I had the impression of someone with a lot of apparent self confidence but who knew he was a charlatan. I don't think he will revoke. He is betting on either someone else stopping no deal or it being not as bad as people imagine. As you say, nobody really knows what it will be like. I am an economic forecaster, and I have no idea - nobody has ever done anything this crazy before. My guess is that it will be a disaster and Johnson is swept away. But who knows, maybe he is right.
Thanks, OLB.
I pretty much agree with all that except I think you have to distinguish short and long-term effects.
Apart from some immediate panics over stuff like medicines and border issues, I don't think the short-term problems will be too bad. Longer term the outlook looks very bad to me.
Hopefully I will be proved wrong.
Funny I think the exact opposite.
Longer term I don't think it makes that much difference elther way.
Short term I think it could be very disruptive and a nasty shock.
Survation had the Cons 11% ahead at the start of the 2017 campaign. Doesn't look good for Johnson.
52% back a Deal minus the backstop, 52% back the Queen proroguing Parliament.
Opposition split down the middle with Swinson now overtaking Corbyn as best PM, looks very good for Johnson
There is going to be tactical voting on an epic scale so the Lib Dem / Labour split is irrelevant, it's their totals that matter. Also Labour vote will come up over any campaign and current don't knows will flood in just like in 2017.
There will be no deal without a backstop so irrelevant.
People think the Queen had to prorogue if the PM asks her to, they aren't condoning the act in the first place as we see by the fact only 39% think Johnson was right.
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
The youth vote for Labour, for Labour, has halved since 2017 and it aint coming back. Labour is going to be reduced to its inner City and university heartlands. Until you all grasp this fact there is no hope for Labour.
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
Even if the poll was correct (as I say the Tories were significantly further ahead with Survation at a roughly equivalent point last time) am I not wrong to say it would be the second worst Tory vote share of all time after 1997?
Maybe but the Tories would also win more seats than at any election in the last 27 years bar 2015, Labour would win fewer seats than at any time since 1983
On the basis of UNS the Tories would gain 23 seats from Labour - ignoring the fact that most of the MPs concerned would be likely to enjoy a first term incumbency bonus. This would be offset by 18 losses to the LDs. Then,of course , there is Scotland - how many Tory losses there?
There is going to be tactical voting on an epic scale so the Lib Dem / Labour split
Johnson is screwed on these figures.
He just isnt. He really isnt! Please believe me...
Labour is heading for its lowest voteshare in 100 years and utter humiliation on tonight's poll and still the Corbynistas think their Messiah walks on water!
And in 2017, even after the exit poll, Tory loyalists still believed Theresa May was heading for a majority.
Survation had just a 1% Tory lead on eve of poll 2017 compared to a 7% Tory lead tonight
It's not the eve of the election in case you hadn't noticed. At the start of the campaign the Tories were 11% ahead. They are significantly less ahead than that now and the campaign hasn't even started.
Boris is a far better campaigner than May and will not repeat the dementia tax disaster.
Plus even in 2017 Labour was on 29% with Survation at the beginning of the campaign, they are on just 24% tonight with the same pollster
It's a total myth. May was crap. But the Tory campaign wasn't the issue, they got one of the highest vote shares in modern times (unlike Boris who is headed for one of the lowest Tory vote shares in history). It was the Labour surge that did for them. Don't understand how this self-serving myth gets bandied around the Westminster bubble so much, but I guess the clue is in the phrase 'self-serving'.
The Tories were on 40% with Survation, now they are on 31%.
Utter rubbish, the biggest move over the campaign was after May's dementia tax announcement disaster. Minus that it would have been a small Tory majority
May got one of the highest votes in modern times, Johnson is headed for the second lowest Tory vote share in history. It wasn't about the campaign (well it was about the Labour campaign.)
Blair won a very good 66 seat majority in 2005 with just 35/36% of the vote.
Hmmm, but I was told Boris made a huge mistake by suspending Parliament.
No deal, here we come.
You do realise Johnson really desperately doesn't want no deal because it would see him go down as one of the worst Prime Ministers in history, don't you?
That's you projecting.
You feel no deal will be bad, so you're projecting that on him.
Johnson thinks that no deal won't be as bad as people ma
Nobody knows how bad No Deal will be. We are all guessing.
Some guesses will be better than others. By all accounts the Civil back,
No, I met him at an event through work. I had the impression of someone with.
Thanks, OLB.
I pretty much agree with all that except I think you have to distinguish short and long-term effects.
Apart from some immediate panics over stuff like medicines and border issues, I don't think the short-term problems will be too bad. Longer term the outlook looks very bad to me.
Hopefully I will be proved wrong.
Funny I think the exact opposite.
Longer term I don't think it makes that much difference elther way.
Short term I think it could be very disruptive and a nasty shock.
It’ll be disruptive up front, but it’s hard to know by how much. I think it’ll be manageable.
Long term I think we’re all arguing because our definitions are different. Compared to the counterfactual of staying in, I’m sure we’ll be worse off. For a short period, we may even end up worse off in real terms. Thereafter we’ll be growing again, and you won’t be able to prove definitively we are not so rich as we may have been.
I’m willing to accept that. I can understand the point of view of those who are not. That difference is, I think, why otherwise rational folk are shouting at each other.
Whether it’s sustainable depends entirely on exactly how disruptive the initial bit is, who’s in power, for how long, and what their majority is.
YouGov and now Survation. Lol. The dissonance for many of the PB commentariat between the polling and the self-entitled purveyors of 'wisdom' on here on full display tonight. It's clear all the polling must be wrong. Like 2016 all over again. The daft thing is all the polling really shows is a country divided over Brexit but united over Jeremy Corbyn. Above all they want it to be over.
That's why I don't think there will or should be an extension. This needs to end now, enough is enough.
I wonder whether Johnson's next surprise move will be to announce that he actually wants to have an election as soon as possible, and to see how the other parties respond to that challenge. It could split Labour once again, with the Corbynistas happy to have an election and the centrists not happy about the idea.
Looking at the long list of recent thread headers on the inadequacies of the current government and comparing them to the most recent polls is another fun exercise. It's the same on Twitter. Never has the commentariat looked so inadequate. No wonder the likes of Philip Pullman, La Toynbee and others have completely lost it. The Tuscan wine must have been very vinegary this summer.
I think the spending announcements could hurt the government. A whole orchard of money trees found just before a snap election? It’s not a brexit dividend, because brexit change is expensive. We also still throw money away on debt interest bills to the extent Cameron used to win votes pointing that out in speeches.
In football Sometimes you are genuinely fouled in the box, but the theatrical dive costs you a penalty. In politics It’s not what you are saying, it’s the credibility you need for people to listen.
And the suspicion is, swap Corbyn for just about anyone as loto tomorrow, and the polls will dramatically switch. So the nice looking polling is a castle built on sand really.
I think the spending announcements could hurt the government. A whole orchard of money trees found just before a snap election? It’s not a brexit dividend, because brexit change is expensive. We also still throw money away on debt interest bills to the extent Cameron used to win votes pointing that out in speeches.
In football Sometimes you are genuinely fouled in the box, but the theatrical dive costs you a penalty. In politics It’s not what you are saying, it’s the credibility you need for people to listen.
And the suspicion is, swap Corbyn for just about anyone as loto tomorrow, and the polls will dramatically switch. So the nice looking polling is a castle built on sand really.
You may well be right about Corbyn but he has tainted the Labour brand so much that most of his likely successors would poll even worse atm. The polling may well be built on sand - I don't see the Sahara desert going anywhere soon.
That's why I don't think there will or should be an extension. This needs to end now, enough is enough.
I wonder whether Johnson's next surprise move will be to announce that he actually wants to have an election as soon as possible, and to see how the other parties respond to that challenge. It could split Labour once again, with the Corbynistas happy to have an election and the centrists not happy about the idea.
An election before brexit will result in a big Tory defeat. The impact of No Deal on households will be deafening throughout the campaign and seem all too real for voters on polling day.
I think the spending announcements could hurt the government. A whole orchard of money trees found just before a snap election? It’s not a brexit dividend, because brexit change is expensive. We also still throw money away on debt interest bills to the extent Cameron used to win votes pointing that out in speeches.
In football Sometimes you are genuinely fouled in the box, but the theatrical dive costs you a penalty. In politics It’s not what you are saying, it’s the credibility you need for people to listen.
And the suspicion is, swap Corbyn for just about anyone as loto tomorrow, and the polls will dramatically switch. So the nice looking polling is a castle built on sand really.
You may well be right about Corbyn but he has tainted the Labour brand so much that most of his likely successors would poll even worse atm. The polling may well be built on sand - I don't see the Sahara desert going anywhere soon.
You think swapping corbyn for someone else, and they will poll worse?
That's why I don't think there will or should be an extension. This needs to end now, enough is enough.
I wonder whether Johnson's next surprise move will be to announce that he actually wants to have an election as soon as possible, and to see how the other parties respond to that challenge. It could split Labour once again, with the Corbynistas happy to have an election and the centrists not happy about the idea.
An election before brexit will result in a big Tory defeat. The impact of No Deal on households will be deafening throughout the campaign and seem all too real for voters on polling day.
That's why I don't think there will or should be an extension. This needs to end now, enough is enough.
I wonder whether Johnson's next surprise move will be to announce that he actually wants to have an election as soon as possible, and to see how the other parties respond to that challenge. It could split Labour once again, with the Corbynistas happy to have an election and the centrists not happy about the idea.
An election before brexit will result in a big Tory defeat. The impact of No Deal on households will be deafening throughout the campaign and seem all too real for voters on polling day.
Yes let's ignore all the polling shall we.
Don’t get me wrong, I would like there to be an election. I’m in a politics chat room because I find these things fascinating, always have. Not as fascinating as being in a sports bar drinking lager all evening as I have been, but a general election right now would be the most fascinating and crazy election of my lifetime. But I really don’t see it coming anytime soon. The smartest thing in the world the Tory’s could do right now is go into opposition, leave others to either brexit or no Brexit, and come back strongly capitalising onthat, but there’s a chance the Tory’s could win an election right now, so whilst there is that chance I don’t think they will go for one.
Boris Johnson's gamble is paying off: Tory lead over Labour nearly DOUBLES in three weeks and most voters think the Queen was RIGHT to approve his request to suspend Parliament in his drive to deliver Brexit
I'm starting to wonder if Boris might be outperforming expectations - by looking serious, not doing (many) silly stunts - and concentrating on just communicating clearly, which is a strength of his.
Longer term I don't think it makes that much difference elther way.
Short term I think it could be very disruptive and a nasty shock.
Isn't the correct answer "it depends".
In the very short term, I think we'll discover that food and medicines arrive without any great issues.
In the medium term, we have some difficult decisions to make. Do we choose to prioritise existing manufacturing industries, by reducing (or entirely eliminating) tariffs on a range of products so that - for example - Nissan in Sunderland is barely effected. The downside of doing this, though, is that it isn't great news for British farmers, and by further reducing the cost of imported consumer products it encourages spending over saving. In other words, the right thing for car manufacturing in the UK in the medium term unbalances our economy further.
The alternative, though, has it's own problems. Farmers are happy. The UK economy doesn't get any more unbalanced. But some industries take a big (near term) knock.
And then there are second order effects. Say the UK economy enters a serious downturn, that is exacerbated by dropping out of the tariff free arrangements with the UK and a host of other countries. Imagine, that the voters revolt and demand Jeremy Corbyn becomes Prime Minister. Do you think he's going to be keen to implement pro-market policies. Now, complacency dictates that one assumes that Corbyn would be followed by a more sensible leader. But that's not how it worked in Argentina, which was once as rich - relative to the rest of the world - as the UK is.
A Labour leader could always rely on "the common touch" against a rich, aloof, baby-eating Tory bastard. When they are even lagging on that one....chuck another bairn on the barbie, Jezza.....
On the basis of UNS the Tories would gain 23 seats from Labour - ignoring the fact that most of the MPs concerned would be likely to enjoy a first term incumbency bonus.
Incumbency bonus is bollocks when MPs are so reviled for not getting Brexit done....
That's why I don't think there will or should be an extension. This needs to end now, enough is enough.
I like the idea of honouring the 2016 vote and consigning it to history. But that’s not the end of it, just a whole new beginning...
That whole new beginning commences with those who are EUrophiles having to win the argument, rather than fight tooth and nail to save a status quo that the voters have rejected. If it is such a good thing, the voters will be wowed by EU 1.2
That Remainers are fighting so viciously tells us they believe they cannot make that argument.
The food industry says that it fears a “complete and catastrophic embargo” on exports in the event of a no-deal Brexit after the government admitted that it had yet to apply for regulatory clearance required for selling animal products to the European Union.
“Listed status” is required for countries wishing to export live animals and animal products to the EU and can take as long as six months to secure.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said it was confident that the EU would agree that Britain meets the health and biosecurity standards but, with only nine weeks until the UK is due to leave, declined to say when officials might apply.
The food industry says that it fears a “complete and catastrophic embargo” on exports in the event of a no-deal Brexit after the government admitted that it had yet to apply for regulatory clearance required for selling animal products to the European Union.
If you're Jeremy Corbyn it must be so, so tempting just to stand back and let them crash this thing...
The food industry says that it fears a “complete and catastrophic embargo” on exports in the event of a no-deal Brexit after the government admitted that it had yet to apply for regulatory clearance required for selling animal products to the European Union.
“Listed status” is required for countries wishing to export live animals and animal products to the EU and can take as long as six months to secure.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said it was confident that the EU would agree that Britain meets the health and biosecurity standards but, with only nine weeks until the UK is due to leave, declined to say when officials might apply.
Union is being broken by Brexit and Britain's best battler in Scotland has raised white flag
Even Ruth Davidson has had enough of Boris Johnson's extremist nonsense and Record View believes the case for independence is being bolstered by the actions of the Tory buffoon.
We can but hope. I don't relish the forthcoming demise of the UK because I would rather we could make it work properly, but I don't think that the attitudes of any of the political parties involved - let alone the very large numbers of hostile voters in Scotland and Northern Ireland - makes this possible. And that's before one factors in the tremendous European problem.
The prerequisite for making the Union work properly is goodwill. There is nothing but ill-will flooding out of Westminster and Whitehall, and that has been true for a very long time. They don’t respect the Irish, Scots and Welsh, and they go out of their way to be as vindictive, obstructive and obnoxious as possible.
The Union could have developed well, but it took a wrong turn over a hundred years ago now, and is simply too far up shit creek.
Longer term I don't think it makes that much difference elther way.
Short term I think it could be very disruptive and a nasty shock.
Isn't the correct answer "it depends".
In the very short term, I think we'll discover that food and medicines arrive without any great issues.
In the medium term, we have some difficult decisions to make. Do we choose to prioritise existing manufacturing industries, by reducing (or entirely eliminating) tariffs on a range of products so that - for example - Nissan in Sunderland is barely effected. The downside of doing this, though, is that it isn't great news for British farmers, and by further reducing the cost of imported consumer products it encourages spending over saving. In other words, the right thing for car manufacturing in the UK in the medium term unbalances our economy further.
The alternative, though, has it's own problems. Farmers are happy. The UK economy doesn't get any more unbalanced. But some industries take a big (near term) knock.
And then there are second order effects. Say the UK economy enters a serious downturn, that is exacerbated by dropping out of the tariff free arrangements with the UK and a host of other countries. Imagine, that the voters revolt and demand Jeremy Corbyn becomes Prime Minister. Do you think he's going to be keen to implement pro-market policies. Now, complacency dictates that one assumes that Corbyn would be followed by a more sensible leader. But that's not how it worked in Argentina, which was once as rich - relative to the rest of the world - as the UK is.
Quick read - No Deal makes every UK citizen and business less free, while removing control from the UK government.
Just how toxic is Jeremy Corbyn? The Tories would could well win an election on the Survation numbers - with a vote share lower than the one they got in 1997 when Labour secured a majority of over 150.
Just how toxic is Jeremy Corbyn? The Tories would could well win an election on the Survation numbers - with a vote share lower than the one they got in 1997 when Labour secured a majority of over 150.
Its not just Corbyn, its those behind him. The really nasty Milne and the Momentum group... and then there McDonnell.. who wants a revolution.
On the basis of UNS the Tories would gain 23 seats from Labour - ignoring the fact that most of the MPs concerned would be likely to enjoy a first term incumbency bonus.
Incumbency bonus is bollocks when MPs are so reviled for not getting Brexit done....
I love the way 'incumbency' only seems to apply to Labour MPs
Barring an electoral shock imminently I think it will be sustainable for the simple reason that realpolitik means it has to be sustainable.
However we leave our path and our leaders will be tied to that. Their fate will ride on that. So they need to make it work.
Plus I think we are too damn stubborn to admit otherwise.
Stubbornness is certainly a factor. I have been surprised by how long people have maintained their state of denial. Which is why we haven't left yet.
No Deal isn't an end state. It's the absence of agreement. Eventually people in the UK will need to decide it can live with ongoing EU demands so it can have a working relationship or the EU stops making demands. The second is highly unlikely.
I don't expect Brexit be cancelled. I expect it to lead to the UK as a subservient satellite of the EU. Which is a crap thing to be, and not at all what Leavers voted for. But we can live with it.
Comments
The SNP would probably let Labour get away with anything short of gulags and killing fields if they were granted a second independence referendum, but the Libs could quickly find themselves in an impossible bind. Again.
Plus even in 2017 Labour was on 29% with Survation at the beginning of the campaign, they are on just 24% tonight with the same pollster
The Tories were on 40% with Survation, now they are on 31%.
This is not a bad approximation of the current political situation.
I expect Johnson to prevail.
The Lib Dems can't be seen to consort with or prop up Corbyn or the Tories, because to get chummy with either would alienate the opposing half of their own support. So they will presumably have to run an election campaign in which they imagine themselves in a fantasy world in which they can actually win it and form a majority Government. In the meantime, the main question the media will be putting to them (and which will also be foremost in the minds of many of their potential voters) will be about the choices they'd make in a hung Parliament.
Either likely response - a flat refusal to answer, or an insistence that they won't get into bed with anyone under any circumstances - is likely to be met with scorn. As a consequence, they may very well not prosper to the extent that the polls suggest.
Like it or lump it. Parliament had 3 chances to vote for a deal.
Then, beyond that, we have to consider (a) how many Lib Dem or potential Lib Dem backers would trust Jeremy Corbyn to give them what they want, over Brexit or anything else, and (b) the extent to which the Lib Dem leadership would want to risk creating a scenario in which they would not only place Jeremy Corbyn into office, but perhaps also give him an overall majority (or a result close enough to one that he could govern with the backing of the SNP alone.) We know that the Lib Dems do not view the prospect of Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister with equanimity, and if they hadn't the numbers to have real influence over him it would be so much the worse for them.
But I don't think it will come to that anyway. There's no history of which I'm aware of Labour agreeing not to field candidates in significant numbers of seats as part of an electoral pact under any leader, let alone one such as they presently have.
Hmmm, but I was told Boris made a huge mistake by suspending Parliament.
No deal, here we come.
The last Survation before the Tory manifesto launch and dementia tax announcement on 18th May 2017 had it Tories 48%, Labour 30%.
The next Survation had it Tories 43% Labour 34%. That was the biggest swing of the campaign with the rest done by squeezing other parties.
The utter tripe about a Northern Ireland referendum followed by a renegotiation of the Withdrawal Agreement?
Everyone could see the whole thing was sheer fantasy, but you kept spouting it regardless, just as you keep spouting your new collection of drivel.
More fool anyone who wastes a moment on your nonsense. More fool me for even bothering to point it out.
However I could not give a toss what you think anyway so will keep posting regardless and if it annoys you all the better!
You feel no deal will be bad, so you're projecting that on him.
Doubt Arlene will feature. Hard to see why she should.
Loudly and repeatedly.
I think we should take him at face value.
The problems we will see with NO Deal will be minor.
I've signed up to one of their degree level modules. I want to know how they are when you have a question?
Some guesses will be better than others. By all accounts the Civil Service briefings are pretty scary; they certainly seemed to scare May.
Does Boris care though? My assessment is that he really doesn't. This makes him dangerous. He really would do it.
Perversely he might also suddenly Revoke. He has done u-turns before. I;m not expecting it but it wouldn't be out of character.
Were you at Balliol with him? I have a friend who was and wrote a very good article about the man a few years back,
I pretty much agree with all that except I think you have to distinguish short and long-term effects.
Apart from some immediate panics over stuff like medicines and border issues, I don't think the short-term problems will be too bad. Longer term the outlook looks very bad to me.
Hopefully I will be proved wrong.
Longer term I don't think it makes that much difference elther way.
Short term I think it could be very disruptive and a nasty shock.
Long term I think we’re all arguing because our definitions are different. Compared to the counterfactual of staying in, I’m sure we’ll be worse off. For a short period, we may even end up worse off in real terms. Thereafter we’ll be growing again, and you won’t be able to prove definitively we are not so rich as we may have been.
I’m willing to accept that. I can understand the point of view of those who are not. That difference is, I think, why otherwise rational folk are shouting at each other.
Whether it’s sustainable depends entirely on exactly how disruptive the initial bit is, who’s in power, for how long, and what their majority is.
However we leave our path and our leaders will be tied to that. Their fate will ride on that. So they need to make it work.
Plus I think we are too damn stubborn to admit otherwise.
In football Sometimes you are genuinely fouled in the box, but the theatrical dive costs you a penalty. In politics It’s not what you are saying, it’s the credibility you need for people to listen.
And the suspicion is, swap Corbyn for just about anyone as loto tomorrow, and the polls will dramatically switch. So the nice looking polling is a castle built on sand really.
One more time. Twitter. Is. Not. The Real. World.
Daniel Hannan added,
Britain Elects
@britainelects
Westminster voting intention:
CON: 31% (+3)
LAB; 24% (-)…
6:34 pm - 30 Aug 2019
And the supplementaries are also much better for Boris than the recent YG
Boris Johnson's gamble is paying off: Tory lead over Labour nearly DOUBLES in three weeks and most voters think the Queen was RIGHT to approve his request to suspend Parliament in his drive to deliver Brexit
How could the most rational ruling elite in history have fallen for the most dangerous toxin in politics?
John Gray"
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/08/why-liberals-now-believe-conspiracies
When the question of 'Out of the following, who do you most trust on Brexit" has a wider range of choices the preferences are:
Johnson: 32
Bercow: 5
Swinson: 11
Hammond: 3
Corbyn: 12
Sturgeon: 6 (33% in Scotland - Johnson on 20%, I'd have thought Sturgeon might be higher)
Farage: 11
Don't Know: 21
But when its limited to 3 (diff vs choice of 7):
Johnson: 45 (+13)
Corbyn: 16 (+4)
Swinson: 21 (+10)
Don't Know: 19 (-2)
So Corbyn does least well in picking up support, and with fewer choices, fewer 'Don't Knows'.
Remain in EU: 40
Leave EU with Deal: 34
Leave EU no Deal: 19
Expected outcome for Brexit:
Remain in EU: 13
Leave EU with Deal: 19
Leave EU no Deal: 52
If EU willing to drop Backstop
UK Govt should agree deal: 52
UK Govt should NOT agree deal: 22
Don't Know: 26
Johnson: +19
Corbyn: -52
Swinson: -18
Statesmanlike (net)
Johnson: -17
Corbyn: -52
Intelligent
Johnson: +38
Corbyn: -6
Strong
Johnson: +16
Corbyn: -49
Caring
Johnson: -20
Corbyn: -14
Common Touch
Johnson: -19
Corbyn: -24
Charismatic
Johnson: +19
Corbyn: -57
Strong leader -52
Statesmanlike -52
Strong -49
And the Boris numbers aren't too bad at all.
I'm starting to wonder if Boris might be outperforming expectations - by looking serious, not doing (many) silly stunts - and concentrating on just communicating clearly, which is a strength of his.
In the very short term, I think we'll discover that food and medicines arrive without any great issues.
In the medium term, we have some difficult decisions to make. Do we choose to prioritise existing manufacturing industries, by reducing (or entirely eliminating) tariffs on a range of products so that - for example - Nissan in Sunderland is barely effected. The downside of doing this, though, is that it isn't great news for British farmers, and by further reducing the cost of imported consumer products it encourages spending over saving. In other words, the right thing for car manufacturing in the UK in the medium term unbalances our economy further.
The alternative, though, has it's own problems. Farmers are happy. The UK economy doesn't get any more unbalanced. But some industries take a big (near term) knock.
And then there are second order effects. Say the UK economy enters a serious downturn, that is exacerbated by dropping out of the tariff free arrangements with the UK and a host of other countries. Imagine, that the voters revolt and demand Jeremy Corbyn becomes Prime Minister. Do you think he's going to be keen to implement pro-market policies. Now, complacency dictates that one assumes that Corbyn would be followed by a more sensible leader. But that's not how it worked in Argentina, which was once as rich - relative to the rest of the world - as the UK is.
That Remainers are fighting so viciously tells us they believe they cannot make that argument.
“Listed status” is required for countries wishing to export live animals and animal products to the EU and can take as long as six months to secure.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said it was confident that the EU would agree that Britain meets the health and biosecurity standards but, with only nine weeks until the UK is due to leave, declined to say when officials might apply.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/brexit-exporters-fear-catastrophic-embargo-on-food-products-n2pkrhtc3
Looking forward to F1 qualifying.
I see that Corbyn is deemed to be less popular than Jo Swinson, not sure that any attempt to install him as interim PM looks very credible.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7412505/Boriss-gamble-paying-Tory-lead-Labour-DOUBLES-three-weeks.html
The survation polling also suggests that Ken Clarke beats Corbyn in the interim PM handicap race.
The Union could have developed well, but it took a wrong turn over a hundred years ago now, and is simply too far up shit creek.
NEW THREAD
No Deal isn't an end state. It's the absence of agreement. Eventually people in the UK will need to decide it can live with ongoing EU demands so it can have a working relationship or the EU stops making demands. The second is highly unlikely.
I don't expect Brexit be cancelled. I expect it to lead to the UK as a subservient satellite of the EU. Which is a crap thing to be, and not at all what Leavers voted for. But we can live with it.