Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Remainers of the Day. Why are pollsters consistently findi

1246710

Comments

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163

    kle4 said:

    Byronic said:

    Roger said:

    Anyone hear the spokesman from Zanu describe Mugabe's death as 'untimely'?

    I once attended a funeral service where there was lots of really unsettlingly weird behaviour - vestal virgins, guitars, acrobats, God knows what. Forced to make a positive comment for the press I described the occasion as "memorable".
    “Jesus Christ, the son of a carpenter, died at a tragically young age”
    In those times 34/36 was a good age - top end of average life expectancy!
    Slightly misleading due to higher infant mortality surely?
    kle4 said:

    Byronic said:

    Roger said:

    Anyone hear the spokesman from Zanu describe Mugabe's death as 'untimely'?

    I once attended a funeral service where there was lots of really unsettlingly weird behaviour - vestal virgins, guitars, acrobats, God knows what. Forced to make a positive comment for the press I described the occasion as "memorable".
    “Jesus Christ, the son of a carpenter, died at a tragically young age”
    In those times 34/36 was a good age - top end of average life expectancy!
    Slightly misleading due to higher infant mortality surely?
    By any contemporary measure 36 was not “tragically young”. Some of his contemporaries would have been grandparents.
    Didnt think he was tragically young, just that mid 30s not quite at the top end if youd expect them to reach mid 50s once past childhood.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    edited September 2019

    By any contemporary measure 36 was not “tragically young”. Some of his contemporaries would have been grandparents.

    A friend of a friend of mine was a grandmother at 33. :D
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    eek said:

    Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    And now the Tories can't back down resulting in 12 seats probably being needlessly lost.
    Can't see many of those indies winning, grieve for example has a very tough ask to win Beaconsfield
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    eek said:

    alex. said:

    Is there not a potential flip side on a post nov election, though(assuming extension is enacted)? Which is that anti-no deal Tories may be more inclined to vote Tory in this scenario?

    How? Boris is going to have to go for No Deal just to avoid Farage kicking him daily.
    Boris will refuse to extend, as Peston reported yesterday he will either stay in post and challenge the Commons to impeach him rather than ask Brussels for an extension or resign and let Corbyn do the extension and thus destroy Labour in Labour Leave seats for betraying the Brexit vote as Swinson immediately VONCs Corbyn straight after extension to force a general election
    You expect Swinson to be LotO?
    Without Swinson Corbyn cannot become PM and she can stop him staying PM too post extension, Swinson not Corbyn holds the real power in the opposition now a long with Blackford and Hammond on the Government side
    Only the LotO can VONC. Swinson will not be the LotO - Johnson’s successor will.
    Why would Johnson have a successor?

    Johnson would be LotO.
    If the Conservatives are in opposition you think he’ll still be leader?
    If they haven't lost an election yet and are still preparing for one, yes absolutely!

    Corbyn didn't resign when he lost an election, why would Boris resign before getting his election?
  • He's a photographer's gift, you have to give him that.

    https://twitter.com/ThePoke/status/1169897859321171971

    Laura Kuenssberg revealed as evil mastermind behind The Boris Bot.
    Reassure me that's a big fat blunt between her fingers and not a BBC-issue ballpoint.
  • JackW said:

    JackW said:

    This is the Speakers ruling, still valid, in relation to the "Queen's Consent" from the recent Cooper Benn bill :

    "As the House will recall, no Queen’s Consent was required for the contents of the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill, which was introduced in January 2017 after the UK Supreme Court decision in the Miller case. My ruling is that as no prerogative consent was required for the Bill in 2017 giving parliamentary authority to the Prime Minister to take action under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, there is no requirement for new and separate prerogative consent to be sought for legislation in 2019 on what further action the Prime Minister should take under the same Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union."

    The Speaker's ruling IMHO is not valid for the new bill because there is a major distinction between the prior bills and this bill.

    The original notification bill gave authority to notify to the PM but left the decision whether to notify or not to the PM in her role using royal prerogative. The bill did not instruct the PM that she had to notify.

    Similarly the prior extension request left the decision on whether to accept an extension in the hands of the PM, she was not compelled to accept.

    This bill unlike any prior precedent in this chain compels the PM to accept the extension and gives all choice to Parliament like the bill Blair vetoed under royal consent regarding the Iraq War.
    The government has not disputed the Speakers ruling. End of.
    Agreed.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163

    eek said:

    Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    And now the Tories can't back down resulting in 12 seats probably being needlessly lost.
    Can't see many of those indies winning, grieve for example has a very tough ask to win Beaconsfield
    Winning may not be the point. It might be to stop the tories winning, although in many of those seats that would still be a difficult thing to achieve.
  • AndyJS said:
    Well, there's Quentin Letts and...err, that's it.

    https://twitter.com/thequentinletts/status/1169850394375098368?s=20
    Is Quentin Letts right about anything? As I recall he gave Hamilton its only bad London review.
    Well it is a quite ridiculous, hyperbolic and inappropriate inferred analogy. Par for the course in the Brexit debate.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    eek said:

    Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    And now the Tories can't back down resulting in 12 seats probably being needlessly lost.
    Can't see many of those indies winning, grieve for example has a very tough ask to win Beaconsfield
    I think Grieve and Clarke could win their seats as independents if the LDs don't stand.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,617
    AndyJS said:

    eek said:

    Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    And now the Tories can't back down resulting in 12 seats probably being needlessly lost.
    Can't see many of those indies winning, grieve for example has a very tough ask to win Beaconsfield
    I think Grieve and Clarke could win their seats as independents if the LDs don't stand.
    I can't see Clarke standing again.
  • If Boris Johnson can lose an election against Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell he is even more crap than even I thought
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    On Mugabe, I see the BBC front page describe his legacy as "mixed".
  • Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    Cummings may be a tool but this was priced in after he ran amok at Education. Where were the politicians? Why did Boris or the Cabinet or anyone apply any political judgement?

    Remember the omnishambles budget, which Damian McBride (whose position as most reviled wonk ever has been usurped by Cummings) revealed was chock-full of measures the Treasury put up every year but were knocked back as being politically toxic. It is the same thing.

    As grandpa Churchill said of scientists, advisors should be on tap, not on top.
  • Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    I think they Cummings [and Boris and Grieve etc] all knew exactly what they were doing.

    Grieve and the others were preventing the Tories from implementing their policy to Brexit, do or die. Even had there been an election now and the Tories won a small majority, they could have still caused problems.

    The rotten apples have been removed now and if there's an election and Boris wins a majority he can implement his policy. There will be no Grieve sitting on the government benches after the election if Boris wins.
  • MrsBMrsB Posts: 574

    He's a photographer's gift, you have to give him that.

    https://twitter.com/ThePoke/status/1169897859321171971

    Laura Kuenssberg revealed as evil mastermind behind The Boris Bot.
    all I can imagine is her saying "come on now, it's not THAT bad"
  • By any contemporary measure 36 was not “tragically young”. Some of his contemporaries would have been grandparents.

    A friend of a friend of mine was a grandmother at 33. :D
    Was she from Harlow ?
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760

    GIN1138 said:

    Morning PB

    Gina Millar and her "legal team" have lost then! :D

    Surely it would have been far better for Boris if she had won? He could have Parliament sitting again and get up to all sorts of mischief. At the moment he is hoisted by his own petard...
    No chance, some decent news for Boris. It's important for the country to see that Boris's actions are legit and Gina Miller etc are the ones who are trying to pick away at democracy.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,216
    edited September 2019
    kle4 said:


    Winning may not be the point. It might be to stop the tories winning, although in many of those seats that would still be a difficult thing to achieve.

    Most people absolubtely do not know or care which MP they're electing. I remember ( @rcs1000 niece? I think it was) voting Labour in err... Vauxhall to "stop Brexit".

    I'm not saying there aren't good or bad MPs, there clearly are but the rosette is ~95-99% of whether they'll get elected or not.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    AndyJS said:

    eek said:

    Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    And now the Tories can't back down resulting in 12 seats probably being needlessly lost.
    Can't see many of those indies winning, grieve for example has a very tough ask to win Beaconsfield
    I think Grieve and Clarke could win their seats as independents if the LDs don't stand.
    If the opposition stand aside then perhaps but from a small c conservative perspective it guarantees a fiscal conservative in parliament who will almost certainly back Tory policy Brexit aside
  • GIN1138 said:

    Morning PB

    Gina Millar and her "legal team" have lost then! :D

    Was that tool Jolyon Maugham involved as well ?
  • AndyJS said:

    eek said:

    Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    And now the Tories can't back down resulting in 12 seats probably being needlessly lost.
    Can't see many of those indies winning, grieve for example has a very tough ask to win Beaconsfield
    I think Grieve and Clarke could win their seats as independents if the LDs don't stand.
    I can't see Clarke standing again.
    I think he had already said this would be his last term.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,617
    kle4 said:

    Its alliterative so they think it'll stick well . But Conservative Chaos works even better.
    Over a picture of Corbyn:

    This isn't just chaos. This is M&S* chaos.....

    (*Marxist and Socialist....)
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293

    GIN1138 said:

    Morning PB

    Gina Millar and her "legal team" have lost then! :D

    Surely it would have been far better for Boris if she had won? He could have Parliament sitting again and get up to all sorts of mischief. At the moment he is hoisted by his own petard...
    I just think it's funny that finally Mrs Gina "I've got my legal team on standby" Millar has actually lost one of her litigations. :D
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    Corbyn acting with unusual restraint, and holding the line

    https://www.ft.com/content/30ee9c44-d07b-11e9-b018-ca4456540ea6?desktop=true

    Looks like No Deal is off the table. Probably forever. Because a new, majority Boris govt would avoid No Deal, and use the extra power and time to do something different, and a minority Boris govt would be hemmed in by parliament.

  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,193
    Lots of people want to get Brexit over with.
    There's only one way to get Brexit over with.
    It's not No Deal - that will be followed by years of negotiating with the EU
    It's not May's WA - ditto
    It's not revoke - leavers will carry on campaigning to leave

    It's to leave and stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union.
    Not only is this the option that by far the most people can live with, it has lots of advantages:

    The UK carries out the result of 2016 referendum to leave the EU
    The disruption is minimal
    The UK will stop sending "350 million a week" to the EU
    The UK will be out of the CAP
    The UK will be out of the CFP
    The UK will be out of "ever-closer union" or the European superstate

    Maybe the main problem is the UK will still have Freedom of Movement. But a few tweaks should be possible, I think a couple of restrictions could be introduced, an "emergency break" could be allowed. Maybe the UK could get an opt out from Freedom of Movement for any new member states, so that if, for example, Turkey ever joins the EU (of course it won't but that was a Leave campaign claim) Turkish citizens wouldn't get FoM to the UK, (nor British citizens to Turkey). Or some other fudges might be possible.

    There's a few disadvantages as well of course, but it looks like the only reasonable way forward from here
  • eek said:

    Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    And now the Tories can't back down resulting in 12 seats probably being needlessly lost.
    Can't see many of those indies winning, grieve for example has a very tough ask to win Beaconsfield
    I'd be surprised if any did, tbh. But while Patrick O'Flynn and other Leavers are banking on them splitting the Remain vote and taking Lab/LibDem votes, I think they're just as likely to split the Tory vote. By definition, their personal vote will all come from the Con column last time round. And most Labs/LDs would see the opportunity of giving the Tories a kicking rather than switching.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    GIN1138 said:

    Morning PB

    Gina Millar and her "legal team" have lost then! :D

    Was that tool Jolyon Maugham involved as well ?
    Yep
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    AndyJS said:

    eek said:

    Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    And now the Tories can't back down resulting in 12 seats probably being needlessly lost.
    Can't see many of those indies winning, grieve for example has a very tough ask to win Beaconsfield
    I think Grieve and Clarke could win their seats as independents if the LDs don't stand.
    I can't see Clarke standing again.
    I think he had already said this would be his last term.
    He said that before the previous election and changed his mind.
  • Brom said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Morning PB

    Gina Millar and her "legal team" have lost then! :D

    Surely it would have been far better for Boris if she had won? He could have Parliament sitting again and get up to all sorts of mischief. At the moment he is hoisted by his own petard...
    No chance, some decent news for Boris. It's important for the country to see that Boris's actions are legit and Gina Miller etc are the ones who are trying to pick away at democracy.
    And to establish that Conservatives will have no objection to a Labour government proroguing parliament for five years while Jeremy Corbyn nationalises jam factories from his prime ministerial dacha in Venezuela.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840

    Byronic said:

    Byronic said:

    Scott_P said:
    Brexit is one of those issues where you just can’t afford nuance, let alone fudge. It’s polarising. It’s like being in favour of committing suicide, or against it. “Well we might ask the nation to kill itself, we’re not sure. Depends whether we have a noose.”

    This works both ways. Remainers think Brexit is economic suicide. Leavers think No Brexit is cultural/political suicide.

    Labour have about a week to sort this out, or they could be facing electoral suicide.
    Disagree. At the moment they just need to be more reasonable than the other side. Which they are.

    Under May, there was a clear Brexit policy. Vote for the WA, that is Brexit. That was sensible, and the labour position was muddled.

    Now the labour position still has large issues, but its somewhat workable, but the tories isn't.

    So Labour are in a better position.
    What is Labour’s official position on Brexit then? I don’t know. Genuinely. And I’m a politics geek. And if I don’t know I suggest 98% of Brits don’t know, including Jeremy Corbyn Esq of London N1, which is a terrible place to be when you’re going into an election which will be consumed with Brexit
    I’m assuming the Labour conference will throw up some bantz in this regard.
    TBH the people unhappy with Labour 2nd referendum position in the party are generally leavers given it was remainers (mostly) who pushed for the position.

    Although the reason Labour moved is because the latter is bigger and more powerful than the former. So I don't think there will be that much fuss.

    It is not really a policy designed to appeal to people like SeanT...
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293

    If Boris Johnson can lose an election against Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell he is even more crap than even I thought

    Er, Jermey has to actually come out from behind the sofa and face the electorate for that to happen...
  • GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Morning PB

    Gina Millar and her "legal team" have lost then! :D

    Surely it would have been far better for Boris if she had won? He could have Parliament sitting again and get up to all sorts of mischief. At the moment he is hoisted by his own petard...
    I just think it's funny that finally Mrs Gina "I've got my legal team on standby" Millar has actually lost one of her litigations. :D
    Fair enough.
  • kamski said:

    Lots of people want to get Brexit over with.
    There's only one way to get Brexit over with.
    It's not No Deal - that will be followed by years of negotiating with the EU
    It's not May's WA - ditto
    It's not revoke - leavers will carry on campaigning to leave

    It's to leave and stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union.
    Not only is this the option that by far the most people can live with, it has lots of advantages:

    The UK carries out the result of 2016 referendum to leave the EU
    The disruption is minimal
    The UK will stop sending "350 million a week" to the EU
    The UK will be out of the CAP
    The UK will be out of the CFP
    The UK will be out of "ever-closer union" or the European superstate

    Maybe the main problem is the UK will still have Freedom of Movement. But a few tweaks should be possible, I think a couple of restrictions could be introduced, an "emergency break" could be allowed. Maybe the UK could get an opt out from Freedom of Movement for any new member states, so that if, for example, Turkey ever joins the EU (of course it won't but that was a Leave campaign claim) Turkish citizens wouldn't get FoM to the UK, (nor British citizens to Turkey). Or some other fudges might be possible.

    There's a few disadvantages as well of course, but it looks like the only reasonable way forward from here

    that is far too sensible to appeal to the headbangers at either end of the debate. I would prefer that the whole sorry charade had never happened, but it has. I would be very happy with what you have described, it is the common sense solution.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 5,005

    Scott_P said:

    Nigelb said:

    Which would tend to suggest they think Johnson has stretched prorogation to its absolute limits, and they need to establish those limits in law PDQ ?

    Yes. If he can prorogue for 5 weeks, he can do it for 5 months or 5 years.

    There is no political route to prevent that. There ought to be a legal one.
    So the perfectly normal system of prorogation that normally happens every year and has been legally applied here needs supreme court intervention because people think Boris Johnson might be Loki in disguise?
    It's just possible that people might think it's being abused as a way of closing down Parliamentary debate.

    Possibly due to the fact that prorogations of Parliament outside of dissolutions for an election tend to last between 3 and 5 calendar days, with a median of 4 calendar days and have sometimes lasted for 0 calendar days. Only twice since 1930 have they ever gone into double figures in days (12 and 20) and the 20 day one was over Easter.
    One lasting for 31 calendar days is, outside of a General Election dissolution, unheard of in living memory.

    And, in addition, the abuse of a uniquely extended prorogation was being discussed repeatedly during the Conservative Leadership election campaign as a tactic to shut down Parliamentary scrutiny - but fortunately Boris and others agreed that it would be unacceptable and wouldn't us it.

    You know. That.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,237
    GIN1138 said:

    I just think it's funny that finally Mrs Gina "I've got my legal team on standby" Millar has actually lost one of her litigations. :D

    In many ways it would have been better if she had lost the big one a couple of years go. We would have been out on time and under the WA if she had. We would now be in transition (all peaceful and stable) and our top top team of negotiators would be cracking on with nailing down that all important future relationship.

    Paradise Lost.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163
    AndyJS said:

    AndyJS said:

    eek said:

    Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    And now the Tories can't back down resulting in 12 seats probably being needlessly lost.
    Can't see many of those indies winning, grieve for example has a very tough ask to win Beaconsfield
    I think Grieve and Clarke could win their seats as independents if the LDs don't stand.
    I can't see Clarke standing again.
    I think he had already said this would be his last term.
    He said that before the previous election and changed his mind.
    Sure, but he had a party machine to do a lot of the campaigning work and the rosette vote. Not now.
  • kamski said:

    Lots of people want to get Brexit over with.
    There's only one way to get Brexit over with.
    It's not No Deal - that will be followed by years of negotiating with the EU
    It's not May's WA - ditto
    It's not revoke - leavers will carry on campaigning to leave

    It's to leave and stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union.
    Not only is this the option that by far the most people can live with, it has lots of advantages:

    The UK carries out the result of 2016 referendum to leave the EU
    The disruption is minimal
    The UK will stop sending "350 million a week" to the EU
    The UK will be out of the CAP
    The UK will be out of the CFP
    The UK will be out of "ever-closer union" or the European superstate

    Maybe the main problem is the UK will still have Freedom of Movement. But a few tweaks should be possible, I think a couple of restrictions could be introduced, an "emergency break" could be allowed. Maybe the UK could get an opt out from Freedom of Movement for any new member states, so that if, for example, Turkey ever joins the EU (of course it won't but that was a Leave campaign claim) Turkish citizens wouldn't get FoM to the UK, (nor British citizens to Turkey). Or some other fudges might be possible.

    There's a few disadvantages as well of course, but it looks like the only reasonable way forward from here

    And it is what parliament would vote for if the leaderships of the two main parties gave MPs a free vote.

    Can anyone really think either the Tory & Labour parties have done well from this stand off? If the party leaderships just stand aside they can go back to being a two party state with far less damage to the country than we are seeing now.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    Nigelb said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    Nigelb said:

    Which would tend to suggest they think Johnson has stretched prorogation to its absolute limits, and they need to establish those limits in law PDQ ?

    Yes. If he can prorogue for 5 weeks, he can do it for 5 months or 5 years.

    There is no political route to prevent that. There ought to be a legal one.
    And if there isn't? There perhaps ought to be laws on many things.
    Parliament has to meet at least once in the year, and a Bill has to be enacted - Triennial Act and Septennial Act so prorogation cannot be for more than about 10 months.
    AFAIK, the FTPA repealed the Septennial Act in its entirety.
    (The Triennial Act was repealed well before.)
    Parliament has to pass at least one Finance Act every year to set a budget and reauthorize some taxes. There’s also the Armed Forces Act that renews the legal basis of the services only lasts five years with the next being due in 2021.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293
    edited September 2019
    Byronic said:

    Corbyn acting with unusual restraint, and holding the line

    https://www.ft.com/content/30ee9c44-d07b-11e9-b018-ca4456540ea6?desktop=true

    Looks like No Deal is off the table. Probably forever. Because a new, majority Boris govt would avoid No Deal, and use the extra power and time to do something different, and a minority Boris govt would be hemmed in by parliament.

    For those wanting to avoid No Deal this game playing could go horribly wrong if the Brexit Party really take off during an election campaign and finish up holding the balance of power in a Hung Parliament.

    Westminster is playing Russian Roulette with the electorate again... It could very easily blow up in their faces.
  • Brom said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Morning PB

    Gina Millar and her "legal team" have lost then! :D

    Surely it would have been far better for Boris if she had won? He could have Parliament sitting again and get up to all sorts of mischief. At the moment he is hoisted by his own petard...
    No chance, some decent news for Boris. It's important for the country to see that Boris's actions are legit and Gina Miller etc are the ones who are trying to pick away at democracy.
    She is trying to defend something that defends our freedoms more than democracy itself. It is called the rule of law. It is the one thing we should cherish more than anything else.
  • I think BXP standing is good for the Tories.

    There are some voters who will never vote Tory. Anyone who wants Brexit and is prepared to accept the Tories will vote Tory. BXP will attract voters who want Brexit but hate the Tories. Better they vote BXP than Labour.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited September 2019
    Interesting to consider that all of this was caused by greedy bankers in 2008 who were annoyed that the person sitting next to them in the office might be getting a bigger bonus than they were. People like this:

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-iceland-crisis/executives-at-collapsed-iceland-bank-jailed-for-fraud-idUKBRE8BR0EW20121228
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,570
    edited September 2019
    kamski said:

    Lots of people want to get Brexit over with.
    There's only one way to get Brexit over with.
    It's not No Deal - that will be followed by years of negotiating with the EU
    It's not May's WA - ditto
    It's not revoke - leavers will carry on campaigning to leave

    It's to leave and stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union.
    Not only is this the option that by far the most people can live with, it has lots of advantages:

    The UK carries out the result of 2016 referendum to leave the EU
    The disruption is minimal
    The UK will stop sending "350 million a week" to the EU
    The UK will be out of the CAP
    The UK will be out of the CFP
    The UK will be out of "ever-closer union" or the European superstate

    Maybe the main problem is the UK will still have Freedom of Movement. But a few tweaks should be possible, I think a couple of restrictions could be introduced, an "emergency break" could be allowed. Maybe the UK could get an opt out from Freedom of Movement for any new member states, so that if, for example, Turkey ever joins the EU (of course it won't but that was a Leave campaign claim) Turkish citizens wouldn't get FoM to the UK, (nor British citizens to Turkey). Or some other fudges might be possible.

    There's a few disadvantages as well of course, but it looks like the only reasonable way forward from here

    Generally I agree. The only issue would be with the Customs Union. We cannot stay in 'The' Customs Union as that requires EU membership. But being in 'A' customs union like Turkey would be an utter disaster as it would leave us exposed to one sided tariff free trade. Any country with an FTA with the EU would be able to export to the UK tariff free but we would not have reciprocal rights.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,238
    rpjs said:

    Nigelb said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    Nigelb said:

    Which would tend to suggest they think Johnson has stretched prorogation to its absolute limits, and they need to establish those limits in law PDQ ?

    Yes. If he can prorogue for 5 weeks, he can do it for 5 months or 5 years.

    There is no political route to prevent that. There ought to be a legal one.
    And if there isn't? There perhaps ought to be laws on many things.
    Parliament has to meet at least once in the year, and a Bill has to be enacted - Triennial Act and Septennial Act so prorogation cannot be for more than about 10 months.
    AFAIK, the FTPA repealed the Septennial Act in its entirety.
    (The Triennial Act was repealed well before.)
    Parliament has to pass at least one Finance Act every year to set a budget and reauthorize some taxes. There’s also the Armed Forces Act that renews the legal basis of the services only lasts five years with the next being due in 2021.
    So until otherwise ruled, nothing to prevent shuttering the place for most of the year ?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,293
    kinabalu said:

    GIN1138 said:

    I just think it's funny that finally Mrs Gina "I've got my legal team on standby" Millar has actually lost one of her litigations. :D

    In many ways it would have been better if she had lost the big one a couple of years go. We would have been out on time and under the WA if she had. We would now be in transition (all peaceful and stable) and our top top team of negotiators would be cracking on with nailing down that all important future relationship.

    Paradise Lost.
    Indeed.
  • By any contemporary measure 36 was not “tragically young”. Some of his contemporaries would have been grandparents.

    A friend of a friend of mine was a grandmother at 33. :D
    Was she from Harlow ?
    South Manchester.

    Are there a lot of young grandmothers in Harlow?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,478

    By any contemporary measure 36 was not “tragically young”. Some of his contemporaries would have been grandparents.

    A friend of a friend of mine was a grandmother at 33. :D
    Snap. Or pretty close. The lady was a great-gran around the time she was 50, too.
  • GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Morning PB

    Gina Millar and her "legal team" have lost then! :D

    Surely it would have been far better for Boris if she had won? He could have Parliament sitting again and get up to all sorts of mischief. At the moment he is hoisted by his own petard...
    I just think it's funny that finally Mrs Gina "I've got my legal team on standby" Millar has actually lost one of her litigations. :D
    Mmm. How many votes in parliament has Boris The Crap won so far?
  • AndyJS said:

    Interesting to consider that all of this was caused by greedy bankers in 2008 who were annoyed that the person sitting next to them in the office might be getting a bigger bonus than they were.

    No all this was caused by Blair and Brown deciding 2006/2007 to renege on having a referendum on Lisbon because they'd lose it.

    The voters were never going to let that stand forever.
  • Scott_P said:
    That isn't, however, Labour's current Brexit policy. Labour's current Brexit policy is: "we'll negotiate a good deal. And then we'll campaign against it."
    It is actually very simple to resolve, amazed it hasnt been suggested.

    They appoint Stephen Kinnock, Lucy Powell, Caroline Flint to negotiate with the EU rather than Thornberry and Starmer and to work independently of the Labour leadership and cabinet.

    Solved, next problem please?
    Not a bad suggestion to have them on the team actually.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    edited September 2019

    kamski said:

    Lots of people want to get Brexit over with.
    There's only one way to get Brexit over with.
    It's not No Deal - that will be followed by years of negotiating with the EU
    It's not May's WA - ditto
    It's not revoke - leavers will carry on campaigning to leave

    It's to leave and stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union.
    Not only is this the option that by far the most people can live with, it has lots of advantages:

    The UK carries out the result of 2016 referendum to leave the EU
    The disruption is minimal
    The UK will stop sending "350 million a week" to the EU
    The UK will be out of the CAP
    The UK will be out of the CFP
    The UK will be out of "ever-closer union" or the European superstate

    Maybe the main problem is the UK will still have Freedom of Movement. But a few tweaks should be possible, I think a couple of restrictions could be introduced, an "emergency break" could be allowed. Maybe the UK could get an opt out from Freedom of Movement for any new member states, so that if, for example, Turkey ever joins the EU (of course it won't but that was a Leave campaign claim) Turkish citizens wouldn't get FoM to the UK, (nor British citizens to Turkey). Or some other fudges might be possible.

    There's a few disadvantages as well of course, but it looks like the only reasonable way forward from here

    that is far too sensible to appeal to the headbangers at either end of the debate. I would prefer that the whole sorry charade had never happened, but it has. I would be very happy with what you have described, it is the common sense solution.
    It’s a bit of a wish list (eg we’d still have to send money to Brussels ) but I’d be content with that. Not happy, but content. And certainly pleased it was all over. I imagine 70% of the country would feel similar, and in 10 years we could revisit the issue and decide if we want to move further away (or further in again)

    Question is, how do you get there, politically?
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    edited September 2019

    Brom said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Morning PB

    Gina Millar and her "legal team" have lost then! :D

    Surely it would have been far better for Boris if she had won? He could have Parliament sitting again and get up to all sorts of mischief. At the moment he is hoisted by his own petard...
    No chance, some decent news for Boris. It's important for the country to see that Boris's actions are legit and Gina Miller etc are the ones who are trying to pick away at democracy.
    And to establish that Conservatives will have no objection to a Labour government proroguing parliament for five years while Jeremy Corbyn nationalises jam factories from his prime ministerial dacha in Venezuela.
    Prorogation is a royal prerogative, HMQ would not approve a very lengthy one.
    And without parliament theres nothing can get on the statue book, and without a budget no way to pay for anything. So, hilarity aside, prorogation as a tool of dictatorship is a non starter.
    You use the army/police and rip up the constitution and chuck Liz in the tower
  • Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    I think they Cummings [and Boris and Grieve etc] all knew exactly what they were doing.

    Grieve and the others were preventing the Tories from implementing their policy to Brexit, do or die. Even had there been an election now and the Tories won a small majority, they could have still caused problems.

    The rotten apples have been removed now and if there's an election and Boris wins a majority he can implement his policy. There will be no Grieve sitting on the government benches after the election if Boris wins.
    So you are finally coming round to realising the PM didnt want to do no deal, and that events have largely played out as they expected, probably bar losing control of the GE date.
  • F1: bloody weather. Seems to be improving, so Kvyat's slipped out of the top 3.
  • GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Morning PB

    Gina Millar and her "legal team" have lost then! :D

    Surely it would have been far better for Boris if she had won? He could have Parliament sitting again and get up to all sorts of mischief. At the moment he is hoisted by his own petard...
    I just think it's funny that finally Mrs Gina "I've got my legal team on standby" Millar has actually lost one of her litigations. :D
    Mmm. How many votes in parliament has Boris The Crap won so far?
    Votes in Parliament don't matter.

    Lets have the inevitable election and then speak.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,163

    kamski said:

    Lots of people want to get Brexit over with.
    There's only one way to get Brexit over with.
    It's not No Deal - that will be followed by years of negotiating with the EU
    It's not May's WA - ditto
    It's not revoke - leavers will carry on campaigning to leave

    It's to leave and stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union.
    Not only is this the option that by far the most people can live with, it has lots of advantages:

    The UK carries out the result of 2016 referendum to leave the EU
    The disruption is minimal
    The UK will stop sending "350 million a week" to the EU
    The UK will be out of the CAP
    The UK will be out of the CFP
    The UK will be out of "ever-closer union" or the European superstate

    Maybe the main problem is the UK will still have Freedom of Movement. But a few tweaks should be possible, I think a couple of restrictions could be introduced, an "emergency break" could be allowed. Maybe the UK could get an opt out from Freedom of Movement for any new member states, so that if, for example, Turkey ever joins the EU (of course it won't but that was a Leave campaign claim) Turkish citizens wouldn't get FoM to the UK, (nor British citizens to Turkey). Or some other fudges might be possible.

    There's a few disadvantages as well of course, but it looks like the only reasonable way forward from here

    And it is what parliament would vote for if the leaderships of the two main parties gave MPs a free vote.

    Can anyone really think either the Tory & Labour parties have done well from this stand off? If the party leaderships just stand aside they can go back to being a two party state with far less damage to the country than we are seeing now.
    A great many mps have rebelled on this issue. If others are not willing to stand up without being given a free vote on this issue they are cowards, end of.
  • dr_spyn said:

    https://twitter.com/elliotwagland/status/1169904935451815937

    Do as your told or you're going to MacDonalds.

    Funnily enough, that's what Dom said to Boris this morning as well.


  • Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    I think they Cummings [and Boris and Grieve etc] all knew exactly what they were doing.

    Grieve and the others were preventing the Tories from implementing their policy to Brexit, do or die. Even had there been an election now and the Tories won a small majority, they could have still caused problems.

    The rotten apples have been removed now and if there's an election and Boris wins a majority he can implement his policy. There will be no Grieve sitting on the government benches after the election if Boris wins.
    So you are finally coming round to realising the PM didnt want to do no deal, and that events have largely played out as they expected, probably bar losing control of the GE date.
    I have always said the PM wants a deal [as the PM says] and the only way of getting a good deal is to be prepared to have no deal [as the PM says].
  • Byronic said:

    kamski said:

    Lots of people want to get Brexit over with.
    There's only one way to get Brexit over with.
    It's not No Deal - that will be followed by years of negotiating with the EU
    It's not May's WA - ditto
    It's not revoke - leavers will carry on campaigning to leave

    It's to leave and stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union.
    Not only is this the option that by far the most people can live with, it has lots of advantages:

    The UK carries out the result of 2016 referendum to leave the EU
    The disruption is minimal
    The UK will stop sending "350 million a week" to the EU
    The UK will be out of the CAP
    The UK will be out of the CFP
    The UK will be out of "ever-closer union" or the European superstate

    Maybe the main problem is the UK will still have Freedom of Movement. But a few tweaks should be possible, I think a couple of restrictions could be introduced, an "emergency break" could be allowed. Maybe the UK could get an opt out from Freedom of Movement for any new member states, so that if, for example, Turkey ever joins the EU (of course it won't but that was a Leave campaign claim) Turkish citizens wouldn't get FoM to the UK, (nor British citizens to Turkey). Or some other fudges might be possible.

    There's a few disadvantages as well of course, but it looks like the only reasonable way forward from here

    that is far too sensible to appeal to the headbangers at either end of the debate. I would prefer that the whole sorry charade had never happened, but it has. I would be very happy with what you have described, it is the common sense solution.
    It’s a bit of a wish list (eg we’d still have to send money to Brussels ) but I’d be content with that. Not happy, but content. And certainly pleased it was all over. I imagine 70% of the country would feel similar, and in 10 years we could revisit the issue and decide if we want to move further away (or further in again)

    Question is, how do you get there, politically?
    'Tis a good question. I think a single transferable vote 3 option referendum might get us there, but I can't see it happening. I would put it as my first preference above remain.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    edited September 2019
    Too chicken shit to fight his own seat but goes fo one where hes coming from 11%??
    And the LDs had a guy already selected. Strange.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,478
    Brom said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Morning PB

    Gina Millar and her "legal team" have lost then! :D

    Surely it would have been far better for Boris if she had won? He could have Parliament sitting again and get up to all sorts of mischief. At the moment he is hoisted by his own petard...
    No chance, some decent news for Boris. It's important for the country to see that Boris's actions are legit and Gina Miller etc are the ones who are trying to pick away at democracy.
    How is proroguing Parliament 'democratic'?

    Some 'democrats' on here seem as committed to democracy as the one-time German National Socialist Party was to socialism.
  • dr_spyn said:

    https://twitter.com/elliotwagland/status/1169904935451815937

    Do as your told or you're going to MacDonalds.

    Funnily enough, that's what Dom said to Boris this morning as well.


    At the moment the the tories can't control their bull (sh*t)
  • Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    Grieve and the others were preventing the Tories from implementing their policy to Brexit, do or die.
    The 2017 manifesto they were elected on was not “Brexit do or die” least of all to a deadline set by the President of France!
  • Too chicken shit to fight his own seat
    What a childish comment.
  • kle4 said:

    kamski said:

    Lots of people want to get Brexit over with.
    There's only one way to get Brexit over with.
    It's not No Deal - that will be followed by years of negotiating with the EU
    It's not May's WA - ditto
    It's not revoke - leavers will carry on campaigning to leave

    It's to leave and stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union.
    Not only is this the option that by far the most people can live with, it has lots of advantages:

    The UK carries out the result of 2016 referendum to leave the EU
    The disruption is minimal
    The UK will stop sending "350 million a week" to the EU
    The UK will be out of the CAP
    The UK will be out of the CFP
    The UK will be out of "ever-closer union" or the European superstate

    Maybe the main problem is the UK will still have Freedom of Movement. But a few tweaks should be possible, I think a couple of restrictions could be introduced, an "emergency break" could be allowed. Maybe the UK could get an opt out from Freedom of Movement for any new member states, so that if, for example, Turkey ever joins the EU (of course it won't but that was a Leave campaign claim) Turkish citizens wouldn't get FoM to the UK, (nor British citizens to Turkey). Or some other fudges might be possible.

    There's a few disadvantages as well of course, but it looks like the only reasonable way forward from here

    And it is what parliament would vote for if the leaderships of the two main parties gave MPs a free vote.

    Can anyone really think either the Tory & Labour parties have done well from this stand off? If the party leaderships just stand aside they can go back to being a two party state with far less damage to the country than we are seeing now.
    A great many mps have rebelled on this issue. If others are not willing to stand up without being given a free vote on this issue they are cowards, end of.
    May gave her MPs [except the cabinet] a free vote during the Indicative Votes. Parliament still rejected every option.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,238

    Too chicken shit to fight his own seat
    So irritating when your opponents don't do what you want them to, isn't it ?
  • Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    I think they Cummings [and Boris and Grieve etc] all knew exactly what they were doing.

    Grieve and the others were preventing the Tories from implementing their policy to Brexit, do or die. Even had there been an election now and the Tories won a small majority, they could have still caused problems.

    The rotten apples have been removed now and if there's an election and Boris wins a majority he can implement his policy. There will be no Grieve sitting on the government benches after the election if Boris wins.
    I suspect the whip removal was initially just a threat that Boris had no intention of carrying out - recall Leadsom's comments on the night of the vote. But when the rebellion materialized Cummings (possibly pissed) was enraged and ordered Boris to go through with it. (Boris, left to his own devices, wouldn't endanger many long-term friendships in the Tory party simply over some parliamentary fun and games.)
  • eekeek Posts: 28,406

    Too chicken shit to fight his own seat
    The Lib Dems already have a candidate for his seat.
  • Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    Grieve and the others were preventing the Tories from implementing their policy to Brexit, do or die.
    The 2017 manifesto they were elected on was not “Brexit do or die” least of all to a deadline set by the President of France!
    The 2017 manifesto didn't win a majority and the PM was elected by the party after that and is preparing his own manifesto.

    He needs MPs who will back his own manifesto, not May's.
  • dr_spyn said:

    https://twitter.com/elliotwagland/status/1169904935451815937

    Do as your told or you're going to MacDonalds.

    Funnily enough, that's what Dom said to Boris this morning as well.


    I think the quote should be "I am the only person you have come across who has produced more bullshit and carnage than you could ever manage, even in a teashop"
  • Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool.
    I think they Cummings [and Boris and Grieve etc] all knew exactly what they were doing.

    Grieve and the others were preventing the Tories from implementing their policy to Brexit, do or die. Even had there been an election now and the Tories won a small majority, they could have still caused problems.

    The rotten apples have been removed now and if there's an election and Boris wins a majority he can implement his policy. There will be no Grieve sitting on the government benches after the election if Boris wins.
    So you are finally coming round to realising the PM didnt want to do no deal, and that events have largely played out as they expected, probably bar losing control of the GE date.
    I have always said the PM wants a deal [as the PM says] and the only way of getting a good deal is to be prepared to have no deal [as the PM says].
    His half hearted prorogation made no deal extremely unlikely with close to zero benefits for actually delivering no deal as parliament had time either side of it.

    If they knew exactly what they were doing, and I think they broadly did and your post says you agree, then by definition they were trying to minimise the chance of no deal and gain an extension.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    eek said:

    Too chicken shit to fight his own seat
    The Lib Dems already have a candidate for his seat.
    They had one for London and westminister too
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Morning PB

    Gina Millar and her "legal team" have lost then! :D

    Surely it would have been far better for Boris if she had won? He could have Parliament sitting again and get up to all sorts of mischief. At the moment he is hoisted by his own petard...
    I just think it's funny that finally Mrs Gina "I've got my legal team on standby" Millar has actually lost one of her litigations. :D
    Mmm. How many votes in parliament has Boris The Crap won so far?
    Votes in Parliament don't matter.

    Lets have the inevitable election and then speak.
    OK. November ?? 2019
  • Regarding the thread, it should reflect on why the polls in 2016 generally found that Remain would win the referendum by about the same margin as they lost it. It doesn't.

    The polls then had a systematic bias that tended to overstate in the sample the sort of people who voted Remain (or miss those who tended to vote Leave). If there is a correlation between votes for Remain then and support for Remain now (there is indeed!) and the factors causing sampling bias in 2016 are still in play, then you would expect the pattern described.
  • AndyJS said:

    eek said:

    Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    And now the Tories can't back down resulting in 12 seats probably being needlessly lost.
    Can't see many of those indies winning, grieve for example has a very tough ask to win Beaconsfield
    I think Grieve and Clarke could win their seats as independents if the LDs don't stand.
    I can't see Clarke standing again.
    I think he had already said this would be his last term.
    Becoming a widower may have changed his mind. I sense mischief in the old dog yet.....
  • I suspect the whip removal was initially just a threat that Boris had no intention of carrying out - recall Leadsom's comments on the night of the vote. But when the rebellion materialized Cummings (possibly pissed) was enraged and ordered Boris to go through with it. (Boris, left to his own devices, wouldn't endanger many long-term friendships in the Tory party simply over some parliamentary fun and games.)

    I think Leadsom's comments were a mistake or misunderstanding.

    You can not threaten something then fail to follow through. If you do that you have zero authority ever again, that would be terminal stupidity. Never ever threaten something you are not prepared to follow through on.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,237
    kamski said:

    Lots of people want to get Brexit over with.
    There's only one way to get Brexit over with.
    It's not No Deal - that will be followed by years of negotiating with the EU
    It's not May's WA - ditto
    It's not revoke - leavers will carry on campaigning to leave

    It's to leave and stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union.
    Not only is this the option that by far the most people can live with, it has lots of advantages:

    The UK carries out the result of 2016 referendum to leave the EU
    The disruption is minimal
    The UK will stop sending "350 million a week" to the EU
    The UK will be out of the CAP
    The UK will be out of the CFP
    The UK will be out of "ever-closer union" or the European superstate

    Maybe the main problem is the UK will still have Freedom of Movement. But a few tweaks should be possible, I think a couple of restrictions could be introduced, an "emergency break" could be allowed. Maybe the UK could get an opt out from Freedom of Movement for any new member states, so that if, for example, Turkey ever joins the EU (of course it won't but that was a Leave campaign claim) Turkish citizens wouldn't get FoM to the UK, (nor British citizens to Turkey). Or some other fudges might be possible.

    There's a few disadvantages as well of course, but it looks like the only reasonable way forward from here

    This (subject to confirmatory referendum) is the 'incoherent' Labour policy.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,238
    The arguments for the Democrats seriously contesting Texas:
    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/09/house-republicans-texas-are-retiring-2020/597406/

    (FWIW, I think they should try to raise the cash to do so.)
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Nigelb said:

    Too chicken shit to fight his own seat
    So irritating when your opponents don't do what you want them to, isn't it ?
    It is a bit. Odd choice of seat to fight though, hes high profile, I'd have thought they'd give him an easier gig
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    Nigelb said:

    Too chicken shit to fight his own seat
    So irritating when your opponents don't do what you want them to, isn't it ?
    Are you suggesting that the Lib Dems think that Streatham is a slam dunk gain even without Chuka and that they can use him to increase their chances in London and Westminster?
  • GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Morning PB

    Gina Millar and her "legal team" have lost then! :D

    Surely it would have been far better for Boris if she had won? He could have Parliament sitting again and get up to all sorts of mischief. At the moment he is hoisted by his own petard...
    I just think it's funny that finally Mrs Gina "I've got my legal team on standby" Millar has actually lost one of her litigations. :D
    Mmm. How many votes in parliament has Boris The Crap won so far?
    Votes in Parliament don't matter.

    Lets have the inevitable election and then speak.
    OK. November ?? 2019
    5 November works for me.
  • Byronic said:

    kamski said:

    Lots of people want to get Brexit over with.
    There's only one way to get Brexit over with.
    It's not No Deal - that will be followed by years of negotiating with the EU
    It's not May's WA - ditto
    It's not revoke - leavers will carry on campaigning to leave

    It's to leave and stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union.
    Not only is this the option that by far the most people can live with, it has lots of advantages:

    The UK carries out the result of 2016 referendum to leave the EU
    The disruption is minimal
    The UK will stop sending "350 million a week" to the EU
    The UK will be out of the CAP
    The UK will be out of the CFP
    The UK will be out of "ever-closer union" or the European superstate

    Maybe the main problem is the UK will still have Freedom of Movement. But a few tweaks should be possible, I think a couple of restrictions could be introduced, an "emergency break" could be allowed. Maybe the UK could get an opt out from Freedom of Movement for any new member states, so that if, for example, Turkey ever joins the EU (of course it won't but that was a Leave campaign claim) Turkish citizens wouldn't get FoM to the UK, (nor British citizens to Turkey). Or some other fudges might be possible.

    There's a few disadvantages as well of course, but it looks like the only reasonable way forward from here

    that is far too sensible to appeal to the headbangers at either end of the debate. I would prefer that the whole sorry charade had never happened, but it has. I would be very happy with what you have described, it is the common sense solution.
    It’s a bit of a wish list (eg we’d still have to send money to Brussels ) but I’d be content with that. Not happy, but content. And certainly pleased it was all over. I imagine 70% of the country would feel similar, and in 10 years we could revisit the issue and decide if we want to move further away (or further in again)

    Question is, how do you get there, politically?
    In 2016 a free vote would have been fine. Now the idea of compromise has been so tarnished that will look like a stitch up. A citizens assembly is the best option, and Rory Stewart would have made an excellent PM.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    Too chicken shit to fight his own seat
    What a childish comment.
    Tis the season for it looking at the press
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469
    Umunna has chosen City & Westminster apparently because parties conduct MRP polling.
  • Scott_P said:
    Proroguing doesn’t look too smart now - just allows Jezza to sit back and count the days until a post-No Deal general election. Tic toc.
    I think you mean a post-extension general election? After Johnson's "do or die" pledge to leave by 31 October has been binned.
    Depends whether Boris can kill off the Rebel Bill by not allowing HM to give assent etc. His best option now is Leave 31 October with No Deal and election later. Nothing else seems possible or good.
    I think the govt has already agreed the bill will receive the RA by Monday.

    In that case Cummings must have another trick up his sleeve to prevent an extension. Quite what remains to be seen and be amazed at.
    I do wish people would stop elevating this politically autistic advisor. He was good on one single issue campaign that didn't involve dealing with MPs or, indeed, anyone who had a voice in or around his team.

    Cummings is politically inept and has created a total disaster.

    We had all this nonsense hero worship with Nick Timothy.
    Cummings is a tool. Framing the opposition as blocking Brexit is broadly a winning approach I think but its execution has been abject. What really did for him was the size of the rebellion. I guess he thought they might be suspending the whip from a handful, not 21, but that was down to how things were done. The sequencing was all askew.
    Grieve and the others were preventing the Tories from implementing their policy to Brexit, do or die.
    The 2017 manifesto they were elected on was not “Brexit do or die” least of all to a deadline set by the President of France!
    The 2017 manifesto didn't win a majority and the PM was elected by the party after that and is preparing his own manifesto.

    He needs MPs who will back his own manifesto, not May's.
    He needs a mandate for his own manifesto - in the meantime MPs were elected on the 2017 one.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,193
    kinabalu said:

    kamski said:

    Lots of people want to get Brexit over with.
    There's only one way to get Brexit over with.
    It's not No Deal - that will be followed by years of negotiating with the EU
    It's not May's WA - ditto
    It's not revoke - leavers will carry on campaigning to leave

    It's to leave and stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union.
    Not only is this the option that by far the most people can live with, it has lots of advantages:

    The UK carries out the result of 2016 referendum to leave the EU
    The disruption is minimal
    The UK will stop sending "350 million a week" to the EU
    The UK will be out of the CAP
    The UK will be out of the CFP
    The UK will be out of "ever-closer union" or the European superstate

    Maybe the main problem is the UK will still have Freedom of Movement. But a few tweaks should be possible, I think a couple of restrictions could be introduced, an "emergency break" could be allowed. Maybe the UK could get an opt out from Freedom of Movement for any new member states, so that if, for example, Turkey ever joins the EU (of course it won't but that was a Leave campaign claim) Turkish citizens wouldn't get FoM to the UK, (nor British citizens to Turkey). Or some other fudges might be possible.

    There's a few disadvantages as well of course, but it looks like the only reasonable way forward from here

    This (subject to confirmatory referendum) is the 'incoherent' Labour policy.
    Is it though? I've never heard Corbyn say that they would stay in the Single Market.
  • His half hearted prorogation made no deal extremely unlikely with close to zero benefits for actually delivering no deal as parliament had time either side of it.

    If they knew exactly what they were doing, and I think they broadly did and your post says you agree, then by definition they were trying to minimise the chance of no deal and gain an extension.

    His half-hearted prorogation was as far as he could constitutionally push it.

    To completely prorogue Parliament would have been undemocratic and probably ruled illegal by the courts.

    By acting as he did he flushed out the rats and got rid of them.
  • A good article Alistair.

    A few other points to consider:

    - The final polls for the referendum itself has remain in the lead for most pollsters so it is not perhaps surprising if remain is in the lead now
    - I agree that leavers are probably harder to find. Many older voters were leave and don't use the internet
    - It is worth thinking about the difference between a general election turnout and the referendum turnout. It is my view that many of the extra voters voted leave and were often in safe Labour seats

    As you say it is hard to know exactly what the weightings should be.

    If we have an election soon and it becomes a proxy referendum on Brexit then we could see a much higher turnout than usual, which could certainly lead to another polling disaster.
  • By any contemporary measure 36 was not “tragically young”. Some of his contemporaries would have been grandparents.

    A friend of a friend of mine was a grandmother at 33. :D
    Snap. Or pretty close. The lady was a great-gran around the time she was 50, too.
    That is unlikely to happen to the woman I knew. Life was not kind to her kids. They are still alive and kicking but both have suffered medical issues - one congenital, the other by a road traffic accident.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    Umunna has chosen City & Westminster apparently because parties conduct MRP polling.

    If they are winning that they are taking most of London
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    Nigelb said:

    Too chicken shit to fight his own seat
    So irritating when your opponents don't do what you want them to, isn't it ?
    It is a bit. Odd choice of seat to fight though, hes high profile, I'd have thought they'd give him an easier gig
    It's not an odd choice IMO, he'd have a good chance of winning.
  • surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Morning PB

    Gina Millar and her "legal team" have lost then! :D

    Surely it would have been far better for Boris if she had won? He could have Parliament sitting again and get up to all sorts of mischief. At the moment he is hoisted by his own petard...
    I just think it's funny that finally Mrs Gina "I've got my legal team on standby" Millar has actually lost one of her litigations. :D
    Mmm. How many votes in parliament has Boris The Crap won so far?
    Votes in Parliament don't matter.

    Lets have the inevitable election and then speak.
    OK. November ?? 2019
    5 November works for me.
    Probably OK by me too. Is it Oct 19 + 17 days ?
  • By any contemporary measure 36 was not “tragically young”. Some of his contemporaries would have been grandparents.

    A friend of a friend of mine was a grandmother at 33. :D
    Was she from Harlow ?
    South Manchester.

    Are there a lot of young grandmothers in Harlow?
    I believe so
  • kinabalu said:

    kamski said:

    Lots of people want to get Brexit over with.
    There's only one way to get Brexit over with.
    It's not No Deal - that will be followed by years of negotiating with the EU
    It's not May's WA - ditto
    It's not revoke - leavers will carry on campaigning to leave

    It's to leave and stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union.
    Not only is this the option that by far the most people can live with, it has lots of advantages:

    The UK carries out the result of 2016 referendum to leave the EU
    The disruption is minimal
    The UK will stop sending "350 million a week" to the EU
    The UK will be out of the CAP
    The UK will be out of the CFP
    The UK will be out of "ever-closer union" or the European superstate

    Maybe the main problem is the UK will still have Freedom of Movement. But a few tweaks should be possible, I think a couple of restrictions could be introduced, an "emergency break" could be allowed. Maybe the UK could get an opt out from Freedom of Movement for any new member states, so that if, for example, Turkey ever joins the EU (of course it won't but that was a Leave campaign claim) Turkish citizens wouldn't get FoM to the UK, (nor British citizens to Turkey). Or some other fudges might be possible.

    There's a few disadvantages as well of course, but it looks like the only reasonable way forward from here

    This (subject to confirmatory referendum) is the 'incoherent' Labour policy.
    No it definitely isnt. Kamski put "It's not revoke - leavers will carry on campaigning to leave". Labour policy is heavily tilted toward 2nd ref and revoke.
  • Byronic said:

    kamski said:

    Lots of people want to get Brexit over with.
    There's only one way to get Brexit over with.
    It's not No Deal - that will be followed by years of negotiating with the EU
    It's not May's WA - ditto
    It's not revoke - leavers will carry on campaigning to leave

    It's to leave and stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union.
    Not only is this the option that by far the most people can live with, it has lots of advantages:

    The UK carries out the result of 2016 referendum to leave the EU
    The disruption is minimal
    The UK will stop sending "350 million a week" to the EU
    The UK will be out of the CAP
    The UK will be out of the CFP
    The UK will be out of "ever-closer union" or the European superstate

    Maybe the main problem is the UK will still have Freedom of Movement. But a few tweaks should be possible, I think a couple of restrictions could be introduced, an "emergency break" could be allowed. Maybe the UK could get an opt out from Freedom of Movement for any new member states, so that if, for example, Turkey ever joins the EU (of course it won't but that was a Leave campaign claim) Turkish citizens wouldn't get FoM to the UK, (nor British citizens to Turkey). Or some other fudges might be possible.

    There's a few disadvantages as well of course, but it looks like the only reasonable way forward from here

    that is far too sensible to appeal to the headbangers at either end of the debate. I would prefer that the whole sorry charade had never happened, but it has. I would be very happy with what you have described, it is the common sense solution.
    It’s a bit of a wish list (eg we’d still have to send money to Brussels ) but I’d be content with that. Not happy, but content. And certainly pleased it was all over. I imagine 70% of the country would feel similar, and in 10 years we could revisit the issue and decide if we want to move further away (or further in again)

    Question is, how do you get there, politically?
    First, the Boris approach needs to fail, and be seen to fail. The next key moment is when he has to open his box labelled "Brilliant plan that the EU will agree to" and we all discover that it's empty.

    Next, we need an inconclusive election.

    Then, the whole thing gets chucked over to the Rory Steward / Archbishop of Canterbury Citizens Jury thing, who will converge on a very soft Brexit because it's the only thing that makes any sense at all.
This discussion has been closed.