So we have a Supreme Court hearing pencilled in for 17th September to determine whether or not a prorogation that will come into effect tonight is valid or not, the Inner House of the Court of Session having refused to make an interim order at the end of last week. They are apparently due to give their decision on Wednesday and the High Court has promised its decision dismissing Gina Miller's case in early course to help the Supreme Court.
I am sure I am missing something but is this not all a bit pointless?
Surely if the prorogation is ruled illegal, Parliament would need to be recalled?
But they are asking the Courts to strike down an order that is already in effect. And I am not sure what would happen to Parliament in those circumstances to be honest. On whose authority would it be reconvened?
Its probably academic because I don't think that the appeals have any prospects of success in any event but even by recent standards this seems frankly weird displacement activity.
I think the courts can only rule on whether the advice is legal, not on the Queen's action. I don't think the prorogation can be reversed. But the judgment would be relevant to possible prorogations in the future.
Even judges can get it wrong. But all else being equal his seems a more considered view than people desperately brainstorming ideas to get around the law because they want it to be true.
But there are those pesky Tory gains from the SNP in Scotland again!!
So what, the Tories would still be about 70 seats ahead of Labour even if they lost every Scottish seat to the SNP (Labour will lose 6 seats to the SNP too)
The key thing is the majority. If we have an election at which Johnson tells everyone the opposition is intent on keeping the UK in the EU and the opposition ends up with a majority of seats, then by Leaver logic there will be a mandate to Remain.
Possibly though on those figures the DUP could still hold the balance of power giving a majority for Brexit, while if Swinson holds the balance of power as is the only alternative on those numbers she would in her own words refuse to vote for a Corbyn Premiership
The LD's would support whoever in return for a promise off a referendum...since that is more likely to come from Labour a NOM outcome where the LD's hold the balance of power will almost certainly lead to Corbyn being next PM....
So we have a Supreme Court hearing pencilled in for 17th September to determine whether or not a prorogation that will come into effect tonight is valid or not, the Inner House of the Court of Session having refused to make an interim order at the end of last week. They are apparently due to give their decision on Wednesday and the High Court has promised its decision dismissing Gina Miller's case in early course to help the Supreme Court.
I am sure I am missing something but is this not all a bit pointless?
Not if the Supreme Court sheds further light on when prorogation can and cannot happen - and the circumstances under which it can be extended.
I am sure that would be very useful the next time this comes up. Hopefully that will not be for some time.
It could happen within the next few weeks!
It's being so optimistic that keeps you going Joff. Don't get me wrong, more court cases and more lawyers gainfully engaged are not entirely a bad thing but I am sure that there is something more useful that the Courts could be doing.
Farage has always outright opposed the Withdrawal Agreement, even without the backstop and so the only Tory MPs and candidates he will do a pact with are the likes of Baker, Francois and Redwood wh
So come October, Boris Johnson will be extending Article 50 and pursuing a policy of implementing a version of Theresa May's deal? How do you think winning back Brexit Party voters will go after that?
He won't, Boris will likely be Leader of the Opposition if the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop has passed by then.
Though of course Yougov gives a Tory majority of around 100 in its latest poll even with the Brexit Party still over 10% as the Brexit Party are picking up Labour Leave votes too
You were literally saying earlier that Boris would pass the WA with the NI only backstop. What’s changed?
He might but only if he wins a majority at the next general election
Why would he pass the WA with NI backstop if he had a majority? Surely then he could implement his highly successful ‘my way or no deal’ maneuver?
Boris' first choice has always been the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop, only Farage's first choice is no Deal
Yea. That’s what I said. Why would he pass the WA with the NI backstop if he had a majority? Surely he could easily convince the EU to drop the backstop entirely if he had a majority and could effectively threaten them with no deal?
But there are those pesky Tory gains from the SNP in Scotland again!!
So what, the Tories would still be about 70 seats ahead of Labour even if they lost every Scottish seat to the SNP (Labour will lose 6 seats to the SNP too)
The Tories only have one potential partner....well maybe the LD's if they offer another referendum.
If the election delivers the 2010 result which is not beyond imagination....a Tory led minority Govt with LD supply support could have the numbers to throw both the ERG and the DUP under a bus.....spelling out a Maylite deal and a promise of a referendum....
Tories plus LDs significantly more than Labour plus SNP plus Greens plus Plaid certainly on current polls
But there are those pesky Tory gains from the SNP in Scotland again!!
So what, the Tories would still be about 70 seats ahead of Labour even if they lost every Scottish seat to the SNP (Labour will lose 6 seats to the SNP too)
The key thing is the majority. If we have an election at which Johnson tells everyone the opposition is intent on keeping the UK in the EU and the opposition ends up with a majority of seats, then by Leaver logic there will be a mandate to Remain.
Possibly though on those figures the DUP could still hold the balance of power giving a majority for Brexit, while if Swinson holds the balance of power as is the only alternative on those numbers she would in her own words refuse to vote for a Corbyn Premiership
What would the DUP demand from Johnson to vote with the Conservatives?
But there are those pesky Tory gains from the SNP in Scotland again!!
Perhaps a thread on how many Scottish seats would be SNP under AV would be enlightening.
Opponents of FPTP don’t normally point to Scotland as an example of the injustices..
In 2015, I was making this comment all the time. The SNP won 95% of the seats with 50% of the vote. How can that be democratic?
Since it made fuck all difference to the amount of influence Scotland had on subsequent events, the democracy point is somewhat academic. In any case it's the UK's system, if they don't like it they should get off their lardy arses and do something about it.
Paraphrased: We should put up with a rubbish electoral system because Scotland doesn't matter.
More like we'll put up with a rubbish electoral system because we're innately conservative & the 2 main parties like FPTP for partisan reasons, and Scotland, where's that?
41% think proroguing Parliament unacceptable for No Deal but a higher 54% think it unacceptable to revoke
It’s an interesting piece of polling because it tests how respondents’ views about ‘unconstitutional’ actions change if they are first asked about their approval for using that technique to force through a policy against their preference. Interestingly Leave supporters were less likely to support prorogation in order to facilitate no deal if they were first asked about using it to support revocation, whereas Remain supporters showed little difference in their attachment to constitutional principles whatever the order of the questions.
The 54% headline figure is based on reactions before trying out the ‘disliked option’ test - not sure if you can reconstruct the headline figure for Leavers after the test.
I don’t think the EC would allow that . Because you wouldnt have a proper mandate .
Let’s say it ended up with 40 yes and 60 no. And then the second question only allows those who voted no to answer the second question . You then have stopped the 40 percent from having an opinion on what happens next .
The best way is to have two referendums . A simple straight Remain v Leave . If it’s Leave then you have a second ballot on deal v no deal . That way you get a proper mandate going forward .
The whole justification for the second in-out referendum is that people should get to choose whether they still want to do it *once they know what leave means*. So it doesn't help to have a Remain vs Leave vote, then the Deal vs no No Deal vote after that.
What would totally make sense would be to do Deal vs No Deal first to work out what Brexit means, and once you've decided what Brexit means, do That vs Remain to make sure the voters still want to do it.
The complication is that there would be an almighty bunfight about how to handle spending limits and media time, eg do the Leave campaigns cumulatively get 3x the amount that the Remain campaign does, which seems unfair, or is one of the Leave campaigns expected to run 2 rounds on the same budget that Remain had for one, which also sounds unfair, etc etc.
The complication with this proposal is many "die hard remainers" voting for "No deal", in the hope that there will be some "Brexit but not no-deal" voters who will then vote remain in the "Remain versus No deal" referendum.
Yep any 3 way referendum can be gamed - which is why the electoral commission won't allow it.
Well a straight AV type ranking referendum seems the least objectionable. There are three options for our future, Deal, No Deal, No Brexit. Please rank in order of preference. 2 points awarded to your first choice, 1 to your second choice, 0 to the 3rd choice. Total up number of points. (this way everyone's second pref counts and not just those who get knocked out first)
But there are those pesky Tory gains from the SNP in Scotland again!!
So what, the Tories would still be about 70 seats ahead of Labour even if they lost every Scottish seat to the SNP (Labour will lose 6 seats to the SNP too)
The key thing is the majority. If we have an election at which Johnson tells everyone the opposition is intent on keeping the UK in the EU and the opposition ends up with a majority of seats, then by Leaver logic there will be a mandate to Remain.
Possibly though on those figures the DUP could still hold the balance of power giving a majority for Brexit, while if Swinson holds the balance of power as is the only alternative on those numbers she would in her own words refuse to vote for a Corbyn Premiership
What would the DUP demand from Johnson to vote with the Conservatives?
Well it would have to be no Deal without a Tory majority yes reliant on the DUP unless the NI backstop removed
But there are those pesky Tory gains from the SNP in Scotland again!!
So what, the Tories would still be about 70 seats ahead of Labour even if they lost every Scottish seat to the SNP (Labour will lose 6 seats to the SNP too)
The Tories only have one potential partner....well maybe the LD's if they offer another referendum.
If the election delivers the 2010 result which is not beyond imagination....a Tory led minority Govt with LD supply support could have the numbers to throw both the ERG and the DUP under a bus.....spelling out a Maylite deal and a promise of a referendum....
Tories plus LDs significantly more than Labour plus SNP plus Greens plus Plaid certainly on current polls
The LD's will jump into bed with whoever offers a referendum with remain as an option....
But there are those pesky Tory gains from the SNP in Scotland again!!
So what, the Tories would still be about 70 seats ahead of Labour even if they lost every Scottish seat to the SNP (Labour will lose 6 seats to the SNP too)
The key thing is the majority. If we have an election at which Johnson tells everyone the opposition is intent on keeping the UK in the EU and the opposition ends up with a majority of seats, then by Leaver logic there will be a mandate to Remain.
Possibly though on those figures the DUP could still hold the balance of power giving a majority for Brexit, while if Swinson holds the balance of power as is the only alternative on those numbers she would in her own words refuse to vote for a Corbyn Premiership
The LD's would support whoever in return for a promise off a referendum...since that is more likely to come from Labour a NOM outcome where the LD's hold the balance of power will almost certainly lead to Corbyn being next PM....
An alternative is that a Tory remains PM, but with absolutely no power. The opposition could just agree legislation for a referendum - or even for Revoke - and get it through.
Yes, MPs have refused to vote for Brexit with a Deal or with No Deal despite the Leave win
They are just trying to honour the Leave campaign pledge that we would Leave with a deal.
TSE in full on lie mode again.
Sorry I have to agree with TSE, every time Project Fear said we would / could leave without a deal, Leave stated we would get a (great, awesome, world's easiest) deal .
I think quite a lot depends on how the extension is sorted.
If Bozo rolls over and seeks it himself in accordance with the rebel act then Farage will go into full betrayal mode, the BXP will pick up in the polls and the opposition will probably decide it's in their interests to go for an early GE.
But if Bozo tries to frustrate the process he will probably be VONC'd and replaced by a rebel-led government, led by a grandee or even by Corbyn, and I wonder if such a government might lead to a second referendum before a GE. Suppose Corbyn offered the LDs such a referendum as the price of their supporting him as caretaker? Would they really reject such an offer? A month ago perhaps they would but now I'm not so sure. They seem to have worked so closely together over the past week that personal relationships and mutual trust must have improved.
So I do not think an early election can be taken for granted.
It's not just a question of being VONCed, though, is it? It's potentially a question of being convicted, imprisoned and made personally liable for damages.
But there are those pesky Tory gains from the SNP in Scotland again!!
So what, the Tories would still be about 70 seats ahead of Labour even if they lost every Scottish seat to the SNP (Labour will lose 6 seats to the SNP too)
The key thing is the majority. If we have an election at which Johnson tells everyone the opposition is intent on keeping the UK in the EU and the opposition ends up with a majority of seats, then by Leaver logic there will be a mandate to Remain.
Possibly though on those figures the DUP could still hold the balance of power giving a majority for Brexit, while if Swinson holds the balance of power as is the only alternative on those numbers she would in her own words refuse to vote for a Corbyn Premiership
The LD's would support whoever in return for a promise off a referendum...since that is more likely to come from Labour a NOM outcome where the LD's hold the balance of power will almost certainly lead to Corbyn being next PM....
The LDs will vote down a Corbyn Premiership, they do not need it if they have the numbers for a referendum while it kills them in Tory Remain seats.
But there are those pesky Tory gains from the SNP in Scotland again!!
So what, the Tories would still be about 70 seats ahead of Labour even if they lost every Scottish seat to the SNP (Labour will lose 6 seats to the SNP too)
The key thing is the majority. If we have an election at which Johnson tells everyone the opposition is intent on keeping the UK in the EU and the opposition ends up with a majority of seats, then by Leaver logic there will be a mandate to Remain.
Possibly though on those figures the DUP could still hold the balance of power giving a majority for Brexit, while if Swinson holds the balance of power as is the only alternative on those numbers she would in her own words refuse to vote for a Corbyn Premiership
What would the DUP demand from Johnson to vote with the Conservatives?
Yes, MPs have refused to vote for Brexit with a Deal or with No Deal despite the Leave win
MPs who voted against May's deal are now in government. Meanwhile those who voted for the deal 3 times have been expelled from the Tory Party. Go figure.
Superb piece Casino although it’s another piece by a Remainer. 🤣
Glad to see you responding to criticism 👍🏻
Although the thrust of the criticism was that the articles were all pro Remain, not necessarily that they were always written by Remain voters. This article is not pro Leave
I campaigned for Leave, voted Leave and still advocate Leave. I am a Leaver. Further this article describes a course of action which would still result in us Leaving.
So that’s incorrect.
Fail the purity test. Diehard remainer!!
This is the biggest problem this country faces. On both sides.
Quite frankly, it pisses me off. It is dogmatic, unthinking and childish.
Scenario: Clarke (or other) becomes caretaker PM on basis of extending to hold a General Election (basis for French acceptance). Tories refuse to vote for said election. What happens then? VoNC in Clarke government?
That is a fascinating proposition
Ken Clarke ends a 50 year parliamentary career by becoming the shortest serving PM ever as he is VONC'd into retirement
But there are those pesky Tory gains from the SNP in Scotland again!!
So what, the Tories would still be about 70 seats ahead of Labour even if they lost every Scottish seat to the SNP (Labour will lose 6 seats to the SNP too)
The key thing is the majority. If we have an election at which Johnson tells everyone the opposition is intent on keeping the UK in the EU and the opposition ends up with a majority of seats, then by Leaver logic there will be a mandate to Remain.
Possibly though on those figures the DUP could still hold the balance of power giving a majority for Brexit, while if Swinson holds the balance of power as is the only alternative on those numbers she would in her own words refuse to vote for a Corbyn Premiership
What would the DUP demand from Johnson to vote with the Conservatives?
1 Billion Dollars - it worked last time.
I think second time around they will up the ante, and if they have any sense will insist on an exemption for Brexit bills.
Further to my discussions with others yesterday re Chuka and Westminster. Worth noting for betting purposes that all of Jo's new LDs will have to face 'he/she sat in two stints as an independent and for 3 parties in the space of 6 months, how can you trust them?' That will sway some votes, no doubt.
Wait a mo. Are they all going to stand?
Berger has ZERO hope in Liverpool Wavertree -- and it is not a good look to kick out an existing LibDem candidate in Finchley and Golders Green.
The existing LibDem candidate in Totnes will certainly be unhappy if she is booted out for Wollaston.
There are existing, hardworking candidates and there are Big Egos from other parties (who only earlier this year were taking of annihilating the LibDems).
So expect the sound of Totnes and Golders Green arms being twisted during this weekend's Bournemouth conference. And of press releases soon from local LDs saying how delighted they are to be endorsing Mesdames Wollaston and Berger.
Neither current LibDem candidate has much of a chance. Both constituencies will have Johnsonite destroyers of the local economy masquerading as Tories. Surrounded by hundreds of fellow LibDems realising how close they are to wielding serious power - and repeating every minute the awfulness of Johnsonite collaborators - the social pressure to take one for the team will be overwhelming.
Now what was it Berger & Wollaston were plotting earlier this year as TIGgers.
Was there not a leaked memo saying we want to wipe out the Liberal Democrat party and take on all its members, donors and MPs ?
Hilarious.
Indeed. However, if parties want to encourage defections, it makes sense for them to treat defectors well, even if it means existing candidates get in a huff.
On another note, is it possible No10 has bamboozled Labour and has in fact asked the Queen to refuse Royal Assent to this bill?
Yes, MPs have refused to vote for Brexit with a Deal or with No Deal despite the Leave win
Exactly why we need a referendum, not a GE.
The problem with another referendum is that even if it votes Remain it won't be the end of it. The new purged Tory party would say "Remain MPs refused to listen to a referendum result, so why should we? We will leave on a manifesto mandate next time we have a majority."
Further to my discussions with others yesterday re Chuka and Westminster. Worth noting for betting purposes that all of Jo's new LDs will have to face 'he/she sat in two stints as an independent and for 3 parties in the space of 6 months, how can you trust them?' That will sway some votes, no doubt.
Wait a mo. Are they all going to stand?
Berger has ZERO hope in Liverpool Wavertree -- and it is not a good look to kick out an existing LibDem candidate in Finchley and Golders Green.
The existing LibDem candidate in Totnes will certainly be unhappy if she is booted out for Wollaston.
There are existing, hardworking candidates and there are Big Egos from other parties (who only earlier this year were taking of annihilating the LibDems).
So expect the sound of Totnes and Golders Green arms being twisted during this weekend's Bournemouth conference. And of press releases soon from local LDs saying how delighted they are to be endorsing Mesdames Wollaston and Berger.
Neither current LibDem candidate has much of a chance. Both constituencies will have Johnsonite destroyers of the local economy masquerading as Tories. Surrounded by hundreds of fellow LibDems realising how close they are to wielding serious power - and repeating every minute the awfulness of Johnsonite collaborators - the social pressure to take one for the team will be overwhelming.
Now what was it Berger & Wollaston were plotting earlier this year as TIGgers.
Was there not a leaked memo saying we want to wipe out the Liberal Democrat party and take on all its members, donors and MPs ?
Hilarious.
Indeed. However, if parties want to encourage defections, it makes sense for them to treat defectors well, even if it means existing candidates get in a huff.
On another note, is it possible No10 has bamboozled Labour and has in fact asked the Queen to refuse Royal Assent to this bill?
Does the bill have Royal Assent at the moment. I mean I know it's due to get RA today but does it have it right now ?
But there are those pesky Tory gains from the SNP in Scotland again!!
So what, the Tories would still be about 70 seats ahead of Labour even if they lost every Scottish seat to the SNP (Labour will lose 6 seats to the SNP too)
The key thing is the majority. If we have an election at which Johnson tells everyone the opposition is intent on keeping the UK in the EU and the opposition ends up with a majority of seats, then by Leaver logic there will be a mandate to Remain.
Possibly though on those figures the DUP could still hold the balance of power giving a majority for Brexit, while if Swinson holds the balance of power as is the only alternative on those numbers she would in her own words refuse to vote for a Corbyn Premiership
What would the DUP demand from Johnson to vote with the Conservatives?
Yes, MPs have refused to vote for Brexit with a Deal or with No Deal despite the Leave win
They are just trying to honour the Leave campaign pledge that we would Leave with a deal.
TSE in full on lie mode again.
Sorry I have to agree with TSE, every time Project Fear said we would / could leave without a deal, Leave stated we would get a (great, awesome, world's easiest) deal .
Its called politicking. Both sides do it. Show me this mystical pledge.
Lord Ashcroft 's panel has suggested that the voters do not know Jo Swinson well (if at all). This contrasts with views of Corbyn and Johnson.
This suggests that the light of a general election, TV debates, etc. could well be positive leading to a surge like 2010.
How high could it get?
Lib Dems to get over 100 seats i tell you..many will laugh in my face but im sticking to it.
Well, perhaps the laughter is because you predicted the LibDems to take Brecon & Radnorshire with over 50 per cent of the vote ... based on your "intel".
Further to my discussions with others yesterday re Chuka and Westminster. Worth noting for betting purposes that all of Jo's new LDs will have to face 'he/she sat in two stints as an independent and for 3 parties in the space of 6 months, how can you trust them?' That will sway some votes, no doubt.
Wait a mo. Are they all going to stand?
Berger has ZERO hope in Liverpool Wavertree -- and it is not a good look to kick out an existing LibDem candidate in Finchley and Golders Green.
The existing LibDem candidate in Totnes will certainly be unhappy if she is booted out for Wollaston.
There are existing, hardworking candidates and there are Big Egos from other parties (who only earlier this year were taking of annihilating the LibDems).
So expect the sound of Totnes and Golders Green arms being twisted during this weekend's Bournemouth conference. And of press releases soon from local LDs saying how delighted they are to be endorsing Mesdames Wollaston and Berger.
Neither current LibDem candidate has much of a chance. Both constituencies will have Johnsonite destroyers of the local economy masquerading as Tories. Surrounded by hundreds of fellow LibDems realising how close they are to wielding serious power - and repeating every minute the awfulness of Johnsonite collaborators - the social pressure to take one for the team will be overwhelming.
Now what was it Berger & Wollaston were plotting earlier this year as TIGgers.
Was there not a leaked memo saying we want to wipe out the Liberal Democrat party and take on all its members, donors and MPs ?
Hilarious.
Indeed. However, if parties want to encourage defections, it makes sense for them to treat defectors well, even if it means existing candidates get in a huff.
On another note, is it possible No10 has bamboozled Labour and has in fact asked the Queen to refuse Royal Assent to this bill?
Does the bill have Royal Assent at the moment. I mean I know it's due to get RA today but does it have it right now ?
Further to my discussions with others yesterday re Chuka and Westminster. Worth noting for betting purposes that all of Jo's new LDs will have to face 'he/she sat in two stints as an independent and for 3 parties in the space of 6 months, how can you trust them?' That will sway some votes, no doubt.
Wait a mo. Are they all going to stand?
Berger has ZERO hope in Liverpool Wavertree -- and it is not a good look to kick out an existing LibDem candidate in Finchley and Golders Green.
The existing LibDem candidate in Totnes will certainly be unhappy if she is booted out for Wollaston.
There are existing, hardworking candidates and there are Big Egos from other parties (who only earlier this year were taking of annihilating the LibDems).
So expect the sound of Totnes and Golders Green arms being twisted during this weekend's Bournemouth conference. And of press releases soon from local LDs saying how delighted they are to be endorsing Mesdames Wollaston and Berger.
Neither current LibDem candidate has much of a chance. Both constituencies will have Johnsonite destroyers of the local economy masquerading as Tories. Surrounded by hundreds of fellow LibDems realising how close they are to wielding serious power - and repeating every minute the awfulness of Johnsonite collaborators - the social pressure to take one for the team will be overwhelming.
Now what was it Berger & Wollaston were plotting earlier this year as TIGgers.
Was there not a leaked memo saying we want to wipe out the Liberal Democrat party and take on all its members, donors and MPs ?
Hilarious.
Indeed. However, if parties want to encourage defections, it makes sense for them to treat defectors well, even if it means existing candidates get in a huff.
On another note, is it possible No10 has bamboozled Labour and has in fact asked the Queen to refuse Royal Assent to this bill?
Does the bill have Royal Assent at the moment. I mean I know it's due to get RA today but does it have it right now ?
I will not believe the Royal Assent until I see it. Unlikely but entirely plausible that the govt advises HMQ not to sign.
Lord Ashcroft 's panel has suggested that the voters do not know Jo Swinson well (if at all). This contrasts with views of Corbyn and Johnson.
This suggests that the light of a general election, TV debates, etc. could well be positive leading to a surge like 2010.
How high could it get?
Lib Dems to get over 100 seats i tell you..many will laugh in my face but im sticking to it.
Well, perhaps the laughter is because you predicted the LibDems to take Brecon & Radnorshire with over 50 per cent of the vote ... based on your "intel".
As opposed to you who suggested the Tories would win because you understood the constituency and nobody else did
Lord Ashcroft 's panel has suggested that the voters do not know Jo Swinson well (if at all). This contrasts with views of Corbyn and Johnson.
This suggests that the light of a general election, TV debates, etc. could well be positive leading to a surge like 2010.
How high could it get?
Lib Dems to get over 100 seats i tell you..many will laugh in my face but im sticking to it.
Well, perhaps the laughter is because you predicted the LibDems to take Brecon & Radnorshire with over 50 per cent of the vote ... based on your "intel".
That is also true.... But you have to get back on the bike..it also showed how out of touch CCHQ really are
Yes, MPs have refused to vote for Brexit with a Deal or with No Deal despite the Leave win
Exactly why we need a referendum, not a GE.
Nope we need a GE to clean out the current scum polluting the Commons.
I don’t see much prospect of a new Commons being anything other than a deterioration, given the moderate and sensible people we are already likely to be losing.
Further to my discussions with others yesterday re Chuka and Westminster. Worth noting for betting purposes that all of Jo's new LDs will have to face 'he/she sat in two stints as an independent and for 3 parties in the space of 6 months, how can you trust them?' That will sway some votes, no doubt.
Wait a mo. Are they all going to stand?
Berger has ZERO hope in Liverpool Wavertree -- and it is not a good look to kick out an existing LibDem candidate in Finchley and Golders Green.
The existing LibDem candidate in Totnes will certainly be unhappy if she is booted out for Wollaston.
There are existing, hardworking candidates and there are Big Egos from other parties (who only earlier this year were taking of annihilating the LibDems).
So expect the sound of Totnes and Golders Green arms being twisted during this weekend's Bournemouth conference. And of press releases soon from local LDs saying how delighted they are to be endorsing Mesdames Wollaston and Berger.
Neither current LibDem candidate has much of a chance. Both constituencies will have Johnsonite destroyers of the local economy masquerading as Tories. Surrounded by hundreds of fellow LibDems realising how close they are to wielding serious power - and repeating every minute the awfulness of Johnsonite collaborators - the social pressure to take one for the team will be overwhelming.
Now what was it Berger & Wollaston were plotting earlier this year as TIGgers.
Was there not a leaked memo saying we want to wipe out the Liberal Democrat party and take on all its members, donors and MPs ?
Hilarious.
Indeed. However, if parties want to encourage defections, it makes sense for them to treat defectors well, even if it means existing candidates get in a huff.
On another note, is it possible No10 has bamboozled Labour and has in fact asked the Queen to refuse Royal Assent to this bill?
It is possible. Not sure how that bamboozles Labour though? What on Earth could they possibly have done more? It would be simply the government refusing assent and shutting down Parliament. What alternative plan should the opposition have had?
Yes, MPs have refused to vote for Brexit with a Deal or with No Deal despite the Leave win
Exactly why we need a referendum, not a GE.
If we have a referendum it would have to have multiple options. A two option referendum would probably be viewed as a stitch-up by many people.
I think a referendum is likely to be boycotted, and so its legitimacy would be questioned. It certainly won't end things.
The only endpoint is some Halfway House between Leave & Remain that satisfies enough people.
No Deal & Revoke/Remain are not sensible endpoints. No Deal is a bit more sensible than Revoke/Remain, as it will become clear within a year or 2 that it won't work, & we'd begin a rapprochement to a Halfway House.
Revoke/Remain on a contested referendum probably guarantees we're arguing for decades. The problem that led to the Referendum and the Leave vote in the first place will simply recur.
But there are those pesky Tory gains from the SNP in Scotland again!!
So what, the Tories would still be about 70 seats ahead of Labour even if they lost every Scottish seat to the SNP (Labour will lose 6 seats to the SNP too)
The key thing is the majority. If we have an election at which Johnson tells everyone the opposition is intent on keeping the UK in the EU and the opposition ends up with a majority of seats, then by Leaver logic there will be a mandate to Remain.
Possibly though on those figures the DUP could still hold the balance of power giving a majority for Brexit, while if Swinson holds the balance of power as is the only alternative on those numbers she would in her own words refuse to vote for a Corbyn Premiership
What would the DUP demand from Johnson to vote with the Conservatives?
Well it would have to be no Deal without a Tory majority yes reliant on the DUP unless the NI backstop removed
I do not understand what you have written, but the DUP are against no deal and they are against treating NI as different from the GB. They have been conspicuously quiet in the last 3 months so I am assuming they have voted with the current PM, because this is what they promised in the C&S agreement.
Now that the issues between NI/RoI and Brexit are much clearer, they would be fools not to push very hard for what they want before signing the next C&S agreement post GE.
Sorry I have to agree with TSE, every time Project Fear said we would / could leave without a deal, Leave stated we would get a (great, awesome, world's easiest) deal .
It is slightly ironic that Brexiteers' primary defense of No Deal is "Project Fear was true"...
Further to my discussions with others yesterday re Chuka and Westminster. Worth noting for betting purposes that all of Jo's new LDs will have to face 'he/she sat in two stints as an independent and for 3 parties in the space of 6 months, how can you trust them?' That will sway some votes, no doubt.
Wait a mo. Are they all going to stand?
Berger has ZERO hope in Liverpool Wavertree -- and it is not a good look to kick out an existing LibDem candidate in Finchley and Golders Green.
The existing LibDem candidate in Totnes will certainly be unhappy if she is booted out for Wollaston.
There are existing, hardworking candidates and there are Big Egos from other parties (who only earlier this year were taking of annihilating the LibDems).
So expect the sound of Totnes and Golders Green arms being twisted during this weekend's Bournemouth conference. And of press releases soon from local LDs saying how delighted they are to be endorsing Mesdames Wollaston and Berger.
Neither current LibDem candidate has much of a chance. Both constituencies will have Johnsonite destroyers of the local economy masquerading as Tories. Surrounded by hundreds of fellow LibDems realising how close they are to wielding serious power - and repeating every minute the awfulness of Johnsonite collaborators - the social pressure to take one for the team will be overwhelming.
Now what was it Berger & Wollaston were plotting earlier this year as TIGgers.
Was there not a leaked memo saying we want to wipe out the Liberal Democrat party and take on all its members, donors and MPs ?
Hilarious.
Indeed. However, if parties want to encourage defections, it makes sense for them to treat defectors well, even if it means existing candidates get in a huff.
On another note, is it possible No10 has bamboozled Labour and has in fact asked the Queen to refuse Royal Assent to this bill?
Does the bill have Royal Assent at the moment. I mean I know it's due to get RA today but does it have it right now ?
I will not believe the Royal Assent until I see it. Unlikely but entirely plausible that the govt advises HMQ not to sign.
It's a 96% implied chance to get RA according to the Betfair market.
Actually, sorry, if Johnson agrees to the extension it will not go well. If he plonked Mays Deal, tarted up a bit, to the public as Tory policy in a GE before Nov, Brexit Party would be wiped out I reckon.
Yes. Agree. FWIW the only way out of this for the country, and for Boris, is to bring back a TUMD (Tarted Up May Deal). Or "rolled in glitter" as is becoming the vernacular. And because, country aside, it incidentally saves Boris is why it should be front runner.
Yes, MPs have refused to vote for Brexit with a Deal or with No Deal despite the Leave win
They are just trying to honour the Leave campaign pledge that we would Leave with a deal.
TSE in full on lie mode again.
No you're confusing me for Vote Leave.
Now pay particular attention to the top and bottom bullet points.
Wow. They actually promised a deal would be negotiated before Article 50 was invoked. I hadn't realised that.
That's what I call a really, really big lie.
Well I reckon that was David Davis behind that, he tweeted before the referendum we'd get a trade deal with Germany just like and with other major EU nations as well.
Further to my discussions with others yesterday re Chuka and Westminster. Worth noting for betting purposes that all of Jo's new LDs will have to face 'he/she sat in two stints as an independent and for 3 parties in the space of 6 months, how can you trust them?' That will sway some votes, no doubt.
Wait a mo. Are they all going to stand?
Berger has ZERO hope in Liverpool Wavertree -- and it is not a good look to kick out an existing LibDem candidate in Finchley and Golders Green.
The existing LibDem candidate in Totnes will certainly be unhappy if she is booted out for Wollaston.
There are existing, hardworking candidates and there are Big Egos from other parties (who only earlier this year were taking of annihilating the LibDems).
So expect the sound of Totnes and Golders Green arms being twisted during this weekend's Bournemouth conference. And of press releases soon from local LDs saying how delighted they are to be endorsing Mesdames Wollaston and Berger.
Neither current LibDem candidate has much of a chance. Both constituencies will have Johnsonite destroyers of the local economy masquerading as Tories. Surrounded by hundreds of fellow LibDems realising how close they are to wielding serious power - and repeating every minute the awfulness of Johnsonite collaborators - the social pressure to take one for the team will be overwhelming.
Now what was it Berger & Wollaston were plotting earlier this year as TIGgers.
Was there not a leaked memo saying we want to wipe out the Liberal Democrat party and take on all its members, donors and MPs ?
Hilarious.
Indeed. However, if parties want to encourage defections, it makes sense for them to treat defectors well, even if it means existing candidates get in a huff.
On another note, is it possible No10 has bamboozled Labour and has in fact asked the Queen to refuse Royal Assent to this bill?
Does the bill have Royal Assent at the moment. I mean I know it's due to get RA today but does it have it right now ?
I will not believe the Royal Assent until I see it. Unlikely but entirely plausible that the govt advises HMQ not to sign.
It's a 96% implied chance to get RA according to the Betfair market.
I'd put it a bit lower but still well above 50% - maybe 85%? I would imagine that HMQ has told #10 to keep her well out of it.
Are you comparing investments by private companies with payments from the government using taxpayers money?
British companies investing in the Netherlands instead of the UK will have an impact on government tax receipts, as well as job creation. The £10 billion a year we paid generated investments that were of far greater value. That was my point.
Scenario: Clarke (or other) becomes caretaker PM on basis of extending to hold a General Election (basis for French acceptance). Tories refuse to vote for said election. What happens then? VoNC in Clarke government?
That is a fascinating proposition
Ken Clarke ends a 50 year parliamentary career by becoming the shortest serving PM ever as he is VONC'd into retirement
Good for a final salary pension though?
Remember the hilarity in 2010 when David Cameron shouted from the rooftops he would be taking a pay cut, and then was crestfallen to discover Gordon Brown had already taken one without announcing it?
Actually, sorry, if Johnson agrees to the extension it will not go well. If he plonked Mays Deal, tarted up a bit, to the public as Tory policy in a GE before Nov, Brexit Party would be wiped out I reckon.
Yes. Agree. FWIW the only way out of this for the country, and for Boris, is to bring back a TUMD (Tarted Up May Deal). Or "rolled in glitter" as is becoming the vernacular. And because, country aside, it incidentally saves Boris is why it should be front runner.
I don’t think the EC would allow that . Because you wouldnt have a proper mandate .
Let’s say it ended up with 40 yes and 60 no. And then the second question only allows those who voted no to answer the second question . You then have stopped the 40 percent from having an opinion on what happens next .
The best way is to have two referendums . A simple straight Remain v Leave . If it’s Leave then you have a second ballot on deal v no deal . That way you get a proper mandate going forward .
The whole justification for the second in-out referendum is that people should get to choose whether they still want to do it *once they know what leave means*. So it doesn't help to have a Remain vs Leave vote, then the Deal vs no No Deal vote after that.
What would totally make sense would be to do Deal vs No Deal first to work out what Brexit means, and once you've decided what Brexit means, do That vs Remain to make sure the voters still want to do it.
The complication is that there would be an almighty bunfight about how to handle spending limits and media time, eg do the Leave campaigns cumulatively get 3x the amount that the Remain campaign does, which seems unfair, or is one of the Leave campaigns expected to run 2 rounds on the same budget that Remain had for one, which also sounds unfair, etc etc.
The complication with this proposal is many "die hard remainers" voting for "No deal", in the hope that there will be some "Brexit but not no-deal" voters who will then vote remain in the "Remain versus No deal" referendum.
Maybe the best way to do it if there is more than one option is by approval voting.
Allow people to vote for as many options as are acceptable to them. Obviously if there are 3 options then approving 3 options is the same as approving none, so voters could choose to approve 1 or 2 options (without any ranking).
Whichever gets the most votes wins. Hopefully, there would be a good chance that the winner would get a majority.
The problem with any kind of ranked choices or run-offs is that it would look a bit crap at this point if the eventual winner got less than 52% first choices...
Are you comparing investments by private companies with payments from the government using taxpayers money?
British companies investing in the Netherlands instead of the UK will have an impact on government tax receipts, as well as job creation. The £10 billion a year we paid generated investments that were of far greater value. That was my point.
Yes, MPs have refused to vote for Brexit with a Deal or with No Deal despite the Leave win
MPs who voted against May's deal are now in government. Meanwhile those who voted for the deal 3 times have been expelled from the Tory Party. Go figure.
They voted to extend that is why
Yet the deal was in the manifesto but 31 October certainly wasn’t.
Actually, sorry, if Johnson agrees to the extension it will not go well. If he plonked Mays Deal, tarted up a bit, to the public as Tory policy in a GE before Nov, Brexit Party would be wiped out I reckon.
Yes. Agree. FWIW the only way out of this for the country, and for Boris, is to bring back a TUMD (Tarted Up May Deal). Or "rolled in glitter" as is becoming the vernacular. And because, country aside, it incidentally saves Boris is why it should be front runner.
I happen to continue to believe it will happen.
How does it save him, though? It will split the Tories evwn further as the ERG would all march off and it would regalvinise Farage. And I doubt that many on the other side of the argument would be that impressed either. It would expose Johnson to everyone as a complete chancer in it only for himself. At the moment, there are still 35% or so of voters who do not view him that way.
Are you comparing investments by private companies with payments from the government using taxpayers money?
British companies investing in the Netherlands instead of the UK will have an impact on government tax receipts, as well as job creation. The £10 billion a year we paid generated investments that were of far greater value. That was my point.
Actually, sorry, if Johnson agrees to the extension it will not go well. If he plonked Mays Deal, tarted up a bit, to the public as Tory policy in a GE before Nov, Brexit Party would be wiped out I reckon.
Yes. Agree. FWIW the only way out of this for the country, and for Boris, is to bring back a TUMD (Tarted Up May Deal). Or "rolled in glitter" as is becoming the vernacular. ...
As in "We can't do much with Boris Johnson, but we can try rolling him in glitter"?
Yes, MPs have refused to vote for Brexit with a Deal or with No Deal despite the Leave win
They are just trying to honour the Leave campaign pledge that we would Leave with a deal.
TSE in full on lie mode again.
No you're confusing me for Vote Leave.
Now pay particular attention to the top and bottom bullet points.
I thought it was bad that we lost to a bus. Now I realise that we lost to a burger made out of money.
It would of course have been sensible for us to negotiate the deal with the EU before serving the Article 50 notice but they refused to do so. Hindsight is 20:20 but I suspect they regret that almost as much as us.
Lord Ashcroft 's panel has suggested that the voters do not know Jo Swinson well (if at all). This contrasts with views of Corbyn and Johnson.
This suggests that the light of a general election, TV debates, etc. could well be positive leading to a surge like 2010.
How high could it get?
Lib Dems to get over 100 seats i tell you..many will laugh in my face but im sticking to it.
Well, perhaps the laughter is because you predicted the LibDems to take Brecon & Radnorshire with over 50 per cent of the vote ... based on your "intel".
As opposed to you who suggested the Tories would win because you understood the constituency and nobody else did
Incorrect. I did not say the Tories would win the by-election.
My postings were restricted to saying that:
(i) Dodds was a poor candidate parachuted in from Richmond via Montgomeryshire,
(ii) the Plaid Cymru vote would not all back the LibDems just because Plaid Cymru foolishly refused to stand a candidate and
(iii) the Tories could win if they had chosen a farmer rather than convicted fraudster.
I made no prediction for the by-election, although like everyone else on pb.com, I laughed when I heard timmo's 50 per cent prediction based on "intel".
No-one has taken 50 per cent of the vote in Brecon & Radnorshire for a long, long time.
So why is Boris Johnson not even trying for an early election? Because he doesn't really want one?
Because the only chance was getting Corbyn to agree before Labour backbenchers could explain to him what a spectacularly rubbish idea that was. Now that's off the table, there's no point in flogging the dead horse.
Actually, sorry, if Johnson agrees to the extension it will not go well. If he plonked Mays Deal, tarted up a bit, to the public as Tory policy in a GE before Nov, Brexit Party would be wiped out I reckon.
Yes. Agree. FWIW the only way out of this for the country, and for Boris, is to bring back a TUMD (Tarted Up May Deal). Or "rolled in glitter" as is becoming the vernacular. And because, country aside, it incidentally saves Boris is why it should be front runner.
I happen to continue to believe it will happen.
How does it save him, though? It will split the Tories evwn further as the ERG would all march off and it would regalvinise Farage. And I doubt that many on the other side of the argument would be that impressed either. It would expose Johnson to everyone as a complete chancer in it only for himself. At the moment, there are still 35% or so of voters who do not view him that way.
It only saves him if he can win a vote on it in the Commons and can then tell the electorate that he has achieved departure from the EU - though even then there are risks from Farage et all.
But he's made May's difficult job even harder for himself by insisting the backstop had to go. If Corbyn were willing to bail out a Tory PM by voting for it he would have done so already.
Perhaps he has to try, though. Maybe we will see the whip restored to Gauke, Clarke, Stewart, etc, and removed from Baker and the Spartans? What a mess.
Right, I need to write the afternoon thread in the next 40 mins, then around 4 pm I'll post some stuff reminding us all of the times Leavers said No Deal was Project Fear and/or them saying we'd Leave with a deal.
Yes, MPs have refused to vote for Brexit with a Deal or with No Deal despite the Leave win
Exactly why we need a referendum, not a GE.
Nope we need a GE to clean out the current scum polluting the Commons.
Ridiculous hyperbolic language Richard that is beneath you. It is this kind of sentiment that drives the "I don't do politics" memes. Sure there are some bad people in parliament but there are lots of good ones too. The pointless charade of Brexit has pushed out over 20 of the decent ones
Mr. Eagles, worth noting the EU permitted no discussion at all ahead of triggering Article 50.
But Article 50 itself places the negotiation after the notification.
Just more evidence of the breathtaking ignorance of Brexiteers about the procedures they wanted to set in motion.
We just assumed the EU wouldn't be so pig-headedly stupid as to actually follow the letter of their ineptly written rules.
Which is sort of weird, since the EU's habitual blind adherence to bad ideas is a key facet of why we wanted out in the first place.
You're saying Brexiteers made that pledge based on an understanding that the rules would make it impossible, but an assumption that the rules would be broken? Is that meant to be a good thing to do?
Actually, sorry, if Johnson agrees to the extension it will not go well. If he plonked Mays Deal, tarted up a bit, to the public as Tory policy in a GE before Nov, Brexit Party would be wiped out I reckon.
Yes. Agree. FWIW the only way out of this for the country, and for Boris, is to bring back a TUMD (Tarted Up May Deal). Or "rolled in glitter" as is becoming the vernacular. And because, country aside, it incidentally saves Boris is why it should be front runner.
I happen to continue to believe it will happen.
How does it save him, though? It will split the Tories evwn further as the ERG would all march off and it would regalvinise Farage. And I doubt that many on the other side of the argument would be that impressed either. It would expose Johnson to everyone as a complete chancer in it only for himself. At the moment, there are still 35% or so of voters who do not view him that way.
Challenge Labour not to back the deal, throw out the ERG-ers (he would have to as it's not Brexit to them), welcome or not the 21 back. And then leave on Oct 31st.
And then call the election. Which Lab would have to support.
At this point remainer Tories would be relieved we didn't have No Deal, and could more willingly vote Cons vs LD or Lab; Leaver Tories would be happy that we'd left. I think there would be enough BXP-ers to realise that we'd left so that would leave Nigel with a hollowed out rump. And meanwhile Jezza would be there frightening the horses to a Cons minority or even majority (I'll leave @HYUFD to work up the numbers).
Actually, sorry, if Johnson agrees to the extension it will not go well. If he plonked Mays Deal, tarted up a bit, to the public as Tory policy in a GE before Nov, Brexit Party would be wiped out I reckon.
Yes. Agree. FWIW the only way out of this for the country, and for Boris, is to bring back a TUMD (Tarted Up May Deal). Or "rolled in glitter" as is becoming the vernacular. ...
As in "We can't do much with Boris Johnson, but we can try rolling him in glitter"?
Are you comparing investments by private companies with payments from the government using taxpayers money?
British companies investing in the Netherlands instead of the UK will have an impact on government tax receipts, as well as job creation. The £10 billion a year we paid generated investments that were of far greater value. That was my point.
I don’t think the EC would allow that . Because you wouldnt have a proper mandate .
Let’s say it ended up with 40 yes and 60 no. And then the second question only allows those who voted no to answer the second question . You then have stopped the 40 percent from having an opinion on what happens next .
The best way is to have two referendums . A simple straight Remain v Leave . If it’s Leave then you have a second ballot on deal v no deal . That way you get a proper mandate going forward .
The whole justification for the second in-out referendum is that people should get to choose whether they still want to do it *once they know what leave means*. So it doesn't help to have a Remain vs Leave vote, then the Deal vs no No Deal vote after that.
What would totally make sense would be to do Deal vs No Deal first to work out what Brexit means, and once you've decided what Brexit means, do That vs Remain to make sure the voters still want to do it.
The complication is that there would be an almighty bunfight about how to handle spending limits and media time, eg do the Leave campaigns cumulatively get 3x the amount that the Remain campaign does, which seems unfair, or is one of the Leave campaigns expected to run 2 rounds on the same budget that Remain had for one, which also sounds unfair, etc etc.
The complication with this proposal is many "die hard remainers" voting for "No deal", in the hope that there will be some "Brexit but not no-deal" voters who will then vote remain in the "Remain versus No deal" referendum.
Maybe the best way to do it if there is more than one option is by approval voting.
Allow people to vote for as many options as are acceptable to them. Obviously if there are 3 options then approving 3 options is the same as approving none, so voters could choose to approve 1 or 2 options (without any ranking).
Whichever gets the most votes wins. Hopefully, there would be a good chance that the winner would get a majority.
The problem with any kind of ranked choices or run-offs is that it would look a bit crap at this point if the eventual winner got less than 52% first choices...
I was saying the same thing, there need to be more than two options.
Why the chuff are we leaving a union that hates the French nearly as much as we do?
Utter madness.
Agreed. Johnson should go to Brussels tonight and say: "We'll stay in the EU, sign up the Euro, and Schengen, and cancel the rebate.... just kick out the French." He'll come back to a heros welcome and 90% in the polls.
Yes, MPs have refused to vote for Brexit with a Deal or with No Deal despite the Leave win
MPs who voted against May's deal are now in government. Meanwhile those who voted for the deal 3 times have been expelled from the Tory Party. Go figure.
They voted to extend that is why
Yet the deal was in the manifesto but 31 October certainly wasn’t.
Please don't allow facts to worry the great HYUFD. Everyone that does not unquestioningly swallow every utterance of The Great King Bozo The First is a traitor to democracy and their opinion discounted
Actually, sorry, if Johnson agrees to the extension it will not go well. If he plonked Mays Deal, tarted up a bit, to the public as Tory policy in a GE before Nov, Brexit Party would be wiped out I reckon.
Yes. Agree. FWIW the only way out of this for the country, and for Boris, is to bring back a TUMD (Tarted Up May Deal). Or "rolled in glitter" as is becoming the vernacular. And because, country aside, it incidentally saves Boris is why it should be front runner.
I happen to continue to believe it will happen.
How does it save him, though? It will split the Tories evwn further as the ERG would all march off and it would regalvinise Farage. And I doubt that many on the other side of the argument would be that impressed either. It would expose Johnson to everyone as a complete chancer in it only for himself. At the moment, there are still 35% or so of voters who do not view him that way.
I wonder if the countdown clock to Oct 31st is still running in CCHQ
Comments
The 54% headline figure is based on reactions before trying out the ‘disliked option’ test - not sure if you can reconstruct the headline figure for Leavers after the test.
https://twitter.com/PARLYapp/status/1171025004882026496?s=20
*Delete according to your prejudices.
Swinson will only vote for Harman etc as PM
On another note, is it possible No10 has bamboozled Labour and has in fact asked the Queen to refuse Royal Assent to this bill?
Now pay particular attention to the top and bottom bullet points.
Had Miller not taken her court action then would May not have concluded her deal with the EU?
But you have to get back on the bike..it also showed how out of touch CCHQ really are
https://twitter.com/nick_gutteridge/status/1170968674267795456
And we wouldn't have Article 50 had Brown not reneged upon a manifesto pledge.
That's what I call a really, really big lie.
The only endpoint is some Halfway House between Leave & Remain that satisfies enough people.
No Deal & Revoke/Remain are not sensible endpoints. No Deal is a bit more sensible than Revoke/Remain, as it will become clear within a year or 2 that it won't work, & we'd begin a rapprochement to a Halfway House.
Revoke/Remain on a contested referendum probably guarantees we're arguing for decades. The problem that led to the Referendum and the Leave vote in the first place will simply recur.
Now that the issues between NI/RoI and Brexit are much clearer, they would be fools not to push very hard for what they want before signing the next C&S agreement post GE.
Just more evidence of the breathtaking ignorance of Brexiteers about the procedures they wanted to set in motion.
I happen to continue to believe it will happen.
Allow people to vote for as many options as are acceptable to them. Obviously if there are 3 options then approving 3 options is the same as approving none, so voters could choose to approve 1 or 2 options (without any ranking).
Whichever gets the most votes wins.
Hopefully, there would be a good chance that the winner would get a majority.
The problem with any kind of ranked choices or run-offs is that it would look a bit crap at this point if the eventual winner got less than 52% first choices...
/sarcasm>
Which is sort of weird, since the EU's habitual blind adherence to bad ideas is a key facet of why we wanted out in the first place.
https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1065648460903473152
My postings were restricted to saying that:
(i) Dodds was a poor candidate parachuted in from Richmond via Montgomeryshire,
(ii) the Plaid Cymru vote would not all back the LibDems just because Plaid Cymru foolishly refused to stand a candidate and
(iii) the Tories could win if they had chosen a farmer rather than convicted fraudster.
I made no prediction for the by-election, although like everyone else on pb.com, I laughed when I heard timmo's 50 per cent prediction based on "intel".
No-one has taken 50 per cent of the vote in Brecon & Radnorshire for a long, long time.
But he's made May's difficult job even harder for himself by insisting the backstop had to go. If Corbyn were willing to bail out a Tory PM by voting for it he would have done so already.
Perhaps he has to try, though. Maybe we will see the whip restored to Gauke, Clarke, Stewart, etc, and removed from Baker and the Spartans? What a mess.
And then call the election. Which Lab would have to support.
At this point remainer Tories would be relieved we didn't have No Deal, and could more willingly vote Cons vs LD or Lab; Leaver Tories would be happy that we'd left. I think there would be enough BXP-ers to realise that we'd left so that would leave Nigel with a hollowed out rump. And meanwhile Jezza would be there frightening the horses to a Cons minority or even majority (I'll leave @HYUFD to work up the numbers).
What's not to like?