Not just votes at 16, there's probably a majority in the Commons to give votes to EU citizens as well.
That would boost the Tories by another few percent when they promise to repeal votes at 16 and votes for EU citizens.
It would be an almost unbelievable piece of vote-rigging. The Tories could run most of their campaign on telling the existing electorate that the opposition wants to dilute their votes because they know they can't win any other way.
Why don't you think EU citizens would vote Conservative? Quite a few of the people I work with from EU countries have voted Conservative in local and Holyrood elections.
Whatever their normal political leanings, the great majority of them are hardly likely to vote Conservative if that means the UK leaving the EU, are they?
Why wouldn't they be? Do you think EU citizens living here are going to suffer from the UK leaving the EU?
You do like being utterly disingenuous, don't you?
It's a perfectly innocent question. If EU citizens already living here are going to be fine, then they should be as equally in favour of leaving the EU as UK citizens. If they aren't, then perhaps giving them the vote ought to be an important counterweight to what is being done to them.
Conservatives used to believe in giving folk personal responsibility. I can't fathom why that idea doesn't translate into given them votes.
I wouldn't mind compulsory voting as long as there's a "None Of The Above" option - which is why it'll never happen as "None Of The Above" would win a landslide every time.
Thanks for your support but I am not planning on standing.
To be honest I think we should have NOTA on voting now. Make a world of difference I think and encourage better candidates.
What would be the practical effect of NOTA winning the vote?
I see Tory Swinsons number one choice was congratulating Jester and saying if bill given 7 days rather than 3 he would vote for it.
Tory Swinson really doesn't have a clue
Tory Swinson is still better than Jeremy Corbyn.
But a vote for Tory Swinson leads to PM Jestet and hard BREXIT.
It's either PM Jester or Jezza and a 2nd Referendum
I’m voting for Tory Swinson regardless.
You aren't that bothered about stopping BREXIT or a 2nd Referendum then.
What's Tory Swinsons other policies BTW?
Oh BJO, I remember when we used to post daily YouGov polls with Red Ed winning and the words "tick tock".
I thought you learned the perils of being hyper partisan from the 2015 experience
Never used tick tock in any post ever.
EICIPM was me.
You have (see above).
??
EICIPM was so 2015
Tory Swinson is the new EICIPM
What doies the acronym mean, please?
Ed (Milliband) Is Crap Is Prime Minister.
Prior to 2015 many of the polls were showing Labour leads (ask your mother), and criticism of Ed Miliband (the then-Labour leader at a time where Jews weren't hounded from the party) was inevitably met with a retort of "EICIPM"
Thank you - I had retreated from PB at that time. You may be thinking of someone else, not that it matters at all - my late mother's ideas of Labour were founded on the likes of Harold Wilson and Wedgie Benn (with utter horror).
I was trying to be funny. The saying "oh, ask your mother" is a humorous way of saying that something happened a long time ago. My use of the phrase was meant to emphasise the fact that the time of Labour leads was many years ago.
"A No.10 source says that the government will push for a general election if a Brexit extension is agreed".
FFS, that is already government policy. Do that but also try to push your legislation through while you're still there if you care about it.
I really get the impression the Tories have lost their bottle in parliament, and after days of momentum are now scared they don't have the votes to get it through.
Because that's key for me - they said they felt they had the votes to pass it, and if they were not lying still think that. OBviously they are very upset that they will face an extension, but if they want to pass it, and have the votes to pass it, why are they not passing it?
At least May could argue she didn't have the votes to pass anything she might negotiate, as despite a slim majority she had enough ERGers and Grievers that it would have been a struggle. But Boris, with fewer MPs, says he can pass it, so doesn't need a GE to do that.
Cummings' strategy is working. The average Tory lead is now 11% in the opinion polls compared to about 5% a few weeks ago.
Listening to "Newsnight" a few minutes ago (desperate, I know), one of the talking heads there commented that Corbyn had dodged a bullet when he refused to allow Johnson a general election a month or two ago.
I think not, for the reason you state. Johnson's lead in the polls has grown in the meantime and an election now looks inevitable whatever Labour do.
It's a bit like the Lib Dems in the period 2010-15, when they dared not pull the plug on the coalition for fear that they would be decimated in an early GE. They just carried on, hoping that something would turn up, only to find that things worked out worse than their worst nightmares when finally they had to face the music in 2015.
Not just votes at 16, there's probably a majority in the Commons to give votes to EU citizens as well.
That would boost the Tories by another few percent when they promise to repeal votes at 16 and votes for EU citizens.
It would be an almost unbelievable piece of vote-rigging. The Tories could run most of their campaign on telling the existing electorate that the opposition wants to dilute their votes because they know they can't win any other way.
Why don't you think EU citizens would vote Conservative? Quite a few of the people I work with from EU countries have voted Conservative in local and Holyrood elections.
Whatever their normal political leanings, the great majority of them are hardly likely to vote Conservative if that means the UK leaving the EU, are they?
Why wouldn't they be? Do you think EU citizens living here are going to suffer from the UK leaving the EU?
You do like being utterly disingenuous, don't you?
It's a perfectly innocent question. If EU citizens already living here are going to be fine, then they should be as equally in favour of leaving the EU as UK citizens. If they aren't, then perhaps giving them the vote ought to be an important counterweight to what is being done to them.
Conservatives used to believe in giving folk personal responsibility. I can't fathom why that idea doesn't translate into given them votes.
Because they are not citizens of this country. If they wish to be, they can follow the prescribed procedure to become citizens and thus gain the right to vote.
I know you subscribe to the utopian fantasy that all residents should have votes, but as has been discussed on here before very few places in the entire world hand out voting rights as if they were sweeties.
So tonight johnson will speak to Varadkar, Macron and Merkel and theyll tell him what extension is getting given, he will tell them when he thinks he can get it through and tomorrow we will have a clearer picture. Smart money is Jan 31 flexitension with 15, 30, 15, 31, 15, 31 offered as exit dates
31st December? That is not a good idea.
Why not?
(Setting aside that exit is not a good idea full stop!)
Someone may have already answered but there is a huge amount of money flowing around due to year end balance sheets
Add in options expiry and the financial sector is already stressed so don’t distract with another issue
Not just votes at 16, there's probably a majority in the Commons to give votes to EU citizens as well.
That would boost the Tories by another few percent when they promise to repeal votes at 16 and votes for EU citizens.
It would be an almost unbelievable piece of vote-rigging. The Tories could run most of their campaign on telling the existing electorate that the opposition wants to dilute their votes because they know they can't win any other way.
Why don't you think EU citizens would vote Conservative? Quite a few of the people I work with from EU countries have voted Conservative in local and Holyrood elections.
Whatever their normal political leanings, the great majority of them are hardly likely to vote Conservative if that means the UK leaving the EU, are they?
Why wouldn't they be? Do you think EU citizens living here are going to suffer from the UK leaving the EU?
You do like being utterly disingenuous, don't you?
It's a perfectly innocent question. If EU citizens already living here are going to be fine, then they should be as equally in favour of leaving the EU as UK citizens. If they aren't, then perhaps giving them the vote ought to be an important counterweight to what is being done to them.
Conservatives used to believe in giving folk personal responsibility. I can't fathom why that idea doesn't translate into given them votes.
If they wish to be given the right to vote they should take on the responsibility of British citizenship.
In the past 3 months I have stood referee for three 3 friends - two Polish and a Vietnamese - who wished to show their commitment to the UK by becoming British citizens. I was immensely proud to be asked to do so. I am pretty sure that given the chance the two Polish friends would vote to Remain in the EU but that doesn't matter. I love the fact they wish to commit to being British (actually in two of the three cases being Scottish if that is the way the Indy referendum goes)
I wouldn't mind compulsory voting as long as there's a "None Of The Above" option - which is why it'll never happen as "None Of The Above" would win a landslide every time.
Thanks for your support but I am not planning on standing.
To be honest I think we should have NOTA on voting now. Make a world of difference I think and encourage better candidates.
What would be the practical effect of NOTA winning the vote?
In an individual constituency? A new slate of candidates has to be put up. Rinse and repeat.
At the moment I’m sure in many constituencies the least worst candidate wins and wins by default. The assumption someone *must*win can’t be a good thing.
Cummings' strategy is working. The average Tory lead is now 11% in the opinion polls compared to about 5% a few weeks ago.
Listening to "Newsnight" a few minutes ago (desperate, I know), one of the talking heads there commented that Corbyn had dodged a bullet when he refused to allow Johnson a general election a month or two ago.
I think not, for the reason you state. Johnson's lead in the polls has grown in the meantime and an election now looks inevitable whatever Labour do.
It's a bit like the Lib Dems in the period 2010-15, when they dared not pull the plug on the coalition for fear that they would be decimated in an early GE. They just carried on, hoping that something would turn up, only to find that things worked out worse than their worst nightmares when finally they had to face the music in 2015.
The country dodged a bullet, because it looked a lot like Boris was trying to "achieve" no deal. The opposition parties did exactly the right thing in keeping him from dismissing parliament during that crucial time. We needed MPs to keep our PM in check.
Honest question - why? I don't doubt the popularity of Labour and Jezza with young people, but what is it about him that she finds so appealing? He's got an amount of gravitas, at times, but he's not a superb speaker, plenty of others say similar things, what quality does he have that she adores so much?
Think she wants an end to people using food banks and sleeping in shop doorways and likes the sound of council houses and not wasting money on wars and Labours Green Deal and the fact that he would ban fracking.
Apart from that not sure.
Yes, but that's a reason to support him and his policies. Why the love? I can understand why people would get fired up by a poltical leader and their policies, but its the adoration I do not understand, particularly when plenty of others within the same movement support the same things and may have other beneficial qualities. Yes he is the leader and that gives a boost, but he's not some unique christ like figure.
I'd ask, and have asked, the same question about people adorating leaders on the right as well.
Think it's the fact he is so comfortable talking to ordinary people and never personal about opponents.
I will ask her tomorrow.
"Darling, a strange man on the internet wants me to ask you about Mr Corbyn..."
Cummings' strategy is working. The average Tory lead is now 11% in the opinion polls compared to about 5% a few weeks ago.
Listening to "Newsnight" a few minutes ago (desperate, I know), one of the talking heads there commented that Corbyn had dodged a bullet when he refused to allow Johnson a general election a month or two ago.
I think not, for the reason you state. Johnson's lead in the polls has grown in the meantime and an election now looks inevitable whatever Labour do.
It's a bit like the Lib Dems in the period 2010-15, when they dared not pull the plug on the coalition for fear that they would be decimated in an early GE. They just carried on, hoping that something would turn up, only to find that things worked out worse than their worst nightmares when finally they had to face the music in 2015.
They couldn't have foreseen that Boris would achieve a deal. They were blinded by their hatred for him and so bought into their own propaganda about his uselessness that they completely underestimated him, thinking they'd just leave him to stew. Their fox is now shot.
My mate's lad has just turned 17 and is an apprentice sparky, earning about 4 quid an hour. Why shouldn't he be allowed a say in how the country is run?
Because he is under the legal voting age.
Listen, I've got a niece who's very bright, has strong views, wise before her years. She's 8 - should we give her the vote too? Tell you what, how about you can vote from any age, and go into the booth marking an X with your favourite colour crayon?
Your mate's lad is a year or less off being able to vote. He can wait that long.
People bring up joining the army at this point, and various other things, but all it really says is we are inconsistent in our attitude to young people and what age we think they can and cannot do things, or should not be allowed to do things.
Definitely there should be more consistency in approach, and for me the question is whether on balance we treat people aged 16-17 as children and think that is the right approach, or whether on balance we think of them as adults and treat them as such. What we shouldn't do is treat them like children one day on one issue and then like adults the next day on another issue, so once we settle if we think they are children or adults, we can adjust the rules on various things up or down depending on that.
The obvious question to me is whether you would be happy to have a 16 year old signing contracts, sitting in judgement on you in a jury or making decisions about your money.
Personally I think 18 is the right age for all these things and hence think that is also the right age for have the right to vote.
I bet Cummings can't believe his luck with talk of votes for 16 year-olds and EU citizens. He'll be praying the opposition is actually stupid enough to do it.
Not just votes at 16, there's probably a majority in the Commons to give votes to EU citizens as well.
That would boost the Tories by another few percent when they promise to repeal votes at 16 and votes for EU citizens.
It would be an almost unbelievable piece of vote-rigging. The Tories could run most of their campaign on telling the existing electorate that the opposition wants to dilute their votes because they know they can't win any other way.
Why don't you think EU citizens would vote Conservative? Quite a few of the people I work with from EU countries have voted Conservative in local and Holyrood elections.
Whatever their normal political leanings, the great majority of them are hardly likely to vote Conservative if that means the UK leaving the EU, are they?
Why wouldn't they be? Do you think EU citizens living here are going to suffer from the UK leaving the EU?
You do like being utterly disingenuous, don't you?
It's a perfectly innocent question. If EU citizens already living here are going to be fine, then they should be as equally in favour of leaving the EU as UK citizens. If they aren't, then perhaps giving them the vote ought to be an important counterweight to what is being done to them.
Conservatives used to believe in giving folk personal responsibility. I can't fathom why that idea doesn't translate into given them votes.
Nothing is being done to them. The country they live in is going through some political changes. I lived in France for a short while. If the political status of France had changed in that time, I'd have dealt with the ramifications, not made it into some weepy X-factor vt.
Quite amusing - Newnight 4-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
Not just votes at 16, there's probably a majority in the Commons to give votes to EU citizens as well.
That would boost the Tories by another few percent when they promise to repeal votes at 16 and votes for EU citizens.
It would be an almost unbelievable piece of vote-rigging. The Tories could run most of their campaign on telling the existing electorate that the opposition wants to dilute their votes because they know they can't win any other way.
Why don't you think EU citizens would vote Conservative? Quite a few of the people I work with from EU countries have voted Conservative in local and Holyrood elections.
Whatever their normal political leanings, the great majority of them are hardly likely to vote Conservative if that means the UK leaving the EU, are they?
Why wouldn't they be? Do you think EU citizens living here are going to suffer from the UK leaving the EU?
You do like being utterly disingenuous, don't you?
It's a perfectly innocent question. If EU citizens already living here are going to be fine, then they should be as equally in favour of leaving the EU as UK citizens. If they aren't, then perhaps giving them the vote ought to be an important counterweight to what is being done to them.
Conservatives used to believe in giving folk personal responsibility. I can't fathom why that idea doesn't translate into given them votes.
If they wish to be given the right to vote they should take on the responsibility of British citizenship.
In the past 3 months I have stood referee for three 3 friends - two Polish and a Vietnamese - who wished to show their commitment to the UK by becoming British citizens. I was immensely proud to be asked to do so. I am pretty sure that given the chance the two Polish friends would vote to Remain in the EU but that doesn't matter. I love the fact they wish to commit to being British (actually in two of the three cases being Scottish if that is the way the Indy referendum goes)
What are the additonal responsibilities of British citizenship compared to a British resident.
Voting Eligible for conscription in a war? Not going to happen with modern warfare. Anything else?
So they shouldnt be able to vote as they havent taken on the responsibility of the right to vote.....
Quite amusing - Newnight 5-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
It's almost like voters can see through the remainiacs tactics.
My mate's lad has just turned 17 and is an apprentice sparky, earning about 4 quid an hour. Why shouldn't he be allowed a say in how the country is run?
Because he is under the legal voting age.
Listen, I've got a niece who's very bright, has strong views, wise before her years. She's 8 - should we give her the vote too? Tell you what, how about you can vote from any age, and go into the booth marking an X with your favourite colour crayon?
Your mate's lad is a year or less off being able to vote. He can wait that long.
People bring up joining the army at this point, and various other things, but all it really says is we are inconsistent in our attitude to young people and what age we think they can and cannot do things, or should not be allowed to do things.
Definitely there should be more consistency in approach, and for me the question is whether on balance we treat people aged 16-17 as children and think that is the right approach, or whether on balance we think of them as adults and treat them as such. What we shouldn't do is treat them like children one day on one issue and then like adults the next day on another issue, so once we settle if we think they are children or adults, we can adjust the rules on various things up or down depending on that.
The obvious question to me is whether you would be happy to have a 16 year old signing contracts, sitting in judgement on you in a jury or making decisions about your money.
Personally I think 18 is the right age for all these things and hence think that is also the right age for have the right to vote.
I wouldnt be happy with a 55 year old bank manager looking after my money, nor a 35 year old financial advisor.
The best argument for 18 is simply there has to be a cut off somewhere and 18 is the status quo and no better or worse than 16 or 17.
If they wish to be given the right to vote they should take on the responsibility of British citizenship.
In the past 3 months I have stood referee for three 3 friends - two Polish and a Vietnamese - who wished to show their commitment to the UK by becoming British citizens. I was immensely proud to be asked to do so. I am pretty sure that given the chance the two Polish friends would vote to Remain in the EU but that doesn't matter. I love the fact they wish to commit to being British (actually in two of the three cases being Scottish if that is the way the Indy referendum goes)
Yes, we've been over this conversation before. I'm trying to get my shovel under this idea that giving EU citizens the vote is somehow "rigging" elections; I have spoken before about the immigrants I know in the UK, folk from Venezuela, Lithuania, Romania, Czech Republic. These are people who are not going to vote Labour, because they know something about politics from their own past in those countries. I do also know immigrants who would vote Labour.
I respect but reject your argument for making certain people jump through a difficult series of hoops before they vote, but it's a bit of a tangent to the main point I was making, that it's wrong that you can rely on EU citizens to vote a certain way, and even if it were that is then an argument against them being allowed to vote. Your arguments are separate from that point, so I'll leave them to stand for themselves.
Quite amusing - Newnight 5-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
It's almost like voters can see through the remainiacs tactics.
I think Letwin on Saturday sealed the deal with BJ being deliberately and vindictively cornered. May extending by choice is completely different to Johnson being compelled against his will. The more they push the more they get further away from their goal of neutralising him.
What are the additonal responsibilities of British citizenship compared to a British resident.
Voting Eligible for conscription in a war? Not going to happen with modern warfare. Anything else?
So they shouldnt be able to vote as they havent taken on the responsibility of the right to vote.....
Jury service is the immediate one I can think of.
But the important point is that they are showing a commitment to remaining in Britain and making their lives here. The long term well being of our country now becomes part of their responsibility rather than just short term personal advantage.
If they wish to be given the right to vote they should take on the responsibility of British citizenship.
In the past 3 months I have stood referee for three 3 friends - two Polish and a Vietnamese - who wished to show their commitment to the UK by becoming British citizens. I was immensely proud to be asked to do so. I am pretty sure that given the chance the two Polish friends would vote to Remain in the EU but that doesn't matter. I love the fact they wish to commit to being British (actually in two of the three cases being Scottish if that is the way the Indy referendum goes)
Yes, we've been over this conversation before. I'm trying to get my shovel under this idea that giving EU citizens the vote is somehow "rigging" elections; I have spoken before about the immigrants I know in the UK, folk from Venezuela, Lithuania, Romania, Czech Republic. These are people who are not going to vote Labour, because they know something about politics from their own past in those countries. I do also know immigrants who would vote Labour.
I respect but reject your argument for making certain people jump through a difficult series of hoops before they vote, but it's a bit of a tangent to the main point I was making, that it's wrong that you can rely on EU citizens to vote a certain way, and even if it were that is then an argument against them being allowed to vote. Your arguments are separate from that point, so I'll leave them to stand for themselves.
That s fair enough. I was arguing purely on the ethics of giving non citizens the vote rather than the practical effects on any individual election.
Though I would of course point out that giving 3 million people the vote in a referendum when in all likelihood they are not interested in the long term effects of that vote, merely the next few years before they then go home, does seem a bit off.
Not just votes at 16, there's probably a majority in the Commons to give votes to EU citizens as well.
That would boost the Tories by another few percent when they promise to repeal votes at 16 and votes for EU citizens.
It would be an almost unbelievable piece of vote-rigging. The Tories could run most of their campaign on telling the existing electorate that the opposition wants to dilute their votes because they know they can't win any other way.
Why don't you think EU citizens would vote Conservative? Quite a few of the people I work with from EU countries have voted Conservative in local and Holyrood elections.
Whatever their normal political leanings, the great majority of them are hardly likely to vote Conservative if that means the UK leaving the EU, are they?
Why wouldn't they be? Do you think EU citizens living here are going to suffer from the UK leaving the EU?
You do like being utterly disingenuous, don't you?
It's a perfectly innocent question. If EU citizens already living here are going to be fine, then they should be as equally in favour of leaving the EU as UK citizens. If they aren't, then perhaps giving them the vote ought to be an important counterweight to what is being done to them.
Conservatives used to believe in giving folk personal responsibility. I can't fathom why that idea doesn't translate into given them votes.
Nothing is being done to them. The country they live in is going through some political changes. I lived in France for a short while. If the political status of France had changed in that time, I'd have dealt with the ramifications, not made it into some weepy X-factor vt.
Passing out drunk in the toilets of a hypermarket isn't "living in France".
And in point of fact, I was offering up the idea of stuff being "done to them" as a choice of two things. If you assert that nothing is being "done to them", then you are saying that they won't suffer from these changes. That's my challenge to you now: tell me that EU citizens in the UK aren't going to suffer from the UK leaving the EU.
What are the additonal responsibilities of British citizenship compared to a British resident.
Voting Eligible for conscription in a war? Not going to happen with modern warfare. Anything else?
So they shouldnt be able to vote as they havent taken on the responsibility of the right to vote.....
Jury service is the immediate one I can think of.
But the important point is that they are showing a commitment to remaining in Britain and making their lives here. The long term well being of our country now becomes part of their responsibility rather than just short term personal advantage.
Do you think UK nationals who live abroad for a lengthy period of time should have the right to vote here? I just find it hard to accept that someone who has lived in the country for 20 years plus and chosen to move here, has shown less of a commitment to the country than someone else, who has a UK passport from an accident of birth and chooses to live elsewhere!
Quite amusing - Newnight 5-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
It's almost like voters can see through the remainiacs tactics.
I think Letwin on Saturday sealed the deal with BJ being deliberately and vindictively cornered. May extending by choice is completely different to Johnson being compelled against his will. The more they push the more they get further away from their goal of neutralising him.
It's almost as if the electorate can see the Remain Bloc placing not just a thumb on the scales, but loading several sumo wrestlers onto it...
A November election needs to be called by Thursday.
December is possible but even that requires a 2/3rd vote otherwise we are rapidly into late December and very quickly into early January.
I expect Boris to call it immediately he receives Tusk letter confirming a flexi extension to 31st January. As that is likely tomorrow Boris calls it on Thursday and GE on 28th November
And Boris campaign will be elect me and we leave the EU on the 31st December. Clear and no prevarication. Powerful message
Quite amusing - Newnight 5-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
It's almost like voters can see through the remainiacs tactics.
I think Letwin on Saturday sealed the deal with BJ being deliberately and vindictively cornered. May extending by choice is completely different to Johnson being compelled against his will. The more they push the more they get further away from their goal of neutralising him.
May was also compelled against her will. She was just more dignified about it.
Votes at sixteen isn't ambitious enough. I'd like to see votes from birth - but exercised by proxy by the mother until the child claims their vote by writing a letter to the returning officer to do so.
Yes to the principle, which is that MPs should govern in the interest of all citizens, which means representing all equally amongst the electorate rather than ignoring those aged 0 to 17.
In terms of practicalities, I would favour the child taking over the right to vote for themselves only at an age when they were deemed responsible enough, that is 18 or perhaps 16 but not before. Also, where both parents were living together, the father would be given the voting rights for boys, and the mother the voting rights for girls. Where children were living at an address where only one parent was registered to vote, that parent would vote for all of them.
An interim step would be to equalise constituency sizes based on ONS estimates for the whole population, rather than just those aged 18+ who bother to register.
Quite amusing - Newnight 5-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
It's almost like voters can see through the remainiacs tactics.
I think Letwin on Saturday sealed the deal with BJ being deliberately and vindictively cornered. May extending by choice is completely different to Johnson being compelled against his will. The more they push the more they get further away from their goal of neutralising him.
May was also compelled against her will. She was just more dignified about it.
Well not compelled by newly made laws designed specifically for her.
What are the additonal responsibilities of British citizenship compared to a British resident.
Voting Eligible for conscription in a war? Not going to happen with modern warfare. Anything else?
So they shouldnt be able to vote as they havent taken on the responsibility of the right to vote.....
Jury service is the immediate one I can think of.
But the important point is that they are showing a commitment to remaining in Britain and making their lives here. The long term well being of our country now becomes part of their responsibility rather than just short term personal advantage.
Do you think UK nationals who live abroad for a lengthy period of time should have the right to vote here? I just find it hard to accept that someone who has lived in the country for 20 years plus and chosen to move here, has shown less of a commitment to the country than someone else, who has a UK passport from an accident of birth and chooses to live elsewhere!
No I don't think they should. They should take out citizenship of the country in which they are living and vote there.
A November election needs to be called by Thursday.
December is possible but even that requires a 2/3rd vote otherwise we are rapidly into late December and very quickly into early January.
I expect Boris to call it immediately he receives Tusk letter confirming a flexi extension to 31st January. As that is likely tomorrow Boris calls it on Thursday and GE on 28th November
And Boris campaign will be elect me and we leave the EU on the 31st December. Clear and no prevarication. Powerful message
Not sure that's possible.
Motion for GE must go on Order Paper the night before.
So earliest date motion could be debated is now Thurs.
And I think that's too late for 28 Nov - Parliament would not actually be dissolved the same day as the vote - think Queen has to sign a proclamation or similar which would only be the next day (at earliest).
Quite amusing - Newnight 5-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
It's almost like voters can see through the remainiacs tactics.
I think Letwin on Saturday sealed the deal with BJ being deliberately and vindictively cornered. May extending by choice is completely different to Johnson being compelled against his will. The more they push the more they get further away from their goal of neutralising him.
May was also compelled against her will. She was just more dignified about it.
Well not compelled by newly made laws designed specifically for her.
A cross-party group of MPs has forced through an emergency bill in less than six hours to instruct Theresa May to seek an extension to article 50 and avoid a no-deal Brexit, despite government opposition.
Anyway, if we do get an election, my prediction is a Tory majority of ~40. Prediction for vote shares: Tories 42%, Labour 36%. Much as people aren't pleased with either of the two parties, they'll end up polarising anyway with people picking the lesser evil, because the alternative seems so unbelievably horrendous (a la Clinton/Trump).
"A No.10 source says that the government will push for a general election if a Brexit extension is agreed".
FFS, that is already government policy. Do that but also try to push your legislation through while you're still there if you care about it.
I really get the impression the Tories have lost their bottle in parliament, and after days of momentum are now scared they don't have the votes to get it through.
Because that's key for me - they said they felt they had the votes to pass it, and if they were not lying still think that. OBviously they are very upset that they will face an extension, but if they want to pass it, and have the votes to pass it, why are they not passing it?
Because the bill might get amended, and while clearly willing to compromise on all manner of stuff (the integrity of the union, for example), they absolutely refuse to compromise on stuff that matters to them... or doesn’t accord with the maintenance of Boris’ ego.
And think they can win a majority any ensuing election.
What are the additonal responsibilities of British citizenship compared to a British resident.
Voting Eligible for conscription in a war? Not going to happen with modern warfare. Anything else?
So they shouldnt be able to vote as they havent taken on the responsibility of the right to vote.....
Jury service is the immediate one I can think of.
But the important point is that they are showing a commitment to remaining in Britain and making their lives here. The long term well being of our country now becomes part of their responsibility rather than just short term personal advantage.
Do you think UK nationals who live abroad for a lengthy period of time should have the right to vote here? I just find it hard to accept that someone who has lived in the country for 20 years plus and chosen to move here, has shown less of a commitment to the country than someone else, who has a UK passport from an accident of birth and chooses to live elsewhere!
I suppose the argument would be someone who has lived in the UK for 20 years plus would have had the opportunity to apply for British citizenship if they wanted. If they have chosen for whatever reason not to, then they can't vote.
As an aside, when living in the US, I contacted Manchester City Council about getting on the electoral roll to maintain my voting rights and was told "I wouldn't bother mate, they're all as bad as each other". When I said I'd still like to register regardless he said "Well if you must then. I'll send the form in the post". And then didn't.
If they wish to be given the right to vote they should take on the responsibility of British citizenship.
In the past 3 months I have stood referee for three 3 friends - two Polish and a Vietnamese - who wished to show their commitment to the UK by becoming British citizens. I was immensely proud to be asked to do so. I am pretty sure that given the chance the two Polish friends would vote to Remain in the EU but that doesn't matter. I love the fact they wish to commit to being British (actually in two of the three cases being Scottish if that is the way the Indy referendum goes)
Yes, we've been over this conversation before. I'm trying to get my shovel under this idea that giving EU citizens the vote is somehow "rigging" elections; I have spoken before about the immigrants I know in the UK, folk from Venezuela, Lithuania, Romania, Czech Republic. These are people who are not going to vote Labour, because they know something about politics from their own past in those countries. I do also know immigrants who would vote Labour.
I respect but reject your argument for making certain people jump through a difficult series of hoops before they vote, but it's a bit of a tangent to the main point I was making, that it's wrong that you can rely on EU citizens to vote a certain way, and even if it were that is then an argument against them being allowed to vote. Your arguments are separate from that point, so I'll leave them to stand for themselves.
That s fair enough. I was arguing purely on the ethics of giving non citizens the vote rather than the practical effects on any individual election.
Though I would of course point out that giving 3 million people the vote in a referendum when in all likelihood they are not interested in the long term effects of that vote, merely the next few years before they then go home, does seem a bit off.
I'm not so much interested in giving people the vote for the referendum, it's a lot more general and principled than that for me. I am a Remainer, but that aside I have no party affiliations and I'm a floating voter. I'm really keen for people who live here to vote in general elections. I can't tell whether that would benefit me personally, because I don't always know who I'm going to vote for. I didn't make up my mind in May until I was in the polling station. So I appreciate it's hard to put Brexit to one side in this conversation, but I assure you it's not my motivation here.
I expect Boris to call it immediately he receives Tusk letter confirming a flexi extension to 31st January. As that is likely tomorrow Boris calls it on Thursday and GE on 28th November
And Boris campaign will be elect me and we leave the EU on the 31st December. Clear and no prevarication. Powerful message
I agree.
To be fair the LD's message is also completely clear which will hoover up millions of remainers.
It is Labour's positioning that is unlikely to survive the first week of a GE campaign.
What are the additonal responsibilities of British citizenship compared to a British resident.
Voting Eligible for conscription in a war? Not going to happen with modern warfare. Anything else?
So they shouldnt be able to vote as they havent taken on the responsibility of the right to vote.....
Jury service is the immediate one I can think of.
But the important point is that they are showing a commitment to remaining in Britain and making their lives here. The long term well being of our country now becomes part of their responsibility rather than just short term personal advantage.
Do you think UK nationals who live abroad for a lengthy period of time should have the right to vote here? I just find it hard to accept that someone who has lived in the country for 20 years plus and chosen to move here, has shown less of a commitment to the country than someone else, who has a UK passport from an accident of birth and chooses to live elsewhere!
No I don't think they should. They should take out citizenship of the country in which they are living and vote there.
Thanks, that is consistent. In the hierarchy of voting I would be UK resident nationals > UK nationals temporarily overseas > long term foreign residents here > UK nationals long term overseas.
Where we draw the line is arbitrary enough that I have no strong view, but think long term foreign residents should be treated at least as well as UK nationals long term overseas. I think we should phase out the differences between Commonwealth, EU and other foreign nationals voting rights too, possibly Irish too although that may be too controversial.
Votes at sixteen isn't ambitious enough. I'd like to see votes from birth - but exercised by proxy by the mother until the child claims their vote by writing a letter to the returning officer to do so.
Yes to the principle, which is that MPs should govern in the interest of all citizens, which means representing all equally amongst the electorate rather than ignoring those aged 0 to 17.
In terms of practicalities, I would favour the child taking over the right to vote for themselves only at an age when they were deemed responsible enough, that is 18 or perhaps 16 but not before. Also, where both parents were living together, the father would be given the voting rights for boys, and the mother the voting rights for girls. Where children were living at an address where only one parent was registered to vote, that parent would vote for all of them.
An interim step would be to equalise constituency sizes based on ONS estimates for the whole population, rather than just those aged 18+ who bother to register.
A fascinating variation on that is giving dads the girls' votes and mums the boys'. Maybe get you thinking a bit about other people's viewpoints.
I expect Boris to call it immediately he receives Tusk letter confirming a flexi extension to 31st January. As that is likely tomorrow Boris calls it on Thursday and GE on 28th November
And Boris campaign will be elect me and we leave the EU on the 31st December. Clear and no prevarication. Powerful message
I agree.
To be fair the LD's message is also completely clear which will hoover up millions of remainers.
It is Labour's positioning that is unlikely to survive the first week of a GE campaign.
I have been saying this for a while. It could be a labour bloodbath caught in a pincer between Boris and Lib Dems
Quite amusing - Newnight 5-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
It's almost like voters can see through the remainiacs tactics.
I think Letwin on Saturday sealed the deal with BJ being deliberately and vindictively cornered. May extending by choice is completely different to Johnson being compelled against his will. The more they push the more they get further away from their goal of neutralising him.
May was also compelled against her will. She was just more dignified about it.
Dignity, sanity and politeness don't seem traits much appreciated by the electorate though.
But Thurs 12 Dec looks a bit silly - w/c Mon 16 Dec would be taken up with swearing in MPs (3 days) + electing Speaker so there wouldn't even be time for a Queens Speech before Christmas.
One other thing - there needs to be a Budget in 2019 - I think by law there have to be two fiscal events each calendar year - and by law OBR has to issue forecasts on public finances twice each calendar year.
If Parliament is dissolved in next few days for a Thurs 5 Dec GE there is no way a Budget could take place before January.
Quite amusing - Newnight 5-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
It's almost like voters can see through the remainiacs tactics.
I think Letwin on Saturday sealed the deal with BJ being deliberately and vindictively cornered. May extending by choice is completely different to Johnson being compelled against his will. The more they push the more they get further away from their goal of neutralising him.
May was also compelled against her will. She was just more dignified about it.
Well not compelled by newly made laws designed specifically for her.
A cross-party group of MPs has forced through an emergency bill in less than six hours to instruct Theresa May to seek an extension to article 50 and avoid a no-deal Brexit, despite government opposition.
I expect Boris to call it immediately he receives Tusk letter confirming a flexi extension to 31st January. As that is likely tomorrow Boris calls it on Thursday and GE on 28th November
And Boris campaign will be elect me and we leave the EU on the 31st December. Clear and no prevarication. Powerful message
I agree.
To be fair the LD's message is also completely clear which will hoover up millions of remainers.
It is Labour's positioning that is unlikely to survive the first week of a GE campaign.
A November election needs to be called by Thursday.
December is possible but even that requires a 2/3rd vote otherwise we are rapidly into late December and very quickly into early January.
I expect Boris to call it immediately he receives Tusk letter confirming a flexi extension to 31st January. As that is likely tomorrow Boris calls it on Thursday and GE on 28th November
And Boris campaign will be elect me and we leave the EU on the 31st December. Clear and no prevarication. Powerful message
Not sure that's possible.
Motion for GE must go on Order Paper the night before.
So earliest date motion could be debated is now Thurs.
And I think that's too late for 28 Nov - Parliament would not actually be dissolved the same day as the vote - think Queen has to sign a proclamation or similar which would only be the next day (at earliest).
i Having double checked it's too late for the 28th. It's 25 business days before an election so the only November date left is the 29th.
Not just votes at 16, there's probably a majority in the Commons to give votes to EU citizens as well.
That would boost the Tories by another few percent when they promise to repeal votes at 16 and votes for EU citizens.
It would be an almost unbelievable piece of vote-rigging. The Tories could run most of their campaign on telling the existing electorate that the opposition wants to dilute their votes because they know they can't win any other way.
Why don't you think EU citizens would vote Conservative? Quite a few of the people I work with from EU countries have voted Conservative in local and Holyrood elections.
Whatever their normal political leanings, the great majority of them are hardly likely to vote Conservative if that means the UK leaving the EU, are they?
Why wouldn't they be? Do you think EU citizens living here are going to suffer from the UK leaving the EU?
You do like being utterly disingenuous, don't you?
It's a perfectly innocent question. If EU citizens already living here are going to be fine, then they should be as equally in favour of leaving the EU as UK citizens. If they aren't, then perhaps giving them the vote ought to be an important counterweight to what is being done to them.
Conservatives used to believe in giving folk personal responsibility. I can't fathom why that idea doesn't translate into given them votes.
If they wish to be given the right to vote they should take on the responsibility of British citizenship.
In the past 3 months I have stood referee for three 3 friends - two Polish and a Vietnamese - who wished to show their commitment to the UK by becoming British citizens. I was immensely proud to be asked to do so. I am pretty sure that given the chance the two Polish friends would vote to Remain in the EU but that doesn't matter. I love the fact they wish to commit to being British (actually in two of the three cases being Scottish if that is the way the Indy referendum goes)
What are the additonal responsibilities of British citizenship compared to a British resident.
Voting Eligible for conscription in a war? Not going to happen with modern warfare. Anything else?
So they shouldnt be able to vote as they havent taken on the responsibility of the right to vote.....
Eligible to be selected for the England football team ?
Eligible for the protection of HMG in the event they get in trouble overseas - Don Pacifico etc
Quite amusing - Newnight 5-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
It's almost like voters can see through the remainiacs tactics.
I think Letwin on Saturday sealed the deal with BJ being deliberately and vindictively cornered. May extending by choice is completely different to Johnson being compelled against his will. The more they push the more they get further away from their goal of neutralising him.
Does anyone with a head on their shoulders really think Boris Johnson isn't down on his knees every night thanking heaven for Benn, Letwin and Co. for giving him the time he needs to get his deal through - and simultaneously relieving him of reponsibility for the extension?
I dithered over taking a punt on the election being next month and in the space of a few minutes the 30s have been taken and there's a few quid left at 20.
Just catching up on the evening’s goings-on. Been at the football. Sean will lose his bet to William if we are still in the EU at 0001hrs on 1 Jan 2020. Is that now the case? (Warning, I’m smashed, so speak slowly)
I wouldn't mind compulsory voting as long as there's a "None Of The Above" option - which is why it'll never happen as "None Of The Above" would win a landslide every time.
Thanks for your support but I am not planning on standing.
To be honest I think we should have NOTA on voting now. Make a world of difference I think and encourage better candidates.
What would be the practical effect of NOTA winning the vote?
In an individual constituency? A new slate of candidates has to be put up. Rinse and repeat.
At the moment I’m sure in many constituencies the least worst candidate wins and wins by default. The assumption someone *must*win can’t be a good thing.
So you're talking about the student union staple RON, Re-Open Nominations. I thought you might have something else in mind.
I expect Boris to call it immediately he receives Tusk letter confirming a flexi extension to 31st January. As that is likely tomorrow Boris calls it on Thursday and GE on 28th November
And Boris campaign will be elect me and we leave the EU on the 31st December. Clear and no prevarication. Powerful message
I agree.
To be fair the LD's message is also completely clear which will hoover up millions of remainers.
It is Labour's positioning that is unlikely to survive the first week of a GE campaign.
A November election needs to be called by Thursday.
December is possible but even that requires a 2/3rd vote otherwise we are rapidly into late December and very quickly into early January.
I expect Boris to call it immediately he receives Tusk letter confirming a flexi extension to 31st January. As that is likely tomorrow Boris calls it on Thursday and GE on 28th November
And Boris campaign will be elect me and we leave the EU on the 31st December. Clear and no prevarication. Powerful message
Not sure that's possible.
Motion for GE must go on Order Paper the night before.
So earliest date motion could be debated is now Thurs.
And I think that's too late for 28 Nov - Parliament would not actually be dissolved the same day as the vote - think Queen has to sign a proclamation or similar which would only be the next day (at earliest).
i Having double checked it's too late for the 28th. It's 25 business days before an election so the only November date left is the 29th.
Not just votes at 16, there's probably a majority in the Commons to give votes to EU citizens as well.
That would boost the Tories by another few percent when they promise to repeal votes at 16 and votes for EU citizens.
Why don't you think EU citizens would vote Conservative? Quite a few of the people I work with from EU countries have voted Conservative in local and Holyrood elections.
Whatever their normal political leanings, the great majority of them are hardly likely to vote Conservative if that means the UK leaving the EU, are they?
Why wouldn't they be? Do you think EU citizens living here are going to suffer from the UK leaving the EU?
You do like being utterly disingenuous, don't you?
It's a perfectly innocent question. If EU citizens already living here are going to be fine, then they should be as equally in favour of leaving the EU as UK citizens. If they aren't, then perhaps giving them the vote ought to be an important counterweight to what is being done to them.
Conservatives used to believe in giving folk personal responsibility. I can't fathom why that idea doesn't translate into given them votes.
If they wish to be given the right to vote they should take on the responsibility of British citizenship.
In the past 3 months I have stood referee for three 3 friends - two Polish and a Vietnamese - who wished to show their commitment to the UK by becoming British citizens. I was immensely proud to be asked to do so. I am pretty sure that given the chance the two Polish friends would vote to Remain in the EU but that doesn't matter. I love the fact they wish to commit to being British (actually in two of the three cases being Scottish if that is the way the Indy referendum goes)
What are the additonal responsibilities of British citizenship compared to a British resident.
Voting Eligible for conscription in a war? Not going to happen with modern warfare. Anything else?
So they shouldnt be able to vote as they havent taken on the responsibility of the right to vote.....
Eligible to be selected for the England football team ?
Eligible for the protection of HMG in the event they get in trouble overseas - Don Pacifico etc
Quite amusing - Newnight 5-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
It's almost like voters can see through the remainiacs tactics.
I think Letwin on Saturday sealed the deal with BJ being deliberately and vindictively cornered. May extending by choice is completely different to Johnson being compelled against his will. The more they push the more they get further away from their goal of neutralising him.
Does anyone with a head on their shoulders really think Boris Johnson isn't down on his knees every night thanking heaven for Benn, Letwin and Co. for giving him the time he needs to get his deal through - and simultaneously relieving him of reponsibility for the extension?
Indeed. ‘Vindictively cornered’ is almost as absurd as Rees Mogg’s disingenuous nonsense from earlier today.
Conservative majority is now favourite for the next GE. Another case of hypothetical, pre campaign polls being reverse indicators, or will Boris buck the trend?
Anyway, if we do get an election, my prediction is a Tory majority of ~40. Prediction for vote shares: Tories 42%, Labour 36%. Much as people aren't pleased with either of the two parties, they'll end up polarising anyway with people picking the lesser evil, because the alternative seems so unbelievably horrendous (a la Clinton/Trump).
My guess is Tory majority of 20, with Tories no higher than 40 %.
Like you, I expect a classic small party squeeze on the LibDems and The Brexit Party.
The election will be good for the SNP and bad for PC.
Quite amusing - Newnight 5-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
It's almost like voters can see through the remainiacs tactics.
I think Letwin on Saturday sealed the deal with BJ being deliberately and vindictively cornered. May extending by choice is completely different to Johnson being compelled against his will. The more they push the more they get further away from their goal of neutralising him.
Does anyone with a head on their shoulders really think Boris Johnson isn't down on his knees every night thanking heaven for Benn, Letwin and Co. for giving him the time he needs to get his deal through - and simultaneously relieving him of reponsibility for the extension?
Except he seems to be giving up on getting in through.
I'm not convinced the Tories will win an easy majority at a GE. They could lose loads of seats in the home counties and SW London to the LDs like Guildford and Wimbledon. The polls may not be a good guide because the Conservatives could be piling up huge majorities in their safe seats in the SW, Midlands, Yorkshire, etc.
Quite amusing - Newnight 5-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
It's almost like voters can see through the remainiacs tactics.
I think Letwin on Saturday sealed the deal with BJ being deliberately and vindictively cornered. May extending by choice is completely different to Johnson being compelled against his will. The more they push the more they get further away from their goal of neutralising him.
Does anyone with a head on their shoulders really think Boris Johnson isn't down on his knees every night thanking heaven for Benn, Letwin and Co. for giving him the time he needs to get his deal through - and simultaneously relieving him of reponsibility for the extension?
He is a very lucky general and if he wins a GE before Xmas with divorce from the EU on the 31st December he will have confounded us all
Anyway, from a betting point of view, if there's an election in early December and Johnson gets a working majority, do people think he'll still be mad keen to get Brexit done within a few days, or will he adopt a more leirsurely approach and leave next year?
Quite amusing - Newnight 5-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
It's almost like voters can see through the remainiacs tactics.
I think Letwin on Saturday sealed the deal with BJ being deliberately and vindictively cornered. May extending by choice is completely different to Johnson being compelled against his will. The more they push the more they get further away from their goal of neutralising him.
Does anyone with a head on their shoulders really think Boris Johnson isn't down on his knees every night thanking heaven for Benn, Letwin and Co. for giving him the time he needs to get his deal through - and simultaneously relieving him of reponsibility for the extension?
Except he seems to be giving up on getting in through.
Not sure he has the numbers - you really don't want to be relying on the likes of Lisa Nandy.
Looks like the public want to remain in the EU with a mahoosive Tory majority
Deltapoll must have surveyed @Richard_Nabavi a lot of times...
Yes, but they forget to mention the caveat that I wanted Cameron and Osborne back running things, or if they're not available David Gauke, Phil Hammond and Amber Rudd.
Quite amusing - Newnight 5-1 Remainer panel tearing their hair out that Boris isn't being punished by the electorate for us not leaving on 31st October!
It's almost like voters can see through the remainiacs tactics.
I think Letwin on Saturday sealed the deal with BJ being deliberately and vindictively cornered. May extending by choice is completely different to Johnson being compelled against his will. The more they push the more they get further away from their goal of neutralising him.
Does anyone with a head on their shoulders really think Boris Johnson isn't down on his knees every night thanking heaven for Benn, Letwin and Co. for giving him the time he needs to get his deal through - and simultaneously relieving him of reponsibility for the extension?
Except he seems to be giving up on getting in through.
I've got some sympathy with this viewpoint. After all, Ken Clarke said quite reasonably after the vote tonight that perhaps only another 3-4 days of debate was needed on the WAB than what was already slated, why doesn't the government just plough on?
But of course we know the reason. The mendacity of a Remainer House that will amend the bill up to the gills and be holding things up indefinitely through whatever chicanery it can improvise. There needs to be some time pressure or the thing will get salami-sliced to oblivion.
Anyway, from a betting point of view, if there's an election in early December and Johnson gets a working majority, do people think he'll still be mad keen to get Brexit done within a few days, or will he adopt a more leirsurely approach and leave next year?
I assume the current bill dies if there is an election as it's a new session ?
My guess is he'd allow scrutiny of the bill for the exit date of 31st January - there's probably legitimate things that need tidying up in there that don't alter the substance of the matter.
I'm not convinced the Tories will win an easy majority at a GE. They could lose loads of seats in the home counties and SW London to the LDs like Guildford and Wimbledon. The polls may not be a good guide because the Conservatives could be piling up huge majorities in their safe seats in the SW, Midlands, Yorkshire, etc.
There will be a point where the middle class make a decision on their priorities.
No deal Brexit is no longer a threat so for many I would think Corbyn will be much the bigger fear.
I'm not convinced the Tories will win an easy majority at a GE. They could lose loads of seats in the home counties and SW London to the LDs like Guildford and Wimbledon. The polls may not be a good guide because the Conservatives could be piling up huge majorities in their safe seats in the SW, Midlands, Yorkshire, etc.
They already piled up huge majorities in many of those in 2017.
I'm not convinced the Tories will win an easy majority at a GE. They could lose loads of seats in the home counties and SW London to the LDs like Guildford and Wimbledon. The polls may not be a good guide because the Conservatives could be piling up huge majorities in their safe seats in the SW, Midlands, Yorkshire, etc.
I am not convinced they will get a big majority, & I would not be at all surprised if they lost Wimbledon & Guildford.
But there are many more Wrexhams and Newcastle-Under-Lymes and Ashfields that I think they will take.
Comments
If they aren't, then perhaps giving them the vote ought to be an important counterweight to what is being done to them.
Conservatives used to believe in giving folk personal responsibility. I can't fathom why that idea doesn't translate into given them votes.
I seem to recall the LD manifesto was a little more detailed than the Labour one on the same area last time, but not by much.
"A No.10 source says that the government will push for a general election if a Brexit extension is agreed".
I really get the impression the Tories have lost their bottle in parliament, and after days of momentum are now scared they don't have the votes to get it through.
Because that's key for me - they said they felt they had the votes to pass it, and if they were not lying still think that. OBviously they are very upset that they will face an extension, but if they want to pass it, and have the votes to pass it, why are they not passing it?
At least May could argue she didn't have the votes to pass anything she might negotiate, as despite a slim majority she had enough ERGers and Grievers that it would have been a struggle. But Boris, with fewer MPs, says he can pass it, so doesn't need a GE to do that.
Good for those who called it
I think not, for the reason you state. Johnson's lead in the polls has grown in the meantime and an election now looks inevitable whatever Labour do.
It's a bit like the Lib Dems in the period 2010-15, when they dared not pull the plug on the coalition for fear that they would be decimated in an early GE. They just carried on, hoping that something would turn up, only to find that things worked out worse than their worst nightmares when finally they had to face the music in 2015.
I don't recall her being a EUsceptic in previous decades.
Has she had another religious experience ?
I know you subscribe to the utopian fantasy that all residents should have votes, but as has been discussed on here before very few places in the entire world hand out voting rights as if they were sweeties.
Add in options expiry and the financial sector is already stressed so don’t distract with another issue
In the past 3 months I have stood referee for three 3 friends - two Polish and a Vietnamese - who wished to show their commitment to the UK by becoming British citizens. I was immensely proud to be asked to do so. I am pretty sure that given the chance the two Polish friends would vote to Remain in the EU but that doesn't matter. I love the fact they wish to commit to being British (actually in two of the three cases being Scottish if that is the way the Indy referendum goes)
At the moment I’m sure in many constituencies the least worst candidate wins and wins by default. The assumption someone *must*win can’t be a good thing.
We needed MPs to keep our PM in check.
That's disastrous news
Air New Zealand was the best value business class from London to LAX. You could often get returns for under £3,000. And it was really good too.
I'm completely gutted.
Worse, this means that prices for other airlines will rise as capacity is taken out of the market.
Personally I think 18 is the right age for all these things and hence think that is also the right age for have the right to vote.
Labour seem determined to self-immolate.
7 days to heart bypass assessment appointment.
Voting
Eligible for conscription in a war? Not going to happen with modern warfare.
Anything else?
So they shouldnt be able to vote as they havent taken on the responsibility of the right to vote.....
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.154849135
The latter would provide the novelty of an election campaign over Christmas. Happy Holidays.....
The best argument for 18 is simply there has to be a cut off somewhere and 18 is the status quo and no better or worse than 16 or 17.
I'm trying to get my shovel under this idea that giving EU citizens the vote is somehow "rigging" elections; I have spoken before about the immigrants I know in the UK, folk from Venezuela, Lithuania, Romania, Czech Republic. These are people who are not going to vote Labour, because they know something about politics from their own past in those countries. I do also know immigrants who would vote Labour.
I respect but reject your argument for making certain people jump through a difficult series of hoops before they vote, but it's a bit of a tangent to the main point I was making, that it's wrong that you can rely on EU citizens to vote a certain way, and even if it were that is then an argument against them being allowed to vote. Your arguments are separate from that point, so I'll leave them to stand for themselves.
But the important point is that they are showing a commitment to remaining in Britain and making their lives here. The long term well being of our country now becomes part of their responsibility rather than just short term personal advantage.
December is possible but even that requires a 2/3rd vote otherwise we are rapidly into late December and very quickly into early January.
Though I would of course point out that giving 3 million people the vote in a referendum when in all likelihood they are not interested in the long term effects of that vote, merely the next few years before they then go home, does seem a bit off.
And in point of fact, I was offering up the idea of stuff being "done to them" as a choice of two things. If you assert that nothing is being "done to them", then you are saying that they won't suffer from these changes. That's my challenge to you now: tell me that EU citizens in the UK aren't going to suffer from the UK leaving the EU.
Do you think UK nationals who live abroad for a lengthy period of time should have the right to vote here? I just find it hard to accept that someone who has lived in the country for 20 years plus and chosen to move here, has shown less of a commitment to the country than someone else, who has a UK passport from an accident of birth and chooses to live elsewhere!
And Boris campaign will be elect me and we leave the EU on the 31st December. Clear and no prevarication. Powerful message
But the election campaigning wouldn't start in December - it would kick off as soon as the vote was held (or 14 days later if it's a VoNC).
In terms of practicalities, I would favour the child taking over the right to vote for themselves only at an age when they were deemed responsible enough, that is 18 or perhaps 16 but not before. Also, where both parents were living together, the father would be given the voting rights for boys, and the mother the voting rights for girls. Where children were living at an address where only one parent was registered to vote, that parent would vote for all of them.
An interim step would be to equalise constituency sizes based on ONS estimates for the whole population, rather than just those aged 18+ who bother to register.
Doesn't sound much …….. until you see it's a Rasmussen.
Motion for GE must go on Order Paper the night before.
So earliest date motion could be debated is now Thurs.
And I think that's too late for 28 Nov - Parliament would not actually be dissolved the same day as the vote - think Queen has to sign a proclamation or similar which would only be the next day (at earliest).
A cross-party group of MPs has forced through an emergency bill in less than six hours to instruct Theresa May to seek an extension to article 50 and avoid a no-deal Brexit, despite government opposition.
And think they can win a majority any ensuing election.
As an aside, when living in the US, I contacted Manchester City Council about getting on the electoral roll to maintain my voting rights and was told "I wouldn't bother mate, they're all as bad as each other". When I said I'd still like to register regardless he said "Well if you must then. I'll send the form in the post". And then didn't.
So I appreciate it's hard to put Brexit to one side in this conversation, but I assure you it's not my motivation here.
To be fair the LD's message is also completely clear which will hoover up millions of remainers.
It is Labour's positioning that is unlikely to survive the first week of a GE campaign.
Where we draw the line is arbitrary enough that I have no strong view, but think long term foreign residents should be treated at least as well as UK nationals long term overseas. I think we should phase out the differences between Commonwealth, EU and other foreign nationals voting rights too, possibly Irish too although that may be too controversial.
But Thurs 12 Dec looks a bit silly - w/c Mon 16 Dec would be taken up with swearing in MPs (3 days) + electing Speaker so there wouldn't even be time for a Queens Speech before Christmas.
One other thing - there needs to be a Budget in 2019 - I think by law there have to be two fiscal events each calendar year - and by law OBR has to issue forecasts on public finances twice each calendar year.
If Parliament is dissolved in next few days for a Thurs 5 Dec GE there is no way a Budget could take place before January.
Having double checked it's too late for the 28th. It's 25 business days before an election so the only November date left is the 29th.
Eligible for the protection of HMG in the event they get in trouble overseas - Don Pacifico etc
Like you, I expect a classic small party squeeze on the LibDems and The Brexit Party.
The election will be good for the SNP and bad for PC.
But of course we know the reason. The mendacity of a Remainer House that will amend the bill up to the gills and be holding things up indefinitely through whatever chicanery it can improvise. There needs to be some time pressure or the thing will get salami-sliced to oblivion.
My guess is he'd allow scrutiny of the bill for the exit date of 31st January - there's probably legitimate things that need tidying up in there that don't alter the substance of the matter.
No deal Brexit is no longer a threat so for many I would think Corbyn will be much the bigger fear.
The situation is both complicated and unclear.
But there are many more Wrexhams and Newcastle-Under-Lymes and Ashfields that I think they will take.