I don't think so either. The public may well think differently though. The UKIP takeover of the Tories is nearly complete.
It is No Deal at the end of Transition imo. BoZo has promised* no extension.
*though obviously his promises are worth nothing.
UKIP/BXP favoured zero immigration, No Deal, opposed same sex marriage, wanted a referendum on reintroducing the death penalty, wanted to slash foreign aid, to be militarily isolationist and denies climate change.
All of those positions are at odds with the Conservatives.
Were at odds with the Conservatives. Where do you think the people that now control the party - the Raabs, the Patels, the Rees Moggs, the Bridgens, the Francois, etc - stand on those issues? There may be nuanced differences in some areas, but the direction of travel is clearly a shared one.
Apparently Philip Hammond was in favour of reintroducing the death penalty when he first stood for the party, but that well-known radical has now been flung out, so we're all good.
In any case, Johnson controls the party, and - for all his faults - has never given the slightest indication he'll govern as anything other than a centrist One Nation Tory.
The next five years of his one-eyed bigoted detractors denigrating everything he does is going to be extremely irritating. I take comfort in the knowledge that it'll annoy them even more.
My late Mother was a Tory Remainer and thought Nigel Farage was "a ghastly man"
She would not have voted for anything that had the whiff of Farage.
I am a Tory Brexiteer and think Farage a ghastly man.
But he is yesterday's ghastly man. He has been found out. He had no interest in Brexit - just in keeping his milch-cow soap box going. With the UK out of the EU, he really is nothing.
Far be it from me to defend the man, but in fairness he did campaign, including spending his own money and, AIUI putting his marriage under considerable ........ too great ..... a strain for quite a while before people began to take him seriously. I believe too, that he could have made more money on the Metal Exchange if he hadn't turned away into politics. I expect to see him as UK Ambassador to the US after Christmas, appointed by a triumphant, and triumphing, Boris.
Having said that, yes, he is a ghastly man. I fear that public life in our country is going to get worse before it gets better.
We’re not going for politically appointed diplomats
I disagree with anyone doing deals to stand down - you either win your argument with the electorate or you do not. The SNP grew to a massive party from a small base by building their narrative and supporters - if you need others to step aside to boost you then you haven't convinced enough people. And in a democracy what is democratic about a party not standing? Have seen a lot of LD/Green/BXP voters outraged by these deals on Twitter.
As for Brexit the thing not Brexit the Party, I read HYUFD bleating on about trade deals and wonder how we will spin reality when it arrives. The bigger you are the better the deal. Making ourselves smaller than our current trade value in the EU means that we get a worse deal not a better one.
I'm sure that eventually we will manage to replace all of the free trade deals that enthusiasts for free trade demand we walk away from. And all of those deals will be on worse terms because we will be smaller and more insignificant a market than the EU. Thats reality. FTA rampers are either stupid, or know that the people they are selling to are stupid. Either way, its dishonest.
We will be the 5th largest economy in the works - hardly insignificant
And a trade deal could be optimised for the UK rather than being optimised for the EU
Thinking about it, Labour needs to put electoral reform in their manifesto if they want to further consolidate the centre left. It could work if they are serious about it, unlike Tony Blair.
Yet Blair had more credibility on that issue than today's Labour will ever have. Remember all Blair's dealings with Ashdown.
As I said early last week, Tory remain voters have to decide which is more important to them, being members of the EU or potentially being unable to afford their mortgages and seeing their pension funds trashed by Corbyn and MacDonnell.
Vote Tory = Get Johnson and move on with Brexit
Vote Labour = Get Corbyn Vote LibDem = Get Corbyn Vote Green = Get Corbyn Vote PC = Get Corbyn Vote SNP = Get Corbyn Vote Brexit = risk getting Corbyn by default.
As long as the Tories keep plugging away at this, Boris should get his working majority. Let's see who is standing where on Friday morning once nominations have closed. Incidentally any last minute retirees due?
Or we could just vote for a narcissistic liar because he has a blue rosette stuck on his ill-fitting suit.
So you'd vote for him if only he'd get a better-fitting suit?
Thought not.
At least I am not letting party loyalty blind me about the fact that the Leader of the said party is a proven liar and is, apparently, loathed and distrusted by almost anyone who comes into contact with him?
Can you not see that this complete a*se of a man seems to have integrity whatsoever? That he is utterly unsuited to run a bicycle stand never mind a country?
I'm sure that eventually we will manage to replace all of the free trade deals that enthusiasts for free trade demand we walk away from. And all of those deals will be on worse terms because we will be smaller and more insignificant a market than the EU. Thats reality. FTA rampers are either stupid, or know that the people they are selling to are stupid. Either way, its dishonest.
It is possible that you are wrong about this. Consider a possible UK-Canada trade deal.
The UK's priorities will probably be on access for the services sector, particularly the City, and some other areas where we have particular strength, such as pharmaceuticals, satellite engineering. There's a whole bunch of things that other EU countries are bothered about, such as machine tools, say, which don't matter so much to us. So Canada could be able to get more of what it wants and we could be able to get more of what we want, at the same time, relative to the EU-Canada trade deal.
I don't say that it is likely, but it is possible.
There is a big, hulking agreement called NAFTA which stands in the way of that. And you have to factor in what we are giving up with by far our biggest export market to get that deal with Canada. Overall, it will be a net loss.
NAFTA doesn't have any bearing on services standards recognition between the UK and Canada. NAFTA becomes a factor for agricultural and goods alignment, but no one is saying we should have alignment with Canada, just recognition of their standards, many of which are higher than the NAFTA baseline as set out by the US (and usually set to Mexican standards).
Of course it does. Any deal between the UK and Canada will have to be compliant with this:
Surely the point is that only the goods exported between parties to the deal have to be compliant with regulations in the importing country? We couldn't force the US to stop chlorinating chicken for its domestic market. We absolutely could insist that only unchlorinated chicken be imported to the UK as part of any deal.
Writing as a liberal Conservative myself, Farage's move doesn't make the slightest difference. There is no Con deal with the Brexit Party - Farage has unilaterally capitulated. His decision doesn't affect Tory policy or actions so I don't see why it should influence my thinking.
Of much more relevance is the failure to publish the report on Russian involvement / influence.
I don't think so either. The public may well think differently though. The UKIP takeover of the Tories is nearly complete.
It is No Deal at the end of Transition imo. BoZo has promised* no extension.
*though obviously his promises are worth nothing.
UKIP/BXP favoured zero immigration, No Deal, opposed same sex marriage, wanted a referendum on reintroducing the death penalty, wanted to slash foreign aid, to be militarily isolationist and denies climate change.
All of those positions are at odds with the Conservatives.
Were at odds with the Conservatives. Where do you think the people that now control the party - the Raabs, the Patels, the Rees Moggs, the Bridgens, the Francois, etc - stand on those issues? There may be nuanced differences in some areas, but the direction of travel is clearly a shared one.
Which is why it is a party I can no longer support. I don't think I am alone in my thinking. If the LDs can suggest this is actually a Con/BXP secret pact it may do the Tory brand further damage with centrist voters. If Corbyn goes after this election and is replaced with a more centrist Labour figure who also has a brain the Tories will be in serious trouble next time.
As I said early last week, Tory remain voters have to decide which is more important to them, being members of the EU or potentially being unable to afford their mortgages and seeing their pension funds trashed by Corbyn and MacDonnell.
Vote Tory = Get Johnson and move on with Brexit
Vote Labour = Get Corbyn Vote LibDem = Get Corbyn Vote Green = Get Corbyn Vote PC = Get Corbyn Vote SNP = Get Corbyn Vote Brexit = risk getting Corbyn by default.
As long as the Tories keep plugging away at this, Boris should get his working majority. Let's see who is standing where on Friday morning once nominations have closed. Incidentally any last minute retirees due?
Or we could just vote for a narcissistic liar because he has a blue rosette stuck on his ill-fitting suit.
So you'd vote for him if only he'd get a better-fitting suit?
Thought not.
It does remind me of the criticisms Cameron made of Corbyn though - ‘do your tie up.’
And of course, he did, so now instead of the scruffy Trot with the bad hairstyle people see Magic Grandpa looking like a retired stockbroker.
Jezza does dress well now, with a genuine stylishness. I wonder if his inner self has had a makeover too. Clothes maketh man.
Yes, I always feel myself become less racist whenever I put on a suit.
I really can't see this influencing Tory remainers against Boris, if they were planning on voting that way. Boris being the Brexity option is pretty priced in surely?
I think theres a chance it will put off some, based on what it might portend that Farage is to a degree backing him. But it looks like a move born out of weakness not strength, and Boris got a deal for this phase. Risks later still exist, but given that willingness to get a deal and Farage looking weak I think most Tory remainers who have returned to the fold will remain so.
My late Mother was a Tory Remainer and thought Nigel Farage was "a ghastly man"
She would not have voted for anything that had the whiff of Farage.
I am a Tory Brexiteer and think Farage a ghastly man.
But he is yesterday's ghastly man. He has been found out. He had no interest in Brexit - just in keeping his milch-cow soap box going. With the UK out of the EU, he really is nothing.
Far be it from me to defend the man, but in fairness he did campaign, including spending his own money and, AIUI putting his marriage under considerable ........ too great ..... a strain for quite a while before people began to take him seriously. I believe too, that he could have made more money on the Metal Exchange if he hadn't turned away into politics. I expect to see him as UK Ambassador to the US after Christmas, appointed by a triumphant, and triumphing, Boris.
Having said that, yes, he is a ghastly man. I fear that public life in our country is going to get worse before it gets better.
If Farage gets anything, let alone US Ambassadorship, out of standing down his candidates - then surely that is corruption.
Which is BAU for the Tories, you can bet your shirt he is on a promise.
I don't think so either. The public may well think differently though. The UKIP takeover of the Tories is nearly complete.
It is No Deal at the end of Transition imo. BoZo has promised* no extension.
*though obviously his promises are worth nothing.
The thing about Johnson's lies is that they are not necessary. He was always going to be beat Corbyn. All that he is doing is storing up huge problems for himself and the country. It makes noi sense to me, except to the extent that Johnson cannot help himself - he is genuinely a congenital liar.
May presumed she was always going to beat Corbyn. Look where that nearly landed us.
So you are saying that the only way to beat Corbyn is to lie. That is not going to end well for either the Tories or the UK, Philip.
No. I'm suggesting don't be arrogant or take anything for granted.
My late Mother was a Tory Remainer and thought Nigel Farage was "a ghastly man"
She would not have voted for anything that had the whiff of Farage.
I am a Tory Brexiteer and think Farage a ghastly man.
But he is yesterday's ghastly man. He has been found out. He had no interest in Brexit - just in keeping his milch-cow soap box going. With the UK out of the EU, he really is nothing.
Far be it from me to defend the man, but in fairness he did campaign, including spending his own money and, AIUI putting his marriage under considerable ........ too great ..... a strain for quite a while before people began to take him seriously. I believe too, that he could have made more money on the Metal Exchange if he hadn't turned away into politics. I expect to see him as UK Ambassador to the US after Christmas, appointed by a triumphant, and triumphing, Boris.
Having said that, yes, he is a ghastly man. I fear that public life in our country is going to get worse before it gets better.
If Farage gets anything, let alone US Ambassadorship, out of standing down his candidates - then surely that is corruption.
Which is BAU for the Tories, you can bet your shirt he is on a promise.
I don't think so either. The public may well think differently though. The UKIP takeover of the Tories is nearly complete.
It is No Deal at the end of Transition imo. BoZo has promised* no extension.
*though obviously his promises are worth nothing.
The thing about Johnson's lies is that they are not necessary. He was always going to be beat Corbyn. All that he is doing is storing up huge problems for himself and the country. It makes noi sense to me, except to the extent that Johnson cannot help himself - he is genuinely a congenital liar.
May presumed she was always going to beat Corbyn. Look where that nearly landed us.
So you are saying that the only way to beat Corbyn is to lie. That is not going to end well for either the Tories or the UK, Philip.
No. I'm suggesting don't be arrogant or take anything for granted.
I'm sure that eventually we will manage to replace all of the free trade deals that enthusiasts for free trade demand we walk away from. And all of those deals will be on worse terms because we will be smaller and more insignificant a market than the EU. Thats reality. FTA rampers are either stupid, or know that the people they are selling to are stupid. Either way, its dishonest.
It is possible that you are wrong about this. Consider a possible UK-Canada trade deal.
The UK's priorities will probably be on access for the services sector, particularly the City, and some other areas where we have particular strength, such as pharmaceuticals, satellite engineering. There's a whole bunch of things that other EU countries are bothered about, such as machine tools, say, which don't matter so much to us. So Canada could be able to get more of what it wants and we could be able to get more of what we want, at the same time, relative to the EU-Canada trade deal.
I don't say that it is likely, but it is possible.
There is a big, hulking agreement called NAFTA which stands in the way of that. And you have to factor in what we are giving up with by far our biggest export market to get that deal with Canada. Overall, it will be a net loss.
NAFTA doesn't have any bearing on services standards recognition between the UK and Canada. NAFTA becomes a factor for agricultural and goods alignment, but no one is saying we should have alignment with Canada, just recognition of their standards, many of which are higher than the NAFTA baseline as set out by the US (and usually set to Mexican standards).
Of course it does. Any deal between the UK and Canada will have to be compliant with this:
Look at what is covered. It's even more sparse than what the EU covers in the single market for services. Again, it's not about alignment it is about each country recognising the other's standards.
In the last round Canada was more than happy to open up the services discussion but didn't because the EU don't have much of a strategy, once we're into the transition period those are the conversations we will be having, but not just with Canada, with loads of countries who want favourable access to the UKs internal market for goods.
The revised NAFTA deal is hugely beneficial to US services providers. Any deal that gives UK services providers backdoor access to the US market would not be NAFTA-compliant.
I don't think so either. The public may well think differently though. The UKIP takeover of the Tories is nearly complete.
It is No Deal at the end of Transition imo. BoZo has promised* no extension.
*though obviously his promises are worth nothing.
The thing about Johnson's lies is that they are not necessary. He was always going to be beat Corbyn. All that he is doing is storing up huge problems for himself and the country. It makes noi sense to me, except to the extent that Johnson cannot help himself - he is genuinely a congenital liar.
May presumed she was always going to beat Corbyn. Look where that nearly landed us.
So you are saying that the only way to beat Corbyn is to lie. That is not going to end well for either the Tories or the UK, Philip.
No. I'm suggesting don't be arrogant or take anything for granted.
Lying to the electorate is the height of arrogance.
As we can see from the reaction - a deal would have been a toxic stick to beat the blues with.
This a far better result for Boris.
Boris has successfully bullied Farage here. Good optics for the PM.
Bullied? You sure? I had another b word in mind. However Farage was on BBC earlier saying he'd been offered a peerage 'several times' but he'd always refused.
Lord Ashcroft says that 25% of remainers in 2016 voted Tory in 2017.
And the Tory voteshare was 42% in 2017.
And Mike has that 31% of Tory Remainers from 2017 are saying they are going elsewhere.
So assuming everything being equal and ignoring distribution, I make that .25 * .424 * .31 percent of the Electorate being Tory Remainers going elsewhere.
Or 3.3% of the voters in this case. 3.2% switching Tory -> LD. 0.1% switching Tory -> Lab.
Significant?
IMO that depends on distribution.
What does the poll show for Lab Leave voters going Tory?
Why the 0.424 multiple?
Isn’t it 25% of Remainers voted Tory if which 31% (ie 7.5% of Remainers) are considering their options
I disagree with anyone doing deals to stand down - you either win your argument with the electorate or you do not. The SNP grew to a massive party from a small base by building their narrative and supporters - if you need others to step aside to boost you then you haven't convinced enough people. And in a democracy what is democratic about a party not standing? Have seen a lot of LD/Green/BXP voters outraged by these deals on Twitter.
As for Brexit the thing not Brexit the Party, I read HYUFD bleating on about trade deals and wonder how we will spin reality when it arrives. The bigger you are the better the deal. Making ourselves smaller than our current trade value in the EU means that we get a worse deal not a better one.
I'm sure that eventually we will manage to replace all of the free trade deals that enthusiasts for free trade demand we walk away from. And all of those deals will be on worse terms because we will be smaller and more insignificant a market than the EU. Thats reality. FTA rampers are either stupid, or know that the people they are selling to are stupid. Either way, its dishonest.
Voters 'outraged by these deals' need to support Proportional Representation to get rid of the need for them.
PR gets rid of shady deals and stitch-ups between parties? You're in for a nasty shock in the aftermath of the first election held under it, assuming we do switch.
One of the better arguments for FPTP is that it (usually) forces these deals to happen in advance of the poll, rather than after, thus increasing transparency. Brexit has mucked some of this up on both sides of the political divide.
Within any system politicians will do deals and change their policies from what they originally promised (cf. pick any recent UK political year you choose). The argument here is that forcing (or denying) voters' choices about how they are represented would be unnecessary if we had a voting system that actually represented people properly and more fairly.
I'm sure that eventually we will manage to replace all of the free trade deals that enthusiasts for free trade demand we walk away from. And all of those deals will be on worse terms because we will be smaller and more insignificant a market than the EU. Thats reality. FTA rampers are either stupid, or know that the people they are selling to are stupid. Either way, its dishonest.
It is possible that you are wrong about this. Consider a possible UK-Canada trade deal.
The UK's priorities will probably be on access for the services sector, particularly the City, and some other areas where we have particular strength, such as pharmaceuticals, satellite engineering. There's a whole bunch of things that other EU countries are bothered about, such as machine tools, say, which don't matter so much to us. So Canada could be able to get more of what it wants and we could be able to get more of what we want, at the same time, relative to the EU-Canada trade deal.
I don't say that it is likely, but it is possible.
There is a big, hulking agreement called NAFTA which stands in the way of that. And you have to factor in what we are giving up with by far our biggest export market to get that deal with Canada. Overall, it will be a net loss.
NAFTA doesn't have any bearing on services standards recognition between the UK and Canada. NAFTA becomes a factor for agricultural and goods alignment, but no one is saying we should have alignment with Canada, just recognition of their standards, many of which are higher than the NAFTA baseline as set out by the US (and usually set to Mexican standards).
Of course it does. Any deal between the UK and Canada will have to be compliant with this:
Surely the point is that only the goods exported between parties to the deal have to be compliant with regulations in the importing country? We couldn't force the US to stop chlorinating chicken for its domestic market. We absolutely could insist that only unchlorinated chicken be imported to the UK as part of any deal.
That is absolutely true. The issue is whether we will. Given what we are giving up in terms of access to the EU market, we are going to be desperate to do deals. That will have consequences.
Related betting query: why are Chelsea shorter than Leicester to be winner without Liverpool/Manchester City?
On Betfair the odds (back/lay) are: Chelsea - 1.81/1.9 Leicester - 2.7/3.3
I'm more inclined to lay Leicester because I have a previous bet (9.5, same market) but if I were looking at this without prior involvement I'd be more interested in perhaps backing them.
Just checked and the next fixtures are Brighton/Leicester, and Manchester City/Chelsea. If those run to the odds, Leicester's odds should be better afterwards, and Chelsea's worse.
Writing as a liberal Conservative myself, Farage's move doesn't make the slightest difference. There is no Con deal with the Brexit Party - Farage has unilaterally capitulated. His decision doesn't affect Tory policy or actions so I don't see why it should influence my thinking.
Of much more relevance is the failure to publish the report on Russian involvement / influence.
Which, as I pointed out yesterday, has already been leaked.
The loyalists on here have already discounted the leak as containing nothing of consequence, but none of them answered the obvious question of "If it is so unimportant, why fail to publish it?"
Hopefully Labour can redirect the money to dualing the A1 north of Morpeth then.
When I lived in Berwick on Tweed in the late fifties-early sixties dualing the A1 down to Newcastle was often demanded and so, nearly 60 years later, it is still ignored. As is the case with the dualing of the A9 north of Perth the lack of investment in these two major routes says all that needs to be said on how London and the south have neglected the needs of the north over decades
What we saw was Farage retreating from the field in exchange for.....nothing.
Just what we would expect a Tory to try and promote, sleazy crooks trying to stitch up the election.
Stitch up how? Sleazy I'll grant you, crooks we shall see, and I dont like parties standing down unless they're in formal alliance, but what is the stitch up? People dont have to stand in elections
Is the a deal or has the BXP did this of it's own accord ?
Don't be stupid of course it is a deal.
It’s like the greens standing aside in Scotland every Westminster election.
They don't stand aside, they have no support and cannot afford to lose deposits in most seats you f***ing numpty. It is also a local constituency decision not a country wide stitch up for gain.
Is the a deal or has the BXP did this of it's own accord ?
Don't be stupid of course it is a deal.
It’s like the greens standing aside in Scotland every Westminster election.
They don't stand aside, they have no support and cannot afford to lose deposits in most seats you f***ing numpty. It is also a local constituency decision not a country wide stitch up for gain.
I don't think so either. The public may well think differently though. The UKIP takeover of the Tories is nearly complete.
It is No Deal at the end of Transition imo. BoZo has promised* no extension.
*though obviously his promises are worth nothing.
The thing about Johnson's lies is that they are not necessary. He was always going to be beat Corbyn. All that he is doing is storing up huge problems for himself and the country. It makes noi sense to me, except to the extent that Johnson cannot help himself - he is genuinely a congenital liar.
May presumed she was always going to beat Corbyn. Look where that nearly landed us.
So you are saying that the only way to beat Corbyn is to lie. That is not going to end well for either the Tories or the UK, Philip.
No. I'm suggesting don't be arrogant or take anything for granted.
Well, that is Boris stuffed then.....
On the arrogance yes. That hes not taking it for granted explains some of the wilder tactics though.
As a Tory Remainer, I really don't like losing the MPs from my side of the party so the Lib Dems would be a temptation especially with someone like Dorrell as their candidate in my constituency.
The buffoon is not my choice of Tory leader either, although getting a new deal was a positive surprise I'll admit.
BUT unlike the Brexit Party retreat which seems rather one-sided as deals go, the Lib Dem pact with a party who specifically wants to split off Wales from the UK is repugnant to me.
Simplistic I'm sure but I think it's a real turn off.
Lord Ashcroft says that 25% of remainers in 2016 voted Tory in 2017.
And the Tory voteshare was 42% in 2017.
And Mike has that 31% of Tory Remainers from 2017 are saying they are going elsewhere.
So assuming everything being equal and ignoring distribution, I make that .25 * .424 * .31 percent of the Electorate being Tory Remainers going elsewhere.
Or 3.3% of the voters in this case. 3.2% switching Tory -> LD. 0.1% switching Tory -> Lab.
Significant?
IMO that depends on distribution.
What does the poll show for Lab Leave voters going Tory?
Why the 0.424 multiple?
Isn’t it 25% of Remainers voted Tory if which 31% (ie 7.5% of Remainers) are considering their options
Hence 7.5% * 48
That's the same thing and has the same outcome.
How to make heavy weather of a calculation in two easy lessons?
Roughly half the population are remainers. A quarter of them voted Tory, making an eighth of the population Tory remainers. If about a third are currently switching then that's a twenty fourth of the total, or about 4%. Given the polling inaccuracy at each stage, it's not a calculation worth getting out the calculator for.
Any bookies offering odds on Farage getting a peerage/knighthood in the next 14 months?
That would be a disgrace.
Yes. Although various people have laboured for him to have either for years. Theres plenty of awful knights and peers. How pathetic of Farage though if he was so ego driven that really was the price.
Is the a deal or has the BXP did this of it's own accord ?
Don't be stupid of course it is a deal.
It’s like the greens standing aside in Scotland every Westminster election.
They don't stand aside, they have no support and cannot afford to lose deposits in most seats you f***ing numpty. It is also a local constituency decision not a country wide stitch up for gain.
You’re always so cheery Malcolm. What’s your secret?
I don't think so either. The public may well think differently though. The UKIP takeover of the Tories is nearly complete.
It is No Deal at the end of Transition imo. BoZo has promised* no extension.
*though obviously his promises are worth nothing.
UKIP/BXP favoured zero immigration, No Deal, opposed same sex marriage, wanted a referendum on reintroducing the death penalty, wanted to slash foreign aid, to be militarily isolationist and denies climate change.
All of those positions are at odds with the Conservatives.
Were at odds with the Conservatives. Where do you think the people that now control the party - the Raabs, the Patels, the Rees Moggs, the Bridgens, the Francois, etc - stand on those issues? There may be nuanced differences in some areas, but the direction of travel is clearly a shared one.
Apparently Philip Hammond was in favour of reintroducing the death penalty when he first stood for the party, but that well-known radical has now been flung out, so we're all good.
In any case, Johnson controls the party, and - for all his faults - has never given the slightest indication he'll govern as anything other than a centrist One Nation Tory.
The next five years of his one-eyed bigoted detractors denigrating everything he does is going to be extremely irritating. I take comfort in the knowledge that it'll annoy them even more.
What were those meetings with Steve Bannon about then?
I disagree with anyone doing deals to stand down - you either win your argument with the electorate or you do not. The SNP grew to a massive party from a small base by building their narrative and supporters - if you need others to step aside to boost you then you haven't convinced enough people. And in a democracy what is democratic about a party not standing? Have seen a lot of LD/Green/BXP voters outraged by these deals on Twitter.
As for Brexit the thing not Brexit the Party, I read HYUFD bleating on about trade deals and wonder how we will spin reality when it arrives. The bigger you are the better the deal. Making ourselves smaller than our current trade value in the EU means that we get a worse deal not a better one.
I'm sure that eventually we will manage to replace all of the free trade deals that enthusiasts for free trade demand we walk away from. And all of those deals will be on worse terms because we will be smaller and more insignificant a market than the EU. Thats reality. FTA rampers are either stupid, or know that the people they are selling to are stupid. Either way, its dishonest.
Voters 'outraged by these deals' need to support Proportional Representation to get rid of the need for them.
PR gets rid of shady deals and stitch-ups between parties? You're in for a nasty shock in the aftermath of the first election held under it, assuming we do switch.
One of the better arguments for FPTP is that it (usually) forces these deals to happen in advance of the poll, rather than after, thus increasing transparency. Brexit has mucked some of this up on both sides of the political divide.
Within any system politicians will do deals and change their policies from what they originally promised (cf. pick any recent UK political year you choose). The argument here is that forcing (or denying) voters' choices about how they are represented would be unnecessary if we had a voting system that actually represented people properly and more fairly.
But voters don't choose with full information under PR.
Under FPTP parties compromise before the vote and voters can choose with full information.
Under PR first people vote and then parties make shady backroom deals and compromise but by then it's too late the voters have already voted.
We got a taste of that with the Coalition and Tuition Fees. After the voters have voted just pretend like you never said anything about fees.
Writing as a liberal Conservative myself, Farage's move doesn't make the slightest difference. There is no Con deal with the Brexit Party - Farage has unilaterally capitulated. His decision doesn't affect Tory policy or actions so I don't see why it should influence my thinking.
Of much more relevance is the failure to publish the report on Russian involvement / influence.
With respect to your first point, maybe so, but if I were working for the LDs or Labour I would be keen to suggest it is possible, or even highly likely. There is not much difference between those running the current Conservative Party and Farage. It seems inconceivable that lines of communication were not opened that influenced this decision. For me, as a liberal conservative, any links with the far right are abhorrent, though it is fair to admit my decision to not vote Conservative is already made. This is just further evidence to convince me not to change my mind.
Is the a deal or has the BXP did this of it's own accord ?
Don't be stupid of course it is a deal.
It’s like the greens standing aside in Scotland every Westminster election.
They don't stand aside, they have no support and cannot afford to lose deposits in most seats you f***ing numpty. It is also a local constituency decision not a country wide stitch up for gain.
You’re always so cheery Malcolm. What’s your secret?
"It is never difficult to distinguish between a Scotsman with a grievance and a ray of sunshine" - P G Wodehouse
Dura_Ace, thank you for that. Beautiful. Powerful.
Almost all poetry is shit.
That was no exception.
I've got you, my guy...
Of all the trees that grow so fair, Old England to adorn, Greater are none beneath the Sun, Than Oak, and Ash, and Thorn. Sing Oak, and Ash, and Thorn, good sirs, (All of a Midsummer morn!) Surely we sing no little thing, In Oak, and Ash, and Thorn!
Oak of the Clay lived many a day, Or ever AEneas began. Ash of the Loam was a lady at home, When Brut was an outlaw man. Thorn of the Down saw New Troy Town (From which was London born); Witness hereby the ancientry Of Oak, and Ash, and Thorn!
Yew that is old in churchyard-mould, He breedeth a mighty bow. Alder for shoes do wise men choose, And beech for cups also. But when ye have killed, and your bowl is spilled, And your shoes are clean outworn, Back ye must speed for all that ye need, To Oak, and Ash, and Thorn!
Ellum she hateth mankind, and waiteth Till every gust be laid, To drop a limb on the head of him That anyway trusts her shade: But whether a lad be sober or sad, Or mellow with ale from the horn, He will take no wrong when he lieth along 'Neath Oak, and Ash, and Thorn!
Oh, do not tell the Priest our plight, Or he would call it a sin; But - we have been out in the woods all night, A-conjuring Summer in! And we bring you news by word of mouth- Good news for cattle and corn- Now is the Sun come up from the South, With Oak, and Ash, and Thorn!
Sing Oak, and Ash, and Thorn, good sirs (All of a Midsummer morn): England shall bide ti11 Judgment Tide, By Oak, and Ash, and Thorn!
Is the a deal or has the BXP did this of it's own accord ?
Don't be stupid of course it is a deal.
It’s like the greens standing aside in Scotland every Westminster election.
They don't stand aside, they have no support and cannot afford to lose deposits in most seats you f***ing numpty. It is also a local constituency decision not a country wide stitch up for gain.
I know you dont like me being a vascillating fanny malc, so I have to say you sound like an utter fool this morning.
You are seriously tying yourself in knots to get outraged that one set of parties work together and thats terrible but when others do it's fine.
I'm sorry, but if a party says its not standing somewhere to help another then it's the same, even though the extents can be different.
It's either outrageous or it isn't for parties to work together formally or otherwise, you cannot widdle yourself in rage at one and not another, it looks bloody ridiculous and were it not that I trust people mean what they say itd be hard to believe it sincere it's so silly.
I disagree with anyone doing deals to stand down - you either win your argument with the electorate or you do not. The SNP grew to a massive party from a small base by building their narrative and supporters - if you need others to step aside to boost you then you haven't convinced enough people. And in a democracy what is democratic about a party not standing? Have seen a lot of LD/Green/BXP voters outraged by these deals on Twitter.
As for Brexit the thing not Brexit the Party, I read HYUFD bleating on about trade deals and wonder how we will spin reality when it arrives. The bigger you are the better the deal. Making ourselves smaller than our current trade value in the EU means that we get a worse deal not a better one.
I'm sure that eventually we will manage to replace all of the free trade deals that enthusiasts for free trade demand we walk away from. And all of those deals will be on worse terms because we will be smaller and more insignificant a market than the EU. Thats reality. FTA rampers are either stupid, or know that the people they are selling to are stupid. Either way, its dishonest.
Voters 'outraged by these deals' need to support Proportional Representation to get rid of the need for them.
PR gets rid of shady deals and stitch-ups between parties? You're in for a nasty shock in the aftermath of the first election held under it, assuming we do switch.
One of the better arguments for FPTP is that it (usually) forces these deals to happen in advance of the poll, rather than after, thus increasing transparency. Brexit has mucked some of this up on both sides of the political divide.
Within any system politicians will do deals and change their policies from what they originally promised (cf. pick any recent UK political year you choose). The argument here is that forcing (or denying) voters' choices about how they are represented would be unnecessary if we had a voting system that actually represented people properly and more fairly.
I'm not convinced that any system would capture the intricacies of, for example, a Scottish Lib Dem voter trying to work out if their party is really Unionist, or if voting for them helps enable a minority Labour government backed by the SNP in return for a second referendum. These ar simpler calculations to make under FPTP than PR.
The problem seems to me that political theorists assume that parliament should be representative, whereas in reality people don't give a stuff about parliament, and just want to maximise the chance of a government they could stomach voting for. It's an all-or-nothing loss problem.
I don't think so either. The public may well think differently though. The UKIP takeover of the Tories is nearly complete.
It is No Deal at the end of Transition imo. BoZo has promised* no extension.
*though obviously his promises are worth nothing.
UKIP/BXP favoured zero immigration, No Deal, opposed same sex marriage, wanted a referendum on reintroducing the death penalty, wanted to slash foreign aid, to be militarily isolationist and denies climate change.
All of those positions are at odds with the Conservatives.
Were at odds with the Conservatives. Where do you think the people that now control the party - the Raabs, the Patels, the Rees Moggs, the Bridgens, the Francois, etc - stand on those issues? There may be nuanced differences in some areas, but the direction of travel is clearly a shared one.
Boris is liberal on immigration (more so than May), doesn't favour No Deal, was one of the first to support gay marriage and the Conservative manifesto will promise further action on climate change. Foreign aid may be reviewed but I doubt substantially changed.
Sure, Farage has some fans on the Toryback benches (he always did) and that wing of the party is also represented in Cabinet.
But, that's very far from it controlling the direction of the Executive.
Writing as a liberal Conservative myself, Farage's move doesn't make the slightest difference. There is no Con deal with the Brexit Party - Farage has unilaterally capitulated. His decision doesn't affect Tory policy or actions so I don't see why it should influence my thinking.
Of much more relevance is the failure to publish the report on Russian involvement / influence.
Which, as I pointed out yesterday, has already been leaked.
The loyalists on here have already discounted the leak as containing nothing of consequence, but none of them answered the obvious question of "If it is so unimportant, why fail to publish it?"
It has been leaked. It is really not important - there is no smoking gun.
Why somebody thought it worth being prosecuted for breaching the Official Secrets Act by leaking it is more of a mystery.
I love the picture of a completely solitary Dan Z on his own in a Cambridge street with the caption:
"Daniel Zeichner of Labour is joined by supporters as he begins campaigning for the upcoming election".
I think Jamei is right that the Local elections are more telling than the Euros. Lab will hold Cambridge easily enough. The East of the city is smothered in Vote Labour placards.
Is the a deal or has the BXP did this of it's own accord ?
Don't be stupid of course it is a deal.
It’s like the greens standing aside in Scotland every Westminster election.
They don't stand aside, they have no support and cannot afford to lose deposits in most seats you f***ing numpty. It is also a local constituency decision not a country wide stitch up for gain.
I know you dont like me being a vascillating fanny malc, so I have to say you sound like an utter fool this morning.
You are seriously tying yourself in knots to get outraged that one set of parties work together and thats terrible but when others do it's fine.
I'm sorry, but if a party says its not standing somewhere to help another then it's the same, even though the extents can be different.
It's either outrageous or it isn't for parties to work together formally or otherwise, you cannot widdle yourself in rage at one and not another, it looks bloody ridiculous.
Malcolm's views always are bloody ridiculous. He hates everyone who does not share his rose tinted view of nationalism. No point arguing with him. Sympathy for his anger challenges are probably more appropriate.
Is the a deal or has the BXP did this of it's own accord ?
Don't be stupid of course it is a deal.
It’s like the greens standing aside in Scotland every Westminster election.
They don't stand aside, they have no support and cannot afford to lose deposits in most seats you f***ing numpty. It is also a local constituency decision not a country wide stitch up for gain.
You’re always so cheery Malcolm. What’s your secret?
It has never struck me until this morning that regular posters on PB are (it seems to me) overwhelmingly urbanites, living in large towns and cities. Few of you seem to write from the perspective of living in a rural community. I also suspect the majority of you live in the south-east of England. Accordingly your thinking about how voters think or vote are "coloured" by the communities within which you live. No doubt I will be greeted with howls of protest but it would be an interesting exercise for all regular PBers to disclose in which constituency they live and vote. You all know I live in the most northerly mainland constituency Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross which is larger than the entire Home Counties I think.
Lord Ashcroft says that 25% of remainers in 2016 voted Tory in 2017.
And the Tory voteshare was 42% in 2017.
And Mike has that 31% of Tory Remainers from 2017 are saying they are going elsewhere.
So assuming everything being equal and ignoring distribution, I make that .25 * .424 * .31 percent of the Electorate being Tory Remainers going elsewhere.
Or 3.3% of the voters in this case. 3.2% switching Tory -> LD. 0.1% switching Tory -> Lab.
Significant?
IMO that depends on distribution.
What does the poll show for Lab Leave voters going Tory?
Why the 0.424 multiple?
Isn’t it 25% of Remainers voted Tory if which 31% (ie 7.5% of Remainers) are considering their options
Hence 7.5% * 48
That's the same thing and has the same outcome.
How to make heavy weather of a calculation in two easy lessons?
Roughly half the population are remainers. A quarter of them voted Tory, making an eighth of the population Tory remainers. If about a third are currently switching then that's a twenty fourth of the total, or about 4%. Given the polling inaccuracy at each stage, it's not a calculation worth getting out the calculator for.
Yep but I think the tense is perfect: “switched”. That 4% is already in the numbers. The question is whether more will join them. As the policy has not changed I think not.
Any bookies offering odds on Farage getting a peerage/knighthood in the next 14 months?
That would be a disgrace.
Yes. Although various people have laboured for him to have either for years. Theres plenty of awful knights and peers. How pathetic of Farage though if he was so ego driven that really was the price.
I have always joked that I have always been against the ridiculous honours system until the day I get offered something myself (!), but to reward someone that is so divisive as Farage, and who has not denied his racist utterances in the past would be really beyond the pale.
If I was going to stand as a PPC, my first step would be deleting all my social media and starting fresh with new profiles. There will always be something that others can pick on so why give them the opportunity?
One could surmise that:
PPCs are addicted to popularity - unsurprising as they they are seeking to enter into the biggest popularity contest going.
Existing followers are the drug that feeds their popularity receptors.
Deleting ones social media and starting again is metaphorical cold turkey.
I don't think so either. The public may well think differently though. The UKIP takeover of the Tories is nearly complete.
It is No Deal at the end of Transition imo. BoZo has promised* no extension.
*though obviously his promises are worth nothing.
UKIP/BXP favoured zero immigration, No Deal, opposed same sex marriage, wanted a referendum on reintroducing the death penalty, wanted to slash foreign aid, to be militarily isolationist and denies climate change.
All of those positions are at odds with the Conservatives.
Were at odds with the Conservatives. Where do you think the people that now control the party - the Raabs, the Patels, the Rees Moggs, the Bridgens, the Francois, etc - stand on those issues? There may be nuanced differences in some areas, but the direction of travel is clearly a shared one.
Apparently Philip Hammond was in favour of reintroducing the death penalty when he first stood for the party, but that well-known radical has now been flung out, so we're all good.
In any case, Johnson controls the party, and - for all his faults - has never given the slightest indication he'll govern as anything other than a centrist One Nation Tory.
The next five years of his one-eyed bigoted detractors denigrating everything he does is going to be extremely irritating. I take comfort in the knowledge that it'll annoy them even more.
What were those meetings with Steve Bannon about then?
I don't know. Do you? Probably more about general strategy than anything. Or perhaps just a courtesy. Probably not any of the things listed above.
Slashing foreign aid has quite a bit of support in this country. I don't think any of the others do, bar military isolationism, which of course finds much more support with the current Labour leadership than the Conservatives.
BUT unlike the Brexit Party retreat which seems rather one-sided as deals go, the Lib Dem pact with a party who specifically wants to split off Wales from the UK is repugnant to me.
Simplistic I'm sure but I think it's a real turn off.
The remarkable thing about the LibDem/Plaid Cymru Alliance is that it is a real turn-off to both potential LibDem voters and Plaid Cymru voters. The party most likely to benefit is Labour (possible gains in Arfon and Vale of Glamorgan).
Let us recall which idiots thought of this idea.
Ah, yes, it was the ex-TIGgers. Heidi Allen and Co have been in charge.
The launch, hubris & demise of the TIGgers should be enough to persuade anyone that Heidi & Chuka & Co are telegenic faces, but have no real idea of practical politics.
Casino_Royale said: "Boris is liberal on immigration (more so than May), doesn't favour No Deal, was one of the first to support gay marriage and the Conservative manifesto will promise further action on climate change. Foreign aid may be reviewed but I doubt substantially changed."
I think that`s about right. A Cameron conservative. The demonization of BOJO is largely, but not entirely, unfair.
It has never struck me until this morning that regular posters on PB are (it seems to me) overwhelmingly urbanites, living in large towns and cities. Few of you seem to write from the perspective of living in a rural community. I also suspect the majority of you live in the south-east of England. Accordingly your thinking about how voters think or vote are "coloured" by the communities within which you live. No doubt I will be greeted with howls of protest but it would be an interesting exercise for all regular PBers to disclose in which constituency they live and vote. You all know I live in the most northerly mainland constituency Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross which is larger than the entire Home Counties I think.
I live in a small rural village. One pub, no shop. Nearest town 10 miles. Lived in the countryside all my life, worked on farms as a boy and support country ways of life including the dreaded H word!
It has never struck me until this morning that regular posters on PB are (it seems to me) overwhelmingly urbanites, living in large towns and cities. Few of you seem to write from the perspective of living in a rural community. I also suspect the majority of you live in the south-east of England. Accordingly your thinking about how voters think or vote are "coloured" by the communities within which you live. No doubt I will be greeted with howls of protest but it would be an interesting exercise for all regular PBers to disclose in which constituency they live and vote. You all know I live in the most northerly mainland constituency Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross which is larger than the entire Home Counties I think.
I'm surprised you think that PB is urbanite - I'd have guessed it's more rural overall than the population as a whole (82% are urban according to tradingeconomics.com).
Anyway, a small village in rural North Dorset for me.
I don't think so either. The public may well think differently though. The UKIP takeover of the Tories is nearly complete.
It is No Deal at the end of Transition imo. BoZo has promised* no extension.
*though obviously his promises are worth nothing.
The thing about Johnson's lies is that they are not necessary. He was always going to be beat Corbyn. All that he is doing is storing up huge problems for himself and the country. It makes noi sense to me, except to the extent that Johnson cannot help himself - he is genuinely a congenital liar.
May presumed she was always going to beat Corbyn. Look where that nearly landed us.
So you are saying that the only way to beat Corbyn is to lie. That is not going to end well for either the Tories or the UK, Philip.
No. I'm suggesting don't be arrogant or take anything for granted.
Lying to the electorate is the height of arrogance.
They are all liars to some extent or another, there isn't a politician alive nay even yet to be born who will not dissemble.
Any bookies offering odds on Farage getting a peerage/knighthood in the next 14 months?
That would be a disgrace.
Absolutely agree - unless the supposed offer was made by rentagob repellants like Francois or Bridgen & who would hopefully have no authority to make any such suggestions!
Casino_Royale said: "Boris is liberal on immigration (more so than May), doesn't favour No Deal, was one of the first to support gay marriage and the Conservative manifesto will promise further action on climate change. Foreign aid may be reviewed but I doubt substantially changed."
I think that`s about right. A Cameron conservative. The demonization of BOJO is largely, but not entirely, unfair.
His personal morality is questionable, his dishonesty is plain and well documented but his politics have always been centre right and socially liberal. It’s pretty silly to claim anything else.
It has never struck me until this morning that regular posters on PB are (it seems to me) overwhelmingly urbanites, living in large towns and cities. Few of you seem to write from the perspective of living in a rural community. I also suspect the majority of you live in the south-east of England. Accordingly your thinking about how voters think or vote are "coloured" by the communities within which you live. No doubt I will be greeted with howls of protest but it would be an interesting exercise for all regular PBers to disclose in which constituency they live and vote. You all know I live in the most northerly mainland constituency Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross which is larger than the entire Home Counties I think.
I'm surprised you think that PB is urbanite - I'd have guessed it's more rural overall than the population as a whole (82% are urban according to tradingeconomics.com).
Anyway, a small village in rural North Dorset for me.
Not even in a village, on a road that has no name, in rural South Devon here.
Casino_Royale said: "Boris is liberal on immigration (more so than May), doesn't favour No Deal, was one of the first to support gay marriage and the Conservative manifesto will promise further action on climate change. Foreign aid may be reviewed but I doubt substantially changed."
I think that`s about right. A Cameron conservative. The demonization of BOJO is largely, but not entirely, unfair.
Not largely unfair because he is a lying duplicitous little toad. He doesn't really believe in anything unless it advances his own egotistical career goals. He is probably a Cameronesque Conservative at heart, but he has sold his soul, and the country's future to the ERG.
Casino_Royale said: "Boris is liberal on immigration (more so than May), doesn't favour No Deal, was one of the first to support gay marriage and the Conservative manifesto will promise further action on climate change. Foreign aid may be reviewed but I doubt substantially changed."
I think that`s about right. A Cameron conservative. The demonization of BOJO is largely, but not entirely, unfair.
Any bookies offering odds on Farage getting a peerage/knighthood in the next 14 months?
That would be a disgrace.
Absolutely agree - unless the supposed offer was made by rentagob repellants like Francois or Bridgen & who would hopefully have no authority to make any such suggestions!
What do you make of the disgrace Raheem Sterling? He should never again play for England.
Casino_Royale said: "Boris is liberal on immigration (more so than May), doesn't favour No Deal, was one of the first to support gay marriage and the Conservative manifesto will promise further action on climate change. Foreign aid may be reviewed but I doubt substantially changed."
I think that`s about right. A Cameron conservative. The demonization of BOJO is largely, but not entirely, unfair.
The demonization of Boris the Politician is unfair.
The demonization of Boris the Cad might have more legs.
The revised NAFTA deal is hugely beneficial to US services providers. Any deal that gives UK services providers backdoor access to the US market would not be NAFTA-compliant.
That's why trade deals have whole sections dedicated to point of origin issues.
Just realised, from hearing her on Radio 4, what a cunning plan it is by Labour to have Angela Rayner at education. She is promising free Fervour Education for all. I hope everybody is ready for compulsory "Ooooh Jeremy Corbyn" classes.
Any bookies offering odds on Farage getting a peerage/knighthood in the next 14 months?
That would be a disgrace.
Absolutely agree - unless the supposed offer was made by rentagob repellants like Francois or Bridgen & who would hopefully have no authority to make any such suggestions!
What do you make of the disgrace Raheem Sterling? He should never again play for England.
Writing as a liberal Conservative myself, Farage's move doesn't make the slightest difference. There is no Con deal with the Brexit Party - Farage has unilaterally capitulated. His decision doesn't affect Tory policy or actions so I don't see why it should influence my thinking.
Of much more relevance is the failure to publish the report on Russian involvement / influence.
Which, as I pointed out yesterday, has already been leaked.
The loyalists on here have already discounted the leak as containing nothing of consequence, but none of them answered the obvious question of "If it is so unimportant, why fail to publish it?"
It has been leaked. It is really not important - there is no smoking gun.
Why somebody thought it worth being prosecuted for breaching the Official Secrets Act by leaking it is more of a mystery.
Has the full report been leaked? All I have seen is a brief report in the Times online which frankly could have been guessed at.
Also, if the report is that innocuous why was it subject to the Official Secrets Act, and why not officially published by the government?
It has never struck me until this morning that regular posters on PB are (it seems to me) overwhelmingly urbanites, living in large towns and cities. Few of you seem to write from the perspective of living in a rural community. I also suspect the majority of you live in the south-east of England. Accordingly your thinking about how voters think or vote are "coloured" by the communities within which you live. No doubt I will be greeted with howls of protest but it would be an interesting exercise for all regular PBers to disclose in which constituency they live and vote. You all know I live in the most northerly mainland constituency Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross which is larger than the entire Home Counties I think.
PB is, unsurprisingly, a place where city types gather to talk about betting strategies.
BUT unlike the Brexit Party retreat which seems rather one-sided as deals go, the Lib Dem pact with a party who specifically wants to split off Wales from the UK is repugnant to me.
Simplistic I'm sure but I think it's a real turn off.
The remarkable thing about the LibDem/Plaid Cymru Alliance is that it is a real turn-off to both potential LibDem voters and Plaid Cymru voters. The party most likely to benefit is Labour (possible gains in Arfon and Vale of Glamorgan).
Let us recall which idiots thought of this idea.
Ah, yes, it was the ex-TIGgers. Heidi Allen and Co have been in charge.
The launch, hubris & demise of the TIGgers should be enough to persuade anyone that Heidi & Chuka & Co are telegenic faces, but have no real idea of practical politics.
On the contrary, they are the face of moderation, and perhaps conservatism in its real sense. It is people with extremely naïve utopian views on a revolutionary idea called Brexit such as yourself, who believe that it will bring benefits, when it is really just about small minded nationalism, that are the ones that have no idea about practicality and pragmatism. Time will prove my point.
It has never struck me until this morning that regular posters on PB are (it seems to me) overwhelmingly urbanites, living in large towns and cities. Few of you seem to write from the perspective of living in a rural community. I also suspect the majority of you live in the south-east of England. Accordingly your thinking about how voters think or vote are "coloured" by the communities within which you live. No doubt I will be greeted with howls of protest but it would be an interesting exercise for all regular PBers to disclose in which constituency they live and vote. You all know I live in the most northerly mainland constituency Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross which is larger than the entire Home Counties I think.
I live in Llandudno and vote in Aberconwy constituency
You may be interested to know my wife is a northern Scot with her father from Wick and she spent time in the Orkneys and Sutherland during the war years
Any bookies offering odds on Farage getting a peerage/knighthood in the next 14 months?
That would be a disgrace.
Absolutely agree - unless the supposed offer was made by rentagob repellants like Francois or Bridgen & who would hopefully have no authority to make any such suggestions!
What do you make of the disgrace Raheem Sterling? He should never again play for England.
Why - did he offer Farage a peerage?
Give TSE a break - he doesn't have much to get excited about living in rural Salford
Any bookies offering odds on Farage getting a peerage/knighthood in the next 14 months?
That would be a disgrace.
Absolutely agree - unless the supposed offer was made by rentagob repellants like Francois or Bridgen & who would hopefully have no authority to make any such suggestions!
What do you make of the disgrace Raheem Sterling? He should never again play for England.
Why - did he offer Farage a peerage?
He became involved in a physical altercation with a team mate. He’s been dropped for the next match.
@NorthCadboll - I hope you don't find it rude if I point out that the vast majority of settlements will seem to be vast urban megacities relative to your experience. I currently live in Edinburgh.
I don't think so either. The public may well think differently though. The UKIP takeover of the Tories is nearly complete.
It is No Deal at the end of Transition imo. BoZo has promised* no extension.
*though obviously his promises are worth nothing.
The thing about Johnson's lies is that they are not necessary. He was always going to be beat Corbyn. All that he is doing is storing up huge problems for himself and the country. It makes noi sense to me, except to the extent that Johnson cannot help himself - he is genuinely a congenital liar.
May presumed she was always going to beat Corbyn. Look where that nearly landed us.
So you are saying that the only way to beat Corbyn is to lie. That is not going to end well for either the Tories or the UK, Philip.
No. I'm suggesting don't be arrogant or take anything for granted.
Lying to the electorate is the height of arrogance.
They are all liars to some extent or another, there isn't a politician alive nay even yet to be born who will not dissemble.
I have some sympathy for politicans on this one. We attack them for not taking firm positions on anything. If they do, and then change position due to new circumstances or information or a change of mind, we attack them for telling lies in the first place or now telling lies.
Just realised, from hearing her on Radio 4, what a cunning plan it is by Labour to have Angela Rayner at education. She is promising free Fervour Education for all. I hope everybody is ready for compulsory "Ooooh Jeremy Corbyn" classes.
Angela Raynor is a fabulous role model to many who are starting out life with literally no advantages whatsoever.
Writing as a liberal Conservative myself, Farage's move doesn't make the slightest difference. There is no Con deal with the Brexit Party - Farage has unilaterally capitulated. His decision doesn't affect Tory policy or actions so I don't see why it should influence my thinking.
Of much more relevance is the failure to publish the report on Russian involvement / influence.
I'd think it will also reinforce tactical voting to defend sensible Labour MPs in Lab/Con marginals and help LibDems in Con/LD ones. "Stop Brexit/stop Johnson" is already a strong message. "...and stop Farage/Trump getting what they want" works too for those of centre-left disposition. I see McDonnell is already on the case - whatever people think of his politics, he's one of the fastest minds on the front bench.
I disagree with anyone doing deals to stand down - you either win your argument with the electorate or you do not. The SNP grew to a massive party from a small base by building their narrative and supporters - if you need others to step aside to boost you then you haven't convinced enough people. And in a democracy what is democratic about a party not standing? Have seen a lot of LD/Green/BXP voters outraged by these deals on Twitter.
As for Brexit the thing not Brexit the Party, I read HYUFD bleating on about trade deals and wonder how we will spin reality when it arrives. The bigger you are the better the deal. Making ourselves smaller than our current trade value in the EU means that we get a worse deal not a better one.
I'm sure that eventually we will manage to replace all of the free trade deals that enthusiasts for free trade demand we walk away from. And all of those deals will be on worse terms because we will be smaller and more insignificant a market than the EU. Thats reality. FTA rampers are either stupid, or know that the people they are selling to are stupid. Either way, its dishonest.
Voters 'outraged by these deals' need to support Proportional Representation to get rid of the need for them.
One of the better arguments for FPTP is that it (usually) forces these deals to happen in advance of the poll, rather than after, thus increasing transparency. Brexit has mucked some of this up on both sides of the political divide.
Within any system politicians will do deals and change their policies from what they originally promised (cf. pick any recent UK political year you choose). The argument here is that forcing (or denying) voters' choices about how they are represented would be unnecessary if we had a voting system that actually represented people properly and more fairly.
But voters don't choose with full information under PR.
Under FPTP parties compromise before the vote and voters can choose with full information.
Under PR first people vote and then parties make shady backroom deals and compromise but by then it's too late the voters have already voted.
We got a taste of that with the Coalition and Tuition Fees. After the voters have voted just pretend like you never said anything about fees.
Under PR voters get a proportion of what they voted for and there are few wasted votes. The Lib Dems didn't win in 2010 so had to make the best of the Tories policy on tuition fees (actually they could and should have stuck to their policy, but for some reason thought that other things were more important).
Mr. Pointer, Cameron's electoral strategist (Crosby?) had a philosophy of getting barnacles off the boat, stopping side-issues detracting from the central message so the ship sails smoothly.
It has never struck me until this morning that regular posters on PB are (it seems to me) overwhelmingly urbanites, living in large towns and cities. Few of you seem to write from the perspective of living in a rural community. I also suspect the majority of you live in the south-east of England. Accordingly your thinking about how voters think or vote are "coloured" by the communities within which you live. No doubt I will be greeted with howls of protest but it would be an interesting exercise for all regular PBers to disclose in which constituency they live and vote. You all know I live in the most northerly mainland constituency Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross which is larger than the entire Home Counties I think.
I live in a small village on the edge of Newcastle upon Tyne.
Lord Ashcroft says that 25% of remainers in 2016 voted Tory in 2017.
And the Tory voteshare was 42% in 2017.
And Mike has that 31% of Tory Remainers from 2017 are saying they are going elsewhere.
So assuming everything being equal and ignoring distribution, I make that .25 * .424 * .31 percent of the Electorate being Tory Remainers going elsewhere.
Or 3.3% of the voters in this case. 3.2% switching Tory -> LD. 0.1% switching Tory -> Lab.
Significant?
IMO that depends on distribution.
What does the poll show for Lab Leave voters going Tory?
Why the 0.424 multiple?
Isn’t it 25% of Remainers voted Tory if which 31% (ie 7.5% of Remainers) are considering their options
Comments
In any case, Johnson controls the party, and - for all his faults - has never given the slightest indication he'll govern as anything other than a centrist One Nation Tory.
The next five years of his one-eyed bigoted detractors denigrating everything he does is going to be extremely irritating. I take comfort in the knowledge that it'll annoy them even more.
And a trade deal could be optimised for the UK rather than being optimised for the EU
Can you not see that this complete a*se of a man seems to have integrity whatsoever? That he is utterly unsuited to run a bicycle stand never mind a country?
Of much more relevance is the failure to publish the report on Russian involvement / influence.
But some people dont think it works out well for the Tories, so it's not guaranteed theyve offered anything.
On Betfair the odds (back/lay) are:
Chelsea - 1.81/1.9
Leicester - 2.7/3.3
I'm more inclined to lay Leicester because I have a previous bet (9.5, same market) but if I were looking at this without prior involvement I'd be more interested in perhaps backing them.
Just checked and the next fixtures are Brighton/Leicester, and Manchester City/Chelsea. If those run to the odds, Leicester's odds should be better afterwards, and Chelsea's worse.
The loyalists on here have already discounted the leak as containing nothing of consequence, but none of them answered the obvious question of "If it is so unimportant, why fail to publish it?"
The buffoon is not my choice of Tory leader either, although getting a new deal was a positive surprise I'll admit.
BUT unlike the Brexit Party retreat which seems rather one-sided as deals go, the Lib Dem pact with a party who specifically wants to split off Wales from the UK is repugnant to me.
Simplistic I'm sure but I think it's a real turn off.
Roughly half the population are remainers. A quarter of them voted Tory, making an eighth of the population Tory remainers. If about a third are currently switching then that's a twenty fourth of the total, or about 4%. Given the polling inaccuracy at each stage, it's not a calculation worth getting out the calculator for.
Not Liz Truss.
Under FPTP parties compromise before the vote and voters can choose with full information.
Under PR first people vote and then parties make shady backroom deals and compromise but by then it's too late the voters have already voted.
We got a taste of that with the Coalition and Tuition Fees. After the voters have voted just pretend like you never said anything about fees.
You are seriously tying yourself in knots to get outraged that one set of parties work together and thats terrible but when others do it's fine.
I'm sorry, but if a party says its not standing somewhere to help another then it's the same, even though the extents can be different.
It's either outrageous or it isn't for parties to work together formally or otherwise, you cannot widdle yourself in rage at one and not another, it looks bloody ridiculous and were it not that I trust people mean what they say itd be hard to believe it sincere it's so silly.
The problem seems to me that political theorists assume that parliament should be representative, whereas in reality people don't give a stuff about parliament, and just want to maximise the chance of a government they could stomach voting for. It's an all-or-nothing loss problem.
Sure, Farage has some fans on the Toryback benches (he always did) and that wing of the party is also represented in Cabinet.
But, that's very far from it controlling the direction of the Executive.
Why somebody thought it worth being prosecuted for breaching the Official Secrets Act by leaking it is more of a mystery.
"Daniel Zeichner of Labour is joined by supporters as he begins campaigning for the upcoming election".
I think Jamei is right that the Local elections are more telling than the Euros. Lab will hold Cambridge easily enough. The East of the city is smothered in Vote Labour placards.
Well, when it suits Remainers, at least...
PPCs are addicted to popularity - unsurprising as they they are seeking to enter into the biggest popularity contest going.
Existing followers are the drug that feeds their popularity receptors.
Deleting ones social media and starting again is metaphorical cold turkey.
Slashing foreign aid has quite a bit of support in this country. I don't think any of the others do, bar military isolationism, which of course finds much more support with the current Labour leadership than the Conservatives.
Let us recall which idiots thought of this idea.
Ah, yes, it was the ex-TIGgers. Heidi Allen and Co have been in charge.
The launch, hubris & demise of the TIGgers should be enough to persuade anyone that Heidi & Chuka & Co are telegenic faces, but have no real idea of practical politics.
I think that`s about right. A Cameron conservative. The demonization of BOJO is largely, but not entirely, unfair.
Anyway, a small village in rural North Dorset for me.
https://t.co/TzMVCozX1H
Get orf moi land...
The demonization of Boris the Cad might have more legs.
Also, if the report is that innocuous why was it subject to the Official Secrets Act, and why not officially published by the government?
Or the gun might not be smoking, but the barrel might be warm.
You may be interested to know my wife is a northern Scot with her father from Wick and she spent time in the Orkneys and Sutherland during the war years
His political achievements clearly warrant it.
Far more than those of, for example, Sayeeda Warsi did.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2019/nov/11/england-drop-raheem-sterling-montenegro-match
The Lib Dems didn't win in 2010 so had to make the best of the Tories policy on tuition fees (actually they could and should have stuck to their policy, but for some reason thought that other things were more important).