politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Palace is laying the groundwork for a Regency

Sean_F said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

When will you pea-brained Tory idiots learn from GE 2017? Corbyn made mince-meat of a 25% deficit so the current neck and neck situation sees him in good shape.

As I keep saying, Corbyn or equivalent will be our next PM. The Tories are a busted flush - staid, old, sleazy and broken.

It's similar to the argument that because the Scottish nationalists gained lots of ground in the 2014 referendum, they'd have no difficulty repeating the trick in a future referendum. The people who voted against independence in 2014 are going to be very hard to win over, just as people who voted Conservative in 2017 will be very hard to win over.

This is so obvious that its clear that the fella you're quoting is posting for effect and very little else.

On topic, I could see the palace going for an arrangement like this (In terms of a 'regency' at least, not sure about the Commonwealth bit - Charles already represents her abroad and I'm not sure what the practical difference would be. The emotional link to HM is still strong even if she's not physically present and its not a job with any fixed 'duties' per se).

The benefit is that it smooths the transition and gets the country prepared and might in some way lessen the huge national shock that there will be when the Queen dies. There will be nothing quite like it in our lifetimes, the sense of national loss will be significant and profound.

If the public has got comfortable with Charles opening parliament and meeting PMs and doing all the day to day functions already, it will establish him and it will lessen the feeling of swift and scary change if that makes sense. HM can still appear at the balcony and remembrance events and show her face now and again but she can 'retire' from the day to day functions without the need for an abdication (still a dirty word in her eyes I'd bet).

Without wanting to dip my toe into the politics of the event too significantly, you can also see some advantages to the palace in getting this out of the way just in case a Labour government led by Corbyn comes to power, who will be ambivalent to the whole thing and might speak out of line about the future of the monarchy, whereas if Charles has been doing the 'King thing' for a few years prior (and managed not to naff up too spectacularly) there will be less of a sensitive mood.

It would necessitate amendments to the regency legislation though I think. At the moment I think the monarch essentially has to be of unsound mind which can't be said for Liz who remains sharp as a knife. A bespoke act would probably have to be passed.

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

When will you pea-brained Tory idiots learn from GE 2017? Corbyn made mince-meat of a 25% deficit so the current neck and neck situation sees him in good shape.

As I keep saying, Corbyn or equivalent will be our next PM. The Tories are a busted flush - staid, old, sleazy and broken.

That is faulty logic.

Corbyn significantly outperformed vs expectations which is why the result was so close.

If he/Labour were to perform just as well and May/Con were to do as poorly then you would expect the result to be about the same.

You wouldn’t logically expect him to achieve +25 from the current position

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

murali_s said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

When will you pea-brained Tory idiots learn from GE 2017? Corbyn made mince-meat of a 25% deficit so the current neck and neck situation sees him in good shape.

As I keep saying, Corbyn or equivalent will be our next PM. The Tories are a busted flush - staid, old, sleazy and broken.

Why do you need to sound so abusive but is that the way with the left in our Country.

I was responding to the original assertion by a brainwashed Tory apparatchik. Corbyn (not his greatest fan as you know) has a good chance to be our next PM - he was the star of GE 2017 and yet people still dismiss him - these foolish people are in for a rude awakening.

Rude is the word.

Do you not realise the strength of an argument is enhanced with the lack of abuse

G , C'mon a bit of abuse spices up some really boring topics at times

Morning Malc on this bonnie day

I never like abuse but jokey as practiced by yourself in your particular art form can make me smile sometimes.

On my way to Auld Reekie for a few days shortly then onward to Lossiemouth with my eldest son and his wife in from Vancouver as we celebrate our family

OllyT said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

When will you pea-brained Tory idiots learn from GE 2017? Corbyn made mince-meat of a 25% deficit so the current neck and neck situation sees him in good shape.

As I keep saying, Corbyn or equivalent will be our next PM. The Tories are a busted flush - staid, old, sleazy and broken.

Why do you need to sound so abusive but is that the way with the left in our Country.

I agree with their being no need for abusive posts, particularly posts that abuse the individual posting but why go on to turn that into a slur on "the left"?

Spend half an hour on Conservative Home or read some of the responses to Alistair Meeks great posts and you will soon be disabused of that notion.

I comment about the left because, as we see from the sobbing labour mps in the HOC, it is especially true of those in Corbyn's coterie but of course it is not restricted to the left

Roger said:

Some years ago I was in Manchester city centre when I became aware of a large crowd. I wandered into it and at its centre was the queen.

Standing next to me on a concrete block was a young girl so I asked her what was the queen doing in Manchester?

'She's opening the new tram system' she said.

At that moment the queen and her entourage walked right past us and stepped onto a waiting tram which then drove off.

The young girl was now jumping up and down and screaming and waving wildly.

"I don't suppose you get to see the queen very often?" I said

"It's not that" she said. "My Dad's driving the tram!"

Lovely story Roger....I once stumbled across Thatcher and Gorbochov when I was lost navigating my way across London and was interviewed by CNN for my efforts. The interviewer asked me how excited I was to be here...I replied I was lost...I was looking for the office for a kibbutz induction. As a lefty, even then it would have been beyond the pale to suggest I would have gone out of my way to see Thatch.

Other random entourages I have stumbled into.....the Chinese PM at Krakow Cathedral, Berlusconi at Florence Airport, James Callaghan PM at Manchester Airport......

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Roger, the alternative to cuts is more borrowing. That means more debt and a higher deficit. Which means younger generations having less of their money because they're paying off the debts of older generations who lacked the stomach to try and get things in order.

Catchy one-liners and election slogans are just empty rhetoric (like Corbyn's claim to be tough on anti-Semitism).

Not that he's entirely opposed to cuts, of course. He'd cut defence, he'd cut national security, and he'd cut the ability of the UK to set its own foreign policy by giving the Russians a veto.

Defence and national security have been cut to ribbons by the Conservatives, and the alternative to cuts is more borrowing for investment, to expand the economy, increase prosperity and pay off the mountain of debt the Tories have racked up since 2010.

Recidivist said:

RoyalBlue said:

Interesting article on ConHome (*ducks*) about May being no-confidenced if she gives way on the Customs Union:

https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2018/04/the-risks-to-mays-position-if-she-backs-off-leaving-off-the-customs-union.html

What would that achieve? I think she’d get a vote of confidence from more than 200 MPs. The only options left would be to effectively no-confidence their own government, or secede to form a new party. Neither sound like a good idea to me.

It would achieve the creation of a betrayal narrative so that leavers can later blame all the problems caused by Brexit as due to May not doing the right kind of Brexit.

Incidentally I hadn't realised that ex-pats were excluded from the referendum. That doesn't sound very democratic.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/expat-can-sue-to-overturn-brexit-referendum-x7kbp5krf

Another reason to question the robustness of the vote. Another reason for a proper vote on “the deal”.

As for a no-confidence, I think we’ve seen that the ERG are all mouth and no trousers. They will submit with nary a peep.

tyson said:

Roger said:

Some years ago I was in Manchester city centre when I became aware of a large crowd. I wandered into it and at its centre was the queen.

Standing next to me on a concrete block was a young girl so I asked her what was the queen doing in Manchester?

'She's opening the new tram system' she said.

At that moment the queen and her entourage walked right past us and stepped onto a waiting tram which then drove off.

The young girl was now jumping up and down and screaming and waving wildly.

"I don't suppose you get to see the queen very often?" I said

"It's not that" she said. "My Dad's driving the tram!"

Lovely story Roger....I once stumbled across Thatcher and Gorbochov when I was lost navigating my way across London and was interviewed by CNN for my efforts. The interviewer asked me how excited I was to be here...I replied I was lost...I was looking for the office for a kibbutz induction. As a lefty, even then it would have been beyond the pale to suggest I would have gone out of my way to see Thatch.

Other random entourages I have stumbled into.....the Chinese PM at Krakow Cathedral, Berlusconi at Florence Airport, James Callaghan PM at Manchester Airport......

....President George H W Bush in Tokyo....oh, and Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, 10,000 feet up a Himalaya....

Gardenwalker said:

On topic: no Regency please.

Oh c'mon, the Regency gave us some cracking humour in Blackadder...

Incidentally, my old passport came just now. Note said they were processing my application. Damned impressive they completed that *and* it arrived before the old one.

Mr. Meeks, pish. There was plenty of talk of doing our own trade deals and leaving the customs union.

Mr. L, agreed, all parties have been far too weak on defence. Corbyn, however, would be like contracting Black Death after having had influenza.

Recidivist said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Recidivist, peers and pro-EU MPs colluding to weaken the UK's negotiating position and trying to force the UK to remain in the customs union after voting to leave the EU would embed this as a running sore in our political system for decades.

It is not legitimate when the electorate vote to leave the EU for politicians to try and force us to remain subject to the EU when it comes to trade.

People only voted to leave the EU. That doesn't preclude staying in the customs union, or any of the many other mutually beneficial arrangements the EU runs. And given the narrowness of the vote and the almost inevitability of us rejoining again in the near future I'd argue that the government is being extremely irresponsible in following any other policy than absolutely minimal disruption to existing relations with our neighbours. We do still live in a democracy.

We will probably (I think.almost certainly) stay in a customs union with the EU because it's perceived to be better than the alternatives. In fact I think it's the only viable alternative to membership. We will also accept conformance to EU regulation on trade in goods, agriculture,business practice and the environment (partial or full single market). Reasons in brief: getting an A50 withdrawal agreement signed, a transition, Irish border issues, avoiding a Dover infarction, keeping the Nissan flag flying in Sunderland, appeasing the powerful farmer lobby,holding onto third country agreements. For its part, the first eu priority is to keep the UK in its regulatory orbit and it gets an agreement that plays to its goods based strengths. It's a functional baseline agreement but I think the actual agreement will go betting that.

The rest , payments, FOM, services, aviation, nuclear processing etc are negotiable from that base.

Sean_F said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

When will you pea-brained Tory idiots learn from GE 2017? Corbyn made mince-meat of a 25% deficit so the current neck and neck situation sees him in good shape.

As I keep saying, Corbyn or equivalent will be our next PM. The Tories are a busted flush - staid, old, sleazy and broken.

It's similar to the argument that because the Scottish nationalists gained lots of ground in the 2014 referendum, they'd have no difficulty repeating the trick in a future referendum. The people who voted against independence in 2014 are going to be very hard to win over, just as people who voted Conservative in 2017 will be very hard to win over.

Interesting that you appear not to see a need for Tories and/or Unionists to win over new voters in any future contests. That sort of complacency led to the bowel evacuation in the week before the indy referendum.

Though tbf the Unionists were a bit rubbish at the winning over thing.

Charles said:

ThomasNashe said:

Charles. Re. Nobel: Literature highly troubled? Winston Churchill winning in the 1940s, or whenever, was a strange one. But most winners seem to be writers of genuine international stature.

https://www.pressherald.com/2018/04/19/protests-erupt-in-sweden-over-nobel-scandal/

Think we're at cross-purposes here. The article relates to questioning about who's on the awarding committee, not about the quality of the recipients - who with the possible exceptions of Bob Dylan and Winston Churchill - have over the last 50 years or so pretty much been giants of world literature.

CarlottaVance said:

From a while back - but a good long read on the day the queen's only higher authority intervenes:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/16/what-happens-when-queen-elizabeth-dies-london-bridge

Yes, a very interesting read, if sprinkled with the occasional unnecessary and lazy note about the UK's place in the world.

Mr. P, the single market and the customs union are not the same thing.

archer101au said:

FF43 said:

Recidivist said:

We will probably (I think.almost certainly) stay in a customs union with the EU because it's perceived to be better than the alternatives. In fact I think it's the only viable alternative to membership. We will also accept conformance to EU regulation on trade in goods, agriculture,business practice and the environment (partial or full single market). Reasons in brief: getting an A50 withdrawal agreement signed, a transition, Irish border issues, avoiding a Dover infarction, keeping the Nissan flag flying in Sunderland, holding onto third country agreements. For its part, the first eu priority is to keep the UK in its regulatory orbit. It's a functional baseline agreement but I think the actual agreement will go betting that.

The rest , payments, FOM, services, aviation, nuclear processing etc are negotiable from that base.

The deal you describe is really the worst of all Worlds. It would be massively harmful to the UK to have to follow the economic and trade policy of another 'country'. But that is the reality with the Remainers - they don't really care about whether the UK gets a good deal as long as they can start the process of unwinding Brexit.

The good thing about the EUs position is that it is so uncompromising that if (when) May caves in, there will be no doubt that what she is doing is completely against the will of the people as expressed in the referendum. If we stay in the CU and have to follow SM rules (the two go together, there is no CU agreement with regulatory divergence on offer), we will not have taken back control, and that is specifically what people voted for. The argument that people voted to leave the EU but remain in the CU is a lie, pure and simple.

I am surprised that there has been so little discussion here of the EU's rejection of the NI border suggestions as the endgame is a complete capitulation by the PM. It seems there is an assumption that she will capitulate so it is not worth discussing. But there is a reason that the polls will not show a break to the Tories despite Corbyn's return to usual form - people don't trust her on Brexit. Nobody wants to make a move until the endgame plays out but her support will collapse if she caves in, and that (other than walking away) is all that is left to do. I still believe that she will be gone by October.

The EU are trying to call our bluff in the negotiations, but they don’t seem to understand the dynamic in the Conservative party and how our leadership works. It’s quite possible that the day she’s seen to cave on something so important, Graham Brady gets the requisite number of letters and she’s replaced with someone like Michael Gove within a week.

daodao said:

SandyRentool said:

This is the commonwealth that I'd like to see:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_of_Britain_Bill

+1, and the seconder of this bill deserves to be the next PM.

No one deserves to be PM. At best someone deserves to be considered for the role.

murali_s said:

O/T Local council elections - Why the hell do we elect councilors using the block voting mechanism? It's even more archaic than FPTP....

The local governmemt boundary commission seem to like it? That is they encourage multi member wards, so it is used.

Gardenwalker said:

ThomasNashe said:

Charles said:

ThomasNashe said:

Charles. Re. Nobel: Literature highly troubled? Winston Churchill winning in the 1940s, or whenever, was a strange one. But most winners seem to be writers of genuine international stature.

https://www.pressherald.com/2018/04/19/protests-erupt-in-sweden-over-nobel-scandal/

Think we're at cross-purposes here. The article relates to questioning about who's on the awarding committee, not about the quality of the recipients - who with the possible exceptions of Bob Dylan and Winston Churchill - have over the last 50 years or so pretty much been giants of world literature.

You need to check yourself on Bob Dylan.

Personally, I was in favour. That's why I said 'possible'. I'm a big fan, but I could see the grounds on which others might object.

Scott_P said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Meeks, pish. There was plenty of talk of doing our own trade deals and leaving the customs union.

https://twitter.com/JoRichardsKent/status/890474412151099392

You’re the one confused. Hannan talked at length about leaving the customs union and making trade deals. The single market is something completely different.

DecrepitJohnL said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Roger, the alternative to cuts is more borrowing. That means more debt and a higher deficit. Which means younger generations having less of their money because they're paying off the debts of older generations who lacked the stomach to try and get things in order.

Catchy one-liners and election slogans are just empty rhetoric (like Corbyn's claim to be tough on anti-Semitism).

Not that he's entirely opposed to cuts, of course. He'd cut defence, he'd cut national security, and he'd cut the ability of the UK to set its own foreign policy by giving the Russians a veto.

Defence and national security have been cut to ribbons by the Conservatives, and the alternative to cuts is more borrowing for investment, to expand the economy, increase prosperity and pay off the mountain of debt the Tories have racked up since 2010.

Public borrowing does not pay for itself. It's the reverse of the argument that US Republicans make that tax cuts pay for themselves.

That's not to say there isn't an element of truth in both arguments. Some infrastructure projects that are funded by public borrowing do generate a good return: raising tax rates too high does lead to a law of diminishing returns - but, when you inherit a budget deficit of 10% of GDP, spending has to be cut, and taxes have to be increased.

Gardenwalker said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Recidivist, departure in name only, or leaving as much of the UK under the EU's thumb as possible to make a return likelier, is not respecting the result of the referendum.

For a long time I said I was very relaxed about the spectrum of distant or close departures. My only red line was leaving the customs union.

You don't get to decide what leaving means.

If Leave were bothered about the customs union, they had their opportunity to campaign about it. But they chose to rail against immigration from Turkey and to promise to spend money on the NHS instead. Everything else is up for grabs.

It is impossible to decide what Leave meant.
The ballot was a simple yes or no, and the official Leave organisation adopted a “See no Evil” approach the moment the vote was declared.

As far as I am concerned, anything from North Korea style autarchy to some formalised associate EU membership are entirely compatible with the vote.

I laugh when I read on here threats of riots on the street in the event of a “sell out”. A few smashed tea cups in a Worthing care home, maybe.

Agree entirely - though getting back to the purpose of this forum, if activity on the ground is anything to go by one of the Worthing seats might turn out to be 2022's Kensington. If you are looking for a long shot bet might be worth a punt.

murali_s said:

CarlottaVance said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

Corbyn....... will be our next PM.

Not on his current Best PM ratings, he won't....

What were the best PM ratings in May 2017 I wonder?

Always important to not this. 2017 wasn't the triumph some of his supporters pretend it is - the tories went backwards as their lead narrowed, but they did still retain largest party status - but it means the worries over his ratings for one will be ignored, and for two won't be as significant as they could be, since in a campaign he can stick to positives and rallies and people ignore his bad points.

FTPT - Thrilling Scottish council by election chat

david_herdson said:

Alistair said:

Vote transfer docs are now available for the Scottish by election both Labour and Lib Dems transferred more towards the SNP candidate than the Tory. This is a reverse of general results in 2017, don't know about the council area specifically.

It may be that the votes had pre-transferred? That is, that weak LD/Lab-identifying unionists voted Con on the first preference, despite not needing to.

So looking at last years election the picture gets even more complicated. Labour didn't put up a candidate in 2017 in the ward which makes trying to identify trends basically impossible. In 2017 it was a 3 member ward where the Tory candidate got elected in the first round and the SNP candidate was the 3rd candidate elected.

I think overall the by election was good news for YES.

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

murali_s said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

When will you pea-brained Tory idiots learn from GE 2017? Corbyn made mince-meat of a 25% deficit so the current neck and neck situation sees him in good shape.

As I keep saying, Corbyn or equivalent will be our next PM. The Tories are a busted flush - staid, old, sleazy and broken.

Why do you need to sound so abusive but is that the way with the left in our Country.

I was responding to the original assertion by a brainwashed Tory apparatchik. Corbyn (not his greatest fan as you know) has a good chance to be our next PM - he was the star of GE 2017 and yet people still dismiss him - these foolish people are in for a rude awakening.

Rude is the word.

Do you not realise the strength of an argument is enhanced with the lack of abuse

G , C'mon a bit of abuse spices up some really boring topics at times

Like spice you've got to know when to sprinkle it though. Dump the lot over the food every time and it's gross.

also like spice, good to combine flavours, subtle variations. No point slathering everything in hot curry powder!

Following on from my observation that Labour seem very active in Worthing, I've just looked it up on wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Worthing_and_Shoreham_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

I hadn't realised Labour got within 5,000 votes last time.

For those not familiar with the geography, Shoreham is contiguous with the Brighton conurbation and is a pretty working class sort of place, and the eastern half of Worthing and Lancing are not as prosperous as the surrounding areas. It's an easy trip by road or rail for activists from central Brighton who might well regard time spent undermining the eurosceptic sitting Tory MP as time well spent. As I say, worth a punt.

tlg86 said:

kle4 said:

murali_s said:

O/T Local council elections - Why the hell do we elect councilors using the block voting mechanism? It's even more archaic than FPTP....

The local governmemt boundary commission seem to like it? That is they encourage multi member wards, so it is used.

Yes, but I think what @murali_s is getting at is we still use FPTP to elect them. It would be better to use STV.

FPTnP in multi-member wards (which is what English council elections use) is worse than FPTnP single-member wards for distorting the distribution of seats in relation to votes.

As far as the BC is concerned, in most urban areas there aren't identifiable communities (with good boundaries) covering areas as small as say 3000 voters, hence multi-member wards work better. In rural areas, where you are essentially adding villages together to make up the necessary numbers, single-member wards work much better.

SandyRentool said:

kle4 said:

MarqueeMark said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

When will you pea-brained Tory idiots learn from GE 2017? Corbyn made mince-meat of a 25% deficit so the current neck and neck situation sees him in good shape.

As I keep saying, Corbyn or equivalent will be our next PM. The Tories are a busted flush - staid, old, sleazy and broken.

Perhaps, pea-brain Labour idiot, you would like to explain where Corbyn is going to find another chunk of the electorate to make up the deficit, giving that he hoovered up the "not Tory" vote last time? Or is there a yet-to-be-exploited pool of anti-semites he can rely on in 2022?

Corbyn is the busted flush in UK politics.

Maybe, but he doesn't necessarily need many more voters - if more tories stay at home in the right places, combined with the question of can they retain all their Scottish seats.

Not likely? Perhaps. But there's a path.

Plus 5 years worth of elderly Tories passing away, to be replaced with 5 years worth of pink-haired Corbynite students.

But the some of the Corbynite students will have become bloated capitalists during those five years.

JosiasJessop said:

logical_song said:

JosiasJessop said:

If Trump strikes a workable, sane deal with Kim then it'll be a remarkable achievement, and I (and others) will have to start taking him more seriously.

That's one heck of a conditional, though: there is much in the way of a deal, and China will have to be fully onboard (which I think they are).

But if he does ... wow.

Could it be that Kim wants to ensure that he and his regime don't go the way of Saddam/Iraq and Gaddafi/Libya. He might see that having a workable nuclear weapon would be sufficient to do that.
So how would a sane deal be worked out? Kim would want the US out of South Korea in exchange for giving up his bomb. Trump would just want Kim to give it up unilaterally. I can't see either of those things happening.
A deal involving no more tests of the bomb or the missiles and a dialling down of anti-US rhetoric in exchange for food aid might be a possibility. Are either of these leaders capable of making any progress or at least not making things worse?

To be fair, it would be hard for it to be worse for the NK people.

So what do the sides want?
NK:
*) To maintain the regime.
*) To unify with the south.

SK:
*) To maintain their success story
*) To unify with the north.
*) Peace.

China:
*) To prevent a war on their doorstep that would be damaging to their international reputation.
*) To prevent the potential of millions of refugees flowing over the border.
*) US troops out of Korea (perhaps in the short term replaced by a.n.other).

US:
*) A foreign policy success that the sainted Obama never came close to.
*) Reduce the costs of maintaining the DMZ.
*) To prevent China extending its influence in the region to SK, and by keeping bases in SK.

If you look at these, there may be a way forward if all sides are adult about it and put the needs of the NK people ahead of their interests (yeah, right). Reunification should be seen very much as a long-term goal.

You missed for China:
*) To avoid having a wealthy, successful capitalist democracy on their borders.

DecrepitJohnL said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Roger, the alternative to cuts is more borrowing. That means more debt and a higher deficit. Which means younger generations having less of their money because they're paying off the debts of older generations who lacked the stomach to try and get things in order.

Catchy one-liners and election slogans are just empty rhetoric (like Corbyn's claim to be tough on anti-Semitism).

Not that he's entirely opposed to cuts, of course. He'd cut defence, he'd cut national security, and he'd cut the ability of the UK to set its own foreign policy by giving the Russians a veto.

Defence and national security have been cut to ribbons by the Conservatives, and the alternative to cuts is more borrowing for investment, to expand the economy, increase prosperity and pay off the mountain of debt the Tories have racked up since 2010.

In reality more borrowing means more borrowing to bribe voters and fund vanity projects.

another_richard said:

Sean_F said:

Recidivist said:

Following on from my observation that Labour seem very active in Worthing, I've just looked it up on wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Worthing_and_Shoreham_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

I hadn't realised Labour got within 5,000 votes last time.

For those not familiar with the geography, Shoreham is contiguous with the Brighton conurbation and is a pretty working class sort of place, and the eastern half of Worthing and Lancing are not as prosperous as the surrounding areas. It's an easy trip by road or rail for activists from central Brighton who might well regard time spent undermining the eurosceptic sitting Tory MP as time well spent. As I say, worth a punt.

Labour did very well in a lot of South Coast seats. Worthing is a good example, so is Portsmouth South, the Bournemouth seats, and Truro. Curiously, they didn't match this performance on the East Coast, where seats like Great Yarmouth, Waveney, and the Thames Estuary constituencies are now very Conservative.

I wonder if house prices are behind that with the east coast having much lower prices than the south coast.

With affordable housing removing one of the negatives to voting Conservative but also allowing more immigration which provided an incentive to vote Conservative.

It's a reasonable theory. Housing is a big issue on the south coast, especially where rail links to London are good.

Recidivist said:

another_richard said:

Sean_F said:

Recidivist said:

Following on from my observation that Labour seem very active in Worthing, I've just looked it up on wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Worthing_and_Shoreham_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

I hadn't realised Labour got within 5,000 votes last time.

For those not familiar with the geography, Shoreham is contiguous with the Brighton conurbation and is a pretty working class sort of place, and the eastern half of Worthing and Lancing are not as prosperous as the surrounding areas. It's an easy trip by road or rail for activists from central Brighton who might well regard time spent undermining the eurosceptic sitting Tory MP as time well spent. As I say, worth a punt.

Labour did very well in a lot of South Coast seats. Worthing is a good example, so is Portsmouth South, the Bournemouth seats, and Truro. Curiously, they didn't match this performance on the East Coast, where seats like Great Yarmouth, Waveney, and the Thames Estuary constituencies are now very Conservative.

I wonder if house prices are behind that with the east coast having much lower prices than the south coast.

With affordable housing removing one of the negatives to voting Conservative but also allowing more immigration which provided an incentive to vote Conservative.

It's a reasonable theory. Housing is a big issue on the south coast, especially where rail links to London are good.

It's fascinating to see how big some of the swings have been in individual constituencies over the past generation.

The_Apocalypse said:

Sean_F said:

SandyRentool said:

kle4 said:

MarqueeMark said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

When will you pea-brained Tory idiots learn from GE 2017? Corbyn made mince-meat of a 25% deficit so the current neck and neck situation sees him in good shape.

As I keep saying, Corbyn or equivalent will be our next PM. The Tories are a busted flush - staid, old, sleazy and broken.

Perhaps, pea-brain Labour idiot, you would like to explain where Corbyn is going to find another chunk of the electorate to make up the deficit, giving that he hoovered up the "not Tory" vote last time? Or is there a yet-to-be-exploited pool of anti-semites he can rely on in 2022?

Corbyn is the busted flush in UK politics.

Maybe, but he doesn't necessarily need many more voters - if more tories stay at home in the right places, combined with the question of can they retain all their Scottish seats.

Not likely? Perhaps. But there's a path.

Plus 5 years worth of elderly Tories passing away, to be replaced with 5 years worth of pink-haired Corbynite students.

But the some of the Corbynite students will have become bloated capitalists during those five years.

Not when many of the under 40s right now don’t feel too happy with the system as it stands. Corbyn did well in part because he won over many 25-40 year olds, reversing some of the progress Cameron had made with the 30+ group.

Re YouGov, it’ll be interesting to see if other polls show this. Last weeks polls basically showed the situation between the two parties as a tie (which is pretty much what the polls since January have indicated) so could be an outlier like that seven point Labour lead for Survation clearly was.

I think that the media's focus on defence/security/foreign affairs has hurt Corbyn, because it's easily his weakest area. But, other issues will come up that favour him.

Yorkcity said:

Theuniondivvie said:

SandyRentool said:

kle4 said:

MarqueeMark said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

When will you pea-brained Tory idiots learn from GE 2017? Corbyn made mince-meat of a 25% deficit so the current neck and neck situation sees him in good shape.

As I keep saying, Corbyn or equivalent will be our next PM. The Tories are a busted flush - staid, old, sleazy and broken.

Perhaps, pea-brain Labour idiot, you would like to explain where Corbyn is going to find another chunk of the electorate to make up the deficit, giving that he hoovered up the "not Tory" vote last time? Or is there a yet-to-be-exploited pool of anti-semites he can rely on in 2022?

Corbyn is the busted flush in UK politics.

Maybe, but he doesn't necessarily need many more voters - if more tories stay at home in the right places, combined with the question of can they retain all their Scottish seats.

Not likely? Perhaps. But there's a path.

Plus 5 years worth of elderly Tories passing away, to be replaced with 5 years worth of pink-haired Corbynite students.

Careful, don't wake up the 'I've sensibly voted Tory all my life but everyone else makes the journey from youthful left to aging right' brigade.

They clarify that to they once voted for Blair.Makes them seem like they might consider a change..

You think that it is impossible to have done that, and therefore they shouldn't be allowed to truthfully make that point?

Note: I did not vote for Blair.

The_Apocalypse said:

Theuniondivvie said:

SandyRentool said:

kle4 said:

MarqueeMark said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

When will you pea-brained Tory idiots learn from GE 2017? Corbyn made mince-meat of a 25% deficit so the current neck and neck situation sees him in good shape.

As I keep saying, Corbyn or equivalent will be our next PM. The Tories are a busted flush - staid, old, sleazy and broken.

Perhaps, pea-brain Labour idiot, you would like to explain where Corbyn is going to find another chunk of the electorate to make up the deficit, giving that he hoovered up the "not Tory" vote last time? Or is there a yet-to-be-exploited pool of anti-semites he can rely on in 2022?

Corbyn is the busted flush in UK politics.

Maybe, but he doesn't necessarily need many more voters - if more tories stay at home in the right places, combined with the question of can they retain all their Scottish seats.

Not likely? Perhaps. But there's a path.

Plus 5 years worth of elderly Tories passing away, to be replaced with 5 years worth of pink-haired Corbynite students.

Careful, don't wake up the 'I've sensibly voted Tory all my life but everyone else makes the journey from youthful left to aging right' brigade.

It looks like voting Tory isn’t about aging, but about the extent to which you feel the status quo works for you. Those who don’t feel happy with it are more likely to vote Labour.

How does that make sense when Labour is in government, for extended periods? Were people who voted Tory in 2010 voting for the 'status quo'?

That argument is another one of those I think political parties just tell themselves, but which is not in fact true, no different to 'sensible people vote Tory', and 'good people vote Labour', and which we the public tend not to call them out on due to our prejudices. A similar example of that train of thought is the way, oft mentioned on here, that given the perceptions of the parties Labour seems better able to get away with saying things about the NHS, and Tories on defence, regardless of their actual records in recent times on either.

Yorkcity said:

Theuniondivvie said:

SandyRentool said:

kle4 said:

MarqueeMark said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

When will you pea-brained Tory idiots learn from GE 2017? Corbyn made mince-meat of a 25% deficit so the current neck and neck situation sees him in good shape.

As I keep saying, Corbyn or equivalent will be our next PM. The Tories are a busted flush - staid, old, sleazy and broken.

Perhaps, pea-brain Labour idiot, you would like to explain where Corbyn is going to find another chunk of the electorate to make up the deficit, giving that he hoovered up the "not Tory" vote last time? Or is there a yet-to-be-exploited pool of anti-semites he can rely on in 2022?

Corbyn is the busted flush in UK politics.

Maybe, but he doesn't necessarily need many more voters - if more tories stay at home in the right places, combined with the question of can they retain all their Scottish seats.

Not likely? Perhaps. But there's a path.

Plus 5 years worth of elderly Tories passing away, to be replaced with 5 years worth of pink-haired Corbynite students.

Careful, don't wake up the 'I've sensibly voted Tory all my life but everyone else makes the journey from youthful left to aging right' brigade.

They clarify that to they once voted for Blair.Makes them seem like they might consider a change..

Almost by definition there’s a group of a couple of million people who voted for Blair, and also for Major before him and Cameron after him.

It may be an unpopular view now, but Blair’s success was in persuading a lot of people who’d normally be Conservatives to vote for him - those people are very much in the blue camp with Corbyn in position.

Sandpit said:

Yorkcity said:

Theuniondivvie said:

SandyRentool said:

kle4 said:

MarqueeMark said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

When will you pea-brained Tory idiots learn from GE 2017? Corbyn made mince-meat of a 25% deficit so the current neck and neck situation sees him in good shape.

As I keep saying, Corbyn or equivalent will be our next PM. The Tories are a busted flush - staid, old, sleazy and broken.

Perhaps, pea-brain Labour idiot, you would like to explain where Corbyn is going to find another chunk of the electorate to make up the deficit, giving that he hoovered up the "not Tory" vote last time? Or is there a yet-to-be-exploited pool of anti-semites he can rely on in 2022?

Corbyn is the busted flush in UK politics.

Maybe, but he doesn't necessarily need many more voters - if more tories stay at home in the right places, combined with the question of can they retain all their Scottish seats.

Not likely? Perhaps. But there's a path.

Plus 5 years worth of elderly Tories passing away, to be replaced with 5 years worth of pink-haired Corbynite students.

Careful, don't wake up the 'I've sensibly voted Tory all my life but everyone else makes the journey from youthful left to aging right' brigade.

They clarify that to they once voted for Blair.Makes them seem like they might consider a change..

Almost by definition there’s a group of a couple of million people who voted for Blair, and also for Major before him and Cameron after him.

It may be an unpopular view now, but Blair’s success was in persuading a lot of people who’d normally be Conservatives to vote for him - those people are very much in the blue camp with Corbyn in position.

Totally agree.

Yorkcity said:

Sandpit said:

Yorkcity said:

Theuniondivvie said:

SandyRentool said:

kle4 said:

MarqueeMark said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

When will you pea-brained Tory idiots learn from GE 2017? Corbyn made mince-meat of a 25% deficit so the current neck and neck situation sees him in good shape.

As I keep saying, Corbyn or equivalent will be our next PM. The Tories are a busted flush - staid, old, sleazy and broken.

Perhaps, pea-brain Labour idiot, you would like to explain where Corbyn is going to find another chunk of the electorate to make up the deficit, giving that he hoovered up the "not Tory" vote last time? Or is there a yet-to-be-exploited pool of anti-semites he can rely on in 2022?

Corbyn is the busted flush in UK politics.

Maybe, but he doesn't necessarily need many more voters - if more tories stay at home in the right places, combined with the question of can they retain all their Scottish seats.

Not likely? Perhaps. But there's a path.

Plus 5 years worth of elderly Tories passing away, to be replaced with 5 years worth of pink-haired Corbynite students.

Careful, don't wake up the 'I've sensibly voted Tory all my life but everyone else makes the journey from youthful left to aging right' brigade.

They clarify that to they once voted for Blair.Makes them seem like they might consider a change..

Almost by definition there’s a group of a couple of million people who voted for Blair, and also for Major before him and Cameron after him.

It may be an unpopular view now, but Blair’s success was in persuading a lot of people who’d normally be Conservatives to vote for him - those people are very much in the blue camp with Corbyn in position.

Totally agree.

But the model of government the centrists espouse is discredited and broken.

kle4 said:

Yorkcity said:

Theuniondivvie said:

SandyRentool said:

kle4 said:

MarqueeMark said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

Ooh! Yougov.

CON: 43% (+3)
LAB: 38% (-2)
LD: 8% (-1)

Unsurprising , given Corbyn's recent performances on the Russia and the Anti=Semitic rows.
It would be hard for Labour to find a worse Leader.. Only Gordon Brown comes as close.

When will you pea-brained Tory idiots learn from GE 2017? Corbyn made mince-meat of a 25% deficit so the current neck and neck situation sees him in good shape.

As I keep saying, Corbyn or equivalent will be our next PM. The Tories are a busted flush - staid, old, sleazy and broken.

Perhaps, pea-brain Labour idiot, you would like to explain where Corbyn is going to find another chunk of the electorate to make up the deficit, giving that he hoovered up the "not Tory" vote last time? Or is there a yet-to-be-exploited pool of anti-semites he can rely on in 2022?

Corbyn is the busted flush in UK politics.

Maybe, but he doesn't necessarily need many more voters - if more tories stay at home in the right places, combined with the question of can they retain all their Scottish seats.

Not likely? Perhaps. But there's a path.

Plus 5 years worth of elderly Tories passing away, to be replaced with 5 years worth of pink-haired Corbynite students.

Careful, don't wake up the 'I've sensibly voted Tory all my life but everyone else makes the journey from youthful left to aging right' brigade.

They clarify that to they once voted for Blair.Makes them seem like they might consider a change..

You think that it is impossible to have done that, and therefore they shouldn't be allowed to truthfully make that point?

Note: I did not vote for Blair.

Well you should have in 97, it was required.

TheJezziah said:

Presumably the voters dying off will mostly be older voters so mostly Tories, also the younger voters coming through will be mostly Labour, as things stand anyway.

I've been hearing this argument for 40 years...of which only 14 have been under a Labour government. Shouldn't the Tories all be dead by now?

As Ben Goldacre would observe "I think you'll find its a bit more complicated than that...."

The_Apocalypse said:

kle4 said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Theuniondivvie said:

SandyRentool said:

kle4 said:

MarqueeMark said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

.

.

.

,

.

.

.

.

People vote Labour because they are think they are changing the status quo when they’re in government? Things like spending more on public services, minimum wage, tax credits etc. I didn’t mean to offend you or anything.

@Sandpit I don’t think many saw the Tories as tackling inter generational unfairness. I was much more sympathetic to the Tories back then - even considered voting for them - but I never saw the dementia tax as part of tackling inter generational unfairness. I think Corbyn’s polices on e.g. tuition fees, being anti-austerity, tapped into that feeling a lot more. There are a lot of people who think it’ll be easier to buy a house under Labour, which is understandable considering many of the difficulties 25-40 year olds have faced on this issue have occurred during the time period where there has been a Conservative government.

The problem is that there has not been any actual austerity. Government spending is higher than it has ever been, the government is still spending £100,000,000 a day more than we receive in taxes, and we spend more on debt interest than we do on education or defence.

People who are arguing for “the end of austerity” are arguing for burdening your generation with even more debts, to fund additional spending now. Rather like a big night out, it might feel good in the short term but will leave us with a collective hangover in the future.

The only way that housing in London gets cheaper is either to build more houses or have fewer people chasing them. Ideally a lot of both. Secondary actions would be things like investment in other regions and a loosening of mortgage regulations. Demand for housing is to a large extent dependent on supply of finance via mortgages.

One thing for certain is that if house prices start actually falling, then banks who are keen to lend 90% of the value now will quickly start changing that to 80% or 70%. We went through this in the early ‘90s and it wasn’t very pleasant for a few years, with people in negative equity unable to move to change jobs for example.

I didn't think Jolyon views Remain voters that way....but we live & learn...

https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/987659459752353792

CarlottaVance said:

Scott_P said:

Senior Cabinet Brexiteers are more concerned about the project than they have been in some time, I write in The Sun this morning.

The reason for this is that there is a concerted push underway to keep Britain in a customs union with the EU for good even after December 2020.

One of the key tests for any Brexit deal is whether it is sustainable. Any deal that doesn’t leave Britain free to make its own comprehensive free trade deals will fail that test and end up with everyone back round the negotiating table within a decade.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/why-brexiteer-ministers-are-so-concerned-at-the-moment/

ttps://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/987643356455944193

I think the EU may have underestimated May's stubborness.....

She’s got no choice in the matter, if she backs down she will get challenged. The EU don’t seem to realise this, and have raised all in thinking she’s bluffing.

Sandpit said:

The_Apocalypse said:

kle4 said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Theuniondivvie said:

SandyRentool said:

kle4 said:

MarqueeMark said:

murali_s said:

SquareRoot said:

felix said:

.

.

.

,

.

.

.

.

People vote Labour because they are think they are changing the status quo when they’re in government? Things like spending more on public services, minimum wage, tax credits etc. I didn’t mean to offend you or anything.

@Sandpit I don’t think many saw the Tories as tackling inter generational unfairness. I was much more sympathetic to the Tories back then - even considered voting for them - but I never saw the dementia tax as part of tackling inter generational unfairness. I think Corbyn’s polices on e.g. tuition fees, being anti-austerity, tapped into that feeling a lot more. There are a lot of people who think it’ll be easier to buy a house under Labour, which is understandable considering many of the difficulties 25-40 year olds have faced on this issue have occurred during the time period where there has been a Conservative government.

The problem is that there has not been any actual austerity. Government spending is higher than it has ever been, the government is still spending £100,000,000 a day more than we receive in taxes, and we spend more on debt interest than we do on education or defence.

People who are arguing for “the end of austerity” are arguing for burdening your generation with even more debts, to fund additional spending now. Rather like a big night out, it might feel good in the short term but will leave us with a collective hangover in the future.

The only way that housing in London gets cheaper is either to build more houses or have fewer people chasing them. Ideally a lot of both. Secondary actions would be things like investment in other regions and a loosening of mortgage regulations. Demand for housing is to a large extent dependent on supply of finance via mortgages.

One thing for certain is that if house prices start actually falling, then banks who are keen to lend 90% of the value now will quickly start changing that to 80% or 70%. We went through this in the early ‘90s and it wasn’t very pleasant for a few years, with people in negative equity unable to move to change jobs for example.

There was austerity for the young and profligacy for the old.

another_richard said:

There was austerity for the young and profligacy for the old.

I think it's a bit more nuanced than that. I think the people who have been prioritised the most in the last decade are those who are now in their 40s and early 50s.

Dura_Ace said:

CarlottaVance said:

TheJezziah said:

Presumably the voters dying off will mostly be older voters so mostly Tories, also the younger voters coming through will be mostly Labour, as things stand anyway.

I've been hearing this argument for 40 years...of which only 14 have been under a Labour government. Shouldn't the Tories all be dead by now?

As Ben Goldacre would observe "I think you'll find its a bit more complicated than that...."

Over that 40 years the tories keep having to assume increasing more socially progressive positions (minimum wage, ssm, etc.) in order to get new voters to replace those assiduously bribed OAPs the reaper takes from them.

They have now reversed that direction of travel and retreated to being the nasty party with the added bonus of incompetence.

And yet, when it came to it, people voted to leave the EU.