politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A Very British Populism

TheScreamingEagles said:

RoyalBlue said:

Have been reflecting on Brexit.

I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.

If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.

The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.

Ahem.

How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/10/18/the-brexiteers-junckers-fifth-columnists/

As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.

Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!

IanB2 said:

Not sure Marr has been lucky in landing Starmer and IDS as guests on this critical weekend. Perhaps Sturgeon will have something interesting to say, if she can talk to a bigger picture than her domestic one?

Time she was promoting her domestic one, she cannot dither much longer or she will become like Corbyn.

kle4 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Seems a bit bad-tempered this morning. How can anyone be upset when David Lidington is being tipped to take over as Prime Minister?

We dont all have bets on him.

If his plan is to labour Brexit I'd be all for it not because I like labour but because it means we get a resolution, but I dont see how he would manage it - theoretically the numbers are there but he never get it through cabinet or to the commons.

He might be able to sell it as a replacement backstop. A transition arrangement until the EU finally agree on Max Fac and Canada+. It will be just as popular as the backstop among Tory Leavers though.

RoyalBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

RoyalBlue said:

Have been reflecting on Brexit.

I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.

If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.

The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.

Ahem.

How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/10/18/the-brexiteers-junckers-fifth-columnists/

As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.

Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!

A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.

malcolmg said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Seems a bit bad-tempered this morning. How can anyone be upset when David Lidington is being tipped to take over as Prime Minister?

Or even worse Gove , a mendacious lying toerag of the first order.

A bit early on a Sunday for tortology, Malc…...

edmundintokyo said:

Barnesian said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Morning Peeps.

Have we agreed yet roughly how many were at yesterday's Meaningful March/Pointless Protest? My guess would be about half a million, but that includes dogs, Russian stooges and tourists just trying to find their way to Fortnum & Masons.

I was at yesterday's march and also at the anti Iraq war march in 2003.

It is difficult to estimate numbers when you are actually in a march. I tried arithmetic - how many abreast, how far apart, at what speed and for how long. Came out at about a million plus or minus half a million. It was very sprawling. People were stationary for ages in Park Lane and it sprawled out at many junctions. There weren't pictures from the air in 2003 to compare with yesterday's pictures but my own best estimate is that yesterday's march had at least as many as the 2003 march, and probably more.

I wish the mobile phone companies would publish numbers on stuff like this - I bet with their data you could get an estimate to within 10%.

Creative idea!

kle4 said:

I think the idea that the logjam in parliament might not have occurred if May had involved them sooner is rather fanciful. Why has it occurred? Because of inflexible leaver ultras and die hard remainers. Theres no reason to suspect asking them things sooner would have led to more urgency from them.

It is more than fanciful, it is utter nonsense. Her only way to deliver Brexit smoothly was to get a big majority in the HoC. That was what GE17 was all about. Great idea, poor execution.

IanB2 said:

edmundintokyo said:

Barnesian said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Morning Peeps.

Have we agreed yet roughly how many were at yesterday's Meaningful March/Pointless Protest? My guess would be about half a million, but that includes dogs, Russian stooges and tourists just trying to find their way to Fortnum & Masons.

I was at yesterday's march and also at the anti Iraq war march in 2003.

It is difficult to estimate numbers when you are actually in a march. I tried arithmetic - how many abreast, how far apart, at what speed and for how long. Came out at about a million plus or minus half a million. It was very sprawling. People were stationary for ages in Park Lane and it sprawled out at many junctions. There weren't pictures from the air in 2003 to compare with yesterday's pictures but my own best estimate is that yesterday's march had at least as many as the 2003 march, and probably more.

I wish the mobile phone companies would publish numbers on stuff like this - I bet with their data you could get an estimate to within 10%.

Apparently the networks couldn't cope and a lot of people had no connection

I had no connection at all. Just a message telling me it was blocked. Throughout the whole march I heard people muttering about it.

I was surprised by the pictures on the TV showing it free flowing, but I think that was just at the very front looking at the aerial shot going along the line. We weren't far from the front, but we were stationary at Hyde park for an hour. I heard others were there for several hours. It then moved ok, but packed. It hurt the legs to take shorter steps than you would normally do. We managed to get just short of Downing Street and then the crowd density got very scary.

I got two excellent pictures of people dressed as Boris and Theresa. Amazingly good humoured. There were a few posters in poor taste, but also some very funny ones.

It is great that at a time of crisis our political leaders are focused on discussing hard choices rather focusing on which gets to sit in the top chair with no plan for what theyd actually be able to do when they got there.

I haven't seen such dignified unity of effort at a time of crisis since I watched The death of Stalin last week.

notme2 said:

IanB2 said:

edmundintokyo said:

Barnesian said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Morning Peeps.

Have we agreed yet roughly how many were at yesterday's Meaningful March/Pointless Protest? My guess would be about half a million, but that includes dogs, Russian stooges and tourists just trying to find their way to Fortnum & Masons.

I was at yesterday's march and also at the anti Iraq war march in 2003.

It is difficult to estimate numbers when you are actually in a march. I tried arithmetic - how many abreast, how far apart, at what speed and for how long. Came out at about a million plus or minus half a million. It was very sprawling. People were stationary for ages in Park Lane and it sprawled out at many junctions. There weren't pictures from the air in 2003 to compare with yesterday's pictures but my own best estimate is that yesterday's march had at least as many as the 2003 march, and probably more.

I wish the mobile phone companies would publish numbers on stuff like this - I bet with their data you could get an estimate to within 10%.

Apparently the networks couldn't cope and a lot of people had no connection

That’s quite common at any large event. The expense of catering forsuch an unusually high capacity doesn’t make it worth it. It happens at most of the conferences I’ve been to. Unually high demand means little to no data access and intermittent call capacity.

I can never get on the internet when I'm at PL football matches.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

DavidL said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

(snip)

Perhaps that's what the next generation want, but for me it's very depressing. If all Conservatism means is just good stewardship of the national finances and day-to-day administration and otherwise abrogating any leadership of the national debate (and I admit, to many, that's all they want) then politics no longer holds any real interest for me.

It's an interesting viewpoint but what are the alternatives? I certainly would not want the Tory party to follow the path taken by the Republican party in the US. What policies do you want them to propose that they are not?

I am a Conservative voter (or at least I have been up to now) but I don't want radical attacks on the welfare state, indeed the harshness of the reforms on disability for example offend me as does the incompetence with which UC has been introduced. I certainly don't want the equivalent of US Evangelicals having any say on social policy. I am not up for another wave of privatisations, the recent experience of private sector involvement in the provision of public services has not been a success on any measure. What do I want?

* Sound public finances and reduced government debt (as a share of GDP).
*Efficient and effective public services which are adequately funded to meet the challenges we have given to them.
*The application of our laws to all and for all. Having some of our citizens treated as second class because of "cultural sensitivity" is unacceptable.
*A society that is, so far as possible, left to get on with their own lives without politicians thinking we need new laws on everything all the time.
* A society that is compassionate about those in need.

I accept it is not the most ambitious list. One might say it is almost conservative.

Exactly my thoughts David

Unfortunately it is a million mile from current Conservatism, in fact almost complete opposite.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Alanbrooke said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Alanbrooke said:

Im afraid thats just nonsense

what people lost was in no way compensated by "London" money. The butchering of manufacturing in the Midlands and North didnt replace high paying jobs, wages stagnated under Labour, no sizeable investments were made in infrastructure and while Mandelson was getting filthy rich.

People dont want charity, they want sensible jobs and to date none of the parties has anything in store to address that.

Because governments can't just m at all.

And Brexit will help manufacturing how? Even Brexiteers' favourite economist, Patrick Minford, thinks that post Brexit the UK's manufacturing sector should disappear. That will go down like a bucket of cold sick in the Midlands and the North of England. Luckily, the Tory donors who paid for Brexit couldn't give two shits about that.

Again thats just nonsense,

The Blair government bet the farm on financial services and the "new" economy and lost. It held the pound high, penalised energy costs for manufacturing, did nothing to incentivise investment, encouraged takeovers of UK companies which we subsequently shut down and their order books offshored, wrecked the concept of a high skill high wage economy by throwing the doors open to cheap labour. And for the record the Conservatives havent been any better. But to say there was nothing the governmentcould do is just nonsense, it chose to do nothing.

It didn't 'hold the pound high' because the pound's value is market determined.

Labour's bet was that you can't fight comparative advantage. Unfortunately, they were probably right in that. Although I agree with you they could have done more, I think they did more than either the preceding or subsequent governments did, and more than anyone promoting Brexit plans to do.

Then how come we have the concept of a currency being over\under valued ? For most of the Blair years the £ was about 1.50 to the euro when it should have been about 1.3

As for comparative advantage just gobbledigook. You make your own advantages. The UK instead decided to lob disadvantages on its own industries.

kjh said:

IanB2 said:

edmundintokyo said:

Barnesian said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Morning Peeps.

Have we agreed yet roughly how many were at yesterday's Meaningful March/Pointless Protest? My guess would be about half a million, but that includes dogs, Russian stooges and tourists just trying to find their way to Fortnum & Masons.

I was at yesterday's march and also at the anti Iraq war march in 2003.

It is difficult to estimate numbers when you are actually in a march. I tried arithmetic - how many abreast, how far apart, at what speed and for how long. Came out at about a million plus or minus half a million. It was very sprawling. People were stationary for ages in Park Lane and it sprawled out at many junctions. There weren't pictures from the air in 2003 to compare with yesterday's pictures but my own best estimate is that yesterday's march had at least as many as the 2003 march, and probably more.

I wish the mobile phone companies would publish numbers on stuff like this - I bet with their data you could get an estimate to within 10%.

Apparently the networks couldn't cope and a lot of people had no connection

I had no connection at all. Just a message telling me it was blocked. Throughout the whole march I heard people muttering about it.

I was surprised by the pictures on the TV showing it free flowing, but I think that was just at the very front looking at the aerial shot going along the line. We weren't far from the front, but we were stationary at Hyde park for an hour. I heard others were there for several hours. It then moved ok, but packed. It hurt the legs to take shorter steps than you would normally do. We managed to get just short of Downing Street and then the crowd density got very scary.

I got two excellent pictures of people dressed as Boris and Theresa. Amazingly good humoured. There were a few posters in poor taste, but also some very funny ones.

Oh and I was very surprised to see the large number of 'Tories against Brexit' posterboards being carried on the march.

RoyalBlue said:

williamglenn said:

RoyalBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

RoyalBlue said:

Have been reflecting on Brexit.

I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.

If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.

The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.

Ahem.

How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/10/18/the-brexiteers-junckers-fifth-columnists/

As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.

Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!

A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.

Only if we don’t leave. That’s still to be determined.

We're not leaving. 2 years of trying has failed so somehow they'll get us there. All that remains is the tricky process of reversing things.

First step, Tory implosion as they panic as Brexit slips away, and they try something stupid like replacing May before they have any idea what the next leader would need to do.

If Liddington does concede to soft brexit, we'll see the amusing prospect of the Conservative party campaigning against their own government's Brexit policy at the next election.

RoyalBlue said:

Have been reflecting on Brexit.

I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.

If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.

The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.

The trouble with the referendum is that it was a (near) 50/50 split.

If we remain, don't be misguided by the admittedly impressive sight of one or even two (sorry, Casino) people marching through london waving blue flags. The country remains deeply divided.

If we remain, it will be as a recalcitrant, unhappy member. In it for the money, in it because we'll go broke otherwise. Forced to accept the political project for fear of losing jobs. We won't become fervently pro-EU, because outside of metropolitan Remania, we never have.

LBJ famously said it is better to be inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in. But if we remain I suspect our relationship with the EU will be one of us inside the tent, pissing all over the walls, the sleeping bags, and our fellow members. Particularly when we elect a load of hardline nationalists. Don't think it can happen? Look north of the border to see what happens when a nation narrowly decides to "remain" and isn't happy about it...

AlanC said:

If Liddington does concede to soft brexit, we'll see the amusing prospect of the Conservative party campaigning against their own government's Brexit policy at the next election.

Worth it.

I dont see the issue - unless they're prepared to no deal Brexit without a fight, which not enough are, it really as simple as do you want soft Brexit or no Brexit. It's not difficult.

These bozos are still unable to agree what the choices are let alone make one though.

kle4 said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1109740906939404288

How can they help anything? This coup is exactly one week early. Once parliament forces the governments hand in whatever direction then an interim leader takes over to manage things knowing what the ppmath is. scrabbling around like this is not rearranging deck chairs on the titanic, its arguing over sunbathing spots in Pompeii.

But if May stays, Cooper/Letwin ensures that de facto leadership passes elsewhere, and May is left in the same position as she was sitting eating her sandwich in that windowless room whilst the EU had dinner and decided our fate next door. A new leader is really their only chance to grab hold of the process.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Alanbrooke said:

Im afraid thats just nonsense

what people lost was in no way compensated by "London" money. The butchering of manufacturing in the Midlands and North didnt replace high paying jobs, wages stagnated under Labour, no sizeable investments were made in infrastructure and while Mandelson was getting filthy rich.

People dont want charity, they want sensible jobs and to date none of the parties has anything in store to address that.

Because governments can't just magic high paying private sector jobs into existence. The loss of manufacturing jobs reflected ongoing productivity increases in the sector, the accession of China into the WTO and the high value of GBP - and only the latter could be blamed in any part on the government of the day (because they ran what were seen as sensible economic policies that boosted investor confidence). Labour's policies were perhaps too much of a sticking plaster, but compare Northern towns now with what they looked like in 2003 say and tell me that they were of no help at all.

And Brexit will help manufacturing how? Even Brexiteers' favourite economist, Patrick Minford, thinks that post Brexit the UK's manufacturing sector should disappear. That will go down like a bucket of cold sick in the Midlands and the North of England. Luckily, the Tory donors who paid for Brexit couldn't give two shits about that.

Perhaps having policies that encourage projects outside London and the south east may have helped a little. The cretins have totally ignored anything outside the M25, happy to have the south awash with our cash and that of the foreign launderers.
The gits even make Scotland pay a share of the London projects into the bargain and interest on the loans, whilst cutting our budgets.

IanB2 said:

https://twitter.com/fleetstreetfox/status/1109513237320658944

a cracker

AlanC said:

If Liddington does concede to soft brexit, we'll see the amusing prospect of the Conservative party campaigning against their own government's Brexit policy at the next election.

Even Lidington cannot concede anything. He would be in the same deadlock as TM

kle4 said:

IanB2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

Dura_Ace said:

The Revoke march had far better meme based placards than Farage's Ramble for the Permanently Bewildered. Unless Brexit can somehow be marketed as offering something positive for the under 60s then it's not going to be viable even if it is achieved in the near future.

It caused a militantly European cultural identity to appear in the UK in the way that 40+ years of membership of the EU and its progenitor organisation never did.

Yes, it's extremely depressing.

Nothing makes me more angry (go on, call me a Gammon) than when I see a Briton march with the yellow and blue flag. It brings out of all my innermost fears and demons.

I voted Brexit to try and bring a stop to that and to restrengthen our believe and pride in our nation and its democratic principles, and to set an example to Europe and the World of how else it could and should be done.

It hasn't exactly worked out like that.

Being a British Patriot and pro EU is not a contradiction. There were many Union Flags on the march alongside the EU ones. Of course some British patriots are anti, but surely no one has a monopoly of patriotism? Indeed a patriotism that treats 48% of it own voters as an internal enemy is taking the country in a very dangerous direction.

Listen to Heseltines speech for that patriotic pro EU view:

There's nothing patriotic about a desire to see your nation absorbed into a suprafederal union, and a new country.

This is at the heart of the issue. This is *why* we're all here.

But Heseltine himself gives you the answer. The world is changing and history doesn't run backwards.

"We are here, now, on the right side of history. In a shrinking world, of global terrorism, international tax avoidance, millisecond communication, giant corporations, superpowers, mass migration, climate change and a host of other threats, our duty is to build on our achievements, to maintain our access to the corridors of world power, to keep our place at the centre of the stages of the world"

History does run backwards sometimes. It's not a march toward some enlightened ideal

You are right that many things go in cycles, examples being social conservatism/liberalism and the strength of religion in societies.

But history cannot return things to how they were before - which is part of the fundamental mistake many leavers have made, the other being to overlook the rupture and challenge of the transition, regardless of how feasible is their desired end state.

https://twitter.com/RobBurl/status/1109760127580676096

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/RobBurl/status/1109760127580676096

Oh the irony. A French journalist extolling a peaceful march in London while Paris burns every weekend

SquareRoot said:

malcolmg said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Seems a bit bad-tempered this morning. How can anyone be upset when David Lidington is being tipped to take over as Prime Minister?

Or even worse Gove , a mendacious lying toerag of the first order.

A bit early on a Sunday for tortology, Malc…...

A new one on me Suare, and not much explanation on google other than it may be about cakes, nice word though. I presume it is around combination of words.

RoyalBlue said:

Have been reflecting on Brexit.

I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.

If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.

The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.

Yet again I agree with what you are posting Royal. Where and why this came, not necessarily though your direction of travel.

This crisis in Britain now has been a growing shadow across these lands for the last 25 years at least. right from the start in the 97 GE as Maastricht sank into the English mindfulness. Preferring Blair as PM over Hague and Howard masked what was really happening, masked that Labour had no answer to the negative impacts of Ever more EU integration, globalisation, de industrialisation, no government then or since will tackle looming social care and NHS time bombs, and the only answer to British unease over immigration to UK in EU single market has been brexit.

So lets be honest and see the role nationalism and identity has played in this brexit outcome, there were two union jacks behind Theresa May as she addressed the nation this week, yet she is oblivious to how this crisis challenges them, threatening to make them relics from a bygone age, if those union jacks are weaker today than ever it proves what this whole process has underlined, its not the British parliament anymore is it? Its not a British Brexit, it’s the English who have done this.

It’s the ego of a Captain of this world that wore the pips for hundreds of years, and couldn’t face going back into the ranks when the inevitable time came. Unless you actually believe such times may never come?

Yet, unlike your post, now is not that moment, the English are not yet ready.

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

AlanC said:

If Liddington does concede to soft brexit, we'll see the amusing prospect of the Conservative party campaigning against their own government's Brexit policy at the next election.

Even Lidington cannot concede anything. He would be in the same deadlock as TM

swapping a useless nonentity for another useless nonentity will achieve nothing G.

We agree on the logic Malc

isam said:

An amazing picture when you consider London’s demographic make up

https://twitter.com/essexpr/status/1109489011276595202?s=21

Lammy really is a bellend of the first order.

Mortimer said:

williamglenn said:

RoyalBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

RoyalBlue said:

Have been reflecting on Brexit.

I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.

If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.

The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.

Ahem.

How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/10/18/the-brexiteers-junckers-fifth-columnists/

As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.

Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!

A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.

Were you a member of a political party you’d realise how hilarious that sounds. It is interesting to reflect that the tiny pro-European minority in the party consists largely of middle class, middle aged men between the age of aggrieved (that was meant to say Grieve, but is quite a funny autocorrect so I’ve left it) and Clarke. Our younger members and politicians are in the main far more eurosceptic than their preceding generations.

The Conservative party is 80% + Eurosceptic. This used to be just the membership - since the Brexit vote it has been their vote, too.

Revoke will never happen because of this; long delay is death by a thousand cuts (the deepest of which would be the MEP elections).

It is no doubt a weird statistical fluke of small numbers, but all the Conservative Party members I know are strongly pro-EU. And I met another couple on the train home from the march yesterday. Not trying to make any particular point other than it is very easy for your personal experiences to be misleading.

NickPalmer said:

tlg86 said:

Hilary Benn talking a load of shit on Sophie Ridge. Had the PM had her way, the WA would have been signed before Christmas without the consent of Parliament. The MPs voted for the Grieve amendment so that Parliament could take back control. That the MPs cannot agree on a course of action is not the fault of the government as claimed by Benn.

No, because the Cooper-Boles amendment failed - that was the one that would have enabled MPs to set the Parliamentary agenda. The Government has up to now not allowed MPs the chance to adopt an alternative strategy. Essentially Grieve's amendment prevented the Government from doing stuff, but the Government has prevented MPs from doing stuff.

This week, with luck, will change that.

And what exactly do you expect to change?

rural_voter said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

kle4 said:

I think the idea that the logjam in parliament might not have occurred if May had involved them sooner is rather fanciful. Why has it occurred? Because of inflexible leaver ultras and die hard remainers. Theres no reason to suspect asking them things sooner would have led to more urgency from them.

And the casualty is TM who tried to reflect the 52/48 vote with the least worst exit

She didn't. She tried for a compromise among the 52% and ignored the 48%. She's now wasted 33 months. F*** her.

BTW this morning the petition for Revoke - not just a Ratifying Referendum - has got to 4.9 million whereas I heard on R4 yesterday that one urging a No Deal exit had got to 490,000.

It is not the answer and will not happen unless through a referendum

IanB2 said:

kle4 said:

IanB2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

Dura_Ace said:

The Revoke march had far better meme based placards than Farage's

Yes, it's extremely depressing.

Nothing makes me more angry (go on, call me a Gammon) than when I see a Briton march with the yellow and blue flag. It brings out of all my innermost fears and demons.

I voted Brexit to try and bring a stop to that and to restrengthen our believe and pride in our nation and its democratic principles, and to set an example to Europe and the World of how else it could and should be done.

It hasn't exactly worked out like that.

Being a British Patriot and pro EU is not a contradiction. There were many Union Flags on the march alongside the EU ones. Of course some British patriots are anti, but surely no one has a monopoly of patriotism? Indeed a patriotism that treats 48% of it own voters as an internal enemy is taking the country in a very dangerous direction.

Listen to Heseltines speech for that patriotic pro EU view:

There's nothing patriotic about a desire to see your nation absorbed into a suprafederal union, and a new country.

This is at the heart of the issue. This is *why* we're all here.

But Heseltine himself gives you the answer. The world is changing and history doesn't run backwards.

"We are here, now, on the right side of history. In a shrinking world, of global terrorism, international tax avoidance, millisecond communication, giant corporations, superpowers, mass migration, climate change and a host of other threats, our duty is to build on our achievements, to maintain our access to the corridors of world power, to keep our place at the centre of the stages of the world"

History does run backwards sometimes. It's not a march toward some enlightened ideal

You are right that many things go in cycles, examples being social conservatism/liberalism and the strength of religion in societies.

But history cannot return things to how they were before - which is part of the fundamental mistake many leavers have made, the other being to overlook the rupture and challenge of the transition, regardless of how feasible is their desired end state.

“Can anyone really have thought that this great greasy, congealed granny knot, tied and retied and tightened for nearly 50 years, could be undone by a single clean stroke?”

https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

DavidL said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

(snip)

Perhaps that's what the next generation want, but for me it's very depressing. If all Conservatism means is just good stewardship of the national finances and day-to-day administration and otherwise abrogating any leadership of the national debate (and I admit, to many, that's all they want) then politics no longer holds any real interest for me.

It's an interesting viewpoint but what are the alternatives? I certainly would not want the Tory party to follow the path taken by the Republican party in the US. What policies do you want them to propose that they are not?

I am a Conservative voter (or at least I have been up to now) but I don't want radical attacks on the welfare state, indeed the harshness of the reforms on disability for example offend me as does the incompetence with which UC has been introduced. I certainly don't want the equivalent of US Evangelicals having any say on social policy. I am not up for another wave of privatisations, the recent experience of private sector involvement in the provision of public services has not been a success on any measure. What do I want?

* Sound public finances and reduced government debt (as a share of GDP).
*Efficient and effective public services which are adequately funded to meet the challenges we have given to them.
*The application of our laws to all and for all. Having some of our citizens treated as second class because of "cultural sensitivity" is unacceptable.
*A society that is, so far as possible, left to get on with their own lives without politicians thinking we need new laws on everything all the time.
* A society that is compassionate about those in need.

I accept it is not the most ambitious list. One might say it is almost conservative.

Exactly my thoughts David

Unfortunately it is a million mile from current Conservatism, in fact almost complete opposite.

But it is my conservatism Malc and if I may be bold not too far from yourself

Indeed G but we should not hold our breath awaiting its return.

True

SquareRoot said:

SquareRoot said:

malcolmg said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Seems a bit bad-tempered this morning. How can anyone be upset when David Lidington is being tipped to take over as Prime Minister?

Or even worse Gove , a mendacious lying toerag of the first order.

A bit early on a Sunday for tortology, Malc…...

ouch pred text typo I meant tautology

so I was right it was nothing to do with cakes.

Sturgeon says she wants to see Article 50 revoked as a last resort but would prefer EUref2.

Says that is her first preference but does not rule out backing a Single Market and Customs Union BINO but SNP will continue to back EUref2 or revoke as their first preference

HYUFD said:

IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too

More importantly he softened on opposition to the deal

malcolmg said:

kle4 said:

IanB2 said:

kle4 said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1109740906939404288

How can they help anything? This coup is exactly one week early. Once parliament forces the governments hand in whatever direction then an interim leader takes over to manage things knowing what the ppmath is. scrabbling around like this is not rearranging deck chairs on the titanic, its arguing over sunbathing spots in Pompeii.

But if May stays, Cooper/Letwin ensures that de facto leadership passes elsewhere, and May is left in the same position as she was sitting eating her sandwich in that windowless room whilst the EU had dinner and decided our fate next door. A new leader is really their only chance to grab hold of the process.

How? The reports are they dont agree what they want and even if they did it wont get through the commons . It's too late to grab hold, either they replaced May long before now or they have to wait.

Slamming on the breaks when you're only 2 feet from smashing into a wall doesn't achieve anything

pedant alert should be "brakes"

Argh. Yes .

Recidivist said:

Mortimer said:

williamglenn said:

RoyalBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

RoyalBlue said:

Have been reflecting on Brexit.

I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.

If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace self-describing and voting as pro-Europeans. I would therefore expect the campaign for Euro membership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.

The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.

Ahem.

How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/10/18/the-brexiteers-junckers-fifth-columnists/

As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.

Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!

A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.

Were you a member of a political party you’d realise how hilarious that sounds. It is interesting to reflect that the tiny pro-European minority in the party consists largely of middle class, middle aged men between the age of aggrieved (that was meant to say Grieve, but is quite a funny autocorrect so I’ve left it) and Clarke. Our younger members and politicians are in the main far more eurosceptic than their preceding generations.

The Conservative party is 80% + Eurosceptic. This used to be just the membership - since the Brexit vote it has been their vote, too.

Revoke will never happen because of this; long delay is death by a thousand cuts (the deepest of which would be the MEP elections).

It is no doubt a weird statistical fluke of small numbers, but all the Conservative Party members I know are strongly pro-EU. And I met another couple on the train home from the march yesterday. Not trying to make any particular point other than it is very easy for your personal experiences to be misleading.

Your friends have lost.

The Conservative party is now pre-2016 UKIP: hard right, deeply anti-EU, xenophobic and English nationalist. All those vying to take over from May know this very clearly.

HYUFD said:

IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too

May's last throw of the dice: a Night of the Long Knives, massive Cabinet sackings to be replaced with the ambitious next generation of MPs.....

We are in a complete time loop - the BBC headline is 'May urged to quit to help Brexit deal pass'. We really have gone nowhere in 3 months.

Have a good day everyone, I'm going to enjoy this glorious sunshine and pray MPs do better than they have to date and actually choose something in the week.

I predict May goes before April 12th.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

kle4 said:

HYUFD said:

IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too

He's an idiot. No sensible person could think that there is time to consult the members now. I'm actually worried for mps who think otherwise, i cannot conceive of how theyd think it appropriate in these circumstances, it frightens me they could think that .

I did not read that into his comments.

He does not want TM to go now but when she does he looks for a proper leadership election and going to the membership which will take appox 3 months

Others do though, it was reported last night that a row was brewing over replacing leader now without an election.

SouthamObserver said:

Recidivist said:

Mortimer said:

williamglenn said:

RoyalBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

RoyalBlue said:

Have been reflecting on Brexit.

SNIP

The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.

Ahem.

How the Leavers may have ultimately signed the United Kingdom up for the single currency, the Schengen agreement, an EU Army, and a United States of Europe.

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/10/18/the-brexiteers-junckers-fifth-columnists/

As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.

Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!

A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.

Were you a member of a political party you’d realise how hilarious that sounds. It is interesting to reflect that the tiny pro-European minority in the party consists largely of middle class, middle aged men between the age of aggrieved (that was meant to say Grieve, but is quite a funny autocorrect so I’ve left it) and Clarke. Our younger members and politicians are in the main far more eurosceptic than their preceding generations.

The Conservative party is 80% + Eurosceptic. This used to be just the membership - since the Brexit vote it has been their vote, too.

Revoke will never happen because of this; long delay is death by a thousand cuts (the deepest of which would be the MEP elections).

It is no doubt a weird statistical fluke of small numbers, but all the Conservative Party members I know are strongly pro-EU. And I met another couple on the train home from the march yesterday. Not trying to make any particular point other than it is very easy for your personal experiences to be misleading.

Your friends have lost.

The Conservative party is now pre-2016 UKIP: hard right, deeply anti-EU, xenophobic and English nationalist. All those vying to take over from May know this very clearly.

How true SO, and May did it deliberately.

SouthamObserver said:

Recidivist said:

Mortimer said:

williamglenn said:

RoyalBlue said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

RoyalBlue said:

Have been reflecting on Brexit.

I think future historians might view the 2016 referendum as being a judgement on European policy since Maastricht; essentially, stay out of the most important European project, but still expect to be a key decision-maker. Cameron’s actions over the fiscal pact showed that the strategy was ultimately a dead-end.

If we end up Remaining in a second referendum, it will be with a substantial part of the populace bership to get underway swiftly, and for British exceptionalism in terms of not identifying as European to diminish.

The EU referendum has summoned the European demos.

Ahem.

How the Leavers mEU Army, and a United States of Europe.

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/10/18/the-brexiteers-junckers-fifth-columnists/

As in all revolutions, both sides have continued to radicalise. Calls for no deal were rare before the referendum, while support for joining the single currency has grown since 2016.

Brexit as failed revolution. I’ve been saying it for months, if not years!

A corollary of your argument is that the Conservative party only has a future as a pro-European party, otherwise it will always be on the back foot.

Were you a member of a political party you’d realise how hilarious that sounds. It is interesting to reflect that the tiny pro-European minority in the party consists largely of middle class, middle aged men between the age of aggrieved (that was meant to say Grieve, but is quite a funny autocorrect so I’ve left it) and Clarke. Our younger members and politicians are in the main far more eurosceptic than their preceding generations.

The Conservative party is 80% + Eurosceptic. This used to be just the membership - since the Brexit vote it has been their vote, too.

Revoke will never happen because of this; long delay is death by a thousand cuts (the deepest of which would be the MEP elections).

It is no doubt a weird statistical fluke of small numbers, but all the Conservative Party members I know are strongly pro-EU. And I met another couple on the train home from the march yesterday. Not trying to make any particular point other than it is very easy for your personal experiences to be misleading.

Your friends have lost.

The Conservative party is now pre-2016 UKIP: hard right, deeply anti-EU, xenophobic and English nationalist. All those vying to take over from May know this very clearly.

The mirror image of your previous situation, then.

Welcome to TIG.

kle4 said:

HYUFD said:

IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too

He's an idiot. No sensible person could think that there is time to consult the members now. I'm actually worried for mps who think otherwise, i cannot conceive of how theyd think it appropriate in these circumstances, it frightens me they could think that .

The growth of calling public figures ‘stupid’ or ‘an idiot’ fails to appreciate that their public pronouncements always have multiple contexts, rather than existing in an intellectual vacuum.

Let me give you a little context for comments like this: Tory associations need to have AGMS by the end of March; much recent posturing is inextricably linked to this. MPs can’t stand up and say ‘we won’t give you a vote in this leadership election either’.

kle4 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

kle4 said:

HYUFD said:

IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too

He's an idiot. No sensible person could think that there is time to consult the members now. I'm actually worried for mps who think otherwise, i cannot conceive of how theyd think it appropriate in these circumstances, it frightens me they could think that .

I did not read that into his comments.

He does not want TM to go now but when she does he looks for a proper leadership election and going to the membership which will take appox 3 months

Others do though, it was reported last night that a row was brewing over replacing leader now without an election.

Presumably they could try to replace May as PM but not leader of the Tory Party. That's the only way of avoiding a contest, is it not? Mind you, I could see a VoNC succeeding in those circumstances.

MarqueeMark said:

HYUFD said:

IDS on Marr calls the idea of a Remainer 'cabinet cabal' to replace the PM and install their own leader 'appalling' and that Tory backbenchers will force the Tory membership to be consulted on the next Tory leader. Says May should sack some of the Cabinet too

May's last throw of the dice: a Night of the Long Knives, massive Cabinet sackings to be replaced with the ambitious next generation of MPs.....

Interesting idea. If somehow that enabled her to get her deal through then it'd be possible I guess. I can't see how it could enable her deal though - possibly could enable no deal.

I doubt the government would last long enough in those circumstances though - bound to be a VONC, and some of the sacked might well abstain.

alex. said:

williamglenn said:

kyf_100 said:

LBJ famously said it is better to be inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in. But if we remain I suspect our relationship with the EU will be one of us inside the tent, pissing all over the walls, the sleeping bags, and our fellow members. Particularly when we elect a load of hardline nationalists. Don't think it can happen? Look north of the border to see what happens when a nation narrowly decides to "remain" and isn't happy about it...

That was the 52/48 win for Remain in 2016 scenario, but that ship has sailed. Instead it went the other way, and Brexit was tested to destruction as a viable political project.

It hasn't been remotely tested to destruction. What has been tested to destruction is the ability of MPs to agree a form of Brexit in the circumstances where a large proportion don't accept that Brexit should happen. We're staying in the EU because the MPs can't agree if or how to leave is not testing Brexit to destruction. For it to be tested to destruction it has to happen in one form or another.

It's easy to say that May didn't do enough "reaching out to remainers". But how many remainers are opposing the deal because they genuinely think she could have done better (as opposed to just opposing it because 'it's not as good as remain')?

She did reach out to Remainers. Saying otherwise is garbage.

When even Ken Clarke thinks it is a deal worth backing she reached out to Remainers.

What she's not done is keep the opposition on board. But the opposition is opposing her because it opposes her not because of the deal.

Starmer on Marr as evasive as everyone else

The Country has not got a prayer with these utterly useless mps

Within May's own party almost all 2016 Remainers back the deal (with a few hardline exceptions) while it is Leavers that oppose it. May's deal is a very Remainer deal.

Opposition for oppositions sake from Corbyn and co does not change that.

If someone had told you in 2016 there was a deal backed by Ken Clarke while opposed by the ERG nobody would have said that the deal maker had not reached out to Remainers.

Starmer says Labour will vote for a permanent Customs Union and the benefits of the Single Market first in any indicative votes and if that fails for a 'People's Vote' EUref2. However he is concerned whether May will accept what the Commons votes for and push her Deal again