politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With a CON leadership contest perhaps imminent new Ipsos-MORI
Comments
-
Well Malcolm you are free to play along at home!malcolmg said:
Wild bollox more like.CarlottaVance said:Rentoul reckons nothing will get through:
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1110879921847574528
I think the Beckett vote is by far the most interesting.0 -
Play nicely or Mike might force feed you some Hawaiian pizza.TOPPING said:Bah humbug
0 -
We know that some voted Leave thinking it would mean we ended up staying. Can you prove that wasn't the difference between winning and losing?CD13 said:Mr Glenn,
So you know why leave voters voted that way? I hate to shatter your illusions, but most voters don't examine the minutiae of campaigns because they are either too busy, or more likely they have a healthy disrespect for the lies/exaggeration of politicians.
"If we vote to leave, the poor little seabirds will fall out of the sky, and the wardrobe monster will come and get us."
It could be that many had lived through 40 years of the EU, and they didn't like what they saw. The kiddies obviously didn't have that advantage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWKtoG_a_hE0 -
638 total votes?CarlottaVance said:Rentoul reckons nothing will get through:
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1110879921847574528
That can't account for the cabinet abstaining. That just accounts for Sinn Fein, the unfilled seat and Speakers.0 -
TOPPING said:
Bah humbugmalcolmg said:
Come on Topping , extend the hand of friendshipTOPPING said:
Not wrong about anything. Especially the dolt bit.Casino_Royale said:
God, that’s poor.TOPPING said:
I'll say it to your face any time you want.Casino_Royale said:
You’re a coward who hasn’t got the bollocks to say it to my face, and are now trying to wriggle out of it as you realise you haven’t got a leg to stand on.TOPPING said:
LOLCasino_Royale said:
It’s perfectly obvious you were referring to me.TOPPING said:
Where in that post did I say that you ever didn't support the deal.Casino_Royale said:
Find me a single post Topping (a single one) I made going back to the Chequers Deal last year when I didn’t support May’s Deal.TOPPING said:
She's probably relaxed because the Commons took back control and guess what? Even (k)nobs like JRM and our very own @******_****** realise that when you get down and dirty, which is where we are now, her deal is the only game in town.RochdalePioneers said:
This. With the concluding missive "fuck the lot of you" as she walks from the '22 noisly farting.TheScreamingEagles said:
Yeah, she's quitting tonight.CarlottaVance said:I noticed this too:
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1110883371276738562
Thinks she can get the deal through?
Demob happy?
At least Major had the style to say "I lost. I quit. See ya" and then go to the cricket where he could sit there grinning at the cameras through his shades.
Own it.
Get over yourself. Whatever you did or didn't say, post or think you remain in the dolt Brexiter category.
My argument was never with you but you decide to get stuck in and hurl some mud my way, all because I picked on your chum and his posting style, as you recognised a kindred spirit.
Pathetic.
I have said that I don't care whether you supported the deal or didn't support the deal. I am not wriggling out of anything. I am perfectly happy to accept you have always been an avid supporter of the deal. You are nevertheless a dolt Brexiter.
Basically you’ve admitted you were wrong about everything but you’ve just added “dolt” at the end of it to save a bit of face.
I’ll take that as a victory, thank you.
Good day.
0 -
Here's a Labour view:Bob__Sykes said:As this impasse continues, I'm warming to the idea of the CM 2.0 plan, and have been reading the summary here: http://betterbrexit.org.uk/
It has flaws, but given none of the available options (incl revoke and Ref2) are particularly palatable in any event, I am beginning to think this offers us a pathway out of the mess, particularly if it does allow us some degree of initial consultative influence as an EEA member on future EU proposals. It also means that if and when we find a frictionless border solution, agreeable to all sides, a future UK Govt could transition us across to that (even if that is not the intention of Boles etc who are supporting it).
The "rule taker" objection is there, but even on the hardest of Bill Cash style Brexits, we will still be a rule taker in practice. The newly emerged EU proposals for embedded speed limiters on cars and on universal summer time all year round (both of which I strongly oppose) are good examples of this. Even on a hard Brexit, we will be beholden to these because no car manufacturer is going to manufacture UK specific models without any of the Brussels enforced gubbins, even if UK law doesn't require it in order to sell here - we will get it anyway because manufacturers will include it. A Hard Brexit UK would have had no influence over that, but will still have to live with EU product standards on everything we buy and sell. Whereas our commitments to Ireland, and desire to avoid Irish reunification, would mean a UK government would in practice have to go along with the universal summertime proposal as a means of avoiding either two timezones in the UK or NI being in a different timezone to the ROI at the UK's behest.
Practical reality will take over regardless of legal obligations.
Of course remaining a full EU member is the only way to mitigate those concerns properly. But doing so would not only be a national humiliation at this stage, it is unthinkable that we could after 3 years just junk the wishes of the 17.4m who made up the narrow majority.
Am I missing something really obviously bad with the CM 2.0 plan?
https://twitter.com/LabourList/status/11108138919010877440 -
So you are saying if I pick a fight, I get free Hawaiian pizza?TheScreamingEagles said:
Play nicely or Mike might force feed you some Hawaiian pizza.TOPPING said:Bah humbug
0 -
+1CD13 said:Mr Glenn,
So you know why leave voters voted that way? I hate to shatter your illusions, but most voters don't examine the minutiae of campaigns because they are either too busy, or more likely they have a healthy disrespect for the lies/exaggeration of politicians.
"If we vote to leave, the poor little seabirds will fall out of the sky, and the wardrobe monster will come and get us."
It could be that many had lived through 40 years of the EU, and they didn't like what they saw. The kiddies obviously didn't have that advantage.
0 -
You make an excellent summation. It has always amused me that Brexiteers think that as soon as we are in their Utopian post Brexit we will be able to ignore EU rules, when most are to do with manufactured goods or services, all of which will have to comply with said rules, whether we are in or out. Perhaps Swivel-eyed Brexit fanatics will go around filing off CE marks from all products that find their way to our sceptred isle.Bob__Sykes said:As this impasse continues, I'm warming to the idea of the CM 2.0 plan, and have been reading the summary here: http://betterbrexit.org.uk/
It has flaws, but given none of the available options (incl revoke and Ref2) are particularly palatable in any event, I am beginning to think this offers us a pathway out of the mess, particularly if it does allow us some degree of initial consultative influence as an EEA member on future EU proposals. It also means that if and when we find a frictionless border solution, agreeable to all sides, a future UK Govt could transition us across to that (even if that is not the intention of Boles etc who are supporting it).
The "rule taker" objection is there, but even on the hardest of Bill Cash style Brexits, we will still be a rule taker in practice. The newly emerged EU proposals for embedded speed limiters on cars and on universal summer time all year round (both of which I strongly oppose) are good examples of this. Even on a hard Brexit, we will be beholden to these because no car manufacturer is going to manufacture UK specific models without any of the Brussels enforced gubbins, even if UK law doesn't require it in order to sell here - we will get it anyway because manufacturers will include it. A Hard Brexit UK would have had no influence over that, but will still have to live with EU product standards on everything we buy and sell. Whereas our commitments to Ireland, and desire to avoid Irish reunification, would mean a UK government would in practice have to go along with the universal summertime proposal as a means of avoiding either two timezones in the UK or NI being in a different timezone to the ROI at the UK's behest.
Practical reality will take over regardless of legal obligations.
Of course remaining a full EU member is the only way to mitigate those concerns properly. But doing so would not only be a national humiliation at this stage, it is unthinkable that we could after 3 years just junk the wishes of the 17.4m who made up the narrow majority.
Am I missing something really obviously bad with the CM 2.0 plan?0 -
I am an Amazon Music subscriber so I can tee up the playlist for the ambience.TheScreamingEagles said:
Play nicely or Mike might force feed you some Hawaiian pizza.TOPPING said:Bah humbug
0 -
He's also recently stated that we will have “full freedom to diverge from EU law on the Single Market and Customs Union” with May's deal after the transition period. Do you trust him on that as well?TheScreamingEagles said:
I'd rather trust his words on what honours the referendum result than someone like you.TrèsDifficile said:
You think Gove's word is the law?TheScreamingEagles said:
Gove has said that No Deal doesn't honour the referendum result, so Parliament is ensuring the result if honoured.kjohnw said:
To ignore 17.4 million voters who they promised to obey , and giving their sovereignty back to the EU. They are in contempt of the peopleTheScreamingEagles said:
I apologise if it turns out you were a member of the Vote Leave board.0 -
Rentoul's numbers seem to have been plucked out of thin air every time he's attempted to predict Commons votes but that assessment is two hours old.Philip_Thompson said:
638 total votes?CarlottaVance said:Rentoul reckons nothing will get through:
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1110879921847574528
That can't account for the cabinet abstaining. That just accounts for Sinn Fein, the unfilled seat and Speakers.0 -
CE marks are largely globalised standards anyway. That's why the same products often have both CE and FCC marks anyway. Those aren't the rules generally objected to.Nigel_Foremain said:
You make an excellent summation. It has always amused me that Brexiteers think that as soon as we are in their Utopian post Brexit we will be able to ignore EU rules, when most are to do with manufactured goods or services, all of which will have to comply with said rules, whether we are in or out. Perhaps Swivel-eyed Brexit fanatics will go around filing off CE marks from all products that find their way to our sceptred isle.Bob__Sykes said:As this impasse continues, I'm warming to the idea of the CM 2.0 plan, and have been reading the summary here: http://betterbrexit.org.uk/
It has flaws, but given none of the available options (incl revoke and Ref2) are particularly palatable in any event, I am beginning to think this offers us a pathway out of the mess, particularly if it does allow us some degree of initial consultative influence as an EEA member on future EU proposals. It also means that if and when we find a frictionless border solution, agreeable to all sides, a future UK Govt could transition us across to that (even if that is not the intention of Boles etc who are supporting it).
The "rule taker" objection is there, but even on the hardest of Bill Cash style Brexits, we will still be a rule taker in practice. The newly emerged EU proposals for embedded speed limiters on cars and on universal summer time all year round (both of which I strongly oppose) are good examples of this. Even on a hard Brexit, we will be beholden to these because no car manufacturer is going to manufacture UK specific models without any of the Brussels enforced gubbins, even if UK law doesn't require it in order to sell here - we will get it anyway because manufacturers will include it. A Hard Brexit UK would have had no influence over that, but will still have to live with EU product standards on everything we buy and sell. Whereas our commitments to Ireland, and desire to avoid Irish reunification, would mean a UK government would in practice have to go along with the universal summertime proposal as a means of avoiding either two timezones in the UK or NI being in a different timezone to the ROI at the UK's behest.
Practical reality will take over regardless of legal obligations.
Of course remaining a full EU member is the only way to mitigate those concerns properly. But doing so would not only be a national humiliation at this stage, it is unthinkable that we could after 3 years just junk the wishes of the 17.4m who made up the narrow majority.
Am I missing something really obviously bad with the CM 2.0 plan?0 -
Well if we can't have a Scottish peer as the next Prime Minister then a knight of the realm, in the personage of Sir Oliver Letwin, will have to do.GIN1138 said:
Oh how lovely for him...TOPPING said:Meanwhile, Letwin is enjoying himself greatly.
Interestingly the last knight and peer to be Prime Minister was the one and same Alec Douglas-Home .... a Scot !! ....
0 -
Yes but even in a free vote, the headlines would be all about Cabinet splits. Abstaining avoids this.dixiedean said:
But it is a free vote. And Junior Ministers will be taking part.DecrepitJohnL said:
It avoids ministers resigning (like the junior ministers have been doing) and voting against the PM and each other.dixiedean said:Can someone explain the practicality (not the Constitutional logic) of the Cabinet abstaining?
Seems more likely to simply give more chance of success to outcomes not wanted.
It is not as if their individual, personal preferences are a matter of much mystery.0 -
..0
-
To make Letwin the next Cons PM would be trolling Lab immensely. First a woman, then a Jew.JackW said:
Well if we can't have a Scottish peer as the next Prime Minister then a knight of the realm, in the personage of Sir Oliver Letwin, will have to do.GIN1138 said:
Oh how lovely for him...TOPPING said:Meanwhile, Letwin is enjoying himself greatly.
Interestingly the last knight and peer to be Prime Minister was the one and same Alec Douglas-Home .... a Scot !! ....0 -
Wait, I thought there were reports the other week suggesting they donations to the Tories were actually quite healthy?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Would be surprised if the whole cabinet just opts out of this process.DecrepitJohnL said:
Yes but even in a free vote, the headlines would be all about Cabinet splits. Abstaining avoids this.dixiedean said:
But it is a free vote. And Junior Ministers will be taking part.DecrepitJohnL said:
It avoids ministers resigning (like the junior ministers have been doing) and voting against the PM and each other.dixiedean said:Can someone explain the practicality (not the Constitutional logic) of the Cabinet abstaining?
Seems more likely to simply give more chance of success to outcomes not wanted.
It is not as if their individual, personal preferences are a matter of much mystery.0 -
Mr Glenn,
"We know that some voted Leave thinking it would mean we ended up staying."
I think Theo talks perfect sense, but I never shared his optimism about the EU reforming, and I think he'd be even more likely to leave now. Federalism decided him, and it did for me too.
0 -
Shame they forget the purpose of the penalty in the first place OR it is just considered a revenue generator.malcolmg said:
Easier to get money out of people who obey the rules, given they are obviously decent reasonable people.kjh said:On the earlier subject of 'jobs worth' and people implementing rules regardless of circumstances - Back in January we got a parking ticket. We didn't know until we got the follow up because it had obviously blown away or been nicked.
Anyway we had paid for the parking but the voice recognition software had mistaken an F for an S on our registration so there was a simple provable explanation. The penalty has been waived.
However the letter says 'I should point out that I shall be unable to cancel and further Notices incurred in similar circumstances'. I was livid by the arrogance of this comment. We had paid and could prove it and it wasn't our mistake. You damn well will cancel future tickets if it happens again!
I was told if it happens again it will not be cancelled and I would have to go thru' the appeals process which presumably I would win. What a pointless exercise.
What is wrong with these people? What is the point in penalising people who have obeyed the rules?0 -
-
Which will definitely lose, so the DUP not in danger of actual swinging anything. I wonder if that is deliberate.CarlottaVance said:0 -
https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-politics-47392658RobD said:
Wait, I thought there were reports the other week suggesting they donations to the Tories were actually quite healthy?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Stories of Tory donors not giving money, is a bit like hearing unions not going to give Labour money. When the time comes and it is Tories vs Corbyn, both will get the funding they need from their respective backers.0
-
Just a way of ducking the issue and allowing them to claim support for a positive option that isn't realistic.CarlottaVance said:
Really Bercow should take Malthouse out of the equation.0 -
Are we saying that FT might doing some of that Fake News?RobD said:
https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-politics-47392658RobD said:
Wait, I thought there were reports the other week suggesting they donations to the Tories were actually quite healthy?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
If the indicative votes work as they should do then the DUP lose their leverage. Of course it would be critical to know the timeline for them to no confidence the govt.CarlottaVance said:
Perhaps they realise that it's all up. Indicative votes mean they don't hold the balance of power any more so if they were sensible* they would row in behind the govt.
*I know0 -
Prime Minister Letwin should go for Troll-Max - Have his bits off (part of the way already) and while the surgeon is at it, have a leg off - The first Jewish, Disabled and Transgender PM.TOPPING said:
To make Letwin the next Cons PM would be trolling Lab immensely. First a woman, then a Jew.JackW said:
Well if we can't have a Scottish peer as the next Prime Minister then a knight of the realm, in the personage of Sir Oliver Letwin, will have to do.GIN1138 said:
Oh how lovely for him...TOPPING said:Meanwhile, Letwin is enjoying himself greatly.
Interestingly the last knight and peer to be Prime Minister was the one and same Alec Douglas-Home .... a Scot !! ....0 -
https://twitter.com/theopaphitis/status/1070342265695027200?s=21CD13 said:Mr Glenn,
"We know that some voted Leave thinking it would mean we ended up staying."
I think Theo talks perfect sense, but I never shared his optimism about the EU reforming, and I think he'd be even more likely to leave now. Federalism decided him, and it did for me too.0 -
I'm sure he will.IanB2 said:
Just a way of ducking the issue and allowing them to claim support for a positive option that isn't realistic.CarlottaVance said:
Really Bercow should take Malthouse out of the equation.0 -
Lay 2019 election.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Not enough when you consider there's a major set of locals coming up.RobD said:
Wait, I thought there were reports the other week suggesting they donations to the Tories were actually quite healthy?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
And change his name to Olivia and go by the pronoun of they.JackW said:
Prime Minister Letwin should go for Troll-Max - Have his bits off (part of the way already) and while the surgeon is at it, have a leg off - The first Jewish, Disabled and Transgender PM.TOPPING said:
To make Letwin the next Cons PM would be trolling Lab immensely. First a woman, then a Jew.JackW said:
Well if we can't have a Scottish peer as the next Prime Minister then a knight of the realm, in the personage of Sir Oliver Letwin, will have to do.GIN1138 said:
Oh how lovely for him...TOPPING said:Meanwhile, Letwin is enjoying himself greatly.
Interestingly the last knight and peer to be Prime Minister was the one and same Alec Douglas-Home .... a Scot !! ....0 -
CS I suspect this is going to be a waste of time because I did try the other day and got rebuffed but when someone posts: 'We really have plumbed new lows in the self-awareness stakes when Casino Royale is accusing other posters of being pompous and rude.' How does a reply of: 'There’s a cluster of morons who like to fornicate awkwardly together in the basement of this site now, and it’s about time they were called out on it.' do anything other than reinforce that impression?Casino_Royale said:
Thanks Malc.malcolmg said:
Is this get Casino day today, he is getting a concerted pasting last couple of threads. Get in among them Casino._Anazina_ said:We really have plumbed new lows in the self-awareness stakes when Casino Royale is accusing other posters of being pompous and rude.
Funny old world.
There’s a cluster of morons who like to fornicate awkwardly together in the basement of this site now, and it’s about time they were called out on it.
I think they’re upset I was right about the PV numbers on the march at the weekend, and can’t bear to admit it.
I’d take ten of you any day of the week over one of them.0 -
Fair point, and the FT look like they are discussing the current state rather than last quarter.TheScreamingEagles said:
Not enough when you consider there's a major set of locals coming up.RobD said:
Wait, I thought there were reports the other week suggesting they donations to the Tories were actually quite healthy?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Plus they don't get Short Money.TheScreamingEagles said:
Not enough when you consider there's a major set of locals coming up.RobD said:
Wait, I thought there were reports the other week suggesting they donations to the Tories were actually quite healthy?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Lol @ Vaizey taking the piss out of Barclay.
Any limits on blue on blue have long since disappeared.0 -
It must be quite likely that Labour's JobsFirstBrexit wins this contest, possibly with REF2. If so, if that is to be govt policy, then it strikes me that the most appropriate PM to take that forward is one Jeremy Corbyn.
Meaning the 'Next PM' market on Betfair would settle as - yes - Jeremy Corbyn.
Meaning that yours truly, a person who prides himself on being perhaps the most astute political punter of his generation, will be losing many many units of moolah.
Yikes.0 -
Troll-Max or Poll-Tax that is the question?JackW said:
Prime Minister Letwin should go for Troll-Max - Have his bits off (part of the way already) and while the surgeon is at it, have a leg off - The first Jewish, Disabled and Transgender PM.TOPPING said:
To make Letwin the next Cons PM would be trolling Lab immensely. First a woman, then a Jew.JackW said:
Well if we can't have a Scottish peer as the next Prime Minister then a knight of the realm, in the personage of Sir Oliver Letwin, will have to do.GIN1138 said:
Oh how lovely for him...TOPPING said:Meanwhile, Letwin is enjoying himself greatly.
Interestingly the last knight and peer to be Prime Minister was the one and same Alec Douglas-Home .... a Scot !! ....
0 -
There is precedent - Maggie used the Prime Ministerial "we".FrancisUrquhart said:
And change his name to Olivia and go by the pronoun of they.JackW said:
Prime Minister Letwin should go for Troll-Max - Have his bits off (part of the way already) and while the surgeon is at it, have a leg off - The first Jewish, Disabled and Transgender PM.TOPPING said:
To make Letwin the next Cons PM would be trolling Lab immensely. First a woman, then a Jew.JackW said:
Well if we can't have a Scottish peer as the next Prime Minister then a knight of the realm, in the personage of Sir Oliver Letwin, will have to do.GIN1138 said:
Oh how lovely for him...TOPPING said:Meanwhile, Letwin is enjoying himself greatly.
Interestingly the last knight and peer to be Prime Minister was the one and same Alec Douglas-Home .... a Scot !! .... 0 -
Mogg is struggling here. He doesn't have so much sway with his colleagues.
Wishart starts his speech mocking JRM's 1500s references.0 -
Well we all know this never sleeping thing was fake and actually she had a body double like Melania Trump ;-)JackW said:
There is precedent - Maggie used the Prime Ministerial "we".FrancisUrquhart said:
And change his name to Olivia and go by the pronoun of they.JackW said:
Prime Minister Letwin should go for Troll-Max - Have his bits off (part of the way already) and while the surgeon is at it, have a leg off - The first Jewish, Disabled and Transgender PM.TOPPING said:
To make Letwin the next Cons PM would be trolling Lab immensely. First a woman, then a Jew.JackW said:
Well if we can't have a Scottish peer as the next Prime Minister then a knight of the realm, in the personage of Sir Oliver Letwin, will have to do.GIN1138 said:
Oh how lovely for him...TOPPING said:Meanwhile, Letwin is enjoying himself greatly.
Interestingly the last knight and peer to be Prime Minister was the one and same Alec Douglas-Home .... a Scot !! ....0 -
Or Conservatives dancing on a BREXIT pin head - A Maypole Tax ....GIN1138 said:
Troll-Max or Poll-Tax that is the question?JackW said:
Prime Minister Letwin should go for Troll-Max - Have his bits off (part of the way already) and while the surgeon is at it, have a leg off - The first Jewish, Disabled and Transgender PM.TOPPING said:
To make Letwin the next Cons PM would be trolling Lab immensely. First a woman, then a Jew.JackW said:
Well if we can't have a Scottish peer as the next Prime Minister then a knight of the realm, in the personage of Sir Oliver Letwin, will have to do.GIN1138 said:
Oh how lovely for him...TOPPING said:Meanwhile, Letwin is enjoying himself greatly.
Interestingly the last knight and peer to be Prime Minister was the one and same Alec Douglas-Home .... a Scot !! ....0 -
Surely calling an election is the only way the Tories will get any money at all. Especially if they ditch May as the first step.Philip_Thompson said:
Lay 2019 election.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
From the Guardian live blog:
Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman confirmed that the party would whip for Margaret Beckett’s “confirmatory public vote” option - as well as Gareth Snell’s and Ken Clarke’s, calling for a customs union, and of course the one setting out Labour’s own Brexit policy.
And he said whips would be “encouraging” Labour MPs to support common market 2.0, the cross-party proposal drawn up by Stephen Kinnock, among others.
..
"The basis for that is that they’re all in line with our policy - in the case of the public vote motion, in the sense of our conference policy that if we’re unable to achieve a general election, keeping all options on the table. So the intention is to support those options going forward in the process"..
In other words, having voted for the indicative vote motion which seeks to find a way forward, Labour actually wants to ensure that there isn't a way forward. Got it.0 -
You mean Steve Nallon ?!?FrancisUrquhart said:
Well we all know this never sleeping thing was fake and actually she had a body double like Melania Trump ;-)JackW said:
There is precedent - Maggie used the Prime Ministerial "we".FrancisUrquhart said:
And change his name to Olivia and go by the pronoun of they.JackW said:
Prime Minister Letwin should go for Troll-Max - Have his bits off (part of the way already) and while the surgeon is at it, have a leg off - The first Jewish, Disabled and Transgender PM.TOPPING said:
To make Letwin the next Cons PM would be trolling Lab immensely. First a woman, then a Jew.JackW said:
Well if we can't have a Scottish peer as the next Prime Minister then a knight of the realm, in the personage of Sir Oliver Letwin, will have to do.GIN1138 said:
Oh how lovely for him...TOPPING said:Meanwhile, Letwin is enjoying himself greatly.
Interestingly the last knight and peer to be Prime Minister was the one and same Alec Douglas-Home .... a Scot !! ....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThkVqCYdR0Y0 -
Malthouse really is nonsense on stilts, much like the DUP’s stance that any checks on intra-UK trade are an abomination, but divergence on marriage and abortion are A-OK.
The so-called loyalists are loyal to no-one but themselves.0 -
Chortle.williamglenn said:
https://twitter.com/theopaphitis/status/1070342265695027200?s=21CD13 said:Mr Glenn,
"We know that some voted Leave thinking it would mean we ended up staying."
I think Theo talks perfect sense, but I never shared his optimism about the EU reforming, and I think he'd be even more likely to leave now. Federalism decided him, and it did for me too.
0 -
Who can forget: "We are a grandmother"JackW said:
There is precedent - Maggie used the Prime Ministerial "we".FrancisUrquhart said:
And change his name to Olivia and go by the pronoun of they.JackW said:
Prime Minister Letwin should go for Troll-Max - Have his bits off (part of the way already) and while the surgeon is at it, have a leg off - The first Jewish, Disabled and Transgender PM.TOPPING said:
To make Letwin the next Cons PM would be trolling Lab immensely. First a woman, then a Jew.JackW said:
Well if we can't have a Scottish peer as the next Prime Minister then a knight of the realm, in the personage of Sir Oliver Letwin, will have to do.GIN1138 said:
Oh how lovely for him...TOPPING said:Meanwhile, Letwin is enjoying himself greatly.
Interestingly the last knight and peer to be Prime Minister was the one and same Alec Douglas-Home .... a Scot !! ....0 -
Abrams does not sound as though she's ready to be Biden's running mate just yet...
https://twitter.com/CBSThisMorning/status/11108924225973575690 -
No warchest. Ditch May, steady the ship, build up war chest, 2020 election.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Surely calling an election is the only way the Tories will get any money at all. Especially if they ditch May as the first step.Philip_Thompson said:
Lay 2019 election.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
So, we have MPs voting on a list which mixes up outcomes and processes, we have the Cabinet not voting at all, we have Labour whipping it but the Tories not, we have absolutist MPs who will only vote for one thing and more tolerant ones who will vote for multiple options, we have MPs wishing to evolve a middle ground compromise, others intent on gaming the process to get their extremist nirvana, and we have both the government and the main opposition party machinating to ensure that the whole thing collapses into chaos and solves precisely nothing.
It's a thing of beauty!0 -
Is there any point to an indicative vote which one side whips?Richard_Nabavi said:From the Guardian live blog:
Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman confirmed that the party would whip for Margaret Beckett’s “confirmatory public vote” option - as well as Gareth Snell’s and Ken Clarke’s, calling for a customs union, and of course the one setting out Labour’s own Brexit policy.
And he said whips would be “encouraging” Labour MPs to support common market 2.0, the cross-party proposal drawn up by Stephen Kinnock, among others.
..
"The basis for that is that they’re all in line with our policy - in the case of the public vote motion, in the sense of our conference policy that if we’re unable to achieve a general election, keeping all options on the table. So the intention is to support those options going forward in the process"..
In other words, having voted for the indicative vote motion which seeks to find a way forward, Labour actually wants to ensure that there isn't a way forward. Got it.0 -
Mr Glenn,
Now I suspect his earlier speech was for the TV. He claimed a Leave vote would make the EU see sense. On being proven wrong, he becomes frit of a no-deal. Sounds like reverse Bo-Jo to me. Smells like BS. Aren't you the slightest suspicious?
Ah, bless.
But Remainers will always believe what they want to. And as Prof Curtis said yesterday, very few voters have changed their minds. A few non-voters from 2016 may have gone for Remain but will they vote? .0 -
Yep, I think you nailed it!kinabalu said:So, we have MPs voting on a list which mixes up outcomes and processes, we have the Cabinet not voting at all, we have Labour whipping it but the Tories not, we have absolutist MPs who will only vote for one thing and more tolerant ones who will vote for multiple options, we have MPs wishing to evolve a middle ground compromise, others intent on gaming the process to get their extremist nirvana, and we have both the government and the main opposition party machinating to ensure that the whole thing collapses into chaos and solves precisely nothing.
It's a thing of beauty!0 -
Not really.Sean_F said:
Is there any point to an indicative vote which one side whips?Richard_Nabavi said:From the Guardian live blog:
Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman confirmed that the party would whip for Margaret Beckett’s “confirmatory public vote” option - as well as Gareth Snell’s and Ken Clarke’s, calling for a customs union, and of course the one setting out Labour’s own Brexit policy.
And he said whips would be “encouraging” Labour MPs to support common market 2.0, the cross-party proposal drawn up by Stephen Kinnock, among others.
..
"The basis for that is that they’re all in line with our policy - in the case of the public vote motion, in the sense of our conference policy that if we’re unable to achieve a general election, keeping all options on the table. So the intention is to support those options going forward in the process"..
In other words, having voted for the indicative vote motion which seeks to find a way forward, Labour actually wants to ensure that there isn't a way forward. Got it.0 -
Bercow could yet make some sense of the mess MPs have tabled.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yep, I think you nailed it!kinabalu said:So, we have MPs voting on a list which mixes up outcomes and processes, we have the Cabinet not voting at all, we have Labour whipping it but the Tories not, we have absolutist MPs who will only vote for one thing and more tolerant ones who will vote for multiple options, we have MPs wishing to evolve a middle ground compromise, others intent on gaming the process to get their extremist nirvana, and we have both the government and the main opposition party machinating to ensure that the whole thing collapses into chaos and solves precisely nothing.
It's a thing of beauty!0 -
One is devolution that is under locals control, the other is barriers that are out of their control.RoyalBlue said:Malthouse really is nonsense on stilts, much like the DUP’s stance that any checks on intra-UK trade are an abomination, but divergence on marriage and abortion are A-OK.
The so-called loyalists are loyal to no-one but themselves.
You can't comprehend the difference?0 -
Having lost the election, she clearly has an unorthodox definition of success, much like Corbyn and his admirers.Nigelb said:Abrams does not sound as though she's ready to be Biden's running mate just yet...
https://twitter.com/CBSThisMorning/status/11108924225973575690 -
Jezza can claim he did everything to stop Brexit.Sean_F said:
Is there any point to an indicative vote which one side whips?Richard_Nabavi said:From the Guardian live blog:
Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman confirmed that the party would whip for Margaret Beckett’s “confirmatory public vote” option - as well as Gareth Snell’s and Ken Clarke’s, calling for a customs union, and of course the one setting out Labour’s own Brexit policy.
And he said whips would be “encouraging” Labour MPs to support common market 2.0, the cross-party proposal drawn up by Stephen Kinnock, among others.
..
"The basis for that is that they’re all in line with our policy - in the case of the public vote motion, in the sense of our conference policy that if we’re unable to achieve a general election, keeping all options on the table. So the intention is to support those options going forward in the process"..
In other words, having voted for the indicative vote motion which seeks to find a way forward, Labour actually wants to ensure that there isn't a way forward. Got it.0 -
Some Tories now speaking up for Letwin - pointing out that while they have been voting for May's deal the Brexiters have been voting it down.0
-
It is easy to get sucked into tit-for-tat exchanges, and eventually you have a feud. One rule I try to observe is never to carry over from one thread to the next. As Balfour said, Nothing matters very much and few things matter at all.kjh said:
CS I suspect this is going to be a waste of time because I did try the other day and got rebuffed but when someone posts: 'We really have plumbed new lows in the self-awareness stakes when Casino Royale is accusing other posters of being pompous and rude.' How does a reply of: 'There’s a cluster of morons who like to fornicate awkwardly together in the basement of this site now, and it’s about time they were called out on it.' do anything other than reinforce that impression?Casino_Royale said:
Thanks Malc.malcolmg said:
Is this get Casino day today, he is getting a concerted pasting last couple of threads. Get in among them Casino._Anazina_ said:We really have plumbed new lows in the self-awareness stakes when Casino Royale is accusing other posters of being pompous and rude.
Funny old world.
There’s a cluster of morons who like to fornicate awkwardly together in the basement of this site now, and it’s about time they were called out on it.
I think they’re upset I was right about the PV numbers on the march at the weekend, and can’t bear to admit it.
I’d take ten of you any day of the week over one of them.
Balfour of course was a Scottish old Etonian who went to Trinity, Cambridge and was a published philosopher, the same path followed by Oliver Letwin. See, this isn't just thrown together. 0 -
Corbyn has as little control over his Party as May over hers. If backbenchers want to defy the whip, they are unlikely to hold back. It's not as if the current Leader was supportive of the Leadership when he was on the back benches.Sean_F said:
Is there any point to an indicative vote which one side whips?Richard_Nabavi said:From the Guardian live blog:
Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman confirmed that the party would whip for Margaret Beckett’s “confirmatory public vote” option - as well as Gareth Snell’s and Ken Clarke’s, calling for a customs union, and of course the one setting out Labour’s own Brexit policy.
And he said whips would be “encouraging” Labour MPs to support common market 2.0, the cross-party proposal drawn up by Stephen Kinnock, among others.
..
"The basis for that is that they’re all in line with our policy - in the case of the public vote motion, in the sense of our conference policy that if we’re unable to achieve a general election, keeping all options on the table. So the intention is to support those options going forward in the process"..
In other words, having voted for the indicative vote motion which seeks to find a way forward, Labour actually wants to ensure that there isn't a way forward. Got it.0 -
We can comprehend they're talking bollocks if they claim they believe in no divergence as a matter of principle.Philip_Thompson said:
One is devolution that is under locals control, the other is barriers that are out of their control.RoyalBlue said:Malthouse really is nonsense on stilts, much like the DUP’s stance that any checks on intra-UK trade are an abomination, but divergence on marriage and abortion are A-OK.
The so-called loyalists are loyal to no-one but themselves.
You can't comprehend the difference?0 -
No. This is laughable from Corbyn.Sean_F said:
Is there any point to an indicative vote which one side whips?Richard_Nabavi said:From the Guardian live blog:
Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman confirmed that the party would whip for Margaret Beckett’s “confirmatory public vote” option - as well as Gareth Snell’s and Ken Clarke’s, calling for a customs union, and of course the one setting out Labour’s own Brexit policy.
And he said whips would be “encouraging” Labour MPs to support common market 2.0, the cross-party proposal drawn up by Stephen Kinnock, among others.
..
"The basis for that is that they’re all in line with our policy - in the case of the public vote motion, in the sense of our conference policy that if we’re unable to achieve a general election, keeping all options on the table. So the intention is to support those options going forward in the process"..
In other words, having voted for the indicative vote motion which seeks to find a way forward, Labour actually wants to ensure that there isn't a way forward. Got it.0 -
Division on going ahead with Letwin. Looks like it will carry despite government opposition.0
-
Mr/Ms Anazina,
You do see Theo isn't a fan of TM's deal. Nor are a lot of leavers (or me for that matter). The EU are and that tells you a lot. We still pay, we still stay until the EU give us permission to leave. That's why they'd like the May/EU deal versus Remain. Illogical, as Mr Spock would say.
A second clarification referendum of Mrs May's deal versus a hard Brexit/no deal would make more sense. Even Theo would agree. Why isn't that on the table?0 -
Wait - do you mean this isn't all going to be sorted out today?kinabalu said:So, we have MPs voting on a list which mixes up outcomes and processes, we have the Cabinet not voting at all, we have Labour whipping it but the Tories not, we have absolutist MPs who will only vote for one thing and more tolerant ones who will vote for multiple options, we have MPs wishing to evolve a middle ground compromise, others intent on gaming the process to get their extremist nirvana, and we have both the government and the main opposition party machinating to ensure that the whole thing collapses into chaos and solves precisely nothing.
It's a thing of beauty!0 -
Presume there is a typo in his tweet. She just won't let go.CarlottaVance said:0 -
Not sure the Balfour Declaration hasn't mattered much.DecrepitJohnL said:
It is easy to get sucked into tit-for-tat exchanges, and eventually you have a feud. One rule I try to observe is never to carry over from one thread to the next. As Balfour said, Nothing matters very much and few things matter at all.kjh said:
CS I suspect this is going to be a waste of time because I did try the other day and got rebuffed but when someone posts: 'We really have plumbed new lows in the self-awareness stakes when Casino Royale is accusing other posters of being pompous and rude.' How does a reply of: 'There’s a cluster of morons who like to fornicate awkwardly together in the basement of this site now, and it’s about time they were called out on it.' do anything other than reinforce that impression?Casino_Royale said:
Thanks Malc.malcolmg said:
Is this get Casino day today, he is getting a concerted pasting last couple of threads. Get in among them Casino._Anazina_ said:We really have plumbed new lows in the self-awareness stakes when Casino Royale is accusing other posters of being pompous and rude.
Funny old world.
There’s a cluster of morons who like to fornicate awkwardly together in the basement of this site now, and it’s about time they were called out on it.
I think they’re upset I was right about the PV numbers on the march at the weekend, and can’t bear to admit it.
I’d take ten of you any day of the week over one of them.
Balfour of course was a Scottish old Etonian who went to Trinity, Cambridge and was a published philosopher, the same path followed by Oliver Letwin. See, this isn't just thrown together.0 -
Who will go first her or Bercow....At this rate, 2022 GE it will be May vs Corbyn with Bercow standing for re-election as speaker.IanB2 said:
Presume there is a typo in his tweet. She just won't let go.CarlottaVance said:0 -
It seems silly too, for the Cabinet not to participate, if the aim is to actually determine what the median position in Parliament is._Anazina_ said:
No. This is laughable from Corbyn.Sean_F said:
Is there any point to an indicative vote which one side whips?Richard_Nabavi said:From the Guardian live blog:
Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman confirmed that the party would whip for Margaret Beckett’s “confirmatory public vote” option - as well as Gareth Snell’s and Ken Clarke’s, calling for a customs union, and of course the one setting out Labour’s own Brexit policy.
And he said whips would be “encouraging” Labour MPs to support common market 2.0, the cross-party proposal drawn up by Stephen Kinnock, among others.
..
"The basis for that is that they’re all in line with our policy - in the case of the public vote motion, in the sense of our conference policy that if we’re unable to achieve a general election, keeping all options on the table. So the intention is to support those options going forward in the process"..
In other words, having voted for the indicative vote motion which seeks to find a way forward, Labour actually wants to ensure that there isn't a way forward. Got it.0 -
Nothing has changed.CarlottaVance said:0 -
They don't want divergence forced on them as a matter of principle.Chris said:
We can comprehend they're talking bollocks if they claim they believe in no divergence as a matter of principle.Philip_Thompson said:
One is devolution that is under locals control, the other is barriers that are out of their control.RoyalBlue said:Malthouse really is nonsense on stilts, much like the DUP’s stance that any checks on intra-UK trade are an abomination, but divergence on marriage and abortion are A-OK.
The so-called loyalists are loyal to no-one but themselves.
You can't comprehend the difference?
Divergence where they choose to diverge is a different matter.0 -
Called it!IanB2 said:
Presume there is a typo in his tweet. She just won't let go.CarlottaVance said:0 -
"Next" for "not".IanB2 said:
Presume there is a typo in his tweet. She just won't let go.CarlottaVance said:0 -
Surely there's only a problem if one of the options is whipped differently, by either party, in indicative votes than if it were potentially voted on for real._Anazina_ said:
No. This is laughable from Corbyn.Sean_F said:
Is there any point to an indicative vote which one side whips?Richard_Nabavi said:From the Guardian live blog:
Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman confirmed that the party would whip for Margaret Beckett’s “confirmatory public vote” option - as well as Gareth Snell’s and Ken Clarke’s, calling for a customs union, and of course the one setting out Labour’s own Brexit policy.
And he said whips would be “encouraging” Labour MPs to support common market 2.0, the cross-party proposal drawn up by Stephen Kinnock, among others.
..
"The basis for that is that they’re all in line with our policy - in the case of the public vote motion, in the sense of our conference policy that if we’re unable to achieve a general election, keeping all options on the table. So the intention is to support those options going forward in the process"..
In other words, having voted for the indicative vote motion which seeks to find a way forward, Labour actually wants to ensure that there isn't a way forward. Got it.0 -
The government is effectively opposing and boycotting - likely to be defeated on opposing and its boycott will be no more effective than any other abstention from a democratic process. Truly it's pitiful and just underlines how power is slipping away from them.Sean_F said:
It seems silly too, for the Cabinet not to participate, if the aim is to actually determine what the median position in Parliament is._Anazina_ said:
No. This is laughable from Corbyn.Sean_F said:
Is there any point to an indicative vote which one side whips?Richard_Nabavi said:From the Guardian live blog:
Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman confirmed that the party would whip for Margaret Beckett’s “confirmatory public vote” option - as well as Gareth Snell’s and Ken Clarke’s, calling for a customs union, and of course the one setting out Labour’s own Brexit policy.
And he said whips would be “encouraging” Labour MPs to support common market 2.0, the cross-party proposal drawn up by Stephen Kinnock, among others.
..
"The basis for that is that they’re all in line with our policy - in the case of the public vote motion, in the sense of our conference policy that if we’re unable to achieve a general election, keeping all options on the table. So the intention is to support those options going forward in the process"..
In other words, having voted for the indicative vote motion which seeks to find a way forward, Labour actually wants to ensure that there isn't a way forward. Got it.0 -
He’s not a politician. Are you slightly paranoid?CD13 said:Mr Glenn,
Now I suspect his earlier speech was for the TV. He claimed a Leave vote would make the EU see sense. On being proven wrong, he becomes frit of a no-deal. Sounds like reverse Bo-Jo to me. Smells like BS. Aren't you the slightest suspicious?.
Here’s an earlier tweet.
https://twitter.com/theopaphitis/status/902876668066373632?s=210 -
Sean_F said:
It seems silly too, for the Cabinet not to participate, if the aim is to actually determine what the median position in Parliament is._Anazina_ said:
Indeed.Sean_F said:
Is there any point to an indicative vote which one side whips?Richard_Nabavi said:From the Guardian live blog:
Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman confirmed that the party would whip for Margaret Beckett’s “confirmatory public vote” option - as well as Gareth Snell’s and Ken Clarke’s, calling for a customs union, and of course the one setting out Labour’s own Brexit policy.
And he said whips would be “encouraging” Labour MPs to support common market 2.0, the cross-party proposal drawn up by Stephen Kinnock, among others.
..
"The basis for that is that they’re all in line with our policy - in the case of the public vote motion, in the sense of our conference policy that if we’re unable to achieve a general election, keeping all options on the table. So the intention is to support those options going forward in the process"..
In other words, having voted for the indicative vote motion which seeks to find a way forward, Labour actually wants to ensure that there isn't a way forward. Got it.
No. This is laughable from Corbyn.0 -
If Letwin's business motion is defeated (surely not) then at least he'd hold the record for the shortest-serving PM in history....0
-
Would be ironic if after all the talk they then failed to pass the motion to actually have the votes.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Even Letwin can't be that incompetent.tpfkar said:If Letwin's business motion is defeated (surely not) then at least he'd hold the record for the shortest-serving PM in history....
0 -
Yes, that's also risible. Just make the whole thing a free vote.Sean_F said:
It seems silly too, for the Cabinet not to participate, if the aim is to actually determine what the median position in Parliament is._Anazina_ said:
No. This is laughable from Corbyn.Sean_F said:
Is there any point to an indicative vote which one side whips?Richard_Nabavi said:From the Guardian live blog:
Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman confirmed that the party would whip for Margaret Beckett’s “confirmatory public vote” option - as well as Gareth Snell’s and Ken Clarke’s, calling for a customs union, and of course the one setting out Labour’s own Brexit policy.
And he said whips would be “encouraging” Labour MPs to support common market 2.0, the cross-party proposal drawn up by Stephen Kinnock, among others.
..
"The basis for that is that they’re all in line with our policy - in the case of the public vote motion, in the sense of our conference policy that if we’re unable to achieve a general election, keeping all options on the table. So the intention is to support those options going forward in the process"..
In other words, having voted for the indicative vote motion which seeks to find a way forward, Labour actually wants to ensure that there isn't a way forward. Got it.0 -
This is not a good development in the context of India/Pakistan friction:
https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/Modi-hails-India-as-a-space-superpower-after-satellite-kill-1 -
They've effectively just paired themselves out. Which is fine._Anazina_ said:
Yes, that's also risible. Just make the whole thing a free vote.Sean_F said:
It seems silly too, for the Cabinet not to participate, if the aim is to actually determine what the median position in Parliament is._Anazina_ said:
No. This is laughable from Corbyn.Sean_F said:
Is there any point to an indicative vote which one side whips?Richard_Nabavi said:From the Guardian live blog:
Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman confirmed that the party would whip for Margaret Beckett’s “confirmatory public vote” option - as well as Gareth Snell’s and Ken Clarke’s, calling for a customs union, and of course the one setting out Labour’s own Brexit policy.
And he said whips would be “encouraging” Labour MPs to support common market 2.0, the cross-party proposal drawn up by Stephen Kinnock, among others.
..
"The basis for that is that they’re all in line with our policy - in the case of the public vote motion, in the sense of our conference policy that if we’re unable to achieve a general election, keeping all options on the table. So the intention is to support those options going forward in the process"..
In other words, having voted for the indicative vote motion which seeks to find a way forward, Labour actually wants to ensure that there isn't a way forward. Got it.0 -
Jackie Walker expelled by Labour say Jewish Chronicle0
-
Activist Jackie Walker expelled by Labour for 'prejudicial' and 'grossly detrimental' comments
Three years after she was first suspended by the party, Jackie Walker has been expelled from Labour for making comments that were “prejudical” and “grossly detrimental” to the party, the JC has learned.
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/activist-jackie-walker-expelled-by-labour-1.4821770 -
India should be made a pariah state for this, it completely litters up earth's orbit and can endanger rockets being launched etc.Nigelb said:This is not a good development in the context of India/Pakistan friction:
https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/Modi-hails-India-as-a-space-superpower-after-satellite-kill0 -
I doubt if it's difficult to guess what the DUP will say.TheScreamingEagles said:0
