politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » More pressure is piled on the ERG to back the deal today

Sean_F said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Buzzfeed moves Craig Tracey to Support

So the running count is:

Start with defeat by 149:

31 Tory switchers and 1 switcher from absent (based on the most favourable reading of Buzzfeed/Speccie)

Gives defeat by 86.

There were 3 Labour supports, so I would imagine Dan Hodges means *another* 3 plus 10 abstentions

Gives defeat by 70

Does that include Raab and Trevelyan?

Yes.

Buzzfeed is here: https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/70-tory-mps-may-deal-opposed

There is only one potential switcher (Anne Main) not listed (plus Ross Douglas who was absent)

kle4 said:

Nemtynakht said:

nico67 said:

May saying she’s going to leave soon essentially means Labour voting for the deal are voting to bring in a hardline Brexiter .

Which should be great for Labour as the party will not put up with it and there will be defections and current MPs leaving the party to stand independently, which will usher in a socialist paradise. This argument stands up to no scrutiny.

It's a load of old wank is what it is. The parliamentary numbers wont magically alter. Nandy is going right down in my estimation.

Hopefully also in the estimation of her voters....

Casino_Royale said:

TND seems to think the DUP might just be driving a very hard bargain over on Twitter.

https://twitter.com/darranmarshall/status/1111604389788217344?s=21

Nigel_Foremain said:

RH1992 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Benpointer said:

What time is the vote today?

2.30pm

Is that when MPs go to the dentist?

It's certainly when the ERG are having their credibility extracted.

The Tories need a good scale and polish to get rid of the Raabs and Bakers.

I believe Jacob Rees Mogg would like to bring back indentured servitude

Sorry, that was a poor attempt at a dentistry pun. I was just filling in time

Sean_F said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Sean_F said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Buzzfeed moves Craig Tracey to Support

So the running count is:

Start with defeat by 149:

31 Tory switchers and 1 switcher from absent (based on the most favourable reading of Buzzfeed/Speccie)

Gives defeat by 86.

There were 3 Labour supports, so I would imagine Dan Hodges means *another* 3 plus 10 abstentions

Gives defeat by 70

Does that include Raab and Trevelyan?

Yes.

Buzzfeed is here: https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/70-tory-mps-may-deal-opposed

There is only one potential switcher (Anne Main) not listed (plus Ross Douglas who was absent)

It's difficult to understand why Grant Shapps and Michaell Fallon should be bitter enders.

The default, if you like, is to assume they will vote as they voted before unless Buzzfeed learns otherwise.

kinabalu said:

Benpointer said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Looks like Ken Clarke for PM then!!

Yes, if the policy eventually agreed for Brexit is the KENNETH CLARKE plan this does suggest that it requires a KENNETH CLARKE to pursue it.

And if we need a Ken Clarke as PM, why on earth not go for the Ken Clarke? It would be downright rude not to.

Hour of need and all that. As a lifelong non-Tory, even I could support Clarke at this point.

Me too. And what irony if the ultimate Europhile ends up as the man who saves Brexit and takes us out.

That is why it would be such a neat solution, and why we would get a much better deal

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Sean_F said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Sean_F said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Buzzfeed moves Craig Tracey to Support

So the running count is:

Start with defeat by 149:

31 Tory switchers and 1 switcher from absent (based on the most favourable reading of Buzzfeed/Speccie)

Gives defeat by 86.

There were 3 Labour supports, so I would imagine Dan Hodges means *another* 3 plus 10 abstentions

Gives defeat by 70

Does that include Raab and Trevelyan?

Yes.

Buzzfeed is here: https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/70-tory-mps-may-deal-opposed

There is only one potential switcher (Anne Main) not listed (plus Ross Douglas who was absent)

It's difficult to understand why Grant Shapps and Michaell Fallon should be bitter enders.

The default, if you like, is to assume they will vote as they voted before unless Buzzfeed learns otherwise.

That's correct, IMHO. They seem to have developed the zeal of converts/

Casino_Royale said:

kle4 said:

Casino_Royale said:

TND seems to think the DUP might just be driving a very hard bargain over on Twitter.

They've driven themselves into a corner. What could possibly get them to reverse that is remotely plausible?

And if they did a bunch of Tory remainers and lab rebels would claim DUP backing means they cannot support or some such crap, bar Hoey I guess.

Permanent CU, a veto on single market divergence with GB and a bung would deliver Brexit and also give them everything they want.

It’s far from impossible they’re driving hard for that. After all, they keep on talking.

Because they like being listened to.

Raab folds.

kinabalu said:

Benpointer said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Looks like Ken Clarke for PM then!!

Yes, if the policy eventually agreed for Brexit is the KENNETH CLARKE plan this does suggest that it requires a KENNETH CLARKE to pursue it.

And if we need a Ken Clarke as PM, why on earth not go for the Ken Clarke? It would be downright rude not to.

Hour of need and all that. As a lifelong non-Tory, even I could support Clarke at this point.

Me too. And what irony if the ultimate Europhile ends up as the man who saves Brexit and takes us out.

But Clarke favours revocation, that is hardly "taking us out." I know he says we would invoke again later but he must know that the chances of that actually happening are minimal.

bunnco said:

Raab folds.

Master tactician.

Dan Hodges talking up a Labour rebellion, so it almost certainly won't happen.

Leicester Liz giving the Tories a good kicking.

Presumably some of our entryists can't get their heads round that.

FPT:

IanB2 said:

OblitusSumMe said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).

Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?

Yes, but listening to IDS this morning it seems like if the WA does miraculously pass today we then have less than eight weeks of failing to get the ERG to vote for the legal detail of what they vote for today, and then having a choice between no deal, or revoking without Euro elections and smashing up the legal order of the EU.

So that could end up being worse.

If the ERG were sensible (from their own perspective) that should be their plan. Vote the "in principle" WA through today and then switch en masse and vote the WAIB down next month. Pretty much guarantees a no deal exit.

That may be what the brighter ones have worked out already.

That's what I'm worried about, but I'm then forced to rely on the pig-headed stupidity of Bill Cash and Mark Francois to avoid it.

anothernick said:

kinabalu said:

Benpointer said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Looks like Ken Clarke for PM then!!

Yes, if the policy eventually agreed for Brexit is the KENNETH CLARKE plan this does suggest that it requires a KENNETH CLARKE to pursue it.

And if we need a Ken Clarke as PM, why on earth not go for the Ken Clarke? It would be downright rude not to.

Hour of need and all that. As a lifelong non-Tory, even I could support Clarke at this point.

Me too. And what irony if the ultimate Europhile ends up as the man who saves Brexit and takes us out.

But Clarke favours revocation, that is hardly "taking us out." I know he says we would invoke again later but he must know that the chances of that actually happening are minimal.

I think if he took us out and remained in a CU, and that was the will of parliament, he would live with that and get us a bloody good deal. The guy is a serious grown-up and has high integrity. I know it is unlikely to happen, but one can dream!

Jim Fitzpatrick says he will vote in favour.

Nigelb said:

bunnco said:

Raab on his feet now....

Presumably not thinking, though ?

He is a fecking lightweight. He is so lightweight, he must have to have lead in his shoes

nico67 said:

May saying she’s going to leave soon essentially means Labour voting for the deal are voting to bring in a hardline Brexiter .

More likely a general election as the DUP will back a VONC if the Deal passes today as that will mean the backstop has passed too

OblitusSumMe said:

FPT:

IanB2 said:

OblitusSumMe said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).

Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?

Yes, but listening to IDS this morning it seems like if the WA does miraculously pass today we then have less than eight weeks of failing to get the ERG to vote for the legal detail of what they vote for today, and then having a choice between no deal, or revoking without Euro elections and smashing up the legal order of the EU.

So that could end up being worse.

If the ERG were sensible (from their own perspective) that should be their plan. Vote the "in principle" WA through today and then switch en masse and vote the WAIB down next month. Pretty much guarantees a no deal exit.

That may be what the brighter ones have worked out already.

That's what I'm worried about, but I'm then forced to rely on the pig-headed stupidity of Bill Cash and Mark Francois to avoid it.

Grieve as good as said that was their plan, during his speech.

Certainly, those (like Finkelstein) that think passing the WA reduces the chance of no deal are probably mistaken; quite the reverse.

IanB2 said:

OblitusSumMe said:

FPT:

IanB2 said:

OblitusSumMe said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).

Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?

Yes, but listening to IDS this morning it seems like if the WA does miraculously pass today we then have less than eight weeks of failing to get the ERG to vote for the legal detail of what they vote for today, and then having a choice between no deal, or revoking without Euro elections and smashing up the legal order of the EU.

So that could end up being worse.

If the ERG were sensible (from their own perspective) that should be their plan. Vote the "in principle" WA through today and then switch en masse and vote the WAIB down next month. Pretty much guarantees a no deal exit.

That may be what the brighter ones have worked out already.

That's what I'm worried about, but I'm then forced to rely on the pig-headed stupidity of Bill Cash and Mark Francois to avoid it.

Grieve as good as said that was their plan, during his speech.

Certainly, those (like Finkelstein) that think passing the WA reduces the chance of no deal are probably mistaken; quite the reverse.

Something tells me Grieve is not involved in their planning.

HYUFD said:

nico67 said:

May saying she’s going to leave soon essentially means Labour voting for the deal are voting to bring in a hardline Brexiter .

More likely a general election as the DUP will back a VONC if the Deal passes today as that will mean the backstop has passed too

It runs on whether TIG and other indpendents want a general election right now. The DUP do not have the leverage that they had.

Lady Hermon, Ivan Lewis, and John Woodcock would probably vote against a VONC, so 316 is the number to beat.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sean_F said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Sean_F said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Buzzfeed moves Craig Tracey to Support

So the running count is:

Start with defeat by 149:

31 Tory switchers and 1 switcher from absent (based on the most favourable reading of Buzzfeed/Speccie)

Gives defeat by 86.

There were 3 Labour supports, so I would imagine Dan Hodges means *another* 3 plus 10 abstentions

Gives defeat by 70

Does that include Raab and Trevelyan?

Yes.

Buzzfeed is here: https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/70-tory-mps-may-deal-opposed

There is only one potential switcher (Anne Main) not listed (plus Ross Douglas who was absent)

It's difficult to understand why Grant Shapps and Michaell Fallon should be bitter enders.

They both have long standing issues with Mrs May.

Fallon doesn’t like he was sacked by Mrs May.

Shapps has issues with Nick Timothy and other Mrs May staffer which saw Shapps block them from standing in 2015.

If that was all it is about then backing the deal now gets rid of Mrs May.

New York Times: The Unlovable Theresa May

Britain’s prime minister was never suited for politics. Now the country is dealing with the consequences.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/29/opinion/theresa-may.html

Sean_F said:

HYUFD said:

nico67 said:

May saying she’s going to leave soon essentially means Labour voting for the deal are voting to bring in a hardline Brexiter .

More likely a general election as the DUP will back a VONC if the Deal passes today as that will mean the backstop has passed too

It runs on whether TIG and other indpendents want a general election right now. The DUP do not have the leverage that they had.

Lady Hermon, Ivan Lewis, and John Woodcock would probably vote against a VONC, so 316 is the number to beat.

Of course the Government would then lose its majority and confidence and supply on everything else so we really would have a Government in name only

williamglenn said:

Casino_Royale said:

TND seems to think the DUP might just be driving a very hard bargain over on Twitter.

https://twitter.com/darranmarshall/status/1111604389788217344?s=21

https://youtu.be/wxpYW_w5pgo

SandyRentool said:

Leicester Liz giving the Tories a good kicking.

Presumably some of our entryists can't get their heads round that.

I'm endlessly entertained by Labour members screeching on that MPs who vote with the Tories should be expelled / sacked.

Yes. Voting with the Tories. Against the Labour Whip. Just like Corbyn then...

I think the problem with some of them is rank stupidity, with the others that they read whatever manipulative guff is spun by The Canary or Shitebox and think its true.

New Joe video

https://youtu.be/Gq_gORJNn58

HYUFD said:

Sean_F said:

Jim Fitzpatrick says he will vote in favour.

Key gain for May

15-25 to go.

HYUFD said:

TIG to apply to be listed as a political party so they should be a permanent feature of polls soon

Tried to oust a Democratically elected leader of Labour

Trying to overturn a democratic referendum

Refuse to call by elections to ratify their switch of party

What a refreshing change! The Anti Democratic League for the bored middle class

Barnier confirms the EU will support an EU-UK Customs Union

TheWhiteRabbit said:

kle4 said:

HYUFD said:

Sean_F said:

Jim Fitzpatrick says he will vote in favour.

Key gain for May

15-25 to go.

I make it 35 to go...

I was just spitballing the Labour numbers needed - is it really as high as all that?

I’m not as confident of losing by 90 now, but 50-70 still looks good.

What time is the vote?

HYUFD said:

kinabalu said:

Nemtynakht said:

Which should be great for Labour as the party will not put up with it and there will be defections and current MPs leaving the party to stand independently, which will usher in a socialist paradise. This argument stands up to no scrutiny.

Yes, Labour are well placed if the WA passes. As they are if it doesn't.

The question I have is of the following 2 GE scenarios -

(i) Pre Brexit, running on renegotiation and REF2.
(ii) Post Brexit, running on CU/SM.

Which are they more likely to win. I think (i).

You ignore the fact most of the top Tory and Labour marginal seats voted Leave, if Labour is seen to have blocked Brexit that will hit them in the Northern and Midlands marginals even if they pile up even bigger majorities in the inner cities and university towns

Unlike you to ignore more recent polling, HY?

IanB2 said:

Barnier confirms the EU will support an EU-UK Customs Union

Which the Commons will likely vote for on Monday after preferences if the Withdrawal Agreement fails again today, well done ERG

HYUFD said:

kinabalu said:

Nemtynakht said:

Which should be great for Labour as the party will not put up with it and there will be defections and current MPs leaving the party to stand independently, which will usher in a socialist paradise. This argument stands up to no scrutiny.

Yes, Labour are well placed if the WA passes. As they are if it doesn't.

The question I have is of the following 2 GE scenarios -

(i) Pre Brexit, running on renegotiation and REF2.
(ii) Post Brexit, running on CU/SM.

Which are they more likely to win. I think (i).

You ignore the fact most of the top Tory and Labour marginal seats voted Leave, if Labour is seen to have blocked Brexit that will hit them in the Northern and Midlands marginals even if they pile up even bigger majorities in the inner cities and university towns

I think you'll find it is the Tories (ERG) who have blocked Brexit.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Ishmael_Z said:

kle4 said:

IanB2 said:

New York Times: The Unlovable Theresa May

Britain’s prime minister was never suited for politics. Now the country is dealing with the consequences.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/29/opinion/theresa-may.html

Unsuited for politics is clearly nonsense. You dont last even on backbenches for that long without being suited for politics, and she held high office for years. She's unsuited to be PM but going that far is clearly silliness and projection.

That's a second-order type of argument which is trumped by actual first-hand observation of, to take one example out of hundreds, the 2017 GE fiasco. Yes, it is heavily against the odds that someone utterly unsuited to politics should become PM, but she has managed it.

May like brown is totally unsuited to leader / pm, but both showed ability to last as a minister, operating as technocrats.

Exactly. The top job is not easy, few are great, most are crappy, some are very bad, but none means someone is unsuited to politics, even senior politics. There is a wealth of evidence that she is suited to it given her career. Observation of her time as leader and PM doesn’t erase decades of political life, much of it successful or at least competent enough as these things go.

IanB2 said:

Barnier confirms the EU will support an EU-UK Customs Union

Trying to help the Clarke option, and so encourage a few MV2 backers to not do so this time I wonder.

isam said:

HYUFD said:

TIG to apply to be listed as a political party so they should be a permanent feature of polls soon

Tried to oust a Democratically elected leader of Labour

Trying to overturn a democratic referendum

Refuse to call by elections to ratify their switch of party

What a refreshing change! The Anti Democratic League for the bored middle class

What’s the problem in trying to oust a democratically elected leader? If a leader were awful should people have to sit and wait for them to quit of their own accord?

FrancisUrquhart said:

With only 90 mins to go, it clearly isn't close as if it was the journos on twitter would be telling us all about may meeting individual hold-outs, whips doing X / Y / Z as a last push to get it over the line etc

May doesn't do that sort of thing.

kle4 said:

IanB2 said:

Barnier confirms the EU will support an EU-UK Customs Union

Trying to help the Clarke option, and so encourage a few MV2 backers to not do so this time I wonder.

Indeed. The possibility that the EU wont give an extension for Clarke or something similar is very low.

AndyJS said:

IanB2 said:

AndyJS said:

What time is the vote?

1430

Thanks. Not a very long debate this time.

I have been watching since 0930 and it feels pretty long

AndyJS said:

IanB2 said:

AndyJS said:

What time is the vote?

1430

Thanks. Not a very long debate this time.

To be fair, they have shot the breeze on this topic quite enough.

CD13 said:

I've been cutting the grass for the last few minutes, it's more interesting. It's the first cut of the season and it seems very long and lush. Only a tiny back garden, but situated where the warm gulf stream caresses the tropical NW coast of England, it grows quickly.

I planted a peach tree about ten years ago in the hope of global warming and I've had a consistent crop of leaves ever since. Those pesky frosts in April foiled that hope. I blame the bloody MPs.

Surely it is because of Brexit....

kle4 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Ishmael_Z said:

kle4 said:

IanB2 said:

New York Times: The Unlovable Theresa May

Britain’s prime minister was never suited for politics. Now the country is dealing with the consequences.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/29/opinion/theresa-may.html

Unsuited for politics is clearly nonsense. You dont last even on backbenches for that long without being suited for politics, and she held high office for years. She's unsuited to be PM but going that far is clearly silliness and projection.

That's a second-order type of argument which is trumped by actual first-hand observation of, to take one example out of hundreds, the 2017 GE fiasco. Yes, it is heavily against the odds that someone utterly unsuited to politics should become PM, but she has managed it.

May like brown is totally unsuited to leader / pm, but both showed ability to last as a minister, operating as technocrats.

Exactly. The top job is not easy, few are great, most are crappy, some are very bad, but none means someone is unsuited to politics, even senior politics. There is a wealth of evidence that she is suited to it given her career. Observation of her time as leader and PM doesn’t erase decades of political life, much of it successful or at least competent enough as these things go.

Timing has a lot to do with it as well. Imagine if the Blair/Brown and Cameron/May terms had been reversed. May and Brown might have been seen as good PMs.

malcolmg said:

kle4 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Ishmael_Z said:

kle4 said:

IanB2 said:

New York Times: The Unlovable Theresa May

Britain’s prime minister was never suited for politics. Now the country is dealing with the consequences.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/29/opinion/theresa-may.html

Unsuited for politics is clearly nonsense. You dont last even on backbenches for that long without being suited for politics, and she held high office for years. She's unsuited to be PM but going that far is clearly silliness and projection.

That's a second-order type of argument which is trumped by actual first-hand observation of, to take one example out of hundreds, the 2017 GE fiasco. Yes, it is heavily against the odds that someone utterly unsuited to politics should become PM, but she has managed it.

May like brown is totally unsuited to leader / pm, but both showed ability to last as a minister, operating as technocrats.

Exactly. The top job is not easy, few are great, most are crappy, some are very bad, but none means someone is unsuited to politics, even senior politics. There is a wealth of evidence that she is suited to it given her career. Observation of her time as leader and PM doesn’t erase decades of political life, much of it successful or at least competent enough as these things go.

KLE, you sure you are not her other half, or are you just having a laugh

I’m not saying she is good at all, but she at least knows how to operate in politics well enough to rise through the ranks and then survive in a difficult ministry for a long time. She has long since exhausted sympathy she might deserve for the difficulty of the job before her, she has made things so much worse through indecision and poor decisions respectively, but it is simply absurd to suggest someone lasts this long in politics while being unsuited for it. Even a total incompetent could be suited to politics and so last a long time, indeed there’s plenty who fit that description. She’s a bad PM, no question, but unsuited to politics? I don’t think the evidence of her career supports that.

HYUFD said:

You ignore the fact most of the top Tory and Labour marginal seats voted Leave, if Labour is seen to have blocked Brexit that will hit them in the Northern and Midlands marginals even if they pile up even bigger majorities in the inner cities and university towns

I'm not ignoring that. It is a clear risk.

On the other hand, offering REF2 makes them the party likely to stop Brexit. It says to Remainers, you want to stop this disaster? OK you must swallow JC as PM. It might work. My sense is that it would.

But a post Brexit GE, running just on closer alignment than the Tories? No, I fear that the Tories win that one quite easily.

Result at 14:45 I guess?

IanB2 said:

Barnier confirms the EU will support an EU-UK Customs Union

Just drawing them further and further into the revoke web

Philip_Thompson said:

13:10
Chope: 'Why hold your nose and vote for it?'

House of Commons

Parliament
BBCCopyright: BBC

Sir Christopher Chope condemns those who have changed their minds to back Theresa May's withdrawal agreement.

He tells the Commons: "Why would you want to hold your nose and vote for something that was so against your instincts and against the interests of the British people?"

Former Tory and member of the Independent Group Anna Soubry praises him for "being consistent".

*puke emoji* *puke emoji* *puke emoji* *puke emoji*

Soubry and Chope together agreeing would imply the other side is right.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bn_FaWDglP_/