Anyway, Rory Stewart’s idea of citizens’ assemblies to resolve Brexit is a bad one. The public has already divided in two. Neither is ready to compromise. Citizens’ assemblies might well have been helpful before the referendum in clarifying voters’ thinking. But they’ve done their thinking now and both sides think they are now in a majority to get everything they want. They’re not going to split the difference.
The ironic thing is that both sides are in a minority - I think there’s a clear majority for “just make it stop”
The only option that is capable of making it stop is Remain.
Indeed, and via Revoke rather than a Peoples Vote...
I have complained many times about the ERG not understanding reality and not being able to count.
The same is true to a lesser extent of remainers. If we revoke or even have a 2nd referendum which remains wins, we will only ever be one general election result from leaving on a no deal basis. As HYUFD has pointed out, on a constituency basis the Westminster map is pretty leavy, whilst I disagree with much of his analysis and spin, it is realistic that sooner or later a no deal party would win. I wouldnt expect them to want any further referendums and would see the GE win as sufficient basis for leaving on whatever terms they want.
We will have no stability, businesses will not go back to investing as they did before this nonsense, the EU will not trust us as dependable members.
The best deal available now for pragmatic remainers is May's deal in exchange for parliament having some control over the more important future negotiations.
The best option for no dealers is actually a referendum, which they might well win, it is not happening through this parliament, and probably not through the next. If they lose they can still win through a future GE.
Our politicans are so dumb they are doing the opposite of the best tactics available, with remainers wanting the referendum and no-dealers against it.
BBC R4 - On second ballot -candid from Javid - "Rory taking support from all candidates"
If it's really true that support has moved to Stewart not only from the 3 who have dropped out but also from the other 6 who remain, and considering Hunt and Stewart were separated by only about 24 votes - or just 8% of the total - in the first round, it's not impossible that Stewart could move into second place in today's ballot.
Aĺl seems bizarre to me. Stewart has surely the least chance with members, yet somehow he is getting the anti-Boris vote.
If they want brexit even if destroyed the party they could have saved us all some time and get their mps to back the deal and cause a split!
And yes they did see that as brexiting as did 90% of Tory MPs.
Many I know did not see it that way.
And yet in the end when faced with no brexit or the WA the vast majority of Tory MPs, the overwhelming number of them, vastly outnumbering the hold outs, did. I'm to believe they would not have backed it in the end if they did not believe it was Brexit, albeit a crappy one and that their members agreed?
The time for the WA has passed, and yes you and some others thought it was not really Brexit, but theres revisionism going on where people are ignoring just how many Tories backed it in the end because they did think it was Brexit of some kind and better than remaining.
I like coming on here to read the intense arguments that often go nowhere. By comparison with the general public you count as fanatics. My suspicion is that few go into such forensic detail.
The take home for most is this. We had a referendum. Leave won. But many MPs decided otherwise and became obstructive. So we probably won't leave because the powers that be have decided otherwise. Some are happy with this. Many are not and they blame the MPs.
Solution? None available. We're now in the blame game phase. Who loses? Democracy and the MPs, and they don't like it up 'em..
BBC R4 - On second ballot -candid from Javid - "Rory taking support from all candidates"
If it's really true that support has moved to Stewart not only from the 3 who have dropped out but also from the other 6 who remain, and considering Hunt and Stewart were separated by only about 24 votes - or just 8% of the total - in the first round, it's not impossible that Stewart could move into second place in today's ballot.
Aĺl seems bizarre to me. Stewart has surely the least chance with members, yet somehow he is getting the anti-Boris vote.
If Boris is going to win anyway but you dislike him you might as well go for the candidate most opposed to him. Anyone else is pulling their punches because they want a job so backing doesnt make the point about opposing Boris.
BBC R4 - On second ballot -candid from Javid - "Rory taking support from all candidates"
If it's really true that support has moved to Stewart not only from the 3 who have dropped out but also from the other 6 who remain, and considering Hunt and Stewart were separated by only about 24 votes - or just 8% of the total - in the first round, it's not impossible that Stewart could move into second place in today's ballot.
Aĺl seems bizarre to me. Stewart has surely the least chance with members, yet somehow he is getting the anti-Boris vote.
Not really. Boris is the macho 'we can do Brexit right' candidate. That quite rightly deserves to be challenged and taken apart.
I have met Rory Stewart several times and have always been a fan.
I cannot however make sense of his proposals to resolve Brexit via a citizens' assembly. He gives no indication as to how our parliamentary democracy would be bound by the views of such an assembly, when it refuses to be bound by the views of the assembly that occurred on 23 June 2016.
The proposed number of attendees for the assembly also seems to be growing in number, to the point that it now has the distinct whiff of becoming a second referendum.
The remit of a citizens assembly would be to propose a workable Brexit, so it would be a constructive result.
The referendum was either Remain or Leave and so not constructive at all.
Didn't the Irish have one on abortion and it (?they) came up with a workable solution. I can see how the idea would work with a country with a population the size of RoI; I'm less sure about how it work with a population ten or so times bigger.
How is the population size of any relevance?
Increased sorts and conditions of men (and women and.........)
Nah
Why? Genuine question.
From statistics we know that the size of the population is irrelevant to the representativeness of the sample. Sample size is what matters.
On the politics I don’t believe there is a greater spread or complexity of view on Brexit in the Uk than on abortion in Ireland
That said, relatively few of the recommendations of the various CAs that have been tried have subsequently found favour with either politicians or referendums. I am sceptical that it offers the magic bullet to our particular situation.
Take the first point. You've given me something else to dig into when I've finished the couple of dozen things already on my to-do list! I accept that I may well be slowing down a bit but I really don't know, with so many interesting things in the world, how I ever had time to go to work!
Just imagine being asked to fish ten balls out of a barrel and another ten out of a swimming pool.
Both the barrel and the swimming pool contain three quarters white balls and one quarter black balls, all thoroughly mixed.
In both cases the probability of various outcomes from the ten balls you have chosen is exactly the same. If you choose twenty balls, again, exactly the same, but you'll have a more accurate sample (more of the time).
The size of the population only becomes relevant as your sample starts to approach the total number of balls in the barrel.
I like coming on here to read the intense arguments that often go nowhere. By comparison with the general public you count as fanatics. My suspicion is that few go into such forensic detail.
The take home for most is this. We had a referendum. Leave won. But many MPs decided otherwise and became obstructive. So we probably won't leave because the powers that be have decided otherwise. Some are happy with this. Many are not and they blame the MPs.
Solution? None available. We're now in the blame game phase. Who loses? Democracy and the MPs, and they don't like it up 'em..
Alternatively, we had a referendum. Leave won, but they never defined what the end state was. It has been impossible to find an end state without serious risks of political and economic harm.
So we ask the question, given the new information, do we still want to actually do this?
Meanwhile the snake oil salesmen that got us into this mess shout betrayal with impunity.
I like coming on here to read the intense arguments that often go nowhere. By comparison with the general public you count as fanatics. My suspicion is that few go into such forensic detail.
The take home for most is this. We had a referendum. Leave won. But many MPs decided otherwise and became obstructive. So we probably won't leave because the powers that be have decided otherwise. Some are happy with this. Many are not and they blame the MPs.
Solution? None available. We're now in the blame game phase. Who loses? Democracy and the MPs, and they don't like it up 'em..
Alternatively, we had a referendum. Leave won, but they never defined what the end state was. It has been impossible to find an end state without serious risks of political and economic harm.
So we ask the question, given the new information, do we still want to actually do this?
Meanwhile the snake oil salesmen that got us into this mess shout betrayal with impunity.
and that is the valid reason for a referendum and why Leave hate it so much - they will have to present a plan rather than everyone's personal unicorn and see how many people will accept the compromises that are required.
The Tories had had a poll lead with Yougov when IDS was deposed, IDS may even have done better than Howard in 2005
Yes, a 1% lead 32-31 with the LDs on 30%, a poll taken shortly after the Brent East by-election where the Conservatives finished a humiliating third as I'm sure you remember.
Populus after the Labour Conference had Labour ahead 36-28 and ICM after the Conservative Conference had Labour ahead 38-33.
As to the assertion IDS would have done better than Howard in 2005, we can neither prove nor disprove that. What we do know is IDS was ousted in a vote of No Confidence in October 2003 which doesn't suggest backbench Conservative MPs thought he was leading them to victory.
I think facing Gove could also be equally probing for Boris and would not rule out that prospect either and that would at least ensure 2 Leavers in the final 2 albeit with different visions of how to Leave.
Boris will be taking part in the BBC debate tonight
I wonder whether you have any idea of the revulsion the Gove/Johnson combo would create among the 48% if they appear on TV every night for a month? Regina might have forgiven their red bus but plenty of the public wont have
Diehard Remainers will be voting LD, Labour or Green anyway not Tory so who cares if they are annoyed
You can rightly blame Cameron to blocking any preparation on Brexit options by the CS. Whatever they came up with would be criticised but it wouldn't have been so overtly political as the MPs managed and intended to make it.
They will reap what they sowed, and whinging about it is pointless. Few come out with any credit.
If Rory Stewart had suggested this idea his head would already be on a pike.
Ruth Davidson currently cannot even beat the Brexit Party in Scotland let alone the SNP and she should thank Boris he will get a FTA polling shows most Scots far prefer to No Deal
I cannot let that go unchallenged. Yes, recent polling does indicate that Ruth Davidson’s team is neck and neck with the Brexit Party in Scotland (usual caveats, sub-samples blah blah), but where on earth is the evidence that “polling shows most Scots far prefer to No Deal”?
No Deal got just 29% support from Scottish respondents in the latest YouGov (compared to 42% GB-wide). How does that equate with ”most Scots far prefer”? (page 14:)
A confirmatory referendum - of the kind that Farage et al were talking up before the first one - would highlight the divisions out there. We will have the grass chewers making utter tossers of themselves. We will have the gammony "patriots" making utter tossers of themselves. We will have the screaming remainers making utter tossers of themselves shouting about how the grass chewers and gammony patriots are utter tossers.
Meanwhile in the middle, most people however they voted forst time around will have to have a hard examination of whether principle trumps reality. Hard to cling to project fear when industry people explain in vivid detail just how fucked no deal leaves them - and therefore leaves you.
I like coming on here to read the intense arguments that often go nowhere. By comparison with the general public you count as fanatics. My suspicion is that few go into such forensic detail.
The take home for most is this. We had a referendum. Leave won. But many MPs decided otherwise and became obstructive. So we probably won't leave because the powers that be have decided otherwise. Some are happy with this. Many are not and they blame the MPs.
Solution? None available. We're now in the blame game phase. Who loses? Democracy and the MPs, and they don't like it up 'em..
Nail, head, hit!
The establishment (both main parties) were too complacent and regarded the voting public of the UK as irrelevant to their soft jobs in Westminster. Cue mass hysteria when the public said something they didn't like and 3 years of doing nothing (something MP's are really good at) hoping the problem would go away.
Unfortunately the options in front of us now is to hope the EU get fed up with us and kick us out. This lame duck useless parliament don't know how to do anything anymore. Sack the lot of them.
I never really thought I would need to plan for a hard brexit and Scottish independence but now that almost seems like the most likely route. How will the border at Carlisle look? Will the English allow us to use the £ and do we want to? What happens to the British army? Will there be a wave of English heading to Scotland ?
Boris is now considering a referendum on the backstop for NI and a FTA for GB, avoids ultra hard Brexit and more acceptable to Scots than No Deal as it likely ensures a Deal and FTA and also lets the people of NI not the DUP decide on the backstop
Oh look, it’s a new @HYUFD fantasy which he’ll spam us with incessantly - until he thinks of a new one in a week or two.
Not a fantasy reported on here last night and on twitter
Would that put the DUP in the position of voting for the inevitable no confidence motion?
Plus it enables a FTA with the EU for GB and removes the temporary Customs Union
I guess the obvious question is, since you need to win a general election with a DUP-free majority to do this anyhow, why not just go ahead and do it without the referendum.
As it needs mandate from NI voters to override the will of NI's largest party at Westminster
Good interview from Javid with John Humphrys on "Today". However I think it very unlikely he'll make the threshold especially given his concession that he's losing votes to Rory Stewart.
Javid said he was more Homer Simpson than Cicero which was a good line
Raab will get through today's winnowing. Btw yesterday's amusement about the EU negotiators nicknaming Dominic Raab "turnip" seems to me little more than a German pun on his name - think kohl-rabi (cabbage turnip).
I never really thought I would need to plan for a hard brexit and Scottish independence but now that almost seems like the most likely route. How will the border at Carlisle look? Will the English allow us to use the £ and do we want to? What happens to the British army? Will there be a wave of English heading to Scotland ?
Boris is now considering a referendum on the backstop for NI and a FTA for GB, avoids ultra hard Brexit and more acceptable to Scots than No Deal as it likely ensures a Deal and FTA and also lets the people of NI not the DUP decide on the backstop
Oh look, it’s a new @HYUFD fantasy which he’ll spam us with incessantly - until he thinks of a new one in a week or two.
Not a fantasy reported on here last night and on twitter
Would that put the DUP in the position of voting for the inevitable no confidence motion?
Sod the DUP, Boris wins a general election comfortably with that anyway
Plus it enables a FTA with the EU for GB and removes the temporary Customs Union
I guess the obvious question is, since you need to win a general election with a DUP-free majority to do this anyhow, why not just go ahead and do it without the referendum.
As it needs mandate from NI voters to override the will of NI's largest party at Westminster
But it doesn’t need a mandate from Scottish voters to override the will of Scotland’s largest party at Westminster?
You Tories are getting yourselves into all kinds of very deep water, and all the signs are that you never learned how to swim.
Prediction: Johnson becomes conservative leader and PM. A general election follows immediately, with a Conservative-Farage pact. The pact's Brexit policy will be "we leave on 31st October, Deal or No Deal". Crush the Saboteurs! Conservatives get a decent majority, against a hopelessly split opposition. At which point Corbyn resigns, too late to save us from a shitty Brexit, or 5 years of Johnson as PM.
But then what? No Deal seems most likely. But possibly Johnson rushes through essentially May's Deal (rebranded as the Boris Brexit), successfully ignoring the cries of Traitor from the hardline Brexiters who are still a minority among conservative MPs. He might also need to have a short "technical extension" past 31st October to pass a few laws, claiming that this doesn't change the fact of the UK being out and/or claiming that it's a centuries-old British tradition not to leave international organisations on Halloween.
If Rory Stewart had suggested this idea his head would already be on a pike.
Ruth Davidson currently cannot even beat the Brexit Party in Scotland let alone the SNP and she should thank Boris he will get a FTA polling shows most Scots far prefer to No Deal
I cannot let that go unchallenged. Yes, recent polling does indicate that Ruth Davidson’s team is neck and neck with the Brexit Party in Scotland (usual caveats, sub-samples blah blah), but where on earth is the evidence that “polling shows most Scots far prefer to No Deal”?
No Deal got just 29% support from Scottish respondents in the latest YouGov (compared to 42% GB-wide). How does that equate with ”most Scots far prefer”? (page 14:)
Anyway, Rory Stewart’s idea of citizens’ assemblies to resolve Brexit is a bad one. The public has already divided in two. Neither is ready to compromise. Citizens’ assemblies might well have been helpful before the referendum in clarifying voters’ thinking. But they’ve done their thinking now and both sides think they are now in a majority to get everything they want. They’re not going to split the difference.
I understand citizens assemblies have been successful in Ireland in dealing with controversial topics, in particular abortion. It seems when tasked with getting to a consensus, these assemblies will actually come to some kind of common ground. I haven't followed the topic closely, however.
And however you dress it up it's an impossible difference to split. It's a binary choice.
La Fin.
It really isn't and it never was. There is a world of difference between leaving the EU with a deal and quite possibly a CU and leaving without one in dispute about the bills left behind. What we need is a deal that in the view of remainers mitigates the damage they perceive that we will suffer from leaving the EU whilst at the same time satisfies the majority of leavers that we have actually left. In short we need a compromise.
May's deal could have been that deal but her complete failure to build a consensus doomed a reasonable resolution to defeat and rejection by both sides. The challenge is how do we get back there again when, as Alastair says, people have become so entrenched? I am not sure about a Citizens Assembly but I confess other ideas about how we build that consensus are painfully thin on the ground.
The deal is dead. If it somehow gets adopted it will have no legitimacy for anyone and will be political poison for generations. I’m afraid I now see no alternative to a referendum between Remain and No Deal.
Plus it enables a FTA with the EU for GB and removes the temporary Customs Union
I guess the obvious question is, since you need to win a general election with a DUP-free majority to do this anyhow, why not just go ahead and do it without the referendum.
As it needs mandate from NI voters to override the will of NI's largest party at Westminster
But it doesn’t need a mandate from Scottish voters to override the will of Scotland’s largest party at Westminster?
You Tories are getting yourselves into all kinds of very deep water, and all the signs are that you never learned how to swim.
Scots will be fine with an EU FTA as the poll below shows, however if NI keeps the backstop to protect the Good Friday Agreement until a technical solution is found to the Irish border also fine.
Scotland has not had a terrorist war for decades as NI had so is a different scenario
Anyway, Rory Stewart’s idea of citizens’ assemblies to resolve Brexit is a bad one. The public has already divided in two. Neither is ready to compromise. Citizens’ assemblies might well have been helpful before the referendum in clarifying voters’ thinking. But they’ve done their thinking now and both sides think they are now in a majority to get everything they want. They’re not going to split the difference.
I understand citizens assemblies have been successful in Ireland in dealing with controversial topics, in particular abortion. It seems when tasked with getting to a consensus, these assemblies will actually come to some kind of common ground. I haven't followed the topic closely, however.
And however you dress it up it's an impossible difference to split. It's a binary choice.
La Fin.
It really isn't and it never was. There is a world of difference between leaving the EU with a deal and quite possibly a CU and leaving without one in dispute about the bills left behind. What we need is a deal that in the view of remainers mitigates the damage they perceive that we will suffer from leaving the EU whilst at the same time satisfies the majority of leavers that we have actually left. In short we need a compromise.
May's deal could have been that deal but her complete failure to build a consensus doomed a reasonable resolution to defeat and rejection by both sides. The challenge is how do we get back there again when, as Alastair says, people have become so entrenched? I am not sure about a Citizens Assembly but I confess other ideas about how we build that consensus are painfully thin on the ground.
The deal is dead. If it somehow gets adopted it will have no legitimacy for anyone and will be political poison for generations. I’m afraid I now see no alternative to a referendum between Remain and No Deal.
Unfortunately so. (Though I think we will get a GE first as it kicks the can). With all but one leadership candidate essentially saying the deal will only come back once they change it it has no chance if they cannot pull off that miracle.
With the outcome being something like 50.5% to 49.5%, regardless of which side wins it.
Plus it enables a FTA with the EU for GB and removes the temporary Customs Union
I guess the obvious question is, since you need to win a general election with a DUP-free majority to do this anyhow, why not just go ahead and do it without the referendum.
As it needs mandate from NI voters to override the will of NI's largest party at Westminster
But it doesn’t need a mandate from Scottish voters to override the will of Scotland’s largest party at Westminster?
You Tories are getting yourselves into all kinds of very deep water, and all the signs are that you never learned how to swim.
Scots will be fine with an EU FTA as the poll below shows, however if NI keeps the backstop to protect the Good Friday Agreement until a technical solution is found to the Irish border also fine
Does said FTA include mutual recognition of each others standards? What about dispute resolution?
If Rory Stewart had suggested this idea his head would already be on a pike.
Ruth Davidson currently cannot even beat the Brexit Party in Scotland let alone the SNP and she should thank Boris he will get a FTA polling shows most Scots far prefer to No Deal
I cannot let that go unchallenged. Yes, recent polling does indicate that Ruth Davidson’s team is neck and neck with the Brexit Party in Scotland (usual caveats, sub-samples blah blah), but where on earth is the evidence that “polling shows most Scots far prefer to No Deal”?
No Deal got just 29% support from Scottish respondents in the latest YouGov (compared to 42% GB-wide). How does that equate with ”most Scots far prefer”? (page 14:)
If Rory Stewart had suggested this idea his head would already be on a pike.
Ruth Davidson currently cannot even beat the Brexit Party in Scotland let alone the SNP and she should thank Boris he will get a FTA polling shows most Scots far prefer to No Deal
I cannot let that go unchallenged. Yes, recent polling does indicate that Ruth Davidson’s team is neck and neck with the Brexit Party in Scotland (usual caveats, sub-samples blah blah), but where on earth is the evidence that “polling shows most Scots far prefer to No Deal”?
No Deal got just 29% support from Scottish respondents in the latest YouGov (compared to 42% GB-wide). How does that equate with ”most Scots far prefer”? (page 14:)
Mr. Gate, Leeds was about 50.2% Remain, which is about as close to a tie as you can get.
Worth noting that the counting area was very large, I think the third largest in the country, so (if usual trends apply) one might expect the city proper to be pro-EU and the outlying areas sceptical, to an almost perfect balance.
What time do we discover the results from today's vote?
Mr. Gate, Leeds was about 50.2% Remain, which is about as close to a tie as you can get.
Worth noting that the counting area was very large, I think the third largest in the country, so (if usual trends apply) one might expect the city proper to be pro-EU and the outlying areas sceptical, to an almost perfect balance.
What time do we discover the results from today's vote?
I appreciate that. I just wanted to remind @HYUFD that there are significant blocks of Remain outside of London, Oxford and Cambridge.
More people voted for Remain in Birmingham than in any other city outside of London, for example.
61% of Conservative Party members would rather Brexit took place even if it caused significant damage to the UK economy. Begs belief.
Democracy is more important than anything else.
Would you trade our democracy for Chinese one party state and no free media dictatorship if it was better for the economy?
No, but our democracy is not built on referendums so your point falls flat on its face straight away.
No, but Brexit is democracy. It is what MPs were elected to offer a referendum on, it is what MPs were elected to implement and having our MPs set our laws is the very point of taking back control. Nothing is more important than safeguarding democracy.
If Rory Stewart had suggested this idea his head would already be on a pike.
Ruth Davidson currently cannot even beat the Brexit Party in Scotland let alone the SNP and she should thank Boris he will get a FTA polling shows most Scots far prefer to No Deal
I cannot let that go unchallenged. Yes, recent polling does indicate that Ruth Davidson’s team is neck and neck with the Brexit Party in Scotland (usual caveats, sub-samples blah blah), but where on earth is the evidence that “polling shows most Scots far prefer to No Deal”?
No Deal got just 29% support from Scottish respondents in the latest YouGov (compared to 42% GB-wide). How does that equate with ”most Scots far prefer”? (page 14:)
1) a Canada style FTA is not the same thing as No Deal. By definition, it requires a Deal.
2) still cannot see any numbers there that support your contention that “most Scots far prefer”. By definition, “most Scots” implies a majority.
1) Indeed hence Boris will deliver a Canada style FTA for GB if the voters of NI back the backstop in a referendum. Even Barnier has said he will deliver a Canada style FTA for GB if NI keeps the backstop until a technical solution found to the Irish border
2) The poll showed a plurality in Scotland back a Canada style FTA, if you dislike the conclusions tough
So the choice is Jeff Bridges' stunt double from Dumb & Dumber, or James Bond?
If that’s the choice, number 1 all the way please. I'm not a Boris fan but I think I have a pretty good idea of his motivations. That's immensely preferable to me than a member of our friendly neighbourhood spook community. Hope it's not true.
Come on!
Scottish gentry (minor) Scion of an ancient albeit scruffy House Eton educated Former governor of Iraqi province Friends with President of Afghanistan Charming and beautiful wife
It could almost be a character from an Ian Fleming novel
What’s not to like?
A wife acquired from another man, she was previously married to an academic who lost out to Rory's charms in Afghanistan when they were doing academic research
What century do you think this is HY? Do you think that men possess wives as property to be acquired and disposed of?
I didn’t think my respect for Tories could sink any further, but you just managed it.
Turns out Corbyn is the only thing keeping Tory members awake at night. Otherwise the "Conservative and Unionist" party is perfectly OK with the other destruction of the economy, the United Kingdom and their own party in the pursuit of their project
61% of Conservative Party members would rather Brexit took place even if it caused significant damage to the UK economy. Begs belief.
Democracy is more important than anything else.
Would you trade our democracy for Chinese one party state and no free media dictatorship if it was better for the economy?
No, but our democracy is not built on referendums so your point falls flat on its face straight away.
No, but Brexit is democracy. It is what MPs were elected to offer a referendum on, it is what MPs were elected to implement and having our MPs set our laws is the very point of taking back control. Nothing is more important than safeguarding democracy.
And MPs are not their to implement constituents views regardless but to represent their best interests, that’s the UK parliamentary democracy.
I never really thought I would need to plan for a hard brexit and Scottish independence but now that almost seems like the most likely route. How will the border at Carlisle look? Will the English allow us to use the £ and do we want to? What happens to the British army? Will there be a wave of English heading to Scotland ?
Boris is now considering a referendum on the backstop for NI and a FTA for GB, avoids ultra hard Brexit and more acceptable to Scots than No Deal as it likely ensures a Deal and FTA and also lets the people of NI not the DUP decide on the backstop
Oh look, it’s a new @HYUFD fantasy which he’ll spam us with incessantly - until he thinks of a new one in a week or two.
Not a fantasy reported on here last night and on twitter
Would that put the DUP in the position of voting for the inevitable no confidence motion?
Sod the DUP, Boris wins a general election comfortably with that anyway
The Tories' confidence in Boris as an election winner is yet another self-deception. Just look at his leadership campaign - he cowers in a corner, refusing to engage with his opponents or expose himself to any form of challenge and offers no credible or coherent policy platform. That might work in the fantasy world inhabited by most Tory Party members but it is hardly going to carry him through a general election.
BoJo is a core vote strategy at best. And i have no idea why even the core vote think he's anything other than an incompetent joker. But there it is.
Tories won't be getting back to election winning vote shares until they skip a generation. Not convinced Stewart is the answer but at least he's a bit different. He can't win though given the electorate for this job.
May's deal could have been that deal but her complete failure to build a consensus doomed a reasonable resolution to defeat and rejection by both sides.
The real mistake (in a crowded field) was not to involve Labour supporters in the process of developing our position and negotiating the terms of the deal. I argued vociferously on here that we should have asked Mandelson, Benn, Starmer etc to be involved along with Sturgeon, the DUP and some Labour muppet from Wales. This needed to be a national effort not a party one, especially after May had thrown her majority away.
To be cynical, not to even give the appearance of seeking consensus (regardless of your final intention) was dumbfuckery of a very high order.
There's nothing desperately unusual about that - everyone wants to be on the winning side so they can prosper under the new regime in terms of a Cabinet job or just general favour from the new Whips office.
Back in 1990, everyone thought Heseltine would win right up until a poll showed Major doing as well and suddenly Major became the option. IF a poll came out showing Javid or Stewart doing as well as Boris in a hypothetical GE they would suddenly attract support.
The ComRes poll ended the contest - Conservatives see Boris Johnson as their only hope for not only staying in Government but winning a future GE. Nothing else matters for backbench MPs seeing their careers ending on polls of 20% - with Boris it won't only be salvation and redemption but a landslide and that's all that matters.
Self interest and self preservation - the two best recruiters Boris has. His personal qualifications and competencies are entirely irrelevant as long as there is that promise of a GE win - if he fails, his erstwhile supporters will turn on him and end him but for now, they will stand by him.
Mr. Gate, because of the UK's history (long centralised rather than the patchwork of Germany or Italy, with large regional capitals), the urban/rural divide also plays into a London-centric aspect.
Osborne's 'Northern Powerhouse' had some merit, if only in recognising that governments tend to have cash to splash for London but when it comes to elsewhere in the country there's always room to cut promised spending on rail and the like.
I have met Rory Stewart several times and have always been a fan.
The proposed number of attendees for the assembly also seems to be growing in number, to the point that it now has the distinct whiff of becoming a second referendum.
The remit of a citizens assembly would be to propose a workable Brexit, so it would be a constructive result.
The referendum was either Remain or Leave and so not constructive at all.
Didn't the Irish have one on abortion and it (?they) came up with a workable solution. I can see how the idea would work with a country with a population the size of RoI; I'm less sure about how it work with a population ten or so times bigger.
How is the population size of any relevance?
Increased sorts and conditions of men (and women and.........)
Nah
Why? Genuine question.
That said, relatively few of the recommendations of the various CAs that have been tried have subsequently found favour with either politicians or referendums. I am sceptical that it offers the magic bullet to our particular situation.
Take the first point. You've given me something else to dig into when I've finished the couple of dozen things already on my to-do list! I accept that I may well be slowing down a bit but I really don't know, with so many interesting things in the world, how I ever had time to go to work!
Just imagine being asked to fish ten balls out of a barrel and another ten out of a swimming pool.
Both the barrel and the swimming pool contain three quarters white balls and one quarter black balls, all thoroughly mixed.
In both cases the probability of various outcomes from the ten balls you have chosen is exactly the same. If you choose twenty balls, again, exactly the same, but you'll have a more accurate sample (more of the time).
The size of the population only becomes relevant as your sample starts to approach the total number of balls in the barrel.
Thanks for the reminder; I didn't explain myself properly. It was the politics I was thinking I'd have to investigate. It's usually the case of course that an answer, especially a simple answer, to a politico-social problem propounded by someone and taken up with alacrity by many others isn't the cure-all it's assumed to be.
BoJo is a core vote strategy at best. And i have no idea why even the core vote think he's anything other than an incompetent joker. But there it is.
Tories won't be getting back to election winning vote shares until they skip a generation. Not convinced Stewart is the answer but at least he's a bit different. He can't win though given the electorate for this job.
Tories retreating to a Core Vote strategy in England.
Tories have been in Core Vote hibernation in Scotland for decades now.
How on earth are they ever going to win elections without appealing to the vast numbers of waverers/weak-preference voters in the centre?
I do enjoy reading HYFUD's confident assertions about what will happen at a hypothetical general election. It takes me back to the heady days in 2015 when he confidently assured us that a Corbyn-lead Labour party couldn't top 25%
May's deal could have been that deal but her complete failure to build a consensus doomed a reasonable resolution to defeat and rejection by both sides.
The real mistake (in a crowded field) was not to involve Labour supporters in the process of developing our position and negotiating the terms of the deal. I argued vociferously on here that we should have asked Mandelson, Benn, Starmer etc to be involved along with Sturgeon, the DUP and some Labour muppet from Wales. This needed to be a national effort not a party one, especially after May had thrown her majority away.
To be cynical, not to even give the appearance of seeking consensus (regardless of your final intention) was dumbfuckery of a very high order.
For May the Tories are not a One-Nation party, but the The Nation party. Others are not with her, so they must be against her.
Mr. Gate, because of the UK's history (long centralised rather than the patchwork of Germany or Italy, with large regional capitals), the urban/rural divide also plays into a London-centric aspect.
Osborne's 'Northern Powerhouse' had some merit, if only in recognising that governments tend to have cash to splash for London but when it comes to elsewhere in the country there's always room to cut promised spending on rail and the like.
I agree but I think there's a deeper issue than that. I live in Newcastle upon Tyne which is much more wealthy than the surrounding towns. The same resentment that the country has about investment in London also applies on a local level to investment in the regional capital.
I'm not sure how you begin to approach the issue. I think city mayors potentially make things worse.
The 'North of Tyne' city region is interesting because it has both the City of Newcastle and the whole of Northumberland. Quite different to the other 'metro mayors'.
There's nothing desperately unusual about that - everyone wants to be on the winning side so they can prosper under the new regime in terms of a Cabinet job or just general favour from the new Whips office.
Back in 1990, everyone thought Heseltine would win right up until a poll showed Major doing as well and suddenly Major became the option. IF a poll came out showing Javid or Stewart doing as well as Boris in a hypothetical GE they would suddenly attract support.
The ComRes poll ended the contest - Conservatives see Boris Johnson as their only hope for not only staying in Government but winning a future GE. Nothing else matters for backbench MPs seeing their careers ending on polls of 20% - with Boris it won't only be salvation and redemption but a landslide and that's all that matters.
Self interest and self preservation - the two best recruiters Boris has. His personal qualifications and competencies are entirely irrelevant as long as there is that promise of a GE win - if he fails, his erstwhile supporters will turn on him and end him but for now, they will stand by him.
Which to be fair isn't cynical of the MPs it is quite appropriate for a democracy.
Furthermore I think Boris will do far better than either May or Brown and will be a PM in the shape of Cameron who was our most successful leader of recent times. Boris I expect will delegate accordingly and not micromanage everything which is what we need from a PM.
Good interview from Javid with John Humphrys on "Today". However I think it very unlikely he'll make the threshold especially given his concession that he's losing votes to Rory Stewart.
Javid said he was more Homer Simpson than Cicero which was a good line
It would have been if it hadn't immediately given the impression that he and his team had spent 7 hours fashioning it.
Turns out Corbyn is the only thing keeping Tory members awake at night. Otherwise the "Conservative and Unionist" party is perfectly OK with the other destruction of the economy, the United Kingdom and their own party in the pursuit of their project
That's quite funny. We need more Corbyns. If you met someone socially and they said they were a member of the Conservative Party there would be several assumptions you would be likely to make but since Brexit that list has got a lot longer
It'd be interesting if Westminster stopped getting in the way of Yorkshire's desire for a full Yorkshire mayor, and to see how that worked out. The county, being large, has both a number of big cities and lots of rural areas too. A Yorkshire mayor might be able to balance the urban and rural concerns people have.
Mr. Gate, because of the UK's history (long centralised rather than the patchwork of Germany or Italy, with large regional capitals), the urban/rural divide also plays into a London-centric aspect.
Osborne's 'Northern Powerhouse' had some merit, if only in recognising that governments tend to have cash to splash for London but when it comes to elsewhere in the country there's always room to cut promised spending on rail and the like.
I agree but I think there's a deeper issue than that. I live in Newcastle upon Tyne which is much more wealthy than the surrounding towns. The same resentment that the country has about investment in London also applies on a local level to investment in the regional capital.
I'm not sure how you begin to approach the issue. I think city mayors potentially make things worse.
The 'North of Tyne' city region is interesting because it has both the City of Newcastle and the whole of Northumberland. Quite different to the other 'metro mayors'.
and the reason why the North of Tyne city region exists shows a large part of the issue.
Newcastle insisted on being the regional capital so the councils south of the Tyne said no...
When 1 area is so much more successful than the others resentment builds up (look at London, Salford v Manchester, Sunderland v Shields, Yorkshire..)
BoJo is a core vote strategy at best. And i have no idea why even the core vote think he's anything other than an incompetent joker. But there it is.
Tories won't be getting back to election winning vote shares until they skip a generation. Not convinced Stewart is the answer but at least he's a bit different. He can't win though given the electorate for this job.
I think you underestimate his popularity, even amongst white working class labour voters would vote for him.
Personal anecdote : My own mother in law who has always voted labour really likes Boris and would vote for him . If he can get brexit over the line he can reunite the nation and he is the only one capable of defeating the corbyn hard left Labour Party
Mr. Gate, because of the UK's history (long centralised rather than the patchwork of Germany or Italy, with large regional capitals), the urban/rural divide also plays into a London-centric aspect.
Osborne's 'Northern Powerhouse' had some merit, if only in recognising that governments tend to have cash to splash for London but when it comes to elsewhere in the country there's always room to cut promised spending on rail and the like.
It had merit in all aspects other than actually spending any money at all in the north.
Proving my point. These people would eat grass rather than compromise.
I don’t think it does. “Brexit” is not defined. As it become more and more hair-shirted the costs go up and the benefits down.
So, for example, EFTA and May’s Deal absolutely I would take even at the cost of the above.
No Deal on balance yes
Full hair shirted autarky is a lot less compelling
There is room to compromise once you get people in a room. A huge portion of the Leaver voters want to Brexit because that’s what the result of the vote was. They are not as fussed by the form. A CA dilutes (hopefully!) the nutter-quotient
And again Leavers shift the goalposts. No deal is now the moderate option? Heaven help us.
No, that’s not what I said.
No deal is less extreme than “full hair shirted autarky”. But it’s not the moderate option.
Read and think rather than lashing out would be my advice
I read and thought and saw that you contrasted no deal Brexit with a hypothetical more severe alternative to obscure the fact that you are falling in behind a batshit mental idea.
What was derided as Project Fear during the referendum campaign has now become the only way to fulfil the referendum result.
Same people who are now trying to convince us that Johnson will make a good PM after telling us he was a buffoon for years.
I think it boils down to the fact that many Tories, particularly leavers, will go along with just about anything if it gives them the result they want. I suspect HUYFD would be arguing on here for WW3 if he'd seen a poll that showed it notched the Tories lead up a couple of points!
May's deal could have been that deal but her complete failure to build a consensus doomed a reasonable resolution to defeat and rejection by both sides.
The real mistake (in a crowded field) was not to involve Labour supporters in the process of developing our position and negotiating the terms of the deal. I argued vociferously on here that we should have asked Mandelson, Benn, Starmer etc to be involved along with Sturgeon, the DUP and some Labour muppet from Wales. This needed to be a national effort not a party one, especially after May had thrown her majority away.
To be cynical, not to even give the appearance of seeking consensus (regardless of your final intention) was dumbfuckery of a very high order.
I was optimistic the first time May visited Sturgeon. I thought that maybe, just maybe we had finally ended up with a Tory that respected Scots.
Turned out that May didn’t respect anyone at all. Not even herself.
Turns out Corbyn is the only thing keeping Tory members awake at night. Otherwise the "Conservative and Unionist" party is perfectly OK with the other destruction of the economy, the United Kingdom and their own party in the pursuit of their project
Turns out Corbyn is the only thing keeping Tory members awake at night. Otherwise the "Conservative and Unionist" party is perfectly OK with the other destruction of the economy, the United Kingdom and their own party in the pursuit of their project
Yep, the Conservative and Unionist Party might as well change its name to the English Nationalist Party. They would destroy everything in order to inflict economic catastrophe on a country they used to pretend to care about. They are unhinged.
Proving my point. These people would eat grass rather than compromise.
I don’t think it does. “Brexit” is not defined. As it become more and more hair-shirted the costs go up and the benefits down.
So, for example, EFTA and May’s Deal absolutely I would take even at the cost of the above.
No Deal on balance yes
Full hair shirted autarky is a lot less compelling
There is room to compromise once you get people in a room. A huge portion of the Leaver voters want to Brexit because that’s what the result of the vote was. They are not as fussed by the form. A CA dilutes (hopefully!) the nutter-quotient
And again Leavers shift the goalposts. No deal is now the moderate option? Heaven help us.
No, that’s not what I said.
No deal is less extreme than “full hair shirted autarky”. But it’s not the moderate option.
Read and think rather than lashing out would be my advice
I read and thought and saw that you contrasted no deal Brexit with a hypothetical more severe alternative to obscure the fact that you are falling in behind a batshit mental idea.
I think it boils down to the fact that many Tories, particularly leavers, will go along with just about anything if it gives them the result they want. I suspect HUYFD would be arguing on here for WW3 if he'd seen a poll that showed it notched the Tories lead up a couple of points!
We've already seen a hard right poster on here this morning say he'd rather see the troubles return to Northern Ireland if it meant doing away with the backstop.
Brexit hasn't brought out the best in people, has it?
BoJo is a core vote strategy at best. And i have no idea why even the core vote think he's anything other than an incompetent joker. But there it is.
Tories won't be getting back to election winning vote shares until they skip a generation. Not convinced Stewart is the answer but at least he's a bit different. He can't win though given the electorate for this job.
I think you underestimate his popularity, even amongst white working class labour voters would vote for him.
Personal anecdote : My own mother in law who has always voted labour really likes Boris and would vote for him . If he can get brexit over the line he can reunite the nation and he is the only one capable of defeating the corbyn hard left Labour Party
They would vote for the current, carefully scripted “Boris” they think he is now but when they see the real Johnson, tax cuts for the better off, fuck business and incompetent they may well think again.
Mr. Gate, because of the UK's history (long centralised rather than the patchwork of Germany or Italy, with large regional capitals), the urban/rural divide also plays into a London-centric aspect.
Osborne's 'Northern Powerhouse' had some merit, if only in recognising that governments tend to have cash to splash for London but when it comes to elsewhere in the country there's always room to cut promised spending on rail and the like.
I agree but I think there's a deeper issue than that. I live in Newcastle upon Tyne which is much more wealthy than the surrounding towns. The same resentment that the country has about investment in London also applies on a local level to investment in the regional capital.
I'm not sure how you begin to approach the issue. I think city mayors potentially make things worse.
The 'North of Tyne' city region is interesting because it has both the City of Newcastle and the whole of Northumberland. Quite different to the other 'metro mayors'.
and the reason why the North of Tyne city region exists shows a large part of the issue.
Newcastle insisted on being the regional capital so the councils south of the Tyne said no...
When 1 area is so much more successful than the others resentment builds up (look at London, Salford v Manchester, Sunderland v Shields, Yorkshire..)
That's not the case at all. Newcastle insisted on nothing, Newcastle IS the regional capital. The councillors in South Tyneside and Gateshead are just guilty of short term thinking and petty tribalism.
I think it boils down to the fact that many Tories, particularly leavers, will go along with just about anything if it gives them the result they want.
BoJo is a core vote strategy at best. And i have no idea why even the core vote think he's anything other than an incompetent joker. But there it is.
Tories won't be getting back to election winning vote shares until they skip a generation. Not convinced Stewart is the answer but at least he's a bit different. He can't win though given the electorate for this job.
Personal anecdote : My own mother in law who has always voted labour really likes Boris and would vote for him .
I have Labour friends who love Rory Stewart and would vote for him. They're intelligent, well read, but no they don't live in the metropolitan elite. In fact they're all northerners.
It'd be interesting if Westminster stopped getting in the way of Yorkshire's desire for a full Yorkshire mayor, and to see how that worked out. The county, being large, has both a number of big cities and lots of rural areas too. A Yorkshire mayor might be able to balance the urban and rural concerns people have.
I agree. Problem is that Westminster does not want more strong devolved administrations getting in the way!
So the choice is Jeff Bridges' stunt double from Dumb & Dumber, or James Bond?
If that’s the choice, number 1 all the way please. I'm not a Boris fan but I think I have a pretty good idea of his motivations. That's immensely preferable to me than a member of our friendly neighbourhood spook community. Hope it's not true.
Come on!
Scottish gentry (minor) Scion of an ancient albeit scruffy House Eton educated Former governor of Iraqi province Friends with President of Afghanistan Charming and beautiful wife
It could almost be a character from an Ian Fleming novel
What’s not to like?
A wife acquired from another man, she was previously married to an academic who lost out to Rory's charms in Afghanistan when they were doing academic research
What century do you think this is HY? Do you think that men possess wives as property to be acquired and disposed of?
I didn’t think my respect for Tories could sink any further, but you just managed it.
I'm bemused that HYUFD seems to think that Stewart's marriage to a previously married woman - a union that has resulted in two children - is a profitable line given the line of wrecked marriages and relationships left in Johnson's wake.
BBC R4 - On second ballot -candid from Javid - "Rory taking support from all candidates"
If it's really true that support has moved to Stewart not only from the 3 who have dropped out but also from the other 6 who remain, and considering Hunt and Stewart were separated by only about 24 votes - or just 8% of the total - in the first round, it's not impossible that Stewart could move into second place in today's ballot.
Aĺl seems bizarre to me. Stewart has surely the least chance with members, yet somehow he is getting the anti-Boris vote.
I think MPs realise that Johnson will win the members vote whatever happens so I suspect the thinking is to select the opponent who will give him the hardest scrutiny and that is Stewart,
Turns out Corbyn is the only thing keeping Tory members awake at night. Otherwise the "Conservative and Unionist" party is perfectly OK with the other destruction of the economy, the United Kingdom and their own party in the pursuit of their project
A confirmatory referendum - of the kind that Farage et al were talking up before the first one - would highlight the divisions out there. We will have the grass chewers making utter tossers of themselves. We will have the gammony "patriots" making utter tossers of themselves. We will have the screaming remainers making utter tossers of themselves shouting about how the grass chewers and gammony patriots are utter tossers.
In another referendum leave wouldn't have Bob Mercer's money, Cambridge Analytica and AggregateIQ behind them so they'd almost certainly lose. The Russians would still be on board with the project so that's a thread of hope to which they can cling.
Turns out Corbyn is the only thing keeping Tory members awake at night. Otherwise the "Conservative and Unionist" party is perfectly OK with the other destruction of the economy, the United Kingdom and their own party in the pursuit of their project
I know that a lot of people on here will find that graph depressing. I don’t. I welcome it. The Tories are slowly but surely letting go of the Union. It has taken many decades, but they’re almost there.
Turns out Corbyn is the only thing keeping Tory members awake at night. Otherwise the "Conservative and Unionist" party is perfectly OK with the other destruction of the economy, the United Kingdom and their own party in the pursuit of their project
I'd love to see a similar poll but with Marxist principles as the options e.g. "Would you vote for Brexit if all current utility companies were returned to state control?"
61% of Conservative Party members would rather Brexit took place even if it caused significant damage to the UK economy. Begs belief.
Democracy is more important than anything else. Would you trade our democracy for Chinese one party state and no free media dictatorship if it was better for the economy?
Perhaps more important than "democracy" is trust that the processes are working honestly. The Conservatives have destroyed that trust. And Mrs May destroyed it even more by ruling out any enquiry into suspected Russian involvement in the referendum.
If Boris wins the leadership he will have to go to the country this autumn. That's his only hope of governing the House of Commons and it's his only hope of staying in power for 5 years. Why? Because we all know he's an incompetent knave and, even if he wasn't, the honeymoon will end abruptly by Christmas and the tories will lose power in three years. I know the tories are totally obsessed about Brexit but there's other legislation as well to pass and a divisive figure like Boris Johnson will not have the numbers in the House of Commons. Defeat after defeat is not a good look. Ask John Major.
If Rory wins I actually think he might be able to navigate the parliamentary arithmetic for a little longer. He's open enough to others to get some legislation through with the help of cross-bench moderates. So I could see the tories holding on for perhaps a year or more. He won't bring the same baggage as Boris either so his honeymoon will last a little longer.
What will happen with this race? I fully expect the Conservative Party to continue their mission of self-destruction and therefore to elect Boris as their leader. Were the country not in such a parlous state it might be bemusing to watch. But we are and it won't be.
Turns out Corbyn is the only thing keeping Tory members awake at night. Otherwise the "Conservative and Unionist" party is perfectly OK with the other destruction of the economy, the United Kingdom and their own party in the pursuit of their project
Yep, the Conservative and Unionist Party might as well change its name to the English Nationalist Party. They would destroy everything in order to inflict economic catastrophe on a country they used to pretend to care about. They are unhinged.
You say economic catastrophe but that is your projection. To protect and save the country we must implement Brexit. L'etat c'est Brexit
The country at no fewer than three national elections now have seen the country take steps to endorse Brexit. Five if you count the last 2 European Elections.
2015 the electorate voted to elect a government that would hold a Brexit referendum. 2016 the electorate voted for Brexit in that referendum. 2017 the electorate voted for MPs pledging to honour that referendum.
Having democracy is more important than economic inconvenience.
BBC R4 - On second ballot -candid from Javid - "Rory taking support from all candidates"
If it's really true that support has moved to Stewart not only from the 3 who have dropped out but also from the other 6 who remain, and considering Hunt and Stewart were separated by only about 24 votes - or just 8% of the total - in the first round, it's not impossible that Stewart could move into second place in today's ballot.
Aĺl seems bizarre to me. Stewart has surely the least chance with members, yet somehow he is getting the anti-Boris vote.
I think MPs realise that Johnson will win the members vote whatever happens so I suspect the thinking is to select the opponent who will give him the hardest scrutiny and that is Stewart,
is it really in the party interest to have blue on blue on such a scale, this isnt a general election, it is a party leader election where the candidates are supposedly batting for same team. Rory is acting more like labour/lib opposition than a conservative contender.
Turns out Corbyn is the only thing keeping Tory members awake at night. Otherwise the "Conservative and Unionist" party is perfectly OK with the other destruction of the economy, the United Kingdom and their own party in the pursuit of their project
Yep, the Conservative and Unionist Party might as well change its name to the English Nationalist Party. They would destroy everything in order to inflict economic catastrophe on a country they used to pretend to care about. They are unhinged.
You say economic catastrophe but that is your projection. To protect and save the country we must implement Brexit. L'etat c'est Brexit
The country at no fewer than three national elections now have seen the country take steps to endorse Brexit. Five if you count the last 2 European Elections.
In case others on here aren't aware, this is the person who stated he'd like to see the troubles return to Northern Ireland as the price to pay for his Brexit.
I don't really need to add anything further to that.
Turns out Corbyn is the only thing keeping Tory members awake at night. Otherwise the "Conservative and Unionist" party is perfectly OK with the other destruction of the economy, the United Kingdom and their own party in the pursuit of their project
Yep, the Conservative and Unionist Party might as well change its name to the English Nationalist Party. They would destroy everything in order to inflict economic catastrophe on a country they used to pretend to care about. They are unhinged.
You say economic catastrophe but that is your projection. To protect and save the country we must implement Brexit. L'etat c'est Brexit
The country at no fewer than three national elections now have seen the country take steps to endorse Brexit. Five if you count the last 2 European Elections.
2015 the electorate voted to elect a government that would hold a Brexit referendum. 2016 the electorate voted for Brexit in that referendum. 2017 the electorate voted for MPs pledging to honour that referendum.
Having democracy is more important than economic inconvenience.
The attitude to NI that you espoused yesterday shows that you're not interested in protecting or saving the country. You're willing to see it be consumed in hatred and flame.
Mr. Gate, because of the UK's history (long centralised rather than the patchwork of Germany or Italy, with large regional capitals), the urban/rural divide also plays into a London-centric aspect.
Osborne's 'Northern Powerhouse' had some merit, if only in recognising that governments tend to have cash to splash for London but when it comes to elsewhere in the country there's always room to cut promised spending on rail and the like.
I agree but I think there's a deeper issue than that. I live in Newcastle upon Tyne which is much more wealthy than the surrounding towns. The same resentment that the country has about investment in London also applies on a local level to investment in the regional capital.
I'm not sure how you begin to approach the issue. I think city mayors potentially make things worse.
The 'North of Tyne' city region is interesting because it has both the City of Newcastle and the whole of Northumberland. Quite different to the other 'metro mayors'.
I doubt that Newcastle is 'much more wealthy' than Ponteland, Darras Hall and other affluent parts of Northumberland and North Tyneside.
And this suggests that regional cities tend to be less affluent than their surrounding areas:
Comments
The same is true to a lesser extent of remainers. If we revoke or even have a 2nd referendum which remains wins, we will only ever be one general election result from leaving on a no deal basis. As HYUFD has pointed out, on a constituency basis the Westminster map is pretty leavy, whilst I disagree with much of his analysis and spin, it is realistic that sooner or later a no deal party would win. I wouldnt expect them to want any further referendums and would see the GE win as sufficient basis for leaving on whatever terms they want.
We will have no stability, businesses will not go back to investing as they did before this nonsense, the EU will not trust us as dependable members.
The best deal available now for pragmatic remainers is May's deal in exchange for parliament having some control over the more important future negotiations.
The best option for no dealers is actually a referendum, which they might well win, it is not happening through this parliament, and probably not through the next. If they lose they can still win through a future GE.
Our politicans are so dumb they are doing the opposite of the best tactics available, with remainers wanting the referendum and no-dealers against it.
The time for the WA has passed, and yes you and some others thought it was not really Brexit, but theres revisionism going on where people are ignoring just how many Tories backed it in the end because they did think it was Brexit of some kind and better than remaining.
The take home for most is this. We had a referendum. Leave won. But many MPs decided otherwise and became obstructive. So we probably won't leave because the powers that be have decided otherwise. Some are happy with this. Many are not and they blame the MPs.
Solution? None available. We're now in the blame game phase. Who loses? Democracy and the MPs, and they don't like it up 'em..
Not really. Boris is the macho 'we can do Brexit right' candidate. That quite rightly deserves to be challenged and taken apart.
Both the barrel and the swimming pool contain three quarters white balls and one quarter black balls, all thoroughly mixed.
In both cases the probability of various outcomes from the ten balls you have chosen is exactly the same. If you choose twenty balls, again, exactly the same, but you'll have a more accurate sample (more of the time).
The size of the population only becomes relevant as your sample starts to approach the total number of balls in the barrel.
So we ask the question, given the new information, do we still want to actually do this?
Meanwhile the snake oil salesmen that got us into this mess shout betrayal with impunity.
Populus after the Labour Conference had Labour ahead 36-28 and ICM after the Conservative Conference had Labour ahead 38-33.
As to the assertion IDS would have done better than Howard in 2005, we can neither prove nor disprove that. What we do know is IDS was ousted in a vote of No Confidence in October 2003 which doesn't suggest backbench Conservative MPs thought he was leading them to victory.
They will reap what they sowed, and whinging about it is pointless. Few come out with any credit.
No Deal got just 29% support from Scottish respondents in the latest YouGov (compared to 42% GB-wide). How does that equate with ”most Scots far prefer”? (page 14:)
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/4ofbig74dp/SundayTimes_190614_Results_w.pdf
... or are you referring to some other polling?
So if he will get an easier ride against Hunt, then one can expect that is who is head to head opponent will be.
Meanwhile in the middle, most people however they voted forst time around will have to have a hard examination of whether principle trumps reality. Hard to cling to project fear when industry people explain in vivid detail just how fucked no deal leaves them - and therefore leaves you.
The establishment (both main parties) were too complacent and regarded the voting public of the UK as irrelevant to their soft jobs in Westminster. Cue mass hysteria when the public said something they didn't like and 3 years of doing nothing (something MP's are really good at) hoping the problem would go away.
Unfortunately the options in front of us now is to hope the EU get fed up with us and kick us out. This lame duck useless parliament don't know how to do anything anymore. Sack the lot of them.
Btw yesterday's amusement about the EU negotiators nicknaming Dominic Raab "turnip" seems to me little more than a German pun on his name - think kohl-rabi (cabbage turnip).
You Tories are getting yourselves into all kinds of very deep water, and all the signs are that you never learned how to swim.
But then what? No Deal seems most likely. But possibly Johnson rushes through essentially May's Deal (rebranded as the Boris Brexit), successfully ignoring the cries of Traitor from the hardline Brexiters who are still a minority among conservative MPs. He might also need to have a short "technical extension" past 31st October to pass a few laws, claiming that this doesn't change the fact of the UK being out and/or claiming that it's a centuries-old British tradition not to leave international organisations on Halloween.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2016/08/18/majority-people-think-freedom-movement-fair-price-
Scotland has not had a terrorist war for decades as NI had so is a different scenario
Would you trade our democracy for Chinese one party state and no free media dictatorship if it was better for the economy?
2) still cannot see any numbers there that support your contention that “most Scots far prefer”. By definition, “most Scots” implies a majority.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/08/08/those-whom-the-gods-wish-to-destroy-what-happens-next-now-that-britain-has-gone-mad/
Worth noting that the counting area was very large, I think the third largest in the country, so (if usual trends apply) one might expect the city proper to be pro-EU and the outlying areas sceptical, to an almost perfect balance.
What time do we discover the results from today's vote?
More people voted for Remain in Birmingham than in any other city outside of London, for example.
2) The poll showed a plurality in Scotland back a Canada style FTA, if you dislike the conclusions tough
I didn’t think my respect for Tories could sink any further, but you just managed it.
https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1140885827364544513
I realise that this is no way exclusively a British thing.
Tories won't be getting back to election winning vote shares until they skip a generation. Not convinced Stewart is the answer but at least he's a bit different. He can't win though given the electorate for this job.
Back in 1990, everyone thought Heseltine would win right up until a poll showed Major doing as well and suddenly Major became the option. IF a poll came out showing Javid or Stewart doing as well as Boris in a hypothetical GE they would suddenly attract support.
The ComRes poll ended the contest - Conservatives see Boris Johnson as their only hope for not only staying in Government but winning a future GE. Nothing else matters for backbench MPs seeing their careers ending on polls of 20% - with Boris it won't only be salvation and redemption but a landslide and that's all that matters.
Self interest and self preservation - the two best recruiters Boris has. His personal qualifications and competencies are entirely irrelevant as long as there is that promise of a GE win - if he fails, his erstwhile supporters will turn on him and end him but for now, they will stand by him.
Osborne's 'Northern Powerhouse' had some merit, if only in recognising that governments tend to have cash to splash for London but when it comes to elsewhere in the country there's always room to cut promised spending on rail and the like.
Tories have been in Core Vote hibernation in Scotland for decades now.
How on earth are they ever going to win elections without appealing to the vast numbers of waverers/weak-preference voters in the centre?
I'm not sure how you begin to approach the issue. I think city mayors potentially make things worse.
The 'North of Tyne' city region is interesting because it has both the City of Newcastle and the whole of Northumberland. Quite different to the other 'metro mayors'.
Furthermore I think Boris will do far better than either May or Brown and will be a PM in the shape of Cameron who was our most successful leader of recent times. Boris I expect will delegate accordingly and not micromanage everything which is what we need from a PM.
It'd be interesting if Westminster stopped getting in the way of Yorkshire's desire for a full Yorkshire mayor, and to see how that worked out. The county, being large, has both a number of big cities and lots of rural areas too. A Yorkshire mayor might be able to balance the urban and rural concerns people have.
Newcastle insisted on being the regional capital so the councils south of the Tyne said no...
When 1 area is so much more successful than the others resentment builds up (look at London, Salford v Manchester, Sunderland v Shields, Yorkshire..)
Personal anecdote : My own mother in law who has always voted labour really likes Boris and would vote for him . If he can get brexit over the line he can reunite the nation and he is the only one capable of defeating the corbyn hard left Labour Party
Same people who are now trying to convince us that Johnson will make a good PM after telling us he was a buffoon for years.
I think it boils down to the fact that many Tories, particularly leavers, will go along with just about anything if it gives them the result they want. I suspect HUYFD would be arguing on here for WW3 if he'd seen a poll that showed it notched the Tories lead up a couple of points!
Turned out that May didn’t respect anyone at all. Not even herself.
Brexit hasn't brought out the best in people, has it?
BoZo is at best a donkey with a cone on his head.
So, hey.
This is all about name recognition at the moment.
Mr. Royale, let's hope he gets 49 votes
I think MPs realise that Johnson will win the members vote whatever happens so I suspect the thinking is to select the opponent who will give him the hardest scrutiny and that is Stewart,
If Boris wins the leadership he will have to go to the country this autumn. That's his only hope of governing the House of Commons and it's his only hope of staying in power for 5 years. Why? Because we all know he's an incompetent knave and, even if he wasn't, the honeymoon will end abruptly by Christmas and the tories will lose power in three years. I know the tories are totally obsessed about Brexit but there's other legislation as well to pass and a divisive figure like Boris Johnson will not have the numbers in the House of Commons. Defeat after defeat is not a good look. Ask John Major.
If Rory wins I actually think he might be able to navigate the parliamentary arithmetic for a little longer. He's open enough to others to get some legislation through with the help of cross-bench moderates. So I could see the tories holding on for perhaps a year or more. He won't bring the same baggage as Boris either so his honeymoon will last a little longer.
What will happen with this race? I fully expect the Conservative Party to continue their mission of self-destruction and therefore to elect Boris as their leader. Were the country not in such a parlous state it might be bemusing to watch. But we are and it won't be.
The country at no fewer than three national elections now have seen the country take steps to endorse Brexit. Five if you count the last 2 European Elections.
2015 the electorate voted to elect a government that would hold a Brexit referendum.
2016 the electorate voted for Brexit in that referendum.
2017 the electorate voted for MPs pledging to honour that referendum.
Having democracy is more important than economic inconvenience.
I don't really need to add anything further to that.
And this suggests that regional cities tend to be less affluent than their surrounding areas:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/regionalaccounts/grossdisposablehouseholdincome/bulletins/regionalgrossdisposablehouseholdincomegdhi/1997to2016#what-was-the-average-disposable-household-income-in-your-local-area
What you tend to get in big urban areas is greater disparity of wealth and greater proximity of inequality.
Edit: Though I assume that Newcastle is wealthier than Gateshead although Gateshead is effectively part of the Newcastle conurbation.