politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » In spite of all the uncertainty a 2019 general election is sti
Comments
-
Good afternoon, everyone.
Mr. Tokyo, I agree. This will help Labour.0 -
I suspect some Remainers will go back to Labour from the LDs after Corbyn's backing for EUref2 this morning but not all given Corbyn has only said Labour will campaign for Remain against No Deal or a Tory Deal not against a Labour Dealmarke09 said:Scenario 1: Imagine that a General Election is held later this year before Brexit has been delivered. Boris Johnson is the leader of the Conservatives, Jeremy Corbyn remains leader of the Labour Party, Jo Swinson is leader of the Liberal Democrats and Nigel Farage is leader of the Brexit Party. How do you think you would then vote?
Con: 17%
LDem: 17%
Brex: 16%
Lab: 13%
SNP: 3%
Green: 6%
Plaid: 1%
Oth: 2%
Don’t know: 14%
Would not vote: 9%
Refused: 2%
Figures with undecideds and refused excluded:
Con: 23%
LDem: 23%
Brex: 21%
Lab: 17%
Grn: 8%0 -
-
Incidentally, more domestic woes, so if I happen not to post F1 stuff it's probable that's the cause. Just a heads up.
[Obviously I could be decapitated by a low-flying flamingo, but that's less predictable].0 -
But what is this "Brexit" which has been "delivered"? This is the nub of the problem, and one which makes me sceptical of any such polls.marke09 said:Scenario 2: Imagine that a General Election is held later this year after Brexit has been delivered. Boris Johnson is the leader of the Conservatives, Jeremy Corbyn remains leader of the Labour Party, Jo Swinson is leader of the Liberal Democrats and Nigel Farage is leader of the Brexit Party. How do you think you would then vote?
Con: 20%
Lib: 15%
Brex: 10%
Lab: 13%
SNP: 3%
Grn: 7%
Plaid: 1%
Oth: 1%
Don’t know: 16%
Would not vote: 9%
Refused: 4%
Figures with undecideds and refused excluded:
Con: 28%
LDem: 20%
Brex: 14%
Lab: 17%
Grn: 9%0 -
The problem with any amendments now is the Tory Leadership .
This is complicating the issue and the maths .0 -
Surely it suggests Hunt was just answering a silly question about whether the Russians leaked it: Of course it would be massively concerning if it was the act of a foreign, hostile state. I’ve seen no evidence that that’s the case.FF43 said:
The highly spun article in the Sun yesterday suggests Jeremy Hunt has a good idea who was responsible for the leak and is VERY keen that attention is diverted to the Russians
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1148339719262089216
The idea (or misdirection) it was a foreign state comes from a different, unnamed "senior government figure" elsewhere in the article.0 -
Priest: "Do you, Jeremy Corbyn, take Referenda to be your lawful wedded policy?"Endillion said:
The first sentence you quote is calling on the new PM to call a referendum. How much more support do you want?Richard_Nabavi said:I don't think that Labour have actually said what people think they have said. Corbyn's letter to party members says this:
Whoever becomes the new Prime Minister should have the confidence to put their deal, or No Deal, back to the people in a public vote.
In those circumstances, I want to make it clear that Labour would campaign for Remain against either No Deal or a Tory deal that does not protect the economy and jobs.
In other words, IF there is a referendum on Revoke vs No Deal (or a wicked Tory-branded deal indistinguishable from the warm cuddly Labour-branded deal which Corbyn could magic up if he were PM), then Labour would campaign for Revoke. But they've always said they would oppose No Deal or a wicked Tory-branded deal, so there doesn't seem much new here.
What is very conspicuously missing is a commitment to support such a referendum in the first place.
Is it me that has missed something, or is it every journalist reporting on this who has failed to spot this?
Corbyn: "I, Jeremy Palestine Corbyn, do probably expect that the new PM will call for a referendum in which I may support it unless I won't"
Referenda: "What the fuck is that? Do you love me or don't you?"
Corbyn: "I've made my position quite clear"
Referenda: "Aargh!" (Runs out of church)
Priest: "Dude, what the fuck is wrong with you?"
0 -
But they don't necessarily get their referendumedmundintokyo said:Lots of people bitching about Labour's new position but I think it's what they need.
All but the most remainiacest remainiacs can tolerate the it since they get their referendum, but it's also something an MP in a leave-voting seat can reasonably defend: They're trying for a better deal, Brexit can still happen, Labour may even support it if it protects jobs.
Leaving those little bits of air on either side means they won't get much credit from very EU-focused people of a Leave or a Remain persuasion, but the job isn't to impress them, it's to avoid hamstringing incumbent Labour MPs running for reelection.
Parliament has voted against a second vote on a number of occasions now
The only way Labour can force won is to win a GE. This new fudge makes no attempt to answer the question as to what they would campaign for in that election manifesto.
There is no outline of how a Labour deal would come about.
This is not a credible position and it is clearly unravelling already.
It will not help them at all.0 -
I assume that the Panorama programme is absolutely damning.0
-
I don't really understand Labour's "prolong the agony" stance.
It'd be very odd going into a General Election saying, "we'll drag this out with a further long period of negotiation AND a referendum..." It's incredibly unattractive to people who are tired of the whole thing, and has the oddity mentioned by Chris Leslie that, if they win an election then they are pro-Brexit, and if they lose it they are anti-Brexit, which is hard to explain and sell.0 -
Labour's Brexit policy will be up for grabs at conference in September anyway so today's announcement needs to cover only the situation where Boris (or Hunt) somehow contrives to call an election before then.0
-
Every cloud has a silver lining!Morris_Dancer said:Incidentally, more domestic woes, so if I happen not to post F1 stuff it's probable that's the cause. Just a heads up.
[Obviously I could be decapitated by a low-flying flamingo, but that's less predictable].
Hope your woes get resolved asap.0 -
This is more broad spectrum dysfunction that smacks of the Weimar Republic.Theuniondivvie said:
Is there any precedent for a nation going through a years long fubar with its politicians aware of how disastrous it is and will be, yet seemingly unable to do anything to sort it? Vietnam?Dura_Ace said:
That book sounds brutal.Theuniondivvie said:
'Was May merely the fall guy for an inevitable failure or was she utterly incompetent? The answer is of course both – May was doomed to fail but she and her government sure managed, to adapt Samuel Beckett, to fail better.'williamglenn said:
She successfully kicked the can this far. No mean feat.GIN1138 said:
Because one thing everyone, whatever side of the Brexit debate they're on, can agree with is his assessment of the complete disaster that is Theresa May?CarlottaVance said:Gentlemen every one.....
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1148514985355743233
https://twitter.com/fotoole/status/1148487472806072321
On the ideas floating around in Whitehall for the Border, one official asks Cook: “Has someone told you about facial recognition for pigs?”
Fucking hell. However bad you think this is in the repining hours before dawn; it's actually worse.
"Violated, dishonored, wading in blood, dripping filth. There stands bourgeois society," as Rosa Luxemburg observed.0 -
It's everyone's imagined unicorn brexit. Hence I doubt that 28% figure as I suspect things would be far less rosy than many people think.dixiedean said:
But what is this "Brexit" which has been "delivered"? This is the nub of the problem, and one which makes me sceptical of any such polls.marke09 said:Scenario 2: Imagine that a General Election is held later this year after Brexit has been delivered. Boris Johnson is the leader of the Conservatives, Jeremy Corbyn remains leader of the Labour Party, Jo Swinson is leader of the Liberal Democrats and Nigel Farage is leader of the Brexit Party. How do you think you would then vote?
Con: 20%
Lib: 15%
Brex: 10%
Lab: 13%
SNP: 3%
Grn: 7%
Plaid: 1%
Oth: 1%
Don’t know: 16%
Would not vote: 9%
Refused: 4%
Figures with undecideds and refused excluded:
Con: 28%
LDem: 20%
Brex: 14%
Lab: 17%
Grn: 9%0 -
Nothing on tonight's Boris vs Hunt debate?0
-
Incoming...
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1148559442885185536
How perceptive a little earlier from Sopel:
https://twitter.com/BBCJonSopel/status/11485237282985000960 -
Who was saying be would be making things up with us this morning?Harris_Tweed said:0 -
They get their referendum if Labour wins a GE, that's what it's about.oxfordsimon said:
But they don't necessarily get their referendum
Parliament has voted against a second vote on a number of occasions now
The only way Labour can force won is to win a GE. This new fudge makes no attempt to answer the question as to what they would campaign for in that election manifesto.
There is no outline of how a Labour deal would come about.
This is not a credible position and it is clearly unravelling already.
It will not help them at all.
A Labour deal would theoretically come about by going back to the EU and saying we'd like to renegotiate a new deal without being bound by TMay's red lines. I think this negotiation probably would actually happen in a way that the Boris "we'd like to recommence banging our heads on the same brick wall we've been banging it against for the last 3 years" wouldn't, but as a Remainiac I'm not particularly bothered if it doesn't and we end up with a referendum on Remain vs TMay-Barnier.
Not being able to say whether they'd be for the result of their deal or not has *some* potential to make them look shifty in an election campaign, but TBF since this theoretical deal hasn't yet been negotiated it's not an unreasonable stance. Cameron won a majority on something similar: He was going to ask for a negotiation, then a referendum, and recommend Leave or Remain depending on the outcome of the negotiation. Cynical observers may have said that he was obviously going to recommend Remain no matter what the outcome, but the line was enough to get him through the campaign.0 -
One reason to think it wasn't the Russians, is that the emails weren't dumped on the internet, they were passed to Oakeshott but someone who was presumably checked out by her editors. They would have to be extraordinarily dozy to publish them without being highly confident of their origin.DecrepitJohnL said:
Surely it suggests Hunt was just answering a silly question about whether the Russians leaked it: Of course it would be massively concerning if it was the act of a foreign, hostile state. I’ve seen no evidence that that’s the case.FF43 said:
The highly spun article in the Sun yesterday suggests Jeremy Hunt has a good idea who was responsible for the leak and is VERY keen that attention is diverted to the Russians
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1148339719262089216
The idea (or misdirection) it was a foreign state comes from a different, unnamed "senior government figure" elsewhere in the article.0 -
-
An LD/Green agreement as in Brecon gets very interesting in that scenario.marke09 said:Scenario 1: Imagine that a General Election is held later this year before Brexit has been delivered. Boris Johnson is the leader of the Conservatives, Jeremy Corbyn remains leader of the Labour Party, Jo Swinson is leader of the Liberal Democrats and Nigel Farage is leader of the Brexit Party. How do you think you would then vote?
Con: 17%
LDem: 17%
Brex: 16%
Lab: 13%
SNP: 3%
Green: 6%
Plaid: 1%
Oth: 2%
Don’t know: 14%
Would not vote: 9%
Refused: 2%
Figures with undecideds and refused excluded:
Con: 23%
LDem: 23%
Brex: 21%
Lab: 17%
Grn: 8%
0 -
Exactly. How did it go? Disruption, chaos and shortages filling the media -> Tory wipeout. The world appears normal -> Tory honeymoon. Any poll that tries to embrace both of these scenarios is worthless.dixiedean said:
But what is this "Brexit" which has been "delivered"? This is the nub of the problem, and one which makes me sceptical of any such polls.marke09 said:Scenario 2: Imagine that a General Election is held later this year after Brexit has been delivered. Boris Johnson is the leader of the Conservatives, Jeremy Corbyn remains leader of the Labour Party, Jo Swinson is leader of the Liberal Democrats and Nigel Farage is leader of the Brexit Party. How do you think you would then vote?
Con: 20%
Lib: 15%
Brex: 10%
Lab: 13%
SNP: 3%
Grn: 7%
Plaid: 1%
Oth: 1%
Don’t know: 16%
Would not vote: 9%
Refused: 4%
Figures with undecideds and refused excluded:
Con: 28%
LDem: 20%
Brex: 14%
Lab: 17%
Grn: 9%0 -
Nothing matters. Votes are already cast.DecrepitJohnL said:Nothing on tonight's Boris vs Hunt debate?
0 -
You have to imagine Twitter is just seen as some sort of safety valve by whatever grown-ups Trump has around him.. y'know.. picking your battles. "Well, I suppose it's better than the Big Red Button when he's got one on him".
One assumes that if he *did* reach for the Big Red Button in the same sort of mood, someone would put him on the naughty step and take his electronic devices away until he calmed down.0 -
Well, I think he's been pretty clear this time, but I suppose he only has himself to blame if he doesn't get credit for it, given what a mess he's got into on the issue to date.viewcode said:
Priest: "Do you, Jeremy Corbyn, take Referenda to be your lawful wedded policy?"Endillion said:
The first sentence you quote is calling on the new PM to call a referendum. How much more support do you want?Richard_Nabavi said:I don't think that Labour have actually said what people think they have said. Corbyn's letter to party members says this:
Whoever becomes the new Prime Minister should have the confidence to put their deal, or No Deal, back to the people in a public vote.
In those circumstances, I want to make it clear that Labour would campaign for Remain against either No Deal or a Tory deal that does not protect the economy and jobs.
In other words, IF there is a referendum on Revoke vs No Deal (or a wicked Tory-branded deal indistinguishable from the warm cuddly Labour-branded deal which Corbyn could magic up if he were PM), then Labour would campaign for Revoke. But they've always said they would oppose No Deal or a wicked Tory-branded deal, so there doesn't seem much new here.
What is very conspicuously missing is a commitment to support such a referendum in the first place.
Is it me that has missed something, or is it every journalist reporting on this who has failed to spot this?
Corbyn: "I, Jeremy Palestine Corbyn, do probably expect that the new PM will call for a referendum in which I may support it unless I won't"
Referenda: "What the fuck is that? Do you love me or don't you?"
Corbyn: "I've made my position quite clear"
Referenda: "Aargh!" (Runs out of church)
Priest: "Dude, what the fuck is wrong with you?"0 -
Some confusion .
4 out of 5 Grieve amendments have been selected . I think the issue with NC14 might be that it could involve the Queen .
0 -
Time to convene the COBRA committee.Scott_P said:0 -
The Russian business is absolute balls. Hunt thinks the rest of us are as fucking thick as the tory membership.glw said:
One reason to think it wasn't the Russians, is that the emails weren't dumped on the internet, they were passed to Oakeshott but someone who was presumably checked out by her editors. They would have to be extraordinarily dozy to publish them without being highly confident of their origin.DecrepitJohnL said:
Surely it suggests Hunt was just answering a silly question about whether the Russians leaked it: Of course it would be massively concerning if it was the act of a foreign, hostile state. I’ve seen no evidence that that’s the case.FF43 said:
The highly spun article in the Sun yesterday suggests Jeremy Hunt has a good idea who was responsible for the leak and is VERY keen that attention is diverted to the Russians
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1148339719262089216
The idea (or misdirection) it was a foreign state comes from a different, unnamed "senior government figure" elsewhere in the article.0 -
Looks pretty pointless hypothetical polling reinforced by 'pushing' Brexit and the leadership of the various parties. Voters can decide for themselves how important those issues are to them.SouthamObserver said:
An LD/Green agreement as in Brecon gets very interesting in that scenario.marke09 said:Scenario 1: Imagine that a General Election is held later this year before Brexit has been delivered. Boris Johnson is the leader of the Conservatives, Jeremy Corbyn remains leader of the Labour Party, Jo Swinson is leader of the Liberal Democrats and Nigel Farage is leader of the Brexit Party. How do you think you would then vote?
Con: 17%
LDem: 17%
Brex: 16%
Lab: 13%
SNP: 3%
Green: 6%
Plaid: 1%
Oth: 2%
Don’t know: 14%
Would not vote: 9%
Refused: 2%
Figures with undecideds and refused excluded:
Con: 23%
LDem: 23%
Brex: 21%
Lab: 17%
Grn: 8%0 -
Those who were furious when a President with brown skin talked about the back of the queue, must be incandescent with rage now.Scott_P said:
0 -
Pretty clear Trump's mental decline is accelerating as he loses touch with any reality other than his own sense of being slighted.
The US needs to act on 25th amendment and remove him from office before complete disaster befalls the world.0 -
I think the difference is we all know Trump is a total arse with little regard beyond his own ego. Obama was high in much higher regard.SouthamObserver said:
Those who were furious when a President with brown skin talked about the back of the queue, must be incandescent with rage now.Scott_P said:0 -
How would a Corbyn created Customs Union deal do in a referendum? Remainers would vote remain as there's no benefits to leaving, Brexiteers wouldn't be satisfied on immigration/giving up control. It'd be a landslide surely.0
-
Obama told us how to vote, we voted and the Leave vote still has not been delivered.SouthamObserver said:
Those who were furious when a President with brown skin talked about the back of the queue, must be incandescent with rage now.Scott_P said:
Trump will be fine with Boris as he tweeted last night, it is the May administration and soon to retire Ambassador who insulted him0 -
From the stuff in the Mueller report, it seems like the officials just ignore most of his damaging requests, from get Mueller fired to immediate withdrawal from Syria.rottenborough said:Pretty clear Trump's mental decline is accelerating as he loses touch with any reality other than his own sense of being slighted.
The US needs to act on 25th amendment and remove him from office before complete disaster befalls the world.0 -
With Brexit we get to decide our own laws, border controls snd sovereignty, whether with the US or any other nationScott_P said:0 -
Wasn't one during a referendum campaign and one afterwards? Pretty obvious difference. Our civil servants are as embarrassing as our politicians.SouthamObserver said:
Those who were furious when a President with brown skin talked about the back of the queue, must be incandescent with rage now.Scott_P said:0 -
Darroch didn't insult anyone, he told the truth in plain language.HYUFD said:
Obama told us how to vote, we voted and the Leave vote still has not been delivered.SouthamObserver said:
Those who were furious when a President with brown skin talked about the back of the queue, must be incandescent with rage now.Scott_P said:
Trump will be fine with Boris as he tweeted last night, it is the May administration and soon to retire Ambassador who insulted him1 -
I would be, if the sitting Prime Minister had explicitly asked Trump to say this in an attempt to swing votes as part of the second referendum campaign we aren't having right now.SouthamObserver said:
Those who were furious when a President with brown skin talked about the back of the queue, must be incandescent with rage now.Scott_P said:0 -
The 4 put some blocks against suspending Parliament . The NC14 I think would have def stopped that but it would have involved the Queen.Pulpstar said:
What do the 4 amendments do and what did the 5th (Ruled out by Laing, not Bercow) do ?nico67 said:Some confusion .
4 out of 5 Grieve amendments have been selected . I think the issue with NC14 might be that it could involve the Queen .
If I’m reading this right then if the PM wanted to suspend parliament they’d have to do it before September 4th because one of the other amendments require a statement and amendable motion on NI progress .
And of course if Bozo did that there would be weeks before October 31 st so plenty of time for a lot of political pressure to happen .0 -
Ironic if the rumour's true about the cretin doing the leaking being pro-American. This unedifying hissyfit only harms the US-UK relationship and helps those who want us to remain in the EU.
Not to mention, even were that not that case, such a leak is a wretched act in and of itself.
Sometimes I think modern politics is like Sideshow Bob and a road full of rakes.0 -
Yep - we mustn’t offend Trump. We’ve taken back control and that means prostrating ourselves at the feet of a racist sexual predator.HYUFD said:
Obama told us how to vote, we voted and the Leave vote still has not been delivered.SouthamObserver said:
Those who were furious when a President with brown skin talked about the back of the queue, must be incandescent with rage now.Scott_P said:
Trump will be fine with Boris as he tweeted last night, it is the May administration and soon to retire Ambassador who insulted him
0 -
OT: Regarding the great sport of Cricket, rain approaching Manchester. Grrrrrrrrr
https://www.netweather.tv/live-weather/radar
0 -
-
This thread has prorogued itself0
-
This thread has been
FIRED
0 -
Would not put it past the rich toffs trying it.noneoftheabove said:
It would be a coup, nothing less. Parliament is sovereign and suspending parliament to enact a major change from the status quo would be a coup.Charles said:
It’s not a route I would advocate but it’s not the same as “suspending democracy”.Gardenwalker said:
Anyone who advocates suspending parliament is beneath contempt.Charles said:
Things always look extreme when you only cite the extreme positions. As always it depends on the phrasing of the question and how the respondent interprets itAlastairMeeks said:
Willing to suspend democracy? Yes.HYUFD said:
Many diehard Remainers would now describe 52% of the electorate as 'far right'Gardenwalker said:
Based on the various polling we’ve seen of membership views, I would now comfortably describe the Conservative Party as “far right”.AlastairMeeks said:Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:
https://twitter.com/johnrentoul/status/1148339539586551810?s=21
See Islam as a threat to the British way of life? Yes.
See the benefits of immigration outweighed by the disadvantages? Yes.
The Conservative party is becoming a haven for extremists.
- immigration: banning immigration is extreme. Thinking the current balance of cost and benefit is wrong is not
- Islam: militant Islam is. More philosophically if you look at the social polling among even moderate Muslims on homosexuality or the rights of women, I’d say their views could be seen as “a threat to the British way of life”
- Suspend democracy - nope. This is a perceived conflict between parliamentary democracy and popular democracy. suspending parliament to implement the result of a popular vote is not the same as “suspending democracy”
But we do have an issue where Parliament seems determined to frustrate any possible outcome0 -
The truth is way more scary. Opportunities for intervention are minimal.Harris_Tweed said:You have to imagine Twitter is just seen as some sort of safety valve by whatever grown-ups Trump has around him.. y'know.. picking your battles. "Well, I suppose it's better than the Big Red Button when he's got one on him".
One assumes that if he *did* reach for the Big Red Button in the same sort of mood, someone would put him on the naughty step and take his electronic devices away until he calmed down.
Still, it beats thinking about Perimetr.
0
