Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tories seem determined to blow up their own party

1356789

Comments

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,100
    Mortimer said:

    Nope, the people who keep talking up a second referendum...
    Just offering solutions to the mess your lot created. You still can’t agree what Leave means.
  • Charles said:

    If (which I acknowledge is Spartan) you assume that post Brexit the Tories will adopt a more traditional posture then they will come back over time (eg Emma Nicholson is a Tory peer).

    What has interested me in the conversations I’ve had is the number of donors and supporters who don’t like Boris one bit and yet are backing him because there needs to be resolution
    To be fair Charles, you’re now talking to a rump of disaster capitalists, inbred aristocrats and crypto-fascists.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,705
    nichomar said:

    Keep asking the question why threatening the EU with the prospect of no deal is so damaging for them that they will give us what we want and on the other hand no deal is no problem with only a few bumps in the road. They can’t both be true.
    Known as the Francois paradox.
  • Charles said:

    If (which I acknowledge is Spartan) you assume that post Brexit the Tories will adopt a more traditional posture then they will come back over time (eg Emma Nicholson is a Tory peer).

    What has interested me in the conversations I’ve had is the number of donors and supporters who don’t like Boris one bit and yet are backing him because there needs to be resolution
    "We hate you, we think you're treacherous quislings, now vote for us you rogues!"
  • Charles said:

    If (which I acknowledge is Spartan) you assume that post Brexit the Tories will adopt a more traditional posture then they will come back over time (eg Emma Nicholson is a Tory peer).

    What has interested me in the conversations I’ve had is the number of donors and supporters who don’t like Boris one bit and yet are backing him because there needs to be resolution
    That is one heck of an assumption. If you were one of the hard-right un-conservative Conservatives such as JRM or Bone, then why would you lose this chance to remodel the country in line with your backwards views?

    As with Johnson (and Corbyn for that matter), this isn't really about Brexit. It's about getting power.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    No. What 'leave' meant in the referendum was unclear, and May's deal satisfied it for many leavers, including many prominent ones on here. It was a typically British compromise. The 2017 Conservative manifesto was mainly about a deal. The Conservative leadership election was infiltrated by entryists, as we saw on here. And the polling is not exactly favourable for no-deal.

    So given the potential consequences of a no-deal, I'd say going for one given the above is utterly undemocratic. But at least we know you'll be safe of the consequences, whatever happens. ;)

    'Scum' is very constructive when talking about people threatening others for actions they have just done themselves. And those who support them knowing this.
    What “leave” meant was very very clear

    It meant leave.

    Under Article 50 the U.K. and the EU had 2 years to agree a new set of arrangements

    They failed

    So we leave without a new set of arrangements

    (And please don’t attack me personally. Playing the man not the ball is never pleasant)
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,557
    kle4 said:

    What's startling about it? As with the non Corbynites most give up when defeated and the others wont all find a ready made home elsewhere so fight in the best way they can, by seeking to be wreckers.
    They will have very few pavement-pounders going with them. And they will be looking for a sponsor with deep pockets.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Charles said:

    Parliament has rejected all other options

    No deal is what remains

    Parliament rejected No Deal

    Revoke is what remains
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,449
    edited September 2019
    Scott_P said:

    Parliament rejected No Deal

    Revoke is what remains
    Yes, and abandon the whole failed experiment. If Brexit had been introduced as a business initiative then the manager in charge would long have been sacked and the staff made redundant.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    malcolmg said:

    Time the Treaty of Union was revoked, then we do not need to worry about Dictators laws from Westminster
    Last time the Scots were asked they decided to stay. Should they change their mind then that would be a shame, but so be it.
  • Cicero said:

    (Snip)
    Cummings, a man who was in contempt of Parliament, has now humiliated the Queen insulted her ministers and demonstrated an arrogance that has seen no equal in an unelected bureaucrat since Thomas Cromwell was beheaded.

    Aside from that, he's a solid bloke. ;)
  • DavidL said:

    Unemployment fell sharply after the 1981 budget until a second recession in the late 80’s. I checked my memory of this this morning before posting but can’t access the table on my phone.
    Unemployment continued to rise after 1981 but then fell sharply during the Lawson boom later in the 1980s:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/unemployment/timeseries/mgsc/unem
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Charles said:

    Under Article 50 the U.K. and the EU had 2 years to agree a new set of arrangements

    They failed

    Under article 50 they can extend, as they have already done
  • nunuonenunuone Posts: 1,138
    *Nicola, looks on smiling like Cheshire cat*
  • Deep thought: If you've got 20 ex-Tories in their own independent group, that feels like enough to form an actual new coalition government, not a GoNAfaE. Execute on the Corbyn plan, get Brexit done or undone depending on the vote, *then* dissolve the thing and have a GE. Or if it's going OK, serve out the full term.

    I know people have reservations about Corbyn but say there's a GE and it goes as well as the remain side can reasonably, there's still no possible outcome you can reasonably hope for with better arithmetic than now, ie a remainer majority with a Moderate Con blocking minority that can restrain Corbyn. If Boris wins that's bad, if you lose your seat (likely) that's bad, and if Corbyn wins big that's also bad.

    There is only one answer to this and that is a GE

    Any moves to install anyone as PM without a GE will result in uproar in the public as demonstrared by the dreadful figures for alternative PM with Corbyn on 12% Swinson on 11% and even Farage on 11%

    The idea Corbyn would reject the chance of a GE is for the birds as even Chuka Umunna has just said on Sky

    A novel idea was put forward last night that any extension would be put to the EU Council in mid October and then as a member Boris would veto it.

    You really cannot make a lot of this chaos up
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,920

    Wrong, they just don't suddenly say, like some sort of moron, "oh a small majority thought this in 2016, and as I now believe in groupspeak we must all now follow that line".
    The reality is that the current "new establishment" view (which is the old establishment with far right policies) is that we must snobbishly follow a far right agenda that feels it has no need to re-consult "the people" on what is now a completely different proposition that people were led to believe they were voting for.
    Jut because lunatics take over the asylum, it doesn't mean that the sane people are really mad.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,103
    Charles said:

    Are you really suggesting that judges should be sacked for making a ruling the Scottish government doesn’t like?
    No , he is saying that the Scottish Courts will not just accept that Westminster Government is trampling all over the Scottish Government and devolution as is the current case.
  • Charles said:

    What “leave” meant was very very clear

    It meant leave.

    Under Article 50 the U.K. and the EU had 2 years to agree a new set of arrangements

    They failed

    So we leave without a new set of arrangements

    (And please don’t attack me personally. Playing the man not the ball is never pleasant)
    Don't be ridiculous. It was massively clear that leave meant with a deal. Stop trying to convince yourself. Which ever way we voted, we were lied to by those advocating leave. If you agreed to that but said you still think leaving without a deal is the right thing, that might have a little more resonance.

    I agree you shouldn't be attacked personally, but those that hold views for which they collectively will not suffer any consequence should collectively criticised. If you fall into that group, well that is for you to decide.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Yes, that would be like haranguing them and calling them Enemies of the People.
    I believe that was the Daily Mail, but the government should have been more vocal in the defence of the courts
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,392
    edited September 2019
    Charles said:

    What “leave” meant was very very clear

    It meant leave.

    Under Article 50 the U.K. and the EU had 2 years to agree a new set of arrangements

    They failed

    So we leave without a new set of arrangements

    (And please don’t attack me personally. Playing the man not the ball is never pleasant)

    Neither is lying, Charles. ;)

    And you're utterly 100% wrong that what leave meant is clear. It wasn't clear, which is why we're in this mess. Now, if only leavers had sorted this out before the referendum, but if they had, they wouldn't have won.

    I (and others) warned about this before the referendum, and it's amusing that so many leavers are still in denial.

    It's now also clear that many of them didn't want to because it gave them the opportunity to get power.

    There are saints and devils in all of this. I have no doubt that the disruption of no-deal will hurt many people, and the poorest in society in particular. You have chosen your side.

    Edit: and I'm actually unsure that pointing out that you'll be immune from the worst consequences of a hard no-deal Brexit is 'attacking' you. Unless you don't like the fact being broadcast. ;)
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    This is the issue dereliction of what duty? The Scots have not voted for Brexit and made it clear they are opposed to no deal. The English Tories are prepared to ignore Parliament but expect the Scots to respect their rules. I rarely agree with Malcolm but in this case is he is right. The Scots can just say and will say no.



    Sure, they can put their fingers in their ears

    But when they turn up to the ports to export stuff and they don’t have the right paperwork...
  • Nigelb said:

    Why ?
    See
    https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/media/5134

    For example you cannot use the ‘Independent Stop the
    Bypass Party’ if there was an already registered ‘Stop the
    Bypass Party’ because ‘Independent’ is being used with the
    name of an existing registered party.

  • Charles said:

    What “leave” meant was very very clear

    It meant leave.

    Under Article 50 the U.K. and the EU had 2 years to agree a new set of arrangements

    They failed

    So we leave without a new set of arrangements

    (And please don’t attack me personally. Playing the man not the ball is never pleasant)
    Boris Johnson and Michael Gove said we wouldn't need to invoke Article 50. Was it "very very clear" to voters that they were wrong?
  • Yes, and abandon the whole failed experiment. If Brexit had been introduced as a business initiative then the manager in charge would long have been sacked and the staff made redundant.
    If only it was so easy
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,677
    Nigelb said:

    Why ?
    After the "Literal Democrat" cheated the LibDems out of a win, the rules were tightened up, and you can't register a party with a similar name to an existing party. But a sensible way forward would be found.

    An interesting question is whether the LibDems and Greens would stand down for them, even if they'd selected candidates (alternative seats might be found, or there's the Lords option). In Broxtowe, LD sources tell me they expect Anna Soubry to stand and they will too because many dislike her personally and think they could win, as will Tories and Brexit and Labour, creating a truly unpredictable 5-way split.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,751
    Mortimer said:

    Electoral law?
    I'm not wholly convinced electoral law would prevent the formation of a party labelled 'Independent conservatives', but you are of course right that there would likely be insufficient time to register a new party ahead of a snap election.

    but would there really be any 'confusion' between Conservative and 'Independent conservative' in the context of current politics ?
  • In what sense are those threatened with deselection "moderates"? Grieve a moderate? He is the most extreme of Europhiles. Ditto Clarke. They snobbishly believe their views top trump those of their voters. They are wrong.
    Clarke voted for TM's deal repeatedly. How is he more extreme than the ERG here?
  • Charles said:

    Sure, they can put their fingers in their ears

    But when they turn up to the ports to export stuff and they don’t have the right paperwork...
    Oh, that is alright then. Another "stuff you" from one of the increasingly small minority of people that are still trying to convince themselves self harm was a good idea.
  • Charles said:

    Parliament has rejected all other options

    No deal is what remains

    Yes, finding a deal is tough. It was always going to be. But the British people have made clear they oppose No Deal. So one has to be found. If it can’t be, the government must explain why and call an election. But the government is not interested in finding a deal. Its most prominent members made that clear in the lobbies earlier this year. And so we are where we are.

  • Cicero said:

    A fanatic is one who won't change his mind and won't change the subject. The No deal fringe can not be compromised with, and the idea that we should crash the constitution, economy and the union for the benefit of the off shore press and the hedge fund managers is one that only Cummings could find congenial.

    I guess that the vast majority of old fashioned, mainstream, conservative Conservatives are as appalled as the rest of us. I would say that we might put our hope in them, but the truth is that these people value party loyalty almost above all else, so I'm not holding my breathe that the Tories will revolt against the catastrophe they are creating before us.

    Unless they have the courage of their convictions, then yes indeed, the idea that the Tories have a long term future is not one I would put money on.

    As it is, they are sowing the wind and will reap the whirlwind. Cummings, a man who was in contempt of Parliament, has now humiliated the Queen insulted her ministers and demonstrated an arrogance that has seen no equal in an unelected bureaucrat since Thomas Cromwell was beheaded.
    What is it with this obsession about hedge fund managers some Remainers have ?

    I would have thought the likes of Mark Francois were enough to abuse without bringing in claims about mysterious plutocrat puppet-masters.

  • The idea Corbyn would reject the chance of a GE is for the birds as even Chuka Umunna has just said on Sky

    Even if he got to be Prime Minister? He's heading to lose the next election, isn't it better to roll the dice and hope to get a bounce? He could probably do a good job of de-scarifying himself.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,739
    https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1168422352650194944

    I assume if the whip is withdrawn any letter to the chair of the 1922 committee is invalid?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,557

    Clarke voted for TM's deal repeatedly. How is he more extreme than the ERG here?
    We will see this week....
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,469

    Come on rebels....resign the whip immediate and form a new decent party....

    Join Soubry
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,705
    edited September 2019
    Charles said:

    What “leave” meant was very very clear

    It meant leave.

    Under Article 50 the U.K. and the EU had 2 years to agree a new set of arrangements

    They failed

    So we leave without a new set of arrangements

    (And please don’t attack me personally. Playing the man not the ball is never pleasant)

    I have a lot of sympathy for this view. We voted to leave we haven't left. That surely can't be right. There was no "how to" on the ballot paper, as we all know and bemoan so leaving with no deal is perfectly legitimate.

    However, the 2017 GE changed more than the electoral maths. As we saw in 2015, promises made in a manifesto become null when there is not the mandate, via overall majority, to implement them. Everything is up in the air. Hence the Cons can perfectly well say we are now going to leave with no deal and that would indeed be fulfilling their obligation to govern without an OE (of course they have plenty of those also).

    But this whole XX% of MPs voted to leave by supporting their 2017 manifesto is by the same token not true. Those manifestos are now chip paper, rendered irrelevant by events, and each MP is legitimately allowed to decide what they believe in individually or as a group and if that is EUref2, revoke, GE, that is perfectly legitimate.
  • As the Tories embrace their inner Trump, we discover there is always a Tweet
    https://twitter.com/jamescleverly/status/1144516063687774214?s=21
  • Even if he got to be Prime Minister? He's heading to lose the next election, isn't it better to roll the dice and hope to get a bounce? He could probably do a good job of de-scarifying himself.
    The political consensus seems to be that Corbyn has no get out clause from backing a GE

    Furthermore it seems that this morning Boris is making the vote one of confidence so lose it I cannot see him doing anything othef than calling a GE
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,637
    DavidL said:

    Unemployment fell sharply after the 1981 budget until a second recession in the late 80’s. I checked my memory of this this morning before posting but can’t access the table on my phone.
    I think you're mistaken on that, it rose until the mid 80s, then declined in the late 80s whilst still being higher than when she took office. The highest point on record is in 1984 I believe.

    https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/unemployment-rate
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,557
    Scott_P said:

    Parliament rejected No Deal

    Revoke is what remains
    Revokers. Craziest of the crazy anti-democrats......
  • We truely are living in the darkest of timelines
  • We truely are living in the darkest of timelines

    That's not true. It's going to get far worse yet.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,644
    edited September 2019
    148grss said:

    Whilst I think the current Con party is splintering, I think maybe half of the existing BXP voters will love the moves towards authoritarianism, and that resistance against will not coalesce. For once, I'm pretty pessimistic and think Johnson might be able to squeak a majority. Where, I'm not sure, but there do seem to be a number of voters who just want action no matter what...

    True, but only because they have little idea of what 'what' might be.
  • That's not true. It's going to get far worse yet.
    To be honest Alastair I don't think it can. It is just so depressing
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,177

    Revokers. Craziest of the crazy anti-democrats......
    You’re the one going against the will of the people.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,203
    edited September 2019
    Scott_P said:
    Indeed. Boris deliberated trashed the Deal, and stabbed Big G’s beloved Tessy in the back, so that he could install his slovenly frame and his trollop into Downing Street.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,739
    edited September 2019

    Even if he got to be Prime Minister? He's heading to lose the next election, isn't it better to roll the dice and hope to get a bounce? He could probably do a good job of de-scarifying himself.
    Exactly that - while it's not a great option - 6 months of Labour not doing very much and detoxifying itself would do their chances the world of good.

    And Boris as opposition leader would show how useless and impotent he really is.
  • To be honest Alastair I don't think it can. It is just so depressing
    I've heard it said that a Hungarian pessimist is someone who thinks that it can't get any worse and a Hungarian optimist is someone who thinks it can.
  • The political consensus seems to be that Corbyn has no get out clause from backing a GE

    Furthermore it seems that this morning Boris is making the vote one of confidence so lose it I cannot see him doing anything othef than calling a GE
    Depends how clever Corbyn’s advisors are.

    An election just a few months later represents his best chance of getting into Downing Street.
  • nunuonenunuone Posts: 1,138
    timmo said:

    Join Soubry
    He said decent party.......
  • Ok this has just gone way way too far. We need a collaspe of government.

    Even a Corbyn government might be the price worth paying.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,557

    You’re the one going against the will of the people.
    The upcoming election is going to prove you so wrong.....
  • In fairness, I have posed that question on here many times. Leavers seem to regard it as an unfair question as to how many people they are willing passively to send to the slaughter in pursuit of their objective.
  • Ok this has just gone way way too far. We need a collaspe of government.

    Even a Corbyn government might be the price worth paying.

    Which bit?

    JRM handwaving away the forthcoming deaths of the ill, or Gavin Williamson re-iterating that government may refuse to obey laws passed by Parliament?
  • eekeek Posts: 29,739
    rkrkrk said:

    I think you're mistaken on that, it rose until the mid 80s, then declined in the late 80s whilst still being higher than when she took office. The highest point on record is in 1984 I believe.

    https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/unemployment-rate
    Were it not for a combination of the SDP splitting Labours vote and the Falklands war, Thatcherism would have died in 1984.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,100

    That's not true. It's going to get far worse yet.
    Yup. Boris is sowing the seeds.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380


    Any moves to install anyone as PM without a GE will result in uproar in the public

    An administration of Labour + Lib Dem represents a larger share of the popular vote than a Conservative + DUP one.
  • To be honest Alastair I don't think it can. It is just so depressing
    Given the difficulties this country has either gone through or been predicted to go through during my lifetime this is nothing.

    And perhaps its a good thing that our failed establishment is finally exposed.
  • In fairness, I have posed that question on here many times. Leavers seem to regard it as an unfair question as to how many people they are willing passively to send to the slaughter in pursuit of their objective.
    You have.

    And I must confess I thought it was a hyperbolic point.

    I was wrong.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,177

    The upcoming election is going to prove you so wrong.....
    Why would we have another election? The people have already spoken and we must implement their wish of a 5 year parliament.
  • Indeed. Boris deliberated trashed the Deal, and stabbed Big G’s beloved Tessy in the back, so that he could install his slovenly frame and his trollop into Downing Street.
    And Big G supporting TM deal was correct at the time, still is, and needs to come back as Antoinette Sandbach has just said on Sky
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,035
    Scott_P said:

    Because HE's a weak, weak PM, taking advice from a single idiot advisor...
    and notoriously lazy and unconcerned with detail to boot. Cummings is running things right now and I think the Conservative Party is going to rue the day they outsourced the running of the country to a maverick.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,100
    Charles said:

    What “leave” meant was very very clear

    It meant leave.

    Under Article 50 the U.K. and the EU had 2 years to agree a new set of arrangements

    They failed

    So we leave without a new set of arrangements

    (And please don’t attack me personally. Playing the man not the ball is never pleasant)
    Brexit means Brexit
    Leave means Leave.

    Listen to yourself. There are clues here.
  • I always used to say that Brexit was the weakest link and would break first, but it looks like the weakest link could be the Conservative party.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,177

    In fairness, I have posed that question on here many times. Leavers seem to regard it as an unfair question as to how many people they are willing passively to send to the slaughter in pursuit of their objective.
    @HYUFD told us last night that there is no price too high.
  • I've heard it said that a Hungarian pessimist is someone who thinks that it can't get any worse and a Hungarian optimist is someone who thinks it can.
    The only thing I can say to that is that I am not Hungarian
  • Ok this has just gone way way too far. We need a collaspe of government.

    Even a Corbyn government might be the price worth paying.

    We need a GE and we need to know what the parties stand for so that we can make a choice.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,188
    DavidL said:

    Unemployment fell sharply after the 1981 budget until a second recession in the late 80’s. I checked my memory of this this morning before posting but can’t access the table on my phone.
    This was the chart I was referring to: https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/780/unemployment/unemployment-rates-history/
  • With respect I dont think even you have the power to enable that

    Though the Brexiteers are 'barking'
  • Probably in the category of unhelpful support:

    https://twitter.com/tom_watson/status/1168415182437179392
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,188

    That doesn't make it right. The EU was a central policy under Major, but the bastards still repeatedly voted against Major and the party.

    And I hope that Johnson and his fellow bastards don't have a government soon, either.
    And the likes of IDS and Bill Cash should have been kicked out. The Conservative party would have been stronger for it. We might even have got Ken Clarke as PM.
  • OllyT said:

    and notoriously lazy and unconcerned with detail to boot. Cummings is running things right now and I think the Conservative Party is going to rue the day they outsourced the running of the country to a maverick.
    Everyone already knew that before the leadership election.

    The blue- rinsers are going to reap what they've sowed.
  • ‪The great news is that whatever happens Jacob Rees Mogg and his family will be fine. Phew!‬
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,557

    Probably in the category of unhelpful support:

    https://twitter.com/tom_watson/status/1168415182437179392

    Not so long ago he was saying "This nonce has courage. The political class threaten him with ruination and he stands strong...."
  • Noo said:

    An administration of Labour + Lib Dem represents a larger share of the popular vote than a Conservative + DUP one.
    If so it has to be tested in a GE
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,324
  • eek said:

    Were it not for a combination of the SDP splitting Labours vote and the Falklands war, Thatcherism would have died in 1984.
    Even before the SDP split Labour was not impressing in the polls.

    IIRC they were only 2% ahead in the 1980 local elections and 3% ahead in 1981.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,705
    Scott_P said:
    The supply of cannabis for Parkinsons should be uninterrupted.
  • Why would we have another election? The people have already spoken and we must implement their wish of a 5 year parliament.
    Why are you so fearful of a GE
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,177
    Scott_P said:
    How many days left until we have to hand in our homework to Mrs Merkel?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,188
    rkrkrk said:

    I think you're mistaken on that, it rose until the mid 80s, then declined in the late 80s whilst still being higher than when she took office. The highest point on record is in 1984 I believe.

    https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/unemployment-rate
    Not according to this chart: https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/780/unemployment/unemployment-rates-history/
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,177

    Why are you so fearful of a GE
    Come on @Big_G_NorthWales. You know I’m just using Brexiteer arguments against them to highlight their hypocrisy.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    The political consensus seems to be that Corbyn has no get out clause from backing a GE

    Furthermore it seems that this morning Boris is making the vote one of confidence so lose it I cannot see him doing anything othef than calling a GE
    He certainly does have a get out clause from a GE whose timing would lead to No Deal (e.g. Nov 1st)
  • eekeek Posts: 29,739

    If so it has to be tested in a GE
    Technically they won a higher percentage of the popular vote at the last election compared to the DUP and Tory party.
    If they also have more votes in Parliament they deserve a chance of Government as that is the purpose of the FTPA.

    Just because you don't like an argument when it's used against you doesn't invalidate the argument.
  • Charles said:

    Sure, they can put their fingers in their ears

    But when they turn up to the ports to export stuff and they don’t have the right paperwork...
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    If so it has to be tested in a GE
    No it doesn't. You might want it to be, but it doesn't have to be.
  • DavidL said:

    And the likes of IDS and Bill Cash should have been kicked out. The Conservative party would have been stronger for it. We might even have got Ken Clarke as PM.
    Would you care to point out where you said that before (say) a year ago?
This discussion has been closed.