politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A closer look at one of tonight’s local council by elections
Comments
-
Just 20% think it’s a possible outcome according to a YouGov poll today.kle4 said:0 -
It won't dent his mojo if the public blames Parliament rather than Boris.Benpointer said:
Of course, that's a possibility. But Boris failing to deliver Brexit on 31 October will seriously dent his mojo.GIN1138 said:
And the legislation currently going through Parliament right now makes No Deal on 31st October illegal.Benpointer said:
I appreciate this will be a difficult concept for Tories to understand the SNP seem to be putting country before party.GIN1138 said:
I still think we're going to have an election in October from the one line bill route.kle4 said:Rather than not follow the law why didn’t boris let the attempted filibuster play out?
Other than Boris the only other party leader who's interests its in to have an election in October is Nicola...
https://twitter.com/itvpeston/status/1169377798835728384?s=20
That's what the Opposition wanted.
But if the argument is that Boris could be returned with a majroty and then push on with NO DEAL.. Well that's another matter.
We could go past 31st October still in the EU, have an election after 31st October which leads to a Con majority and then we leave with no deal on 31st December or January.
That's a risk Remaines will have to take sooner or later unless we're never going to have a general election again?
At the current rate, by the time of a November or spring GE Boris will be a bigger liability to the Tories than TMay was in the last election.
I think Boris is definitely doing enough to make Parliament be viewed as responsible. If we extend due to Parliament expect to hear a lot of "Guy Fawkes was right" comments in November.0 -
0
-
I'm with you 100% on the need for an election, but why is the precise date important? If we imagine for a moment that a Parliament that's strongly for leaving the EU is returned, is it going to make that much difference to anything if the leave date is 31 January rather than 31 October?rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.0 -
The (faint) hope for opponents of Johnson is that their vote will coalesce on geography. Lib Dems strong in the south, Labour strong in the north.Philip_Thompson said:
Not sure who it will drop to or why.eek said:
Likewise - I do expect Boris to hit 40% but for it to drop as the campaign real beginsPhilip_Thompson said:Overwhelming consensus here seems to be that Boris is crashing and burning and doing an awful job . . . by an overall consensus of people who thought Boris was awful before he got the job.
I and others seem to think Boris is getting on with the job and am pleased with what we see so far. Which is what he was elected to do.
Has anyone actually changed their minds?
From a baseline of ~35% in most polls recently it seems, I expect Boris's Tories will hit 40% before 30%.
The bigger danger is that opposition support coalesces around one opponent. That's what did for May last time, all the opposition votes coalesced into Labour. Unless there's a dramatic LD collapse this doesn't seem as likely this time.
I would be surprised if it did so neatly enough to avoid splitting the anti-Johnson vote in enough places to avoid defeat. But the British electorate has surprised me before.0 -
The point is, Johnson's lie about being thwarted from a good deal with the EU thanks to Corbyn's surrender to EU interests will be believed. Or at least promoted, as we have just seen.nichomar said:
There was no deal because Al didn’t propose any solutionsPhilip_Thompson said:
Because Parliament led by Corbyn surrendered to the EU.nichomar said:
There was no dealPhilip_Thompson said:
Because Parliament led by Corbyn surrendered to the EU.nichomar said:Philip_Thompson said:
It is the truth so why not say it?FF43 said:
My take from this is that Johnson will blame Corbyn's "surrender bill" for the failure of a deal that he is only pretending to negotiate with the EU. "The EU were on the point of giving me everything I wanted, only for Corbyn to sabotage it with his craven surrender to EU interests.FF43 said:
Strangely furtive performance from Johnson, as though he expects hostage taker Cummings to discover him, switch the microphone off and do something nasty to him.williamglenn said:
One lie after another, of course, from Johnson. Judging from the Twitter comments it seems he does get uncritical support - from diehards, let's say.
There was no deal0 -
Agreed. All the more remarkable that they are prioritising avoiding a No Deal UK exit.Black_Rook said:
I, like most of us I dare say, remain deeply cynical of the motives of all politicians, BUT... the SNP really do seem to be acting against the advancement of their core policy in this case.Benpointer said:
I appreciate this will be a difficult concept for Tories to understand the SNP seem to be putting country before party.GIN1138 said:
I still think we're going to have an election in October from the one line bill route.kle4 said:Rather than not follow the law why didn’t boris let the attempted filibuster play out?
Other than Boris the only other party leader who's interests its in to have an election in October is Nicola...
https://twitter.com/itvpeston/status/1169377798835728384?s=20
If, at the end of all of this, the UK does stay in the EU then it gives the Scottish Government another hurdle to overcome if it wants to win independence. They've endlessly emphasised their belief that it is contrary to Scotland's interests for Scotland to be removed from the EU, but fact is if the UK stays in and Scotland then secedes, then it also leaves the EU - with no absolute guarantee that it could get back in, given the attitude of some of the other member states towards the threat of secession from within their own borders. This might be considered to be something of a problem for them.0 -
Deleted superfluous post.1
-
The last privy council consisted of JRM and two other conservatives to which her maj said how long do you wantRobD said:
Senior mandarins, no doubt.nichomar said:TheScreamingEagles said:
She'll take soundings then.rcs1000 said:I have a question:
What happens if the Prime Minister goes to the Palace and says
"Ma'am, I have lost the Confidence of the Houses of Parliament and can no longer serve as your Prime Minister"
She says "Do you believe there is another member who could command its Confidence?"
And he says "I do not, Ma'am".
From whom? JRM?0 -
It was a meeting where she received and acted on advice from her PM. Would you expect her to do any differently? As for asking how long, it's clear from the documents that was decided by the government, not the Queen.nichomar said:
The last privy council consisted of JRM and two other conservatives to which her maj said how long do you wantRobD said:
Senior mandarins, no doubt.nichomar said:TheScreamingEagles said:
She'll take soundings then.rcs1000 said:I have a question:
What happens if the Prime Minister goes to the Palace and says
"Ma'am, I have lost the Confidence of the Houses of Parliament and can no longer serve as your Prime Minister"
She says "Do you believe there is another member who could command its Confidence?"
And he says "I do not, Ma'am".
From whom? JRM?0 -
I suspect those who were always minded to vote for Johnson will believe him. Other voters, not so much.FF43 said:
The point is, Johnson's lie about being thwarted from a good deal with the EU thanks to Corbyn's surrender to EU interests will be believed. Or at least promoted, as we have just seen.nichomar said:
There was no deal because Al didn’t propose any solutionsPhilip_Thompson said:
Because Parliament led by Corbyn surrendered to the EU.nichomar said:
There was no dealPhilip_Thompson said:
Because Parliament led by Corbyn surrendered to the EU.nichomar said:Philip_Thompson said:
It is the truth so why not say it?FF43 said:
My take from this is that Johnson will blame Corbyn's "surrender bill" for the failure of a deal that he is only pretending to negotiate with the EU. "The EU were on the point of giving me everything I wanted, only for Corbyn to sabotage it with his craven surrender to EU interests.FF43 said:
Strangely furtive performance from Johnson, as though he expects hostage taker Cummings to discover him, switch the microphone off and do something nasty to him.williamglenn said:
One lie after another, of course, from Johnson. Judging from the Twitter comments it seems he does get uncritical support - from diehards, let's say.
There was no deal0 -
What chance would you give of a landslide (80+) Conservative majority?rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
I think roughly
33% chance of a landslide Conservative majority
33% of a small or almost there majority (and I'm counting 25 as small here)
33% of Referendum for Remain result
1% chance of an unstable Parliament that can't agree on next step for Brexit [because the party slates will be "purer" - no Grieve and no Hoey]0 -
Seriously, your partisan crap is excruciating.....Philip_Thompson said:
Because Parliament led by Corbyn surrendered to the EU.nichomar said:Philip_Thompson said:
It is the truth so why not say it?FF43 said:
My take from this is that Johnson will blame Corbyn's "surrender bill" for the failure of a deal that he is only pretending to negotiate with the EU. "The EU were on the point of giving me everything I wanted, only for Corbyn to sabotage it with his craven surrender to EU interests.FF43 said:
Strangely furtive performance from Johnson, as though he expects hostage taker Cummings to discover him, switch the microphone off and do something nasty to him.williamglenn said:
One lie after another, of course, from Johnson. Judging from the Twitter comments it seems he does get uncritical support - from diehards, let's say.
There was no deal
FWIW I do think that possibly Boris Johnson will be able to find a way to a majority through his campaign....circa 50...and then we come out the EU....
Do I want it...no fucking way...but sadly, we now have to walk the bullshit walk of just how bad Brexit will be to exorcise this vile cancer from our mainstream politics...
I'm alright..I'm well off....I've never been better off quite frankly, largely as a result of rising assets.....but it's not fair.
The Tories are finished in a couple of years
0 -
There has to be a Head of Government. So if Boris Johnson resigns and declines to nominate a successor, I do not believe that it would be controversial for the Queen to call for the Leader of the Opposition.nichomar said:
She would probably dissolve the house, if possible and there would be an election but we would be in uncharted watersGIN1138 said:
That's what I was asking last night. Someone said it would be Corbyn but I'm not so sure...rcs1000 said:I have a question:
What happens if the Prime Minister goes to the Palace and says
"Ma'am, I have lost the Confidence of the Houses of Parliament and can no longer serve as your Prime Minister"
She says "Do you believe there is another member who could command its Confidence?"
And he says "I do not, Ma'am".0 -
-
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.0 -
-
Fine, but don’t claim the privy council is some quasi democratic body defending the rights of the people.RobD said:
It was a meeting where she received and acted on advice from her PM. Would you expect her to do any differently? As for asking how long, it's clear from the documents that was decided by the government, not the Queen.nichomar said:
The last privy council consisted of JRM and two other conservatives to which her maj said how long do you wantRobD said:
Senior mandarins, no doubt.nichomar said:TheScreamingEagles said:
She'll take soundings then.rcs1000 said:I have a question:
What happens if the Prime Minister goes to the Palace and says
"Ma'am, I have lost the Confidence of the Houses of Parliament and can no longer serve as your Prime Minister"
She says "Do you believe there is another member who could command its Confidence?"
And he says "I do not, Ma'am".
From whom? JRM?0 -
I think he is convinced of that.kle4 said:
It’s farage who needs to be convinced of that.Philip_Thompson said:
Because Parliament led by Corbyn surrendered to the EU.nichomar said:
There was no dealPhilip_Thompson said:
Because Parliament led by Corbyn surrendered to the EU.nichomar said:Philip_Thompson said:
It is the truth so why not say it?FF43 said:
My take from this is that Johnson will blame Corbyn's "surrender bill" for the failure of a deal that he is only pretending to negotiate with the EU. "The EU were on the point of giving me everything I wanted, only for Corbyn to sabotage it with his craven surrender to EU interests.FF43 said:
Strangely furtive performance from Johnson, as though he expects hostage taker Cummings to discover him, switch the microphone off and do something nasty to him.williamglenn said:
One lie after another, of course, from Johnson. Judging from the Twitter comments it seems he does get uncritical support - from diehards, let's say.
There was no deal
Expelling Grieve and Clarke and co has destroyed any chance of the date being an issue.
Hence why BXP aren't banging on about the date anymore, they're banging on about no deal/clean Brexit. They're looking to fight Boris on the basis that Boris will go into an election still seeking a deal whereas they won't.0 -
The new session has to be opened by the Queen, and then there has to be a queens speech debate which takes days. There just isn't time to repeal the Benn act before it stipulates an extension must be requested if the election is a few days before the Council meeting.Anabobazina said:
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.0 -
Then be so good as to send me someone who does.rcs1000 said:I have a question:
What happens if the Prime Minister goes to the Palace and says
"Ma'am, I have lost the Confidence of the Houses of Parliament and can no longer serve as your Prime Minister"
She says "Do you believe there is another member who could command its Confidence?"
And he says "I do not, Ma'am".
0 -
If Parliament passed an act making it legal to kill gay people would that be okay? It is a stupid question whichever way it is asked. Indeed it is a logical fallacy (Appeal to Extremes)Gallowgate said:
Genuine question: where is the line?
If 17m voted to make it legal to kill gay people, would that be okay?0 -
Erm, did I ever make that claim?nichomar said:
Fine, but don’t claim the privy council is some quasi democratic body defending the rights of the people.RobD said:
It was a meeting where she received and acted on advice from her PM. Would you expect her to do any differently? As for asking how long, it's clear from the documents that was decided by the government, not the Queen.nichomar said:
The last privy council consisted of JRM and two other conservatives to which her maj said how long do you wantRobD said:
Senior mandarins, no doubt.nichomar said:TheScreamingEagles said:
She'll take soundings then.rcs1000 said:I have a question:
What happens if the Prime Minister goes to the Palace and says
"Ma'am, I have lost the Confidence of the Houses of Parliament and can no longer serve as your Prime Minister"
She says "Do you believe there is another member who could command its Confidence?"
And he says "I do not, Ma'am".
From whom? JRM?0 -
-
What are you smoking?Anabobazina said:
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
It will give the public the opportunity to decide what they want.0 -
Nonsense. You can’t trust Boris. He’d find a way.RobD said:
The new session has to be opened by the Queen, and then there has to be a queens speech debate which takes days. There just isn't time to repeal the Benn act before it stipulates an extension must be requested if the election is a few days before the Council meeting.Anabobazina said:
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.0 -
Tonight’s could be up there with the evening when Boris lost the leadership election after his neighbours called the police and The GuardianAnabobazina said:Benpointer said:
Because:kle4 said:Rather than not follow the law why didn’t boris let the attempted filibuster play out?
a) he knew the filibuster would fail and
b) he wanted to meet Corbyn's condition to force Corbyn to agree to a pre-31 Oct election. Corbyn of course has now spotted the trap (thanks Tony!) and will not play ball on Monday.
The excitable ramping of the filibuster on here last night from the likes of Mortimer makes amusing retrospective reading.1 -
I think you are right...but I would put a Con majority more to 50-60%-- it'll be the last time the Conservatives will be in power in my lifetime...and I still could possibly have 40 plus years in the tank......rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
0 -
What price Clarke for next PM? https://twitter.com/IndyVoices/status/1169701737202147335?s=190
-
Why? The crisis we see now has been engineered by number 10.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.0 -
L
I was too weak to stop Corbyn from extending is a tough sell.Scott_P said:Jezza, don't screw this up
https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1169708831133392897
0 -
It doesn't. It could be opened by Royal Commission.Anabobazina said:
Nonsense. You can’t trust Boris. He’d find a way.RobD said:
The new session has to be opened by the Queen, and then there has to be a queens speech debate which takes days. There just isn't time to repeal the Benn act before it stipulates an extension must be requested if the election is a few days before the Council meeting.Anabobazina said:
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
0 -
If he wins the election then that is his right.Anabobazina said:
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.0 -
Ah thanks. I thought that was only after prorogation and not new parliaments entirely, although isn't there still a multi-day debate required, regardless of who gave the Queen's speech.Chris_A said:
It doesn't. It could be opened by Royal Commission.Anabobazina said:
Nonsense. You can’t trust Boris. He’d find a way.RobD said:
The new session has to be opened by the Queen, and then there has to be a queens speech debate which takes days. There just isn't time to repeal the Benn act before it stipulates an extension must be requested if the election is a few days before the Council meeting.Anabobazina said:
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.0 -
If that is what the public wants we shouldn't waste £3bn and businesses stockpiling and planning on an absolutely pointless 3 month extension that achieves nothing.Black_Rook said:
I'm with you 100% on the need for an election, but why is the precise date important? If we imagine for a moment that a Parliament that's strongly for leaving the EU is returned, is it going to make that much difference to anything if the leave date is 31 January rather than 31 October?rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
What does delaying achieve beyond burning a billion pounds a month and screwing up stockpiling plans?0 -
Scott_P said:
Jezza, don't screw this up
https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1169708831133392897
Shows the great sense in forcing Bunter to eat his words. Jezza just needs to hang on in there and force the election beyond Oct 31.0 -
No. But I’m not the one claiming that anything that has a majority is right and just and must be accepted.Richard_Tyndall said:
If Parliament passed an act making it legal to kill gay people would that be okay? It is a stupid question whichever way it is asked. Indeed it is a logical fallacy (Appeal to Extremes)Gallowgate said:
Genuine question: where is the line?
If 17m voted to make it legal to kill gay people, would that be okay?0 -
Delusional.Anabobazina said:Scott_P said:Jezza, don't screw this up
https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1169708831133392897
Shows the great sense in forcing Bunter to eat his words. Jezza just needs to hang on in there and force the election beyond Oct 31.
The idea the public will be too stupid to realise Jezza was behind surrender is hilarious.1 -
The current Parliament will not permit No Deal, but then again it won't permit *anything*. That's the root cause of this impasse.Anabobazina said:
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
In a General Election campaign, the various parties will have to answer the questions, suspicions and criticisms of the public - including, in the case of the Tories, the prospect that a Boris Johnson-led majority in Parliament might well opt for No Deal.
If the Conservatives win despite this criticism, and then decide to do it, then I'm afraid that's just tough (and no, that's not me advocating that policy, it's simply the way that a representative democracy works.) This Parliament can't sit for all eternity just because its replacement might enact a policy that it does not want and has striven to prevent.1 -
But calling an election isn’t.Richard_Tyndall said:
If he wins the election then that is his right.Anabobazina said:
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.0 -
Section 1 clause 5 of the bill gives Boris a way to leave by 31 October with No Deal even if he has sent the letter requesting an extension... provided he has a majority in the HoC (e.g. after he wins a GE).RobD said:
The new session has to be opened by the Queen, and then there has to be a queens speech debate which takes days. There just isn't time to repeal the Benn act before it stipulates an extension must be requested if the election is a few days before the Council meeting.Anabobazina said:
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
"If, following a request for an extension under subsection (4) but before the end of 30 October 2019, the condition in subsection (1) or the condition in subsection (2) is met, the Prime Minister may withdraw or modify the request."
[The subsection 2 condition is that the HoC has voted to leave with No Deal]1 -
-
-
The true believers on here will just continue to defend/ignore.Scott_P said:0 -
Then there is the question of his performances during a campaign under questioning, assuming he attempts any. His record at PMQs and at the presser today does not inspire much confidence as @ishmael has already alluded to.Harris_Tweed said:
I think (as no great fan) the analysis is realistic, but he’s suffering from the same illusion as TM when she set out to crush the saboteurs in 2017 - that he’s invincible. I’m not sure the “good on him” base is as large as The Sun assumes, nor that it’s entirely immune to breaking the law or having his brother quit. I suspect there’s quite a soft side to his vote, especially among some women.eek said:
Likewise - I do expect Boris to hit 40% but for it to drop as the campaign real beginsPhilip_Thompson said:Overwhelming consensus here seems to be that Boris is crashing and burning and doing an awful job . . . by an overall consensus of people who thought Boris was awful before he got the job.
I and others seem to think Boris is getting on with the job and am pleased with what we see so far. Which is what he was elected to do.
Has anyone actually changed their minds?
From a baseline of ~35% in most polls recently it seems, I expect Boris's Tories will hit 40% before 30%.
So he needs to avoid unforced errors, and remember he’s probably already 10 seats down in Scotland, with BXP potentially stronger than UKIP2017 in England. And a far more focused opposition in the centre too, with the potential (not definite) for greater tactical voting and other cooperation. There’s also a very unclear route from Northern English Lab seats turning (dark) blue.
All in all, the path to a BJ overall majority looks bloody rocky still, however much he fires up his base.
I still expect him to win btw.0 -
There would still be. Queen's Speech though and debate.RobD said:
Ah thanks. I thought that was only after prorogation and not new parliaments entirely, although isn't there still a multi-day debate required, regardless of who gave the Queen's speech.Chris_A said:
It doesn't. It could be opened by Royal Commission.Anabobazina said:
Nonsense. You can’t trust Boris. He’d find a way.RobD said:
The new session has to be opened by the Queen, and then there has to be a queens speech debate which takes days. There just isn't time to repeal the Benn act before it stipulates an extension must be requested if the election is a few days before the Council meeting.Anabobazina said:
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.0 -
Given a quick deadline and a clear result I see no reason the pomp and circumstance can't be curtailed.RobD said:
Ah thanks. I thought that was only after prorogation and not new parliaments entirely, although isn't there still a multi-day debate required, regardless of who gave the Queen's speech.Chris_A said:
It doesn't. It could be opened by Royal Commission.Anabobazina said:
Nonsense. You can’t trust Boris. He’d find a way.RobD said:
The new session has to be opened by the Queen, and then there has to be a queens speech debate which takes days. There just isn't time to repeal the Benn act before it stipulates an extension must be requested if the election is a few days before the Council meeting.Anabobazina said:
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.0 -
...0
-
Hm, hard to see what would be wrong with that? If the majority of the commons voted for it. Repealing the bill to get around is something else entirely.Benpointer said:
Section 1 clause 5 of the bill gives Boris a way to leave by 31 October with No Deal even if he has sent the letter requesting an extension... provided he has a majority in the HoC (e.g. after he wins a GE).RobD said:
The new session has to be opened by the Queen, and then there has to be a queens speech debate which takes days. There just isn't time to repeal the Benn act before it stipulates an extension must be requested if the election is a few days before the Council meeting.Anabobazina said:
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
"If, following a request for an extension under subsection (4) but before the end of 30 October 2019, the condition in subsection (1) or the condition in subsection (2) is met, the Prime Minister may withdraw or modify the request."
[The subsection 2 condition is that the HoC has voted to leave with No Deal]0 -
The public doesn’t want no deal though.Philip_Thompson said:0 -
The last PM who felt it appropriate to compel MPs to vote how he wanted on Europe or they would lose the whip.Scott_P said:
Major isn't upset about what Boris did with the 21. He did it himself. He's upset the sceptics are now the one in charge, that's all.1 -
Will that secure your vote for the Tories? Does it secure enough others?Philip_Thompson said:
0 -
But that’s where the likes of Brendan O’Neill are on dangerous ground: if you’re adamant that the will of the people must be enacted, morally, on Brexit - absolutely regardless of its merits - then where do you stand when something more nasty yet majority-endorsed comes along?Richard_Tyndall said:
If Parliament passed an act making it legal to kill gay people would that be okay? It is a stupid question whichever way it is asked. Indeed it is a logical fallacy (Appeal to Extremes)Gallowgate said:
Genuine question: where is the line?
If 17m voted to make it legal to kill gay people, would that be okay?0 -
"The anti-democratic wreckers in Parliament clubbed together to frustrate the will of the people, vote them out and put my lot in and I can deliver Brexit" might be an easier one though. And the delay can be used to portray Corbyn as a perfidious Remainer.kle4 said:L
I was too weak to stop Corbyn from extending is a tough sell.Scott_P said:Jezza, don't screw this up
https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1169708831133392897
This might or might not work. We just don't know.0 -
Scott_P said:
I’m no fan of Boris but what more can Major say that he has not for years now?0 -
Unless Boris comes out in favour of the backstop it would take a major shock to stop me from voting for the Tories.kle4 said:
Yes IMHO it secures enough others. We're not idiots, we can see what Parliament is doing, they're doing it in plain sight.0 -
Have you asked them all ?Gallowgate said:
The public doesn’t want no deal though.Philip_Thompson said:
0 -
-
He's too chicken to have an election because he's worried the public does actually want that.TGOHF said:
Have you asked them all ?Gallowgate said:
The public doesn’t want no deal though.Philip_Thompson said:0 -
I thought stockpiling was difficult in October , due to the run up to Christmas?Philip_Thompson said:
If that is what the public wants we shouldn't waste £3bn and businesses stockpiling and planning on an absolutely pointless 3 month extension that achieves nothing.Black_Rook said:
I'm with you 100% on the need for an election, but why is the precise date important? If we imagine for a moment that a Parliament that's strongly for leaving the EU is returned, is it going to make that much difference to anything if the leave date is 31 January rather than 31 October?rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
What does delaying achieve beyond burning a billion pounds a month and screwing up stockpiling plans?
Therefore 310120 would be easier.0 -
In reality the Brexit Party would be squeezed just as much in a November election when remainers in parliament are blamed for delaying Brexit and not Boris.1
-
November now the favourite over October for a GE. I agree with that. Time is not Johnson's friend and Labour know this.0
-
Yes I think the bill is fair on that point.RobD said:
Hm, hard to see what would be wrong with that? If the majority of the commons voted for it. Repealing the bill to get around is something else entirely.Benpointer said:
Section 1 clause 5 of the bill gives Boris a way to leave by 31 October with No Deal even if he has sent the letter requesting an extension... provided he has a majority in the HoC (e.g. after he wins a GE).RobD said:
The new session has to be opened by the Queen, and then there has to be a queens speech debate which takes days. There just isn't time to repeal the Benn act before it stipulates an extension must be requested if the election is a few days before the Council meeting.Anabobazina said:
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
"If, following a request for an extension under subsection (4) but before the end of 30 October 2019, the condition in subsection (1) or the condition in subsection (2) is met, the Prime Minister may withdraw or modify the request."
[The subsection 2 condition is that the HoC has voted to leave with No Deal]
But Boris has stupidly boxed himself in, so the opposition parties can force him either to go back on his "dead in a ditch" rhetoric... or to resign.0 -
Predictions for Millar-Major (Major-Millar) ?0
-
If May had chosen 31/01/20 six months ago then maybe.Yorkcity said:
I thought stockpiling was difficult in October , due to the run up to Christmas?Philip_Thompson said:
If that is what the public wants we shouldn't waste £3bn and businesses stockpiling and planning on an absolutely pointless 3 month extension that achieves nothing.Black_Rook said:
I'm with you 100% on the need for an election, but why is the precise date important? If we imagine for a moment that a Parliament that's strongly for leaving the EU is returned, is it going to make that much difference to anything if the leave date is 31 January rather than 31 October?rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
What does delaying achieve beyond burning a billion pounds a month and screwing up stockpiling plans?
Therefore 310120 would be easier.
But companies have already made plans for 31/10/19. Those costs are sunk, those plans are made. It will all have to be torn up and redone once more if we delay - and for what?0 -
Of courseArtist said:In reality the Brexit Party would be squeezed just as much in a November election when remainers in parliament are blamed for delaying Brexit and not Boris.
0 -
Another delay, no doubt!Philip_Thompson said:
If May had chosen 31/01/20 six months ago then maybe.Yorkcity said:
I thought stockpiling was difficult in October , due to the run up to Christmas?Philip_Thompson said:
If that is what the public wants we shouldn't waste £3bn and businesses stockpiling and planning on an absolutely pointless 3 month extension that achieves nothing.Black_Rook said:
I'm with you 100% on the need for an election, but why is the precise date important? If we imagine for a moment that a Parliament that's strongly for leaving the EU is returned, is it going to make that much difference to anything if the leave date is 31 January rather than 31 October?rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
What does delaying achieve beyond burning a billion pounds a month and screwing up stockpiling plans?
Therefore 310120 would be easier.
But companies have already made plans for 31/10/19. Those costs are sunk, those plans are made. It will all have to be torn up and redone once more if we delay - and for what?0 -
-
People trudging off to the polls in dreadful weather and dark nights?kinabalu said:November now the favourite over October for a GE. I agree with that. Time is not Johnson's friend and Labour know this.
Can't see it myself. If the election doesn't happen in October expect whoever is still in power on 1st November to still be there on 1st April.0 -
I’ve been trying to make sense of the current
situation from a Labour perspective, but mostly failing miserably.
My feeling is that an election *before* October 31 is more winnable for Corbyn than one delayed until November. A Labour campaign centred around preventing No Deal, with BoJo little choice but to campaign for it. All-or-nothing.
Whereas, once the deadline has been extended or withdrawn and the No Deal threat has receded, we will likely be back on the previous uncomfortable ground. Corbyn having to walk the tightrope between respecting the 2016 vote and keeping remainers onside.
I understand there are concerns around the date, but in my current view if a 15 October GE date can be secured, JC should accept. Thoughts?
0 -
So BoZo could be PM for 3 daysPhilip_Thompson said:But companies have already made plans for 31/10/19. Those costs are sunk, those plans are made. It will all have to be torn up and redone once more if we delay - and for what?
0 -
-
Easy. People's VoteTGOHF said:
Have you asked them all ?Gallowgate said:
The public doesn’t want no deal though.Philip_Thompson said:0 -
Much as I despise the man it’s what any self-respecting politician would do. Given the choice, why go to the country when the polls are against you? Politicians have always done that - the only difference now is that the FTPA has given the opposition a voice. Trying to goad him by calling him a coward will only stiffen Labour’s resolve. It’s about the only sensible thing I remember him doing.Philip_Thompson said:
He's too chicken to have an election because he's worried the public does actually want that.TGOHF said:
Have you asked them all ?Gallowgate said:
The public doesn’t want no deal though.Philip_Thompson said:0 -
Moral ?rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
You must be a Boris Johnson sycophant.0 -
-
The Opposition should ALWAYS accept an election whenever it's offered.handandmouse said:I’ve been trying to make sense of the current
situation from a Labour perspective, but mostly failing miserably.
My feeling is that an election *before* October 31 is more winnable for Corbyn than one delayed until November. A Labour campaign centred around preventing No Deal, with BoJo little choice but to campaign for it. All-or-nothing.
Whereas, once the deadline has been extended or withdrawn and the No Deal threat has receded, we will likely be back on the previous uncomfortable ground. Corbyn having to walk the tightrope between respecting the 2016 vote and keeping remainers onside.
I understand there are concerns around the date, but in my current view if a 15 October GE date can be secured, JC should accept. Thoughts?
Juxtaposed, notice how we're no longer hearing much about "Stop The Coup" 0 -
...0
-
That's the irony. If they delay until November that gives Boris three months for negotiations so he can say "deal or no deal". Whereas if its mid-October then there's about 3 days for negotiations after the vote.handandmouse said:I’ve been trying to make sense of the current
situation from a Labour perspective, but mostly failing miserably.
My feeling is that an election *before* October 31 is more winnable for Corbyn than one delayed until November. A Labour campaign centred around preventing No Deal, with BoJo little choice but to campaign for it. All-or-nothing.
Whereas, once the deadline has been extended or withdrawn and the No Deal threat has receded, we will likely be back on the previous uncomfortable ground. Corbyn having to walk the tightrope between respecting the 2016 vote and keeping remainers onside.
I understand there are concerns around the date, but in my current view if a 15 October GE date can be secured, JC should accept. Thoughts?0 -
No. Johnson and the Tory members must own their messhandandmouse said:I’ve been trying to make sense of the current
situation from a Labour perspective, but mostly failing miserably.
My feeling is that an election *before* October 31 is more winnable for Corbyn than one delayed until November. A Labour campaign centred around preventing No Deal, with BoJo little choice but to campaign for it. All-or-nothing.
Whereas, once the deadline has been extended or withdrawn and the No Deal threat has receded, we will likely be back on the previous uncomfortable ground. Corbyn having to walk the tightrope between respecting the 2016 vote and keeping remainers onside.
I understand there are concerns around the date, but in my current view if a 15 October GE date can be secured, JC should accept. Thoughts?0 -
Lots of ellipses todayAnabobazina said:...
0 -
A loss . This will end up in the Supreme Court where I think it will lose again . The original Miller case was much stronger , this looks a bit flimsy .GIN1138 said:Predictions for Millar-Major (Major-Millar) ?
As a Remainer and a non Tory I’d love to see this win but think it’s a big long shot .0 -
NEW THREAD
0 -
Let it stiffen his resolve. Let it stiffen it for years more if need be.DougSeal said:
Much as I despise the man it’s what any self-respecting politician would do. Given the choice, why go to the country when the polls are against you? Politicians have always done that - the only difference now is that the FTPA has given the opposition a voice. Trying to goad him by calling him a coward will only stiffen Labour’s resolve. It’s about the only sensible thing I remember him doing.Philip_Thompson said:
He's too chicken to have an election because he's worried the public does actually want that.TGOHF said:
Have you asked them all ?Gallowgate said:
The public doesn’t want no deal though.Philip_Thompson said:
Eventually there has to be an election and being a coward between now and it isn't going to win you any respect or favours. A government can claim they're getting on with the job - Corbyn is too chicken to do his job.0 -
Cummings has wargamed this.kle4 said:Rather than not follow the law why didn’t boris let the attempted filibuster play out?
0 -
Maybe the government would quite like to get out of prorougeation now anyway!nico67 said:
A loss . This will end up in the Supreme Court where I think it will lose again . The original Miller case was much stronger , this looks a bit flimsy .GIN1138 said:Predictions for Millar-Major (Major-Millar) ?
As a Remainer and a non Tory I’d love to see this win but think it’s a big long shot .
0 -
AgreedPhilip_Thompson said:
What are you smoking?Anabobazina said:
Rubbish. That would give Boris the opportunity to No Deal with no electoral consequences.rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
It will give the public the opportunity to decide what they want.
Anything else is just political posturing.0 -
Versus: "You can't trust Boris" - works on so many levels...Black_Rook said:
"The anti-democratic wreckers in Parliament clubbed together to frustrate the will of the people, vote them out and put my lot in and I can deliver Brexit" might be an easier one though. And the delay can be used to portray Corbyn as a perfidious Remainer.kle4 said:L
I was too weak to stop Corbyn from extending is a tough sell.Scott_P said:Jezza, don't screw this up
https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1169708831133392897
This might or might not work. We just don't know.
Sacked for lying x 2 (allegedly)
Serial philanderer
His own brother doesn't trust him
[Will have] failed to "die in a ditch" for 31 October
The deal that never was / the NI border solution that never was
Prorogation to prevent scrutiny
etc
etc
0 -
It's the right thing because the country no longer has a functioning government and it needs one pronto. Ironically, all of those who've been complaining for months that the country has no functioning government are now those that are standing in the way of an election.Yorkcity said:
Moral ?rcs1000 said:By the way, if there's an election on October 15 (or thereabouts), I would expect:
40% chance of a decent (25+) Conservative majority
20% chance of a small majority or almost there (320 seats plus)
25% chance of a Referendum for Remain result (i.e. Lab + LD + SNP + PC + G > 330-ish)
And a 15% chance of an unstable parliament that is unable to get anything done.
The right thing, the moral thing, is for us to have an election. And to have it in mid-October.
You must be a Boris Johnson sycophant.0 -
Comments from my non political friend (n=1)Philip_Thompson said:
It won't dent his mojo if the public blames Parliament rather than Boris.Benpointer said:
Of course, that's a possibility. But Boris failing to deliver Brexit on 31 October will seriously dent his mojo.GIN1138 said:
And the legislation currently going through Parliament right now makes No Deal on 31st October illegal.Benpointer said:
I appreciate this will be a difficult concept for Tories to understand the SNP seem to be putting country before party.GIN1138 said:
I still think we're going to have an election in October from the one line bill route.kle4 said:Rather than not follow the law why didn’t boris let the attempted filibuster play out?
Other than Boris the only other party leader who's interests its in to have an election in October is Nicola...
https://twitter.com/itvpeston/status/1169377798835728384?s=20
That's what the Opposition wanted.
But if the argument is that Boris could be returned with a majroty and then push on with NO DEAL.. Well that's another matter.
We could go past 31st October still in the EU, have an election after 31st October which leads to a Con majority and then we leave with no deal on 31st December or January.
That's a risk Remaines will have to take sooner or later unless we're never going to have a general election again?
At the current rate, by the time of a November or spring GE Boris will be a bigger liability to the Tories than TMay was in the last election.
I think Boris is definitely doing enough to make Parliament be viewed as responsible. If we extend due to Parliament expect to hear a lot of "Guy Fawkes was right" comments in November.
* Boris is the sort of mate who you know would do something stupid on a night out and make it a real fun night. Wouldn’t let him babysit though.
* He’s having a Tough time - lots of backstabbing MPs trying to make him look bad0 -
It’s not the 1960s - fanny by gaslight, smog and Jack the Ripper - pensioners vote by post and in Peterborough they don’t even have to bother filling them in - personally collected. And as for door knocking it’s all done on Facebook from Moscow.GIN1138 said:
People trudging off to the polls in dreadful weather and dark nights?kinabalu said:November now the favourite over October for a GE. I agree with that. Time is not Johnson's friend and Labour know this.
Can't see it myseIf the election doesn't happen in October expect whoever is still in power on 1st November to still be there on 1st April.
So am not sure it’s as big factor as it was.0 -
I'm no SNP fan, but this is particularly ludicrous. They'll cream the Tories in Scotland, and in what possible way does this tweet help his beleaguered colleagues north of the border? Won't exactly appear on THEIR leaflets, will it?TGOHF said:0 -
Good point . Yes , with the Commons sitting they could have applied a lot more pressure for the early election .GIN1138 said:
Maybe the government would quite like to get out of prorougeation now anyway!nico67 said:
A loss . This will end up in the Supreme Court where I think it will lose again . The original Miller case was much stronger , this looks a bit flimsy .GIN1138 said:Predictions for Millar-Major (Major-Millar) ?
As a Remainer and a non Tory I’d love to see this win but think it’s a big long shot .0 -
I do not understand how another three months changes anything other than a later election which Boris will make into a no deal mandateChris_A said:
No. Johnson and the Tory members must own their messhandandmouse said:I’ve been trying to make sense of the current
situation from a Labour perspective, but mostly failing miserably.
My feeling is that an election *before* October 31 is more winnable for Corbyn than one delayed until November. A Labour campaign centred around preventing No Deal, with BoJo little choice but to campaign for it. All-or-nothing.
Whereas, once the deadline has been extended or withdrawn and the No Deal threat has receded, we will likely be back on the previous uncomfortable ground. Corbyn having to walk the tightrope between respecting the 2016 vote and keeping remainers onside.
I understand there are concerns around the date, but in my current view if a 15 October GE date can be secured, JC should accept. Thoughts?
0 -
That’s all true, as well as the fact that it’s imperative that we avoid No Deal. So forcing the government to extend then holding the election afterwards is clearly the best play.DougSeal said:
Much as I despise the man it’s what any self-respecting politician would do. Given the choice, why go to the country when the polls are against you? Politicians have always done that - the only difference now is that the FTPA has given the opposition a voice. Trying to goad him by calling him a coward will only stiffen Labour’s resolve. It’s about the only sensible thing I remember him doing.Philip_Thompson said:
He's too chicken to have an election because he's worried the public does actually want that.TGOHF said:
Have you asked them all ?Gallowgate said:
The public doesn’t want no deal though.Philip_Thompson said:0 -
Exactly if the boot was on the other foot, would our Tory heroes go to the country with the polls against them ?DougSeal said:
Much as I despise the man it’s what any self-respecting politician would do. Given the choice, why go to the country when the polls are against you? Politicians have always done that - the only difference now is that the FTPA has given the opposition a voice. Trying to goad him by calling him a coward will only stiffen Labour’s resolve. It’s about the only sensible thing I remember him doing.Philip_Thompson said:
He's too chicken to have an election because he's worried the public does actually want that.TGOHF said:
Have you asked them all ?Gallowgate said:
The public doesn’t want no deal though.Philip_Thompson said:
If they say yes they are as thick as mince.0
