politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A closer look at one of tonight’s local council by elections
Comments
-
Er... sorry but that's no way to treat a puppy.Scott_P said:
Yes. When a puppy craps on the floor, you rub their nose in it.Chris_A said:No. Johnson and the Tory members must own their mess
BoZo has crapped all over the party, the constitution and the country. This is what happens next
Boris - fine.0 -
If the next opinion polls show a swing from Tory to Labour I bet a lot more Labour supporters will suddenly favour an election as soon as possible and a lot less Tories.0
-
True words indeed.AndyJS said:If the next opinion polls show a swing from Tory to Labour I bet a lot more Labour supporters will suddenly favour an election as soon as possible and a lot less Tories.
0 -
The main problem is EU accession requires a maximum 3% deficit. Scotland's, thanks (never given) to English subsidies, is 9%.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 -
I have been outspoken of my condemnation of Boris together with my resignation but an election before the Council meeting is the corrrct thing to do. I am not a sycophant, indeed I asked for him to resign todayYorkcity 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 -
To be honest, October 31st was a stupid date, because it never allowed any time for negotiation with the new Commission. The government should have either extended for a month and held an election to break the deadlock, or extended until November 30, when at least there would be time for negotiations.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?
But that's all by-the-by.
Let's put it to the voters. Let's let the people decide what the right answer is. That's democracy. And then no-one can say (as I do now), that no one voted for No Deal. Similarly, if the LDs win the election on a Referendum and Revoke platform, we would have to recognise that.
But whatever happens, the current situation is unsustainable. An election offers no certainty, but at least an opportunity to break the deadlock.0 -
They let the Greeks inFenman said:
The main problem is EU accession requires a maximum 3% deficit. Scotland's, thanks (never given) to English subsidies, is 9%.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 -
Don't know.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?
I think the election will be won or lost in Labour marginals, not for the usual reason that Labour voters switch to Conservative. It will depend on whether more 2017 Labour voters switch to Lib Dems in those seats than 2017 Conservative voters switch to the Brexit Party. The Conservatives will almost certainly lose seats to the SNP and LDs - maybe 30 in total. Can they gain enough Labour seats so they go forwards, not back?0 -
...after, I suspect, asking BJ very politely how he dare use the term Prime Minister when he can’t fulfil duty number one (in her book) not ensuring continuity of government.Benpointer said:
Surely she'd then have to consult others, including the LOTO?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 -
That's true but the opposition parties have a chance to force Boris to fail on his 31 Oct commitment. Why wouldn't they take it?rcs1000 said:
To be honest, October 31st was a stupid date, because it never allowed any time for negotiation with the new Commission. The government should have either extended for a month and held an election to break the deadlock, or extended until November 30, when at least there would be time for negotiations.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?
But that's all by-the-by.
Let's put it to the voters. Let's let the people decide what the right answer is. That's democracy. And then no-one can say (as I do now), that no one voted for No Deal. Similarly, if the LDs win the election on a Referendum and Revoke platform, we would have to recognise that.
But whatever happens, the current situation is unsustainable. An election offers no certainty, but at least an opportunity to break the deadlock.0 -
I think that may be right, although Boris's line is that there will be last-minute negotiations at the Council of Minister meeting a couple of days after October 15th when he will deploy his secret plan to win the war, so ultimately he *can* get a deal provided the voters give him a mandate. If soft Leave voters can't be persuaded that Alternative Arrangements are bogus there may be a case for making him show his non-existent hand first.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 -
Might play into his message of Parliament blocking Brexit.Benpointer said:
That's true but the opposition parties have a chance to force Boris to fail on his 31 Oct commitment. Why wouldn't they take it?rcs1000 said:
To be honest, October 31st was a stupid date, because it never allowed any time for negotiation with the new Commission. The government should have either extended for a month and held an election to break the deadlock, or extended until November 30, when at least there would be time for negotiations.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?
But that's all by-the-by.
Let's put it to the voters. Let's let the people decide what the right answer is. That's democracy. And then no-one can say (as I do now), that no one voted for No Deal. Similarly, if the LDs win the election on a Referendum and Revoke platform, we would have to recognise that.
But whatever happens, the current situation is unsustainable. An election offers no certainty, but at least an opportunity to break the deadlock.0 -
But it does not take no deal off the table, it just extends the end date and I would bet Boris will fight the next election on a 'give us a deal or we leave without' mandateAnabobazina said:
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:
I am just surprised so few cannot see this0 -
If it was imperative, they would have voted for the deal.Anabobazina said:
That’s all true, as well as the fact that it’s imperative that we avoid No Deal.
What happens in January when the extension runs out? You know there isn't any deal Corbyn will accept.
0 -
Possible election scenarios, insofar as I can see them: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.
1. Parliament votes for a dissolution on Monday (which seems unlikely as things currently stand.) Election on October 15th.
2. Parliament declines to vote for a dissolution on Monday. Boris Johnson stays in office, goes to Brussels and applies for an A50 extension. Parliament then votes for a dissolution. Election on November 28th
3. Parliament declines to vote for a dissolution on Monday. Boris Johnson stays in office, refuses to go to Brussels and a major legal and constitutional crisis occurs. Election date uncertain, could end up being either December or January
4. Parliament declines to vote for a dissolution on Monday, Boris Johnson resigns and Corbyn (or any other caretaker) is installed. Johnson, as LOTO, tables a VONC under the FTPA and it passes. The 14-day pantomime then has to play out before dissolution
(i) If VONC takes place before Prorogation, election could still take place on October 15th, or possibly the 16th or 17th depending on the date of the vote
(ii) if VONC takes place shortly after the start of the new session, election could take place on December 21st but would most likely be delayed until January
5. As per 4., but Boris Johnson fails to have the new Prime Minister removed at the first attempt (highly unlikely given that it'll almost certainly be Corbyn, but included for completeness.) No election until 2020
Is there anything I've missed?0 -
It will play into his playbook and create a martyr for the brexit cause.RobD said:
Might play into his message of Parliament blocking Brexit.Benpointer said:
That's true but the opposition parties have a chance to force Boris to fail on his 31 Oct commitment. Why wouldn't they take it?rcs1000 said:
To be honest, October 31st was a stupid date, because it never allowed any time for negotiation with the new Commission. The government should have either extended for a month and held an election to break the deadlock, or extended until November 30, when at least there would be time for negotiations.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?
But that's all by-the-by.
Let's put it to the voters. Let's let the people decide what the right answer is. That's democracy. And then no-one can say (as I do now), that no one voted for No Deal. Similarly, if the LDs win the election on a Referendum and Revoke platform, we would have to recognise that.
But whatever happens, the current situation is unsustainable. An election offers no certainty, but at least an opportunity to break the deadlock.
If Boris is still in place at the Council meeting and they give him nothing, he returns to the HOC accusing the no deal act as holing the negotiations and then refuses to seek an extension, is everyone going to turn him into a national hero fighting the remainers, elite and EU by hounding him out
0 -
The crisis is because we rushed into a referendum before preparing properly for it, which lead to us rushing to invoke Article 50 before preparing properly for it, which lead us to rushing to do something in two years that should take five.Jonathan said:
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.
The only natural next step is to rush into an election with too little time for a proper debate. That's now who we are. We are a country of headless chickens, running around in a blind panic.
Elections are good. But democracy, like whisky, is not something to be hurried. Conservatives used to understand this, and cautioned against revolution. I don't know how they managed to lose that core guiding principle, these days... these days the Conservatives are nothing if not revolting.2 -
I can't think of anything no. I think 5 is not quite so unlikely. Johnson has lost a lot of support in the house.Black_Rook said:Possible election scenarios, insofar as I can see them:
1. Parliament votes for a dissolution on Monday (which seems unlikely as things currently stand.) Election on October 15th.
2. Parliament declines to vote for a dissolution on Monday. Boris Johnson stays in office, goes to Brussels and applies for an A50 extension. Parliament then votes for a dissolution. Election on November 28th
3. Parliament declines to vote for a dissolution on Monday. Boris Johnson stays in office, refuses to go to Brussels and a major legal and constitutional crisis occurs. Election date uncertain, could end up being either December or January
4. Parliament declines to vote for a dissolution on Monday, Boris Johnson resigns and Corbyn (or any other caretaker) is installed. Johnson, as LOTO, tables a VONC under the FTPA and it passes. The 14-day pantomime then has to play out before dissolution
(i) If VONC takes place before Prorogation, election could still take place on October 15th, or possibly the 16th or 17th depending on the date of the vote
(ii) if VONC takes place shortly after the start of the new session, election could take place on December 21st but would most likely be delayed until January
5. As per 4., but Boris Johnson fails to have the new Prime Minister removed at the first attempt (highly unlikely given that it'll almost certainly be Corbyn, but included for completeness.) No election until 2020
Is there anything I've missed?
Based on your excellent summary the value bet is 2020. It's a bigger price than it should be.0 -
GALAHAD: Ah -- we could taunt it! It may become so cross that it'll make a mistake!SirNorfolkPassmore said:
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:
ARTHUR: (Incredulously) Like what?0 -
A "good luck in your new job" card.Big_G_NorthWales said:
If Boris is still in place at the Council meeting and they give him nothing
0 -
More previews on the by-elections http://britainelects.com/2019/09/04/previews-05-sep-2019/0
-
The logical position of the 21, having given up their careers to allow time in parliament for an opposition bill, is that they’d back a caretaker govt for as long as it was needed to see it enacted.kinabalu said:
I can't think of anything no. I think 5 is not quite so unlikely. Johnson has lost a lot of support in the house.Black_Rook said:Possible election scenarios, insofar as I can see them:
1. Parliament votes for a dissolution on Monday (which seems unlikely as things currently stand.) Election on October 15th.
2. Parliament declines to vote for a dissolution on Monday. Boris Johnson stays in office, goes to Brussels and applies for an A50 extension. Parliament then votes for a dissolution. Election on November 28th
3. Parliament declines to vote for a dissolution on Monday. Boris Johnson stays in office, refuses to go to Brussels and a major legal and constitutional crisis occurs. Election date uncertain, could end up being either December or January
4. Parliament declines to vote for a dissolution on Monday, Boris Johnson resigns and Corbyn (or any other caretaker) is installed. Johnson, as LOTO, tables a VONC under the FTPA and it passes. The 14-day pantomime then has to play out before dissolution
(i) If VONC takes place before Prorogation, election could still take place on October 15th, or possibly the 16th or 17th depending on the date of the vote
(ii) if VONC takes place shortly after the start of the new session, election could take place on December 21st but would most likely be delayed until January
5. As per 4., but Boris Johnson fails to have the new Prime Minister removed at the first attempt (highly unlikely given that it'll almost certainly be Corbyn, but included for completeness.) No election until 2020
Is there anything I've missed?
Based on your excellent summary the value bet is 2020. It's a bigger price than it should be.
Notwithstanding Philip Hammond’s wish to boil his head before doing so in Corbyn’s case, I agree it’s not beyond the bounds if the LDs and SNP eventually go for it too.0
