Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Remainers of the Day. Why are pollsters consistently findi

1456810

Comments

  • Just heard a quote on 5 Live news headline one of the 'rebel alliance' (didn't hear who, female) saying they have a chance to "bring down Boris and bring down Brexit".

    The mask slips. We can all see and hear what is going on. This next election is a referendum by proxy - if you want Brexit vote Boris's Conservatives. If you don't vote Lib Dem/Labour/SNP/Plaid/Greens/Independents.
  • Not labour for sure but it is a very marginal con-labour seat.

    Of course Colwyn Bay is held by David Jones, a huge brexiteer
    Are you still a Conservative these days?
  • GIN1138 said:

    They have swollowed their own spin that Leavers are all thick and stupid and can be played by them... It will blow up up in theior faces spectacularly.
    Exactly, they're treating us and the public as a whole as idiots. We're not idiots.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,746

    Mr DougSeal, HYUFD is a pathetic little pipsqueak who is not fit to lick the boots of many of the people he is insulting. They are not traitors to anything . People who disagree with a course of action are not obliged to fall in behind any foolhardy position that a small majority believes in. What if 52% wanted a return to slavery, or some such other savagery? The minority would have every right to try and demonstrate it was wrong. Difficult to remonstrate with someone who blindly follows Boris Johnson with the devotion of a particularly stupid puppydog I guess!

    I know. He is the classic university Conservative Association chairman. Which is why I don't let him get on my nerves if I can help it. We had a debate about the tyranny of the majority with Philip Thompson on here last night and I agree with your point entirely. My view of Brexit has always been let them try. They've tried. Look where we are.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,235
    edited September 2019
    BudG said:

    Boris resigns as PM, as an MP and also resigns from the Conservative Party. The Conservative Party and Parliament is in turmoil. Boris then joins the Brexit Party and takes Cummings with him, to fight the next GE alongside Farage.

    Impossible? You couldn't make it up?

    Cummings could make it up and it might just work!

    No chance. The Tory brand, whilst not as powerful in my opinion as the Labour one has way too much latent support for that to happen.
    Also Farage is God Emperor of that particular cabal.

    Like Trump best to fight the insurgent cause whilst wearing the colours of one of the big parties.
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900


    Or VONC him and install someone else: see below.

    Obviously I'm on Ken Clarke and biased. Nicholas Soames would be rather sweet justice ...


    My long-predicted Chris Grayling/Williamson co-premiership creeps ever closer.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    Chris said:

    No, because the wording is "If the European Council decides to agree an extension of the period in Article50(3) of the Treaty on European Union ending at 11.00 pm on 31 October 2019to the period ending at 11.00pm on 31 January 2020 ..."

    Perhaps it would indeed have been better to say "decides to offer," but evidently the bill wasn't drafted to accommodate a prime ministerial refusal to comply with statute law.
    Ah, you’re just a bit dim. Got it. The word ‘agree’ simply means agree within the European Council, where we have no say or veto.
  • That’s not the plan, at least not for the opposition parties. It’s to fuck the Conservatives.

    If the Brexit vote splits between TBXP and the Tories then it does no good whatsoever in a GE.
    Hence why Boris' strategy is the _only_ strategy that can work to prevent that by consolidating the right. I don't understand Conservatives (especially Leave-voting Conservatives) who don't recognize that this is the devil's bargain that we were committed to the moment Leave won. I voted Remain because I knew a Leave victory would drag the party into some dark and uncomfortable places if it wished to survive in the new reality, but now that we're here, we have to either embrace it, or face scoring ~25% to Labour's ~35% at the next GE.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,334
    edited September 2019
    Byronic said:

    Agreed. The nation is endangered. Enough, now.
    Parliament is acting like a lawyer defending a paedophile or a terrorist who is guilty, but looks like getting off on a technicality, Boris is saying he should be hanged, and the progressives are more angry at him than the lawyer.
  • Chris said:

    That's exactly what I've been telling you!

    Good God.
    The two calendar days is a huge potential logistical problem as I have said before. No sensible lawyer would have agreed it in a commercial agreement. It is way too short and is symptomatic of the whole cavalier and undemocratic way this ridiculous bill has been pushed through.
  • He even accused me of being a lib dem and keeps repeating it, bless him
    Yes, really very sad. While I don't approve of violence, I might imagine that it could be amusing to see him accuse a couple of the ex Army lads I know of being "traitors" for supporting remain.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    My anecdote today sits alongside other conversations and the general feeling that is out there of outrage. You would never normally hear politics spoken so much in public areas like Asda or the High Street.

    I am beginning to feel it is a mistake of enormous proportions and labour in particular are going to pay a big price. Mind you if that results in the end of Corbyn as leader that would be a bonus
    Personally I'm seeing a Labour minority Government as being very much on the cards after an election, but if you turn out to be correct and that minority is very small then that can only be a good thing. If we really are going to have PM Corbyn inflicted upon us then the greater the curtailing influence of his coalition (or, more likely, confidence-and-supply) partners, the better.
  • DougSeal said:

    I know. He is the classic university Conservative Association chairman. Which is why I don't let him get on my nerves if I can help it. We had a debate about the tyranny of the majority with Philip Thompson on here last night and I agree with your point entirely. My view of Brexit has always been let them try. They've tried. Look where we are.
    I didn't get involved in the tyranny of the majority debate.

    On the savagery question I will point out that our system led to the abolition of slavery. We were a leading proponent of abolishing slavery, before others. We have led the way time after time on improving human rights.

    I trust our system. I trust our people.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,920
    isam said:

    Parliament is acting like a lawyer defending a paedophile or a terrorist who is guilty, but looks like getting off on a technicality, Boris is saying he should be hanged, and the progressives are more angry at him than the lawyer.
    You know we don't hang people any more?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,235
    A mind from Merseyside ;) who has won far more than me betting on politics reckons it has to be Corbyn btw...
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,746
    HYUFD said:

    As you refused to condemn an image of the burning of the Union Jack
    You're confusing me with someone else. I did, and do, so comdemn - for all sorts of reasons not all of which you would agree with. You called me anti-British when we were talking about the origins of the troubles in NI. Nothing to do with flag burning. Even if it had been I can assure you I have done more for my country than you. We will leave it there.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,814
    tyson said:

    There have been stranger coalitions in Europe....a national unity Govt led by Ken Clarke with the likes of Jo Swinson, Rory Stewart, John McDonnell and Ian Blandford sitting in the cabinet to get us through the Brexit impasse is now within the gift of Jeremy Corbyn.

    It would have the added benefit of detoxifying him.....
    Rory Stewart, ex SIS, is going to serve in a cabinet under
    murali_s said:

    Smart move.

    Boris Johnson stood for the Tory party leadership in a bid "to get Brexit done." He doesn't want an election, the public don't want an election and now it's clear the opposition doesn't want an election.

    Let's see how this piece of sh*t proceeds. Has the retarded moron Cummings war-gamed this? Watching the lying disingenuous fat slob stew in his own mess will be deliciously fun!!!
    You seem a pleasant person.
  • Brom said:

    chill out. Far worse stuff said on this forum than traitor.
    I disagree, but maybe I am old-fashioned. It is cowardly in the extreme to make such accusations from the safety of a keyboard.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,920
    Byronic said:

    Ah, you’re just a bit dim. Got it. The word ‘agree’ simply means agree within the European Council, where we have no say or veto.
    Don't talk nonsense.
  • rawzerrawzer Posts: 189
    Byronic said:

    Ah, you’re just a bit dim. Got it. The word ‘agree’ simply means agree within the European Council, where we have no say or veto.
    It seems far more likely to mean 'agree' with the PMs request given that is what is entirely about
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 14,012
    Byronic said:


    The echoes of the Civil War are, once again, profound. If you’d asked parliamentarians in the 1630s whether they’d end up beheading the king, they would have called you mad. Back then, Oliver Cromwell was an obscure yokel.

    But what started with arcane disputes about money ended up with the overthrow of the entire system, and with Cromwell as Lord Protector.
    However little can be said for Cromwell 'Yokel' is not the right term for graduates of Sidney Sussex and sons of gentlemen.

  • Chris said:

    Don't talk nonsense.
    It is what it means.

    Under Article 50 we don't sit on the European Council for this and the European Council will reach an agreement without us.
  • Are you still a Conservative these days?
    I resigned from the party on the expulsion of 21 good decent conservative mps.

    If Boris does not want them he does not want me
  • Byronic said:


    The echoes of the Civil War are, once again, profound. If you’d asked parliamentarians in the 1630s whether they’d end up beheading the king, they would have called you mad. Back then, Oliver Cromwell was an obscure yokel.

    But what started with arcane disputes about money ended up with the overthrow of the entire system, and with Cromwell as Lord Protector.
    Slightly different society nowadays matey. I may have sometimes used a little bit of hyperbole, but we are not there thankfully.
    More worrying is that we may be doing the bidding of Putin through allowing such cretins as Johnson and Corbyn near the leavers of power. He must ne pissing himself.
  • algarkirk said:


    I suggest that HM the Queen would call for the person Boris advised upon his resignation and no-one else. That looks like Corbyn unless something changed.

    The crisis would be if Boris named no-one.

    That's been fairly well done over here, hasn't it?

    My understanding is that the Queen speaks to her advisers and they suggest somebody. If they cannot, or those they recommend also say they cannot command the confidence of the House, Boris remains PM.

    One would expect a GE to follow pretty quickly in these circumstances, or at the expiry of the term under the FTPA.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    rawzer said:

    Its not a long or complicated document and as I read it the 'offer' of an extension relates specifically to responding to the PMs request, they "decide to *agree* an extension" because they have been asked for one.

    They can do that in one of two ways accept the date requested in the letter or offer another one. In either case they are responding - 'agreeing' - to the request by the PM. In the latter case Parliament can validate the alternative date. This doesn't cope with the PM not offering it in the first place.

    https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2017-2019/0202/18202.pdf


    Hmm. The Act says the prime minister ‘must’ ask for an extension. In that light, Boris is suggesting he will resign, I think, or face the courts - rather than request to extend.
  • On topic, good article and surely mostly correct.

    Shy Leavers is a thing. I know several...
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268

    That's been fairly well done over here, hasn't it?

    My understanding is that the Queen speaks to her advisers and they suggest somebody. If they cannot, or those they recommend also say they cannot command the confidence of the House, Boris remains PM.

    One would expect a GE to follow pretty quickly in these circumstances, or at the expiry of the term under the FTPA.
    It surely can't be right that Boris opposes a policy, is legally obliged to do it, and isn't allowed to resign?
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,746

    I didn't get involved in the tyranny of the majority debate.

    On the savagery question I will point out that our system led to the abolition of slavery. We were a leading proponent of abolishing slavery, before others. We have led the way time after time on improving human rights.

    I trust our system. I trust our people.
    Are you taking the piss? Our system led to the North Atlantic Slave trade and millions of deaths before abolishing it. That's like wanting credit for putting out a fire you yourself started.

    You don't trust a major part of the system, the Commons, which the people voted for. You're also not a big fan of the judiciary. You trust what you think the people want - that's about it. When they don't behave exactly as you like, in electing the current parliament for example. You like *bits* of the system. Indeed you most like a bit of the system, referenda, that has not historically been part of it.
  • I resigned from the party on the expulsion of 21 good decent conservative mps.

    If Boris does not want them he does not want me
    Would you have resigned in 1993 if Major had expelled Cash, Redwood, IDS and 18 others if they'd rebelled on the Maastricht Confidence vote?

    Ken Clarke was in the cabinet that agreed to that punishment being meted out to anyone who rebelled. Was he wrong to do so?
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    algarkirk said:

    However little can be said for Cromwell 'Yokel' is not the right term for graduates of Sidney Sussex and sons of gentlemen.

    Fair dos. But he was ‘obscure’
  • Byronic said:


    The echoes of the Civil War are, once again, profound. If you’d asked parliamentarians in the 1630s whether they’d end up beheading the king, they would have called you mad. Back then, Oliver Cromwell was an obscure yokel.

    But what started with arcane disputes about money ended up with the overthrow of the entire system, and with Cromwell as Lord Protector.
    I agree. People are not going to take to the streets with pikes today but the damage to the institutions which underpin the current democratic system is profound.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,814
    So ignore that first uncompleted bit. Vanilla comments on a phone is still a struggle for me
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,087

    Yes, really very sad. While I don't approve of violence, I might imagine that it could be amusing to see him accuse a couple of the ex Army lads I know of being "traitors" for supporting remain.
    I myself voted Remain so what an idiotic argument but I also respect democracy unlike most MPs
  • rawzerrawzer Posts: 189
    Byronic said:


    Hmm. The Act says the prime minister ‘must’ ask for an extension. In that light, Boris is suggesting he will resign, I think, or face the courts - rather than request to extend.
    Yep I think that is the nub of it, if he doesn't resign and doesn't ask, he is breaking the law but since 31st Oct will come and go while the lawyers squeal, I am not sure how it plays out. There would be a few days after Oct 19th when he is in breach that Parliament could hatch something else I suppose and allow someone else to make the request...but who else represents the Govt...or panic based Revoke and go around it all again post the election
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,344
    edited September 2019
    Byronic said:


    The echoes of the Civil War are, once again, profound. If you’d asked parliamentarians in the 1630s whether they’d end up beheading the king, they would have called you mad. Back then, Oliver Cromwell was an obscure yokel.

    But what started with arcane disputes about money ended up with the overthrow of the entire system, and with Cromwell as Lord Protector.
    Not sure they'd have been that amazed tbh. Less than a hundred years previously they'd had a king who'd beheaded two of his queens and executed advisors, nobles & prelates, a usurper queen beheaded, a queen who beheaded the grandmother of their current king, a serious attempt at regicide & the destruction of parliament and a steady flow of burnings and disembowellings of sundry individuals for praying a bit differently to whatever was the current mode.

    Good times.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited September 2019
    DougSeal said:

    Are you taking the piss? Our system led to the North Atlantic Slave trade and millions of deaths before abolishing it. That's like wanting credit for putting out a fire you yourself started.

    You don't trust a major part of the system, the Commons, which the people voted for. You're also not a big fan of the judiciary. You trust what you think the people want - that's about it. When they don't behave exactly as you like, in electing the current parliament for example. You like *bits* of the system. Indeed you most like a bit of the system, referenda, that has not historically been part of it.
    As Billy Joel sang "we didn't start the fire".

    The slave trade existed for as long as recorded humanity existed as far as I know. The Bible even gives details on slavery and its rules under religion.

    We didn't start slavery or the slave trade. We did end it.

    I do trust the Commons and especially the Commons being held to account at General Elections. I do trust the judiciary, where have I ever said otherwise?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,087

    Yes, really very sad. While I don't approve of violence, I might imagine that it could be amusing to see him accuse a couple of the ex Army lads I know of being "traitors" for supporting remain.
    Impliedly threatening me with violence also does you no credit
  • Would you have resigned in 1993 if Major had expelled Cash, Redwood, IDS and 18 others if they'd rebelled on the Maastricht Confidence vote?

    Ken Clarke was in the cabinet that agreed to that punishment being meted out to anyone who rebelled. Was he wrong to do so?
    I was not a member then.

    I will not condone Boris ( Cummings) treatment of 21 conservative mps, most of whom voted for TM which I endorse, and are one nation conservatives like myself
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    rawzer said:

    It seems far more likely to mean 'agree' with the PMs request given that is what is entirely about
    It’s quite poorly drafted, it seems to me. Far from the masterpiece of legislating that some have described. But IANAL

    Nontheless I’m pretty sure ‘agree’ here, means ‘agree within the EU Council’. Not ‘agree with the UK PM’. The second interpretation renders the whole thing useless.
  • Byronic said:


    Hmm. The Act says the prime minister ‘must’ ask for an extension. In that light, Boris is suggesting he will resign, I think, or face the courts - rather than request to extend.
    Yes, Cummings will have gamed that having Boris direct an election campaign from a prison cell will conjure up romantic images of the glorious martyr amongst the adoring masses. If the Remoaner traitors can somehow conspire to make him drag a wooden cross up Pall Mall then all the better!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,087
    Our very own Nick Palmer with Jeremy Hunt this morning

    https://twitter.com/Jeremy_Hunt/status/1169902266230304770?s=20
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,705

    Yes, really very sad. While I don't approve of violence, I might imagine that it could be amusing to see him accuse a couple of the ex Army lads I know of being "traitors" for supporting remain.

    Not appropriate to bring that up tbh.

    I am a one such ex army lad who voted remain and I don't wish to slap @HYUFD. I want to help him. Hug would be going a bit far but I'd happily buy him a cinzano.

    Because as he is a diehard remainer he is evidently having a huge problem realising that the Conservative party no longer wants him. He believes their Brexit policy is deeply misguided and disagrees with it but has not yet got to the point of self-confidence whereby he can let go.
  • I was not a member then.

    I will not condone Boris ( Cummings) treatment of 21 conservative mps, most of whom voted for TM which I endorse, and are one nation conservatives like myself
    No offence but you are old enough to remember those days politically though aren't you?

    At the time did you think Major was being outrageous? You may not condone that action but Ken Clarke condoned it when he was in the cabinet. You disagree with Ken Clarke over this?
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    I disagree, but maybe I am old-fashioned. It is cowardly in the extreme to make such accusations from the safety of a keyboard.
    It is libel. But worse, it is what lazy people do when their strong feelings are untethered to any firm realities. They escalate because their egos can't face the reality that they are sometimes wrong.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/RobDotHutton/status/1169944667061915649

    Has anyone got a graphic for falling over a cliff?
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,746
    HYUFD said:

    I myself voted Remain so what an idiotic argument but I also respect democracy unlike most MPs
    I don't mind your views, you are often proved right, but your use of violent language and imagery is (for those who have experienced *actual* violence and conflict especially) off-putting and detracts from your points - of which you have many good ones. It's a shame that you wrap them up in juvenile language from the pages of "Commando" magazine. (is that still a thing?)
  • isamisam Posts: 41,334
    Chris said:

    You know we don't hang people any more?
    Yes, I knew that
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,795
    HYUFD said:

    Our very own Nick Palmer with Jeremy Hunt this morning

    https://twitter.com/Jeremy_Hunt/status/1169902266230304770?s=20

    Presume this is the very same Nick Palmer ex-MP, of PB? Great tweet/photo.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,334
    HYUFD said:

    Our very own Nick Palmer with Jeremy Hunt this morning

    https://twitter.com/Jeremy_Hunt/status/1169902266230304770?s=20

    Nick a fan of the Hunt!
  • Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/RobDotHutton/status/1169944667061915649

    Has anyone got a graphic for falling over a cliff?

    Yes it would indeed. A majority Tory government could resolve this quite simply.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,795

    I was not a member then.

    I will not condone Boris ( Cummings) treatment of 21 conservative mps, most of whom voted for TM which I endorse, and are one nation conservatives like myself
    Ken Clarke and Harriet Harman (father and mother of the house) dream ticket.

    Could quite possibly command the confidence of the house.
  • HYUFD said:

    I never said traitors to country, I said traitors to democracy, which they undoubtedly are having refused to respect the winning Leave vote despite voting to have the referendum and invoke Article 50 and most of the country feels the same

    The majority of voters backed parties that specifically opposed a No Deal Brexit in the 2017 General Election. They did so again in the 2019 European Elections.

  • No offence but you are old enough to remember those days politically though aren't you?

    At the time did you think Major was being outrageous? You may not condone that action but Ken Clarke condoned it when he was in the cabinet. You disagree with Ken Clarke over this?
    Yes but I was not as politically involved as I was running my business and politics were I suppose much like most people today something that was of passing interest
  • November is inexplicably now odds-on.

    Alastair explains this better than i can but if Parliament is prorogued until 14th October and then needs to re-convene and vote through an early GE that takes a minimum of 5 weeks then it has a very narrow window to successfully land at the end of November.

    It’s really a bet on proroguation being cancelled or curtailed. VoNC shenanigans or even a new bill to terminate the session notwithstanding the FTPA wouldn’t make it any faster.

    The only day in November it could realistically be is 28th. EU Summit is on 17th/18th October, earliest Parliament would be dissolved is week beginning 21st, and 25 working days takes us to week beginning 25th. Could theoretically not be a Thursday, but why bother when the immediate deadline is gone?

    Yes, I'd bet against November. Particularly given he might try to tart up May's deal a bit at the summit, and have a last ditch attempt to make 31st, "do or die".
  • rawzerrawzer Posts: 189
    edited September 2019


    It seems far more likely to mean 'agree' with the PMs request given that is what is entirely about

    It’s quite poorly drafted, it seems to me. Far from the masterpiece of legislating that some have described. But IANAL

    Nontheless I’m pretty sure ‘agree’ here, means ‘agree within the EU Council’. Not ‘agree with the UK PM’. The second interpretation renders the whole thing useless.

    I agree the drafting isn't great - it should refer back to the request clearly, so who knows what the courts would decide. but if the *agree* does relate to the request, then its only 'useless' in the context that the Prime Minister is prepared to break the law with intent. Which I suppose in normal times is not something you tend to consider likely.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Yes it would indeed. A majority Tory government could resolve this quite simply.

    BoZo had one.

    He torched it.
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    rawzer said:


    Yep I think that is the nub of it, if he doesn't resign and doesn't ask, he is breaking the law but since 31st Oct will come and go while the lawyers squeal, I am not sure how it plays out. There would be a few days after Oct 19th when he is in breach that Parliament could hatch something else …..

    That's exactly what will happen.

    The EU is carefully agnostic on which element of the state is responsible for notification - as long as there's a law saying that X has the authority, they'll go along with it.
  • We know that the opposition parties are opposed to a pre-Halloween election, I wonder whether they want an election soon thereafter, or in March, or seven weeks after the Tories have lost their poll lead...?

    We know that the opposition parties are opposed to a pre-Halloween election, I wonder whether they want an election soon thereafter, or in March, or seven weeks after the Tories have lost their poll lead...?
    My biggest play is laying 2019.

    I’m neutral on December.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Not sure they'd have been that amazed tbh. Less than a hundred years previously they'd had a king who'd beheaded two of his queens and executed advisors, nobles & prelates, a usurper queen beheaded, a queen who beheaded the grandmother of their current king, a serious attempt at regicide & the destruction of parliament and a steady flow of burnings and disembowellings of sundry individuals for praying a bit differently to whatever was the current mode.

    Good times.
    True enough. But I’ve read a lot of Civil War history. No one but the crazies envisaged killing the King, not when the agitations in parliament began. But then things became more polarised...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,705
    Scott_P said:
    Seems a bit more chaff to get rid of before we reach purity.
  • Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/RobDotHutton/status/1169944667061915649

    Has anyone got a graphic for falling over a cliff?

    That is quite poweful as it is simple to understand
  • Boris has done everything he needs to neuter BXP.

    In March May wanted an extension, she voted for an extension on a free vote prior to Europe agreeing to it. Extension was her choice. As a result Brexiteers abandoned her.

    Boris isn't doing that. Even if there's an extension its going to be clear who is to blame. I have lifelong Labour voters on Facebook outraged at Parliament and sharing Leave.EU stuff saying BXP and Boris need to work together.

    The idea Parliament can frustrate an election, frustrate Brexit and the voters will blame Boris is too clever by half. We can see right through it. You don't even need to be politically engaged to see through it.
    Well, someone needs to tell the electorate then because the opinion polls show a spike in BXP support and fall for the Tories if Brexit is delayed again post 31st October.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,594
    Scott_P said:
    Sigh. Everyone is still wasting time. I guess humiliating BoJo is it's own reward, but blimey this is a shambles.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,087

    Well, someone needs to tell the electorate then because the opinion polls show a spike in BXP support and fall for the Tories if Brexit is delayed again post 31st October.
    Though even then ICM still has Labour only tied with the Tories on 28% each and the Brexit Party on 18%.

    However as said Boris will refuse to extend himself
  • DougSeal said:

    Are you taking the piss? Our system led to the North Atlantic Slave trade and millions of deaths before abolishing it. That's like wanting credit for putting out a fire you yourself started.

    (Snip)
    You are both right. Britain (England, really) were a key force in internationalising and industrialising the existing slave trade. It is a hideous stain on our past.

    However, there is the other side of the equation: when we decided to abolish slavery, we not only abolished it for ourselves, but tried abolishing it when it was done by others - aided by our Navy. We had no reason to do this: we could just have 'banned' it and let the slavers get on with their evil work.

    The West Africa Squadron patrolled the African coast, intercepting slaving ships of many countries, not just our own, and freeing the slaves.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Africa_Squadron

    Some people say the costs of the latter more than offset the profits from the former. Not just in money: in 1829, over a quarter of the men serving in the squadron died of illness.

    So whilst we should never forget our role in a hideous trade (and one that we were not alone in doing), we can also take some pride that we eventually fought against it.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,334
    edited September 2019

    The majority of voters backed parties that specifically opposed a No Deal Brexit in the 2017 General Election. They did so again in the 2019 European Elections.

    Leaving, with a deal, is the thing voters consistently have voted for, and MPs have consistently voted against
  • rawzer said:

  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,746
    edited September 2019

    Yes it would indeed. A majority Tory government could resolve this quite simply.
    A majority government would not change attitudes in the EU so we would leave without a deal. You disagree I know but it won't change the fundamentals over in Dublin, Brussels or elsewhere in the EU. It's not Tory weakness in Parliament that is stopping a deal it's a refusal to accept the backstop. And that will not be removed.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    This debate is silly the people will get their election in November so what if it is three weeks later than Johnson wants. During that election parties set out their stalls and the people vote. The winner gets to decide what happens next what is wrong with that at worst it is a 10% extension of the time since the referendum took place why is anyone getting so wound up?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,177
    Scott_P said:
    How’s he going to tweak it when he hasn’t made any proposals?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,334
    Scott_P said:

    BoZo had one.

    He torched it.
    No he didnt!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,087
    edited September 2019
    isam said:

    Nick a fan of the Hunt!
    I am certainly a fan of Nick, he is about the politest person on PB even if I disagree with him on most things
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,594

    Just heard a quote on 5 Live news headline one of the 'rebel alliance' (didn't hear who, female) saying they have a chance to "bring down Boris and bring down Brexit".

    The mask slips. We can all see and hear what is going on. This next election is a referendum by proxy - if you want Brexit vote Boris's Conservatives. If you don't vote Lib Dem/Labour/SNP/Plaid/Greens/Independents.

    It's true buy I'm not sure referring to it as ref by proxy is a good idea as while Tories might win the vote share will favour remain slightly. Obviously that means nothing for parliamentary seats but if you call it s ref by proxy the comparison if remain parties get more votes will be inevitable
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 14,012
    Gabs2 said:

    It surely can't be right that Boris opposes a policy, is legally obliged to do it, and isn't allowed to resign?
    I think that must be right; but also that someone must be PM. Another circle to square.

  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,795
    HYUFD said:

    Our very own Nick Palmer with Jeremy Hunt this morning

    https://twitter.com/Jeremy_Hunt/status/1169902266230304770?s=20

    Presume this is the very same Nick Palmer ex-MP, of PB? Great tweet/photo.

    The only day in November it could realistically be is 28th. EU Summit is on 17th/18th October, earliest Parliament would be dissolved is week beginning 21st, and 25 working days takes us to week beginning 25th. Could theoretically not be a Thursday, but why bother when the immediate deadline is gone?

    Yes, I'd bet against November. Particularly given he might try to tart up May's deal a bit at the summit, and have a last ditch attempt to make 31st, "do or die".
    Fair points very well made by Casino and Sir Norfolk.

    Regarding December, are we really going to have an election in the thick dark, possibly rain, sleet and snow of winter?? Somehow, I can't see it. There are only two possible dates in any case – 4 and 11 Dec – on 18 Dec the schools break up and many people will be travelling/away.

    So perhaps Casino's 2020 play is the right one?
  • Surely Boris will resign,probably very close to The EU council meeting . He won't risk being prosecuted and/or sued personally.The question is who becomes the PM to make the surrender request and achieve Neville Chamberlain status.
  • That is quite poweful as it is simple to understand
    It’s very good.

    Fairly confident Cummings wargamed that one. Campaigning isn’t his problem.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    Just heard a quote on 5 Live news headline one of the 'rebel alliance' (didn't hear who, female) saying they have a chance to "bring down Boris and bring down Brexit".

    The mask slips. We can all see and hear what is going on. This next election is a referendum by proxy - if you want Brexit vote Boris's Conservatives. If you don't vote Lib Dem/Labour/SNP/Plaid/Greens/Independents.

    Why "the mask slips" - was anyone pretending different?

    Dom and Dommer are clearly gearing up to re-fight the referendum, hence the lets give £1bn a month which goes to Brussels, to the police, and the risible police-themed speech of yesterday.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,746

    You are both right. Britain (England, really) were a key force in internationalising and industrialising the existing slave trade. It is a hideous stain on our past.

    However, there is the other side of the equation: when we decided to abolish slavery, we not only abolished it for ourselves, but tried abolishing it when it was done by others - aided by our Navy. We had no reason to do this: we could just have 'banned' it and let the slavers get on with their evil work.

    The West Africa Squadron patrolled the African coast, intercepting slaving ships of many countries, not just our own, and freeing the slaves.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Africa_Squadron

    Some people say the costs of the latter more than offset the profits from the former. Not just in money: in 1829, over a quarter of the men serving in the squadron died of illness.

    So whilst we should never forget our role in a hideous trade (and one that we were not alone in doing), we can also take some pride that we eventually fought against it.
    "You started that fire, but here's a medal for putting it out"
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,795

    That is quite poweful as it is simple to understand

    It is also utter garbage.

    If you think exiting the EU under this rabble will be simple, I have several bridges to sell you.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    rawzer said:



    It seems far more likely to mean 'agree' with the PMs request given that is what is entirely about

    It’s quite poorly drafted, it seems to me. Far from the masterpiece of legislating that some have described. But IANAL

    Nontheless I’m pretty sure ‘agree’ here, means ‘agree within the EU Council’. Not ‘agree with the UK PM’. The second interpretation renders the whole thing useless.

    I agree the drafting isn't great - it should refer back to the request clearly, so who knows what the courts would decide. but if the *agree* does relate to the request, then its only 'useless' in the context that the Prime Minister is prepared to break the law with intent. Which I suppose in normal times is not something you tend to consider likely.

    We need to ask Grieve and Letwin WTAF their silly law means. Incredible that vital words are open to dispute, and crucial points are left vague. I thought it was watertight?!
  • Good afternoon, everyone.

    Bit miffed to see two McLarens in the top three of practice. Ah well.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Don’t understand why Boris doesn’t play the finance angle - this bill doesn’t authorise the Uk to hand over £3Bn - cut off the fee and there won’t be an extension.
  • Is Jeremy Hunt now a member of the legendary #Tories4Palmer?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,235
    rawzer said:

    only 'useless' in the context that the Prime Minister is prepared to break the law with intent. Which I suppose in normal times is not something you tend to consider likely.

    Well the opposition has repeatedly said it doesn't trust Johnson. Surely if you don't trust him you'll try and remove him at the first opportunity ?
  • isam said:

    Leaving, with a deal, is the thing voters consistently have voted for, and MPs have consistently voted against

    Yep - so we need to get to a deal that most voters and MPs would accept. That involves EEA/EFTA, but is politically impossible for the Tories to support becaue it would destroy them.

  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 14,012

    Well, someone needs to tell the electorate then because the opinion polls show a spike in BXP support and fall for the Tories if Brexit is delayed again post 31st October.
    Voters don't tell until they tell John Curtice on the day

  • How’s he going to tweak it when he hasn’t made any proposals?
    Get fellow leaders to change a few meaningless words or give some sort of waffly "best endeavours" statement as a fig-leaf.

    Fuel Cummings up with cheap plonk and set him loose on Geoffrey Cox until he decides that his advice is that Johnson's fig-leaf changes everything.

    Barring that, change the font.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    Well, someone needs to tell the electorate then because the opinion polls show a spike in BXP support and fall for the Tories if Brexit is delayed again post 31st October.
    I think somebody needs to give the electorate a good talking to. "I'm not angry. Just very disappointed....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,594
    Scott_P said:
    Thats what MV3 was attempting to do. It didnt work. Some labour mps are promising that this time theyd back it but thats not enough. Some of the expelled Tories backed it but might not again.

    I think it's too big a risk for Boris. Theoretically since he promised brexit do or die that must include being willing to try the WA again, if tweaked. But theres no guarantee it passes and then hes ripped to shreds by Farage and the Spartans. And even if he gets it through BXP surge to some extent, then labour agree to take him down and hes out of office.
  • isam said:

    No he didnt!
    When he became PM, he had a working majority of 1

    He fired a lot MPs

    He now has a "majority" of -44

    Spin it any way you like....
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,394
    edited September 2019
    DougSeal said:

    "You started that fire, but here's a medal for putting it out"

    I understand where you're coming from, but I think you're wrong to so blithely disregard the point.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,080
    TOPPING said:

    Seems a bit more chaff to get rid of before we reach purity.
    I wonder what purity is?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,177

    It’s very good.

    Fairly confident Cummings wargamed that one. Campaigning isn’t his problem.
    It’s only good if you actually want to leave the EU.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,087

    Surely Boris will resign,probably very close to The EU council meeting . He won't risk being prosecuted and/or sued personally.The question is who becomes the PM to make the surrender request and achieve Neville Chamberlain status.

    Boris hopes Corbyn I suspect
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,867
    edited September 2019
    Byronic said:

    Agreed. The nation is endangered. Enough, now.
    While our politicians are refusing to allow the 2016 referendum to be implemented and refusing to allow an election that could resolve the impasse nothing will change.

    In fact it will get even worse from here.
This discussion has been closed.