politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Bad Boys Of Brexit. A review

TheScreamingEagles said:

Woohoo, my stint as editor of PB is over, I can relax now.

Excellent piece Viewcode.

Oh and first.

You are disqualified on account on insider trading.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Woohoo, my stint as editor of PB is over, I can relax now.

Excellent piece Viewcode.

Oh and first.

Australia now certain to chase 399 to win.

I'm amazed that Oakeshott has managed to compose a semi-fictionalised work that apparently doesn't include dead pigs. Although with Banks included there is at least a pig in there.

JackW said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Woohoo, my stint as editor of PB is over, I can relax now.

Excellent piece Viewcode.

Oh and first.

You are disqualified on account on insider trading.

You're talking to someone who has repeatedly read the Financial Services Act of 2012.

Jo wibbling in response to the Q "How do we win in the north of England?"

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Woohoo, my stint as editor of PB is over, I can relax now.

Excellent piece Viewcode.

Oh and first.

And nothing major happened, you must be quite relieved.

Ooo - angry LibDem heckling St Jo!

viewcode said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Woohoo, my stint as editor of PB is over, I can relax now.

Excellent piece Viewcode.

Oh and first.

Thank you. Although we both know that an article is only as good as its editor, so well done you too...

It's OK

Only kidding, it's a very good article

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

I think that Ken Clarke suggested revoke in order to give a breathing space while we decide 'what the f*** do we do now?'

Back to the Lib Dems.

Having thought about this for - ooh - five minutes, the best policy would be a Revoke and Reconsider, with a cross-party body to recommend a Brexit to be put again to the people.

A flat-out Revoke is just —- irresponsible.

I agree with the comment above, though.
There certainly is a Brexit-cancellation bonus and it should be spent directly on initiatives that promise to bridge “the great divide” between the have regions and the have-nots.

rural_voter said:

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

I think that Ken Clarke suggested revoke in order to give a breathing space while we decide 'what the f*** do we do now?'

Clarke does support leaving with a deal though

dyedwoolie said:

rural_voter said:

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

I think that Ken Clarke suggested revoke in order to give a breathing space while we decide 'what the f*** do we do now?'

Clarke does support leaving with a deal though

You can’t just ignore a referendum - even one legally defined as advisory.

You can however, judge it to be highly flawed and in need for a re-do. That the original referendum was flawed is pretty much common sense.

dyedwoolie said:

Byronic said:

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

On reflection, I think it is a stupid pledge, and will do them harm.

They have completely misread the public mood. Remainers aren't coming to them for ultra-Remain policies, they are coming to them because the Lib Dems are (or were) honest but fair Remainers, who have stood by their principles.

Now the Lib Dems have an insane and extremist policy, they are as bad as the No Deal Ultras. And how can they say the name Liberal "Democrats" ever again, without getting a load of abuse?

Tut tut tut.

Its irresponsible and would trash trust in democracy in the country. She knows that, but she also knows she'll never have to deliver so sees it as free revoker votes

I will still vote for them, but it has pissed me off.

While I am at it, having Guy Verhofwotsit at the conference is pisspoor too.

Byronic is right, I am a Hardcore Remainer but it doesn’t mean I am in love with the EU.

dyedwoolie said:

Gardenwalker said:

dyedwoolie said:

rural_voter said:

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

I think that Ken Clarke suggested revoke in order to give a breathing space while we decide 'what the f*** do we do now?'

Clarke does support leaving with a deal though

You can’t just ignore a referendum - even one legally defined as advisory.

You can however, judge it to be highly flawed and in need for a re-do. That the original referendum was flawed is pretty much common sense.

But a revote is flawed, its 'this one type of deal only' against the general remain. You'd need options for go and negotiate a better deal and no deal too

You can’t negotiate via referendum. That logic is faulty. A single yay / nay is required, and the yay needs to be coherent and as consensus-derived as possible.

Gardenwalker said:

dyedwoolie said:

Gardenwalker said:

dyedwoolie said:

rural_voter said:

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

I think that Ken Clarke suggested revoke in order to give a breathing space while we decide 'what the f*** do we do now?'

Clarke does support leaving with a deal though

You can’t just ignore a referendum - even one legally defined as advisory.

You can however, judge it to be highly flawed and in need for a re-do. That the original referendum was flawed is pretty much common sense.

But a revote is flawed, its 'this one type of deal only' against the general remain. You'd need options for go and negotiate a better deal and no deal too

You can’t negotiate via referendum. That logic is faulty. A single yay / nay is required, and the yay needs to be coherent and as consensus-derived as possible.

Which makes a proposed revote as flawed as the original vote as it wont cover the bases

Gardenwalker said:

dyedwoolie said:

Byronic said:

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

On reflection, I think it is a stupid pledge, and will do them harm.

They have completely misread the public mood. Remainers aren't coming to them for ultra-Remain policies, they are coming to them because the Lib Dems are (or were) honest but fair Remainers, who have stood by their principles.

Now the Lib Dems have an insane and extremist policy, they are as bad as the No Deal Ultras. And how can they say the name Liberal "Democrats" ever again, without getting a load of abuse?

Tut tut tut.

Its irresponsible and would trash trust in democracy in the country. She knows that, but she also knows she'll never have to deliver so sees it as free revoker votes

I will still vote for them, but it has pissed me off.

While I am at it, having Guy Verhofwotsit at the conference is pisspoor too.

Byronic is right, I am a Hardcore Remainer but it doesn’t mean I am in love with the EU.

So why vote for them?

Afternoon all

As a former Leave voter and LD member, I'm quite comfortable with the party's policy.

A GE is and has been the traditional method of choice in our democracy. Parties present programmes which, and given our recent experience I would accept a note of scepticism, should be the template for the government they would be.

The LDs have clearly said in the event of winning a GE majority, they would revoke - I'd also like to think the next manifesto would include a commitment to introducing STV if elected with a majority.

Yes, there are those who continue to point to 23/6/16 and argue the result must be "respected". Will they be doing this in 2026, 2036 or 2046 if we haven't left? There are plenty of instances where countries voted one way in one referendum only to reverse it later.

All we are doing is using the GE as a potential mechanism for reviewing the first result rather than a second referendum. The Conservatives can go into that election on a commitment to honour the 2016 result, Deal or No Deal, though I suspect they won't mention that exiting via an agreed WA keeps us in the EU for an extra year or so with all the commitments and obligations pertaining and none of the decision making involvement.

If Opinium is right they'll win a stonking majority and Boris can then stab the No Dealers wherever he chooses but if ComRes is right it won't be his problem any longer.

Opinium: CON/BP 50%, Lab/LD/Green 43%
ComRes: CON/BP 41%, Lab/LD/Green 52%

Yeah, right....

dyedwoolie said:

Byronic said:

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

On reflection, I think it is a stupid pledge, and will do them harm.

They have completely misread the public mood. Remainers aren't coming to them for ultra-Remain policies, they are coming to them because the Lib Dems are (or were) honest but fair Remainers, who have stood by their principles.

Now the Lib Dems have an insane and extremist policy, they are as bad as the No Deal Ultras. And how can they say the name Liberal "Democrats" ever again, without getting a load of abuse?

Tut tut tut.

Its irresponsible and would trash trust in democracy in the country. She knows that, but she also knows she'll never have to deliver so sees it as free revoker votes

The greater danger is that either the Tories or Labour do win a majority for badly thought through constitutional change and press on regardless without further democratic review - and the LDs won’t have a leg to stand on. Short term it’s a distinctive and potentially successful message - longer term its a bad idea for the clear precedence it sets.

RobD said:

Stereotomy said:

Gardenwalker said:

dyedwoolie said:

Byronic said:

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

On reflection, I think it is a stupid pledge, and will do them harm.

They have completely misread the public mood. Remainers aren't coming to them for ultra-Remain policies, they are coming to them because the Lib Dems are (or were) honest but fair Remainers, who have stood by their principles.

Now the Lib Dems have an insane and extremist policy, they are as bad as the No Deal Ultras. And how can they say the name Liberal "Democrats" ever again, without getting a load of abuse?

Tut tut tut.

Its irresponsible and would trash trust in democracy in the country. She knows that, but she also knows she'll never have to deliver so sees it as free revoker votes

I will still vote for them, but it has pissed me off.

While I am at it, having Guy Verhofwotsit at the conference is pisspoor too.

Byronic is right, I am a Hardcore Remainer but it doesn’t mean I am in love with the EU.

So why vote for them?

Best of a bad bunch?

Best in what way?

Stereotomy said:

RobD said:

Stereotomy said:

Gardenwalker said:

dyedwoolie said:

Byronic said:

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

On reflection, I think it is a stupid pledge, and will do them harm.

They have completely misread the public mood. Remainers aren't coming to them for ultra-Remain policies, they are coming to them because the Lib Dems are (or were) honest but fair Remainers, who have stood by their principles.

Now the Lib Dems have an insane and extremist policy, they are as bad as the No Deal Ultras. And how can they say the name Liberal "Democrats" ever again, without getting a load of abuse?

Tut tut tut.

Its irresponsible and would trash trust in democracy in the country. She knows that, but she also knows she'll never have to deliver so sees it as free revoker votes

I will still vote for them, but it has pissed me off.

While I am at it, having Guy Verhofwotsit at the conference is pisspoor too.

Byronic is right, I am a Hardcore Remainer but it doesn’t mean I am in love with the EU.

So why vote for them?

Best of a bad bunch?

Best in what way?

If I were of the remain persuasion they'd probably be who I would support. Can't speak for Gardenwalker though.

Byronic said:

C'mon Joffra.

Skittle them. Knock them out. Behead them,

Are you okay mate?

Gardenwalker said:

I am not going to vote for right wing populists (the Boris party) or anti-Semites (Labour).

That was my viewpoint as well. Now I can't even vote Lib Dem, as I'm not going to endorse Revoke.

I'd still vote Leave again without hesitation, but I expect my next Parliamentary vote will be spoilt.

Parliamentary democracy has had its day - we are sleepwalking towards more direct democracy, and personally I think that's a good thing. We need to have more referenda - it is clear that, with the decline in deference, people will no longer respect Parliamentary decisions with which they disagree vehemently. However, the process for calling them needs to be formalised and institutionalised - it can't solely be left to the Prime Minister's political calculations any more.

Gabs2 said:

CarlottaVance said:

Thanks for the review Viewcode - sounds a lot more entertaining than I expected......meanwhile the David Cameron five minutes of hate continues unabated:

https://twitter.com/dez_holmes/status/1173202880221843456?s=21

The problem with "leading not leaving" the EU had been there aren't any compelling examples of the UK doing it. PMs for decades have failed to break the French-German axis at the core of it, which means we were always left to agree or diagree after they had made a decision.

When we rejoin it is critical we insist on having British-German meetings ahead of each European summit, just like the French-German ones.

Britain’s approach to the EU has - as far as I can tell - been one of leading behind the scenes and pretending to the British public that “there’s nothing to see here”.

A mendacious proposition that unsurprisingly failed to persuade the nation.

Byronic said:

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

On reflection, I think it is a stupid pledge, and will do them harm.

They have completely misread the public mood. Remainers aren't coming to them for ultra-Remain policies, they are coming to them because the Lib Dems are (or were) honest but fair Remainers, who have stood by their principles.

Now the Lib Dems have an insane and extremist policy, they are as bad as the No Deal Ultras. And how can they say the name Liberal "Democrats" ever again, without getting a load of abuse?

Tut tut tut.

This policy will split the Remainer vote though, revoke with the LDs for die hard Remainers is a better option than referendum on a Labour Brexit with Corbyn.

While the Leaver vote was split between Deal with May or No Deal with the Brexit Party, Boris has largely united it behind the Tories on a Brexit with a Deal or No Deal platform.

So the main winner today under FPTP is Boris

CarlottaVance said:

Thanks for the review Viewcode...

Thank you. Next up: a review of "National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy" by Goodwin and Eatwell. But not this month, cos busy...

HYUFD said:

Gardenwalker said:

The interesting thing about Cameron is that he has now hated by left and right, by Remain and Leave.

It is now generally understood across the spectrum that the Vote was a massive fuck up, the constitutional equivalent of the Iraq War.

Bit like Blair then but both have won most seats or a majority in 5 out of the last 6 general elections

When discussing the qualities of PMs it is unsurprising that the discussion is about people who largely have led their parties to GE victories.

Thanks to viewcode for an interesting header.

viewcode said:

kinabalu said:

Great book review!

By which I mean great review of a book.

Thank you: most kind.

I've just ordered the book based on your header, so Banks owes you a drink. Though with Boris and JRM biographies on the go, I'm not sure there will be time to read it before Thursday and the Cameron (and the new Felix (son of Dick) Francis) books.

Byronic said:

rcs1000 said:

Byronic said:

fpt for kle

No they're not unusual. e.g. Thatcher's memoirs are minor masterpieces. Lots of politicians, Left and Right, write very fine books, witb precious insight.

Cameron's memoirs are revealing, but not in the way he intended - if these extracts are anything to go by.

I thought Thatcher's memoirs fairly wooden, and nowhere near as interesting as (for example) Lawson's

I thought the first volume of her memoirs was superb. Lucid, fascinating, wise. I believe she did get a pro writer to help, though.

Typical of Cameron that he didn't think he needed professional assistance. Perhaps he thought "I'd be rather good as a writer".

Denis Healey's were pretty classy, though not especially illuminating about politics. People read these things partly for historical insights but many mainly for the "omigod is THAT what he was thinking?" moments. Cameron's sounds quite good for that, as was Blair's with his scathing attack on his own FOI policy.

algarkirk said:

HYUFD said:

Gardenwalker said:

The interesting thing about Cameron is that he has now hated by left and right, by Remain and Leave.

It is now generally understood across the spectrum that the Vote was a massive fuck up, the constitutional equivalent of the Iraq War.

Bit like Blair then but both have won most seats or a majority in 5 out of the last 6 general elections

When discussing the qualities of PMs it is unsurprising that the discussion is about people who largely have led their parties to GE victories.

Only 2 out of the last 4 PMs have won a majority at a general election

stodge said:

HYUFD said:

This policy will split the Remainer vote though, revoke with the LDs for die hard Remainers is a better option than referendum on a Labour Brexit with Corbyn.

While the Leaver vote was split between Deal with May or No Deal with the Brexit Party, Boris has largely united it behind the Tories on a Brexit with a Deal or No Deal platform.

So the main winner today under FPTP is Boris

While I'm tempted to say "you would day that, wouldn't you?" I'd note the 14% swing from Con to LD in the latest ComRes but I'm sure you'll quote Opinium back at me so fine.

The policy is to Revoke if the Party wins a Parliamentary majority otherwise it's to support a second vote and continue to block a No Deal which is completely consistent. Why wouldn't those wishing to Remain (more than 10% I suspect) have a clear and unambiguous voice?

The Conservatives are currently riding both the horses of No Deal AND leaving with a Deal but the time is fast approaching when they will be forced to decide which horse they are really on. With No Deal blocked, the options then become leaving with a WA (really?) or storming off in a huff with the traditional Conservative attitude of evading responsibility and leaving the tough decisions to others.

Nope, Boris will stick to his guns of aiming for a Deal but still willing to go to No Deal rather than extend again while still aiming longer term for a Deal. That will keep the Brexit Party at bay while keeping most of the Tory vote but if more Remainers start switching from Labour to LD that boosts Boris by splitting the anti Tory vote unless it goes so far the LDs look like they could get a majority themselves which is unlikely

Byronic said:

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

On reflection, I think it is a stupid pledge, and will do them harm.

They have completely misread the public mood. Remainers aren't coming to them for ultra-Remain policies, they are coming to them because the Lib Dems are (or were) honest but fair Remainers, who have stood by their principles.

Now the Lib Dems have an insane and extremist policy, they are as bad as the No Deal Ultras.

Maybe, although the LDs weren't really being rewarded for their honest but fair principled remain stance until the extension and the Euro campaign, it's one reason the Tiggers briefly entertained thoughts of exceeding the LDs, so the situation counts for a lot - possibly there's a chance the revoke policy will seem appropriate. Though it seems unnecessary.

But I'm inclined to believe the whole move is really just because Labour's policy has moved on and the LDs need to stay ahead of it in a game of remainer than thou.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Mr. JS, perhaps. I think it likelier the EU and pro-EU politicians here would've sought to integrate us more rapidly to make leaving all the harder.

AndyJS said:

There's an argument that the best result would have been Remain 50.1%, Leave 49.9% because then the EU may have had to realise how serious things were getting, not just with regard to the UK but also with other countries like Italy, Hungary, Greece, etc.

Don't be silly. They would have declared the right side of the argument won and what we need is more EU. That's what they said in the the BBC documentary about how they thought the UK's vote would change the EU vision of things to come e.g regards improving the situation in Italy.

CarlottaVance said:

Thanks for the review Viewcode - sounds a lot more entertaining than I expected......meanwhile the David Cameron five minutes of hate continues unabated:

https://twitter.com/dez_holmes/status/1173202880221843456?s=21

Fear campaigns work more often than not of course.

kle4 said:

Byronic said:

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

On reflection, I think it is a stupid pledge, and will do them harm.

They have completely misread the public mood. Remainers aren't coming to them for ultra-Remain policies, they are coming to them because the Lib Dems are (or were) honest but fair Remainers, who have stood by their principles.

Now the Lib Dems have an insane and extremist policy, they are as bad as the No Deal Ultras.

Maybe, although the LDs weren't really being rewarded for their honest but fair principled remain stance until the extension and the Euro campaign, it's one reason the Tiggers briefly entertained thoughts of exceeding the LDs, so the situation counts for a lot - possibly there's a chance the revoke policy will seem appropriate. Though it seems unnecessary.

But I'm inclined to believe the whole move is really just because Labour's policy has moved on and the LDs need to stay ahead of it in a game of remainer than thou.

If Chuka had held his nerve, he could have been welcoming a dozen or so whipless Conservative MPs to the CUK Tiggers. But then Chuka is a knock down ginger politician, who rings the doorbell and runs away from the Labour leadership contest, from the Tiggers, and from Streatham.

Gardenwalker said:

Cameron’s bookcase is pretty standard stuff for, let’s call it a “Sunday Times” demographic.

Yep there’s a few political books in there - including the Obama bio - but they’re hard to find among the Philippa Gregory, Ian Fleming, and Sam Cam’s art books.

https://twitter.com/anitathetweeter/status/1172993181404844032?s=21

It is a good spot but who is Sam Cam's mate? Is she the SpAd (or PA really) who got an OBE, or someone else?

viewcode said:

Thank you: most kind.

☺

I guess reading the book is like spending a few hours in the company of Aaron Banks.

There's only one thing I can think of which would beat that.

FrancisUrquhart said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

kle4 said:

Byronic said:

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

On reflection, I think it is a stupid pledge, and will do them harm.

They have completely misread the public mood. Remainers aren't coming to them for ultra-Remain policies, they are coming to them because the Lib Dems are (or were) honest but fair Remainers, who have stood by their principles.

Now the Lib Dems have an insane and extremist policy, they are as bad as the No Deal Ultras.

Maybe, although the LDs weren't really being rewarded for their honest but fair principled remain stance until the extension and the Euro campaign, it's one reason the Tiggers briefly entertained thoughts of exceeding the LDs, so the situation counts for a lot - possibly there's a chance the revoke policy will seem appropriate. Though it seems unnecessary.

But I'm inclined to believe the whole move is really just because Labour's policy has moved on and the LDs need to stay ahead of it in a game of remainer than thou.

If Chuka had held his nerve, he could have been welcoming a dozen or so whipless Conservative MPs to the CUK Tiggers. But then Chuka is a knock down ginger politician, who rings the doorbell and runs away from the Labour leadership contest, from the Tiggers, and from Streatham.

I'll put you down as a maybe...

Put me down as someone who followed the Pb tip to back Labour hold in Streatham.

HYUFD said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

kle4 said:

Byronic said:

dyedwoolie said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Now that the party conference has formally endorsed this my advice to the Liberal Democrats would be double or quits. A " revoke bonus " should do the trick. A one off spending pledge to be in councils/charities/community groups by the first anniversary of revocation. To be funded from the ' savings ' of cancelling Brexit. If the figure is only half as dishonest as the £350m pw it will look highly credible. There are enough strong correalates of the Leave vote to weight it by Leave vote without weighting it by Leave vote.

As ever the LDs are in a position to promise a whole sky full of moons without having to deliver.

If Swinson believed she could be PM that revoke pledge would never have been made.

On reflection, I think it is a stupid pledge, and will do them harm.

They have completely misread the public mood. Remainers aren't coming to them for ultra-Remain policies, they are coming to them because the Lib Dems are (or were) honest but fair Remainers, who have stood by their principles.

Now the Lib Dems have an insane and extremist policy, they are as bad as the No Deal Ultras.

Maybe, although the LDs weren't really being rewarded for their honest but fair principled remain stance until the extension and the Euro campaign, it's one reason the Tiggers briefly entertained thoughts of exceeding the LDs, so the situation counts for a lot - possibly there's a chance the revoke policy will seem appropriate. Though it seems unnecessary.

But I'm inclined to believe the whole move is really just because Labour's policy has moved on and the LDs need to stay ahead of it in a game of remainer than thou.

If Chuka had held his nerve, he could have been welcoming a dozen or so whipless Conservative MPs to the CUK Tiggers. But then Chuka is a knock down ginger politician, who rings the doorbell and runs away from the Labour leadership contest, from the Tiggers, and from Streatham.

Chuka knows Corbynism now has a grip over the Labour NEC and membership so he had no chance of becoming Labour leader and in the European Parliament elections CUK were far behind the LDs.

So becoming LD leader offers him the best chance of power

It does now but if Chuka had stayed with CUK, they might today have more MPs than the LibDems, since they would have been a more natural home for reluctant defectors like Luciana Berger from Labour and the expelled Conservatives.

DecrepitJohnL said:

Gardenwalker said:

Cameron’s bookcase is pretty standard stuff for, let’s call it a “Sunday Times” demographic.

Yep there’s a few political books in there - including the Obama bio - but they’re hard to find among the Philippa Gregory, Ian Fleming, and Sam Cam’s art books.

https://twitter.com/anitathetweeter/status/1172993181404844032?s=21

It is a good spot but who is Sam Cam's mate? Is she the SpAd (or PA really) who got an OBE, or someone else?

That’s Emily Sheffield, her sister.

She’s a journalist in her own right.

kle4 said:

CarlottaVance said:

Thanks for the review Viewcode - sounds a lot more entertaining than I expected......meanwhile the David Cameron five minutes of hate continues unabated:

https://twitter.com/dez_holmes/status/1173202880221843456?s=21

Fear campaigns work more often than not of course.

But not without cost. We've been running them for decades and now people don't like any politicians.

Morris_Dancer said:

At the risk of posting something betting related, I've seen there are some free football prediction games and was wondering if anyone had played them/what they thought of them? Sky's got a Super 6 prediction games, which involves predicting 6 match scorelines. Free to enter, quarter of a million top prize.

https://super6.skysports.com/

Edited extra bit: not sure it counts as betting, actually, as there's no potential loss.

Wasn't that how Dominic Cummings harvested addresses? I'd want to read the small print about any publicity requirements, and then compare the prize with the accumulator betting odds. If you get all six right, do you win the cash or just a raffle ticket in a draw with all the other correct guessers?

Byronic said:

HYUFD said:

Byronic said:

stodge said:

HYUFD said:

This policy will split the Remainer vote though, revoke with the LDs for die hard Remainers is a better option than referendum on a Labour Brexit with Corbyn.

While the Leaver vote was split between Deal with May or No Deal with the Brexit Party, Boris has largely united it behind the Tories on a Brexit with a Deal or No Deal platform.

So the main winner today under FPTP is Boris

While I'm tempted to say "you would day that, wouldn't you?" I'd note the 14% swing from Con to LD in the latest ComRes but I'm sure you'll quote Opinium back at me so fine.

The policy is to Revoke if the Party wins a Parliamentary majority otherwise it's to support a second vote and continue to block a No Deal which is completely consistent. Why wouldn't those wishing to Remain (more than 10% I suspect) have a clear and unambiguous voice?

The Conservatives are currently riding both the horses of No Deal AND leaving with a Deal but the time is fast approaching when they will be forced to decide which horse they are really on. With No Deal blocked, the options then become leaving with a WA (really?) or storming off in a huff with the traditional Conservative attitude of evading responsibility and leaving the tough decisions to others.

Of course more than 10% want to Remain. It's nearer 50% than 10%.

But how many want to simply Revoke, and sod democracy? 10%? 15%? And how many will be comfortable with a party that espouses the cancellation of votes?

It's a deeply stupid policy.

About 27% want to revoke with Opinium, that could not win the LDs a majority but it could see them beat Corbyn Labour in voteshare which is Swinson's main aim this time I think

I am surprised it is as high as 27%. But fair enough: that's the data. Maybe the LD move is cynical but clever? I still think it is cynical and foolish.

Other pollsters ask the question differently .

As in would revoke be acceptable , the figure is much higher in those. As much as 40% .

Edit that . In May Comres found 51% , 33% very acceptable , 18% somewhat acceptable .

Byronic said:

HYUFD said:

Byronic said:

stodge said:

HYUFD said:

This policy will split the Remainer vote though, revoke with the LDs for die hard Remainers is a better option than referendum on a Labour Brexit with Corbyn.

While the Leaver vote was split between Deal with May or No Deal with the Brexit Party, Boris has largely united it behind the Tories on a Brexit with a Deal or No Deal platform.

So the main winner today under FPTP is Boris

While I'm tempted to say "you would day that, wouldn't you?" I'd note the 14% swing from Con to LD in the latest ComRes but I'm sure you'll quote Opinium back at me so fine.

The policy is to Revoke if the Party wins a Parliamentary majority otherwise it's to support a second vote and continue to block a No Deal which is completely consistent. Why wouldn't those wishing to Remain (more than 10% I suspect) have a clear and unambiguous voice?

The Conservatives are currently riding both the horses of No Deal AND leaving with a Deal but the time is fast approaching when they will be forced to decide which horse they are really on. With No Deal blocked, the options then become leaving with a WA (really?) or storming off in a huff with the traditional Conservative attitude of evading responsibility and leaving the tough decisions to others.

Of course more than 10% want to Remain. It's nearer 50% than 10%.

But how many want to simply Revoke, and sod democracy? 10%? 15%? And how many will be comfortable with a party that espouses the cancellation of votes?

It's a deeply stupid policy.

About 27% want to revoke with Opinium, that could not win the LDs a majority but it could see them beat Corbyn Labour in voteshare which is Swinson's main aim this time I think

I am surprised it is as high as 27%. But fair enough: that's the data. Maybe the LD move is cynical but clever? I still think it is cynical and foolish.

I think the former, due to Labour's refusal to replace Corbyn the Liberals have their best chance to overtake Labour as the main alternative to the Tories since 1983 when Foot was Labour leader and the SDP Liberal Alliance got 25%, just 2% behind Foot's Labour on 27%.

Swinson will be thinking anything that can shift diehard Remainers away from Corbyn Labour towards her party must be worth the risk