Someone pointed out earlier that the Taliban aren't from the "Middle East".. it's as blatant a "they all look the same" type gaffe as you're likely to get, and I have to say, yet again, imagine the reaction if it had been Farage
Lighten up, the joke wouldn't have worked otherwise.
I dont really mind, Im just aware of how different the reaction would have been if it had been Farage.
I think it would have worked ok had he just said "terrorist group" to be fair
Oh dear, some serious straw clutching from the PB Leave fanatics here. Hilarious. Farage wouldn't have said it that way. he would have more likely said "they look all the same" because he uses racist language , well according to Alan Sked anyway. Any ideas as to whether Farage sued Mr Sked over that allegation? Nope thought he didn't
I can only assume David Allen Green has not been out door-knocking.
Because that number is massively low. And they may not know whether popery/Brexit is man or horse. But they know a patronising c*** suggesting they are thick when they hear one.....
I don't know that I'm particularly against pointing out someone is ignorant if it's true. You can call it patronising if you like, and we can find you a safe space where you don't have to listen to it. But if it's true it's true.
I can only assume that most of the prolific posters on here never venture out with a clipboard door-knocking. Their exposure to what real voters think is laughably off-beam.
In my case, your assumption would be wrong. I've campaigned for candidates from two different parties. Street stalls, canvassing, leaflets at the shops, leaflets through the doors. I even went to a count once. That's more activism than most. And I'm struck by how often you hear media lines tripping out of the mouths of voters. They earnest believe what they say, but it's often other people's words. You can tell because exact slogans come out very often. And if you probe gently, just a little, you quickly meet a mass of unreconciled and often contradictory feelings.
A deal looking more likely by the hour. Fingers crossed.
We already have a deal!
A deal both sides, and Parliament, agree on.
And that, according to @Brom, is looking more likely by the hour? Really?
Meh, I remember the days when the WA was not up for negotiation.
You'll no doubt also remember the days when 'no deal was better than a bad deal' or even when a trade deal with the EU would be the 'easiest thing in the world'.
Yeah, she clearly didn't follow through on that, although I suspect she saw it as a good deal. As for the easiest thing in the world, Fox said it should be, but that politics would get in the way. Perhaps one of the most misquoted quotations used on this site.
There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside. David Davis (10 October 2016)
The day after we vote to leave we hold all the cards and we can choose the path we want. Michael Gove (9 April 2016)
There will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market. Boris Johnson (26 June 2016)
Getting out of the EU can be quick and easy – the UK holds most of the cards in any negotiation. John Redwood (17 July 2016)
To me, Brexit is easy. Nigel Farage (20 September 2016)
A deal looking more likely by the hour. Fingers crossed.
We already have a deal!
A deal both sides, and Parliament, agree on.
And that, according to @Brom, is looking more likely by the hour? Really?
Meh, I remember the days when the WA was not up for negotiation.
You'll no doubt also remember the days when 'no deal was better than a bad deal' or even when a trade deal with the EU would be the 'easiest thing in the world'.
Yeah, she clearly didn't follow through on that, although I suspect she saw it as a good deal. As for the easiest thing in the world, Fox said it should be, but that politics would get in the way. Perhaps one of the most misquoted quotations used on this site.
There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside. David Davis (10 October 2016)
The day after we vote to leave we hold all the cards and we can choose the path we want. Michael Gove (9 April 2016)
There will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market. Boris Johnson (26 June 2016)
Getting out of the EU can be quick and easy – the UK holds most of the cards in any negotiation. John Redwood (17 July 2016)
To me, Brexit is easy. Nigel Farage (20 September 2016)
A deal looking more likely by the hour. Fingers crossed.
We already have a deal!
A deal both sides, and Parliament, agree on.
And that, according to @Brom, is looking more likely by the hour? Really?
Meh, I remember the days when the WA was not up for negotiation.
You'll no doubt also remember the days when 'no deal was better than a bad deal' or even when a trade deal with the EU would be the 'easiest thing in the world'.
Yeah, she clearly didn't follow through on that, although I suspect she saw it as a good deal. As for the easiest thing in the world, Fox said it should be, but that politics would get in the way. Perhaps one of the most misquoted quotations used on this site.
There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside. David Davis (10 October 2016)
The day after we vote to leave we hold all the cards and we can choose the path we want. Michael Gove (9 April 2016)
There will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market. Boris Johnson (26 June 2016)
Getting out of the EU can be quick and easy – the UK holds most of the cards in any negotiation. John Redwood (17 July 2016)
To me, Brexit is easy. Nigel Farage (20 September 2016)
So no need to use the Fox one anymore?
Thought you'd had that one already:
The free trade agreement that we will have to do with the European Union should be one of the easiest in human history. Liam Fox (20 July 2017)
I can only assume David Allen Green has not been out door-knocking.
Because that number is massively low. And they may not know whether popery/Brexit is man or horse. But they know a patronising c*** suggesting they are thick when they hear one.....
Also the “I told you it was too difficult” doesn’t really work with the “of course we’re still sovereign - we can leave any time” argument
And if he doesn't reach such a deal then he has to ask for an extension to comply with the Benn act.
Or resign and let someone else do that.
Boris will not resign. He will have a narrative that will galvanise his supporters and many in the country - the remainer parliament has robbed us of Brexit. Vots for me and we will deliver it. Will it be enough though?
I can only assume David Allen Green has not been out door-knocking.
Because that number is massively low. And they may not know whether popery/Brexit is man or horse. But they know a patronising c*** suggesting they are thick when they hear one.....
Also the “I told you it was too difficult” doesn’t really work with the “of course we’re still sovereign - we can leave any time” argument
Sovereignty is too abstract without qualification. Sovereign as in we had the unilateral right to leave? Yes. Sovereign as in the only rules that apply in this country are ones made exclusively in this country? No (but then, who is?). James O'Brien has a good line in questioning Brexiters on "what rules would you change if we had the power", which almost always flummoxed them.
I can only assume David Allen Green has not been out door-knocking.
Because that number is massively low. And they may not know whether popery/Brexit is man or horse. But they know a patronising c*** suggesting they are thick when they hear one.....
Also the “I told you it was too difficult” doesn’t really work with the “of course we’re still sovereign - we can leave any time” argument
Of course it does. We are sovereign because we have the ability to leave, wage war, be a member of the UN etc. etc. We can leave. It is just a stupid fucking thing to do. Period. I can slash my arms with a razor if I wish, but equally it would be a stupid fucking thing to do. That simple enough for you?
I can only assume David Allen Green has not been out door-knocking.
Because that number is massively low. And they may not know whether popery/Brexit is man or horse. But they know a patronising c*** suggesting they are thick when they hear one.....
I don't know that I'm particularly against pointing out someone is ignorant if it's true. You can call it patronising if you like, and we can find you a safe space where you don't have to listen to it. But if it's true it's true.
I can only assume that most of the prolific posters on here never venture out with a clipboard door-knocking. Their exposure to what real voters think is laughably off-beam.
In my case, your assumption would be wrong. I've campaigned for candidates from two different parties. Street stalls, canvassing, leaflets at the shops, leaflets through the doors. I even went to a count once. That's more activism than most. And I'm struck by how often you hear media lines tripping out of the mouths of voters. They earnest believe what they say, but it's often other people's words. You can tell because exact slogans come out very often. And if you probe gently, just a little, you quickly meet a mass of unreconciled and often contradictory feelings.
A deal looking more likely by the hour. Fingers crossed.
We already have a deal!
A deal both sides, and Parliament, agree on.
And that, according to @Brom, is looking more likely by the hour? Really?
Meh, I remember the days when the WA was not up for negotiation.
You'll no doubt also remember the days when 'no deal was better than a bad deal' or even when a trade deal with the EU would be the 'easiest thing in the world'.
Yeah, she clearly didn't follow through on that, although I suspect she saw it as a good deal. As for the easiest thing in the world, Fox said it should be, but that politics would get in the way. Perhaps one of the most misquoted quotations used on this site.
There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside. David Davis (10 October 2016)
The day after we vote to leave we hold all the cards and we can choose the path we want. Michael Gove (9 April 2016)
There will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market. Boris Johnson (26 June 2016)
Getting out of the EU can be quick and easy – the UK holds most of the cards in any negotiation. John Redwood (17 July 2016)
To me, Brexit is easy. Nigel Farage (20 September 2016)
So no need to use the Fox one anymore?
Thought you'd had that one already:
The free trade agreement that we will have to do with the European Union should be one of the easiest in human history. Liam Fox (20 July 2017)
Yep, what do you expect when you put a retired GP in charge of trade? It is like visiting a UN trade negotiator and asking what their opinion on your bunions is.
And if he doesn't reach such a deal then he has to ask for an extension to comply with the Benn act.
Or resign and let someone else do that.
Boris will not resign. He will have a narrative that will galvanise his supporters and many in the country - the remainer parliament has robbed us of Brexit. Vots for me and we will deliver it. Will it be enough though?
But the only way he can deliver it is leaving without a deal. And that is not an election-winning platform.
I can only assume David Allen Green has not been out door-knocking.
Because that number is massively low. And they may not know whether popery/Brexit is man or horse. But they know a patronising c*** suggesting they are thick when they hear one.....
Also the “I told you it was too difficult” doesn’t really work with the “of course we’re still sovereign - we can leave any time” argument
Sovereignty is too abstract without qualification. Sovereign as in we had the unilateral right to leave? Yes. Sovereign as in the only rules that apply in this country are ones made exclusively in this country? No (but then, who is?). James O'Brien has a good line in questioning Brexiters on "what rules would you change if we had the power", which almost always flummoxed them.
I can only assume David Allen Green has not been out door-knocking.
Because that number is massively low. And they may not know whether popery/Brexit is man or horse. But they know a patronising c*** suggesting they are thick when they hear one.....
Also the “I told you it was too difficult” doesn’t really work with the “of course we’re still sovereign - we can leave any time” argument
Sovereignty is too abstract without qualification. Sovereign as in we had the unilateral right to leave? Yes. Sovereign as in the only rules that apply in this country are ones made exclusively in this country? No (but then, who is?). James O'Brien has a good line in questioning Brexiters on "what rules would you change if we had the power", which almost always flummoxed them.
They shouldn’t be flummoxed. The rule we want to change is the rule that means we can’t elect or dismiss those who make the rules. We want to go back to being a democracy. Simples.
I can only assume David Allen Green has not been out door-knocking.
Because that number is massively low. And they may not know whether popery/Brexit is man or horse. But they know a patronising c*** suggesting they are thick when they hear one.....
Also the “I told you it was too difficult” doesn’t really work with the “of course we’re still sovereign - we can leave any time” argument
Of course it does. We are sovereign because we have the ability to leave, wage war, be a member of the UN etc. etc. We can leave. It is just a stupid fucking thing to do. Period. I can slash my arms with a razor if I wish, but equally it would be a stupid fucking thing to do. That simple enough for you?
It would stop you posting so much nonsense, so there are upsides
Boris seems to be by far the most popular leader with the C2DEs doesnt he? It would be a case of polling backing up my anecdotal observations that working class people aren't bothered by posh leaders in the way middle class intellectuals want them to be
He's contemplating the possibility of considering both sides with the potential for expressing his preference, or not, regarding remaining neutral should a second referendum be something on the horizon.
To be fair to Tim, this is up there among his most memorable lines. It is an absolute bullseye hitting the target perfectly. It makes a strong point with clarity and humour. In addition it is concise.
It IS funny. And as with most of the best jokes there is more than a trace of affection for the target. Tim and Jeremy get on, this is very clear.
A deal looking more likely by the hour. Fingers crossed.
dream on
About 100 times more likely than Scottish Independence in fairness
LOL, cuckoo
Poor old Cybernats. Can't qualify for a football tournament in their own country and vote against their own Independence. No chance you're getting a referendum for a number of years and when it does happen you'll just bottle it again.
To be fair to Tim, this is up there among his most memorable lines. It is an absolute bullseye hitting the target perfectly. It makes a strong point with clarity and humour. In addition it is concise.
It IS funny. And as with most of the best jokes there is more than a trace of affection for the target. Tim and Jeremy get on, this is very clear.
I thought it was about Emily T., not JC
Edit to add: Unless you are suggesting that Tim is undermining Emily T. for JC.
Certainly agree with the LD. FPTP is a cruel mistress, and they have only 11 MPs defending seats (People have asked before, but a reply I haven't seen - what is the position with Steve Lloyd - Wiki says he doesn't have the Whip, but is still a LD party member).
The seven joiners from other parties are so far behind in their existing Constituencies, so personal votes of a few thousand aren't going to help them hold the seats. Besides, both Umunna and Berger are jumping ship to fight elsewhere.
With Nick Clegg's 23% performance in 2010, they managed only 57 seats, 1% higher vote share and 5 lower(!) seats.
60 seats is certainly doable. 80 is really pushing it. More than 100, and I would expect them to be on a least 35%, which I just can't see.
If things don't go to plan, I can easily see them NOT regaining third party in terms of seats.
FPTP is has inherent tipping points, once exceeded seats fall thick and fast. Take your 35% in order to get 100 seats. That implies that everybod else has 65% between them. So how would that be distributed?
Labour 25% ( they wouldn't go very much lower would they?) Brexit 10% maybe Green 5% Others 2%
So add that up and you get 23% left for the Tories. With those figures it's landslide territory for the Lib Dems.
Not that I think it's going to happen, but they (and indeed anybody else) could win with around 30%, I think we should look at the opinion polls with that in mind.
The easiest way to think about this is to imagine there are two national parties, one with 80% and one (we'll call them the LibDems) with 20%. (We'll call this 1 + 1)
Assume random variation around the UK, and the LibDems get... maybe... one seat. But more likely none.
Now assume there are two parties on 40%, and one one 20%. (2 + 1). In these circumstances the LDs get... ohhh... 20 seats?
Now let's add another party. So 30% + 30% + 30% + 20%. Now, they get sixty seats.
Add another one... and now it's 120. Add another and it's 200. Simply, the fragmentation of politics allows more seats for a given vote share.
(A non-statistician writes….) Isn't there something called Lakeman's Cube Law which can be used to predict FPTP elections? Formulated by Enid Lakeman who ran the Electoral Reform Society some years ago, it shows that the seats are distributed according to the *cube* of the ratio of the votes cast. So, a 40%/40%/20% split of votes gives a ratio of 2/2/1, which will give a seat allocation in the ratio of 8/8/1. "Proved" by the two General Election results in 1974.
Although it's Johnson who can't handle [telling] the truth.
Corbyn probably deserves as much of a reputation for being a giant fibber. He's been caught barefaced lying several times about his past, and the statements put out on his behalf whenever the latest weekly antisemitism scandal hits Labour would shame comical Ali.
A deal looking more likely by the hour. Fingers crossed.
dream on
About 100 times more likely than Scottish Independence in fairness
LOL, cuckoo
Poor old Cybernats. Can't qualify for a football tournament in their own country and vote against their own Independence. No chance you're getting a referendum for a number of years and when it does happen you'll just bottle it again.
Cuckoo for sure, your village is looking for you troll
Remainers seem to be terrified of a deal emerging.
They still hold out hope that Brexit will never happen.
The correct answer to the hypothetical exam question - "If one places equal importance on not trashing the 2016 referendum AND on protecting living standards, how should one proceed from here?" - is to Brexit with a Deal, this in all probability being the WA amended for a NI only backstop Deal that I think Johnson will try and pull off.
So I ought to be rooting for that, I know I should.
Reason I'm not is my fear that he will get a massive boost from it - deservedly - and it could lead to a Tory landslide. Which is not IMO in the National Interest. Quite the opposite.
Boris seems to be by far the most popular leader with the C2DEs doesnt he? It would be a case of polling backing up my anecdotal observations that working class people aren't bothered by posh leaders in the way middle class intellectuals want them to be
I think the point with the chart is that in a two party system, then the relative satisfaction levels of the PM / LotO has very high predictive power.
Which is as you'd expect.
Where this may break down is a situation where both the PM and the LotO are relatively unpopular.
Take the last French Presidential elections. If you'd measured the incumbent's popularity against the de facto leader of the opposition Mme Le Pen, you'd have had her down for a landslide. But the reality was that neither was particularly popular, and they leaked votes to a new party.
Is this going to happen this time? Well, it depends. Nigel Farage has not gone away, and he continue to nip at the heels of Boris Johnson. The SNP is certainly not going anywhere. And the LibDems have their moment in the sun. It's certainly not inconceivable that the Conservatives get 30%, BXP 15%, Lab 20% and the LDs 25% at the next election. What HoC that results in, I don't know.
(A non-statistician writes….) Isn't there something called Lakeman's Cube Law which can be used to predict FPTP elections? Formulated by Enid Lakeman who ran the Electoral Reform Society some years ago, it shows that the seats are distributed according to the *cube* of the ratio of the votes cast. So, a 40%/40%/20% split of votes gives a ratio of 2/2/1, which will give a seat allocation in the ratio of 8/8/1. "Proved" by the two General Election results in 1974.
And unproved by the 1983 election. The LDs look a bit like the Alliance in that one.
(A non-statistician writes….) Isn't there something called Lakeman's Cube Law which can be used to predict FPTP elections? Formulated by Enid Lakeman who ran the Electoral Reform Society some years ago, it shows that the seats are distributed according to the *cube* of the ratio of the votes cast. So, a 40%/40%/20% split of votes gives a ratio of 2/2/1, which will give a seat allocation in the ratio of 8/8/1. "Proved" by the two General Election results in 1974.
That sounds eminently plausible, with the proviso that Scotland is different.
But lets go with Ipsos Mori: 33 / 24 / 23 / 10 / 4
Which, looking at the non-Scottish, non Northern-Irish seats gives:
C - 328 L - 126 LD - 111 BXP - 9 G - 1
Which is probably a little too high for the LDs and BXP, and a little too low for L, but is otherwise about right.
(A non-statistician writes….) Isn't there something called Lakeman's Cube Law which can be used to predict FPTP elections? Formulated by Enid Lakeman who ran the Electoral Reform Society some years ago, it shows that the seats are distributed according to the *cube* of the ratio of the votes cast. So, a 40%/40%/20% split of votes gives a ratio of 2/2/1, which will give a seat allocation in the ratio of 8/8/1. "Proved" by the two General Election results in 1974.
And unproved by the 1983 election. The LDs look a bit like the Alliance in that one.
Obviously it depends on how the vote is distributed, not just on the total vote.
(A non-statistician writes….) Isn't there something called Lakeman's Cube Law which can be used to predict FPTP elections? Formulated by Enid Lakeman who ran the Electoral Reform Society some years ago, it shows that the seats are distributed according to the *cube* of the ratio of the votes cast. So, a 40%/40%/20% split of votes gives a ratio of 2/2/1, which will give a seat allocation in the ratio of 8/8/1. "Proved" by the two General Election results in 1974.
And unproved by the 1983 election. The LDs look a bit like the Alliance in that one.
The problems the LDs had in 1983 was that they were still 18-19% behind the Conservatives, and almost all their potential wins were against the Conservatives.
Indeed, to look at LD pickups, look at the C-LD spread. I suspect that has a much greater predictive power than almost anything else. And it's currently at about 12-13 points, which suggests a total in the 40s for them.
And if he doesn't reach such a deal then he has to ask for an extension to comply with the Benn act.
Or resign and let someone else do that.
Boris will not resign. He will have a narrative that will galvanise his supporters and many in the country - the remainer parliament has robbed us of Brexit. Vots for me and we will deliver it. Will it be enough though?
Even if the DUP and the EU play ball, there are many obstacles to it working, not least the timescale.
Anyway it's very hard to see how he could get such a deal getting parliament. The opposition parties aren't going to cooperate in setting themselves up to be 'up the electoral creek without a paddle', and he's carelessly turned a tiny majority into a majority of -43 or whatever it is this week. Since parliament probably has the option to force him to miss his self-imposed do-or-die deadline, and he's made many gratuitous enemies, I don't see where the votes come from even if the DUP do vote for the fudge.
Wait, I thought we were going to sideline the Commission and go straight to the individual countries?
More seriously, if we're going to win this, then we need to have the people of Ireland putting pressure on their government to accept our proposals. (And the same is true, to a lesser extent, of other countries.)
We need to be seen as the reasonable ones, who have put in place a proposal that deals with the reason the backstop is seen to need to exist. "If we do x, then you won't need the backstop, so let's do x, and we can all avoid a nasty recession".
Boris seems to be by far the most popular leader with the C2DEs doesnt he? It would be a case of polling backing up my anecdotal observations that working class people aren't bothered by posh leaders in the way middle class intellectuals want them to be
Depends. There is (still) such a thing as working class deference to their betters but, for example, I do not recall the very posh David Cameron going down a storm in the Wheeltappers & Shunters.
You do need something else to be both posh and popular with the lower orders. With Boris I think it's the 'bit of a laugh' vibe. Appears not to take himself - or indeed anybody or anything - at all seriously.
Some people really like that - and there are a disproportionate number of them in the aforesaid lower orders.
"Life's shit. You have to laugh, mate, don't you?, else you'd cry."
Even if the DUP and the EU play ball, there are many obstacles to it working, not least the timescale.
Anyway it's very hard to see how he could get such a deal getting parliament. The opposition parties aren't going to cooperate in setting themselves up to be 'up the electoral creek without a paddle', and he's carelessly turned a tiny majority into a majority of -43 or whatever it is this week. Since parliament probably has the option to force him to miss his self-imposed do-or-die deadline, and he's made many gratuitous enemies, I don't see where the votes come from even if the DUP do vote for the fudge.
The other parties may want to vote for a deal because it is in their interest. I don't think the Boris deadline matters as much as his opponents like to think. Is there a single Leaver on here that will turn against Boris because of it? That is a good indicator. On the other hand, a General Election where MPs have voted against leaving with a deal and against leaving without a deal is going to be catastrophic for them in two thirds of constituencies.
Even if the DUP and the EU play ball, there are many obstacles to it working, not least the timescale.
Anyway it's very hard to see how he could get such a deal getting parliament. The opposition parties aren't going to cooperate in setting themselves up to be 'up the electoral creek without a paddle', and he's carelessly turned a tiny majority into a majority of -43 or whatever it is this week. Since parliament probably has the option to force him to miss his self-imposed do-or-die deadline, and he's made many gratuitous enemies, I don't see where the votes come from even if the DUP do vote for the fudge.
He's completely stuck. Other than hoping he is not punished when a GE does finally come, such options are are available to him rely heavily on others doing what he wants when they have shown no inclination to do so.
I can only assume David Allen Green has not been out door-knocking.
Because that number is massively low. And they may not know whether popery/Brexit is man or horse. But they know a patronising c*** suggesting they are thick when they hear one.....
Also the “I told you it was too difficult” doesn’t really work with the “of course we’re still sovereign - we can leave any time” argument
Of course it does. We are sovereign because we have the ability to leave, wage war, be a member of the UN etc. etc. We can leave. It is just a stupid fucking thing to do. Period. I can slash my arms with a razor if I wish, but equally it would be a stupid fucking thing to do. That simple enough for you?
It would stop you posting so much nonsense, so there are upsides
I leave the nonsense to people that still believe in fairies, Father Christmas and a beneficial Brexit. Do you believe in all three?
Even if the DUP and the EU play ball, there are many obstacles to it working, not least the timescale.
Anyway it's very hard to see how he could get such a deal getting parliament. The opposition parties aren't going to cooperate in setting themselves up to be 'up the electoral creek without a paddle', and he's carelessly turned a tiny majority into a majority of -43 or whatever it is this week. Since parliament probably has the option to force him to miss his self-imposed do-or-die deadline, and he's made many gratuitous enemies, I don't see where the votes come from even if the DUP do vote for the fudge.
If you read Arlene's comments, she's sounding like she's OK with the backstop so long as Stormont can vote for Northern Ireland to leave it. (Which, from a practical perspective, means Northern Ireland will never leave the backstop, as it will have the flexibility of British regulation in areas like employment law, yet be a part of the Single Market. I would load up on Belfast property in that scenario.)
Would Francois and Baker vote for this? I don't know. And I think there are precious few Labour-ites who'd want to support Boris, because Tory Brexit.
Boris seems to be by far the most popular leader with the C2DEs doesnt he? It would be a case of polling backing up my anecdotal observations that working class people aren't bothered by posh leaders in the way middle class intellectuals want them to be
Why are retired people treated as working class?
I seem to be the only one bugged by it, but using C2DE=working class means the group with the fewer workers is working class.
The result is the interests of workers are rarely considered. Helping "working class" or "C2DE"s is treated as helping workers, when it is disproportionately negative for them. Then pensioners and the unemployed get further assistance beyond that.
The other parties may want to vote for a deal because it is in their interest. I don't think the Boris deadline matters as much as his opponents like to think. Is there a single Leaver on here that will turn against Boris because of it? That is a good indicator. On the other hand, a General Election where MPs have voted against leaving with a deal and against leaving without a deal is going to be catastrophic for them in two thirds of constituencies.
It's not the opposition parties who have been saying hundreds of times that we are absolutely certain to be leaving on October 31st do-or-die, deal or no-deal.
I can only assume David Allen Green has not been out door-knocking.
Because that number is massively low. And they may not know whether popery/Brexit is man or horse. But they know a patronising c*** suggesting they are thick when they hear one.....
Also the “I told you it was too difficult” doesn’t really work with the “of course we’re still sovereign - we can leave any time” argument
Of course it does. We are sovereign because we have the ability to leave, wage war, be a member of the UN etc. etc. We can leave. It is just a stupid fucking thing to do. Period. I can slash my arms with a razor if I wish, but equally it would be a stupid fucking thing to do. That simple enough for you?
It would stop you posting so much nonsense, so there are upsides
I leave the nonsense to people that still believe in fairies, Father Christmas and a beneficial Brexit. Do you believe in all three?
Wait, I thought we were going to sideline the Commission and go straight to the individual countries?
More seriously, if we're going to win this, then we need to have the people of Ireland putting pressure on their government to accept our proposals. (And the same is true, to a lesser extent, of other countries.)
We need to be seen as the reasonable ones, who have put in place a proposal that deals with the reason the backstop is seen to need to exist. "If we do x, then you won't need the backstop, so let's do x, and we can all avoid a nasty recession".
How could those idiots ever be seen as reasonable, they are showboating and threatening as if they actually had some power.
It does the LDs no harm to be attacked by Labour or the Conservatives because it means they are being noticed. When the then Conservative Chairman Norman Tebbit launched a day of attacks on the Alliance in 1987 all it did was push the Alliance rating up.
The more the duopoly looks like two cheeks of the same arse the better. It also confirms the view Labour's biggest ally is the Conservatives and vice versa - the relationship is almost symbiotic.
Meanwhile, a regional poll has appeared in Canada. Quebec has 78 ridings out of the 338 so not insignificant. In 2015, the Liberals won 40 seats on 35.7% of the vote with the NDP winning 16 seats on 25.4%, the Bloc Quebecois (BQ) won 10 seats on 19.3% and the Conservatives took 12 seats on 16.7%. The Greens won 2.3%.
The Leger poll (easy for me to say) puts the Liberals on 36% (nc), BQ on 22% (+3), the Conservatives on 21% (+4), the Greens on 10% (+8) and the NDP on 7% (-18).
The NDP looks set to lost most if not all their 16 seats but the swing from Liberal to Conservative is only 2% so there's no Conservative sweep on offer though they will probably share in feeding on the NDP carcass along with BQ and the Liberals.
The problem for the Tories is gains will be offset by the other parties also gaining from the NDP so the net effect may be minimal.
Corbyn is clearly unpopular , but Johnson is far less popular than May was in April 2017 . As a result, the relative popularity of the leaders may matter less than two years ago. The Tory lead is also much smaller than was the case early in that campaign..
Labour is polling below even early 2017 levels though and the LDs far higher so the anti Tory vote is split
(A non-statistician writes….) Isn't there something called Lakeman's Cube Law which can be used to predict FPTP elections? Formulated by Enid Lakeman who ran the Electoral Reform Society some years ago, it shows that the seats are distributed according to the *cube* of the ratio of the votes cast. So, a 40%/40%/20% split of votes gives a ratio of 2/2/1, which will give a seat allocation in the ratio of 8/8/1. "Proved" by the two General Election results in 1974.
That sounds eminently plausible, with the proviso that Scotland is different.
But lets go with Ipsos Mori: 33 / 24 / 23 / 10 / 4
Which, looking at the non-Scottish, non Northern-Irish seats gives:
C - 328 L - 126 LD - 111 BXP - 9 G - 1
Which is probably a little too high for the LDs and BXP, and a little too low for L, but is otherwise about right.
LOL, "just a little too high " and "lets ignore reality"
I can only assume David Allen Green has not been out door-knocking.
Because that number is massively low. And they may not know whether popery/Brexit is man or horse. But they know a patronising c*** suggesting they are thick when they hear one.....
Also the “I told you it was too difficult” doesn’t really work with the “of course we’re still sovereign - we can leave any time” argument
Of course it does. We are sovereign because we have the ability to leave, wage war, be a member of the UN etc. etc. We can leave. It is just a stupid fucking thing to do. Period. I can slash my arms with a razor if I wish, but equally it would be a stupid fucking thing to do. That simple enough for you?
It would stop you posting so much nonsense, so there are upsides
I leave the nonsense to people that still believe in fairies, Father Christmas and a beneficial Brexit. Do you believe in all three?
If only you did
Well that is kind of you. I appreciate it must be pleasant to live in la la land, but one day you have to grow up and live in the real world. By the way, more evidence today that Boris doesn't believe either. Cynical and annoying isn't it? Leavers thought they could point to someone that isn't dumb (even though he acts it), and it turns out that his old school chum tells us that Boris only supported leave because he thought they would lose and it would make him look good ! Hilarious!
Boris seems to be by far the most popular leader with the C2DEs doesnt he? It would be a case of polling backing up my anecdotal observations that working class people aren't bothered by posh leaders in the way middle class intellectuals want them to be
Why are retired people treated as working class?
I seem to be the only one bugged by it, but using C2DE=working class means the group with the fewer workers is working class.
The result is the interests of workers are rarely considered. Helping "working class" or "C2DE"s is treated as helping workers, when it is disproportionately negative for them. Then pensioners and the unemployed get further assistance beyond that.
The latest published Yougov figures have the Tories on 33% with ABC1s and 31% with C2DEs so even under Boris they still do fractionally better with middle class than working class voters though in reality the Tories now do about the same with both.
The LDs are far more middle class than the Tories though, on 22% with ABC1s but only 13% with C2DEs.
Labour is still fractionally more working class on 24% with C2DEs to 22% with ABC1s but the Brexit Party is now the real working class party on 24% with C2DEs and just 8% with ABC1s.
Boris seems to be by far the most popular leader with the C2DEs doesnt he? It would be a case of polling backing up my anecdotal observations that working class people aren't bothered by posh leaders in the way middle class intellectuals want them to be
Why are retired people treated as working class?
I seem to be the only one bugged by it, but using C2DE=working class means the group with the fewer workers is working class.
The result is the interests of workers are rarely considered. Helping "working class" or "C2DE"s is treated as helping workers, when it is disproportionately negative for them. Then pensioners and the unemployed get further assistance beyond that.
The latest published Yougov figures have the Tories on 33% with ABC1s and 31% with C2DEs so even under Boris they still do fractionally better with middle class than working class voters though in reality the Tories now do about the same with both.
Boris seems to be by far the most popular leader with the C2DEs doesnt he? It would be a case of polling backing up my anecdotal observations that working class people aren't bothered by posh leaders in the way middle class intellectuals want them to be
Why are retired people treated as working class?
I seem to be the only one bugged by it, but using C2DE=working class means the group with the fewer workers is working class.
The result is the interests of workers are rarely considered. Helping "working class" or "C2DE"s is treated as helping workers, when it is disproportionately negative for them. Then pensioners and the unemployed get further assistance beyond that.
The latest published Yougov figures have the Tories on 33% with ABC1s and 31% with C2DEs so even under Boris they still do fractionally better with middle class than working class voters though in reality the Tories now do about the same with both.
Boris seems to be by far the most popular leader with the C2DEs doesnt he? It would be a case of polling backing up my anecdotal observations that working class people aren't bothered by posh leaders in the way middle class intellectuals want them to be
Why are retired people treated as working class?
I seem to be the only one bugged by it, but using C2DE=working class means the group with the fewer workers is working class.
The result is the interests of workers are rarely considered. Helping "working class" or "C2DE"s is treated as helping workers, when it is disproportionately negative for them. Then pensioners and the unemployed get further assistance beyond that.
The latest published Yougov figures have the Tories on 33% with ABC1s and 31% with C2DEs so even under Boris they still do fractionally better with middle class than working class voters though in reality the Tories now do about the same with both.
Boris seems to be by far the most popular leader with the C2DEs doesnt he? It would be a case of polling backing up my anecdotal observations that working class people aren't bothered by posh leaders in the way middle class intellectuals want them to be
Why are retired people treated as working class?
I seem to be the only one bugged by it, but using C2DE=working class means the group with the fewer workers is working class.
The result is the interests of workers are rarely considered. Helping "working class" or "C2DE"s is treated as helping workers, when it is disproportionately negative for them. Then pensioners and the unemployed get further assistance beyond that.
The latest published Yougov figures have the Tories on 33% with ABC1s and 31% with C2DEs so even under Boris they still do fractionally better with middle class than working class voters though in reality the Tories now do about the same with both.
As usual random polling numbers addressing none of the questions raised in the post above.
Site is full of bollox about polls at present. Mass hysteria over the Lib Dems, dreams of Labour getting skelped by ignoring what happened last time and that without the buffoon.
Leo Varadkar seems to be keeping his nose very clean from overtly condemning Boris' new deal, leaving Coveney to go around in the role of grinch. Leaves him free to swoop in and agree things at the 11th hour.
There must be a chance Emily Thornberry or Tom Watson must gather together the grey suits team to tell him enough is enough. I guess never having to make a significant decision has dulled his ability to make them but it looks bloody awful
Anyway it's very hard to see how he could get such a deal getting parliament. The opposition parties aren't going to cooperate in setting themselves up to be 'up the electoral creek without a paddle', and he's carelessly turned a tiny majority into a majority of -43 or whatever it is this week. Since parliament probably has the option to force him to miss his self-imposed do-or-die deadline, and he's made many gratuitous enemies, I don't see where the votes come from even if the DUP do vote for the fudge.
There has always been this politics angle in the process. The Party which "successfully" (and that needs a lot of qualifying) engineered our exit from the EU has always stood to gain significant electoral advantage and this has with time only increased with the emergence of the Overwithers.
Those opposed to that Party may ironically not be opposed to the Deal per se but would be opposed to giving electoral advantage to their opponents. The governing party would need to find a way to disclaim all credit for the successful,achievement of the Deal and not to seek to gain political advantage from the successful departure.
Had the A50 process been a cross party exercise this wouldn't matter but for the Conservatives the trap has been to try to seek political advantage from the process of departure. Manifestly seeking to claim credit isn't going to endear you to those who don't support you and when you don't have the Parliamentary numbers it becomes even more absurd and it encourages your opponents to play the political game and frustrate you.
Even if the DUP and the EU play ball, there are many obstacles to it working, not least the timescale.
Anyway it's very hard to see how he could get such a deal getting parliament. The opposition parties aren't going to cooperate in setting themselves up to be 'up the electoral creek without a paddle', and he's carelessly turned a tiny majority into a majority of -43 or whatever it is this week. Since parliament probably has the option to force him to miss his self-imposed do-or-die deadline, and he's made many gratuitous enemies, I don't see where the votes come from even if the DUP do vote for the fudge.
The key question is how many of the 21 rebels would vote for a deal? I don't think Grieve or Clarke would but most of the others probably would having voted for May's deal previously. It would then come down to how many Lab MPs could be persuaded to vote for it.
Someone pointed out earlier that the Taliban aren't from the "Middle East".. it's as blatant a "they all look the same" type gaffe as you're likely to get, and I have to say, yet again, imagine the reaction if it had been Farage
Lighten up, the joke wouldn't have worked otherwise.
Agree, it's funny, but getting the Middle East bit wrong provides the ideal Labour clapback. Of course, Farron could have said Islamist.
Corbyn is clearly unpopular , but Johnson is far less popular than May was in April 2017 . As a result, the relative popularity of the leaders may matter less than two years ago. The Tory lead is also much smaller than was the case early in that campaign..
Labour is polling below even early 2017 levels though and the LDs far higher so the anti Tory vote is split
That depends on the poll - Yougov had Labour on 23% in April 2017. Recent polls have Labour in the range of 21% (Yougov) - 30% 9ICM). Most have the party in the mid- late 20s - broadly similar to April 2017 with the Tories much lower.
Even if the DUP and the EU play ball, there are many obstacles to it working, not least the timescale.
Anyway it's very hard to see how he could get such a deal getting parliament. The opposition parties aren't going to cooperate in setting themselves up to be 'up the electoral creek without a paddle', and he's carelessly turned a tiny majority into a majority of -43 or whatever it is this week. Since parliament probably has the option to force him to miss his self-imposed do-or-die deadline, and he's made many gratuitous enemies, I don't see where the votes come from even if the DUP do vote for the fudge.
The key question is how many of the 21 rebels would vote for a deal? I don't think Grieve or Clarke would but most of the others probably would having voted for May's deal previously. It would then come down to how many Lab MPs could be persuaded to vote for it.
It's the best hope for a sane deal; Simon Jenkins is a rare island of sanity in the Guardian which is increasingly giving the impression of being written by and for narrow minded obsessive lunatics.
Even if the DUP and the EU play ball, there are many obstacles to it working, not least the timescale.
Anyway it's very hard to see how he could get such a deal getting parliament. The opposition parties aren't going to cooperate in setting themselves up to be 'up the electoral creek without a paddle', and he's carelessly turned a tiny majority into a majority of -43 or whatever it is this week. Since parliament probably has the option to force him to miss his self-imposed do-or-die deadline, and he's made many gratuitous enemies, I don't see where the votes come from even if the DUP do vote for the fudge.
If you read Arlene's comments, she's sounding like she's OK with the backstop so long as Stormont can vote for Northern Ireland to leave it. (Which, from a practical perspective, means Northern Ireland will never leave the backstop, as it will have the flexibility of British regulation in areas like employment law, yet be a part of the Single Market. I would load up on Belfast property in that scenario.)
Would Francois and Baker vote for this? I don't know. And I think there are precious few Labour-ites who'd want to support Boris, because Tory Brexit.
A vote on the Queen's Speech would occur before any deal can be presented to Parliament - and the Government could well be defeated.A VNOC would then follow..
Corbyn is clearly unpopular , but Johnson is far less popular than May was in April 2017 . As a result, the relative popularity of the leaders may matter less than two years ago. The Tory lead is also much smaller than was the case early in that campaign..
Labour is polling below even early 2017 levels though and the LDs far higher so the anti Tory vote is split
That depends on the poll - Yougov had Labour on 23% in April 2017. Recent polls have Labour in the range of 21% (Yougov) - 30% 9ICM). Most have the party in the mid- late 20s - broadly similar to April 2017 with the Tories much lower.
Both the latest polls from Yougov and Mori have Labour under 25%, Yougov now have the LDs ahead of Labour this week too
A vote on the Queen's Speech would occur before any deal can be presented to Parliament - and the Government could well be defeated.A VNOC would then follow..
We may be treated to the delicious spectacle of the head-bangers frothing with indignation because they've been denied the opportunity to vote for a deal.
Boris seems to be by far the most popular leader with the C2DEs doesnt he? It would be a case of polling backing up my anecdotal observations that working class people aren't bothered by posh leaders in the way middle class intellectuals want them to be
Why are retired people treated as working class?
I seem to be the only one bugged by it, but using C2DE=working class means the group with the fewer workers is working class.
The result is the interests of workers are rarely considered. Helping "working class" or "C2DE"s is treated as helping workers, when it is disproportionately negative for them. Then pensioners and the unemployed get further assistance beyond that.
The latest published Yougov figures have the Tories on 33% with ABC1s and 31% with C2DEs so even under Boris they still do fractionally better with middle class than working class voters though in reality the Tories now do about the same with both.
Even if the DUP and the EU play ball, there are many obstacles to it working, not least the timescale.
Anyway it's very hard to see how he could get such a deal getting parliament. The opposition parties aren't going to cooperate in setting themselves up to be 'up the electoral creek without a paddle', and he's carelessly turned a tiny majority into a majority of -43 or whatever it is this week. Since parliament probably has the option to force him to miss his self-imposed do-or-die deadline, and he's made many gratuitous enemies, I don't see where the votes come from even if the DUP do vote for the fudge.
The key question is how many of the 21 rebels would vote for a deal? I don't think Grieve or Clarke would but most of the others probably would having voted for May's deal previously. It would then come down to how many Lab MPs could be persuaded to vote for it.
Clarke voted for May's deal - so might well do so again. Much less likely to be true of Grieve, Greening, Sandbach, Bebb and possibly Burt.They now owe Boris absolutely nothing - and revenge might be sweet!
Corbyn is clearly unpopular , but Johnson is far less popular than May was in April 2017 . As a result, the relative popularity of the leaders may matter less than two years ago. The Tory lead is also much smaller than was the case early in that campaign..
Labour is polling below even early 2017 levels though and the LDs far higher so the anti Tory vote is split
That depends on the poll - Yougov had Labour on 23% in April 2017. Recent polls have Labour in the range of 21% (Yougov) - 30% 9ICM). Most have the party in the mid- late 20s - broadly similar to April 2017 with the Tories much lower.
Both the latest polls from Yougov and Mori have Labour under 25%, Yougov now have the LDs ahead of Labour this week too
Corbyn is clearly unpopular , but Johnson is far less popular than May was in April 2017 . As a result, the relative popularity of the leaders may matter less than two years ago. The Tory lead is also much smaller than was the case early in that campaign..
Labour is polling below even early 2017 levels though and the LDs far higher so the anti Tory vote is split
That depends on the poll - Yougov had Labour on 23% in April 2017. Recent polls have Labour in the range of 21% (Yougov) - 30% 9ICM). Most have the party in the mid- late 20s - broadly similar to April 2017 with the Tories much lower.
Both the latest polls from Yougov and Mori have Labour under 25%, Yougov now have the LDs ahead of Labour this week too
Corbyn is clearly unpopular , but Johnson is far less popular than May was in April 2017 . As a result, the relative popularity of the leaders may matter less than two years ago. The Tory lead is also much smaller than was the case early in that campaign..
Labour is polling below even early 2017 levels though and the LDs far higher so the anti Tory vote is split
That depends on the poll - Yougov had Labour on 23% in April 2017. Recent polls have Labour in the range of 21% (Yougov) - 30% 9ICM). Most have the party in the mid- late 20s - broadly similar to April 2017 with the Tories much lower.
Both the latest polls from Yougov and Mori have Labour under 25%, Yougov now have the LDs ahead of Labour this week too
Yougov have been out of line for months - at the end of July it had Labour on 19%.
Wait, I thought we were going to sideline the Commission and go straight to the individual countries?
More seriously, if we're going to win this, then we need to have the people of Ireland putting pressure on their government to accept our proposals. (And the same is true, to a lesser extent, of other countries.)
We need to be seen as the reasonable ones, who have put in place a proposal that deals with the reason the backstop is seen to need to exist. "If we do x, then you won't need the backstop, so let's do x, and we can all avoid a nasty recession".
We have a Home Secretary who said we should threaten Ireland with food shortages...
I've come across a stat very relevant to this thread. JC's rating went from -45 to +6 over the course of the GE17 campaign. Imagine that. In fact you don't have to imagine since it happened. And only 2 years ago. So why would this not happen again, at least to an extent? My sense is that Corbyn is somebody who comes alive in an election, any election, remember his Labour leadership campaigns too? He's all about elections. You think he's nothing special, based on how he is when there isn't one on, and then - bam - when the time cometh so cometh does the man. He is not unlike a major music star in this regard. For example, Michael Buble. Buble, off stage, is quiet, unassuming, the sort of guy you'd barely notice. But when he takes the stage, mic in hand, different story. He becomes electric, formidable.
Comments
The day after we vote to leave we hold all the cards and we can choose the path we want. Michael Gove (9 April 2016)
There will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market.
Boris Johnson (26 June 2016)
Getting out of the EU can be quick and easy – the UK holds most of the cards in any negotiation. John Redwood (17 July 2016)
To me, Brexit is easy. Nigel Farage (20 September 2016)
The free trade agreement that we will have to do with the European Union should be one of the easiest in human history. Liam Fox (20 July 2017)
https://twitter.com/RafBSingh/status/1175056343927054336
James O'Brien has a good line in questioning Brexiters on "what rules would you change if we had the power", which almost always flummoxed them.
The interesting thing to me was the absence of any even moderately compelling ideas.
Are you a gun for hire?
He's contemplating the possibility of considering both sides with the potential for expressing his preference, or not, regarding remaining neutral should a second referendum be something on the horizon.
Decisive.
Edit to add: Unless you are suggesting that Tim is undermining Emily T. for JC.
Assume random variation around the UK, and the LibDems get... maybe... one seat. But more likely none.
Now assume there are two parties on 40%, and one one 20%. (2 + 1). In these circumstances the LDs get... ohhh... 20 seats?
Now let's add another party. So 30% + 30% + 30% + 20%. Now, they get sixty seats.
Add another one... and now it's 120. Add another and it's 200. Simply, the fragmentation of politics allows more seats for a given vote share.
That there's going to be a new Withdrawal Agreement allowing us to leave on the basis of a plan that won't be fully worked out until we've left?
That the missing details are going to be filled in during the last fortnight of October?
That we're going to leave without a deal but they're going to carry on going through the motions because they have nothing better to do?
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
So I ought to be rooting for that, I know I should.
Reason I'm not is my fear that he will get a massive boost from it - deservedly - and it could lead to a Tory landslide. Which is not IMO in the National Interest. Quite the opposite.
Which is as you'd expect.
Where this may break down is a situation where both the PM and the LotO are relatively unpopular.
Take the last French Presidential elections. If you'd measured the incumbent's popularity against the de facto leader of the opposition Mme Le Pen, you'd have had her down for a landslide. But the reality was that neither was particularly popular, and they leaked votes to a new party.
Is this going to happen this time? Well, it depends. Nigel Farage has not gone away, and he continue to nip at the heels of Boris Johnson. The SNP is certainly not going anywhere. And the LibDems have their moment in the sun. It's certainly not inconceivable that the Conservatives get 30%, BXP 15%, Lab 20% and the LDs 25% at the next election. What HoC that results in, I don't know.
Jeremy is the butt of the joke.
And as I say, I sense affection there.
But lets go with Ipsos Mori: 33 / 24 / 23 / 10 / 4
Which, looking at the non-Scottish, non Northern-Irish seats gives:
C - 328
L - 126
LD - 111
BXP - 9
G - 1
Which is probably a little too high for the LDs and BXP, and a little too low for L, but is otherwise about right.
Indeed, to look at LD pickups, look at the C-LD spread. I suspect that has a much greater predictive power than almost anything else. And it's currently at about 12-13 points, which suggests a total in the 40s for them.
How do you think it would play out if the LDs won a higher vote share than Labour, but, say, 1/5th of the seats?
Fresh Brexit talks row as UK asks EU to keep its proposals secret
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/20/fresh-brexit-talks-row-uk-eu-proposals-secret
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/20/boris-johnson-brexit-deal-brussels-dup
Even if the DUP and the EU play ball, there are many obstacles to it working, not least the timescale.
Anyway it's very hard to see how he could get such a deal getting parliament. The opposition parties aren't going to cooperate in setting themselves up to be 'up the electoral creek without a paddle', and he's carelessly turned a tiny majority into a majority of -43 or whatever it is this week. Since parliament probably has the option to force him to miss his self-imposed do-or-die deadline, and he's made many gratuitous enemies, I don't see where the votes come from even if the DUP do vote for the fudge.
More seriously, if we're going to win this, then we need to have the people of Ireland putting pressure on their government to accept our proposals. (And the same is true, to a lesser extent, of other countries.)
We need to be seen as the reasonable ones, who have put in place a proposal that deals with the reason the backstop is seen to need to exist. "If we do x, then you won't need the backstop, so let's do x, and we can all avoid a nasty recession".
You do need something else to be both posh and popular with the lower orders. With Boris I think it's the 'bit of a laugh' vibe. Appears not to take himself - or indeed anybody or anything - at all seriously.
Some people really like that - and there are a disproportionate number of them in the aforesaid lower orders.
"Life's shit. You have to laugh, mate, don't you?, else you'd cry."
Would Francois and Baker vote for this? I don't know. And I think there are precious few Labour-ites who'd want to support Boris, because Tory Brexit.
a) EU has reached the end of its tether wrt further extensions.
b) Johnson has such a large majority he can ram it through.
I seem to be the only one bugged by it, but using C2DE=working class means the group with the fewer workers is working class.
The result is the interests of workers are rarely considered. Helping "working class" or "C2DE"s is treated as helping workers, when it is disproportionately negative for them. Then pensioners and the unemployed get further assistance beyond that.
It does the LDs no harm to be attacked by Labour or the Conservatives because it means they are being noticed. When the then Conservative Chairman Norman Tebbit launched a day of attacks on the Alliance in 1987 all it did was push the Alliance rating up.
The more the duopoly looks like two cheeks of the same arse the better. It also confirms the view Labour's biggest ally is the Conservatives and vice versa - the relationship is almost symbiotic.
Meanwhile, a regional poll has appeared in Canada. Quebec has 78 ridings out of the 338 so not insignificant. In 2015, the Liberals won 40 seats on 35.7% of the vote with the NDP winning 16 seats on 25.4%, the Bloc Quebecois (BQ) won 10 seats on 19.3% and the Conservatives took 12 seats on 16.7%. The Greens won 2.3%.
The Leger poll (easy for me to say) puts the Liberals on 36% (nc), BQ on 22% (+3), the Conservatives on 21% (+4), the Greens on 10% (+8) and the NDP on 7% (-18).
The NDP looks set to lost most if not all their 16 seats but the swing from Liberal to Conservative is only 2% so there's no Conservative sweep on offer though they will probably share in feeding on the NDP carcass along with BQ and the Liberals.
The problem for the Tories is gains will be offset by the other parties also gaining from the NDP so the net effect may be minimal.
The LDs are far more middle class than the Tories though, on 22% with ABC1s but only 13% with C2DEs.
Labour is still fractionally more working class on 24% with C2DEs to 22% with ABC1s but the Brexit Party is now the real working class party on 24% with C2DEs and just 8% with ABC1s.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/09/11/voting-intention-con-32-lab-23-lib-dem-19-brex-14-
Those opposed to that Party may ironically not be opposed to the Deal per se but would be opposed to giving electoral advantage to their opponents. The governing party would need to find a way to disclaim all credit for the successful,achievement of the Deal and not to seek to gain political advantage from the successful departure.
Had the A50 process been a cross party exercise this wouldn't matter but for the Conservatives the trap has been to try to seek political advantage from the process of departure. Manifestly seeking to claim credit isn't going to endear you to those who don't support you and when you don't have the Parliamentary numbers it becomes even more absurd and it encourages your opponents to play the political game and frustrate you.