politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The booby trap. Prime Ministers under the Fixed Term Parliamen

RobD said:

I'm not an expert in such matters, but I think a man is involved at some stage of the process.

The important point being "a man" was involved, not necessarily the husband.

SunnyJim said:

Noo said:

There's been a lot of talk about the SNP these last few days, so this is an opportune moment to consider a potential turn of events.

Say the Conservative & Unionist drop a "give us a majority and we leave without a deal, no referendum" manifesto, and the Liberal Demcrats drop a "give us a majority and we revoke, no referendum" manifesto.
If the SNP put "give us a majority in Scotland and we negotiate independence, no referendum" in their manifesto, how do the Conservative & Unionists and the Liberal Democrats counter it?
There is a real chance that the equivocation and doublespeak needed to say "our mandate will count but yours won't" will seriously weaken Tory and Lib Dem messaging.
I could see both the SNP and Labour doing quite well out of such a situation. Don't know whether it's a card the SNP are considering pulling out of their sleeve, but given the negative noises about an indyref2 (despite a Holyrood mandate), it could be seen as a necessary escalation on their part.

I don't know if there has ever been polling but I reckon there would be strong support in England for Scottish independence.

Personally I would love to see the back of them.

Pity the majority that like our money too much do not have the same views

malcolmg said:

SunnyJim said:

Noo said:

There's been a lot of talk about the SNP these last few days, so this is an opportune moment to consider a potential turn of events.

Say the Conservative & Unionist drop a "give us a majority and we leave without a deal, no referendum" manifesto, and the Liberal Demcrats drop a "give us a majority and we revoke, no referendum" manifesto.
If the SNP put "give us a majority in Scotland and we negotiate independence, no referendum" in their manifesto, how do the Conservative & Unionists and the Liberal Democrats counter it?
There is a real chance that the equivocation and doublespeak needed to say "our mandate will count but yours won't" will seriously weaken Tory and Lib Dem messaging.
I could see both the SNP and Labour doing quite well out of such a situation. Don't know whether it's a card the SNP are considering pulling out of their sleeve, but given the negative noises about an indyref2 (despite a Holyrood mandate), it could be seen as a necessary escalation on their part.

I don't know if there has ever been polling but I reckon there would be strong support in England for Scottish independence.

Personally I would love to see the back of them.

Pity the majority that like our money too much do not have the same views

Can you annex North of Tyne please?

HYUFD said:

Cooper got just 17% from Labour members in 2015 when she was near favourite to be next leader, why would Labour go back to her now? Labour is probably done as the main non Tory Party in the UK and infected by Corbynism now throughout, within a decade the LDs will probably have taken that role

It wasn't a prediction. Just a long shot bet in my book that I think is value.

If you want a prediction I'm happy to give one -

GE in 2020. Labour landslide. Corbyn PM for a decade. Brexit cancelled but forgotten very quickly in the national euphoria as hard left social democracy proves irresistibly attractive to all.

ydoethur said:

RobD said:

Chris said:

JohnO said:

He did have 4 children!

You mean his wife had four children, presumably?

I'm not an expert in such matters, but I think a man is involved at some stage of the process.

Indeed yes. His name was Bob Boothby.

It's thought the first two children were Macmillan's and he then developed some kind of dysfunction.

According to Wikipedia (I know) the common speculation that Boothby was the father of the third child has been disproved. Macmillan certainly went through a devastating depressive period in the 1930s. It was the war, particularly as Minister Resident in the ME, that made him.

Luckyguy1983 said:

Noo said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Noo said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

StuartDickson said:

SunnyJim said:

Noo said:

There's been a lot of talk about the SNP these last few days, so this is an opportune moment to consider a potential turn of events.

Say the Conservative & Unionist drop a "give us a majority and we leave without a deal, no referendum" manifesto, and the Liberal Demcrats drop a "give us a majority and we revoke, no referendum" manifesto.
If the SNP put "give us a majority in Scotland and we negotiate independence, no referendum" in their manifesto, how do the Conservative & Unionists and the Liberal Democrats counter it?
There is a real chance that the equivocation and doublespeak needed to say "our mandate will count but yours won't" will seriously weaken Tory and Lib Dem messaging.
I could see both the SNP and Labour doing quite well out of such a situation. Don't know whether it's a card the SNP are considering pulling out of their sleeve, but given the negative noises about an indyref2 (despite a Holyrood mandate), it could be seen as a necessary escalation on their part.

I don't know if there has ever been polling but I reckon there would be strong support in England for Scottish independence.

Personally I would love to see the back of them.

Yes, there has been such polling. You are far from alone.

And what percentage of English people want to "see the back of" the Scots? I'd quite like to see the back of nationalism as a creed, but I see no reason to encourage the Scots to take a decision that would be even worse for them and us than Brexit. Though if English nationalists cause no-deal I can see why the Scots will want independence within the EU, as how could things be much worse? I suspect there will be quite few English based "mock-Jocks" lining up for Scottish nationality, and who could blame them.

I think England is more nationalistic than Scotland.

Let's be serious now.

I'm deadly serious.

Yes, unfortunately your statement was risible.

Well, I went onto define and justify it, so you could argue against those points if you wanted to be taken seriously, but I don't think you do, so I won't.

Wulfrun_Phil said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Did I mention that I’d tipped this at 55?

https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/1178330140885032961?s=21

And note the reason given. Precisely my rationale.

Interesting that Peston is playing up the risk as seen by Remainers that if they don't act then Johnson could take us out on 31st October. But that means, ironically, that we could eventually get a deal because Remainers blink even when the EU are dismissive of the chances of Johnson leading us out.

You implied I was being discourteous for suggesting No Dealers were stupid.

To be honest I don't always know whether it's stupidity or outright dishonesty, but for God's sake, how stupid do you have to be to imply that anyone who doesn't embrace the insanity of No Deal is a "Remainer"?

HYUFD said:

kinabalu said:

HYUFD said:

Cooper got just 17% from Labour members in 2015 when she was near favourite to be next leader, why would Labour go back to her now? Labour is probably done as the main non Tory Party in the UK and infected by Corbynism now throughout, within a decade the LDs will probably have taken that role

It wasn't a prediction. Just a long shot bet in my book that I think is value.

If you want a prediction I'm happy to give one -

GE in 2020. Labour landslide. Corbyn PM for a decade. Brexit cancelled but forgotten very quickly in the national euphoria as hard left social democracy proves irresistibly attractive to all.

If you want my prediction -

GE in November Boris wins a historic 4th term for the Tories and a Tory majority of 30 to 40, Brexit delivered with the WA and NI only backstop passed through the Commons, LDs surge to 50 seats, Corbyn Labour collapse to under 200 seats.

Chuka Umunna then emerges as the new LD leader and next non Tory PM as Labour collapse to third under the leadership of Pidcock or Long-Bailey (who succeed the defeated Corbyn as Labour leader in 2020) at the next general election

You can keep calling it a “historic 4th term” if you want but it does not make it true.

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Noo said:

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Noo said:

JBriskinindyref2 said:

williamglenn said:

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Noo said:

spudgfsh said:

Noo said:

I think England is more nationalistic than Scotland.

ThSNIPut it appearing thuggish/racist. even then it's happened (labour MPs commenting on england flags anyone)

It's not the football thugs that's the problem. It's the unjustified stupidity of it all. England doesn't suffer from being part of a larger entity where is fails to get its way. It forms the vast majority of the UK, and in terms of the EU, the general centre-right choices of England fit quite nicely with the centrist way Europe has evolved. Certainly, English Conservatives have been instrumental in shaping the single market. England more often than not gets its way*.

Contrast that with Scotland. How much of your lifetime has been spent with a Tory PM in Downing Street? And in how many elections in the same period of time has Scotland voted Tory? There's a worrying gulf there, and I'm surprised it doesn't trouble more people in Scotland than it evidently does.

And yet, for all that, which country has decided to turn the table over? It baffles me, both that Scotland isn't more nationalistic and that England isn't less.

*nobody even think of quoting those "x% of EU laws were opposed by us!" from the referendum. They were all lies.

England is hardly nationalistic at all. It's one of the most multi-cultural places on earth. The BNP vote is tiny. cf. Scotland with a 95pc white population and a 40pc nationalist vote

Multi-culturalism isn't the opposite of nationalism. Just look at the US.

It's a leading indicator - The US is a special case because it uses the world's reserve currency

What on earth are you on about?

What? So you're allowed to write drivel but I can't? Two can play at that game.

I really meant that question. I do not understand what reserve currency has to do with anything.
You might find what I write drivel, I don't much care, but at least I do try to explain what I mean. That is, someone with a reading age of ten ought to be able to understand what I'm saying and either agree or, more likely, fling heavy objects at me because my opinions are so contemptible. But I just didn't understand your cryptic one-line teleportation into economics.

I'm watching Super Sunday now. I hope that's not too cryptic for you. Have a good one.

Slink away and lick your wounds

HYUFD said:

If you want my prediction -

GE in November Boris wins a historic 4th term for the Tories and a Tory majority of 30 to 40, Brexit delivered with the WA and NI only backstop passed through the Commons, LDs surge to 50 seats, Corbyn Labour collapse to under 200 seats.

Chuka Umunna then emerges as the new LD leader and next non Tory PM as Labour collapse to third under the leadership of Pidcock or Long-Bailey (who succeed the defeated Corbyn as Labour leader in 2020) at the next general election.

(Plus Corbyn is a hard left Socialist, hard left Social Democracy is a contradiction in terms and the LDs may be social democrats, Corbyn Labour certainly are not).

2021 next Labour Prime Minister born.

Jo Swinson quick out of the blocks:

https://twitter.com/joswinson/status/1178307516058537985?s=21

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

ydoethur said:

Here's an interesting statistic though. Since 1894 there have been 25 Prime Ministers. Scotland forming about 12% of the population of the UK, they would proportionately have had three of those, Wales one, and Northern Ireland one.

Just look however at the number who have been Scottish or of fairly recent Scottish descent (at least one parent from Scotland) whom I have marked with an asterisk:

The Earl of Rosebery*
Lord Salisbury
Arthur Balfour*
Henry Campbell-Bannerman*
Herbert Asquith
David Lloyd George (only Welshman)
A. Bonar Law* (also, confusingly, the only Northern Irishman and only Canadian)
Stanley Baldwin*
Ramsay Macdonald*
Neville Chamberlain
Winston Churchill
Clement Attlee
Anthony Eden
Harold Macmillan (counted as English although his grandfather was Scottish)
Earl of Home*
Harold Wilson
Edward Heath
James Callaghan
Margaret Thatcher
John Major
Tony Blair*
Gordon Brown*
David Cameron*
Theresa May
Boris Johnson

That's 10, or 40%, of PMs with close ties to Scotland. Far above the proportion you might expect and actually quite close to the number of English PMs (14).

If you're going to say Scotland forms 12% of the UK population, and ask whether they are over-represented among PMs, you have to compare like with like. You can't just say 40% have "close ties" if they aren't actually part of the 12%.

Looking at recent examples, Blair hadn't lived in Scotland for 25 years by the time he became PM, and indeed didn't even spend the majority of his childhood there (he was educated at Fettes - an independent school so not really indicative of your point about the education system).

Brown I'll give you - plainly a Scot and part of the 12%.

Cameron wasn't born in Scotland, brought up there, or educated there. He represented a constituency in the south of England. The only tenuous connection is via his father, who himself left Scotland at a relatively young age. To call him Scottish and compare him in some way with the 12% of the population who live in Scotland is just silly.

Think of it this way, in the period since 1945, if someone said "You know the PM?" and you said, "The Scot? Yes, I know them", they'd look at you as if you were an idiot unless it was 1963-4 or 2007-10 (i.e. six years out of 74).

Exactly pure bollox from Ydoethur, just because they went to Scotland once or had a cousin twice removed lived there does not make them Scottish. Usual unionist bollox propaganda.

ydoethur said:

Chris said:

I am sure you're right that a man would have been involved.

I was talking about this earlier this week in the context of Richard Earl of Cambridge. Born ten years after his two siblings and after his mother and her husband had drifted apart. Not left any land by his 'father' or older brother, taken as a sign that he was really a bastard fathered by the Earl of Huntingdon. He became resentful of his poverty, then foolishly in 1415 rebelled against Henry V and was executed.

Yet his grandson went on to become King, partly claiming a descent from Edward III in the male line. And his descendants sit on the throne - so far as we can tell - to this day.

Confusing old world sometimes.

The body of Richard III was - apparently - identified by mitochondrial DNA, which of course is passed along the maternal line. The comparison based on the Y chromosome - passed along the male line - didn't work. Somewhere along the pedigree "a bitch got over the wall."

AlastairMeeks said:

Jo Swinson quick out of the blocks:

https://twitter.com/joswinson/status/1178307516058537985?s=21

A very stupid comment from Hancock. Asking to be corrected.

HYUFD said:

Chris said:

HYUFD said:

kinabalu said:

HYUFD said:

Cooper got just 17% from Labour members in 2015 when she was near favourite to be next leader, why would Labour go back to her now? Labour is probably done as the main non Tory Party in the UK and infected by Corbynism now throughout, within a decade the LDs will probably have taken that role

It wasn't a prediction. Just a long shot bet in my book that I think is value.

If you want a prediction I'm happy to give one -

GE in 2020. Labour landslide. Corbyn PM for a decade. Brexit cancelled but forgotten very quickly in the national euphoria as hard left social democracy proves irresistibly attractive to all.

If you want my prediction -

GE in November Boris wins a historic 4th term for the Tories and a Tory majority of 30 to 40, Brexit delivered with the WA and NI only backstop passed through the Commons, LDs surge to 50 seats, Corbyn Labour collapse to under 200 seats.

Chuka Umunna then emerges as the new LD leader and next non Tory PM as Labour collapse to third under the leadership of Pidcock or Long-Bailey (who succeed the defeated Corbyn as Labour leader in 2020) at the next general election

We'll file that for future reference, along with your prediction of Boris Johnson achieving a deal, approved by a Northern Ireland referendum, by 31 October.

Do and I have always said it will take a Tory majority for Boris to get his deal through (with confirmatory NI referendum too if needed)

Lovely. It's just that according to you it was all going to have happened by now. Or did I misunderstand?

HYUFD said:

SunnyJim said:

HYUFD said:

If you want my prediction -

GE in November Boris wins a historic 4th term for the Tories and a Tory majority of 30 to 40, Brexit delivered with the WA and NI only backstop passed through the Commons, LDs surge to 50 seats, Corbyn Labour collapse to under 200 seats.

Chuka Umunna then emerges as the new LD leader and next non Tory PM as Labour collapse to third under the leadership of Pidcock or Long-Bailey (who succeed the defeated Corbyn as Labour leader in 2020) at the next general election.

(Plus Corbyn is a hard left Socialist, hard left Social Democracy is a contradiction in terms and the LDs may be social democrats, Corbyn Labour certainly are not).

2021 next Labour Prime Minister born.

Next Labour Deputy PM maybe, I think I may never see another Labour PM again in my lifetime as a result of Corbyn

Don't underestimate the ability of the Labour Party to regenerate itself as a more centrist movement. who in 1983 would have thought that Kinnock would have come close in 1992 or how well Blair did in 1997. once the hard left have lost a couple of elections it will swing back towards the centre.

The other thing to remember that the policies of Corbyn and McDonnell are actually quite popular among the young but the messengers are not. If they can get a leader with some charisma then they have a chance of winning.

AlastairMeeks said:

HYUFD said:

SunnyJim said:

HYUFD said:

If you want my prediction -

GE in November Boris wins a historic 4th term for the Tories and a Tory majority of 30 to 40, Brexit delivered with the WA and NI only backstop passed through the Commons, LDs surge to 50 seats, Corbyn Labour collapse to under 200 seats.

Chuka Umunna then emerges as the new LD leader and next non Tory PM as Labour collapse to third under the leadership of Pidcock or Long-Bailey (who succeed the defeated Corbyn as Labour leader in 2020) at the next general election.

(Plus Corbyn is a hard left Socialist, hard left Social Democracy is a contradiction in terms and the LDs may be social democrats, Corbyn Labour certainly are not).

2021 next Labour Prime Minister born.

Next Labour Deputy PM maybe, I think I may never see another Labour PM again in my lifetime as a result of Corbyn

You might see one before the week is out.

The LDs will veto Corbyn and Beckett as PM would just split Labour in 2 even further

spudgfsh said:

Noo said:

spudgfsh said:

Noo said:

spudgfsh said:

Noo said:

I should clarify that a great number of people in England aren't necessarily English nationalists. Many are British nationalists.

15 to 20 years ago that was probably true and I would have agreed with it. the rise of the SNP and the indyref has changed that. The concept of Britishness for a long time was equivalent to Englishness but it's not true anymore. Britishness as an identity is dying out. The younger generation is more likely to consider themselves European than British

I agree with you that Britishness is in a squeeze between English/Scottish/Welshness and Europeanness.
A few years ago I would have unthinkingly identified as British, but that's not nationalism, that's just identity. It's only when you apply your identity to your beliefs in the governing unit in which you'd like to live that it becomes nationalism. So people can be pro-Europe and identify very strongly as British and that's not nationalism. Conversely you can "feel" European but decide on balance that Britain should be out of the EU. That /is/ nationalism.

Indeed, but without an identity binding the country together the UK will break up over the longer term.

Is that a bad thing?

No, we are clearly going in different directions

Also, from the English point of view there is the perception, regardless of how true it actually is, that we are subsidising the Scots / Welsh / NI through the Barnett formula to the detriment to our own less well off regions.

I grew up in Norfolk which has consistently been at the bottom of the pile when it comes to funding (and East Anglia as a whole) and it's infuriating that Scotland can have 'Free this', 'Free that' and 'free the other' when we can't get a decent road connection to the midlands.

LOL, unionist tactic number 1 , get the plebs to be against each other and we can keep milking them. You morons voted for them and get what you deserve, we have never voted for them but have to suck it up.

Your daily reminder that Corbyn doesn't have the numbers........

ydoethur said:

Chris said:

ydoethur said:

Chris said:

I am sure you're right that a man would have been involved.

I was talking about this earlier this week in the context of Richard Earl of Cambridge. Born ten years after his two siblings and after his mother and her husband had drifted apart. Not left any land by his 'father' or older brother, taken as a sign that he was really a bastard fathered by the Earl of Huntingdon. He became resentful of his poverty, then foolishly in 1415 rebelled against Henry V and was executed.

Yet his grandson went on to become King, partly claiming a descent from Edward III in the male line. And his descendants sit on the throne - so far as we can tell - to this day.

Confusing old world sometimes.

The body of Richard III was - apparently - identified by mitochondrial DNA, which of course is passed along the maternal line. The comparison based on the Y chromosome - passed along the male line - didn't work. Somewhere along the pedigree "a bitch got over the wall."

In fact it's probably more complicated than that. I don't think any serious scholar believes Richard Earl of Cambridge was the son of Edmund Duke of York. So that accounts for the break on its own. But that doesn't mean there are not further breaks elsewhere as well. In fact, there almost certainly are, and I seem to recall the tests showed a false paternity event among the Somerset family even apart from this.

I didn't mean to imply that exactly one bitch got over the wall.

Alistair said:

But IMPeachMent Will just s0l1dify his base

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1178341257082527745?s=19

His base is 40%....

malcolmg said:

spudgfsh said:

No, we are clearly going in different directions

Also, from the English point of view there is the perception, regardless of how true it actually is, that we are subsidising the Scots / Welsh / NI through the Barnett formula to the detriment to our own less well off regions.

I grew up in Norfolk which has consistently been at the bottom of the pile when it comes to funding (and East Anglia as a whole) and it's infuriating that Scotland can have 'Free this', 'Free that' and 'free the other' when we can't get a decent road connection to the midlands.

LOL, unionist tactic number 1 , get the plebs to be against each other and we can keep milking them. You morons voted for them and get what you deserve, we have never voted for them but have to suck it up.

As I said, we are going in different directions. I never said that our direction was strictly the correct one. Scotland had it's chance to leave (and will probably get another sometime soon).

HYUFD said:

Chris said:

HYUFD said:

Chris said:

HYUFD said:

kinabalu said:

HYUFD said:

Cooper got just 17% from Labour members in 2015 when she was near favourite to be next leader, why would Labour go back to her now? Labour is probably done as the main non Tory Party in the UK and infected by Corbynism now throughout, within a decade the LDs will probably have taken that role

It wasn't a prediction. Just a long shot bet in my book that I think is value.

If you want a prediction I'm happy to give one -

GE in 2020. Labour landslide. Corbyn PM for a decade. Brexit cancelled but forgotten very quickly in the national euphoria as hard left social democracy proves irresistibly attractive to all.

If you want my prediction -

GE in November Boris wins a historic 4th term for the Tories and a Tory majority of 30 to 40, Brexit delivered with the WA and NI only backstop passed through the Commons, LDs surge to 50 seats, Corbyn Labour collapse to under 200 seats.

Chuka Umunna then emerges as the new LD leader and next non Tory PM as Labour collapse to third under the leadership of Pidcock or Long-Bailey (who succeed the defeated Corbyn as Labour leader in 2020) at the next general election

We'll file that for future reference, along with your prediction of Boris Johnson achieving a deal, approved by a Northern Ireland referendum, by 31 October.

Do and I have always said it will take a Tory majority for Boris to get his deal through (with confirmatory NI referendum too if needed)

Lovely. It's just that according to you it was all going to have happened by now. Or did I misunderstand?

You misunderstood

Well, I did ask you over and over again how the negotiations, the referendum and the general election could all possibly fit in before 31 October.

If you really don't remember my asking you that, over and over again, I would urge you to seek medical help. I really would.

Anabobazina said:

MarqueeMark said:

Danny565 said:

I've always liked Ma Beckett -- she feels like the best of Labour in that she has some principles and doesn't just cave in on any policy when the right-wing press starts screaming, but also still has some commonsense and knows where to draw the line. Basically, she's Ed Miliband with more backbone/worldliness.

If she does become caretaker PM, personally I think she might be surprisingly popular.

If she gets the gig, then nominting Corbyn will look like the ultimate example of playing the long game.....

MarqueeMark said:

Danny565 said:

I've always liked Ma Beckett -- she feels like the best of Labour in that she has some principles and doesn't just cave in on any policy when the right-wing press starts screaming, but also still has some commonsense and knows where to draw the line. Basically, she's Ed Miliband with more backbone/worldliness.

If she does become caretaker PM, personally I think she might be surprisingly popular.

If she gets the gig, then nominting Corbyn will look like the ultimate example of playing the long game.....

Ha! That’s excellent. 👏

The screenwriter of Brexit: The Uncivil War 2 must be praying for this.

rottenborough said:

Northstar said:

MarqueeMark said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

Andy_JS said:

The Sunday Times reports that internal Labour polling is predicting 100 seat losses. It says Labour has lost a third of its 2017 vote to the LDs and another 10% to the Brexit Party.

So if it's internal polling, why is it appearing?
1. A deliberate leak, in which case there may not even be such polling, motivated maybe by expectations management to allow Jeremy to emerge triumphant when the loss is limited to 30 or so seats, or to keep MPs onside as he chooses not to VONC (although I can't see why Corbyn would need to), or if not what else?
2. It's a genuine leak, for whatever motive, and the polling exists.

Regardless, it's fairly consistent with some but not all published polls.

Labour's determination not to have an election might give you a steer.......

Times is saying Laura Pidcock vs Rebecca Long-Bailey for Corbyn's successor - any tips on who’d win that particular match-up?

Oh, for the love of God...

Well Labour could do much worse than Rebecca. She’s a smart, impeccably presented, self-made northern lady. She is by no means the finished article but she’s of the left but with the ability to reach out to moderates.

Pidcock is a ranting trot.

Ergo, it will be Pidders!

An Isabel Oakeshott tweet that’s actually worth taking note of:

https://twitter.com/isabeloakeshott/status/1178368722651815937?s=21

spudgfsh said:

malcolmg said:

spudgfsh said:

No, we are clearly going in different directions

Also, from the English point of view there is the perception, regardless of how true it actually is, that we are subsidising the Scots / Welsh / NI through the Barnett formula to the detriment to our own less well off regions.

I grew up in Norfolk which has consistently been at the bottom of the pile when it comes to funding (and East Anglia as a whole) and it's infuriating that Scotland can have 'Free this', 'Free that' and 'free the other' when we can't get a decent road connection to the midlands.

LOL, unionist tactic number 1 , get the plebs to be against each other and we can keep milking them. You morons voted for them and get what you deserve, we have never voted for them but have to suck it up.

As I said, we are going in different directions. I never said that our direction was strictly the correct one. Scotland had it's chance to leave (and will probably get another sometime soon).

Still don't understand why England votes in these arseholes either though.

AlastairMeeks said:

An Isabel Oakeshott tweet that’s actually worth taking note of:

https://twitter.com/isabeloakeshott/status/1178368722651815937?s=21

A vanishingly rare specimen Alastair!

spudgfsh said:

HYUFD said:

spudgfsh said:

HYUFD said:

SunnyJim said:

HYUFD said:

If you want my prediction -

GE in November Boris wins a historic 4th term for the Tories and a Tory majority of 30 to 40, Brexit delivered with the WA and NI only backstop passed through the Commons, LDs surge to 50 seats, Corbyn Labour collapse to under 200 seats.

Chuka Umunna then emerges as the new LD leader and next non Tory PM as Labour collapse to third under the leadership of Pidcock or Long-Bailey (who succeed the defeated Corbyn as Labour leader in 2020) at the next general election.

(Plus Corbyn is a hard left Socialist, hard left Social Democracy is a contradiction in terms and the LDs may be social democrats, Corbyn Labour certainly are not).

2021 next Labour Prime Minister born.

Next Labour Deputy PM maybe, I think I may never see another Labour PM again in my lifetime as a result of Corbyn

Don't underestimate the ability of the Labour Party to regenerate itself as a more centrist movement. who in 1983 would have thought that Kinnock would have come close in 1992 or how well Blair did in 1997. once the hard left have lost a couple of elections it will swing back towards the centre.

The other thing to remember that the policies of Corbyn and McDonnell are actually quite popular among the young but the messengers are not. If they can get a leader with some charisma then they have a chance of winning.

Had Benn beaten Healey as Labour Deputy Leader in 1981 the SDP-Liberal Alliance may well have beaten Foot's Labour in 1983 (it ended up SDP 25% Foot's Labour 27%), Corbyn and McDonnell have given the LDs a second chance to replace Labour as the main non Tory Party and this time they will probably take it

but labour have 500000 members... seriously though I think that the unions would have to stop supporting Labour for it to happen long term. I can see it happening in a single election though

Good point about the Unions, quite a lot of cash there.
Wasn't there some talk about some businessmen going to back a new Centre Party with millions - I wonder if any are now backing Jo Swinson.

nunuone said:

Alistair said:

But IMPeachMent Will just s0l1dify his base

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1178341257082527745?s=19

His base is 40%....

No it is the 46% he got in 2016

spudgfsh said:

HYUFD said:

spudgfsh said:

HYUFD said:

SunnyJim said:

HYUFD said:

If you want my prediction -

GE in November Boris wins a historic 4th term for the Tories and a Tory majority of 30 to 40, Brexit delivered with the WA and NI only backstop passed through the Commons, LDs surge to 50 seats, Corbyn Labour collapse to under 200 seats.

Chuka Umunna then emerges as the new LD leader and next non Tory PM as Labour collapse to third under the leadership of Pidcock or Long-Bailey (who succeed the defeated Corbyn as Labour leader in 2020) at the next general election.

(Plus Corbyn is a hard left Socialist, hard left Social Democracy is a contradiction in terms and the LDs may be social democrats, Corbyn Labour certainly are not).

2021 next Labour Prime Minister born.

Next Labour Deputy PM maybe, I think I may never see another Labour PM again in my lifetime as a result of Corbyn

Don't underestimate the ability of the Labour Party to regenerate itself as a more centrist movement. who in 1983 would have thought that Kinnock would have come close in 1992 or how well Blair did in 1997. once the hard left have lost a couple of elections it will swing back towards the centre.

The other thing to remember that the policies of Corbyn and McDonnell are actually quite popular among the young but the messengers are not. If they can get a leader with some charisma then they have a chance of winning.

Had Benn beaten Healey as Labour Deputy Leader in 1981 the SDP-Liberal Alliance may well have beaten Foot's Labour in 1983 (it ended up SDP 25% Foot's Labour 27%), Corbyn and McDonnell have given the LDs a second chance to replace Labour as the main non Tory Party and this time they will probably take it

but labour have 500000 members... seriously though I think that the unions would have to stop supporting Labour for it to happen long term. I can see it happening in a single election though

The Unions are a pale shadow of their former selves, already at least one poll this month has had the LDs ahead of Labour

Noo said:

HYUFD said:

SunnyJim said:

HYUFD said:

If you want my prediction -

GE in November Boris wins a historic 4th term for the Tories and a Tory majority of 30 to 40, Brexit delivered with the WA and NI only backstop passed through the Commons, LDs surge to 50 seats, Corbyn Labour collapse to under 200 seats.

Chuka Umunna then emerges as the new LD leader and next non Tory PM as Labour collapse to third under the leadership of Pidcock or Long-Bailey (who succeed the defeated Corbyn as Labour leader in 2020) at the next general election.

(Plus Corbyn is a hard left Socialist, hard left Social Democracy is a contradiction in terms and the LDs may be social democrats, Corbyn Labour certainly are not).

2021 next Labour Prime Minister born.

Next Labour Deputy PM maybe, I think I may never see another Labour PM again in my lifetime as a result of Corbyn

Some people who need life-saving medication mightn't see another PM at all in their lifetimes, if we leave without a deal in a month.

Boris may get the record as shortest serving PM, only to lose it immediately to Mrs Beckett or Ken Clarke.
So, 2nd shortest serving PM - couldn't even do that right.

HYUFD said:

nunuone said:

Alistair said:

But IMPeachMent Will just s0l1dify his base

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1178341257082527745?s=19

His base is 40%....

No it is the 46% he got in 2016

That's not what "base" means.

Danny565 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Matt showing the teeniest bit of spine.

https://twitter.com/krishgm/status/1178352597222211584?s=20

Surely "I believe my boss is a sex pest, but I'm going to carry on working for him anyway" is if anything even more spineless than just fingers-in-ears denial?

I yield to know one in my opinion of Matt H. being a self serving little creep, but he could have gone down the know nothing, no comment route (& I'm slightly surprised he didn't).

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

AlastairMeeks said:

An Isabel Oakeshott tweet that’s actually worth taking note of:

https://twitter.com/isabeloakeshott/status/1178368722651815937?s=21

A woman problem aye

This is news to nobody that Boris likes women, his supporters do not care just as Trump's did not care

Trump doesn't like women. He likes assaulting women. Which is the opposite of liking women.

HYUFD said:

nunuone said:

Alistair said:

But IMPeachMent Will just s0l1dify his base

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1178341257082527745?s=19

His base is 40%....

No it is the 46% he got in 2016

46% is Trump's ceiling, not his base.

HYUFD said:

spudgfsh said:

but labour have 500000 members... seriously though I think that the unions would have to stop supporting Labour for it to happen long term. I can see it happening in a single election though

The Unions are a pale shadow of their former selves, already at least one poll this month has had the LDs ahead of Labour

That is with as much because of Corbyn than Labour as a brand though

kinabalu said:

@HYUFD

Hard Left Social Democracy is a mixed but mainly market economy with high tax & spend, strong regs, benignly active state, no trident, egalitarian social and educational policy, generally woke, anti US until they see sense and ditch Trump.

No contradiction in terms there.

No that is hard left socialism and Corbyn and McDonnell want a nationalised state dominated economy as the end goal and to defeat capitalism in McDonnell's own words, not even a mixed economy

Alistair said:

But IMPeachMent Will just s0l1dify his base

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1178341257082527745?s=19

It's quite a sticky problem for the Democrats, and particularly Nancy Pelosi, because there's more than positioning for 2020 at stake.

I think Nancy Pelosi has essentially decided impeachment talk does indeed risk solidify Trump's base.

BUT he's not really given them an option. The prima facie case for impeachment is strong and necessitates an inquiry. Even on what the White House has admitted, it's extremely smelly. And they've every reason to try to admit as little as possible - indeed, there are all the signs of a cover up.

If you let it go, you may well still lose in 2020, and you've got another five years of Trump stretching legality and the constitution to and perhaps beyond breaking point. You almost have to look into it to get the White House as a whole (not Trump himself - he's beyond caring) to exercise caution, restraining the Orange One as far as they can.

It's also a constitutional responsibility of Congress to act as a check in this way, whether or not it yields electoral gain (and I think Pelosi is sceptical it will). That's often overlooked. An interesting aspect of the UK Supreme Court ruling which hasn't really cut through, and probably doesn't matter too much electorally, is just that. The most damning part of the judgment was that the PM has constitutional responsibilities (to the monarch and others) transcending electoral considerations and his role as party leader, and that these were simply ignored. So it is in the US - there need to be people saying, "I'm a Congressman and, regardless of electoral consequence, my job is to investigate apparent illegality on the part of the Executive".

HYUFD said:

kinabalu said:

@HYUFD

Hard Left Social Democracy is a mixed but mainly market economy with high tax & spend, strong regs, benignly active state, no trident, egalitarian social and educational policy, generally woke, anti US until they see sense and ditch Trump.

No contradiction in terms there.

No that is hard left socialism

You can add "socialism" to the list of things you don't understand.
- like
- base
- socialism
It's not going well for you this evening, is it?

Foxy said:

HYUFD said:

nunuone said:

Alistair said:

But IMPeachMent Will just s0l1dify his base

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1178341257082527745?s=19

His base is 40%....

No it is the 46% he got in 2016

46% is Trump's ceiling, not his base.

Emerson College poll from July

Trump 51% Warren 49%

http://emersonpolling.com/2019/07/08/july-national-poll-biden-extends-lead-in-democratic-primary-trump-closes-the-gap-in-the-general-election/

HYUFD said:

Foxy said:

HYUFD said:

nunuone said:

Alistair said:

But IMPeachMent Will just s0l1dify his base

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1178341257082527745?s=19

His base is 40%....

No it is the 46% he got in 2016

46% is Trump's ceiling, not his base.

Emerson College poll from July

Trump 51% Warren 49%

http://emersonpolling.com/2019/07/08/july-national-poll-biden-extends-lead-in-democratic-primary-trump-closes-the-gap-in-the-general-election/

It is now the end of September.

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

Alistair said:

But IMPeachMent Will just s0l1dify his base

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1178341257082527745?s=19

It's quite a sticky problem for the Democrats, and particularly Nancy Pelosi, because there's more than positioning for 2020 at stake.

I think Nancy Pelosi has essentially decided impeachment talk does indeed risk solidify Trump's base.

BUT he's not really given them an option. The prima facie case for impeachment is strong and necessitates an inquiry. Even on what the White House has admitted, it's extremely smelly. And they've every reason to try to admit as little as possible - indeed, there are all the signs of a cover up.

If you let it go, you may well still lose in 2020, and you've got another five years of Trump stretching legality and the constitution to and perhaps beyond breaking point. You almost have to look into it to get the White House as a whole (not Trump himself - he's beyond caring) to exercise caution, restraining the Orange One as far as they can.

It's also a constitutional responsibility of Congress to act as a check in this way, whether or not it yields electoral gain (and I think Pelosi is sceptical it will). That's often overlooked. An interesting aspect of the UK Supreme Court ruling which hasn't really cut through, and probably doesn't matter too much electorally, is just that. The most damning part of the judgment was that the PM has constitutional responsibilities (to the monarch and others) transcending electoral considerations and his role as party leader, and that these were simply ignored. So it is in the US - there need to be people saying, "I'm a Congressman and, regardless of electoral consequence, my job is to investigate apparent illegality on the part of the Executive".

Very good post.
It would be a total abrogation of their duty if congress didn't investigate.

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Foxy said:

HYUFD said:

nunuone said:

Alistair said:

But IMPeachMent Will just s0l1dify his base

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1178341257082527745?s=19

His base is 40%....

No it is the 46% he got in 2016

46% is Trump's ceiling, not his base.

Emerson College poll from July

Trump 51% Warren 49%

http://emersonpolling.com/2019/07/08/july-national-poll-biden-extends-lead-in-democratic-primary-trump-closes-the-gap-in-the-general-election/

It is now the end of September.

So, 51% is still a higher ceiling than 46%

Noo said:

nunuone said:

Alistair said:

But IMPeachMent Will just s0l1dify his base

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1178341257082527745?s=19

His base is 40%....

"Just 28% say Trump's actions were proper"

I think the dangerous bit is that there are 10-15% of (traditional conservative middle class) voters who are intellectually capable of discerning that his actions were improper but are not inhibited by this fact to nevertheless vote for him.

AlastairMeeks said:

Meanwhile, BoristheSpidergate is not going away:

https://twitter.com/samcoatessky/status/1178372335784615936?s=21

We had all this in the leadership campaign, Tories and Leavers just do not care, this is just another attempt to distract and try and prevent Brexit being delivered and stop Boris

AlastairMeeks said:

Meanwhile, BoristheSpidergate is not going away:

https://twitter.com/samcoatessky/status/1178372335784615936?s=21

What actually comes of it other than entrenchment of peoples views? It's not like proof of a thigh grope 20 years ago is in any way possible. She says he did he says he didn't. Nothing therefore can come of the story

HYUFD said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Meanwhile, BoristheSpidergate is not going away:

https://twitter.com/samcoatessky/status/1178372335784615936?s=21

We had all this in the leadership campaign, Tories and Leavers just do not care, this is just another attempt to distract and try and prevent Brexit being delivered and stop Boris

Doesn’t that say something about them? Are you really saying that Tories and Leavers do not care about sexual assault?

Noo said:

dyedwoolie said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

Alistair said:

But IMPeachMent Will just s0l1dify his base

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1178341257082527745?s=19

It's quite a sticky problem for the Democrats, and particularly Nancy Pelosi, because there's more than positioning for 2020 at stake.

I think Nancy Pelosi has essentially decided impeachment talk does indeed risk solidify Trump's base.

BUT he's not really given them an option. The prima facie case for impeachment is strong and necessitates an inquiry. Even on what the White House has admitted, it's extremely smelly. And they've every reason to try to admit as little as possible - indeed, there are all the signs of a cover up.

If you let it go, you may well still lose in 2020, and you've got another five years of Trump stretching legality and the constitution to and perhaps beyond breaking point. You almost have to look into it to get the White House as a whole (not Trump himself - he's beyond caring) to exercise caution, restraining the Orange One as far as they can.

It's also a constitutional responsibility of Congress to act as a check in this way, whether or not it yields electoral gain (and I think Pelosi is sceptical it will). That's often overlooked. An interesting aspect of the UK Supreme Court ruling which hasn't really cut through, and probably doesn't matter too much electorally, is just that. The most damning part of the judgment was that the PM has constitutional responsibilities (to the monarch and others) transcending electoral considerations and his role as party leader, and that these were simply ignored. So it is in the US - there need to be people saying, "I'm a Congressman and, regardless of electoral consequence, my job is to investigate apparent illegality on the part of the Executive".

I'm not sure the cover up angle will last. Susan Rice has admitted Obama's calls often went on the same secret server as Trumps in the whistleblower complaint and lets not forget that begins with the line 'I was not personally witness to most of the events'
This damages Biden and impeachment doesn't get past the Senate.
Then 'witchhunt' gathers momentum with the base and right leaners

It doesn't matter too much whether they think the senate will convict. Congress has a duty here, and it'll throw sunlight on the administration. That in itself will have a disinfecting effect.

True. It will also sink Biden and his son