On topic, in a seat that voted for Remain and where the local MP will undoubtedly have some personal vote, you'd have thought Dominic Grieve stands a very good chance. Some value in the 5/6 on him, I think.
I don't think it's nearly enough. He'd have a chance in a by-election but I'm on the Tories here at 5-6 now 4-6.
A lot depends on whether the election turns out to be all about Brexit or not - a curious feature of the debate is that nearly everyone
Grieve's trump card might be that everyone claims to want independent-minded, principled MPs, and whatever one thinks of his views, he fits that model. Do most voters really prefer that to the party they usually vote for, though? Party allegiances are fading fast, but habits are hard to break. I know a local voter who always supports the Tories but hates Brexit, despises Boris and doesn't think much of the MP (Jeremy Hunt). I asked her if she was thinking of voting LibDem in view of that. It was a new thought for her - "I suppose I even might". I wasn't totally convinced that she actually will.
I had a very similar conversation with my mum (a lifelong Conservative) over the weekend. My elder sister is apparently going to vote Lib Dem, much to my mum's bemusement. I misheard and thought she was saying that she was going to vote Lib Dem herself. I was soon corrected.
I think my mum is going to abstain next time round. She did in the Euros and the Conservatives don't seem to be an option for her at the moment.
NB having been a firm Leaver at the time of the referendum, she would now definitely vote Remain if there is a fresh referendum.
On the subject of party loyalties, my family on my wife's side are staunch REMAINERS. Absolutely staunch. But they are also Labour (being in Bootle). My wife is more fence sitting and usually votes Labour but not always. She's determined to vote LD at any upcoming election to stop Brexit. She spoke to her own mum and dad about it, both of whom hate Brexit too, and tried to convince them they really had to think again about Labour.
They told her that the name on the ballot paper could be 'Adolf Hitler - Labour Party Candidate'[1] and they would still vote Labour. Nothing, absolutely NOTHING will convince them to vote anything other than Labour.
[1] With apologies to Godwin's law.... and Ken Livingstone.
lol - the Ken Livingstone remark made me laugh!
My family used to vote Tory but like me will probably vote LD (They will only vote LD, I might vote Labour to ensure the Tories don't beat my local Labour MP who is anti-Brexit).
I agree , the case though has forced the government to give undertakings and importantly not to frustrate the Benn Act .
This is key . If Bozo doesn’t honour what the government QC has provided in terms of written undertakings then he’s in serious trouble with the courts .
Very interesting point, thanks. That it's flushed him and Mr Cummings out of the undergrowth.
My thinking is that, assuming he is still leader of the Conservatives, the next election will reduce down to the question of: for Boris, or against him?
This maps strongly onto the Brexit vote, but it's about more than Brexit.
I think Grieve picks up lots of tactical votes on an anti-Boris ticket, but it won't be enough.
Wouldn't that become for BJ or JC? A straight choice.
That depends on myriad factors - how strongly/weakly the Lib Dems poll in the run-up to the start of the official campaign, whether there's a caretaker PM, whether that caretaker is Corbyn, etc.
Even if Corbyn is seen as the alternative PM-in-waiting I still think that the election will be dominated by Boris. He's a Trump-like figure in the sense that he sucks attention away from anything else.
The Scottish judgement seems very sensible. They aren't going to take preemptive action to prevent a hypothetical. But the wording of the judgement couldn't be clearer they will act if the promises to the court aren't kept. This case was privately funded not crowdfunded but the judgement seems a reasonable return on investment given what was conceeded during the hearing and the way the judgement expects the promises to be kept.
Con hold. Grieve will get under 30%. Then he can be an outraged constitutional commentator when the new government passes acts to prevent backbenchers seizing control of the order paper in future and the commons is put in a strait jacket
If the Greens stand a candidate I think it will be low 30s at best for Grieve. If they don't I think Grieve is looking at high 30s. Still not enough though.
I think the Greens would have difficulties with the idea of standing down in favour of Grieve. That is, standing down a candidate in favour of someone who until Brexit came along was as true blue a nailed on Tory as you can get and whom they had stood against in the last three elections. That's in addition to the passivity of just following unilateral leads of the Libs, which I think will grate a bit. I might be wrong.
As for the Brexit Party, they may not stand. They have pledged not to stand against Tories who voted consistently against the WA. That is of indirect relevant as the BXP will be well aware that the local Tory party were going through the process of pushing Grieve through the door even before Johnson took over on account of his views on Brexit, so presumably they will be more content with his replacement.
Yeah, well, I'm happy to do my own research when I have a hunch there's good evidence out there, but I don't. So it's natural to reach out to those who are so confident in their opinions to signpost it. You know, the trailblazers who have obviously gotten their research in before me. The bonus is, on the off chance that they are merely just lazy shysters talking rubbish, everyone else gets to see that their confident assertions are actually hollow.
1. I don't have at my fingertips the detail of what has been discussed about Brexit and GE2017 over the last 27 months. 2. I have hazy recollections of the above. 3. I will not spend the time to summarise the research for you. 4. A brief Google shows that it is there if you are interested. 5. You have airy assertions to contest my hazy recollections. 6. I have sufficient confidence in my hazy recollections not to revisit them unless presented with something more convincing than your airy assertion.
On the subject of Beaconsfield, I'm going for Conservative Hold:
1. The 51% Remain is a red herring. Now, if it was Richmond Park or Hampstead, or somewhere with a really, really strong Remain vote it would be one thing: but 51% Remain? That's nothing.
2. Does Dominic Grieve really have some massive personal vote? I'm sure he's locally reasonably popular and all, but the vast bulk of 65.3% of the constituency who voted for him did so because of the colour of his rosette.
3. To win this seat, Grieve would need to have a fantastic local organisation that could persuade 40% of Conservatives, 100% of LibDems and the majority of Labour voters to go for him. That's a big, big ask. More likely, Labour supporters will hope that Grieve standing will let them in. (It won't.)
Con hold. Grieve will get under 30%. Then he can be an outraged constitutional commentator when the new government passes acts to prevent backbenchers seizing control of the order paper in future and the commons is put in a strait jacket
If the Greens stand a candidate I think it will be low 30s at best for Grieve. If they don't I think Grieve is looking at high 30s. Still not enough though.
I think the Greens would have difficulties with the idea of standing down in favour of Grieve. That is, standing down a candidate in favour of someone who until Brexit came along was as true blue a nailed on Tory as you can get and whom they had stood against in the last three elections. That's in addition to the passivity of just following unilateral leads of the Libs, which I think will grate a bit. I might be wrong.
As for the Brexit Party, they may not stand. They have pledged not to stand against Tories who voted consistently against the WA. That is of indirect relevant as the BXP will be well aware that the local Tory party were going through the process of pushing Grieve through the door even before Johnson took over on account of his views on Brexit, so presumably they will be more content with his replacement.
Won't be surprised if a Liberal Party candidate stands, just for the shitz n gigglez....
On the subject of party loyalties, my family on my wife's side are staunch REMAINERS. Absolutely staunch. But they are also Labour (being in Bootle). My wife is more fence sitting and usually votes Labour but not always. She's determined to vote LD at any upcoming election to stop Brexit. She spoke to her own mum and dad about it, both of whom hate Brexit too, and tried to convince them they really had to think again about Labour.
They told her that the name on the ballot paper could be 'Adolf Hitler - Labour Party Candidate'[1] and they would still vote Labour. Nothing, absolutely NOTHING will convince them to vote anything other than Labour.
[1] With apologies to Godwin's law.... and Ken Livingstone.
lol - the Ken Livingstone remark made me laugh!
My family used to vote Tory but like me will probably vote LD (They will only vote LD, I might vote Labour to ensure the Tories don't beat my local Labour MP who is anti-Brexit).
It's quite an eye-opener here in Bootle, to see the levels of tribal loyalty. Speaking to my wife's friend in 2015, I asked some general policy questions before the election. "Immigrants are all scum, stealing our jobs. Benefit cheats should be rounded up and shot. Bring back hanging for dirty criminals" etc etc.
I casually asked, "So you'll be voting..... UKIP? Conservative?"
She looked at me like I needed to be committed before she roared "LABOUR! I'm voting LABOUR!"
It's both hilarious and tragic. It reminds me of the John Bird and John Fortune sketch just prior to 1997 election, about how the election is really decided by a handful of voters in a handful of seats. Excepting Southport, I would expect every seat in Merseyside to stay Labour, and safe Labour at the next GE.
Con hold. Grieve will get under 30%. Then he can be an outraged constitutional commentator when the new government passes acts to prevent backbenchers seizing control of the order paper in future and the commons is put in a strait jacket
If the Greens stand a candidate I think it will be low 30s at best for Grieve. If they don't I think Grieve is looking at high 30s. Still not enough though.
I think the Greens would have difficulties with the idea of standing down in favour of Grieve. That is, standing down a candidate in favour of someone who until Brexit came along was as true blue a nailed on Tory as you can get and whom they had stood against in the last three elections. That's in addition to the passivity of just following unilateral leads of the Libs, which I think will grate a bit. I might be wrong.
As for the Brexit Party, they may not stand. They have pledged not to stand against Tories who voted consistently against the WA. That is of indirect relevant as the BXP will be well aware that the local Tory party were going through the process of pushing Grieve through the door even before Johnson took over on account of his views on Brexit, so presumably they will be more content with his replacement.
Won't be surprised if a Liberal Party candidate stands, just for the shitz n gigglez....
Well indeed, if they can find enough signatures. The Liberal Party which is strongly opposed to the EU.
Even if Corbyn is seen as the alternative PM-in-waiting I still think that the election will be dominated by Boris. He's a Trump-like figure in the sense that he sucks attention away from anything else.
That is exactly why I thought, and still think, that Labour has a better chance against Boris than it would have had against a less colourful candidate like Hunt.
On the subject of party loyalties, my family on my wife's side are staunch REMAINERS. Absolutely staunch. But they are also Labour (being in Bootle). My wife is more fence sitting and usually votes Labour but not always. She's determined to vote LD at any upcoming election to stop Brexit. She spoke to her own mum and dad about it, both of whom hate Brexit too, and tried to convince them they really had to think again about Labour.
They told her that the name on the ballot paper could be 'Adolf Hitler - Labour Party Candidate'[1] and they would still vote Labour. Nothing, absolutely NOTHING will convince them to vote anything other than Labour.
[1] With apologies to Godwin's law.... and Ken Livingstone.
lol - the Ken Livingstone remark made me laugh!
My family used to vote Tory but like me will probably vote LD (They will only vote LD, I might vote Labour to ensure the Tories don't beat my local Labour MP who is anti-Brexit).
It's quite an eye-opener here in Bootle, to see the levels of tribal loyalty. Speaking to my wife's friend in 2015, I asked some general policy questions before the election. "Immigrants are all scum, stealing our jobs. Benefit cheats should be rounded up and shot. Bring back hanging for dirty criminals" etc etc.
I casually asked, "So you'll be voting..... UKIP? Conservative?"
She looked at me like I needed to be committed before she roared "LABOUR! I'm voting LABOUR!"
It's both hilarious and tragic. It reminds me of the John Bird and John Fortune sketch just prior to 1997 election, about how the election is really decided by a handful of voters in a handful of seats. Excepting Southport, I would expect every seat in Merseyside to stay Labour, and safe Labour at the next GE.
Indeed, I have said this many times but I don't think Labour will do worse than 29% in a GE. In 2010, Brown took Labour down to 22% in opinion polls after his biggoted woman incident. The 29% is before Labour promise voters things as well. So Labour could do better than 29% in a FPTP election. They might not do in seat terms any better than 2017 but I doubt they will be wiped out. Labour has not split like in the 1980's, with high profile and influntial figures who once held the great offices joining or starting new political parties...
Back from my holidays - not quite such a flash cruise as BIg_G, more a amiable stroll along the Dalmatian Coast with bits of Italy and Greece thrown in. Generally very good weather.
A Holland America cruise so not so many British and plenty of Americans, Canadians, Australians and Kiwis. Brexit and Trump avoided round the dinner table and sport of varying natures also a shade sensitive.
I'm surprised the revelation Johnson is willing to ask for an extension hasn't got further traction. Dying in a ditch may be fashionable but it's not pleasant and it's best avoided even if the cost is a little humiliation and a career.
I think privately Johnson still wants and hopes for a WA which can get through the Commons. The line seems to be to propose something which is effectively the Brady Amendment and hope the EU will be so worried at the prospect of a No Deal they will give in.
With barely three and a half weeks to go, I come back to little having changed apart from the Party Conference rhetoric which can quickly be forgotten. The questions remain whether the EU will offer an extension and, if they do, will Johnson resign in a fit of self-righteous pique or will he agree to the extension?
He is quite right in that he is entitled to remain Prime Minister until an alternative MP, who can command the House exists. Once that happens, Johnson will be in deep water if he refuses to quit. Until then, his position is no different to Brown's in 2010 or even Heath's in February 1974.
I think Grieve would have more of a chance here running as an official Lib Dem fwiw actually.
A solution that might suit both sides is if the whipless 21 organised themselves as National Conservatives, in coalition with but separate from the Lib Dems (just as the old National Liberals used to do with the Conservatives). This would allow the Lib Dems to maintain a bit of distance from some fairly old-style Conservatives, allowing them to continue to hitch their skirts at disaffected Labour supporters, while allowing the National Conservatives to continue to maintain a sense of ideological continuity.
But the Electoral Commission wouldn't allow it, and the experience of 2010-2015 suggests the Lib Dems shouldn't be too strongly associated with any "Conservative" branding anyway. So we'd need two things: better branding for the Conservative escapees, and an equivalent counterweight on the Labour side.
The Grievesters could become the National Centre-Right. The equivalent party on the centre-left, in the absence of using the "Labour" brand, could become the National Socia...
Oh, wait.
In all seriousness, could not the Whipless Tories use the name of "Unionists"? It harks back to an older Conservative name (which should be old enough for the Electoral Commission, shouldn't it?) and gives a flavour of being pro-EU to a degree.
I agree , the case though has forced the government to give undertakings and importantly not to frustrate the Benn Act .
This is key . If Bozo doesn’t honour what the government QC has provided in terms of written undertakings then he’s in serious trouble with the courts .
Very interesting point, thanks. That it's flushed him and Mr Cummings out of the undergrowth.
You’re welcome . Although the media might portray this as a victory for the government it’s not because it’s forced a legally binding assurance regarding the Benn Act .
So not just compliance with the law but not seeking to frustrate it. Frustrate falls into the following , sending two letters , trying to get an EU state to veto an extension, threatening to sabotage EU business etc.
The judge accepted the assurances as legally binding , if Bozo breaks that then he’s in a lot of trouble because judges don’t take kindly to that .
6. I have sufficient confidence in my hazy recollections not to revisit them unless presented with something more convincing than your airy assertion.
Just a point of order, I wasn't trying to convince you. I was trying to get a better understanding of what other people seem to be convinced of, because my hunch is different.
I think Grieve would have more of a chance here running as an official Lib Dem fwiw actually.
A solution that might suit both sides is if the whipless 21 organised themselves as National Conservatives, in coalition with but separate from the Lib Dems (just as the old National Liberals used to do with the Conservatives). This would allow the Lib Dems to maintain a bit of distance from some fairly old-style Conservatives, allowing them to continue to hitch their skirts at disaffected Labour supporters, while allowing the National Conservatives to continue to maintain a sense of ideological continuity.
But the Electoral Commission wouldn't allow it, and the experience of 2010-2015 suggests the Lib Dems shouldn't be too strongly associated with any "Conservative" branding anyway. So we'd need two things: better branding for the Conservative escapees, and an equivalent counterweight on the Labour side.
The Grievesters could become the National Centre-Right. The equivalent party on the centre-left, in the absence of using the "Labour" brand, could become the National Socia...
Oh, wait.
In all seriousness, could not the Whipless Tories use the name of "Unionists"? It harks back to an older Conservative name (which should be old enough for the Electoral Commission, shouldn't it?) and gives a flavour of being pro-EU to a degree.
Would it not fall foul of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party's prior name?
And in practical terms also the Ulster kind of Unionist (and yes I know, the SCUP were the Orangeist kind to begin with and still are in part).
And those prior Unionists are all rabidly anti-EU (the UUP apart), are they not, now that the SCUP is no longer the Ruth Davidsoin anti_Brexit Party?
A quick comment on European elections - the Socialists did about as well as expected in Portugal yesterday and Costa will be able to carry on with the support of the Left Bloc and some others.
The Austrian result was more interesting - I thought the Greens did better and the SPD and FPO worse than expected. Kurz came out on top comfortably and theoretically has options with the SPD, FPO and the Greens to form a majority Government.
It would be interesting to see Kurz look to NEOS or the Greens but I suspect he will run back to his comfort zone and choose the FPO . It's woefully unimaginative at a time when green politics are coming back into the limelight.
For all I can't condone the absurdities of the Extinction Rebellion, there is a point there. I'm a great believer in human ingenuity to resolve these problems but any kind of help with that ingenuity should be at the centre of Government policy.
I'd prefer that to eco-authoritarian policies but there may need to be a mixture of both to get on top of the emerging situation. It was interesting to note the IFS proposal to move away from fuel duty to a form of mileage charging - it's not without its issues but as I've always argued, if there was a cheap and easy way to raise money for the Government without anyone complaining, it would be done.
I agree , the case though has forced the government to give undertakings and importantly not to frustrate the Benn Act .
This is key . If Bozo doesn’t honour what the government QC has provided in terms of written undertakings then he’s in serious trouble with the courts .
Very interesting point, thanks. That it's flushed him and Mr Cummings out of the undergrowth.
EU states and Mr Barnier will also have noted the decision and the restraints it places on the PM.
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
I agree , the case though has forced the government to give undertakings and importantly not to frustrate the Benn Act .
This is key . If Bozo doesn’t honour what the government QC has provided in terms of written undertakings then he’s in serious trouble with the courts .
Very interesting point, thanks. That it's flushed him and Mr Cummings out of the undergrowth.
You’re welcome . Although the media might portray this as a victory for the government it’s not because it’s forced a legally binding assurance regarding the Benn Act .
So not just compliance with the law but not seeking to frustrate it. Frustrate falls into the following , sending two letters , trying to get an EU state to veto an extension, threatening to sabotage EU business etc.
The judge accepted the assurances as legally binding , if Bozo breaks that then he’s in a lot of trouble because judges don’t take kindly to that .
Will the Scottish courts use a European Arrest Warrant for him?
On the subject of party loyalties, my family on my wife's side are staunch REMAINERS. Absolutely staunch. But they are also Labour (being in Bootle). My wife is more fence sitting and usually votes Labour but not always. She's determined to vote LD at any upcoming election to stop Brexit. She spoke to her own mum and dad about it, both of whom hate Brexit too, and tried to convince them they really had to think again about Labour.
They told her that the name on the ballot paper could be 'Adolf Hitler - Labour Party Candidate'[1] and they would still vote Labour. Nothing, absolutely NOTHING will convince them to vote anything other than Labour.
[1] With apologies to Godwin's law.... and Ken Livingstone.
lol - the Ken Livingstone remark made me laugh!
My family used to vote Tory but like me will probably vote LD (They will only vote LD, I might vote Labour to ensure the Tories don't beat my local Labour MP who is anti-Brexit).
It's quite an eye-opener here in Bootle, to see the levels of tribal loyalty. Speaking to my wife's friend in 2015, I asked some general policy questions before the election. "Immigrants are all scum, stealing our jobs. Benefit cheats should be rounded up and shot. Bring back hanging for dirty criminals" etc etc.
I casually asked, "So you'll be voting..... UKIP? Conservative?"
She looked at me like I needed to be committed before she roared "LABOUR! I'm voting LABOUR!"
It's both hilarious and tragic. It reminds me of the John Bird and John Fortune sketch just prior to 1997 election, about how the election is really decided by a handful of voters in a handful of seats. Excepting Southport, I would expect every seat in Merseyside to stay Labour, and safe Labour at the next GE.
Indeed, I have said this many times but I don't think Labour will do worse than 29% in a GE. In 2010, Brown took Labour down to 22% in opinion polls after his biggoted woman incident. The 29% is before Labour promise voters things as well. So Labour could do better than 29% in a FPTP election. They might not do in seat terms any better than 2017 but I doubt they will be wiped out. Labour has not split like in the 1980's, with high profile and influntial figures who once held the great offices joining or starting new political parties...
Sadly, that's probably right. However epically, catastrophically shit they are, however split, however Marxist, Labour can always count on the ~ 30% "payroll vote".
I agree , the case though has forced the government to give undertakings and importantly not to frustrate the Benn Act .
This is key . If Bozo doesn’t honour what the government QC has provided in terms of written undertakings then he’s in serious trouble with the courts .
Very interesting point, thanks. That it's flushed him and Mr Cummings out of the undergrowth.
EU states and Mr Barnier will also have noted the decision and the restraints it places on the PM.
Do regard that to be a positive outcome or a negative one?
James O’Brien really wanted to believe the people he disagreed with politically were guilty of being truly evil, and he let it cloud everything he said about the case
Will he be a Labour candidate in a November election?
Why is an accusation regarding something that allegedly happened 14 years ago being raised literally on the eve of a general election when there is no time to conclude a full investigation and yet the MP cannot stand unless the whip is restored?
The case may be genuine. However, it needs also to be recognised that should a faction wanted a means to deselect an MP that they couldn't get rid of otherwise, then a false allegation to this effect would fit the bill.
I am relieved at the decision of the Court of Session. The Benn Act does however raise a very difficult issue. If Parliament passes a law deliberately framed to play Gotcha with an individual - here the PM-there is bound to be resistance and consideration of breaking the law.This act is designed to constrain his negotiations with the EU.Then on 20th October to jeer at him in terms that he has applied to extend despite his earlier vow. That is cheap political point scoring through statute. Those who frame a law for that purpose are playing with fire. The pressure to break the law will ramp up and many will urge the PM to refuse to sign the letter. If in some future parliament for instance a Labour PM was directed by an ideological majority to sign a document abolishing the NHS would he comply? I doubt it. Many of those now lecturing the PM on his duty to sign the letter would take a different view when the boot was on the other foot. We are in dangerous territory here.
I agree , the case though has forced the government to give undertakings and importantly not to frustrate the Benn Act .
This is key . If Bozo doesn’t honour what the government QC has provided in terms of written undertakings then he’s in serious trouble with the courts .
Very interesting point, thanks. That it's flushed him and Mr Cummings out of the undergrowth.
EU states and Mr Barnier will also have noted the decision and the restraints it places on the PM.
Of more interest is the nobile officium case which is being heard tomorrow . I think Bozo would want to lose that .
That means the Scottish court would write the letter , he could then play the martyr , refuse to sign.
However he would probably be in contempt of court by then .
It's time to seriously ask what influence we think the Remain/Leave percentage has on the result of an election. The OP writes "Given that Beaconsfield voted Remain", and I rolled my eyes. Then I thought twice about it. Do we have any evidence for how much difference that makes? My hunch is that it's greatly exaggerated in the minds of commentators, and that reaching for it is lazy. But I am happy to be disabused of that notion if it's been looked into in detail somewhere.
Well that depends entirely.
51 Remain/49 Leave - That will be a major boost to a Remain backing candidate because . . . because 51 Leave/49 Remain - That is inconsequential and will not matter to the outcome because . . . because
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
On the subject of party loyalties, my family on my wife's side are staunch REMAINERS. Absolutely staunch. But they are also Labour (being in Bootle). My wife is more fence sitting and usually votes Labour but not always. She's determined to vote LD at any upcoming election to stop Brexit. She spoke to her own mum and dad about it, both of whom hate Brexit too, and tried to convince them they really had to think again about Labour.
They told her that the name on the ballot paper could be 'Adolf Hitler - Labour Party Candidate'[1] and they would still vote Labour. Nothing, absolutely NOTHING will convince them to vote anything other than Labour.
[1] With apologies to Godwin's law.... and Ken Livingstone.
lol - the Ken Livingstone remark made me laugh!
My family used to vote Tory but like me will probably vote LD (They will only vote LD, I might vote Labour to ensure the Tories don't beat my local Labour MP who is anti-Brexit).
It's quite an eye-opener here in Bootle, to see the levels of tribal loyalty. Speaking to my wife's friend in 2015, I asked some general policy questions before the election. "Immigrants are all scum, stealing our jobs. Benefit cheats should be rounded up and shot. Bring back hanging for dirty criminals" etc etc.
I casually asked, "So you'll be voting..... UKIP? Conservative?"
She looked at me like I needed to be committed before she roared "LABOUR! I'm voting LABOUR!"
It's both hilarious and tragic. It reminds me of the John Bird and John Fortune sketch just prior to 1997 election, about how the election is really decided by a handful of voters in a handful of seats. Excepting Southport, I would expect every seat in Merseyside to stay Labour, and safe Labour at the next GE.
Indeed, I have said this many times but I don't think Labour will do worse than 29% in a GE. In 2010, Brown took Labour down to 22% in opinion polls after his biggoted woman incident. The 29% is before Labour promise voters things as well. So Labour could do better than 29% in a FPTP election. They might not do in seat terms any better than 2017 but I doubt they will be wiped out. Labour has not split like in the 1980's, with high profile and influntial figures who once held the great offices joining or starting new political parties...
Sadly, that's probably right. However epically, catastrophically shit they are, however split, however Marxist, Labour can always count on the ~ 30% "payroll vote".
They always can - until they can't. Anyone (in any party) who refuses to believe this is stupid.
Examples: Scotland, Canada, Italy (for various parties)
I think Grieve would have more of a chance here running as an official Lib Dem fwiw actually.
A solution that might suit both sides is if the whipless 21 organised themselves as National Conservatives, in coalition with but separate from the Lib Dems (just as the old National Liberals used to do with the Conservatives). This would allow the Lib Dems to maintain a bit of distance from some fairly old-style Conservatives, allowing them to continue to hitch their skirts at disaffected Labour supporters, while allowing the National Conservatives to continue to maintain a sense of ideological continuity.
But the Electoral Commission wouldn't allow it, and the experience of 2010-2015 suggests the Lib Dems shouldn't be too strongly associated with any "Conservative" branding anyway. So we'd need two things: better branding for the Conservative escapees, and an equivalent counterweight on the Labour side.
The Grievesters could become the National Centre-Right. The equivalent party on the centre-left, in the absence of using the "Labour" brand, could become the National Socia...
Oh, wait.
In all seriousness, could not the Whipless Tories use the name of "Unionists"? It harks back to an older Conservative name (which should be old enough for the Electoral Commission, shouldn't it?) and gives a flavour of being pro-EU to a degree.
Why would Unionists be allowed but Conservative not?
The Tories PPC still officially stand as "The Conservative and Unionist Party Candidate"
James O’Brien really wanted to believe the people he disagreed with politically were guilty of being truly evil, and he let it cloud everything he said about the case
If Parliament passes a law deliberately framed to play Gotcha with an individual - here the PM-there is bound to be resistance and consideration of breaking the law.
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
It's time to seriously ask what influence we think the Remain/Leave percentage has on the result of an election. The OP writes "Given that Beaconsfield voted Remain", and I rolled my eyes. Then I thought twice about it. Do we have any evidence for how much difference that makes? My hunch is that it's greatly exaggerated in the minds of commentators, and that reaching for it is lazy. But I am happy to be disabused of that notion if it's been looked into in detail somewhere.
Well that depends entirely.
51 Remain/49 Leave - That will be a major boost to a Remain backing candidate because . . . because 51 Leave/49 Remain - That is inconsequential and will not matter to the outcome because . . . because
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. My hunch is that it's of limited consequence either way. In this case, I'm arguing that the marginal Remain vote of Beaconsfield won't save Grieve and that the Tory candidate will win. Equally, I'm arguing the Leaviness of some Labour seats won't do as much to oust a Labour MP as some commentators think.
Meanwhile, in the "month of next election" market, December 2019 was last matched at 1.98. How low is it going to go?
So if we get past Oct 31st, haven't left... do you think Corbyn will continue to resist a GE?
Seems to me that once the extension is requested and presumably granted, that is the time to go to a general election.
FWIW I think the opposition will not allow an election to be called until after 31 October. Even in the unlikely event of one being called on Friday 1 November, the FTPA requirement for a 25-working day campaign period means the very earliest possible Thursday for polling day is 12 December. If the extension period is only the three months required in the Benn Act then this might be a possibility but if the extension is longer then I think we're looking at the Spring.
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
Yes, passive-aggressive.
But that implies an interest (in being annoying) Apathy: "absence or suppression of passion, emotion, or excitement." from dictionary.com.
Those saying this is a democratic outrage might consider how many Council seats in May weren't contested by the Tories (3%) Labour (23%) or Lib Dems (47%). The idea of voters getting outraged in the polling booths by their party not standing - well it happens in its thousands every time. Where's the outrage about that?
I will cheer Dominic Grieve on all the way; but this is a heck of a hard path for him.
Was that a Lib Dem voter who was outraged by the idea of their not standing ?
It was a fairly silly argument, but if they were of another party, then even sillier.
Ask me today, I'd say i was a non-voter, given the lamentable choices on offer. If I was in Jo Swinson;s constituency I'd vote for whoever was most likely to beat her, can't remember being as irritated by a politician for many a long year. Patronising, sanctimonious, smug and all round awful.
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
Yes, passive-aggressive.
But that implies an interest (in being annoying) Apathy: "absence or suppression of passion, emotion, or excitement." from dictionary.com.
I'd say my Mother is both apathetic and angry at politics. She doesnt care anymore due to politicians behaviour over the Brexit debacle, and is angry at them that they have caused her to be apathetic.
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
Yes, passive-aggressive.
But that implies an interest (in being annoying) Apathy: "absence or suppression of passion, emotion, or excitement." from dictionary.com.
Sulleness, sulking and the silent treatment are characteristic PA behaviour.
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
Yes, passive-aggressive.
I spend most of my day in a barely-controlled, simmering torpor.
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
Yes, passive-aggressive.
But that implies an interest (in being annoying) Apathy: "absence or suppression of passion, emotion, or excitement." from dictionary.com.
I'd say my Mother is both apathetic and angry at politics. She doesnt care anymore due to politicians behaviour over the Brexit debacle, and is angry at them that they have caused her to be apathetic.
It's a pedantic point, but I don't think you mean "apathetic" as such. The definition of apathy does really preclude anger.
You may mean "disinclined to vote" or "disengaged from the political process". But not apathetic, which has a specific meaning.
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
Yes, passive-aggressive.
But that implies an interest (in being annoying) Apathy: "absence or suppression of passion, emotion, or excitement." from dictionary.com.
I'd say my Mother is both apathetic and angry at politics. She doesnt care anymore due to politicians behaviour over the Brexit debacle, and is angry at them that they have caused her to be apathetic.
It's a pedantic point, but I don't think you mean "apathetic" as such. The definition of apathy does really preclude anger.
You may mean "disinclined to vote" or "disengaged from the political process". But not apathetic, which has a specific meaning.
haha I actually googled the word to check it matched up with how she told me she felt!
Those saying this is a democratic outrage might consider how many Council seats in May weren't contested by the Tories (3%) Labour (23%) or Lib Dems (47%). The idea of voters getting outraged in the polling booths by their party not standing - well it happens in its thousands every time. Where's the outrage about that?
I will cheer Dominic Grieve on all the way; but this is a heck of a hard path for him.
Was that a Lib Dem voter who was outraged by the idea of their not standing ?
It was a fairly silly argument, but if they were of another party, then even sillier.
Ask me today, I'd say i was a non-voter, given the lamentable choices on offer. If I was in Jo Swinson;s constituency I'd vote for whoever was most likely to beat her, can't remember being as irritated by a politician for many a long year. Patronising, sanctimonious, smug and all round awful.
I can see how Jo Swinson comes across as sanctimonious or patronising or smug to a tory voter who may be embarassed by their party leader unable to keep it in his trousers and a labour voter who is saddled with Captain Calamity! I am sadly starting to see a similarity between the tories and the GOP with rose tinted spectacles! The man can do no wrong, even down to illegality!
I agree , the case though has forced the government to give undertakings and importantly not to frustrate the Benn Act .
This is key . If Bozo doesn’t honour what the government QC has provided in terms of written undertakings then he’s in serious trouble with the courts .
Very interesting point, thanks. That it's flushed him and Mr Cummings out of the undergrowth.
EU states and Mr Barnier will also have noted the decision and the restraints it places on the PM.
Do regard that to be a positive outcome or a negative one?
I don’t think the court case would have made much difference to the reality of negotiations. Once the law was passed, the PM’s freedom to act was constrained regardless of whether this specific legal action was taken. But I do think that it provides an opportunity for the PM, if he chooses to take it.
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
I think just as many light remainers, who would have accepted something Norwegian or Swiss, will be more firmly Remain if they're up against Boris driving full tilt for the cliffs.
The extremes on both sides will of course be twice as vocal, but still only get one vote. The election will be won (or more likely drawn) on the votes of the moderates on both sides.
Have the Conservatives chosen a candidate yet against Grieve?
If they are wise, they'll go for a moderate who voted Remain in 2016 (but who will support the PM's Brexit strategy). That does tend to blunt Grieve's threat. If he/she is rabid, I'd have thought Grieve has a good chance of hoovering up a huge number of Remain Tories, of whom there are plainly very large numbers in the constituency.
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
Yes, passive-aggressive.
But that implies an interest (in being annoying) Apathy: "absence or suppression of passion, emotion, or excitement." from dictionary.com.
I'd say my Mother is both apathetic and angry at politics. She doesnt care anymore due to politicians behaviour over the Brexit debacle, and is angry at them that they have caused her to be apathetic.
It's a pedantic point, but I don't think you mean "apathetic" as such. The definition of apathy does really preclude anger.
You may mean "disinclined to vote" or "disengaged from the political process". But not apathetic, which has a specific meaning.
haha I actually googled the word to check it matched up with how she told me she felt!
I would have thought that establishing the principle that the executive does not have an unfettered power to prorogue parliament whenever it wishes to avoid awkward questions is quite important in a parliamentary democracy.
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
Yes, passive-aggressive.
But that implies an interest (in being annoying) Apathy: "absence or suppression of passion, emotion, or excitement." from dictionary.com.
I'd say my Mother is both apathetic and angry at politics. She doesnt care anymore due to politicians behaviour over the Brexit debacle, and is angry at them that they have caused her to be apathetic.
It's a pedantic point, but I don't think you mean "apathetic" as such. The definition of apathy does really preclude anger.
You may mean "disinclined to vote" or "disengaged from the political process". But not apathetic, which has a specific meaning.
haha I actually googled the word to check it matched up with how she told me she felt!
Stupid old me, well I did vote to leave
Well, I'm sorry if I was condescending... although I really can't help it as I voted remain
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
Yes, passive-aggressive.
But that implies an interest (in being annoying) Apathy: "absence or suppression of passion, emotion, or excitement." from dictionary.com.
I'd say my Mother is both apathetic and angry at politics. She doesnt care anymore due to politicians behaviour over the Brexit debacle, and is angry at them that they have caused her to be apathetic.
It's a pedantic point, but I don't think you mean "apathetic" as such. The definition of apathy does really preclude anger.
You may mean "disinclined to vote" or "disengaged from the political process". But not apathetic, which has a specific meaning.
haha I actually googled the word to check it matched up with how she told me she felt!
Stupid old me, well I did vote to leave
Well, I'm sorry if I was condescending... although I really can't help it as I voted remain
You can't have voted remain, as you have "sorry" in your vocabulary.....
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
Meanwhile, in the "month of next election" market, December 2019 was last matched at 1.98. How low is it going to go?
So if we get past Oct 31st, haven't left... do you think Corbyn will continue to resist a GE?
Seems to me that once the extension is requested and presumably granted, that is the time to go to a general election.
FWIW I think the opposition will not allow an election to be called until after 31 October. Even in the unlikely event of one being called on Friday 1 November, the FTPA requirement for a 25-working day campaign period means the very earliest possible Thursday for polling day is 12 December. If the extension period is only the three months required in the Benn Act then this might be a possibility but if the extension is longer then I think we're looking at the Spring.
....giving the incoming government the same mad dash to Do Something before a (say) March 31 deadline as we had this time after dicking about with a party leader election. Whatever the difficulties involved, I hope it's extension > election in fairly short order.
If Boris gets a clear majority made up of MPs who *actually* support his plan, then I guess a hardish Brexit is pretty nailed-on with a pretty clear mandate (ie no arguing about whether most Leave voters are up for No Deal).
If not, we'll probably get a referendum which will also need time.
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
Downthread: there might be a lot of traffic both ways in a second referendum. There will be Bregretters who go Remain, but I suspect more Remainers who will want to “honour the result”. These will be the softest of Remainers the first time round, not the diehard.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
Can you be "apathetic and angry" at the same time?
Meanwhile, in the "month of next election" market, December 2019 was last matched at 1.98. How low is it going to go?
So if we get past Oct 31st, haven't left... do you think Corbyn will continue to resist a GE?
Seems to me that once the extension is requested and presumably granted, that is the time to go to a general election.
FWIW I think the opposition will not allow an election to be called until after 31 October. Even in the unlikely event of one being called on Friday 1 November, the FTPA requirement for a 25-working day campaign period means the very earliest possible Thursday for polling day is 12 December. If the extension period is only the three months required in the Benn Act then this might be a possibility but if the extension is longer then I think we're looking at the Spring.
....giving the incoming government the same mad dash to Do Something before a (say) March 31 deadline as we had this time after dicking about with a party leader election. Whatever the difficulties involved, I hope it's extension > election in fairly short order.
If Boris gets a clear majority made up of MPs who *actually* support his plan, then I guess a hardish Brexit is pretty nailed-on with a pretty clear mandate (ie no arguing about whether most Leave voters are up for No Deal).
If not, we'll probably get a referendum which will also need time.
If Johnson gets a majority on. say 35% of the electorate and goes for a hard Brexoit then I think you can say the break up of the UK is pretty nailed on.
Meanwhile, in the "month of next election" market, December 2019 was last matched at 1.98. How low is it going to go?
So if we get past Oct 31st, haven't left... do you think Corbyn will continue to resist a GE?
Seems to me that once the extension is requested and presumably granted, that is the time to go to a general election.
FWIW I think the opposition will not allow an election to be called until after 31 October. Even in the unlikely event of one being called on Friday 1 November, the FTPA requirement for a 25-working day campaign period means the very earliest possible Thursday for polling day is 12 December. If the extension period is only the three months required in the Benn Act then this might be a possibility but if the extension is longer then I think we're looking at the Spring.
....giving the incoming government the same mad dash to Do Something before a (say) March 31 deadline as we had this time after dicking about with a party leader election. Whatever the difficulties involved, I hope it's extension > election in fairly short order.
If Boris gets a clear majority made up of MPs who *actually* support his plan, then I guess a hardish Brexit is pretty nailed-on with a pretty clear mandate (ie no arguing about whether most Leave voters are up for No Deal).
If not, we'll probably get a referendum which will also need time.
Except, the 25 days can be altered. We could still see a GE in November, and I have bet accordingly.
Meanwhile, in the "month of next election" market, December 2019 was last matched at 1.98. How low is it going to go?
So if we get past Oct 31st, haven't left... do you think Corbyn will continue to resist a GE?
Seems to me that once the extension is requested and presumably granted, that is the time to go to a general election.
FWIW I think the opposition will not allow an election to be called until after 31 October. Even in the unlikely event of one being called on Friday 1 November, the FTPA requirement for a 25-working day campaign period means the very earliest possible Thursday for polling day is 12 December. If the extension period is only the three months required in the Benn Act then this might be a possibility but if the extension is longer then I think we're looking at the Spring.
....giving the incoming government the same mad dash to Do Something before a (say) March 31 deadline as we had this time after dicking about with a party leader election. Whatever the difficulties involved, I hope it's extension > election in fairly short order.
If Boris gets a clear majority made up of MPs who *actually* support his plan, then I guess a hardish Brexit is pretty nailed-on with a pretty clear mandate (ie no arguing about whether most Leave voters are up for No Deal).
If not, we'll probably get a referendum which will also need time.
Except, the 25 days can be altered. We could still see a GE in November, and I have bet accordingly.
Excepting Southport, I would expect every seat in Merseyside to stay Labour, and safe Labour at the next GE.
Birkenhead?
Labour.
Field has no chance. And no chance of splitting the vote either. Remember, most people don't even know who their MP is. They see Labour and vote for that 'person'.
My mum was in Liscard two years ago (Wallasey). She ran into Angela Eagle and questioned her about Corbyn. She was the only person in the busy town centre who knew who Angela Eagle was (or, at least was prepared to talk to her).
Comments
My family used to vote Tory but like me will probably vote LD (They will only vote LD, I might vote Labour to ensure the Tories don't beat my local Labour MP who is anti-Brexit).
Even if Corbyn is seen as the alternative PM-in-waiting I still think that the election will be dominated by Boris. He's a Trump-like figure in the sense that he sucks attention away from anything else.
Redoubtable battler against right wing No Deal lunacy? Or true blue Tory who just happens to like the European Union?
This is a question I would need an answer to before backing or laying him.
https://twitter.com/ministerblok/status/1181143341553082368?s=21
I think the Greens would have difficulties with the idea of standing down in favour of Grieve. That is, standing down a candidate in favour of someone who until Brexit came along was as true blue a nailed on Tory as you can get and whom they had stood against in the last three elections. That's in addition to the passivity of just following unilateral leads of the Libs, which I think will grate a bit. I might be wrong.
As for the Brexit Party, they may not stand. They have pledged not to stand against Tories who voted consistently against the WA. That is of indirect relevant as the BXP will be well aware that the local Tory party were going through the process of pushing Grieve through the door even before Johnson took over on account of his views on Brexit, so presumably they will be more content with his replacement.
2. I have hazy recollections of the above.
3. I will not spend the time to summarise the research for you.
4. A brief Google shows that it is there if you are interested.
5. You have airy assertions to contest my hazy recollections.
6. I have sufficient confidence in my hazy recollections not to revisit them unless presented with something more convincing than your airy assertion.
1. The 51% Remain is a red herring. Now, if it was Richmond Park or Hampstead, or somewhere with a really, really strong Remain vote it would be one thing: but 51% Remain? That's nothing.
2. Does Dominic Grieve really have some massive personal vote? I'm sure he's locally reasonably popular and all, but the vast bulk of 65.3% of the constituency who voted for him did so because of the colour of his rosette.
3. To win this seat, Grieve would need to have a fantastic local organisation that could persuade 40% of Conservatives, 100% of LibDems and the majority of Labour voters to go for him. That's a big, big ask. More likely, Labour supporters will hope that Grieve standing will let them in. (It won't.)
I casually asked, "So you'll be voting..... UKIP? Conservative?"
She looked at me like I needed to be committed before she roared "LABOUR! I'm voting LABOUR!"
It's both hilarious and tragic. It reminds me of the John Bird and John Fortune sketch just prior to 1997 election, about how the election is really decided by a handful of voters in a handful of seats. Excepting Southport, I would expect every seat in Merseyside to stay Labour, and safe Labour at the next GE.
Leave vote = 1.57*(Tory vote difference from 2015) + 45.4
r^2 = 0.627
Labour went up pretty much everywhere and their vote was far less correlated to Brexit.
Bearing this in mind, for the Tories a seat needed to be 58.6% leave or more before they received a net benefit.
Scotland was uncorrelated to brexit for the Tories.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/07/met-officers-will-not-face-action-over-vip-child-abuse-inquiry
Power, exercised arbitrarily, and entirely without responsibility.
Back from my holidays - not quite such a flash cruise as BIg_G, more a amiable stroll along the Dalmatian Coast with bits of Italy and Greece thrown in. Generally very good weather.
A Holland America cruise so not so many British and plenty of Americans, Canadians, Australians and Kiwis. Brexit and Trump avoided round the dinner table and sport of varying natures also a shade sensitive.
I'm surprised the revelation Johnson is willing to ask for an extension hasn't got further traction. Dying in a ditch may be fashionable but it's not pleasant and it's best avoided even if the cost is a little humiliation and a career.
I think privately Johnson still wants and hopes for a WA which can get through the Commons. The line seems to be to propose something which is effectively the Brady Amendment and hope the EU will be so worried at the prospect of a No Deal they will give in.
With barely three and a half weeks to go, I come back to little having changed apart from the Party Conference rhetoric which can quickly be forgotten. The questions remain whether the EU will offer an extension and, if they do, will Johnson resign in a fit of self-righteous pique or will he agree to the extension?
He is quite right in that he is entitled to remain Prime Minister until an alternative MP, who can command the House exists. Once that happens, Johnson will be in deep water if he refuses to quit. Until then, his position is no different to Brown's in 2010 or even Heath's in February 1974.
So not just compliance with the law but not seeking to frustrate it. Frustrate falls into the following , sending two letters , trying to get an EU state to veto an extension, threatening to sabotage EU business etc.
The judge accepted the assurances as legally binding , if Bozo breaks that then he’s in a lot of trouble because judges don’t take kindly to that .
It will play out in the final week of October and first week of November.
And in practical terms also the Ulster kind of Unionist (and yes I know, the SCUP were the Orangeist kind to begin with and still are in part).
And those prior Unionists are all rabidly anti-EU (the UUP apart), are they not, now that the SCUP is no longer the Ruth Davidsoin anti_Brexit Party?
The Austrian result was more interesting - I thought the Greens did better and the SPD and FPO worse than expected. Kurz came out on top comfortably and theoretically has options with the SPD, FPO and the Greens to form a majority Government.
It would be interesting to see Kurz look to NEOS or the Greens but I suspect he will run back to his comfort zone and choose the FPO . It's woefully unimaginative at a time when green politics are coming back into the limelight.
For all I can't condone the absurdities of the Extinction Rebellion, there is a point there. I'm a great believer in human ingenuity to resolve these problems but any kind of help with that ingenuity should be at the centre of Government policy.
I'd prefer that to eco-authoritarian policies but there may need to be a mixture of both to get on top of the emerging situation. It was interesting to note the IFS proposal to move away from fuel duty to a form of mileage charging - it's not without its issues but as I've always argued, if there was a cheap and easy way to raise money for the Government without anyone complaining, it would be done.
The question for Leave is whether that will outweigh what will likely be an expanded electorate next time, with hardcore Remainer activists more motivated and Leavers who’ll be very apathetic and angry.
The behaviour of both sides will be critical. I could see either losing it for the other if they play their cards badly, which is normally how both sets of their respective supporters would like them to be played.
BMG has Con+BP at 42%, Lab+LD+Green at 53%.
All about the sampling?
Liberal Party is still a thing, however.....
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/james-obrien-and-the-carl-beech-witch-hunt/
The case may be genuine. However, it needs also to be recognised that should a faction wanted a means to deselect an MP that they couldn't get rid of otherwise, then a false allegation to this effect would fit the bill.
Seems to me that once the extension is requested and presumably granted, that is the time to go to a general election.
That means the Scottish court would write the letter , he could then play the martyr , refuse to sign.
However he would probably be in contempt of court by then .
Almost every ad break has one from the government telling the viewer to prepare for things changing on Oct 31 WHEN Britain leaves the EU
51 Remain/49 Leave - That will be a major boost to a Remain backing candidate because . . . because
51 Leave/49 Remain - That is inconsequential and will not matter to the outcome because . . . because
Because, you know, he is. He's quite into nature and hedgehogs and sheep farming. You couldn't really dispute that it was an accurate description...
Examples: Scotland, Canada, Italy (for various parties)
The Tories PPC still officially stand as "The Conservative and Unionist Party Candidate"
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/09/james-obrien-and-the-vip-child-sex-abuse-lies/
FFS.
Even if Grieve picked up 50% of *all* non Con voters and a quarter of the 2017 tories he'd be thousands short.
FWIW
https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/27/voters-so-promiscuous-the-pollsters-working-to-predict-next-election?__twitter_impression=true
Apathy: "absence or suppression of passion, emotion, or excitement." from dictionary.com.
What a market move in just a few short weeks! Unprecedented, I'd say.
Did anyone get on at the juicy 7 figure odds? If so, you should close out and trouser the profit - because there is bound to be some sort of inquiry.
You may mean "disinclined to vote" or "disengaged from the political process". But not apathetic, which has a specific meaning.
Stupid old me, well I did vote to leave
The extremes on both sides will of course be twice as vocal, but still only get one vote. The election will be won (or more likely drawn) on the votes of the moderates on both sides.
If they are wise, they'll go for a moderate who voted Remain in 2016 (but who will support the PM's Brexit strategy). That does tend to blunt Grieve's threat. If he/she is rabid, I'd have thought Grieve has a good chance of hoovering up a huge number of Remain Tories, of whom there are plainly very large numbers in the constituency.
I can just see the charge of the ‘light remainers’ now...
Con 32.7% (+1.2)
Lab 23.9% (-0.4%)
LD 19.8% (-0.1%)
BXP 13.0% (-0.8%)
Green 5.0% (+0.4%)
Baxter + Flavible
Con 343 (+18)
Lab 187 (-18)
LD 49 (+2)
Tactical model
Con 303 (+7)
Lab 224 (-8)
LD 53 (+1)
If Boris gets a clear majority made up of MPs who *actually* support his plan, then I guess a hardish Brexit is pretty nailed-on with a pretty clear mandate (ie no arguing about whether most Leave voters are up for No Deal).
If not, we'll probably get a referendum which will also need time.
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1181219700711317504
Field has no chance. And no chance of splitting the vote either.
Remember, most people don't even know who their MP is. They see Labour and vote for that 'person'.
My mum was in Liscard two years ago (Wallasey). She ran into Angela Eagle and questioned her about Corbyn. She was the only person in the busy town centre who knew who Angela Eagle was (or, at least was prepared to talk to her).