politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Going long. Why a 2019 election is a lot less likely than gamb
Comments
-
I am not anti Kurdish or pro Putin though we shared the aim of both to defeat ISSunil_Prasannan said:
Why are so anti-Kurdish and pro-Putin?HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
Now IS is defeated should American servicepeoples lives still be risked to defend Kurdish territory from Turkey when European servicepersons lives are not being risked to do the same?0 -
If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful0 -
Well it’s the only deal that has been agreed.dyedwoolie said:The remain solution to 'nobody knew what they were voting for' seems to be to offer a vote between a discredited deal that has been rejected 3 times and leaves us locked in a backstop indefinitely or what they want. Genius.
0 -
So what are you afraid of?isam said:If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful0 -
Well North Norfolk at least will be a Tory gain next time from the LDs and most of the Tory seats in the Southwest Tory holds if the LDs do not care about Leavers, even if the LDs gain a few London, South East and university Remain seatsGallowgate said:@HYUFD the Lib Dems are appealing to Remainers and those who feel they were lied to by the Cummings disinformation campaign. They don’t care about your frothers.
0 -
You’re really missing the point. Turkey would not be invading if American armed forces were not stood down.HYUFD said:
I am not anti Kurdish or pro Putin though we shared the aim of both to defeat ISSunil_Prasannan said:
Why are so anti-Kurdish and pro-Putin?HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
Now IS is defeated should American servicepeoples lives still be risked to defend Kurdish territory from Turkey when European servicepersons lives are not being risked to do the same?1 -
Then any referendum should be that deal or no deal. The decision to leave has been taken.Gallowgate said:
Well it’s the only deal that has been agreed.dyedwoolie said:The remain solution to 'nobody knew what they were voting for' seems to be to offer a vote between a discredited deal that has been rejected 3 times and leaves us locked in a backstop indefinitely or what they want. Genius.
0 -
They care about leavers. Just not the racist and xenophobic frothers who appear to be the core Tory vote these days.HYUFD said:
Well North Norfolk at least will be a Tory gain next time from the LDs and most of the Tory seats in the Southwest Tory holds if the LDs do not care about Leavers, even if the LDs gain a few London, South East and university Remain seatsGallowgate said:@HYUFD the Lib Dems are appealing to Remainers and those who feel they were lied to by the Cummings disinformation campaign. They don’t care about your frothers.
0 -
Yes that seems to be the plan.HYUFD said:
Without a general election or EUref2 there will be no extension, France would veto it as they made clear yesterday, so Boris delivers Brexit on 31st Octoberalgarkirk said:Excellent analysis from Mr Meeks. Thank you. One comment though: It is in no-one's interest to carry on with government and parliament in its present stasis. But it is in no faction's interest to have a GE unless that faction can actually win it. Factions and parties of course coincide less than usual which complicates things. The current minority government has no power to call an election under the FTPA, and not even the power (almost certainly) to change the law to call an election. They haven't got the numbers. There is no faction or party that looks as if it can win a majority, and the nearest possibility is the Conservative/Leave party/faction - the very people who have no power to call one. So why should anyone lift a finger to enable to GE in the foreseeable future when there is no reason to think they can win, and every reason to think that the present government/party/faction will run into trouble.
As parliament will not agree anything on crisis Saturday.0 -
You could get squashed by a falling comet at any time, but you still look both ways before crossing a busy road. That's because a speeding taxi is a commonplace and predictable hazard. As are shortages of imported goods in a situation where an underprepared country is suddenly faced with confusing new border arrangements.Charles said:
It’s a stupid questionScott_P said:
I can’t guarantee the sun will rise tomorrow morning. It probably will but I can’t guarantee it. If it doesn’t there may be deaths. Peoples lives are at risk.1 -
Well why can't British and French forces fill the gap then?Gallowgate said:
You’re really missing the point. Turkey would not be invading if American armed forces were not stood down.HYUFD said:
I am not anti Kurdish or pro Putin though we shared the aim of both to defeat ISSunil_Prasannan said:
Why are so anti-Kurdish and pro-Putin?HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
Now IS is defeated should American servicepeoples lives still be risked to defend Kurdish territory from Turkey when European servicepersons lives are not being risked to do the same?0 -
Breaking news: the human race has absolutely zero influence on the rising of the sun, otoh the importation of life saving drugs is precisely under the agency of humans, particularly governments.Charles said:
It’s a stupid questionScott_P said:
I can’t guarantee the sun will rise tomorrow morning. It probably will but I can’t guarantee it. If it doesn’t there may be deaths. Peoples lives are at risk.2 -
The main bone of contention at the moment is whether the customs border with the EU should be down the Irish sea or across the island of Ireland. What was the people's decision on this question and when did they make it?isam said:“Parliament seems incapable of making its mind up so let the people decide”
They did decide.0 -
No deal is a lie so of course we won’t be doing that. Next.dyedwoolie said:
Then any referendum should be that deal or no deal. The decision to leave has been taken.Gallowgate said:
Well it’s the only deal that has been agreed.dyedwoolie said:The remain solution to 'nobody knew what they were voting for' seems to be to offer a vote between a discredited deal that has been rejected 3 times and leaves us locked in a backstop indefinitely or what they want. Genius.
0 -
Two of the so-called "IS Beatles" have been taken out of Syria to "a secure location controlled by the US", President Donald Trump has said
BBC News - British IS fighters taken into US custody, says Trump
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-499959090 -
You clearly don't know N Norfolk very well. Very simplistic analysis as ever!HYUFD said:
Well North Norfolk at least will be a Tory gain next time from the LDs and most of the Tory seats in the Southwest Tory holds if the LDs do not care about Leavers, even if the LDs gain a few London, South East and university Remain seatsGallowgate said:@HYUFD the Lib Dems are appealing to Remainers and those who feel they were lied to by the Cummings disinformation campaign. They don’t care about your frothers.
0 -
They've already gone to either Labour or Cons. Actually, forget it, you're a Tory version of Professor Pangloss.HYUFD said:
Still over 2% of the vote, handy for the Tories to pick them up in a close electionAnorak said:
2015?!? When they polled under 8%!! That's not really the gotcha you think it is.HYUFD said:
30% of 2015 LD voters voted Leave, as did some LD seats like North Norfolk where Norman Lamb is retiring and which the Tories could gainMorris_Dancer said:Mr. HYUFD, Leavers not backing the Lib Dems does sound a bit like Muslims boycotting pork butchers.
0 -
American forces are already there and are willing to continue their duty. Your apologism for Trump is really something to behold.HYUFD said:
Well why can't British and French forces fill the gap then?Gallowgate said:
You’re really missing the point. Turkey would not be invading if American armed forces were not stood down.HYUFD said:
I am not anti Kurdish or pro Putin though we shared the aim of both to defeat ISSunil_Prasannan said:
Why are so anti-Kurdish and pro-Putin?HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
Now IS is defeated should American servicepeoples lives still be risked to defend Kurdish territory from Turkey when European servicepersons lives are not being risked to do the same?1 -
Mr. Gate, it hasn't been agreed. May's deal was explicitly rejected by the Commons on multiple occasions.0
-
The March to October extension didn't achieve anything, possibly even the reverse. May at least had a deal to put to parliament.OblitusSumMe said:
I don't see any reason for the EU to offer a short extension. It would simply create more hassle for them.Sandpit said:On topic, I agree with Alastair’s conclusions, with one constraint: the suggestion in the Benn Act letter is for an extension until 31st January.
If that is the extension given, then the election is probably going to have to be on 5th December, or possibly 13th. No-one is going to want to campaign over Christmas (or be seen supporting the idea), and an early January dissolution leads to a mid-February election, most likely 20th if we stick to a 25 day campaign and a Thursday election.
My betting plan here is to base decisions on the extension date proposal, any date other than 31st Jan leads to a 2020 election. (But what do I know, I didn’t see Boris as next PM until it was way too late to still be laying the favourite).
Six months is probably the minimum, and it's best to look at dates in the EU calendar that they might link it to. So there's another EU council scheduled for mid-June, which is why the end of June has been mooted as a possible date.
I've also suggested the end of 2020 - the end date for the transition period agreed as part of May's deal.
The EU offering an extension would only make sense from their viewpoint if they thought it mean a GE would (a) happen before the end of the extension and (b) return a Remain friendly government or one likely to run a 2nd referendum. If it returns a Tory majority however, and a Tory party purged largely of Europhiles, this would surely mean no deal.0 -
Interesting assessment of risk. You equate the probability of the sun rising tomorrow with the chances of us running out of medicines post a no deal Brexit and people dying as a result. Those two events in your mind have an equivalent probability.Charles said:
It’s a stupid questionScott_P said:
I can’t guarantee the sun will rise tomorrow morning. It probably will but I can’t guarantee it. If it doesn’t there may be deaths. Peoples lives are at risk.0 -
FWIW I think Parliament will decide that there is a requirement for an electoral process but it will go for a referendum rather than a general election. I'd say there is already a majority for that - almost all Labour MPs, Lib Dems, nationalists, Tory rebels and I think also a number of one nation Tories will see that as a better option than going into an election on a no deal platform.TheValiant said:1. I can't see either a December or January election anymore. This isn't 1910. People start thinking about Christmas in September (certainly the shops do) and by December everyone is in Christmas mood now. No one, but no one, will want an election or a campaign during Christmas. So both December and January are out.
2. Likewise February is unlikely unless its end of February.
3. So I think its either November (28th?) or March 2020.
4. I don't think the average Conservative or Labour MP really wants an election. There are too many banana skins on route to be reasonably sure of keeping your job. For the CONS, all the need is a poor campaign, Brexit party hammering at them day and night and suddenly they finish on 25% and lose 150 seats. For Labour, all they need is for the Lib Dems to hammer them as the party of REMAIN, and Corbyn can't work his magic a second time, and they finish on 25%, and lose 100 seats.
Hell, BOTH could happen. How long ago were those polls with four parties all in the low 20s? Could happen.
5. Never underestimate the average MP wanting to keep their job more than anything. Look at O'Mara. How many times has he 'resigned' now?
6. Never underestimate the love of can kicking. The EU isn't the only organisation that loves to kick the can. If the EU gives us a June 2020 extension, I'm quite sure Parliament won't think about it until next March. If they give us till December 2020, Parliament will forget all about it till this time next year.
Having said all that, the problem at the moment is that we have a Government that are so far in 'the red' in terms of majority they can't do anything. Can we really limp on for six months (or more) with nothing happening (YES! I have a friend who insists the less government does, the better!)?0 -
As some wag put it: "That's a bit rich from someone who didn't help us in Vietnam."Theuniondivvie said:
And yet the tangerine moron was citing the Kurds' non-presence at the Normandy landings as some kind of justifcation, an event that was the very antithesis of America First.HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
The chances of Trump having a rational, thought out position on this are between zero and fuck all, though I guess that reflects the world view of his base pretty well.0 -
That might have been theoretically possible had Trump given a few months' notice. As it was, he didn't even consult his own generals before he announced the abandonment of the Kurds.HYUFD said:
Well why can't British and French forces fill the gap then?Gallowgate said:
You’re really missing the point. Turkey would not be invading if American armed forces were not stood down.HYUFD said:
I am not anti Kurdish or pro Putin though we shared the aim of both to defeat ISSunil_Prasannan said:
Why are so anti-Kurdish and pro-Putin?HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
Now IS is defeated should American servicepeoples lives still be risked to defend Kurdish territory from Turkey when European servicepersons lives are not being risked to do the same?
All of which ought to be pretty obvious, so I guess your question was mere smoke and rhetoric ?0 -
I also wonder.
Last GE 8th June 2017.
PArliament returned for QS on 21st June 2017.
FTPA expires in 2020.
Five year term to 20th June 2022.
25 working days later.
GE held on Monday 25th July 2022.
You heard it here first. Bet accordingly.0 -
I posted these links many moons ago and it looks like I'll have to do so again. Decision making can take place under several conditions (risk, uncertainty, certainty). The referendum a decision made under uncertainty. Things have moved on since then and therefore there is no democratic, moral, or logical deficit by having another referendum.dyedwoolie said:The remain solution to 'nobody knew what they were voting for' seems to be to offer a vote between a discredited deal that has been rejected 3 times and leaves us locked in a backstop indefinitely or what they want. Genius.
0 -
American forces do their duty wherever they are posted, they have no involvement in where they should or should not do that duty. If America has betrayed the Kurds then others must step in if they wish to see the Kurds have support. America isn't the world's policeman, if it wants to be a dick, it's free to do so.Gallowgate said:
American forces are already there and are willing to continue their duty. Your apologism for Trump is really something to behold.HYUFD said:
Well why can't British and French forces fill the gap then?Gallowgate said:
You’re really missing the point. Turkey would not be invading if American armed forces were not stood down.HYUFD said:
I am not anti Kurdish or pro Putin though we shared the aim of both to defeat ISSunil_Prasannan said:
Why are so anti-Kurdish and pro-Putin?HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
Now IS is defeated should American servicepeoples lives still be risked to defend Kurdish territory from Turkey when European servicepersons lives are not being risked to do the same?0 -
N Norfolk voted 59% Leave, the LDs only hold it because of the Norman Lamb personal vote and he is stepping downNigel_Foremain said:
You clearly don't know N Norfolk very well. Very simplistic analysis as ever!HYUFD said:
Well North Norfolk at least will be a Tory gain next time from the LDs and most of the Tory seats in the Southwest Tory holds if the LDs do not care about Leavers, even if the LDs gain a few London, South East and university Remain seatsGallowgate said:@HYUFD the Lib Dems are appealing to Remainers and those who feel they were lied to by the Cummings disinformation campaign. They don’t care about your frothers.
0 -
Liverpool also voted Remain and is not exactly natural Tory territory....Sunil_Prasannan said:
Liverpool Scotland voted Irish Nationalist for many years from 1885 to 1929!nichomar said:
They actually said on sky that they were meeting on neutral ground has Liverpool declared UDI?MarqueeMark said:
Why Liverpool? Does Boris think the Bootle be on the other foot?GIN1138 said:What time asre we expecting Boris and Leo to have their Mexican Standof on the banks of the Mersey?
0 -
Hope they're enjoying the waterboarding.FrancisUrquhart said:Two of the so-called "IS Beatles" have been taken out of Syria to "a secure location controlled by the US", President Donald Trump has said
BBC News - British IS fighters taken into US custody, says Trump
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-499959090 -
And it's not as though the Turks were a conspicuous D-Day ally.Anorak said:
As some wag put it: "That's a bit rich from someone who didn't help us in Vietnam."Theuniondivvie said:
And yet the tangerine moron was citing the Kurds' non-presence at the Normandy landings as some kind of justifcation, an event that was the very antithesis of America First.HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
The chances of Trump having a rational, thought out position on this are between zero and fuck all, though I guess that reflects the world view of his base pretty well.
As a business partner of various dodgy Trump ventures, on the other hand...0 -
Fixed that for you.Yorkcity said:
Yes that seems to be the plan.
As parliament will not agree anythingon crisis Saturday.
0 -
Trump was elected on an 'America First' agenda, he is only doing what he said he would and only fighting wars where America is directly at threat.Gallowgate said:
American forces are already there and are willing to continue their duty. Your apologism for Trump is really something to behold.HYUFD said:
Well why can't British and French forces fill the gap then?Gallowgate said:
You’re really missing the point. Turkey would not be invading if American armed forces were not stood down.HYUFD said:
I am not anti Kurdish or pro Putin though we shared the aim of both to defeat ISSunil_Prasannan said:
Why are so anti-Kurdish and pro-Putin?HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
Now IS is defeated should American servicepeoples lives still be risked to defend Kurdish territory from Turkey when European servicepersons lives are not being risked to do the same?
If we criticise him we cannot do so over the Kurds unless we are also willing to send troops to Syria to protect Kurdish lands0 -
Does the FTPA expire?TheValiant said:I also wonder.
Last GE 8th June 2017.
PArliament returned for QS on 21st June 2017.
FTPA expires in 2020.
Five year term to 20th June 2022.
25 working days later.
GE held on Monday 25th July 2022.
You heard it here first. Bet accordingly.
0 -
There is when it's being framed to achieve a desired result. The May deal is not the only basis on which we can leave the EU, therefore it cannot be the only option presentedTOPPING said:
I posted these links many moons ago and it looks like I'll have to do so again. Decision making can take place under several conditions (risk, uncertainty, certainty). The referendum a decision made under uncertainty. Things have moved on since then and therefore there is no democratic, moral, or logical deficit by having another referendum.dyedwoolie said:The remain solution to 'nobody knew what they were voting for' seems to be to offer a vote between a discredited deal that has been rejected 3 times and leaves us locked in a backstop indefinitely or what they want. Genius.
0 -
That’s for our PM to agree with the EUwilliamglenn said:
The main bone of contention at the moment is whether the customs border with the EU should be down the Irish sea or across the island of Ireland. What was the people's decision on this question and when did they make it?isam said:“Parliament seems incapable of making its mind up so let the people decide”
They did decide.0 -
Unhuh...dyedwoolie said:
American forces do their duty wherever they are posted, they have no involvement in where they should or should not do that duty. If America has betrayed the Kurds then others must step in if they wish to see the Kurds have support. America isn't the world's policeman, if it wants to be a dick, it's free to do so.Gallowgate said:
American forces are already there and are willing to continue their duty. Your apologism for Trump is really something to behold.HYUFD said:
Well why can't British and French forces fill the gap then?Gallowgate said:
You’re really missing the point. Turkey would not be invading if American armed forces were not stood down.HYUFD said:
I am not anti Kurdish or pro Putin though we shared the aim of both to defeat ISSunil_Prasannan said:
Why are so anti-Kurdish and pro-Putin?HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
Now IS is defeated should American servicepeoples lives still be risked to defend Kurdish territory from Turkey when European servicepersons lives are not being risked to do the same?
Turkey's Syria invasion: Member of US Special Forces says, 'I am ashamed for the first time in my career'
https://www.foxnews.com/world/turkey-syria-invasion-special-forces-soldier-kurds0 -
I guess Trump's position has evolved over the years from Donald First to America First, with the provisos that he probably now identifies himself with America and if it ever came down to an argument over whether Trump or 'murica came first, no contest.Anorak said:
As some wag put it: "That's a bit rich from someone who didn't help us in Vietnam."Theuniondivvie said:
And yet the tangerine moron was citing the Kurds' non-presence at the Normandy landings as some kind of justifcation, an event that was the very antithesis of America First.HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
The chances of Trump having a rational, thought out position on this are between zero and fuck all, though I guess that reflects the world view of his base pretty well.0 -
Alistair makes good arguments as always - especially around the uncertainty of the result holding back any enthusiasm to call one, and the likely length of the mere process. So I'd agree about November being out, but I think December's still on - and I definitely don't think this parliament could (or should try to) hang on for a referendum.
The counter-currents to a later poll are strong too:
1. If "nothing has changed" on Nov 1st, we end up in the same circles we've been going round in for the past year, with a parliament which can do nothing but stop No Deal? Surely that's hitting home by now.. even with Corbyn? Anti No Dealers need to weigh the fact that the EU is likely to lose patience at some point and stop the endless extension of faffing time.
2. Those tempted to keep this parliament going with a new leader and a new plan have some questions to answer (namely: who is that leader and what's the plan?). I don't see either being agreed beyond "do extension (or revoke in extremis) and call an election".
3. The view voiced in this short (two-tweet) thread that no-one wins from hanging on too long without seeking a new mandate. Sure, Boris can be made to look like a lame duck/zombie. But to what ends for the other parties?
https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1182217641676738560?s=200 -
FTPA is not due to expire, its due for a reviewTheValiant said:I also wonder.
Last GE 8th June 2017.
PArliament returned for QS on 21st June 2017.
FTPA expires in 2020.
Five year term to 20th June 2022.
25 working days later.
GE held on Monday 25th July 2022.
You heard it here first. Bet accordingly.0 -
Agreed, no good attacking America for invading the Middle East if you then also attack America for withdrawing from the Middle Eastdyedwoolie said:
American forces do their duty wherever they are posted, they have no involvement in where they should or should not do that duty. If America has betrayed the Kurds then others must step in if they wish to see the Kurds have support. America isn't the world's policeman, if it wants to be a dick, it's free to do so.Gallowgate said:
American forces are already there and are willing to continue their duty. Your apologism for Trump is really something to behold.HYUFD said:
Well why can't British and French forces fill the gap then?Gallowgate said:
You’re really missing the point. Turkey would not be invading if American armed forces were not stood down.HYUFD said:
I am not anti Kurdish or pro Putin though we shared the aim of both to defeat ISSunil_Prasannan said:
Why are so anti-Kurdish and pro-Putin?HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
Now IS is defeated should American servicepeoples lives still be risked to defend Kurdish territory from Turkey when European servicepersons lives are not being risked to do the same?0 -
There were soldiers in WW1 who refused to wear helmets because they believed that "if a bullet's got your name on it, it'll get you anyway". In other words, why experience the discomfort of PPE when the outcome is already ordained.TOPPING said:
Interesting assessment of risk. You equate the probability of the sun rising tomorrow with the chances of us running out of medicines post a no deal Brexit and people dying as a result. Those two events in your mind have an equivalent probability.Charles said:
It’s a stupid questionScott_P said:
I can’t guarantee the sun will rise tomorrow morning. It probably will but I can’t guarantee it. If it doesn’t there may be deaths. Peoples lives are at risk.
This fatalism is, of course, the epitome self-destructive silliness. People died because of it, from head wounds that wouldn't have happened had they worn their helmet. But that mindset is with us today. People who have persuaded themselves that human agency isn't meaningful, that there is some sort of spiritual destiny that must be hurried along. Those are the people at the core of this nationalist project.
It's why I believe Mr Meeks refers to them as a death cult. They have a millennarian view of the future, and the lives of individuals are merely the grease that keeps the big wheel of destiny turning. Ok, so some people will die in the grinding gears.. a price worth paying?
Fortunately, most people are not like that. But I'd feel a lot happier if that weirdo minority were not in power.1 -
That has no effect whatsoever on American policy, it's just someone saying how they feel.Nigelb said:
Unhuh...dyedwoolie said:
American forces do their duty wherever they are posted, they have no involvement in where they should or should not do that duty. If America has betrayed the Kurds then others must step in if they wish to see the Kurds have support. America isn't the world's policeman, if it wants to be a dick, it's free to do so.Gallowgate said:
American forces are already there and are willing to continue their duty. Your apologism for Trump is really something to behold.HYUFD said:
Well why can't British and French forces fill the gap then?Gallowgate said:
You’re really missing the point. Turkey would not be invading if American armed forces were not stood down.HYUFD said:
I am not anti Kurdish or pro Putin though we shared the aim of both to defeat ISSunil_Prasannan said:
Why are so anti-Kurdish and pro-Putin?HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
Now IS is defeated should American servicepeoples lives still be risked to defend Kurdish territory from Turkey when European servicepersons lives are not being risked to do the same?
Turkey's Syria invasion: Member of US Special Forces says, 'I am ashamed for the first time in my career'
https://www.foxnews.com/world/turkey-syria-invasion-special-forces-soldier-kurds0 -
Grow up!Gallowgate said:
So what are you afraid of?isam said:If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful
Had Remain won I wouldn’t have been campaigning for or calling for another referendum without a party with one in their manifesto winning a GE. If you are too full of your own self interest to respect the vote of a majority of the country you’ll have to live with yourself2 -
I believe its up for review. I assume it may not be. After all, it means a May 2022 election and if Parliament can kick the can just a little longer, then they will.Daveyboy1961 said:
Does the FTPA expire?TheValiant said:I also wonder.
Last GE 8th June 2017.
PArliament returned for QS on 21st June 2017.
FTPA expires in 2020.
Five year term to 20th June 2022.
25 working days later.
GE held on Monday 25th July 2022.
You heard it here first. Bet accordingly.
I do wonder if Parliament can change the length of terms from 5 years to.... oh I don't know.... 100 years.0 -
anothnick says: "FWIW I think Parliament will decide that there is a requirement for an electoral process but it will go for a referendum rather than a general election."
I agree that this is where we are heading. Odds on 2022 GE are much too long IMO.
With regard to a referendum: can they agree the question?0 -
Even a conspicuous Trump lickspittle like Lindsey Graham is prepared to cross him on this:HYUFD said:
Trump was elected on an 'America First' agenda, he is only doing what he said he would and only fighting wars where America is directly at threat.Gallowgate said:
American forces are already there and are willing to continue their duty. Your apologism for Trump is really something to behold.HYUFD said:
Well why can't British and French forces fill the gap then?Gallowgate said:
You’re really missing the point. Turkey would not be invading if American armed forces were not stood down.HYUFD said:
I am not anti Kurdish or pro Putin though we shared the aim of both to defeat ISSunil_Prasannan said:
Why are so anti-Kurdish and pro-Putin?HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
Now IS is defeated should American servicepeoples lives still be risked to defend Kurdish territory from Turkey when European servicepersons lives are not being risked to do the same?
If we criticise him we cannot do so over the Kurds unless we are also willing to send troops to Syria to protect Kurdish lands
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/09/syria-backlash-trump-0426540 -
Difference is merely an underscore in the twitter account name.logical_song said:Does anybody know who's behind the fake Britain Elects poll yesterday or why they did it (apart from winding up some posters on here)?
"There was no poll released today by @OpiniumResearch or tweeted by us. Figures you may be seeing come from a fake account attempting to impersonate us and put out false data."
BritainElects and Britain_Elects
To be fair the fake one's bio explicitly says it makes up polls. But still people fell for it somehow.
One of my favourite pastimes in idle moments is reading the irate/pompous/gleeful/despairing/etc comments in reply to tweets which people don't realise are fake! It's a shame Corbynsuperfan is no more0 -
That's the one thing the sovereign parliament cannot doTheValiant said:
I believe its up for review. I assume it may not be. After all, it means a May 2022 election and if Parliament can kick the can just a little longer, then they will.Daveyboy1961 said:
Does the FTPA expire?TheValiant said:I also wonder.
Last GE 8th June 2017.
PArliament returned for QS on 21st June 2017.
FTPA expires in 2020.
Five year term to 20th June 2022.
25 working days later.
GE held on Monday 25th July 2022.
You heard it here first. Bet accordingly.
I do wonder if Parliament can change the length of terms from 5 years to.... oh I don't know.... 100 years.0 -
This is the cleverest post from you in quite a while. The contortions needed to avoid pinning your statement to a particular tense is quite something. Well done, sir.isam said:to respect the vote of a majority of the country
Of course, if you had used the past tense -- "what the majority voted for" -- you open the discussion up to the fact that the majority has now gone. And it you used the present tense -- "what the majority want" -- you'd be making the opposite point, since the majority now want remain.
Nice going.0 -
It looks to me like a trial run for a betting coup. Possibly a fake exit poll 'leaked' via Twitter at 9.58pm on election night. Lots of money to be made before the truth puts its boots on. This site would no doubt have a walk-on part to play.JonCisBack said:
Difference is merely an underscore in the twitter account name.logical_song said:Does anybody know who's behind the fake Britain Elects poll yesterday or why they did it (apart from winding up some posters on here)?
"There was no poll released today by @OpiniumResearch or tweeted by us. Figures you may be seeing come from a fake account attempting to impersonate us and put out false data."
BritainElects and Britain_Elects
To be fair the fake one's bio explicitly says it makes up polls. But still people fell for it somehow.
One of my favourite pastimes in idle moments is reading the irate/pompous/gleeful/despairing/etc comments in reply to tweets which people don't realise are fake! It's a shame Corbynsuperfan is no more0 -
I hear you. But it is the basis which has been negotiated in good faith by the two parties. I get also that the current government doesn't like it but that is only because some in Parliament dislike it. The reason for a second referendum is to bypass parliament.dyedwoolie said:
There is when it's being framed to achieve a desired result. The May deal is not the only basis on which we can leave the EU, therefore it cannot be the only option presentedTOPPING said:
I posted these links many moons ago and it looks like I'll have to do so again. Decision making can take place under several conditions (risk, uncertainty, certainty). The referendum a decision made under uncertainty. Things have moved on since then and therefore there is no democratic, moral, or logical deficit by having another referendum.dyedwoolie said:The remain solution to 'nobody knew what they were voting for' seems to be to offer a vote between a discredited deal that has been rejected 3 times and leaves us locked in a backstop indefinitely or what they want. Genius.
0 -
There was literally a UKIP petition already on the gov website the day of the referendum to ask for another one if the result was 52/48 remain.isam said:
Grow up!Gallowgate said:
So what are you afraid of?isam said:If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful
Had Remain won I wouldn’t have been campaigning for or calling for another referendum without a party with one in their manifesto winning a GE. If you are too full of your own self interest to respect the vote of a majority of the country you’ll have to live with yourself
I also remember JRM in the House saying we can always have a confirmatory referendum on any deal.
I also remember the entire referendum campaign being around getting a deal being super easy, no deal was project fear, and we could be just like Norway.
Why can't we just be like Norway? Why are the government ignoring the will of the people by not offering a Norway deal?
There is no mandate for a No Deal exit of the EU. The referendum does not provide it. The last election does not provide it. I doubt another election will provide it.
0 -
?rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
Is S/Lt (Acting) Mordaunt proposing British forces deploy or is it just Americans she is prepared to see die in defence of Rojava?0 -
A range of options need to be presented if we are to truly undo the supposed knowledge deficit of 2016. Anything else is just fixing it for one sideTOPPING said:
I hear you. But it is the basis which has been negotiated in good faith by the two parties. I get also that the current government doesn't like it but that is only because some in Parliament dislike it. The reason for a second referendum is to bypass parliament.dyedwoolie said:
There is when it's being framed to achieve a desired result. The May deal is not the only basis on which we can leave the EU, therefore it cannot be the only option presentedTOPPING said:
I posted these links many moons ago and it looks like I'll have to do so again. Decision making can take place under several conditions (risk, uncertainty, certainty). The referendum a decision made under uncertainty. Things have moved on since then and therefore there is no democratic, moral, or logical deficit by having another referendum.dyedwoolie said:The remain solution to 'nobody knew what they were voting for' seems to be to offer a vote between a discredited deal that has been rejected 3 times and leaves us locked in a backstop indefinitely or what they want. Genius.
0 -
We will be too busy licking their butts for a trade dealHYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?0 -
So you think it’s perfectly fair to present an option which got 48% last time against one that the leaders of the side that got 52% won’t support?!TOPPING said:
I hear you. But it is the basis which has been negotiated in good faith by the two parties. I get also that the current government doesn't like it but that is only because some in Parliament dislike it. The reason for a second referendum is to bypass parliament.dyedwoolie said:
There is when it's being framed to achieve a desired result. The May deal is not the only basis on which we can leave the EU, therefore it cannot be the only option presentedTOPPING said:
I posted these links many moons ago and it looks like I'll have to do so again. Decision making can take place under several conditions (risk, uncertainty, certainty). The referendum a decision made under uncertainty. Things have moved on since then and therefore there is no democratic, moral, or logical deficit by having another referendum.dyedwoolie said:The remain solution to 'nobody knew what they were voting for' seems to be to offer a vote between a discredited deal that has been rejected 3 times and leaves us locked in a backstop indefinitely or what they want. Genius.
What next? You’ll be tempting us with even money about the offer of tails with your double headed coin?0 -
You want Leave? Vote Conrottenborough said:
You want Remain? Vote Lib
You want we, you know, hold on, it's on the tip of my tongue?. Vote Lab.0 -
So make any new referendum Deal or No Deal. But Remain cannot be an option. That question was asked and answered.148grss said:
There was literally a UKIP petition already on the gov website the day of the referendum to ask for another one if the result was 52/48 remain.isam said:
Grow up!Gallowgate said:
So what are you afraid of?isam said:If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful
Had Remain won I wouldn’t have been campaigning for or calling for another referendum without a party with one in their manifesto winning a GE. If you are too full of your own self interest to respect the vote of a majority of the country you’ll have to live with yourself
I also remember JRM in the House saying we can always have a confirmatory referendum on any deal.
I also remember the entire referendum campaign being around getting a deal being super easy, no deal was project fear, and we could be just like Norway.
Why can't we just be like Norway? Why are the government ignoring the will of the people by not offering a Norway deal?
There is no mandate for a No Deal exit of the EU. The referendum does not provide it. The last election does not provide it. I doubt another election will provide it.0 -
He really is a nasty piece of work.Theuniondivvie said:
And yet the tangerine moron was citing the Kurds' non-presence at the Normandy landings as some kind of justifcation, an event that was the very antithesis of America First.HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
The chances of Trump having a rational, thought out position on this are between zero and fuck all, though I guess that reflects the world view of his base pretty well.0 -
Well you can, if they f*** it up, then make it worse by then not clearing up the mess and getting out of there.HYUFD said:
Agreed, no good attacking America for invading the Middle East if you then also attack America for withdrawing from the Middle Eastdyedwoolie said:
American forces do their duty wherever they are posted, they have no involvement in where they should or should not do that duty. If America has betrayed the Kurds then others must step in if they wish to see the Kurds have support. America isn't the world's policeman, if it wants to be a dick, it's free to do so.Gallowgate said:
American forces are already there and are willing to continue their duty. Your apologism for Trump is really something to behold.HYUFD said:
Well why can't British and French forces fill the gap then?Gallowgate said:
You’re really missing the point. Turkey would not be invading if American armed forces were not stood down.HYUFD said:
I am not anti Kurdish or pro Putin though we shared the aim of both to defeat ISSunil_Prasannan said:
Why are so anti-Kurdish and pro-Putin?HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
Now IS is defeated should American servicepeoples lives still be risked to defend Kurdish territory from Turkey when European servicepersons lives are not being risked to do the same?1 -
A more positive interpretation is that the public are open to changing their mind, public debate still matters and political campaigning makes a difference.isam said:If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful0 -
Then they should have voted for Mays agreement with the EU.148grss said:
There was literally a UKIP petition already on the gov website the day of the referendum to ask for another one if the result was 52/48 remain.isam said:
Grow up!Gallowgate said:
So what are you afraid of?isam said:If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful
Had Remain won I wouldn’t have been campaigning for or calling for another referendum without a party with one in their manifesto winning a GE. If you are too full of your own self interest to respect the vote of a majority of the country you’ll have to live with yourself
I also remember JRM in the House saying we can always have a confirmatory referendum on any deal.
I also remember the entire referendum campaign being around getting a deal being super easy, no deal was project fear, and we could be just like Norway.
Why can't we just be like Norway? Why are the government ignoring the will of the people by not offering a Norway deal?
There is no mandate for a No Deal exit of the EU. The referendum does not provide it. The last election does not provide it. I doubt another election will provide it.0 -
Not just a betting coup: there are higher prizes at stake in the markets and even at Westminster itself. In an election expected to be dominated by tactical voting, information on how everyone else will vote can be crucial, so all sides and the KGB will be sending the electronic equivalent of Winning Here! and Only We Can Beat the Reds/Blues/Yellows!Alphabet_Soup said:
It looks to me like a trial run for a betting coup. Possibly a fake exit poll 'leaked' via Twitter at 9.58pm on election night. Lots of money to be made before the truth puts its boots on. This site would no doubt have a walk-on part to play.JonCisBack said:
Difference is merely an underscore in the twitter account name.logical_song said:Does anybody know who's behind the fake Britain Elects poll yesterday or why they did it (apart from winding up some posters on here)?
"There was no poll released today by @OpiniumResearch or tweeted by us. Figures you may be seeing come from a fake account attempting to impersonate us and put out false data."
BritainElects and Britain_Elects
To be fair the fake one's bio explicitly says it makes up polls. But still people fell for it somehow.
One of my favourite pastimes in idle moments is reading the irate/pompous/gleeful/despairing/etc comments in reply to tweets which people don't realise are fake! It's a shame Corbynsuperfan is no more0 -
Why is everyone so reluctant to question pollsters findings on long term hypotheticals, when their track record is so ridiculously poor? It really is like a religionOblitusSumMe said:
A more positive interpretation is that the public are open to changing their mind, public debate still matters and political campaigning makes a difference.isam said:If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful1 -
Remain vs leave.Stocky said:anothnick says: "FWIW I think Parliament will decide that there is a requirement for an electoral process but it will go for a referendum rather than a general election."
I agree that this is where we are heading. Odds on 2022 GE are much too long IMO.
With regard to a referendum: can they agree the question?
The difficult bit will be agreeing on the definition of "leave."0 -
ExactlyRichard_Tyndall said:
So make any new referendum Deal or No Deal. But Remain cannot be an option. That question was asked and answered.148grss said:
There was literally a UKIP petition already on the gov website the day of the referendum to ask for another one if the result was 52/48 remain.isam said:
Grow up!Gallowgate said:
So what are you afraid of?isam said:If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful
Had Remain won I wouldn’t have been campaigning for or calling for another referendum without a party with one in their manifesto winning a GE. If you are too full of your own self interest to respect the vote of a majority of the country you’ll have to live with yourself
I also remember JRM in the House saying we can always have a confirmatory referendum on any deal.
I also remember the entire referendum campaign being around getting a deal being super easy, no deal was project fear, and we could be just like Norway.
Why can't we just be like Norway? Why are the government ignoring the will of the people by not offering a Norway deal?
There is no mandate for a No Deal exit of the EU. The referendum does not provide it. The last election does not provide it. I doubt another election will provide it.0 -
Lindsey Graham is a neocon and was a close ally of John McCain so no surprise there.Nigelb said:
Even a conspicuous Trump lickspittle like Lindsey Graham is prepared to cross him on this:HYUFD said:
Trump was elected on an 'America First' agenda, he is only doing what he said he would and only fighting wars where America is directly at threat.Gallowgate said:
American forces are already there and are willing to continue their duty. Your apologism for Trump is really something to behold.HYUFD said:
Well why can't British and French forces fill the gap then?Gallowgate said:
You’re really missing the point. Turkey would not be invading if American armed forces were not stood down.HYUFD said:
I am not anti Kurdish or pro Putin though we shared the aim of both to defeat ISSunil_Prasannan said:
Why are so anti-Kurdish and pro-Putin?HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
Now IS is defeated should American servicepeoples lives still be risked to defend Kurdish territory from Turkey when European servicepersons lives are not being risked to do the same?
If we criticise him we cannot do so over the Kurds unless we are also willing to send troops to Syria to protect Kurdish lands
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/09/syria-backlash-trump-042654
However while Graham might be able to criticise Trump unless we are prepared to put British boots on the ground in Syria to protect Kurdish territory I don't think we have any moral authority to attack Trump in this0 -
I can't recall a democratic vote where the result hasn't been implemented before. I think very long term leaving then rejoining may have served the remain cause better. The forces of leave can't be held out forever, certainly not under FPTP anyway.OblitusSumMe said:
A more positive interpretation is that the public are open to changing their mind, public debate still matters and political campaigning makes a difference.isam said:If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful
Will Labour go for PR if they have a minority, it's probably that that is crucial in the next parliament for the Lib Dems to push rather than a second referendum.0 -
That question was asked and answered in a different context.Richard_Tyndall said:
So make any new referendum Deal or No Deal. But Remain cannot be an option. That question was asked and answered.148grss said:
There was literally a UKIP petition already on the gov website the day of the referendum to ask for another one if the result was 52/48 remain.isam said:
Grow up!Gallowgate said:
So what are you afraid of?isam said:If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful
Had Remain won I wouldn’t have been campaigning for or calling for another referendum without a party with one in their manifesto winning a GE. If you are too full of your own self interest to respect the vote of a majority of the country you’ll have to live with yourself
I also remember JRM in the House saying we can always have a confirmatory referendum on any deal.
I also remember the entire referendum campaign being around getting a deal being super easy, no deal was project fear, and we could be just like Norway.
Why can't we just be like Norway? Why are the government ignoring the will of the people by not offering a Norway deal?
There is no mandate for a No Deal exit of the EU. The referendum does not provide it. The last election does not provide it. I doubt another election will provide it.
I also don't accept that No Deal should be on a referendum. It would be immoral and irresponsible. If No Deal is going to happen it should be a decision taken by those with the knowledge and understanding of what will happen. It would be like putting healthcare to plebiscite.0 -
And this parliament will certainly not be able to agree on any change, still less repeal.dyedwoolie said:
FTPA is not due to expire, its due for a reviewTheValiant said:I also wonder.
Last GE 8th June 2017.
PArliament returned for QS on 21st June 2017.
FTPA expires in 2020.
Five year term to 20th June 2022.
25 working days later.
GE held on Monday 25th July 2022.
You heard it here first. Bet accordingly.0 -
https://twitter.com/the3million/status/1182203372574822402?s=19
What with this and the prospect of IS being revived because of the malicious ignorance of the tangerine moron, there is not much reason to be cheerful about world affairs this morning.1 -
0
-
Looks like we've avoided technical recession which would have been declared in mid November and dominated the subsequent narrative. Unless the September figures are really, suddenly grim the Government has dodged a bullet. A win for Boris.1
-
Looks like we've avoided technical recession which would have been declared in mid November and dominated the subsequent narrative. Unless the September figures are really, suddenly grim the Government has dodged a bullet. A win for Boris.0
-
It should be stay or leave followed by if leave wins then current WA deal or no deal.Stocky said:anothnick says: "FWIW I think Parliament will decide that there is a requirement for an electoral process but it will go for a referendum rather than a general election."
I agree that this is where we are heading. Odds on 2022 GE are much too long IMO.
With regard to a referendum: can they agree the question?0 -
If that were the case then he should have been consistent and not have let US forces operate alongside the Kurds for the last few years. Much like the US encouraging the Marsh Arabs to rise up against Saddam and the abandoning them to be massacred when they were no longer needed.HYUFD said:
Trump was elected on an 'America First' agenda, he is only doing what he said he would and only fighting wars where America is directly at threat.Gallowgate said:
American forces are already there and are willing to continue their duty. Your apologism for Trump is really something to behold.HYUFD said:
Well why can't British and French forces fill the gap then?Gallowgate said:
You’re really missing the point. Turkey would not be invading if American armed forces were not stood down.HYUFD said:
I am not anti Kurdish or pro Putin though we shared the aim of both to defeat ISSunil_Prasannan said:
Why are so anti-Kurdish and pro-Putin?HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
Now IS is defeated should American servicepeoples lives still be risked to defend Kurdish territory from Turkey when European servicepersons lives are not being risked to do the same?
If we criticise him we cannot do so over the Kurds unless we are also willing to send troops to Syria to protect Kurdish lands0 -
A commons vote on May`s WA subject to the rider of a confirmatory referendum would put us in the interesting position of virtually all MPs in support of the vote with the only MP`s opposing it being from the party which created the WA in the first place (albeit under a different PM).0
-
The EU will offer an extension simply because that is preferable to taking the blame for a No Deal exit and and economic disruption that would cause to their voters.JonCisBack said:
The March to October extension didn't achieve anything, possibly even the reverse. May at least had a deal to put to parliament.OblitusSumMe said:
I don't see any reason for the EU to offer a short extension. It would simply create more hassle for them.Sandpit said:On topic, I agree with Alastair’s conclusions, with one constraint: the suggestion in the Benn Act letter is for an extension until 31st January.
If that is the extension given, then the election is probably going to have to be on 5th December, or possibly 13th. No-one is going to want to campaign over Christmas (or be seen supporting the idea), and an early January dissolution leads to a mid-February election, most likely 20th if we stick to a 25 day campaign and a Thursday election.
My betting plan here is to base decisions on the extension date proposal, any date other than 31st Jan leads to a 2020 election. (But what do I know, I didn’t see Boris as next PM until it was way too late to still be laying the favourite).
Six months is probably the minimum, and it's best to look at dates in the EU calendar that they might link it to. So there's another EU council scheduled for mid-June, which is why the end of June has been mooted as a possible date.
I've also suggested the end of 2020 - the end date for the transition period agreed as part of May's deal.
The EU offering an extension would only make sense from their viewpoint if they thought it mean a GE would (a) happen before the end of the extension and (b) return a Remain friendly government or one likely to run a 2nd referendum. If it returns a Tory majority however, and a Tory party purged largely of Europhiles, this would surely mean no deal.0 -
Why shoukd Remain get a second chance? If the argument is that no one voted for a No Deal first time round then have a vote on the form of Brexit. What is certain is that Remain has already been rejected.nichomar said:
It should be stay or leave followed by if leave wins then current WA deal or no deal.Stocky said:anothnick says: "FWIW I think Parliament will decide that there is a requirement for an electoral process but it will go for a referendum rather than a general election."
I agree that this is where we are heading. Odds on 2022 GE are much too long IMO.
With regard to a referendum: can they agree the question?1 -
Why not? Who changed it from seven year term to five year term?dyedwoolie said:
That's the one thing the sovereign parliament cannot doTheValiant said:
I believe its up for review. I assume it may not be. After all, it means a May 2022 election and if Parliament can kick the can just a little longer, then they will.Daveyboy1961 said:
Does the FTPA expire?TheValiant said:I also wonder.
Last GE 8th June 2017.
PArliament returned for QS on 21st June 2017.
FTPA expires in 2020.
Five year term to 20th June 2022.
25 working days later.
GE held on Monday 25th July 2022.
You heard it here first. Bet accordingly.
I do wonder if Parliament can change the length of terms from 5 years to.... oh I don't know.... 100 years.0 -
Duplicate post deleted.0
-
Now that Ruth Davidson has quit Penny Mordaunt is positioning herself as the new designated survivor. If we Remain she can pivot as an arch Brexiter. " We remain for now. We will revisit this after the next Tory majority with a plan. " Equally if we Brexit badly her sacking means she's a clean skin true believer who can cast herself as a fixer.
Of course if the Boris project works he'll be around for a while.0 -
True. And you could even offer monetary compensation if it didn't (knowing that you wouldn't be around to actually have to pay out).OblitusSumMe said:1 -
I'm not sure the commons numbers are there for a second ref. Tories and DUP will be three line whipped against, and there are a portion of labour that won't vote for it. Would the '21' all vote for? Doubtful, some would but I cant see all of them taking that route.
Then even if it squeaks through there will be more disagreement on the question.0 -
Also I can’t see how they can insist on an election as there is no way of that being guaranteed. They may advise that the UK considers an election or a referendum so give the extension to 31/6 but without a defined position there will be no more.OblitusSumMe said:
The EU will offer an extension simply because that is preferable to taking the blame for a No Deal exit and and economic disruption that would cause to their voters.JonCisBack said:
The March to October extension didn't achieve anything, possibly even the reverse. May at least had a deal to put to parliament.OblitusSumMe said:
I don't see any reason for the EU to offer a short extension. It would simply create more hassle for them.Sandpit said:On topic, I agree with Alastair’s conclusions, with one constraint: the suggestion in the Benn Act letter is for an extension until 31st January.
If that is the extension given, then the election is probably going to have to be on 5th December, or possibly 13th. No-one is going to want to campaign over Christmas (or be seen supporting the idea), and an early January dissolution leads to a mid-February election, most likely 20th if we stick to a 25 day campaign and a Thursday election.
My betting plan here is to base decisions on the extension date proposal, any date other than 31st Jan leads to a 2020 election. (But what do I know, I didn’t see Boris as next PM until it was way too late to still be laying the favourite).
Six months is probably the minimum, and it's best to look at dates in the EU calendar that they might link it to. So there's another EU council scheduled for mid-June, which is why the end of June has been mooted as a possible date.
I've also suggested the end of 2020 - the end date for the transition period agreed as part of May's deal.
The EU offering an extension would only make sense from their viewpoint if they thought it mean a GE would (a) happen before the end of the extension and (b) return a Remain friendly government or one likely to run a 2nd referendum. If it returns a Tory majority however, and a Tory party purged largely of Europhiles, this would surely mean no deal.0 -
In what way is that not interfering?Cyclefree said:Morning all.
Were I French I would simply say that since the last extension was wasted, another one would only be granted on the basis that there is a referendum to decide between leaving on the basis of the WA or Remaining.
I would have zero appetite for trying to negotiate some other deal either with a majority Johnson government or some other unknown government with all the uncertainties involved.
Take it or leave it.
Parliament seems incapable of making its mind up so let the people decide. A GE risks being, from the EU's perspective, a self-indulgent distraction which may do nothing to resolve matters. Much like the last one.
The democratically legitimate option would be deal vs no deal
0 -
They didn't. Parliament is sovereign, not the executive. It was May's job to make a deal that could pass Parliament, not Parliaments job to rubber stamp whatever she produced.isam said:
Then they should have voted for Mays agreement with the EU.148grss said:
There was literally a UKIP petition already on the gov website the day of the referendum to ask for another one if the result was 52/48 remain.isam said:
Grow up!Gallowgate said:
So what are you afraid of?isam said:If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful
Had Remain won I wouldn’t have been campaigning for or calling for another referendum without a party with one in their manifesto winning a GE. If you are too full of your own self interest to respect the vote of a majority of the country you’ll have to live with yourself
I also remember JRM in the House saying we can always have a confirmatory referendum on any deal.
I also remember the entire referendum campaign being around getting a deal being super easy, no deal was project fear, and we could be just like Norway.
Why can't we just be like Norway? Why are the government ignoring the will of the people by not offering a Norway deal?
There is no mandate for a No Deal exit of the EU. The referendum does not provide it. The last election does not provide it. I doubt another election will provide it.1 -
No it hasn’t. Remain has been rejected against a fairytale concept of ‘leave’. Who’s to say that Remain isn’t favored against a realistic Leave scenario.Richard_Tyndall said:
Why shoukd Remain get a second chance? If the argument is that no one voted for a No Deal first time round then have a vote on the form of Brexit. What is certain is that Remain has already been rejected.nichomar said:
It should be stay or leave followed by if leave wins then current WA deal or no deal.Stocky said:anothnick says: "FWIW I think Parliament will decide that there is a requirement for an electoral process but it will go for a referendum rather than a general election."
I agree that this is where we are heading. Odds on 2022 GE are much too long IMO.
With regard to a referendum: can they agree the question?
Regardless this is a pointless debate to have as its your best interest for Remain not to appear on any hypothetical 2nd ref and in my best interest for it to appear.0 -
Nope you don't get to argue that rubbish. Making the choice between Deal or No Deal answes the question of the form of Brexit. But until such times as we actually leave the Original referendum has not been respected and that question should not be asked again.148grss said:
That question was asked and answered in a different context.Richard_Tyndall said:
So make any new referendum Deal or No Deal. But Remain cannot be an option. That question was asked and answered.148grss said:
There was literally a UKIP petition already on the gov website the day of the referendum to ask for another one if the result was 52/48 remain.isam said:
Grow up!Gallowgate said:
So what are you afraid of?isam said:If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful
Had Remain won I wouldn’t have been campaigning for or calling for another referendum without a party with one in their manifesto winning a GE. If you are too full of your own self interest to respect the vote of a majority of the country you’ll have to live with yourself
I also remember JRM in the House saying we can always have a confirmatory referendum on any deal.
I also remember the entire referendum campaign being around getting a deal being super easy, no deal was project fear, and we could be just like Norway.
Why can't we just be like Norway? Why are the government ignoring the will of the people by not offering a Norway deal?
There is no mandate for a No Deal exit of the EU. The referendum does not provide it. The last election does not provide it. I doubt another election will provide it.
I also don't accept that No Deal should be on a referendum. It would be immoral and irresponsible. If No Deal is going to happen it should be a decision taken by those with the knowledge and understanding of what will happen. It would be like putting healthcare to plebiscite.0 -
"Why should Remain get a second chance? If the argument is that no one voted for a No Deal first time round then have a vote on the form of Brexit. What is certain is that Remain has already been rejected."
Remainers would be getting two second chances! Remain plus WA agreement (which is not really Brexit). And I`m saying that as a remainer!0 -
The next election was delayed at least twice during the Second World War to well beyond 5 years.TheValiant said:
I believe its up for review. I assume it may not be. After all, it means a May 2022 election and if Parliament can kick the can just a little longer, then they will.Daveyboy1961 said:
Does the FTPA expire?TheValiant said:I also wonder.
Last GE 8th June 2017.
PArliament returned for QS on 21st June 2017.
FTPA expires in 2020.
Five year term to 20th June 2022.
25 working days later.
GE held on Monday 25th July 2022.
You heard it here first. Bet accordingly.
I do wonder if Parliament can change the length of terms from 5 years to.... oh I don't know.... 100 years.0 -
Total nonsense.Stocky said:"Why should Remain get a second chance? If the argument is that no one voted for a No Deal first time round then have a vote on the form of Brexit. What is certain is that Remain has already been rejected."
Remainers would be getting two second chances! Remain plus WA agreement (which is not really Brexit). And I`m saying that as a remainer!0 -
Stocky said:
A commons vote on May`s WA subject to the rider of a confirmatory referendum would put us in the interesting position of virtually all MPs in support of the vote with the only MP`s opposing it being from the party which created the WA in the first place (albeit under a different PM).
But they would have to hang on without an election until the referendum took place or risk it being cancelled by an incoming government. Also you can’t leave Johnson in place to put the referendum together given he is opposed to it. So not really a simple approach.0 -
Previously such a move would have been unthinkable, it probably still is. But in all the legal cases recently "Parliamentary sovereignty" has been trumped as the absolubte pinacle of the legal and constitutional pillar.TheValiant said:
Why not? Who changed it from seven year term to five year term?dyedwoolie said:
That's the one thing the sovereign parliament cannot doTheValiant said:
I believe its up for review. I assume it may not be. After all, it means a May 2022 election and if Parliament can kick the can just a little longer, then they will.Daveyboy1961 said:
Does the FTPA expire?TheValiant said:I also wonder.
Last GE 8th June 2017.
PArliament returned for QS on 21st June 2017.
FTPA expires in 2020.
Five year term to 20th June 2022.
25 working days later.
GE held on Monday 25th July 2022.
You heard it here first. Bet accordingly.
I do wonder if Parliament can change the length of terms from 5 years to.... oh I don't know.... 100 years.
I'd have thought the declaration of a hundred year term though would be followed by a Hong Kong redux. I'd find that a step too far even to keep Corbyn and his lot out, and I'd be joining the stormers if it was Corbyn himself doing it.0 -
Revisiting the question once wr have left would be absolutely correct. But as you say, doing it before hand to try and overturn the original vote would he unacceptable and extremly dangerous. Long term it will poison both UK and EU politics far more than leaving.Pulpstar said:
I can't recall a democratic vote where the result hasn't been implemented before. I think very long term leaving then rejoining may have served the remain cause better. The forces of leave can't be held out forever, certainly not under FPTP anyway.OblitusSumMe said:
A more positive interpretation is that the public are open to changing their mind, public debate still matters and political campaigning makes a difference.isam said:If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful
Will Labour go for PR if they have a minority, it's probably that that is crucial in the next parliament for the Lib Dems to push rather than a second referendum.0 -
We disagree on many things. But, on this, I'm afraid I agree wholeheartedly with you. Perfectly articulated!isam said:If we went by the results of opinion polls taken before campaigns started, the Tories would have won a majority in 2010, 2015 would have been a hung parliament, Remain won the referendum, Hilary Clinton would be POTUS, and the Conservatives would now have a three figure majority.
Yet people cling on to them to back up want they want to believe. Truly pitiful1 -
An example not a justificationTheuniondivvie said:
And yet the tangerine moron was citing the Kurds' non-presence at the Normandy landings as some kind of justifcation, an event that was the very antithesis of America First.HYUFD said:
I don't disagree but Trump remember was elected on an 'America First' agenda.rottenborough said:Leader-in-waiting tweets:
https://twitter.com/PennyMordaunt/status/1182207332371107840
From his perspective now IS have been defeated there is no need to keep risking US servicemens lives defending Kurdish territory from Turkish strikes even if morally the US might still have an obligation to the Kurds.
Plus where are the British and French forces defending the Kurds?
The chances of Trump having a rational, thought out position on this are between zero and fuck all, though I guess that reflects the world view of his base pretty well.0
