Betfair suggests there are only four serious contenders whatever the rules - Sunak, Penny, Hunt and Wallace.
Even if it goes to the members it looks almost certain the MPs will put two of those four into the Final.
If anyone is worried about it being anyone unsuitable (eg Braverman), look at it this way. Only five MPs would have to switch from Truss last time to Mordaunt this time to prevent Braverman making the Final.
There is no way Braverman would get almost everyone who voted Truss last time.
There is no way Truss can last in No 10 long enough for a leadership contest that goes to the party membership
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Seems odd therefore to conclude that our way out of our current economic trough is to hitch our wagon to Europe.
I reckon today's posts have illustrated the huge dilemma faced by the Tories on who should be their next leader, as Tory-leaners have oscillated wildly just in the space of a day.
This morning there was a push for Wallace, the unifying candidate. And some support for Sunak, the king from North Yorkshire. Then Hunt wowed them with his calmly reassuring statement. Then Mordaunt charged in and electrified the HoC. Then Hunt came back, with more reassurance. In the background, a few still want Boris back, and there's a segment of Badenoch backers. If PB typifies Tory support, you'll never agree on the succession. Messy.
The only consensus among those who'd like to be able to vote Tory is that Truss has to go.
I think it’s a very astute observation and shows how febrile everything is at the moment.
I won’t be voting Tory next time so my observations are as a former Tory voter and who I think will save them from disaster. The fact of the matter is they are going to be facing electoral defeat whoever they pick IMHO.
The safest and most experienced pair of hands to run the government is Hunt. But he won’t excite voters.
The “I told you so” candidate is Rishi. But he is unlikely to be a consensus builder and Hunt has stolen a march on him re economic policy.
The gamble is Penny. She’s the best communicator, but she is the least experienced.
The default is Wallace. Seems to be acceptable to all wings of the Party but a complete unknown when it comes to presentation or leadership qualities.
I say Penny at the moment, backed up by a unity cabinet, but I freely admit it’s not an easy choice for them and in 24 hours it might look very different.
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
Many people voted to leave the EU but they didn't vote to completely leave the EU marketplace.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Those are all because this government are shit, not anything to do with being in or out of the EU.
This (shit) government consists of a bunch of people who thought the leaving the EU was a great idea (albeit only after the referendum result in Truss’s case). That’s not exactly a good sign that leaving the EU was a good sign…
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Seems odd therefore to conclude that our way out of our current economic trough is to hitch our wagon to Europe.
We live nextdoor to Europe - for material goods and exports the Europe is our most logical market. And remember one of the things India wishes to export to use is their people.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Those are all because this government are shit, not anything to do with being in or out of the EU.
This (shit) government consists of a bunch of people who thought the leaving the EU was a great idea (albeit only after the referendum result in Truss’s case). That’s not exactly a good sign that leaving the EU was a good sign…
Wallace was correct. Don’t support Leave; it’s the option for clowns. (Paraphrasing).
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Seems odd therefore to conclude that our way out of our current economic trough is to hitch our wagon to Europe.
We are more f****** than Europe. Rejoining via EEA would still be a financial boost
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Nah, no chance of electoral reform if Labour have a big majority.
And that will be the last opportunity for another generation. I've been a Lib Dem member for almost 20 years and a strong believer in the importance of having a proper liberal party in politics, but if the current FPTP dynamics don't change, at some stage both the Lib Dems and Greens may have to think about jacking it in, accepting 2-party politics and joining the other 2 parties in the hope of dragging them in the right direction.
Labour might still offer AV - but not PR.
An electoral system with zero redeeming features that has already been explicitly rejected by the public?
Remarkably big score for the Tories – a fifth of the country claim to still support them. I hadn't realised the circus population was that large.
The local by election results of the last 3 weeks should show you the Tory vote isnt going to just dissolve. I'd expect even right now they'd get over 25% in an actual GE. There is enough fear and hatred of Labour where the Tories are the only alternative to drive nose peg voting
Even if they don't eventually do so by the time a GE rolls around, the fact that 56% of voters say they would now vote Labour is a strong indication that the "fear and hatred" of Labour is no longer the factor you believe it its be.
I think this is absolutely right. I certainly would not vote for Labour. But I no longer fear a Labour government in the way I did for the last 2 decades.
Yes. While Starmer and Reeves are utterly vacuous and likely no better than the calibre of the present Tories, they don't scare the horses. Some of the others sitting nearby, however....
To be fair that is ever the way with parties. Did anyone voting for Cameron in 2015 expect to end up with Truss in 2022? I know there were 2 GEs in between but still, the collapse of the credibility of the Tory party has been astonishing.
What was Hague thinking in 1998? That is at the heart of this. The ultimate unforced error.
Members selecting the party leader makes sense if you are in opposition - it makes less sense if you are in Government.
Even then you never really know how things will work out until you've actually tested them.
Members selecting the party leader makes sense when your party is vaguely sensible. Maybe the solution is not changing how parties choose leaders, but not voting for parties that pick crap leaders.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Seems odd therefore to conclude that our way out of our current economic trough is to hitch our wagon to Europe.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Bring it on. We will rout the FBPE fools once again
You seem to be forgetting you only won by 3% in 2016 and things have changed dramatically since then.
IIRC Rejoin was 16% ahead in the last poll I saw
Rejoin is generslly ahead by single figures of late. There have been 2 large rejoin leads over 10% both by Omnisis, nobody else seems to have polled the question since to see if its an in house effect or the actual position generally. Stay out has led as recently as April. I suspect rejoin may not look as sexy a prospect after this winter.
it was 51-35 in the latest poll last week. We won't rejoin for a while but very soon we will be looking back wistfully at the position we enjoyed within the EU up to 2016.
Within a decade of leaving we will back in the single market which I would be happy enough with. The credibility of Brexit and those politicians that espoused it is diminishing by the week. Whoever said the best way to kill off Brexit was to experience it wasn't far off the mark.
Remarkably big score for the Tories – a fifth of the country claim to still support them. I hadn't realised the circus population was that large.
The local by election results of the last 3 weeks should show you the Tory vote isnt going to just dissolve. I'd expect even right now they'd get over 25% in an actual GE. There is enough fear and hatred of Labour where the Tories are the only alternative to drive nose peg voting
Even if they don't eventually do so by the time a GE rolls around, the fact that 56% of voters say they would now vote Labour is a strong indication that the "fear and hatred" of Labour is no longer the factor you believe it its be.
I think this is absolutely right. I certainly would not vote for Labour. But I no longer fear a Labour government in the way I did for the last 2 decades.
Yes. While Starmer and Reeves are utterly vacuous and likely no better than the calibre of the present Tories, they don't scare the horses. Some of the others sitting nearby, however....
To be fair that is ever the way with parties. Did anyone voting for Cameron in 2015 expect to end up with Truss in 2022? I know there were 2 GEs in between but still, the collapse of the credibility of the Tory party has been astonishing.
What was Hague thinking in 1998? That is at the heart of this. The ultimate unforced error.
Members selecting the party leader makes sense if you are in opposition - it makes less sense if you are in Government.
Even then you never really know how things will work out until you've actually tested them.
Personally I think it makes no sense in any circumstance.
But I assume Hague was trying to look “down with the kids” after the fusty Major years.
I remember that excruciating pic of him at Notting Hill Carnival with a whistle round his neck.
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Not very radical in 2016. Increasingly so through the 2017-9 blocking parliament led by Bercow and - yes - Sir Keir, driven by the need to get through any form of Brexit in the face of democracy haters trying to overturn the referendum result.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
Pre planned just means they did not bump into each other. It does not give any indication if the pre planning was 5 years before, 5 months before, 5 days before, 5 hours before or 5 mins before......
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Bring it on. We will rout the FBPE fools once again
You seem to be forgetting you only won by 3% in 2016 and things have changed dramatically since then.
IIRC Rejoin was 16% ahead in the last poll I saw
May was 22 points ahead 3 weeks before the 2017 GE.
Starmer won't risk his premiership on an unnecessary reopening of the EU question. Though I do hope he will look at the less contentious issue of EFTA membership (but again think he is probably too cautious to do so)
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Nah, no chance of electoral reform if Labour have a big majority.
And that will be the last opportunity for another generation. I've been a Lib Dem member for almost 20 years and a strong believer in the importance of having a proper liberal party in politics, but if the current FPTP dynamics don't change, at some stage both the Lib Dems and Greens may have to think about jacking it in, accepting 2-party politics and joining the other 2 parties in the hope of dragging them in the right direction.
Labour might still offer AV - but not PR.
An electoral system with zero redeeming features that has already been explicitly rejected by the public?
I disagree. It is my favoured electoral system as conducted in Australia. The electorate has been known to change its mind on such issues.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Seems odd therefore to conclude that our way out of our current economic trough is to hitch our wagon to Europe.
We are more f****** than Europe. Rejoining via EEA would still be a financial boost
We really aren't. I'd suggest revisiting this after this winter. The ECB is going to have to inflict massive pain on Europe, its so far behind the curve on interest rates and QT. Cohesion might not be easy for the brotherhood as shit and fan collide
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
EEA, maybe, undoing Cameron/May's error.
But rejoin the EU, with the euro and Schengen as part of the package? Even if you could persuade the other 27 countries to offer it...
No reason to think we wouldn't be able to get opt-outs for the euro and Schengen, or at least have a way of indefinitely delaying them as Sweden has gone. The rebate has gone for sure though.
So your argument would be that rather than joining EFTA/EEA and having the single market benefits without any of the political rubbish, we should pay a huge wad of additional money to rejoin the political stuff as well? And with the threat of having to join the Euro and Schengen at some point down the line.
Good luck with that.
EFTA/EEA is an easy sell - it is, after all, pretty much what was voted for in 1975 and what well over 90% of people were happy with right up until Maastricht changed everything.
And, of course, who's to say the Rejoin campaign would be any more competent than the Remain campaign was?
There's a lot of misunderstanding about the EFTA/EEA option. In practice, the EU wouldn't let us be a member of the EEA because they regard the institutional structure as too lax. It was originally intended to be a temporary stopgap after Norway narrowly voted against joining the EU. The way some people act as though we could make a unilateral decision and join the EEA overnight is detached from reality.
It's also not really like what we voted for in 1975 because that gave us full participation in the institutions on an equal footing, not being a satellite state.
Genuine question, why do people think the EU wouldn't love to take us back, or that it would be too much trouble for them?
Wouldn't it be a huge boon for them for anyone who tried to leave in the future? They could say for years to come, "The UK tried it and regretted it, so why would it work for you?" and it may also dampen the appetite of Leavers in other countries.
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Not very radical in 2016. Increasingly so through the 2017-9 blocking parliament led by Bercow and - yes - Sir Keir, driven by the need to get through any form of Brexit in the face of democracy haters trying to overturn the referendum result.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
I don’t accept your account, let alone your “blame”. You are one of the cult-members.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Nah, no chance of electoral reform if Labour have a big majority.
And that will be the last opportunity for another generation. I've been a Lib Dem member for almost 20 years and a strong believer in the importance of having a proper liberal party in politics, but if the current FPTP dynamics don't change, at some stage both the Lib Dems and Greens may have to think about jacking it in, accepting 2-party politics and joining the other 2 parties in the hope of dragging them in the right direction.
Labour might still offer AV - but not PR.
An electoral system with zero redeeming features that has already been explicitly rejected by the public?
I disagree. It is my favoured electoral system as conducted in Australia. The electorate has been known to change its mind on such issues.
Point of order. It's majority preferential instant runoff. Not AV.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Have you come from mars?
No, i wafted in from paradise (bonus points for actress/model and product advertised)
Pre planned just means they did not bump into each other. It does not give any indication if the pre planning was 5 years before, 5 months before, 5 days before, 5 hours before or 5 mins before......
What, pray, is the difference between "planned" and "pre-planned"?
A spectacular picture. I doubt this is a shootdown. Everyone in the air force will be tired; from the pilots to the mechanics. Tired people make mistakes.
(This goes for both the Russians and the Ukrainians.)
There have been a couple of lost Russian planes shortly after take off in the last month or so. The planes probably haven't flown this often before.
Russia jet engines are known to have significantly fewer cycles between complete overhauls than Western ones. (Which has always been one of the big arguments in favour of Dassaults, Saabs, etc: yes, the sticker price is more than the MiG, but it lasts longer and costs less to maintain.)
Jet engines, like computer chips, are an area that the ex-Communist Bloc countries seem to find very hard to catch up on. They always seem at least a generation behind.
(Except for early on with the Nene and the traitorous Stafford Cripps...)
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Not very radical in 2016. Increasingly so through the 2017-9 blocking parliament led by Bercow and - yes - Sir Keir, driven by the need to get through any form of Brexit in the face of democracy haters trying to overturn the referendum result.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
I didn't realise it was PM Bercow and deputy PM Keir. For some strange reason I recall PM May at the time. Must have been a random nightmare, although I have been suffering a couple of different variations of the nightmare since, with equally unsuitable Tory PMs.
The yardstick I still see is the sizeable amount of people who I know voted Tory in '97 and '01 who are now voting Labour. That suggests to me that the crazy 400+ totals are not off the cards at all (even though I expect it to not be that high by the time the election rolls around)
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Have you come from mars?
Norfolk surely?
Indeed. A fine poster from a fine city, full of Eastern promise
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Take away the Dollars reserve currency status and the US would be a third world basket case economy
Maybe so. If things were different, they’d be different… but they’re not. You asked a question: you got an answer. There’s no point saying, “Well, your answer would be wrong if it wasn’t right.”
Take away the Conservative Party and Brexit and the UK would be an economic powerhouse!
Pre planned just means they did not bump into each other. It does not give any indication if the pre planning was 5 years before, 5 months before, 5 days before, 5 hours before or 5 mins before......
What, pray, is the difference between "planned" and "pre-planned"?
Depending on the situation you could plan in real time. A football manager making instinctive tactical adjustments mid way through the match for example. Creates a new plan for the players but not pre planned.
Pre planned just means they did not bump into each other. It does not give any indication if the pre planning was 5 years before, 5 months before, 5 days before, 5 hours before or 5 mins before......
What, pray, is the difference between "planned" and "pre-planned"?
The pre prepared people will be here next with their noxious wrongness
Pre planned just means they did not bump into each other. It does not give any indication if the pre planning was 5 years before, 5 months before, 5 days before, 5 hours before or 5 mins before......
What, pray, is the difference between "planned" and "pre-planned"?
The pre prepared people will be here next with their noxious wrongness
Pre planned just means they did not bump into each other. It does not give any indication if the pre planning was 5 years before, 5 months before, 5 days before, 5 hours before or 5 mins before......
What, pray, is the difference between "planned" and "pre-planned"?
Depending on the situation you could plan in real time. A football manager making instinctive tactical adjustments mid way through the match for example. Creates a new plan for the players but not pre planned.
Or to use a topical example, the reversal of the mini-budget was planned, but not pre-planned.
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
Many people voted to leave the EU but they didn't vote to completely leave the EU marketplace.
Leave promised we would be in a free trade zone from Iceland to Turkey. Leave did not say we wouldn’t even have free trade between Belfast and Liverpool.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Have you come from mars?
Norfolk surely?
Indeed. A fine poster from a fine city, full of Eastern promise
Really? I thought it was a rustic backwater surrounded by swamps? A sort of Florida but without either sunshine or alligators?
Pre planned just means they did not bump into each other. It does not give any indication if the pre planning was 5 years before, 5 months before, 5 days before, 5 hours before or 5 mins before......
What, pray, is the difference between "planned" and "pre-planned"?
Depending on the situation you could plan in real time. A football manager making instinctive tactical adjustments mid way through the match for example. Creates a new plan for the players but not pre planned.
Thanks! That's a very good analogy, but I am not sure I am totally convinced. I will go away and think about it.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Those are all because this government are shit, not anything to do with being in or out of the EU.
This (shit) government consists of a bunch of people who thought the leaving the EU was a great idea (albeit only after the referendum result in Truss’s case). That’s not exactly a good sign that leaving the EU was a good sign…
Wallace was correct. Don’t support Leave; it’s the option for clowns. (Paraphrasing).
And the non-clowns who tried to make the damn thing work (May, Stewart, Boles, Clarke etc) had custard pies thrown at them for their pains.
An idea isn't responsible for the people who have it. But did none of the people in the relevant room look round and think "Hold on, nearly everyone else here is a knave, fool, scumbag or some combination of the three. Am I in the right place?"
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Have you come from mars?
No, i wafted in from paradise (bonus points for actress/model and product advertised)
Pre planned just means they did not bump into each other. It does not give any indication if the pre planning was 5 years before, 5 months before, 5 days before, 5 hours before or 5 mins before......
What, pray, is the difference between "planned" and "pre-planned"?
Depending on the situation you could plan in real time. A football manager making instinctive tactical adjustments mid way through the match for example. Creates a new plan for the players but not pre planned.
By definition you have to plan ahead of time, whatever you 'plan' will be implemented later in time.
Remarkably big score for the Tories – a fifth of the country claim to still support them. I hadn't realised the circus population was that large.
The local by election results of the last 3 weeks should show you the Tory vote isnt going to just dissolve. I'd expect even right now they'd get over 25% in an actual GE. There is enough fear and hatred of Labour where the Tories are the only alternative to drive nose peg voting
Even if they don't eventually do so by the time a GE rolls around, the fact that 56% of voters say they would now vote Labour is a strong indication that the "fear and hatred" of Labour is no longer the factor you believe it its be.
I think this is absolutely right. I certainly would not vote for Labour. But I no longer fear a Labour government in the way I did for the last 2 decades.
Yes. While Starmer and Reeves are utterly vacuous and likely no better than the calibre of the present Tories, they don't scare the horses. Some of the others sitting nearby, however....
To be fair that is ever the way with parties. Did anyone voting for Cameron in 2015 expect to end up with Truss in 2022? I know there were 2 GEs in between but still, the collapse of the credibility of the Tory party has been astonishing.
What was Hague thinking in 1998? That is at the heart of this. The ultimate unforced error.
He was thinking "we have a declining membership - we need more involvement to boost it back up"
Well it didn't work
Conservative Party membership fell by more than half from 273,000 to 134,000 between 2002 and 2013, although the decline was temporarily reversed in the mid-2000s
Pre planned just means they did not bump into each other. It does not give any indication if the pre planning was 5 years before, 5 months before, 5 days before, 5 hours before or 5 mins before......
What, pray, is the difference between "planned" and "pre-planned"?
Depending on the situation you could plan in real time. A football manager making instinctive tactical adjustments mid way through the match for example. Creates a new plan for the players but not pre planned.
See also the use of substitutes. Pre-planned. New striker for last 15 minutes. Or because it isn't working, or injury.
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Not very radical in 2016. Increasingly so through the 2017-9 blocking parliament led by Bercow and - yes - Sir Keir, driven by the need to get through any form of Brexit in the face of democracy haters trying to overturn the referendum result.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
Why not blame the people who actually voted for it? It only happened because of them.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Seems odd therefore to conclude that our way out of our current economic trough is to hitch our wagon to Europe.
We live nextdoor to Europe - for material goods and exports the Europe is our most logical market. And remember one of the things India wishes to export to use is their people.
Oddly right now we seem to need some of those people - nurses, doctors, care staff, tech.
Remarkably big score for the Tories – a fifth of the country claim to still support them. I hadn't realised the circus population was that large.
The local by election results of the last 3 weeks should show you the Tory vote isnt going to just dissolve. I'd expect even right now they'd get over 25% in an actual GE. There is enough fear and hatred of Labour where the Tories are the only alternative to drive nose peg voting
Even if they don't eventually do so by the time a GE rolls around, the fact that 56% of voters say they would now vote Labour is a strong indication that the "fear and hatred" of Labour is no longer the factor you believe it its be.
I think this is absolutely right. I certainly would not vote for Labour. But I no longer fear a Labour government in the way I did for the last 2 decades.
Yes. While Starmer and Reeves are utterly vacuous and likely no better than the calibre of the present Tories, they don't scare the horses. Some of the others sitting nearby, however....
To be fair that is ever the way with parties. Did anyone voting for Cameron in 2015 expect to end up with Truss in 2022? I know there were 2 GEs in between but still, the collapse of the credibility of the Tory party has been astonishing.
What was Hague thinking in 1998? That is at the heart of this. The ultimate unforced error.
He was thinking "we have a declining membership - we need more involvement to boost it back up"
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Take away the Dollars reserve currency status and the US would be a third world basket case economy
Maybe so. If things were different, they’d be different… but they’re not. You asked a question: you got an answer. There’s no point saying, “Well, your answer would be wrong if it wasn’t right.”
Take away the Conservative Party and Brexit and the UK would be an economic powerhouse!
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Have you come from mars?
No, i wafted in from paradise (bonus points for actress/model and product advertised)
Why limit ourselves to the EU when we can have the herbs and spices of four continents?
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Have you come from mars?
Norfolk surely?
Indeed. A fine poster from a fine city, full of Eastern promise
Really? I thought it was a rustic backwater surrounded by swamps? A sort of Florida but without either sunshine or alligators?
Norwich is a glorious place to life. The wife would go back like a shot. Great shopping, decent nightlife. Big enough and remote enough that most U.K. tours touch down there. Occasional premiership football. Decent coast twenty miles away. The Norfolk broads. Glorious.
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Not very radical in 2016. Increasingly so through the 2017-9 blocking parliament led by Bercow and - yes - Sir Keir, driven by the need to get through any form of Brexit in the face of democracy haters trying to overturn the referendum result.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
Why not blame the people who actually voted for it? It only happened because of them.
Well, for me, because my order of preference was soft Brexit, hard Brexit, Remain. I would have rather had a soft Brexit. But I think Hard Remain posed a bigger risk to Britain's future prosperity and quality of life than Hard Brexit. Continuity 2005 wasn't on offer.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Seems odd therefore to conclude that our way out of our current economic trough is to hitch our wagon to Europe.
We live nextdoor to Europe - for material goods and exports the Europe is our most logical market. And remember one of the things India wishes to export to use is their people.
Oddly right now we seem to need some of those people - nurses, doctors, care staff, tech.
Aiui, a lot of Indian IT staff relocated to London recently.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Take away the Dollars reserve currency status and the US would be a third world basket case economy
Maybe so. If things were different, they’d be different… but they’re not. You asked a question: you got an answer. There’s no point saying, “Well, your answer would be wrong if it wasn’t right.”
Take away the Conservative Party and Brexit and the UK would be an economic powerhouse!
I didn't ask a question.
You wrote, “Who else’s economy is “booming”?” Kinda looked like a question…
Pre planned just means they did not bump into each other. It does not give any indication if the pre planning was 5 years before, 5 months before, 5 days before, 5 hours before or 5 mins before......
What, pray, is the difference between "planned" and "pre-planned"?
Depending on the situation you could plan in real time. A football manager making instinctive tactical adjustments mid way through the match for example. Creates a new plan for the players but not pre planned.
By definition you have to plan ahead of time, whatever you 'plan' will be implemented later in time.
In the scenario I have given both are ahead of time, but pre-planned would very strongly indicate that the plan was created before the start of the match, in a way that planned does not (could still be, but could also have been planned intra-match or even "at the time").
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Not very radical in 2016. Increasingly so through the 2017-9 blocking parliament led by Bercow and - yes - Sir Keir, driven by the need to get through any form of Brexit in the face of democracy haters trying to overturn the referendum result.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
Why not blame the people who actually voted for it? It only happened because of them.
Well, for me, because my order of preference was soft Brexit, hard Brexit, Remain. I would have rather had a soft Brexit. But I think Hard Remain posed a bigger risk to Britain's future prosperity and quality of life than Hard Brexit. Continuity 2005 wasn't on offer.
There’s no such thing as “Hard Remain”, though, which makes your evaluation rather dubious.
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Not very radical in 2016. Increasingly so through the 2017-9 blocking parliament led by Bercow and - yes - Sir Keir, driven by the need to get through any form of Brexit in the face of democracy haters trying to overturn the referendum result.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
Why not blame the people who actually voted for it? It only happened because of them.
Well, for me, because my order of preference was soft Brexit, hard Brexit, Remain. I would have rather had a soft Brexit. But I think Hard Remain posed a bigger risk to Britain's future prosperity and quality of life than Hard Brexit. Continuity 2005 wasn't on offer.
Continuity 2015 wasn't on offer - because Cameron changed our relationship in January 2016 and no-one could explain what the difference was.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Have you come from mars?
Norfolk surely?
Indeed. A fine poster from a fine city, full of Eastern promise
Really? I thought it was a rustic backwater surrounded by swamps? A sort of Florida but without either sunshine or alligators?
Rustic, yes. Dickeys work in the fields slowly ploddin past a fierce ole mawkin while the ole bor do round up some doddermen what been eating his crops, turnips and that. And blast if them kids int forever on about wantin a teetermatorter. Mardlin on here's all that keeps my head going on the huh. Anyhow keep you a troshin gal.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Seems odd therefore to conclude that our way out of our current economic trough is to hitch our wagon to Europe.
We live nextdoor to Europe - for material goods and exports the Europe is our most logical market. And remember one of the things India wishes to export to use is their people.
Oddly right now we seem to need some of those people - nurses, doctors, care staff, tech.
Aiui, a lot of Indian IT staff relocated to London recently.
Everyone has been bringing Indian staff in for over a decade. Sadly a lot of them aren't actually any use.
Remarkably big score for the Tories – a fifth of the country claim to still support them. I hadn't realised the circus population was that large.
The local by election results of the last 3 weeks should show you the Tory vote isnt going to just dissolve. I'd expect even right now they'd get over 25% in an actual GE. There is enough fear and hatred of Labour where the Tories are the only alternative to drive nose peg voting
Even if they don't eventually do so by the time a GE rolls around, the fact that 56% of voters say they would now vote Labour is a strong indication that the "fear and hatred" of Labour is no longer the factor you believe it its be.
I think this is absolutely right. I certainly would not vote for Labour. But I no longer fear a Labour government in the way I did for the last 2 decades.
Yes. While Starmer and Reeves are utterly vacuous and likely no better than the calibre of the present Tories, they don't scare the horses. Some of the others sitting nearby, however....
To be fair that is ever the way with parties. Did anyone voting for Cameron in 2015 expect to end up with Truss in 2022? I know there were 2 GEs in between but still, the collapse of the credibility of the Tory party has been astonishing.
What was Hague thinking in 1998? That is at the heart of this. The ultimate unforced error.
He was thinking "we have a declining membership - we need more involvement to boost it back up"
Well it didn't work
Conservative Party membership fell by more than half from 273,000 to 134,000 between 2002 and 2013, although the decline was temporarily reversed in the mid-2000s
Great chart. Whilst I do blame the politicians for their rubbish service it is important to remember voters share a collective blame too. We do not take enough interest, are not willing to invest time or really understand problems, and prefer the quick fix from shysters.
If just 5% of us joined a political party I think that may be enough to stop the likes of Corbyn and Truss in the future. Despite that I am not volunteering!
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Not very radical in 2016. Increasingly so through the 2017-9 blocking parliament led by Bercow and - yes - Sir Keir, driven by the need to get through any form of Brexit in the face of democracy haters trying to overturn the referendum result.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
Why not blame the people who actually voted for it? It only happened because of them.
Well, for me, because my order of preference was soft Brexit, hard Brexit, Remain. I would have rather had a soft Brexit. But I think Hard Remain posed a bigger risk to Britain's future prosperity and quality of life than Hard Brexit. Continuity 2005 wasn't on offer.
There’s no such thing as “Hard Remain”, though, which makes your evaluation rather dubious.
There could have been a 'hard Remain', involving adopting the Euro, joining Schengen, reversing Cameron's negotiation, voluntarily giving up our rebate, etc. Hardly anyone was advocating that in 2016, though, just as hardly anyone was advocating the hard Brexit we ended up with.
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Not very radical in 2016. Increasingly so through the 2017-9 blocking parliament led by Bercow and - yes - Sir Keir, driven by the need to get through any form of Brexit in the face of democracy haters trying to overturn the referendum result.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
Why not blame the people who actually voted for it? It only happened because of them.
Well, for me, because my order of preference was soft Brexit, hard Brexit, Remain. I would have rather had a soft Brexit. But I think Hard Remain posed a bigger risk to Britain's future prosperity and quality of life than Hard Brexit. Continuity 2005 wasn't on offer.
There’s no such thing as “Hard Remain”, though, which makes your evaluation rather dubious.
Dave's Deal was literally Soft Remain. Yes, Future Britain could have decided to give up the various optouts, but that would have been up to them.
I reckon today's posts have illustrated the huge dilemma faced by the Tories on who should be their next leader, as Tory-leaners have oscillated wildly just in the space of a day.
This morning there was a push for Wallace, the unifying candidate. And some support for Sunak, the king from North Yorkshire. Then Hunt wowed them with his calmly reassuring statement. Then Mordaunt charged in and electrified the HoC. Then Hunt came back, with more reassurance. In the background, a few still want Boris back, and there's a segment of Badenoch backers. If PB typifies Tory support, you'll never agree on the succession. Messy.
It's not the end of the world if they don't agree. At the present rate they can have all of them over the next six months or so.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Take away the Dollars reserve currency status and the US would be a third world basket case economy
Maybe so. If things were different, they’d be different… but they’re not. You asked a question: you got an answer. There’s no point saying, “Well, your answer would be wrong if it wasn’t right.”
Take away the Conservative Party and Brexit and the UK would be an economic powerhouse!
I didn't ask a question.
You wrote, “Who else’s economy is “booming”?” Kinda looked like a question…
Pre planned just means they did not bump into each other. It does not give any indication if the pre planning was 5 years before, 5 months before, 5 days before, 5 hours before or 5 mins before......
What, pray, is the difference between "planned" and "pre-planned"?
Oh, that's an easy one. And I've planned to give you an answer this afternoon (PST), if that works.
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Not very radical in 2016. Increasingly so through the 2017-9 blocking parliament led by Bercow and - yes - Sir Keir, driven by the need to get through any form of Brexit in the face of democracy haters trying to overturn the referendum result.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
Why not blame the people who actually voted for it? It only happened because of them.
Well, for me, because my order of preference was soft Brexit, hard Brexit, Remain. I would have rather had a soft Brexit. But I think Hard Remain posed a bigger risk to Britain's future prosperity and quality of life than Hard Brexit. Continuity 2005 wasn't on offer.
There’s no such thing as “Hard Remain”, though, which makes your evaluation rather dubious.
There could have been a 'hard Remain', involving adopting the Euro, joining Schengen, reversing Cameron's negotiation, voluntarily giving up our rebate, etc. Hardly anyone was advocating that in 2016, though, just as hardly anyone was advocating the hard Brexit we ended up with.
Nobody was advocating it, and it was never a likelihood either.
So the idea that we must therefore choose Hard Brexit in preference is the kind of lunacy that sadly led us to this present juncture!
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Not very radical in 2016. Increasingly so through the 2017-9 blocking parliament led by Bercow and - yes - Sir Keir, driven by the need to get through any form of Brexit in the face of democracy haters trying to overturn the referendum result.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
Why not blame the people who actually voted for it? It only happened because of them.
Well, for me, because my order of preference was soft Brexit, hard Brexit, Remain. I would have rather had a soft Brexit. But I think Hard Remain posed a bigger risk to Britain's future prosperity and quality of life than Hard Brexit. Continuity 2005 wasn't on offer.
There’s no such thing as “Hard Remain”, though, which makes your evaluation rather dubious.
There could have been a 'hard Remain', involving adopting the Euro, joining Schengen, reversing Cameron's negotiation, voluntarily giving up our rebate, etc. Hardly anyone was advocating that in 2016, though, just as hardly anyone was advocating the hard Brexit we ended up with.
Nobody was advocating it, and it was never a likelihood either.
So the idea that we must therefore choose Hard Brexit in preference is the kind of lunacy that sadly led us to this present juncture!
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Bring it on. We will rout the FBPE fools once again
Don't think porkies on a bus are going to cut it this time
If you think Starmer is going to risk his whole premiership on EU membership when most people are lukewarm at best and just want the whole issue to go away for a decade then you are madder than the ERG mob.
If he has any sense he will make the case for EFTA membership and single market access. And once that happens any chance of rejoining the political aspects of the EU are dead for good.
Assuming they win a decent but not all-conquering, kaleidoscope shaking majority, it's liable to be a second or third term issue when Labour begins to inevitably lose a degree of popularity and needs to shore up its base - rather like Brexit was for Cameron at an earlier stage when he had to shore up the pro-Brexit right. Especially given there are ready made vehicles for pro-European campaigning (Lib Dems, SNP, Greens) even more so than UKIP were.
Pre planned just means they did not bump into each other. It does not give any indication if the pre planning was 5 years before, 5 months before, 5 days before, 5 hours before or 5 mins before......
What, pray, is the difference between "planned" and "pre-planned"?
Depending on the situation you could plan in real time. A football manager making instinctive tactical adjustments mid way through the match for example. Creates a new plan for the players but not pre planned.
By definition you have to plan ahead of time, whatever you 'plan' will be implemented later in time.
In the scenario I have given both are ahead of time, but pre-planned would very strongly indicate that the plan was created before the start of the match, in a way that planned does not (could still be, but could also have been planned intra-match or even "at the time").
It might strongly indicate it, yes, but its still wrong and superfluous.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Take away the Dollars reserve currency status and the US would be a third world basket case economy
Maybe so. If things were different, they’d be different… but they’re not. You asked a question: you got an answer. There’s no point saying, “Well, your answer would be wrong if it wasn’t right.”
Take away the Conservative Party and Brexit and the UK would be an economic powerhouse!
I didn't ask a question.
You wrote, “Who else’s economy is “booming”?” Kinda looked like a question…
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Not very radical in 2016. Increasingly so through the 2017-9 blocking parliament led by Bercow and - yes - Sir Keir, driven by the need to get through any form of Brexit in the face of democracy haters trying to overturn the referendum result.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
Why not blame the people who actually voted for it? It only happened because of them.
Well, for me, because my order of preference was soft Brexit, hard Brexit, Remain. I would have rather had a soft Brexit. But I think Hard Remain posed a bigger risk to Britain's future prosperity and quality of life than Hard Brexit. Continuity 2005 wasn't on offer.
There’s no such thing as “Hard Remain”, though, which makes your evaluation rather dubious.
Hard Remain is what Greece and Italy have, in which their own democracy has been replaced by rule from Brussels and growth has been abolished. The faith I have that we could have stayed at soft remain indedinitely without being ratcheted further and further in is nil.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Take away the Dollars reserve currency status and the US would be a third world basket case economy
Maybe so. If things were different, they’d be different… but they’re not. You asked a question: you got an answer. There’s no point saying, “Well, your answer would be wrong if it wasn’t right.”
Take away the Conservative Party and Brexit and the UK would be an economic powerhouse!
I didn't ask a question.
You wrote, “Who else’s economy is “booming”?” Kinda looked like a question…
I believe you'll find i'm not KentRising.
My apologies.
No need, both Kent and Norfolk are happy with the status quo
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Seems odd therefore to conclude that our way out of our current economic trough is to hitch our wagon to Europe.
We live nextdoor to Europe - for material goods and exports the Europe is our most logical market. And remember one of the things India wishes to export to use is their people.
Oddly right now we seem to need some of those people - nurses, doctors, care staff, tech.
Aiui, a lot of Indian IT staff relocated to London recently.
Everyone has been bringing Indian staff in for over a decade. Sadly a lot of them aren't actually any use.
Recent trends in IT make me wonder if it is a fool's errand. Any service now depends on dozens of technologies chosen apparently at random, and no-one can be experts, or even experienced, in all of them.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Seems odd therefore to conclude that our way out of our current economic trough is to hitch our wagon to Europe.
We live nextdoor to Europe - for material goods and exports the Europe is our most logical market. And remember one of the things India wishes to export to use is their people.
Oddly right now we seem to need some of those people - nurses, doctors, care staff, tech.
Aiui, a lot of Indian IT staff relocated to London recently.
Everyone has been bringing Indian staff in for over a decade. Sadly a lot of them aren't actually any use.
Recent trends in IT make me wonder if it is a fool's errand. Any service now depends on dozens of technologies chosen apparently at random, and no-one can be experts, or even experienced, in all of them.
I can think of a couple of posters on here who are experts in everything, even subjects they have never thought of before reading a post or two on here.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Those are all because this government are shit, not anything to do with being in or out of the EU.
This (shit) government consists of a bunch of people who thought the leaving the EU was a great idea (albeit only after the referendum result in Truss’s case). That’s not exactly a good sign that leaving the EU was a good sign…
Wallace was correct. Don’t support Leave; it’s the option for clowns. (Paraphrasing).
And the non-clowns who tried to make the damn thing work (May, Stewart, Boles, Clarke etc) had custard pies thrown at them for their pains.
An idea isn't responsible for the people who have it. But did none of the people in the relevant room look round and think "Hold on, nearly everyone else here is a knave, fool, scumbag or some combination of the three. Am I in the right place?"
That argument sounds appealing, but doesn't hold. Reasonable people are often wrong. Look at covid, and all the reasonable people calling for further lockdowns. All the reasonable people calling for us to be part of the European vaccine procurement effort.
One consequence of the last few days is that a future Starmer government is going to come under huge pressure for a rejoin referendum. The Brexit / Singapore-on-Thames dream is now dead in the water.
Rejoin ref IndyRef2 PR
too many things too quickly.
If Labour has a majority it's hard to see how IndyRef2 comes into place and likewise rejoining has to be a longer term project.
The important change in the next election is to change our electoral system so that we aren't left with a 2 party system where 1 or other has the risk of being hijacked towards the extremes.
Rejoining won’t happen anytime soon and why would the EU have us given the trouble we have been.
A closer relationship is the best we can hope for.
The relationdhip we have now is fine tbh. There is a whole world to forge ties with, without all the EU bulllshit
Ah, yes, that would be why our economy is booming and our PM is respected around the world. We certainly don’t have the US President and the IMF criticising our policies, or the Indian government wanting to pull out of a trade deal because our Home Secretary insulted them.
Who else's economy is "booming"?
India’s doing well. US OK. Europe is fucked, though.
Seems odd therefore to conclude that our way out of our current economic trough is to hitch our wagon to Europe.
We live nextdoor to Europe - for material goods and exports the Europe is our most logical market. And remember one of the things India wishes to export to use is their people.
Oddly right now we seem to need some of those people - nurses, doctors, care staff, tech.
Aiui, a lot of Indian IT staff relocated to London recently.
Everyone has been bringing Indian staff in for over a decade. Sadly a lot of them aren't actually any use.
Recent trends in IT make me wonder if it is a fool's errand. Any service now depends on dozens of technologies chosen apparently at random, and no-one can be experts, or even experienced, in all of them.
I can think of a couple of posters on here who are experts in everything, even subjects they have never thought of before reading a post or two on here.
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Not very radical in 2016. Increasingly so through the 2017-9 blocking parliament led by Bercow and - yes - Sir Keir, driven by the need to get through any form of Brexit in the face of democracy haters trying to overturn the referendum result.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
Why not blame the people who actually voted for it? It only happened because of them.
Well, for me, because my order of preference was soft Brexit, hard Brexit, Remain. I would have rather had a soft Brexit. But I think Hard Remain posed a bigger risk to Britain's future prosperity and quality of life than Hard Brexit. Continuity 2005 wasn't on offer.
There’s no such thing as “Hard Remain”, though, which makes your evaluation rather dubious.
There could have been a 'hard Remain', involving adopting the Euro, joining Schengen, reversing Cameron's negotiation, voluntarily giving up our rebate, etc. Hardly anyone was advocating that in 2016, though, just as hardly anyone was advocating the hard Brexit we ended up with.
That's really not true. Almost everyone was arguing that we should have an independent trade policy and have control over migration, which necessarily means something like the Brexit we ended up with. It the process hadn't been so contested, there could easily have been a consensus about it, and it could have gone much more smoothly with no talk of cliff edges and 'no deal' planning.
Likewise, I’m surprised that full on “rejoin” is ahead by some margin.
Hunt could indeed look for some kind of EFTA deal and I think the pushback might be less than people think, especially since migration numbers remain high.
I think quite a large proportion of the 52% wouldn't have pushed back at that back in 2016. There were never two implacable camps; there were people weighing up pros and cons. If you could have magically given Britain some sort of early noughties EU, you could have sold it to most on both sides.
It would be instructive, seriously, to look at PB in this period. How “radical” were people to begin with, and how long did radicalisation take?
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Not very radical in 2016. Increasingly so through the 2017-9 blocking parliament led by Bercow and - yes - Sir Keir, driven by the need to get through any form of Brexit in the face of democracy haters trying to overturn the referendum result.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
Why not blame the people who actually voted for it? It only happened because of them.
Well, for me, because my order of preference was soft Brexit, hard Brexit, Remain. I would have rather had a soft Brexit. But I think Hard Remain posed a bigger risk to Britain's future prosperity and quality of life than Hard Brexit. Continuity 2005 wasn't on offer.
There’s no such thing as “Hard Remain”, though, which makes your evaluation rather dubious.
Hard Remain is what Greece and Italy have, in which their own democracy has been replaced by rule from Brussels and growth has been abolished. The faith I have that we could have stayed at soft remain indedinitely without being ratcheted further and further in is nil.
Ok, but this is 90% woo. Which genuinely surprises me as I have you down as one the more level headed posters.
Italy’s issues are entirely self-inflicted and there can’t be many people who think the current Italian government has been imposed by Brussels.
Greece is a more complex case, I’ll grant, but even there at the end of the day, Greeks refused to give up Euro membership and thereby accepted the lumps associated with it.
British governance has of course looked much more unstable since *leaving* the EU, and the two things are not disconnected.
I have just found out that Liz Truss will get a £118,000 pa pension for life for her four weeks as PM.
Nice!
People will see that and demand an end to the triple lock on the state pension which is less than £10,000 a year and among the lowest in comparible nations.
Comments
I won’t be voting Tory next time so my observations are as a former Tory voter and who I think will save them from disaster. The fact of the matter is they are going to be facing electoral defeat whoever they pick IMHO.
The safest and most experienced pair of hands to run the government is Hunt. But he won’t excite voters.
The “I told you so” candidate is Rishi. But he is unlikely to be a consensus builder and Hunt has stolen a march on him re economic policy.
The gamble is Penny. She’s the best communicator, but she is the least experienced.
The default is Wallace. Seems to be acceptable to all wings of the Party but a complete unknown when it comes to presentation or leadership qualities.
I say Penny at the moment, backed up by a unity cabinet, but I freely admit it’s not an easy choice for them and in 24 hours it might look very different.
Personally I was shocked that the government did not go for “Flexcit”, and strident and increasingly lunatic rhetoric from Brexiters simply alienated me, to the extent that I eventually left the country.
Don’t support Leave; it’s the option for clowns.
(Paraphrasing).
That's... ahem... bullshit.
Within a decade of leaving we will back in the single market which I would be happy enough with. The credibility of Brexit and those politicians that espoused it is diminishing by the week. Whoever said the best way to kill off Brexit was to experience it wasn't far off the mark.
It is possible that there will be more cooperation in future, but there will not be full fat rejoin.
If you were alienated by the rhetoric, blame the sore losers who couldn't bring themselves to work for a softer Brexit which drove it.
It's also not really like what we voted for in 1975 because that gave us full participation in the institutions on an equal footing, not being a satellite state.
Wouldn't it be a huge boon for them for anyone who tried to leave in the future? They could say for years to come, "The UK tried it and regretted it, so why would it work for you?" and it may also dampen the appetite of Leavers in other countries.
Where's a better place to hide?
In a fridge
Under a desk
Not AV.
(Except for early on with the Nene and the traitorous Stafford Cripps...)
edit: talking about computers, here's an excellent video on why Russia fell behind in computing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnHdqPBrtH8
Take away the Conservative Party and Brexit and the UK would be an economic powerhouse!
An idea isn't responsible for the people who have it. But did none of the people in the relevant room look round and think "Hold on, nearly everyone else here is a knave, fool, scumbag or some combination of the three. Am I in the right place?"
Conservative Party membership fell by more than half from 273,000 to
134,000 between 2002 and 2013, although the decline was temporarily
reversed in the mid-2000s
https://esrcpartymembersprojectorg.files.wordpress.com/2018//sn05125_hoc_membershipofukpoliticalparties.pdf
Pre-planned. New striker for last 15 minutes.
Or because it isn't working, or injury.
https://www.racingpost.com/news/cheltenham-festival/cheltenham-festival-to-remain-at-four-days-as-jockey-club-listens-to-concerns/583792
Glorious.
I would have rather had a soft Brexit.
But I think Hard Remain posed a bigger risk to Britain's future prosperity and quality of life than Hard Brexit.
Continuity 2005 wasn't on offer.
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1581752508094984198
OK it is still pathetic of course.
If just 5% of us joined a political party I think that may be enough to stop the likes of Corbyn and Truss in the future. Despite that I am not volunteering!
So the idea that we must therefore choose Hard Brexit in preference is the kind of lunacy that sadly led us to this present juncture!
Sturgeon admits to a hard border if Scotland independent. Shame this has been overshadowed by other events.
The faith I have that we could have stayed at soft remain indedinitely without being ratcheted further and further in is nil.
Reasonable people are often wrong.
Look at covid, and all the reasonable people calling for further lockdowns. All the reasonable people calling for us to be part of the European vaccine procurement effort.
Nice!
Which genuinely surprises me as I have you down as one the more level headed posters.
Italy’s issues are entirely self-inflicted and there can’t be many people who think the current Italian government has been imposed by Brussels.
Greece is a more complex case, I’ll grant, but even there at the end of the day, Greeks refused to give up Euro membership and thereby accepted the lumps associated with it.
British governance has of course looked much more unstable since *leaving* the EU, and the two things are not disconnected.