Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » TIGgers can reshape politics – but not as a collective of lone
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » TIGgers can reshape politics – but not as a collective of lone wolves
Extinction is the usual fate of most political splits. Whether by political defeat or by a subsequent merger into a pre-existing party, any MP resigning from his or her party and not defecting directly to another one usually finds their subsequent career to be one of struggle, isolation and defeat.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The TIGs will die. They don't have dragons on their side.
Yep. On its own it means very little. I don't see how they build their own, there's so little that binds them. The four points you make which signal some of the advantages they might have are true, but honestly it seems like the best they can hope for is to influence the main parties who fear more defections (this might happen with Labour already), which pretty much evaporates the big reasons the defected in the first place (sadly voters and certainly most MPs do not care about the anti-semitism stuff) and gives them a short shelf life.
Centre parties certainly are the kind of thing that sound better in the abstract than the reality. I suspect once the TIGgers form a party and some policies, it'll become clear to the electorate that they're a Blairite tribute act. The novelty and the lack of the tainted Lib Dem brand will probably get them into the low teens in the opinion polls, mind.
And as the number of splitters increase or their proposed policies are suggested the number of potential 'people like us' is reduced.
Which is why Ian Austin has become the Popular Front of Judea.
If he could join with Frank Field and add John Mann they could become the Judean People's Front.
It's when you try and translate "values" like 'we hate immigrants' into policies like "let's leave the EU" they all come unstuck
Go on. We'll wait...
And you pose a question as though there are no other leaves? You've completely lost it Scott.
Seriously, I cannot quite get over what you think you were asking with that post. I'll point out that we both used the word 'possible'. And you seem to think I'll have difficult thinking of a single 'possible' leave, not even probable? Hilarious stuff.
Edit: By the way the 'mad' thing is a bit overdone, and I hope is taken as banter and not a suggestion of actual issues which would be most unwarranted.
Time for a break from weighty issues, to turn off the brain, and go watch a Liam Neeson movie. Laters.
None of them has sufficient support in any quarter to be delivered. If you can't do it, it's not possible.
The closest to being actually deliverable is May's deal, which everybody hates. If 200 MPs change their minds this week, then I will have been wrong
None of the cheerleaders were ever interested in engaging with the gritty reality.
And here we are...
Just like Brexit, in the modern era few are willing to accept that things take time.
If not, not so much.
And that would be before they had the difficulties of putting any of their beliefs into practice in government.
We saw how quickly the LibDem beliefs in opposing tuition fees increases and Middle Eastern warmongering disappeared when they were in government.
https://twitter.com/BBCPhilipSim/status/1099264297413369856
For the three Tories? Negligible if we stay in the EU, because there's little to campaign on. otherwise. At least, the labour ones really, really hate Jezza.
For example I would quite like to see a directly elected executive so instead of saying things like I really like Labours nhs thoughts, but prefer the conservatives education policies so which shall I vote for instead I could vote for the Education secretary who I felt had the best plan and the Health secretary with the best plan. I would even go further and suggest that when standing for elections these executors should have to have their plans costed so the voter knows how much its going to cost in terms of percent on income tax and that each policy should have stated success criteria which it could be measured against. So you would see things like
Reduce class sizes to x
cost 3% on basic rate tax
success criteria no class to be bigger than x by 20xx and the improvement in pupil performance to be at least z when measured on whatever scale education uses
Most people just want Brexit, in some form or another, to be done, so we can all get on with our lives.
I wouldn't underestimate Brexit fatigue among the general population right now. Viewed through that lens, the TIGgers don't look like something "new" they look like yet another faction of Parliament squabbling over how to implement the result of something we all voted on nearly three years ago now.
As a barometer, among the people I work with, Shamima Begum has been the only political topic I have heard discussed this week (and it has been, at great length). Nobody has mentioned the TIGgers and Brexit has been mentioned only in passing in a "I wish they'd get on with it" way.
Outside the Westminster bubble, the TIGgers do not look like something new. They look like more of the same.
http://theconversation.com/polling-history-40-years-of-british-views-on-in-or-out-of-europe-61250
1. Jeremy Hunt’s vassal comment in Slovenia was daft, but blame his speechwriter or aides. However, he does come across as having the charisma of a old mop. Lay Hunt, and - sadly - put your money on Javid.
2. The TIGs are not a flash in the pan. This is the culmination of months if not years of planning. They are well-funded and well-connected, and the polling does show a fatigue with the existing parties. What their strategy is, I cannot tell, but it is foolish to write them off.
3. Brexit is still most likely to go through, but the odds of Remaining via a referendum have grown a little higher. The TIGs have made it acceptable to advocate for this, John Cryer’s note is significant, as are John McDonnell’s comments. I’d put the chances of a referendum around 25%.
4. Assuming we do Brexit 29 March, May will be gone within weeks if not days.
We don’t know who might join them in the next few weeks - and we don’t know if the next election will be in three months or three years.
Imagine, we Brexit on 29 March.
May is forced to step down and Javid wins a leadership campaign, seeing off Gove.
Polliing has Labour in the mid 20s.
Let’s be charitable and assume Javid has a honeymoon. Wouldn’t you go for it?
A possible scenario in which big changes might happen:
1. Corbyn continues to hound decent MPs out of the Labour Party. When you consider that the majority of his MPs have already voted against him in a No Confidence vote, and add in the latest bout of intolerance and anti-semitism, and factor in Brexit unhappiness as well, it's not impossible to imagine that dozens of Labour MPs might be driven out of the party.
2. On the Tory side, there are only a handful of MPs who are diehard opponents to Brexit, but there are many, many more who are horrified at the antics of the ERG and the looming danger of a chaotic crash-out, which would be disastrous for the country and therefore for the party as well. If Theresa May miscalculates, or more likely is simply incapable of herding the ERG cats into some kind of order, and it looks as though No Deal is imminent, then we could easily see dozens, maybe more, Tory MPs decide to rebel and vote with the TIGgers and some Labour MPs to take back control of the process to avoid No Deal. It doesn't require too much of a leap then to see a substantial number of resignations of the whip.
3. At that point, the TIGgers (or perhaps an even looser alliance of independents) become, almost overnight, a major force in the Commons. Admittedly, this will be a single-issue major force - they won't be united on general areas of policy such as welfare or public spending - but that doesn't matter in the short term.
4. I think the most likely immediate outcome if the mould does get smashed in that way would be a Remain/Deal referendum, because that would be the one way out which might command a majority.
5. Beyond that, though, the TIG would not be sufficiently coherent to form a single party. Maybe it would all fizzle out back into the main parties again, or maybe the TIG might form the nucleus of two separate parties (centre-left and centre-right).
There are obviously huge obstacles to all of this, and it might all be fanciful. However, I really don't think we can look much further forward than a couple of weeks at the moment. There is no precedent for the situation our politics is in.
In fact, Johnson could do worse (from the freedom of the backbenches) than rediscovering his liberal instincts and speaking out against the dangerous precedent Javid is trying to set.
FPT
I said we are on the first wave of AI, it wont really hit us for until the 2020s and we are woefully prepared for it.
as for the pyramids its how we have been for ages, we have few plans for coping with it bar screaming that the NHS needs more money but I can see us having to bite the bullet on assisted death at some point. Its a debate we should be having.
Any support for Javid’s antics is incredibly superficial.
https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/why-the-uk-condemned-facebook-for-fuelling-fake-news
This is a feedback loop, as we have already seen with Corby appointing Falconer.
And for the Tories, surely the polls showing the damage TIG might do to Labour are an enormous incentive to party unity ... some intelligent Tories must be thinking if we can only stop arguing about Brexit, then we could be looking at another decade in power.
Ah ...intelligent Tories ... I see the mistake.
https://twitter.com/David_K_Clark/status/1098846220162949120?s=19
At least in America they have a process to investigate, here we would rather sweep it under the carpet.
What could possibly go wrong?
http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-eco/2019/02/23/97002-20190223FILWWW00029-macron-veut-reinventer-la-pac.php
I think that you underestimate the Tories, I think it likely that it is a penitent Tory government that applies for EU re-entry.
https://twitter.com/themichaelmoran/status/1099213993200234502?s=21
My LibDems good, your LibDems bad
My LibDems good, your LibDems bad
Bleat, bleat, bleat, bleat, bleat, bleat
Perhaps you'd like to tell us that it will be different next time ?
You can make the case for both outcomes .
It’s possible that Labour will suffer a mass exodus if the Labour front bench doesn’t back the Kyle Wilson amendment . It’s also possible that we see a series of resignations from the government and more moving to the Indy Group .
That is dangerous though because both parties then might realize another general election is needed to finish off the group before it gets off the ground .
In terms of another election that would need an Article 50 extension .
Equally it might be that May secures some tweaking to the WA , enough to allow the ERG and DUP to climb down , fearful of a long Brexit delay . Together with some Labour rebels .
Making forecasts is a fools game though given the current state of British politics.
I dont think hes too particular where the money comes from as long as its not France :-)
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/shamima-begum-uk-citizenship-stripped-home-office-sajid-javid-a8788301.html
The unprecedented thing about Shamima Begum's case is that people have noticed it happened.
Why is another_richard so troubled by eastern europeans coming here anyway as most are only here for a short time? In that sense it is not 'immigration'.
Politicians must shake hands with hundreds, maybe thousands, of people in such a way.
https://twitter.com/NighSide/status/1098980332639080448
What a slippery, slimy, greasy handshake. Said Colonel Gaddafi.
I grew up in a town which, because of historic settlement post WW2, had a high proportion of people of Eastern European descent. I would not look at that as anything other than a huge benefit both for the town and me personally.
At the same time I agree that most of the more recent EU migration is of people who, eventually, choose to head back to their countries of origin. Hence why I think you argument is correct.
But the bottom line is that in both cases I start from a position of believing that the influence and contribution of these people to our lives is positive. Others think differently, for reasons I either do not understand or outright reject. I am not sure the two sides will ever convince each other.
Some migrants to the UK return home while others don't which is why the number of immigrants has steadily increased. Despite that is the government having a manifesto commitment to reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands.
And if you want to talk about immigration from Eastern Europe can you explain how a town like Rotherham benefits from thousands of Eastern European Roma having moving there ?
Cannot see how they succeed other than taking lots of moderate labour votes and potentially seats.
And each individual will affect, and be affected by, the place they are migrating to (and migrating from) differently.
That is why some immigration can be beneficial and some detrimental and why IMO immigrants should be judged on an individual basis.
Remarkably he's one of the good options for next Conservative leader.
Why he has changed that strategy as Foreign Sec I don't know.