Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » In spite of all the uncertainty a 2019 general election is sti

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited July 9 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » In spite of all the uncertainty a 2019 general election is still less than a 50% chance in the betting

Betdata.io chart of movements on Betfair Exchange

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • JBriskinindyref2JBriskinindyref2 Posts: 1,482
    First! like Serena and Murray (what a lovely example of civic nationalism) in the MD
  • JBriskinindyref2JBriskinindyref2 Posts: 1,482
    I don't know - 43pc sounds like a fairly inexpensive lay to me. But, yes, I haven't forgotten about my Verstappen bet either - it will be a long time until I'm brave enough to lay anything again.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 15,371
    Going to the country would be a massive gamble - but not doing so an even bigger one.

    We know from his record that Johnson is not renowned for steely decisiveness, so it seems utterly unpredictable. I’m not going to bet on the whim of someone so unreliable.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,453
    edited July 9
    So just posting what I picked up from previous threads, the issue is the timing.

    He can try to call an election immediately to take place in September. But because his party played games to avoid him facing a vote of confidence, he takes office right as parliament is supposed to be about to end. To pass the vote he may need to extend it and that only works if Corbyn is cooperative. Since he needs 2/3 or MPs (not MPs present) he's potentially vulnerable to some cheeky opposition sabotage where some opposition MPs abstain and others have already left for preexisting commitments, and with the serious risk this situation has for safe seats that their occupants thought were jobs for life, he may find his own guys fail to show up as well.

    So he can call the election in September, to take place in October. But that's his whole Brexit strategy blown: The idea was to promise hard Leavers he won't extend, but also tell anti-destroy-the-economy voters that he'll make a deal. That line won't work if the election result will leave him mere weeks or days away from the deadline, with no time to make a deal - or prepare for No Deal for that matter. He's basically going to have to fight the election on no-preparation No Deal, which is a great way to get moderate voters to suck up the many defects of Jeremy Corbyn.

    He can try to call the election before the election but scheduled to crash out during the campaign, but parliament won't vote for that, and may instead replace him with a less mental caretaker PM who will extend. Maybe Boris gets his election after that with the extension someone else's responsibility, but it's very risky to pass the ball to the opposition like that.

    Finally he can call the election right after failing to Brexit or crashing out with No Deal, but neither of these would be an optimal backdrop for a campaign, to out it mildly.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 27,052

    So just posting what I picked up from previous threads, the issue is the timing.

    He can try to call an election immediately to take place in September. But because his party played games to avoid him facing a vote of confidence, he takes office right as parliament is supposed to be about to end. To pass the vote he may need to extend it and that only works if Corbyn is cooperative. Since he needs 2/3 or MPs (not MPs present) he's potentially vulnerable to some cheeky opposition sabotage where some opposition MPs abstain and others have already left for preexisting commitments, and with the serious risk this situation has for safe seats that their occupants thought were jobs for life, he may find his own guys fail to show up as well.

    So he can call the election in September, to take place in October. But that's his whole Brexit strategy blown: The idea was to promise hard Leavers he won't extend, but also tell anti-destroy-the-economy voters that he'll make a deal. That line won't work if the election result will leave him mere weeks or days away from the deadline, with no time to make a deal - or prepare for No Deal for that matter. He's basically going to have to fight the election on no-preparation No Deal, which is a great way to get moderate voters to suck up the many defects of Jeremy Corbyn.

    He can try to call the election before the election but scheduled to crash out during the campaign, but parliament won't vote for that, and may instead replace him with a less mental caretaker PM who will extend. Maybe Boris gets his election after that with the extension someone else's responsibility, but it's very risky to pass the ball to the opposition like that.

    Finally he can call the election right after failing to Brexit or crashing out with No Deal, but neither of these would be an optimal backdrop for a campaign, to out it mildly.

    That's not Boris's plan.

    His plan is to head of to Brussels to negotiate. Discover there's no-one to negotiate with. Complain of perfidious Albion Brussels. And then dare Parliament to No Confidence him and replace him with a temporary PM (who could ask for an extension).

    If Parliament does this (no guarantee), he hopes that the fact that he attempted to get No Deal (and was only prevented by damned MPs) will stand him in good stead with Brexit voters in the subsequent General Election.

    If Parliament does not do this, he hopes No Deal won't be too bad. And if it is, he hopes the EU will get the blame, not him.

    If No Deal is bad, and the Tory Party is destroyed, well, it will all be a bit embarassing, but he can always fall back on writing opinion pieces for The Telegraph.
  • JBriskinindyref2JBriskinindyref2 Posts: 1,482
    Does anyone here actually play the 2 - 3 on betfair game here?

    50 - 33pc there's money to be made there surely.

    I just round up or down really.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,453
    rcs1000 said:



    That's not Boris's plan.

    His plan is to head of to Brussels to negotiate. Discover there's no-one to negotiate with. Complain of perfidious Albion Brussels. And then dare Parliament to No Confidence him and replace him with a temporary PM (who could ask for an extension).

    If Parliament does this (no guarantee), he hopes that the fact that he attempted to get No Deal (and was only prevented by damned MPs) will stand him in good stead with Brexit voters in the subsequent General Election.

    If Parliament does not do this, he hopes No Deal won't be too bad. And if it is, he hopes the EU will get the blame, not him.

    If No Deal is bad, and the Tory Party is destroyed, well, it will all be a bit embarassing, but he can always fall back on writing opinion pieces for The Telegraph.

    That all sounds plausible but I don't think it gets you to an election this year?
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 1,371
    RobD said:

    How did they take away your right to vote?

    They made a rule that if you've been out of Britain for 15 years you can't vote any more.

    The Tories then said they'd remove this rule, but they lied.
    You've got the Tories to thank for having voting rights in the first place. :)

    As for repealing it, Parliament's website say that the government are still looking to make progress on the bill. Expect another to appear in the next session.

    https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05923
    OK the tories introduced the law, but there was pressure from within the EU, as most countries allow citizens living abroad to vote (Ireland is a notable exception). One major reason why the Conservatives adopted this is that it is generally thought that overseas voters are more likely to be Conservative. That was very likely at the time and it was widely suspected that Bristol North West in GE1992 was kept Conservative by the overseas voters. But I think that over the years as the Conservatives have become more Little Britain that this effect has ben neutralised or may be even reversed. Does anyone know if there has been polling on this?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 27,052

    rcs1000 said:



    That's not Boris's plan.

    His plan is to head of to Brussels to negotiate. Discover there's no-one to negotiate with. Complain of perfidious Albion Brussels. And then dare Parliament to No Confidence him and replace him with a temporary PM (who could ask for an extension).

    If Parliament does this (no guarantee), he hopes that the fact that he attempted to get No Deal (and was only prevented by damned MPs) will stand him in good stead with Brexit voters in the subsequent General Election.

    If Parliament does not do this, he hopes No Deal won't be too bad. And if it is, he hopes the EU will get the blame, not him.

    If No Deal is bad, and the Tory Party is destroyed, well, it will all be a bit embarassing, but he can always fall back on writing opinion pieces for The Telegraph.

    That all sounds plausible but I don't think it gets you to an election this year?
    It does under the first scenario. The temporary Government of National Asking For An Extensionity is not likely to be able to last long beyond the "asking".

    (Unless, of course, it uses its position to push through a second referendum.)
  • JBriskinindyref2JBriskinindyref2 Posts: 1,482
    I will fix the NHS pension cap chaos, says Johnson, says torygraph.

    Brown, Cameron, and now Boris ??
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 1,716
    Ed Davey still 9/2 with Ladbrokes, despite yesterday’s good news. Looks like punters are unconvinced, or are they just not interested in this market?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,623
    eristdoof said:

    RobD said:

    How did they take away your right to vote?

    They made a rule that if you've been out of Britain for 15 years you can't vote any more.

    The Tories then said they'd remove this rule, but they lied.
    You've got the Tories to thank for having voting rights in the first place. :)

    As for repealing it, Parliament's website say that the government are still looking to make progress on the bill. Expect another to appear in the next session.

    https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05923
    One major reason why the Conservatives adopted this is that it is generally thought that overseas voters are more likely to be Conservative.
    Which is why, one suspects, Labour took it away after you'd been out of the country for 15 years.....
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,453
    rcs1000 said:


    It does under the first scenario. The temporary Government of National Asking For An Extensionity is not likely to be able to last long beyond the "asking".

    (Unless, of course, it uses its position to push through a second referendum.)

    I guess the GoNAfaE only takes office at the end of October, can they squeeze the election in before Christmas?
  • JBriskinindyref2JBriskinindyref2 Posts: 1,482

    Ed Davey still 9/2 with Ladbrokes, despite yesterday’s good news. Looks like punters are unconvinced, or are they just not interested in this market?

    Looks like they're convinced he's going to come second - or rather given the new parlance, has a less that 22.5pc that he'll win
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 16,284

    eristdoof said:

    RobD said:

    How did they take away your right to vote?

    They made a rule that if you've been out of Britain for 15 years you can't vote any more.

    The Tories then said they'd remove this rule, but they lied.
    You've got the Tories to thank for having voting rights in the first place. :)

    As for repealing it, Parliament's website say that the government are still looking to make progress on the bill. Expect another to appear in the next session.

    https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05923
    One major reason why the Conservatives adopted this is that it is generally thought that overseas voters are more likely to be Conservative.
    Which is why, one suspects, Labour took it away after you'd been out of the country for 15 years.....
    There was a picture created of retirees drinking gin etc on the Costas and grumbling about 'the country having gone to the dogs', the 'good old days' and whatever.
    There was also alleged, IIRC, to be a 'problem' with identifying which constituency people identified with.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 27,052

    rcs1000 said:


    It does under the first scenario. The temporary Government of National Asking For An Extensionity is not likely to be able to last long beyond the "asking".

    (Unless, of course, it uses its position to push through a second referendum.)

    I guess the GoNAfaE only takes office at the end of October, can they squeeze the election in before Christmas?
    Yes. The extension would be asked for before October 31, and the election would be really December.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 48,329

    rcs1000 said:



    That's not Boris's plan.

    His plan is to head of to Brussels to negotiate. Discover there's no-one to negotiate with. Complain of perfidious Albion Brussels. And then dare Parliament to No Confidence him and replace him with a temporary PM (who could ask for an extension).

    If Parliament does this (no guarantee), he hopes that the fact that he attempted to get No Deal (and was only prevented by damned MPs) will stand him in good stead with Brexit voters in the subsequent General Election.

    If Parliament does not do this, he hopes No Deal won't be too bad. And if it is, he hopes the EU will get the blame, not him.

    If No Deal is bad, and the Tory Party is destroyed, well, it will all be a bit embarassing, but he can always fall back on writing opinion pieces for The Telegraph.

    That all sounds plausible but I don't think it gets you to an election this year?
    Sure it does, since the first crunch point occurs over the summer and the attempted negotiation, he cannot spin that out very long, so the need to commit to no deal will force the hand of the Grievers.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 48,329
    Nigelb said:

    Going to the country would be a massive gamble - but not doing so an even bigger one.

    We know from his record that Johnson is not renowned for steely decisiveness, so it seems utterly unpredictable. I’m not going to bet on the whim of someone so unreliable.

    Hes unreliable, but the options in front of him are very narrow and an election could come about whether he wants one or not depending on the actions of others.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 1,371


    There was also alleged, IIRC, to be a 'problem' with identifying which constituency people identified with.

    That's odd, because the rule is quite clear even under boudary changes or constituency name changes. The last address at which you were registered as an "inland" voter determines which constituency.
    How appropriate it is that the vote counts in a constitiency in which someone lived years ago is questionable, but in a FPTP system it is hard to justify any other system, ...unless..... we are given our own MP. A constituency for all overseas voters. I think it would be a good idea, but I can't see it being popular in Westminster or the Daily Telegraph.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,623

    eristdoof said:

    RobD said:

    How did they take away your right to vote?

    They made a rule that if you've been out of Britain for 15 years you can't vote any more.

    The Tories then said they'd remove this rule, but they lied.
    You've got the Tories to thank for having voting rights in the first place. :)

    As for repealing it, Parliament's website say that the government are still looking to make progress on the bill. Expect another to appear in the next session.

    https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05923
    One major reason why the Conservatives adopted this is that it is generally thought that overseas voters are more likely to be Conservative.
    Which is why, one suspects, Labour took it away after you'd been out of the country for 15 years.....
    There was a picture created of retirees drinking gin etc on the Costas and grumbling about 'the country having gone to the dogs', the 'good old days' and whatever.
    There was also alleged, IIRC, to be a 'problem' with identifying which constituency people identified with.
    I'm not sure what the latter was about - you had to show which electoral roll you had been on.

    If we were like America, where your passport not only entitles you to vote, but also to pay taxes, no matter where you live, then I'd have more sympathy for expat votes - but if people have chosen to spend time abroad - or make their lives abroad, then I'm not sure they should also expect to decide how their home country is governed.
  • JBriskinindyref2JBriskinindyref2 Posts: 1,482
    eristdoof said:


    There was also alleged, IIRC, to be a 'problem' with identifying which constituency people identified with.

    That's odd, because the rule is quite clear even under boudary changes or constituency name changes. The last address at which you were registered as an "inland" voter determines which constituency.
    How appropriate it is that the vote counts in a constitiency in which someone lived years ago is questionable, but in a FPTP system it is hard to justify any other system, ...unless..... we are given our own MP. A constituency for all overseas voters. I think it would be a good idea, but I can't see it being popular in Westminster or the Daily Telegraph.

    It's hardly disenfraishment if you don't live here. Even maxing out their gerrymandering the separatists managed to get that part right in indyref1
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 51,408
    Good morning, everyone.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 11,143

    eristdoof said:

    RobD said:

    How did they take away your right to vote?

    They made a rule that if you've been out of Britain for 15 years you can't vote any more.

    The Tories then said they'd remove this rule, but they lied.
    You've got the Tories to thank for having voting rights in the first place. :)

    As for repealing it, Parliament's website say that the government are still looking to make progress on the bill. Expect another to appear in the next session.

    https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05923
    One major reason why the Conservatives adopted this is that it is generally thought that overseas voters are more likely to be Conservative.
    Which is why, one suspects, Labour took it away after you'd been out of the country for 15 years.....
    There was a picture created of retirees drinking gin etc on the Costas and grumbling about 'the country having gone to the dogs', the 'good old days' and whatever.
    There was also alleged, IIRC, to be a 'problem' with identifying which constituency people identified with.
    I'm not sure what the latter was about - you had to show which electoral roll you had been on.

    If we were like America, where your passport not only entitles you to vote, but also to pay taxes, no matter where you live, then I'd have more sympathy for expat votes - but if people have chosen to spend time abroad - or make their lives abroad, then I'm not sure they should also expect to decide how their home country is governed.
    Yes, a special registration fee with the Consulate should be due, to cover the cost of Consular services provided for non UK tax-payers.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,623
    Foxy said:

    eristdoof said:

    RobD said:

    How did they take away your right to vote?

    They made a rule that if you've been out of Britain for 15 years you can't vote any more.

    The Tories then said they'd remove this rule, but they lied.
    You've got the Tories to thank for having voting rights in the first place. :)

    As for repealing it, Parliament's website say that the government are still looking to make progress on the bill. Expect another to appear in the next session.

    https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05923
    One major reason why the Conservatives adopted this is that it is generally thought that overseas voters are more likely to be Conservative.
    Which is why, one suspects, Labour took it away after you'd been out of the country for 15 years.....
    There was a picture created of retirees drinking gin etc on the Costas and grumbling about 'the country having gone to the dogs', the 'good old days' and whatever.
    There was also alleged, IIRC, to be a 'problem' with identifying which constituency people identified with.
    I'm not sure what the latter was about - you had to show which electoral roll you had been on.

    If we were like America, where your passport not only entitles you to vote, but also to pay taxes, no matter where you live, then I'd have more sympathy for expat votes - but if people have chosen to spend time abroad - or make their lives abroad, then I'm not sure they should also expect to decide how their home country is governed.
    Yes, a special registration fee with the Consulate should be due, to cover the cost of Consular services provided for non UK tax-payers.
    I suspect the overwhelming bulk of Consular Services are for UK tax payers and residents who get into trouble abroad, rather than UK residents abroad, whatever their tax paying status.
  • JBriskinindyref2JBriskinindyref2 Posts: 1,482
    Ni hao Morris

    (I'm practising my Chinese in case Scotland gets swapped for Hong Kong - Boris may be listening.)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,732
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 3,271

    eristdoof said:

    RobD said:

    How did they take away your right to vote?

    They made a rule that if you've been out of Britain for 15 years you can't vote any more.

    The Tories then said they'd remove this rule, but they lied.
    You've got the Tories to thank for having voting rights in the first place. :)

    As for repealing it, Parliament's website say that the government are still looking to make progress on the bill. Expect another to appear in the next session.

    https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05923
    One major reason why the Conservatives adopted this is that it is generally thought that overseas voters are more likely to be Conservative.
    Which is why, one suspects, Labour took it away after you'd been out of the country for 15 years.....
    There was a picture created of retirees drinking gin etc on the Costas and grumbling about 'the country having gone to the dogs', the 'good old days' and whatever.
    There was also alleged, IIRC, to be a 'problem' with identifying which constituency people identified with.
    Morning reporting from a pleasant sunny costa Blanca 20C heading for 30C. We’ve been out here for 11 years and still try and vote but given the 2008 financial crash not many people have followed us since. A large number have now been away for 15 years and hold mild resentment to losing their vote, particularly in the referendum when it was felt the outcome could impact our status. Many don’t exercise their rights even if they still have them but would probably be 60% conservative if they did. The defining factor is that by far the most popular news medium is the Daily Mail which they claim doesn’t inform their views but it clearly does. The current growing meme is ‘Corbyn is a Marxist’ but they can’t tell you what one is if asked so whilst I would like my voting rights to be permanent I could understand why a labour government wouldn’t do it. It’s only a 50% chance you actually get you ballot paper in time either due, occasionally to dispatch problems, or more often that voting is frequently in May/June time frame and the bank holidays out here screw Coreos up somewhat.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,418
    I’m not expecting an early election for the simple reason that the Conservatives would lose and lose badly.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,623
    edited July 9
    This will not be a civil servant seeking to illuminate a very difficult situation or to “blow a whistle” — the dysfunction of Trump’s White House is clear. Someone is seeking to score political points. But using the UK’s foreign relationships as chips within a domestic game is irresponsible in the extreme.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/kim-darroch-trump-uk-ambassador-to-us-email-leak-un-a8996196.html

    In his rebuke of the ambassador, Sir Kim Darroch, Mr. Trump came close to declaring him persona non grata — an extraordinary breach between the United States and one of its closest allies.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/08/us/politics/donald-trump-kim-darroch.html
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,453
    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:



    That's not Boris's plan.

    His plan is to head of to Brussels to negotiate. Discover there's no-one to negotiate with. Complain of perfidious Albion Brussels. And then dare Parliament to No Confidence him and replace him with a temporary PM (who could ask for an extension).

    If Parliament does this (no guarantee), he hopes that the fact that he attempted to get No Deal (and was only prevented by damned MPs) will stand him in good stead with Brexit voters in the subsequent General Election.

    If Parliament does not do this, he hopes No Deal won't be too bad. And if it is, he hopes the EU will get the blame, not him.

    If No Deal is bad, and the Tory Party is destroyed, well, it will all be a bit embarassing, but he can always fall back on writing opinion pieces for The Telegraph.

    That all sounds plausible but I don't think it gets you to an election this year?
    Sure it does, since the first crunch point occurs over the summer and the attempted negotiation, he cannot spin that out very long, so the need to commit to no deal will force the hand of the Grievers.
    I'd have thought he'd spin it out right until the last week, since the whole argument behind the strategy is that the EU will totally do a deal, you just have to stare at them really hard right down to the last second when they accept you're not bluffing.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 21,011
    Sarah James on R4, hopelessly trying to defend Labour’s new Brexit nuance.

    Asked the question whether in a referendum Labour would be Leave or Remain, first there is a pause. Then an answer beginning with the words “It depends...”. Then a qualification that they would probably be Remain “at this stage”.

    Asked how Labour could negotiate hard for a new deal and then campaign against it in a referendum, she was stumped.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 21,011

    eristdoof said:

    RobD said:

    How did they take away your right to vote?

    They made a rule that if you've been out of Britain for 15 years you can't vote any more.

    The Tories then said they'd remove this rule, but they lied.
    You've got the Tories to thank for having voting rights in the first place. :)

    As for repealing it, Parliament's website say that the government are still looking to make progress on the bill. Expect another to appear in the next session.

    https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05923
    One major reason why the Conservatives adopted this is that it is generally thought that overseas voters are more likely to be Conservative.
    Which is why, one suspects, Labour took it away after you'd been out of the country for 15 years.....
    There was a picture created of retirees drinking gin etc on the Costas and grumbling about 'the country having gone to the dogs', the 'good old days' and whatever.
    There was also alleged, IIRC, to be a 'problem' with identifying which constituency people identified with.
    I'm not sure what the latter was about - you had to show which electoral roll you had been on.

    If we were like America, where your passport not only entitles you to vote, but also to pay taxes, no matter where you live, then I'd have more sympathy for expat votes - but if people have chosen to spend time abroad - or make their lives abroad, then I'm not sure they should also expect to decide how their home country is governed.
    I agree - a view reinforced, it has to be said, by the string of rabid no dealer expats we have suffered on here, eagerly urging a crashout edit on the rest of us from a safe distance. If they come back to live here, obviously they get to vote. Until then, not.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 20,527
    For reasons @Mysticrose articulated recently I think an early election is the answer for Boris.

    Boris being Boris as he may be, I believe that as PM and after sitting down with advisors and civil servants he will realise that no leader can take the country into no deal.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,418
    IanB2 said:

    Sarah James on R4, hopelessly trying to defend Labour’s new Brexit nuance.

    Asked the question whether in a referendum Labour would be Leave or Remain, first there is a pause. Then an answer beginning with the words “It depends...”. Then a qualification that they would probably be Remain “at this stage”.

    Asked how Labour could negotiate hard for a new deal and then campaign against it in a referendum, she was stumped.

    It’s as though Labour wants to donate voters to the Lib Dems and the Greens.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,418
    Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,453


    If we were like America, where your passport not only entitles you to vote, but also to pay taxes, no matter where you live, then I'd have more sympathy for expat votes - but if people have chosen to spend time abroad - or make their lives abroad, then I'm not sure they should also expect to decide how their home country is governed.

    Basing the thing on where you pay taxes would make more sense to me. A lot of the UK's current problems come from the fact that the UK doesn't let its tax-paying non-citizens vote in parliamentary elections or referendums.

    But like most countries in the world the UK is run by nationalists, and they think it should depend on nationality. Which is fair enough, as long as they're consistent about it instead of arbitrarily disfranchising people whose nationality and residence don't match.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 1,716

    Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:

    Disgraceful. And only a few weeks after the D-Day memorials. Have we learnt nothing?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,623
    U.K. Ambassador Kim Darroch was disinvited from a dinner that U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin is hosting Monday with President Donald Trump and the emir of Qatar, according to a U.S. official.

    https://time.com/5622419/trump-disinvites-uk-envoy-kim-darroch/
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,418

    Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:

    Disgraceful. And only a few weeks after the D-Day memorials. Have we learnt nothing?
    To listen to them you’d think they had been first on the beaches.
  • PloppikinsPloppikins Posts: 115
    Re: "The Pact", progressive alliance, rainbow coalition, etc - Dream on. It's been mooted for years and has never happened. 1. Just because someone votes green doesn't mean they are going to vote LD. 2. When was the last time 30% was going to get you anywhere close to a majority. 3. If BJ keeps his word(!) Cons with BXP defectors easily hits 30%+
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 15,371
    rcs1000 said:
    Even the language of the plea agreement was murky in the extreme:
    https://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2019/07/09/jeffrey-epstein-prosecution-1402265

    Hard to imagine that such... eminent... attorneys as Starr and Dershowitz (who seems also to have been one of Epstein’s frequent fliers) could have overlooked such obfuscation.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 3,271


    If we were like America, where your passport not only entitles you to vote, but also to pay taxes, no matter where you live, then I'd have more sympathy for expat votes - but if people have chosen to spend time abroad - or make their lives abroad, then I'm not sure they should also expect to decide how their home country is governed.

    Basing the thing on where you pay taxes would make more sense to me. A lot of the UK's current problems come from the fact that the UK doesn't let its tax-paying non-citizens vote in parliamentary elections or referendums.

    But like most countries in the world the UK is run by nationalists, and they think it should depend on nationality. Which is fair enough, as long as they're consistent about it instead of arbitrarily disfranchising people whose nationality and residence don't match.
    A lot of British immigrants have no choice in where they pay tax if they have an occupational pension from a state provider where the tax has to be paid in the U.K. or if they have income from a rented property.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 15,371

    U.K. Ambassador Kim Darroch was disinvited from a dinner that U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin is hosting Monday with President Donald Trump and the emir of Qatar, according to a U.S. official.

    https://time.com/5622419/trump-disinvites-uk-envoy-kim-darroch/

    The concept of speaking truth to power is not currently a popular one in the White House.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 21,011
    Scott_P said:
    Entertaining. The disbelief builds through to the point where the LibDems introduce D'Hondt lists and not STV.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 1,716

    IanB2 said:

    Sarah James on R4, hopelessly trying to defend Labour’s new Brexit nuance.

    Asked the question whether in a referendum Labour would be Leave or Remain, first there is a pause. Then an answer beginning with the words “It depends...”. Then a qualification that they would probably be Remain “at this stage”.

    Asked how Labour could negotiate hard for a new deal and then campaign against it in a referendum, she was stumped.

    It’s as though Labour wants to donate voters to the Lib Dems and the Greens.
    And the Scottish National Party.

    Although Brexit is not the primary determinant of voting behaviour, it is still important for many Scots voters. A lot of SLab empathisers are totally disgusted with their party. Abstention could be high within some voter groups.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,846
    edited July 9

    Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:

    Based on the various polling we’ve seen of membership views, I would now comfortably describe the Conservative Party as “far right”.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 11,143

    IanB2 said:

    Sarah James on R4, hopelessly trying to defend Labour’s new Brexit nuance.

    Asked the question whether in a referendum Labour would be Leave or Remain, first there is a pause. Then an answer beginning with the words “It depends...”. Then a qualification that they would probably be Remain “at this stage”.

    Asked how Labour could negotiate hard for a new deal and then campaign against it in a referendum, she was stumped.

    It’s as though Labour wants to donate voters to the Lib Dems and the Greens.
    Its too little, too late.

    If Labour want to credibly run a different Brexit policy, they have to change leader first to someone like Watson or Phillips.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 3,271
    Leadsom can’t guarantee that Johnson won’t sack Sir Kim.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 11,143

    Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:

    Based on the various polling we’ve seen of membership views, I would now comfortably describe the Conservative Party as “far right”.
    Go the whole hog, Reichstag fire and Enabling Act, Tommy Robinson to lead a new Islamic Kristallnacht...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 11,143
    nichomar said:

    Leadsom can’t guarantee that Johnson won’t sack Sir Kim.

    Take back Control...
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Dominic Grieve is perfect in his role as upper class twit establishment villain. Probably adding 5-10% to Brexit party support.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,956

    Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:

    Disgraceful. And only a few weeks after the D-Day memorials. Have we learnt nothing?
    To listen to them you’d think they had been first on the beaches.
    and a perfect reason why I cannot support the Party, its gone mad. stark staring bonkers.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 1,317

    IanB2 said:

    Sarah James on R4, hopelessly trying to defend Labour’s new Brexit nuance.

    Asked the question whether in a referendum Labour would be Leave or Remain, first there is a pause. Then an answer beginning with the words “It depends...”. Then a qualification that they would probably be Remain “at this stage”.

    Asked how Labour could negotiate hard for a new deal and then campaign against it in a referendum, she was stumped.

    It’s as though Labour wants to donate voters to the Lib Dems and the Greens.
    And the Scottish National Party.

    Although Brexit is not the primary determinant of voting behaviour, it is still important for many Scots voters. A lot of SLab empathisers are totally disgusted with their party. Abstention could be high within some voter groups.
    The remnants of SLAB are unionists. They wouldn't back the SNP.
    They would go Lib Dem, if the LDs have the good sense not to elect a London-based leader.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 24,525

    eristdoof said:


    There was also alleged, IIRC, to be a 'problem' with identifying which constituency people identified with.

    That's odd, because the rule is quite clear even under boudary changes or constituency name changes. The last address at which you were registered as an "inland" voter determines which constituency.
    How appropriate it is that the vote counts in a constitiency in which someone lived years ago is questionable, but in a FPTP system it is hard to justify any other system, ...unless..... we are given our own MP. A constituency for all overseas voters. I think it would be a good idea, but I can't see it being popular in Westminster or the Daily Telegraph.

    It's hardly disenfraishment if you don't live here. Even maxing out their gerrymandering the separatists managed to get that part right in indyref1
    Yes only cheating was done by the cretinous colonists
  • RobDRobD Posts: 39,393
    Scott_P said:
    Impressive, given the UK was only a gleam in the imperialists' eyes at that point.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Scott_P said:
    Ex civil servant supports civil service shock.

    Doesn’t dispute Trumps point that May and the Civil Service borked up Brexit I note...
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 1,716

    IanB2 said:

    Sarah James on R4, hopelessly trying to defend Labour’s new Brexit nuance.

    Asked the question whether in a referendum Labour would be Leave or Remain, first there is a pause. Then an answer beginning with the words “It depends...”. Then a qualification that they would probably be Remain “at this stage”.

    Asked how Labour could negotiate hard for a new deal and then campaign against it in a referendum, she was stumped.

    It’s as though Labour wants to donate voters to the Lib Dems and the Greens.
    And the Scottish National Party.

    Although Brexit is not the primary determinant of voting behaviour, it is still important for many Scots voters. A lot of SLab empathisers are totally disgusted with their party. Abstention could be high within some voter groups.
    The remnants of SLAB are unionists. They wouldn't back the SNP.
    They would go Lib Dem, if the LDs have the good sense not to elect a London-based leader.
    Bizarre as it may sound, if you look carefully at the data, there is *still* a significant minority of the much-depleted SLab vote which is pro-independence. Although the numbers are not high, these people could be decisive in one or two tight seats.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 16,284

    Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:

    Disgraceful. And only a few weeks after the D-Day memorials. Have we learnt nothing?
    To listen to them you’d think they had been first on the beaches.
    It's insane. Even 1954, and the complete end of rationing was 65 years ago. Anyone under 70 will barely remember that.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 24,525
    Even Boris would be better than that loser
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,956

    IanB2 said:

    Sarah James on R4, hopelessly trying to defend Labour’s new Brexit nuance.

    Asked the question whether in a referendum Labour would be Leave or Remain, first there is a pause. Then an answer beginning with the words “It depends...”. Then a qualification that they would probably be Remain “at this stage”.

    Asked how Labour could negotiate hard for a new deal and then campaign against it in a referendum, she was stumped.

    It’s as though Labour wants to donate voters to the Lib Dems and the Greens.
    And the Scottish National Party.

    Although Brexit is not the primary determinant of voting behaviour, it is still important for many Scots voters. A lot of SLab empathisers are totally disgusted with their party. Abstention could be high within some voter groups.
    The remnants of SLAB are unionists. They wouldn't back the SNP.
    They would go Lib Dem, if the LDs have the good sense not to elect a London-based leader.
    Bizarre as it may sound, if you look carefully at the data, there is *still* a significant minority of the much-depleted SLab vote which is pro-independence. Although the numbers are not high, these people could be decisive in one or two tight seats.
    not a Scottish subsample surely...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 39,393
    edited July 9

    IanB2 said:

    Sarah James on R4, hopelessly trying to defend Labour’s new Brexit nuance.

    Asked the question whether in a referendum Labour would be Leave or Remain, first there is a pause. Then an answer beginning with the words “It depends...”. Then a qualification that they would probably be Remain “at this stage”.

    Asked how Labour could negotiate hard for a new deal and then campaign against it in a referendum, she was stumped.

    It’s as though Labour wants to donate voters to the Lib Dems and the Greens.
    And the Scottish National Party.

    Although Brexit is not the primary determinant of voting behaviour, it is still important for many Scots voters. A lot of SLab empathisers are totally disgusted with their party. Abstention could be high within some voter groups.
    The remnants of SLAB are unionists. They wouldn't back the SNP.
    They would go Lib Dem, if the LDs have the good sense not to elect a London-based leader.
    Bizarre as it may sound, if you look carefully at the data, there is *still* a significant minority of the much-depleted SLab vote which is pro-independence. Although the numbers are not high, these people could be decisive in one or two tight seats.
    not a Scottish subsample surely...
    They would form a subsample of a subsample of a subsample if true :p
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,418
    Foxy said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sarah James on R4, hopelessly trying to defend Labour’s new Brexit nuance.

    Asked the question whether in a referendum Labour would be Leave or Remain, first there is a pause. Then an answer beginning with the words “It depends...”. Then a qualification that they would probably be Remain “at this stage”.

    Asked how Labour could negotiate hard for a new deal and then campaign against it in a referendum, she was stumped.

    It’s as though Labour wants to donate voters to the Lib Dems and the Greens.
    Its too little, too late.

    If Labour want to credibly run a different Brexit policy, they have to change leader first to someone like Watson or Phillips.
    The most underreported group in British politics at present comprises those people who voted Labour in 2017 and who are now not supporting them. That makes up 15-20% of the population. But while there are plenty of Labour loyalists still making their views known and plenty of people who never liked Labour making their views known, public statements from members of this very sizeable group are really quite hard to come by.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 63,188
    Boris aides were rumoured to be looking at early autumn for a general election.

    Given the current Commons refuses to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement and refuses to back No Deal trying for a majority is probably the only way to ensure Brexit can be delivered now by October 31st. In any case with Hammond and Grieve set to VONC a Boris Government than allow the risk of No Deal Boris may not have a choice anyway
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 11,143
    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:
    Ex civil servant supports civil service shock.

    Doesn’t dispute Trumps point that May and the Civil Service borked up Brexit I note...
    Not even the finest Civil Service could polish the turd of Brexit to an acceptable sheen.

  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 1,716

    Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:

    Disgraceful. And only a few weeks after the D-Day memorials. Have we learnt nothing?
    To listen to them you’d think they had been first on the beaches.
    and a perfect reason why I cannot support the Party, its gone mad. stark staring bonkers.
    To be fair, the signs have been there a long time. Remember John Major’s bastards.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 24,525

    IanB2 said:

    Sarah James on R4, hopelessly trying to defend Labour’s new Brexit nuance.

    Asked the question whether in a referendum Labour would be Leave or Remain, first there is a pause. Then an answer beginning with the words “It depends...”. Then a qualification that they would probably be Remain “at this stage”.

    Asked how Labour could negotiate hard for a new deal and then campaign against it in a referendum, she was stumped.

    It’s as though Labour wants to donate voters to the Lib Dems and the Greens.
    And the Scottish National Party.

    Although Brexit is not the primary determinant of voting behaviour, it is still important for many Scots voters. A lot of SLab empathisers are totally disgusted with their party. Abstention could be high within some voter groups.
    The remnants of SLAB are unionists. They wouldn't back the SNP.
    They would go Lib Dem, if the LDs have the good sense not to elect a London-based leader.
    LOL, so they have no choice , unless you count the carpetbagger as NOT London based.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 16,284
    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:
    Ex civil servant supports civil service shock.

    Doesn’t dispute Trumps point that May and the Civil Service borked up Brexit I note...
    Cameron was the first to mess up Brexit by preventing the senior Civil Service from doing it's job before an election; a 'what if'
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 11,143
    edited July 9

    IanB2 said:

    Sarah James on R4, hopelessly trying to defend Labour’s new Brexit nuance.

    Asked the question whether in a referendum Labour would be Leave or Remain, first there is a pause. Then an answer beginning with the words “It depends...”. Then a qualification that they would probably be Remain “at this stage”.

    Asked how Labour could negotiate hard for a new deal and then campaign against it in a referendum, she was stumped.

    It’s as though Labour wants to donate voters to the Lib Dems and the Greens.
    And the Scottish National Party.

    Although Brexit is not the primary determinant of voting behaviour, it is still important for many Scots voters. A lot of SLab empathisers are totally disgusted with their party. Abstention could be high within some voter groups.
    The remnants of SLAB are unionists. They wouldn't back the SNP.
    They would go Lib Dem, if the LDs have the good sense not to elect a London-based leader.
    Bizarre as it may sound, if you look carefully at the data, there is *still* a significant minority of the much-depleted SLab vote which is pro-independence. Although the numbers are not high, these people could be decisive in one or two tight seats.
    not a Scottish subsample surely...
    Better still, a subsample of a Scottish subsample!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 63,188

    Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:

    Based on the various polling we’ve seen of membership views, I would now comfortably describe the Conservative Party as “far right”.
    Many diehard Remainers would now describe 52% of the electorate as 'far right'
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Foxy said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:
    Ex civil servant supports civil service shock.

    Doesn’t dispute Trumps point that May and the Civil Service borked up Brexit I note...
    Not even the finest Civil Service could polish the turd of Brexit to an acceptable sheen.

    If true our broken rabble of Remainer taxpayer funded fatcat pensioned incompetents still did a crap job.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 24,525

    IanB2 said:

    Sarah James on R4, hopelessly trying to defend Labour’s new Brexit nuance.

    Asked the question whether in a referendum Labour would be Leave or Remain, first there is a pause. Then an answer beginning with the words “It depends...”. Then a qualification that they would probably be Remain “at this stage”.

    Asked how Labour could negotiate hard for a new deal and then campaign against it in a referendum, she was stumped.

    It’s as though Labour wants to donate voters to the Lib Dems and the Greens.
    And the Scottish National Party.

    Although Brexit is not the primary determinant of voting behaviour, it is still important for many Scots voters. A lot of SLab empathisers are totally disgusted with their party. Abstention could be high within some voter groups.
    The remnants of SLAB are unionists. They wouldn't back the SNP.
    They would go Lib Dem, if the LDs have the good sense not to elect a London-based leader.
    You would need to be brain dead to vote Lib Dem in Scotland
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,115
    Apologies if I’m not the first, but has anyone noted there appears to be a cockatoo on the front of the Times? (Say it out loud. I’ll wait)

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 63,188
    edited July 9

    I’m not expecting an early election for the simple reason that the Conservatives would lose and lose badly.

    According to last night's Comres poll while May and Hunt see a Corbyn minority government, Boris gives a Tory majority government
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,418
    HYUFD said:

    Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:

    Based on the various polling we’ve seen of membership views, I would now comfortably describe the Conservative Party as “far right”.
    Many diehard Remainers would now describe 52% of the electorate as 'far right'
    Willing to suspend democracy? Yes.
    See Islam as a threat to the British way of life? Yes.
    See the benefits of immigration outweighed by the disadvantages? Yes.

    The Conservative party is becoming a haven for extremists.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 11,143

    Apologies if I’m not the first, but has anyone noted there appears to be a cockatoo on the front of the Times? (Say it out loud. I’ll wait)

    Perhaps it is this unlikely anarchist?

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 20,527
    HYUFD said:

    Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:

    Based on the various polling we’ve seen of membership views, I would now comfortably describe the Conservative Party as “far right”.
    Many diehard Remainers would now describe 52% of the electorate as 'far right'
    I don't see what you gain, rhetorically, from using the term diehard Remainer. You could add easily and as meaninglessly take any other minority societal group. Dentists, EDLers, redheads, etc.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 63,188
    rcs1000 said:

    So just posting what I picked up from previous threads, the issue is the timing.

    He can try to call an election immediately to take place in September. But because his party played games to avoid him facing a ught were jobs for life, he may find his own guys fail to show up as well.

    So he can call the election in September, to take place in October. But that's his whole Brexit strategy blown: The idea was to promise hard Leavers he won't extend, but also tell anti-destroy-the-economy voters that he'll make a deal. That line won't work if the election result will leave him mere weeks or days away from the deadline, with no time to make a deal - or prepare for No Deal for that matter. He's basically going to have to fight the election on no-preparation No Deal, which is a great way to get moderate voters to suck up the many defects of Jeremy Corbyn.

    He can try to call the election before the election but scheduled to crash out during the campaign, but parliament won't vote for that, and may instead replace him with a less mental caretaker PM who will extend. Maybe Boris gets his election after that with the extension someone else's responsibility, but it's very risky to pass the ball to the opposition like that.

    Finally he can call the election right after failing to Brexit or crashing out with No Deal, but neither of these would be an optimal backdrop for a campaign, to out it mildly.

    That's not Boris's plan.

    His plan is to head of to Brussels to negotiate. Discover there's no-one to negotiate with. Complain of perfidious Albion Brussels. And then dare Parliament to No Confidence him and replace him with a temporary PM (who could ask for an extension).

    If Parliament does this (no guarantee), he hopes that the fact that he attempted to get No Deal (and was only prevented by damned MPs) will stand him in good stead with Brexit voters in the subsequent General Election.

    If Parliament does not do this, he hopes No Deal won't be too bad. And if it is, he hopes the EU will get the blame, not him.

    If No Deal is bad, and the Tory Party is destroyed, well, it will all be a bit embarassing, but he can always fall back on writing opinion pieces for The Telegraph.
    No Deal will not destory the Tories, even at worst it would take them down to 25%.

    No Brexit however could destroy the Tories and take it down to less than 10% as in the European Parliament elections with the Brexit Party over 30%
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    1st gay pirate : “ Have you ever tasted parrot ?”

    2nd gay pirate : “ No, but I’ve eaten a cockatoo “
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,030
    On topic, it's worth noting the £6k looking to back the election this year at 2.32.
  • JBriskinindyref2JBriskinindyref2 Posts: 1,482
    malcolmg said:

    eristdoof said:


    There was also alleged, IIRC, to be a 'problem' with identifying which constituency people identified with.

    That's odd, because the rule is quite clear even under boudary changes or constituency name changes. The last address at which you were registered as an "inland" voter determines which constituency.
    How appropriate it is that the vote counts in a constitiency in which someone lived years ago is questionable, but in a FPTP system it is hard to justify any other system, ...unless..... we are given our own MP. A constituency for all overseas voters. I think it would be a good idea, but I can't see it being popular in Westminster or the Daily Telegraph.

    It's hardly disenfraishment if you don't live here. Even maxing out their gerrymandering the separatists managed to get that part right in indyref1
    Yes only cheating was done by the cretinous colonists
    Morning Malky!

    You're not making to much sense but I can explain to posters and lurkers how the separatists vote-rigged indyref1-

    1. They used a question that miraculously managed to leave out the term "United Kingdom". Can you imagine the EUref without the term "European Union" ?. It was extremely silly. For shame Electoral Commission.

    2. They expanded the franchise purely as a (correct) gamble that the youth would be more nationalistic. Expand the franchise all you want - but as a one off just to push up your vote share it was rather disgusting.

    And you still lost!

    Roll on #indyref2
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 15,371

    Apologies if I’m not the first, but has anyone noted there appears to be a cockatoo on the front of the Times? (Say it out loud. I’ll wait)

    The hairstyle is somehow familiar - but if you're suggesting that Trump is birdbrained, that would be an insult to all Psittaciformes.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,453

    Apologies if I’m not the first, but has anyone noted there appears to be a cockatoo on the front of the Times? (Say it out loud. I’ll wait)

    Anyone got the gossip on the Trump-Murdoch falling out?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 21,011
    Wishful thinking from Rudd; surely the Tories are too far gone:

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/i-have-debated-boris-and-jeremy-can-win-this-rvp5hvnsr
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,293

    Cameron was the first to mess up Brexit by preventing the senior Civil Service from doing it's job before an election; a 'what if'

    If Cameron had allowed the civil service to prepare for No Deal, Brexiteers would have whined even more loudly about Project Fear.

    Cameron couldn't legislate for what those who came after would do
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 21,011
    HYUFD said:

    I’m not expecting an early election for the simple reason that the Conservatives would lose and lose badly.

    According to last night's Comres poll while May and Hunt see a Corbyn minority government, Boris gives a Tory majority government
    Don't you mean to say, he's lost the Tories 100 seats even before taking office?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,418
    HYUFD said:

    I’m not expecting an early election for the simple reason that the Conservatives would lose and lose badly.

    According to last night's Comres poll while May and Hunt see a Corbyn minority government, Boris gives a Tory majority government
    According to polls in April 2017, the Conservatives were heading for a majority of 200. I read very little into hypothetical polls at a time when they are very volatile. It is better to look at how an election campaign might play out.

    And strategically the Conservatives' position is awful. If the election is made about Brexit, the Brexit party is going to peel off a chunk of Conservative vote everywhere while Brecon & Radnor is showing that Remain-supporting parties are gearing up to work together in the short term in the seats where it counts.

    The Conservatives would be lucky if they only lost 100 seats.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 63,188
    edited July 9

    HYUFD said:

    Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:

    Based on the various polling we’ve seen of membership views, I would now comfortably describe the Conservative Party as “far right”.
    Many diehard Remainers would now describe 52% of the electorate as 'far right'
    Willing to suspend democracy? Yes.
    See Islam as a threat to the British way of life? Yes.
    See the benefits of immigration outweighed by the disadvantages? Yes.

    The Conservative party is becoming a haven for extremists.
    Refuse to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement or No Deal or any form of the Brexit 52% voted for and refuse to respect democracy then diehard Remainers should not be surprised extremism begets extremism.

    Plus support for an Australian style points system as Boris wants is hardly Fascism
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 7,451
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:

    Based on the various polling we’ve seen of membership views, I would now comfortably describe the Conservative Party as “far right”.
    Many diehard Remainers would now describe 52% of the electorate as 'far right'
    Willing to suspend democracy? Yes.
    See Islam as a threat to the British way of life? Yes.
    See the benefits of immigration outweighed by the disadvantages? Yes.

    The Conservative party is becoming a haven for extremists.
    Refuse to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement or No Deal or any form of the Brexit 52% voted for and refuse to respect democracy then diehard Remainers should not be surprised extremism begets extremism.

    Plus support for an Australian style points system as Boris wants is hardly Fascism
    "Refuse to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement" which would otherwise have passed?
    The ERG
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,418
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nothing to see here, just one of the main political parties’ memberships being prepared to suspend democracy:

    Based on the various polling we’ve seen of membership views, I would now comfortably describe the Conservative Party as “far right”.
    Many diehard Remainers would now describe 52% of the electorate as 'far right'
    Willing to suspend democracy? Yes.
    See Islam as a threat to the British way of life? Yes.
    See the benefits of immigration outweighed by the disadvantages? Yes.

    The Conservative party is becoming a haven for extremists.
    Refuse to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement or No Deal or any form of the Brexit 52% voted for and refuse to respect democracy then diehard Remainers should not be surprised extremism begets extremism.

    Plus support for an Australian style points system as Boris wants is hardly Fascism
    The very people who want to suspend democracy were the very people who refused to vote for the withdrawal agreement. This is a systematic assault on democracy and you are cheering it on.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,846
    HYUFD is the new Plato.
    Utterly bonkers on high rotate.
  • StreeterStreeter Posts: 611
    Scott_P said:
    I fear our unwritten constitution and system of checks and balances based on mere custom will prove inadequate to withstand sustained attack.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 1,716

    On topic, it's worth noting the £6k looking to back the election this year at 2.32.

    Noted.
  • felixfelix Posts: 9,095
    IanB2 said:

    eristdoof said:

    RobD said:

    How did they take away your right to vote?

    They made a rule that if you've been out of Britain for 15 years you can't vote any more.

    The Tories then said they'd remove this rule, but they lied.
    You've got the Tories to thank for having voting rights in the first place. :)

    As for repealing it, Parliament's website say that the government are still looking to make progress on the bill. Expect another to appear in the next session.

    https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05923
    One major reason why the Conservatives adopted this is that it is generally thought that overseas voters are more likely to be Conservative.
    Which is why, one suspects, Labour took it away after you'd been out of the country for 15 years.....
    There was a picture created of retirees drinking gin etc on the Costas and grumbling about 'the country having gone to the dogs', the 'good old days' and whatever.
    There was also alleged, IIRC, to be a 'problem' with identifying which constituency people identified with.
    I'm not sure what the latter was about - you had to show which electoral roll you had been on.

    If we were like America, where your passport not only entitles you to vote, but also to pay taxes, no matter where you live, then I'd have more sympathy for expat votes - but if people have chosen to spend time abroad - or make their lives abroad, then I'm not sure they should also expect to decide how their home country is governed.
    I agree - a view reinforced, it has to be said, by the string of rabid no dealer expats we have suffered on here, eagerly urging a crashout edit on the rest of us from a safe distance. If they come back to live here, obviously they get to vote. Until then, not.
    So the 'principle' you're talking about amounts to denying a democratic right to those whose views you dislike. As a remain voting immigrant living in Spain and paying UK taxes I think your argument stinks.
This discussion has been closed.