I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
Despite people's beliefs that it is, the US system is most definitely not a free market system.
There are a lot of laws and regulations designed to please vested interests. In particular a number of laws designed to prevent drugs prices from coming down. The system there is completely broken.
Efficient is not a word that can be used to describe American healthcare at all.
One of the problems with debates over healthcare funding in this country is that people always draw a false dichotomy between our system, on the one hand, and the American system on the other.
Nobody with a brain would pick the American system, because it's (a) rubbish (b) expensive (c) corrupt as hell.
But nobody ever seems to be able to say why the NHS is so superior to the German or Dutch systems.* There's sometimes an almost fetishistic attachment to it that's just embarrassing.
*To be clear, neither of those are perfect either. But I suspect the real reason no politician wants to go for them is because they're more expensive.
+100.
Also, the “envy of the world” schtick hasn’t been true since about 1955.
The UK spends a decent amount less as a percentage of GDP than its European peers, and Canada, but - curiously - more than Australia and NZ.
When I lived in Australia one of the first policies the newly-elected Liberal [aka Conservative] governments after getting elected in 1996 was implement a rebate through the tax system for taking out private medical insurance, despite the fact that Australia has universal coverage through Medicare.
The logic was that it will reduce the stress on Medicare and the government will spend less paying a bit of a rebate on insurance than it will the full coverage and so the healthcare budget will go further on those that actually need it.
So Australia's system is one of universal healthcare like here, but due to the tax system half the country still has private insurance anyway and the universal healthcare spending goes on those who truly need it.
Which makes me laugh when you compare it to here when people look to ban private education etc which would mean the government paying more to pay for the education of those who really don't need the government paying for it.
It goes against the philosophies of many on the left here, but Australia's system is far more progressive.
Aren’t we in fact heading towards this? I wonder what percentage of the UK popn has BUPA etc. The difference is of course there is no rebate.
There are more ads for private GP type services on the tube, too.
The insured market is declining, and quite patchy outside wealthy areas.
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
HYUFD isn't a Tory.
In 2001 he voted for Ken Clarke, the guy who wanted to take us in to the Euro, and in 2005 he voted the David Davis, the civil liberties guy, HYUFD is a Lib Dem, that's even before you factor in that he voted for Remain.
No we take a clean exit because we can and its the only option available to us that respects our wishes. If there is hurt so be it. Exercising hurts but the motto there is no pain, no gain.
I am sorry Philip but that is just nuts. It is delusional to think that we would have a "clean exit". I have argued the case that the consequences of departure with or without a deal are being grossly overstated and still believe that but to avoid perfectly sensible arrangements with our major trading partners giving us many of the advantages of membership without all the political guff and with minimal cost is, well, nuts.
In an ideal world yes it is nuts, I completely and 100% agree.
But a deal offering "perfectly sensible arrangements with our major trading partners giving us many of the advantages of membership without all the political guff and with minimal cost" has never been on the table.
The backstop is political guff. It has to go. You may be OK with that guff - others are too - but for those of us who aren't which now includes the Prime Minister . . . if the EU aren't prepared to drop the political guff then what else are we supposed to do? We can't force them to give us a better offer.
Have you read what the backstop actually is or have you based your opinion on what the papers say?
The clue is in the name. We have the entire transition period to come up with something better. And if we don’t, well, how exactly do the EU hold us to it? We’d have the option of a no deal situation then.
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
HYUFD isn't a Tory.
In 2001 he voted for Ken Clarke, the guy who wanted to take us in to the Euro, and in 2005 he voted the David Davis, the civil liberties guy, HYUFD is a Lib Dem, that's even before you factor in that he voted for Remain.
Last time I checked Ken Clarke and David Davis were both Tories but Nick Clegg was a LD (and I campaigned for Hague against the Euro in 2001)
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
HYUFD isn't a Tory.
In 2001 he voted for Ken Clarke, the guy who wanted to take us in to the Euro, and in 2005 he voted the David Davis, the civil liberties guy, HYUFD is a Lib Dem, that's even before you factor in that he voted for Remain.
Last time I checked Ken Clarke and David Davis were both Tories but Nick Clegg was a LD (and I campaigned for Hague against the Euro in 2001)
You did the most Lib Dem thing ever, you voted Remain.
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
HYUFD isn't a Tory.
In 2001 he voted for Ken Clarke, the guy who wanted to take us in to the Euro, and in 2005 he voted the David Davis, the civil liberties guy, HYUFD is a Lib Dem, that's even before you factor in that he voted for Remain.
As I say, magnificent. You're all too ashamed to associate yourselves with the Tory party. Your boy Cameron really was a Lib Dem plant, wasn't he?
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
That does not stop it still being the most winnable Tory seat in Sheffield, the only district seat I have fought was a LD hold and I increased the Tory vote, unlike you I respect democracy and back Brexit Deal or No Deal
So if parliament votes no confidence in Boris Johnson as PM, presumably because you respect democracy you think Boris Johnson should resign immediately?
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
HYUFD isn't a Tory.
In 2001 he voted for Ken Clarke, the guy who wanted to take us in to the Euro, and in 2005 he voted the David Davis, the civil liberties guy, HYUFD is a Lib Dem, that's even before you factor in that he voted for Remain.
Last time I checked Ken Clarke and David Davis were both Tories but Nick Clegg was a LD (and I campaigned for Hague against the Euro in 2001)
You did the most Lib Dem thing ever, you voted Remain.
The last 3 Tory PMs voted Remain as did half the Boris cabinet
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
HYUFD isn't a Tory.
In 2001 he voted for Ken Clarke, the guy who wanted to take us in to the Euro, and in 2005 he voted the David Davis, the civil liberties guy, HYUFD is a Lib Dem, that's even before you factor in that he voted for Remain.
As I say, magnificent. You're all too ashamed to associate yourselves with the Tory party. Your boy Cameron really was a Lib Dem plant, wasn't he?
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
That does not stop it still being the most winnable Tory seat in Sheffield, the only district seat I have fought was a LD hold and I increased the Tory vote, unlike you I respect democracy and back Brexit Deal or No Deal
So if parliament votes no confidence in Boris Johnson as PM, presumably because you respect democracy you think Boris Johnson should resign immediately?
After October 31st once the democratic vote to Leave the EU has been respected maybe
The insured market is declining, and quite patchy outside wealthy areas.
Having watched my wife and brother have gallbladder operations, BUPA really didn't do themselves any favours when dealing with my brother (especially considering he could well have had cancer)..
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
It’s hardly new. It’s been like that for more than 3 years now.
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
That does not stop it still being the most winnable Tory seat in Sheffield, the only district seat I have fought was a LD hold and I increased the Tory vote, unlike you I respect democracy and back Brexit Deal or No Deal
So if parliament votes no confidence in Boris Johnson as PM, presumably because you respect democracy you think Boris Johnson should resign immediately?
After October 31st once the democratic vote to Leave the EU has been respected maybe
In that scenario, that is not really respecting the decision of democratically elected MPs with a fresher mandate than the referendum. More people voted for the parliaments MPs in 2017 in totality than voted for choice one to Leave or Choice 2 to remain in 2016. A Parliament and its constituent parts represent 30 million plus. Leave won 17.4 Million. On another basis 17.4 Million voted Leave but nearly 50 million UK citizens who are impacted by this decision did not vote for Brexit and certainly not No Deal because we would have as the UK the easiest deal in history....
In 2001 he voted for Ken Clarke, the guy who wanted to take us in to the Euro, and in 2005 he voted the David Davis, the civil liberties guy, HYUFD is a Lib Dem, that's even before you factor in that he voted for Remain.
That's brilliant.
It's even better than all those Nazi nutters Corbynistas telling each other they're not proper socialists.
In 2001 he voted for Ken Clarke, the guy who wanted to take us in to the Euro, and in 2005 he voted the David Davis, the civil liberties guy, HYUFD is a Lib Dem, that's even before you factor in that he voted for Remain.
That's brilliant.
It's even better than all those Nazi nutters Corbynistas telling each other they're not proper socialists.
In 2001 he voted for Ken Clarke, the guy who wanted to take us in to the Euro, and in 2005 he voted the David Davis, the civil liberties guy, HYUFD is a Lib Dem, that's even before you factor in that he voted for Remain.
That's brilliant.
It's even better than all those Nazi nutters Corbynistas telling each other they're not proper socialists.
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
It’s hardly new. It’s been like that for more than 3 years now.
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
It’s hardly new. It’s been like that for more than 3 years now.
What's the plural of Conservative?
Blazing row including accusations of treason.
I'm just having a bit of fun, HYUFD seems to be a Turing test gone wrong.
Can I check if In have got this right, because it IMO there is a lot of confused thinking.
1) Someone at all times has to be prime minister 2) If Boris loses a VONC such a vote does not tell us who the PM should be instead 3) In such a case the PM remains the PM until someone else becomes it (2010 GE for example) 4) They become it because it becomes clear to the PM that X has a decent prospect of commanding a majority and forming a government; the PM then advises HM to call for X and make them PM 5) If no-one is a candidate for X within 14 days, then HM calls an election at a date advised by the PM 6) At all times parliament is in charge because they can pass a resolution to say that the PM should advise HM that X should be PM - at which point it is game over for Boris. 7) All the talk about Boris acting illegally, outwith convention etc if he hangs on is nonsense because he cannot create a vacuum.
That's the best I can do. I should be grateful for expert clarification.
Did anybody notice that corbyn met some Celtic fans on a flight to Romania yesterday who the invited him to the match to which he went? Not posted with any political angle but thought it was interesting that he actually went.
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
It’s hardly new. It’s been like that for more than 3 years now.
What's the plural of Conservative?
Blazing row including accusations of treason.
I'm just having a bit of fun, HYUFD seems to be a Turing test gone wrong.
Did anybody notice that corbyn met some Celtic fans on a flight to Romania yesterday who the invited him to the match to which he went? Not posted with any political angle but thought it was interesting that he actually went.
As an Arsenal fan he wanted the lowdown on Tierney.
Yougov today has the Tories back up to 23% in Scotland with the SNP on 39%, that is a swing of just 4% from the Tories to the SNP since 2017 meaning the Tories would hold 7 out of their 13 Scottish seats ie a majority.
SLAB though have slumped to just 12%, below the LDs on 14% and would lose all their Scottish seats to the SNP bar Ian Murray's in Edinburgh South.
The LDs meanwhile would gain Fife North East from the SNP
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
It’s hardly new. It’s been like that for more than 3 years now.
What's the plural of Conservative?
Blazing row including accusations of treason.
I'm just having a bit of fun, HYUFD seems to be a Turing test gone wrong.
Something's clearly gone wrong with him.
He’s put the fourth wheel in the wrong bomb because his weather reports are out of date.
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
It’s hardly new. It’s been like that for more than 3 years now.
What's the plural of Conservative?
Blazing row including accusations of treason.
I'm just having a bit of fun, HYUFD seems to be a Turing test gone wrong.
Something's clearly gone wrong with him.
He’s put the fourth wheel in the wrong bomb because his weather reports are out of date.
Can I check if In have got this right, because it IMO there is a lot of confused thinking.
1) Someone at all times has to be prime minister 2) If Boris loses a VONC such a vote does not tell us who the PM should be instead 3) In such a case the PM remains the PM until someone else becomes it (2010 GE for example) 4) They become it because it becomes clear to the PM that X has a decent prospect of commanding a majority and forming a government; the PM then advises HM to call for X and make them PM 5) If no-one is a candidate for X within 14 days, then HM calls an election at a date advised by the PM 6) At all times parliament is in charge because they can pass a resolution to say that the PM should advise HM that X should be PM - at which point it is game over for Boris. 7) All the talk about Boris acting illegally, outwith convention etc if he hangs on is nonsense because he cannot create a vacuum.
That's the best I can do. I should be grateful for expert clarification.
1 - I think isn't true, but is in practice so. 2 - could be you! 3 - yes 4 - no, I think the privy council decide as to what they might suggest to the Queen. 5 - yes 6 - No, at all tomes the Queen is in charge 7 - He has to act in accordance with the above
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
It’s hardly new. It’s been like that for more than 3 years now.
What's the plural of Conservative?
Blazing row including accusations of treason.
I'm just having a bit of fun, HYUFD seems to be a Turing test gone wrong.
Something's clearly gone wrong with him.
He’s put the fourth wheel in the wrong bomb because his weather reports are out of date.
??? That makes no sense.
I think that's was meant to be the epitome of a failed Turing test.
Yougov today has the Tories back up to 23% in Scotland with the SNP on 39%, that is a swing of just 4% from the Tories to the SNP since 2017 meaning the Tories would hold 7 out of their 13 Scottish seats ie a majority.
SLAB though have slumped to just 12%, below the LDs on 14% and would lose all their Scottish seats to the SNP bar Ian Murray's in Edinburgh South
That would mean the Tories have 6 less seats which means Boris is doing worse than TM and further away from an overall majority. A bit embarrassing for Boris! That's before tactical voting is taken into account which will break UNS...
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
It’s hardly new. It’s been like that for more than 3 years now.
What's the plural of Conservative?
Blazing row including accusations of treason.
I'm just having a bit of fun, HYUFD seems to be a Turing test gone wrong.
Something's clearly gone wrong with him.
He’s put the fourth wheel in the wrong bomb because his weather reports are out of date.
??? That makes no sense.
I think that's was meant to be the epitome of a failed Turing test.
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
It’s hardly new. It’s been like that for more than 3 years now.
What's the plural of Conservative?
Blazing row including accusations of treason.
I'm just having a bit of fun, HYUFD seems to be a Turing test gone wrong.
Something's clearly gone wrong with him.
He’s put the fourth wheel in the wrong bomb because his weather reports are out of date.
??? That makes no sense.
Ok a poor attempt at humor but Turing broke the enigma code by interpreting the German weather reports which he then input into his computer, the bomb (?) to try and work out the right order for the decoding process. There will be someone out there with a much better grasp of history to correct me
Yougov today has the Tories back up to 23% in Scotland with the SNP on 39%, that is a swing of just 4% from the Tories to the SNP since 2017 meaning the Tories would hold 7 out of their 13 Scottish seats ie a majority.
SLAB though have slumped to just 12%, below the LDs on 14% and would lose all their Scottish seats to the SNP bar Ian Murray's in Edinburgh South
That would mean the Tories have 6 less seats which means Boris is doing worse than TM and further away from an overall majority. A bit embarrassing for Boris! That's before tactical voting is taken into account which will break UNS...
Yes. I didn't quite follow how just about hanging on to half your seats was meant to be a positive.
Yougov today has the Tories back up to 23% in Scotland with the SNP on 39%, that is a swing of just 4% from the Tories to the SNP since 2017 meaning the Tories would hold 7 out of their 13 Scottish seats ie a majority.
SLAB though have slumped to just 12%, below the LDs on 14% and would lose all their Scottish seats to the SNP bar Ian Murray's in Edinburgh South
That would mean the Tories have 6 less seats which means Boris is doing worse than TM and further away from an overall majority. A bit embarrassing for Boris! That's before tactical voting is taken into account which will break UNS...
No as the same poll has the Tories gaining at least 31 seats from Labour across GB so even with 6 less seats in Scotland that is still a net Tory gain of 25 and even with a Tory loss of 17 seats to the LDs as the poll suggests that is still a net Tory gain of 8 which gets them to the 326 needed for a majority even including Sinn Fein who do not take their seats.
Yougov today has the Tories back up to 23% in Scotland with the SNP on 39%, that is a swing of just 4% from the Tories to the SNP since 2017 meaning the Tories would hold 7 out of their 13 Scottish seats ie a majority.
SLAB though have slumped to just 12%, below the LDs on 14% and would lose all their Scottish seats to the SNP bar Ian Murray's in Edinburgh South
That would mean the Tories have 6 less seats which means Boris is doing worse than TM and further away from an overall majority. A bit embarrassing for Boris! That's before tactical voting is taken into account which will break UNS...
No as the same poll has the Tories gaining at least 31 seats from Labour across GB so even with 6 less seats in Scotland that is still a net Tory gain of 25 and they only need 8 more seats on 2017 for a Tory majority
Can I check if In have got this right, because it IMO there is a lot of confused thinking.
1) Someone at all times has to be prime minister 2) If Boris loses a VONC such a vote does not tell us who the PM should be instead 3) In such a case the PM remains the PM until someone else becomes it (2010 GE for example) 4) They become it because it becomes clear to the PM that X has a decent prospect of commanding a majority and forming a government; the PM then advises HM to call for X and make them PM 5) If no-one is a candidate for X within 14 days, then HM calls an election at a date advised by the PM 6) At all times parliament is in charge because they can pass a resolution to say that the PM should advise HM that X should be PM - at which point it is game over for Boris. 7) All the talk about Boris acting illegally, outwith convention etc if he hangs on is nonsense because he cannot create a vacuum.
That's the best I can do. I should be grateful for expert clarification.
I agree with your analysis, however the constitutional precedents are a bit muddy and have never been tested under the FTPA. For instance when the Balfour government resigned at the start of the 20th century (though not, I think, as a result of a VONC) the King sent for the LOTO, Campbell-Bannerman.
Of course, that would be assuming the government has to resign. When Callaghan lost a VONC, he didn’t resign as PM, he just called a GE.
What has not been tested, AFAIK, for well over 100 years (if ever) is what happens if a PM loses a VONC but an alternative figure can, through some method (backroom channels? Vote of MPs?) demonstrate they have the support of more members of the HOC. I think if the PM is not willing to resign at that point, the monarch would have to dismiss the PM and call that other person. That’s not been tested in modern times because a situation has never arisen where this would occur, and I think there is an expectation that the PM would resign at that point.
Yougov today has the Tories back up to 23% in Scotland with the SNP on 39%, that is a swing of just 4% from the Tories to the SNP since 2017 meaning the Tories would hold 7 out of their 13 Scottish seats ie a majority.
SLAB though have slumped to just 12%, below the LDs on 14% and would lose all their Scottish seats to the SNP bar Ian Murray's in Edinburgh South
That would mean the Tories have 6 less seats which means Boris is doing worse than TM and further away from an overall majority. A bit embarrassing for Boris! That's before tactical voting is taken into account which will break UNS...
No as the same poll has the Tories gaining at least 31 seats from Labour across GB so even with 6 less seats in Scotland that is still a net Tory gain of 25 and they only need 8 more seats on 2017 for a Tory majority
You remind me of Adolf Hitler marshalling ghost armies to vanquish the enemy! To be honest I wonder if the purpose of Boris Johnson is not to lead the Tories to victory but to minimise its defeat? Of course Tories would welcome a surprise victory but I suspect holding enough seats to mount a challenge a few years later against a several party Government is as good as it gets for the Tories under Boris...
Yes, I am sure the US is going to give us everything we want and comparatively a better deal than the one we have the EU? In the real world they are going to screw us relentlessly for every concession due to the 5:1 or 6:1 bigger economic weight they have comparatively..
Yougov today has the Tories back up to 23% in Scotland with the SNP on 39%, that is a swing of just 4% from the Tories to the SNP since 2017 meaning the Tories would hold 7 out of their 13 Scottish seats ie a majority.
SLAB though have slumped to just 12%, below the LDs on 14% and would lose all their Scottish seats to the SNP bar Ian Murray's in Edinburgh South
That would mean the Tories have 6 less seats which means Boris is doing worse than TM and further away from an overall majority. A bit embarrassing for Boris! That's before tactical voting is taken into account which will break UNS...
No as the same poll has the Tories gaining at least 31 seats from Labour across GB so even with 6 less seats in Scotland that is still a net Tory gain of 25 and they only need 8 more seats on 2017 for a Tory majority
You remind me of Adolf Hitler marshalling ghost armies to vanquish the enemy! To be honest I wonder if the purpose of Boris Johnson is not to lead the Tories to victory but to minimise its defeat? Of course Tories would welcome a surprise victory but I suspect holding enough seats to mount a challenge a few years later against a several party Government is as good as it gets for the Tories under Boris...
I would also say that I don’t think purdah rules prevent the government from taking the UK out of the EU in an election period. It is a passive occurrence and the legal default. The government has already pre-announced that it intends for the UK to leave on that date and assuming no alternative government is found, it would still be the government on exit day.
Whether it SHOULD do that is another matter, but I don’t actually see anything constitutionally improper with it, unless someone can enlighten me?
Yes, I am sure the US is going to give us everything we want and comparatively a better deal than the one we have the EU? In the real world they are going to screw us relentlessly for every concession due to the 5:1 or 6:1 bigger economic weight they have comparatively..
Do you think Conservative MPs from rural seats would welcome US agricultural products coming into the UK tariff free?
I ask this, because the Conservative Party doesn't actually have much of a majority, and it's by no means clear that the DUP, who have lots of farmers as members, will be keen either.
Specifically, do you think those Conservative MPs with a long history of opposing GM crops, such as Zac Goldsmith, will now be in favour?
Yougov today has the Tories back up to 23% in Scotland with the SNP on 39%, that is a swing of just 4% from the Tories to the SNP since 2017 meaning the Tories would hold 7 out of their 13 Scottish seats ie a majority.
SLAB though have slumped to just 12%, below the LDs on 14% and would lose all their Scottish seats to the SNP bar Ian Murray's in Edinburgh South
That would mean the Tories have 6 less seats which means Boris is doing worse than TM and further away from an overall majority. A bit embarrassing for Boris! That's before tactical voting is taken into account which will break UNS...
No as the same poll has the Tories gaining at least 31 seats from Labour across GB so even with 6 less seats in Scotland that is still a net Tory gain of 25 and they only need 8 more seats on 2017 for a Tory majority
You remind me of Adolf Hitler marshalling ghost armies to vanquish the enemy! To be honest I wonder if the purpose of Boris Johnson is not to lead the Tories to victory but to minimise its defeat? Of course Tories would welcome a surprise victory but I suspect holding enough seats to mount a challenge a few years later against a several party Government is as good as it gets for the Tories under Boris...
On today's Yougov poll there is no doubt the Tories will be largest party, Labour would even fall below 200 seats, it would need a Labour and SNP and LD and PC and Green Government at least to stop Boris returning as PM, which I doubt Boris would be too bothered by, even if he falls fractionally short of a majority he would still be the strongest force at Westminster
I would also say that I don’t think purdah rules prevent the government from taking the UK out of the EU in an election period. It is a passive occurrence and the legal default. The government has already pre-announced that it intends for the UK to leave on that date and assuming no alternative government is found, it would still be the government on exit day.
Whether it SHOULD do that is another matter, but I don’t actually see anything constitutionally improper with it, unless someone can enlighten me?
I think a No Deal Brexit mid election is the way to guarantee a crisis. Not wise.
I think that HM and her advisors would recommend an October date, and it would be hard to refuse.
I would also say that I don’t think purdah rules prevent the government from taking the UK out of the EU in an election period. It is a passive occurrence and the legal default. The government has already pre-announced that it intends for the UK to leave on that date and assuming no alternative government is found, it would still be the government on exit day.
Whether it SHOULD do that is another matter, but I don’t actually see anything constitutionally improper with it, unless someone can enlighten me?
I would tend to agree. However, were Boris to win a majority on November 1st on 32% of the vote, in such a circumstance, the idea that Brexit would have been "delivered" and everything would be just fine and dandy, is stretching optimism, I reckon.
Yougov today has the Tories back up to 23% in Scotland with the SNP on 39%, that is a swing of just 4% from the Tories to the SNP since 2017 meaning the Tories would hold 7 out of their 13 Scottish seats ie a majority.
SLAB though have slumped to just 12%, below the LDs on 14% and would lose all their Scottish seats to the SNP bar Ian Murray's in Edinburgh South
That would mean the Tories have 6 less seats which means Boris is doing worse than TM and further away from an overall majority. A bit embarrassing for Boris! That's before tactical voting is taken into account which will break UNS...
No as the same poll has the Tories gaining at least 31 seats from Labour across GB so even with 6 less seats in Scotland that is still a net Tory gain of 25 and they only need 8 more seats on 2017 for a Tory majority
You remind me of Adolf Hitler marshalling ghost armies to vanquish the enemy! To be honest I wonder if the purpose of Boris Johnson is not to lead the Tories to victory but to minimise its defeat? Of course Tories would welcome a surprise victory but I suspect holding enough seats to mount a challenge a few years later against a several party Government is as good as it gets for the Tories under Boris...
On today's Yougov poll there is no doubt the Tories will be largest party, Labour would even fall below 200 seats, it would need a Labour and SNP and LD and PC and Green Government at least to stop it, which I doubt Boris would be too bothered by, even if he falls fractionally short of a majority he would still be the strongest force at Westminster
Yes, and it's well known fact that being the larget party - but lacking a majority - ensures strong and stable government.
Do you think Conservative MPs from rural seats would welcome US agricultural products coming into the UK tariff free?
I ask this, because the Conservative Party doesn't actually have much of a majority, and it's by no means clear that the DUP, who have lots of farmers as members, will be keen either.
Specifically, do you think those Conservative MPs with a long history of opposing GM crops, such as Zac Goldsmith, will now be in favour?
I’m afraid no one wants to discus tariff issues on here I’ve tried for three days to get a discussion going because I want to understand the issues involved.
Yes, I am sure the US is going to give us everything we want and comparatively a better deal than the one we have the EU? In the real world they are going to screw us relentlessly for every concession due to the 5:1 or 6:1 bigger economic weight they have comparatively..
Yougov today has the Tories back up to 23% in Scotland with the SNP on 39%, that is a swing of just 4% from the Tories to the SNP since 2017 meaning the Tories would hold 7 out of their 13 Scottish seats ie a majority.
SLAB though have slumped to just 12%, below the LDs on 14% and would lose all their Scottish seats to the SNP bar Ian Murray's in Edinburgh South
That would mean the Tories have 6 less seats which means Boris is doing worse than TM and further away from an overall majority. A bit embarrassing for Boris! That's before tactical voting is taken into account which will break UNS...
No as the same poll has the Tories gaining at least 31 seats from Labour across GB so even with 6 less seats in Scotland that is still a net Tory gain of 25 and they only need 8 more seats on 2017 for a Tory majority
You remind me of Adolf Hitler marshalling ghost armies to vanquish the enemy! To be honest I wonder if the purpose of Boris Johnson is not to lead the Tories to victory but to minimise its defeat? Of course Tories would welcome a surprise victory but I suspect holding enough seats to mount a challenge a few years later against a several party Government is as good as it gets for the Tories under Boris...
On today's Yougov poll there is no doubt the Tories will be largest party, Labour would even fall below 200 seats, it would need a Labour and SNP and LD and PC and Green Government at least to stop it, which I doubt Boris would be too bothered by, even if he falls fractionally short of a majority he would still be the strongest force at Westminster
Yes, and it's well known fact that being the larget party - but lacking a majority - ensures strong and stable government.
Well certainly more than a 5 party Government and Boris would win a small majority on today's Yougov anyway
So after Nabaviexit we've had TheEaglesExit !!!!!!!
I've been away - you've followed the herd(son) and RN?
won't be long for me I fear BUT not just yet.
Yup, the headlong rush in to No Deal confirmed it, I couldn't disagree with a word David wrote.
What really depressed me was the realisation that if and when Boris Johnson crashes and burns later on this year the party will not return to sanity with someone like Hunt or Stewart, but the party will double down and go for someone like Patel, Baker, or our own Corbyn Andrew Bridgen.
Yougov today has the Tories back up to 23% in Scotland with the SNP on 39%, that is a swing of just 4% from the Tories to the SNP since 2017 meaning the Tories would hold 7 out of their 13 Scottish seats ie a majority.
SLAB though have slumped to just 12%, below the LDs on 14% and would lose all their Scottish seats to the SNP bar Ian Murray's in Edinburgh South.
The LDs meanwhile would gain Fife North East from the SNP
That's a bit surprising. Anything like that in 2021 would mean the pro-Indy majority in the Scottish Parliament would be kaput. 5 more years of Nicola as FM leading a minority govt with no prospect of an IndyRef to keep the troops happy. Not a pretty sight come 2026!
Yougov today has the Tories back up to 23% in Scotland with the SNP on 39%, that is a swing of just 4% from the Tories to the SNP since 2017 meaning the Tories would hold 7 out of their 13 Scottish seats ie a majority.
SLAB though have slumped to just 12%, below the LDs on 14% and would lose all their Scottish seats to the SNP bar Ian Murray's in Edinburgh South
That would mean the Tories have 6 less seats which means Boris is doing worse than TM and further away from an overall majority. A bit embarrassing for Boris! That's before tactical voting is taken into account which will break UNS...
No as the same poll has the Tories gaining at least 31 seats from Labour across GB so even with 6 less seats in Scotland that is still a net Tory gain of 25 and they only need 8 more seats on 2017 for a Tory majority
You remind me of Adolf Hitler marshalling ghost armies to vanquish the enemy! To be honest I wonder if the purpose of Boris Johnson is not to lead the Tories to victory but to minimise its defeat? Of course Tories would welcome a surprise victory but I suspect holding enough seats to mount a challenge a few years later against a several party Government is as good as it gets for the Tories under Boris...
On today's Yougov poll there is no doubt the Tories will be largest party, Labour would even fall below 200 seats, it would need a Labour and SNP and LD and PC and Green Government at least to stop it, which I doubt Boris would be too bothered by, even if he falls fractionally short of a majority he would still be the strongest force at Westminster
Yes, and it's well known fact that being the larget party - but lacking a majority - ensures strong and stable government.
Well certainly more than a 5 party Government and Boris would win a small majority on today's Yougov anyway
Do you really think that would be the case after 5 weeks of Nigel shouting "you promised we would have left by October 31st" for an election on November 7th / 14th when we are still in the EU...
Yes, I am sure the US is going to give us everything we want and comparatively a better deal than the one we have the EU? In the real world they are going to screw us relentlessly for every concession due to the 5:1 or 6:1 bigger economic weight they have comparatively..
So after Nabaviexit we've had TheEaglesExit !!!!!!!
I've been away - you've followed the herd(son) and RN?
won't be long for me I fear BUT not just yet.
Yup, the headlong rush in to No Deal confirmed it, I couldn't disagree with a word David wrote.
What really depressed me was the realisation that if and when Boris Johnson crashes and burns later on this year the party will not return to sanity with someone like Hunt or Stewart, but the party will double down and go for someone like Patel, Baker, or our own Corbyn Andrew Bridgen.
So after Nabaviexit we've had TheEaglesExit !!!!!!!
I've been away - you've followed the herd(son) and RN?
won't be long for me I fear BUT not just yet.
Yup, the headlong rush in to No Deal confirmed it, I couldn't disagree with a word David wrote.
What really depressed me was the realisation that if and when Boris Johnson crashes and burns later on this year the party will not return to sanity with someone like Hunt or Stewart, but the party will double down and go for someone like Patel, Baker, or our own Corbyn Andrew Bridgen.
Can I check if In have got this right, because it IMO there is a lot of confused thinking.
1) Someone at all times has to be prime minister 2) If Boris loses a VONC such a vote does not tell us who the PM should be instead 3) In such a case the PM remains the PM until someone else becomes it (2010 GE for example) 4) They become it because it becomes clear to the PM that X has a decent prospect of commanding a majority and forming a government; the PM then advises HM to call for X and make them PM 5) If no-one is a candidate for X within 14 days, then HM calls an election at a date advised by the PM 6) At all times parliament is in charge because they can pass a resolution to say that the PM should advise HM that X should be PM - at which point it is game over for Boris. 7) All the talk about Boris acting illegally, outwith convention etc if he hangs on is nonsense because he cannot create a vacuum.
That's the best I can do. I should be grateful for expert clarification.
I agree with your analysis, however the constitutional precedents are a bit muddy and have never been tested under the FTPA. For instance when the Balfour government resigned at the start of the 20th century (though not, I think, as a result of a VONC) the King sent for the LOTO, Campbell-Bannerman.
Of course, that would be assuming the government has to resign. When Callaghan lost a VONC, he didn’t resign as PM, he just called a GE.
What has not been tested, AFAIK, for well over 100 years (if ever) is what happens if a PM loses a VONC but an alternative figure can, through some method (backroom channels? Vote of MPs?) demonstrate they have the support of more members of the HOC. I think if the PM is not willing to resign at that point, the monarch would have to dismiss the PM and call that other person. That’s not been tested in modern times because a situation has never arisen where this would occur, and I think there is an expectation that the PM would resign at that point.
Agree. In the circumstances as they are now - say with talk of GNU and so on, but with no likely ordinary coalition giving the LOTO a chance of being PM - a process like a EDM naming a leader which all MPs could sign, or a resolution of the house doing the same would give an unambiguous signal that a new govt could be formed under prime minister X. At that point Boris would have lost the PM position in favour of X, and there is nothing to indicate he would not accept it. Conversely, failure to do so would be the strongest possible indicator that no alternative leader has emerged - so Boris stays PM until after an election. He would be doing nothing wrong. A good deal of bogus hot air is being generated by failing to understand the system.
I would also say that I don’t think purdah rules prevent the government from taking the UK out of the EU in an election period. It is a passive occurrence and the legal default. The government has already pre-announced that it intends for the UK to leave on that date and assuming no alternative government is found, it would still be the government on exit day.
Whether it SHOULD do that is another matter, but I don’t actually see anything constitutionally improper with it, unless someone can enlighten me?
I think a No Deal Brexit mid election is the way to guarantee a crisis. Not wise.
I think that HM and her advisors would recommend an October date, and it would be hard to refuse.
The monarch can advise, but constitutionally I think would have to defer. In pretty much every situation where a monarch has advised a PM against a course of action, but they have been determined to do the contrary, the Crown has had to roll over.
I would also say that I don’t think purdah rules prevent the government from taking the UK out of the EU in an election period. It is a passive occurrence and the legal default. The government has already pre-announced that it intends for the UK to leave on that date and assuming no alternative government is found, it would still be the government on exit day.
Whether it SHOULD do that is another matter, but I don’t actually see anything constitutionally improper with it, unless someone can enlighten me?
I think a No Deal Brexit mid election is the way to guarantee a crisis. Not wise.
I think that HM and her advisors would recommend an October date, and it would be hard to refuse.
The monarch can advise, but constitutionally I think would have to defer. In pretty much every situation where a monarch has advised a PM against a course of action, but they have been determined to do the contrary, the Crown has had to roll over.
There has seldom been a matter of such import. All this talk of the Queen getting involved in politics. She's the Head of State. It is what we pay her for.
I remain mystified as to quite what U.K. objectives from a trade deal with the US will be? And what they will be prepared to concede to achieve them? Have any of the leading Brexiteers provided much illumination on this?
I would also say that I don’t think purdah rules prevent the government from taking the UK out of the EU in an election period. It is a passive occurrence and the legal default. The government has already pre-announced that it intends for the UK to leave on that date and assuming no alternative government is found, it would still be the government on exit day.
Whether it SHOULD do that is another matter, but I don’t actually see anything constitutionally improper with it, unless someone can enlighten me?
I would tend to agree. However, were Boris to win a majority on November 1st on 32% of the vote, in such a circumstance, the idea that Brexit would have been "delivered" and everything would be just fine and dandy, is stretching optimism, I reckon.
What’s more, I think it’s not a given that Boris would win a 1 November GE. 1945 anyone? “Oh they’ve done what we needed them to do, let’s vote for someone who will spend more on schools and hospitals.”
I remain mystified as to quite what U.K. objectives from a trade deal with the US will be? And what they will be prepared to concede to achieve them? Have any of the leading Brexiteers provided much illumination on this?
They seem remarkably unforthcoming and incurious when it comes to details of any kind on any topic really.
Yougov today has the Tories back up to 23% in Scotland with the SNP on 39%, that is a swing of just 4% from the Tories to the SNP since 2017 meaning the Tories would hold 7 out of their 13 Scottish seats ie a majority.
SLAB though have slumped to just 12%, below the LDs on 14% and would lose all their Scottish seats to the SNP bar Ian Murray's in Edinburgh South
That would mean the Tories have 6 less seats which means Boris is doing worse than TM and further away from an overall majority. A bit embarrassing for Boris! That's before tactical voting is taken into account which will break UNS...
No as the same poll has the Tories gaining at least 31 seats from Labour across GB so even with 6 less seats in Scotland that is still a net Tory gain of 25 and they only need 8 more seats on 2017 for a Tory majority
You remind me of Adolf Hitler marshalling ghost armies to vanquish the enemy! To be honest I wonder if the purpose of Boris Johnson is not to lead the Tories to victory but to minimise its defeat? Of course Tories would welcome a surprise victory but I suspect holding enough seats to mount a challenge a few years later against a several party Government is as good as it gets for the Tories under Boris...
On today's Yougov poll there is no doubt the Tories will be largest party, Labour would even fall below 200 seats, it would need a Labour and SNP and LD and PC and Green Government at least to stop it, which I doubt Boris would be too bothered by, even if he falls fractionally short of a majority he would still be the strongest force at Westminster
Yes, and it's well known fact that being the larget party - but lacking a majority - ensures strong and stable government.
Well certainly more than a 5 party Government and Boris would win a small majority on today's Yougov anyway
Can you foresee any “events dear boy” in the run up to an early November election date that might potentially upset the apple cart?
I would also say that I don’t think purdah rules prevent the government from taking the UK out of the EU in an election period. It is a passive occurrence and the legal default. The government has already pre-announced that it intends for the UK to leave on that date and assuming no alternative government is found, it would still be the government on exit day.
Whether it SHOULD do that is another matter, but I don’t actually see anything constitutionally improper with it, unless someone can enlighten me?
I think a No Deal Brexit mid election is the way to guarantee a crisis. Not wise.
I think that HM and her advisors would recommend an October date, and it would be hard to refuse.
The monarch can advise, but constitutionally I think would have to defer. In pretty much every situation where a monarch has advised a PM against a course of action, but they have been determined to do the contrary, the Crown has had to roll over.
There has seldom been a matter of such import. All this talk of the Queen getting involved in politics. She's the Head of State. It is what we pay her for.
Don’t we pay her not to get involved in politics and pretty much smile and nod? I am being devils advocate here BTW, I’d love her to give Boris a piece of her mind.
No we take a clean exit because we can and its the only option available to us that respects our wishes. If there is hurt so be it. Exercising hurts but the motto there is no pain, no gain.
I am sorry Philip but that is just nuts. It is delusional to think that we would have a "clean exit". I have argued the case that the consequences of departure with or without a deal are being grossly overstated and still believe that but to avoid perfectly sensible arrangements with our major trading partners giving us many of the advantages of membership without all the political guff and with minimal cost is, well, nuts.
In an ideal world yes it is nuts, I completely and 100% agree.
But a deal offering "perfectly sensible arrangements with our major trading partners giving us many of the advantages of membership without all the political guff and with minimal cost" has never been on the table.
The backstop is political guff. It has to go. You may be OK with that guff - others are too - but for those of us who aren't which now includes the Prime Minister . . . if the EU aren't prepared to drop the political guff then what else are we supposed to do? We can't force them to give us a better offer.
Have you read what the backstop actually is or have you based your opinion on what the papers say?
Yes and I have consistently [even at MV3] said it is unacceptable. I have been consistent throughout.
Drop the backstop and we'd be nuts to reject the deal then. Francois is nuts, I am not aligned with Francois. But I'd rather a clean exit than the backstop.
Would you care to actually answer my question. Just because you've been consistently stating it's unacceptable doesn't mean you've read the actual agreement and understand it's details.
I will take your answer as the "NO, I haven't read it", it clearly is.
His answer was a clear yes. You failed to read it!
So after Nabaviexit we've had TheEaglesExit !!!!!!!
I've been away - you've followed the herd(son) and RN?
won't be long for me I fear BUT not just yet.
Yup, the headlong rush in to No Deal confirmed it, I couldn't disagree with a word David wrote.
What really depressed me was the realisation that if and when Boris Johnson crashes and burns later on this year the party will not return to sanity with someone like Hunt or Stewart, but the party will double down and go for someone like Patel, Baker, or our own Corbyn Andrew Bridgen.
I am sure the LDs will be grateful that a core voter such as yourself (voting LD in 2017 when the LDs got 7% and the Tories got 42%) will be voting LD again at the next general election
Unlike you, my vote in 2017 helped the Tories gain a seat from Labour.
You lose seats to the opponents of the Tories, I help them gain them.
Even in Hallam 23% voted for the Tory candidate Ian Walker at the last general election and we held the district seat the LDs were targeting in Epping this year
I correctly recognised the Tories weren't going to win Hallam so swapped my vote with a Lib Dem in North East Derbyshire to help the Tories gain the seat.
Tell me about your council seat you personally fought (and lost) in August 2017.
So you still voted LD then in a seat the Tories held until 1997.
I will tell you about the last district seat I fought in 2018 certainly when I increased the Tory vote to 554 from the 420 the Tories got the last time the seat was up in 2014
It is twenty seven years since the Tories last won Hallam, things have changed.
But thanks for confirming you keep on losing seats/elections, personally I reckon the reason you keep on losing is the people in Essex don't want to vote for a diehard remainer like you.
This is magnificent. Tories taking the piss out of each other can only be good for the country.
HYUFD isn't a Tory.
In 2001 he voted for Ken Clarke, the guy who wanted to take us in to the Euro, and in 2005 he voted the David Davis, the civil liberties guy, HYUFD is a Lib Dem, that's even before you factor in that he voted for Remain.
How about cutting out the personal attacks. You demean the site.
I would also say that I don’t think purdah rules prevent the government from taking the UK out of the EU in an election period. It is a passive occurrence and the legal default. The government has already pre-announced that it intends for the UK to leave on that date and assuming no alternative government is found, it would still be the government on exit day.
Whether it SHOULD do that is another matter, but I don’t actually see anything constitutionally improper with it, unless someone can enlighten me?
I think a No Deal Brexit mid election is the way to guarantee a crisis. Not wise.
I think that HM and her advisors would recommend an October date, and it would be hard to refuse.
The monarch can advise, but constitutionally I think would have to defer. In pretty much every situation where a monarch has advised a PM against a course of action, but they have been determined to do the contrary, the Crown has had to roll over.
As to date, the FTPA is clear: HM appoints the date on the recommendation of the PM. HM could not alter this without getting involved in party politics. This is not going to happen. The High Court could intervene if PM's advice was plainly irrational but a short delay would not be close to fulfilling that criterion.
Parliament will do well to reflect on its 3 opportunities to use their votes or judicious abstentions to avert all this nonsense and leave with a sort of plan. I imagine Boris's plan A is to seek a 4th chance, with a fig leaf, and hope it goes through.
Thanks TP for the header. I think whether or not we have impeachment proceedings will boil down to who wins the civil war in the Democratic Party. At the moment, my money is still on Pelosi, at least until the Dems lose the presidency again. But I agree that 25-35% is more realistic than 17%.
I would also say that I don’t think purdah rules prevent the government from taking the UK out of the EU in an election period. It is a passive occurrence and the legal default. The government has already pre-announced that it intends for the UK to leave on that date and assuming no alternative government is found, it would still be the government on exit day.
Whether it SHOULD do that is another matter, but I don’t actually see anything constitutionally improper with it, unless someone can enlighten me?
I think a No Deal Brexit mid election is the way to guarantee a crisis. Not wise.
I think that HM and her advisors would recommend an October date, and it would be hard to refuse.
The monarch can advise, but constitutionally I think would have to defer. In pretty much every situation where a monarch has advised a PM against a course of action, but they have been determined to do the contrary, the Crown has had to roll over.
There has seldom been a matter of such import. All this talk of the Queen getting involved in politics. She's the Head of State. It is what we pay her for.
It is extraordinary that one of the two party leaders is Jeremy Corbyn and he is not the one determined to cause a crisis for the monarchy.
I remain mystified as to quite what U.K. objectives from a trade deal with the US will be? And what they will be prepared to concede to achieve them? Have any of the leading Brexiteers provided much illumination on this?
They seem remarkably unforthcoming and incurious when it comes to details of any kind on any topic really.
Why should they, they are in reach of their goal we can only guess why they seek it but I bet they won’t be insisting on signing up to the EU financial transparency requirements in the near future.
I would also say that I don’t think purdah rules prevent the government from taking the UK out of the EU in an election period. It is a passive occurrence and the legal default. The government has already pre-announced that it intends for the UK to leave on that date and assuming no alternative government is found, it would still be the government on exit day.
Whether it SHOULD do that is another matter, but I don’t actually see anything constitutionally improper with it, unless someone can enlighten me?
I think a No Deal Brexit mid election is the way to guarantee a crisis. Not wise.
I think that HM and her advisors would recommend an October date, and it would be hard to refuse.
The monarch can advise, but constitutionally I think would have to defer. In pretty much every situation where a monarch has advised a PM against a course of action, but they have been determined to do the contrary, the Crown has had to roll over.
There has seldom been a matter of such import. All this talk of the Queen getting involved in politics. She's the Head of State. It is what we pay her for.
It is extraordinary that one of the two party leaders is Jeremy Corbyn and he is not the one determined to cause a crisis for the monarchy.
There isn't going to be a crisis for the monarchy. The monarchy is just fine thanks. The crisis is for our political party configuration, FPTP, the FTPA and the incompetence of our political class.
I would also say that I don’t think purdah rules prevent the government from taking the UK out of the EU in an election period. It is a passive occurrence and the legal default. The government has already pre-announced that it intends for the UK to leave on that date and assuming no alternative government is found, it would still be the government on exit day.
Whether it SHOULD do that is another matter, but I don’t actually see anything constitutionally improper with it, unless someone can enlighten me?
I think a No Deal Brexit mid election is the way to guarantee a crisis. Not wise.
I think that HM and her advisors would recommend an October date, and it would be hard to refuse.
The monarch can advise, but constitutionally I think would have to defer. In pretty much every situation where a monarch has advised a PM against a course of action, but they have been determined to do the contrary, the Crown has had to roll over.
There has seldom been a matter of such import. All this talk of the Queen getting involved in politics. She's the Head of State. It is what we pay her for.
It is extraordinary that one of the two party leaders is Jeremy Corbyn and he is not the one determined to cause a crisis for the monarchy.
There isn't going to be a crisis for the monarchy. The monarchy is just fine thanks. the crisis is for our political party configuration, FPTP, the FTPA and the incompetence of our political class.
You don’t think a momentous decision that will inevitably alienate one half or the other of the population will cause them problems?
Comments
In 2001 he voted for Ken Clarke, the guy who wanted to take us in to the Euro, and in 2005 he voted the David Davis, the civil liberties guy, HYUFD is a Lib Dem, that's even before you factor in that he voted for Remain.
It's even better than all those
Nazi nuttersCorbynistas telling each other they're not proper socialists.https://www.sportsjoe.ie/football/two-arsenal-fans-engage-in-possibly-the-best-twitter-argument-of-all-time-28446
Blazing row including accusations of treason.
1) Someone at all times has to be prime minister
2) If Boris loses a VONC such a vote does not tell us who the PM should be instead
3) In such a case the PM remains the PM until someone else becomes it (2010 GE for example)
4) They become it because it becomes clear to the PM that X has a decent prospect of commanding a majority and forming a government; the PM then advises HM to call for X and make them PM
5) If no-one is a candidate for X within 14 days, then HM calls an election at a date advised by the PM
6) At all times parliament is in charge because they can pass a resolution to say that the PM should advise HM that X should be PM - at which point it is game over for Boris.
7) All the talk about Boris acting illegally, outwith convention etc if he hangs on is nonsense because he cannot create a vacuum.
That's the best I can do. I should be grateful for expert clarification.
SLAB though have slumped to just 12%, below the LDs on 14% and would lose all their Scottish seats to the SNP bar Ian Murray's in Edinburgh South.
The LDs meanwhile would gain Fife North East from the SNP
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/08/08/voting-intention-con-31-lab-22-lib-dem-21-brex-14-
2 - could be you!
3 - yes
4 - no, I think the privy council decide as to what they might suggest to the Queen.
5 - yes
6 - No, at all tomes the Queen is in charge
7 - He has to act in accordance with the above
It was too cryptic so it was an Enigma to me.
I'll get my coat.
Of course, that would be assuming the government has to resign. When Callaghan lost a VONC, he didn’t resign as PM, he just called a GE.
What has not been tested, AFAIK, for well over 100 years (if ever) is what happens if a PM loses a VONC but an alternative figure can, through some method (backroom channels? Vote of MPs?) demonstrate they have the support of more members of the HOC. I think if the PM is not willing to resign at that point, the monarch would have to dismiss the PM and call that other person. That’s not been tested in modern times because a situation has never arisen where this would occur, and I think there is an expectation that the PM would resign at that point.
With Spurs finding their chequebook at long last, it's all go for another season of bragging rights for those who want a go.
The code for the PB league is k7d6qz. No cost to enter and no prizes on offer.
Now that's a deal!
And still more enjoyable than watching the male buffoon leading your political party...
https://fantasy.premierleague.com/
the more the merrier....
Why should the UK sign a FTA that is only good for the USA?
Whether it SHOULD do that is another matter, but I don’t actually see anything constitutionally improper with it, unless someone can enlighten me?
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1158254546256355328?s=19
I ask this, because the Conservative Party doesn't actually have much of a majority, and it's by no means clear that the DUP, who have lots of farmers as members, will be keen either.
Specifically, do you think those Conservative MPs with a long history of opposing GM crops, such as Zac Goldsmith, will now be in favour?
I think that HM and her advisors would recommend an October date, and it would be hard to refuse.
However, were Boris to win a majority on November 1st on 32% of the vote, in such a circumstance, the idea that Brexit would have been "delivered" and everything would be just fine and dandy, is stretching optimism, I reckon.
won't be long for me I fear BUT not just yet.
What really depressed me was the realisation that if and when Boris Johnson crashes and burns later on this year the party will not return to sanity with someone like Hunt or Stewart, but the party will double down and go for someone like Patel, Baker, or our own Corbyn Andrew Bridgen.
His answer was a clear yes. You failed to read it!
Parliament will do well to reflect on its 3 opportunities to use their votes or judicious abstentions to avert all this nonsense and leave with a sort of plan. I imagine Boris's plan A is to seek a 4th chance, with a fig leaf, and hope it goes through.
If anyone is going to do anything it will be a politician.
Second, what the politicians decide to do will be according to the precedent and protocol.