Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The coming Battle of Brighton could determine the fate of Brex
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The coming Battle of Brighton could determine the fate of Brexit
Conferences don’t usually matter. These days, they’re mostly occasions when the party can try to sell itself and its policies to the media and the public – a glorified party political broadcast, if you like – while also acting as a bonding exercise for members of that party. It doesn’t always work out like that of course, but those are the primary aims.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
ETA the LibDem conference is a week earlier, 14-17 September, so Jo Swinson needs to have some ideas before then.
Labour policy is not a fudge. People have got used to saying it because it was a fudge for a long, deeply ridiculous time, but it's not a fudge any more.
The policy is to renegotiate then have a referendum. This may be bullshit (renegotiation unicorns etc) but it's clear what it means. It's true that they're not being clear which side they would recommend voting for in the referendum, but that's not very important, and logically depends on what they've ended up negotiating.
Whether you can do a GoNAfaE doesn't depend on a change in Labour policy. There's no alternative Labour policy which, if they adopted it, would make a GoNAfaE more likely. There are two ways that Labour may prevent a GoNAfaE from happening when it otherwise would:
1) The leadership may refuse to accept a non-Corbyn option, which might otherwise be viable when Corbyn is not. This doesn't really turn on what the GoNAfaE would do, which is the easy part. (The clue's in the name.)
2) Lab-leave rebels may decline to back the GoNAfaE, or other anti-No-Deal measures. This becomes more likely not less if you tilt the party policy to be more anti-Leave, for example by advocating revoking without a referendum.
So I don't think anything in the short term turns on Labour policy, and I'd be surprised if Labour changed their policy, beyond making the leadership's shift from the last conference policy official.
1. The public think it is as clear as mud.
2. The public don't like it.
In addition the polling evidence is even stronger that the public do not want JCPM.
"the fate of Brexit may rest on the machinations of backroom deals in Labour’s compositing committees."
I fear the baby boomers will be regarded as the selfish generation when they are gone. Their parents were wartime heroes - their children, not so much. Maybe a generalisation too far, but history will be written by those who come after.
'Why are Remainers so convinced that staying in the European Union is what is best for the UK?'.
As I've said before, the ultimate winning side will be determined by who can be guided by a long term, sustainable proposition that moderates on both sides can accept.
That's what ended the iconoclasm, and the religious conflict of the Tudors [although there were some bumps, of course].
The problem is that, together, Labour has ended in the position of effectively being pro-Remain if the Tories are in power but pro-Leave if Labour wins power.
Explaining what logic there might be behind this is very difficult and to the public it presents a very confused message that doesn't appeal to either side.
The big problems of the last 20 years are due to Blair and Brown not Thatcher.
But even with Blair and Brown causing problems for the last 20 years we are still miles better than 40 years ago thanks to Thatcher.
Though they're still not pledging to abolish Barnett.
It didn't take a genius to predict that trying to fiddle with the constitution to create a perpetual fiefdom whilst actually embedding division in the political system might not be clever. Or that calling everyone a racist who disagreed with a policy to 'rub the right's face in diversity' might dilute the charge of 'racist' to very little. Or that telling the electorate one thing and doing the opposite doesn't engender trust.
The polarisation of current politics is the crop grown by complacent 'centrist' politicians who took for granted that they'd always be the ones in charge and that if the electorate had the temerity to disagree they could simply be ignored. If a return from the fringes is to happen, that requires politicians to take account of the legitimate concerns the electorate has. Unfortunately, the habit of throwing around terms like 'traitor', 'xenophobe' and so on has made the middle ground harder to stand in (No Man's Land, if you will, in the current trench warfare).
Boris isn't a hard right nationalist. He is not the diametrically opposition to and equivalent of Corbyn. He's an underwhelming court jester too foolish to realise he isn't up to the job.
If they continue their current "policy" then they will continue to bleed loud mouthed supporters like AC to the Lib Dems. Either way the 50% of the country that cares and that wants to remain will be split. The 50% that cares and want to leave are split too of course but Boris will fancy his chances of a much less even split of that vote.
The interesting thing is how many are in the middle, people who stopped caring about Brexit months or even years ago because it is boring and confusing and they no longer believe a word that anyone says on the subject. My guess is that that number is (a) bigger than we think and (b) growing. How will they vote?
If Bury is as important to its supporters and community as everyone says then a well run supporters cooperative to own and run it would sound a good bet. But I have not noticed many people being prepared to put up their own money as opposed to talking a not very good game.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1164215124124753921
No Grayling for starters.
It is, undeniably, a further prevarication of the choice between leave and remain - and then seeks to hand the problem back to the electorate without being clear which way Labour will be seeking to persuade them to vote.
That is not even wishing the problem to go away; it is conceivably setting up a repeat of the last three years.
They have chosen to compete for that vote rather than any of those in the centre, though.
I am an English nationalist, I want the breakup of the UK, just as a Scottish nationalist wants the same.
Someone who doesn't want the breakup of the UK but is prepared to see it happen isn't a nationalist.
Our family is a little unusual in that we bridge so many groups while belonging to none. But it allowed us to perceive the widening divide between the metropolitan based governing classes and the people they claimed to work for.
“We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet / Yet no man speaketh as we speak in the street”
Anyway, is the type 4 one of those from the grid with intelligent, lazy, active, and stupid, or something along those lines?
I'm not sure what label that makes me.
If Cao Cao were in charge of negotiations, they would've gone rather better.
Where I disagree with the leadership is that I think we should fight for our position instead of constantly trying to change the subject. Corbyn is entirely correct that No Deal is wrong but things like child poverty are more important than the exact details of a deal. But he's wrong to think that people will listen on child poverty or anything but Brexit. So we should be working to promote the position so that people other than EiT understand it - sure, hardcore Remainers and Leavers won't feel it's good enough, but the impression of shifty obscurity is not helped but hindered by talking about other things.
Parliament has about six weeks max to make this move once it gets back, or it won't happen.
So you can trade out your stake in about eight weeks time and lock in the profit to pay for your January sales.
Something to do with Scotland and Ireland being separate Kingdoms 🤔
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/24/world/americas/amazon-rain-forest-fire-maps.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
But this member is entirely sanguine. If Scotland or NI can't see those benefits, good luck to them. But in those divorce proceedings, expect London's team to make Barnier look like a plasticine pussycat.
Corbyn does not seem to care much about the Union either way and the Brexit Party are neutral on the Union, indeed they even won a few nationalists in the European Parliament elections most likely given they came second in Scotland on a Brexit for the UK or an independent Scotland platform.
The LDs believe though the UK must not breakup up and are prepared to stay in the EU and reverse the UK wide vote to Leave the EU to preserve the UK.
So arguably the LDs are now the main Unionist party on that definition but only because they put staying in the EU first
He even looks like a Prime Minister, rather than the clown we were promised. (Although as I said at the time, all those ridiculing Boris were setting the bar for him to be deemed a success so much lower....)
Believing the union getting its way is more important than the union being preserved but not getting its way has nothing to do with English nationalism.
If that's possible to imagine.
The ideal electoral trick for the Tories would be to retain most of them and the vast majority of Leavers, but leaving the extreme fringe to the BXP/UKIP.
Boris needs to be careful he doesn't go all in on the latter.