Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why Tories are wrong to fear that Corbyn could become Prime Mi

13

Comments

  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    alex. said:

    So... if she's gone by the end of the week, who becomes PM?

    If she resigns, the cabinet votes for a name to give to HM. An elder statesman, ideally not in the race. Since their are no elder statesmen.

    Tricky. Gove or Hunt.
    Gove is currently wasted at Environment (even though he is doing a good job of shaping the post-Brexit policy there)

    I have long rated him as a thoughtful reformer - even though he does lack warmth and empathy.

    He does know his mind and what he wants - with the right team around him, he could deliver
    He's clever, innovative, analytical and driven. None of these attributes are exactly common in modern politics and he is an unusual combination. But he is also an iconoclast, pig headed and very reluctant to admit that he is wrong or to listen to advice once he has made his mind up about something. I think, properly marshalled, he could be an excellent number 2. Certainly no government in which he has a major role will be short of ideas. I find the idea of him being the leader more than a bit scary and I'm a fan.
    Gove is a far less scary than the Labour alternatives. A clear, strategic thinker as PM with a deputy with the popular touch might be our best option for the next few years.

    Better than a left-wing populist and his violence-condoning mates.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    alex. said:

    So... if she's gone by the end of the week, who becomes PM?

    If she resigns, the cabinet votes for a name to give to HM. An elder statesman, ideally not in the race. Since their are no elder statesmen.

    Tricky. Gove or Hunt.
    Surely if she resigns, she agrees to continue until a successor is selected?
    Yeh, that would be pretty normal.
    To be honest, if she is dumped like that, I can see her walking away completely. The behaviour of her parliamentary party has been (and continues to be) appalling.
    It isn't good, no.

    If she walked, Hague, Howard or (at a push) Liddington could maybe stand in? But I'd be very surprised.
    Dream on.

    Hague was actually pretty disappointing in office and is now too busy making money.

    Howard is too old, and possibly senile too, given his remarks about nuking Spain or whatever it was.

    As for Liddington he’s so anonymous, Keyser Soze has a better chance.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,545
    DavidL said:

    calum said:
    I tend to agree with others that it’s all talk and no trousers - for the moment.

    There appear to be several dynamics:

    1. Rees Mogg and the ERG losing patience with the Brexit policy

    2. A widespread feeling that May botched the reshuffle and can no longer be trusted to hand over to a viable candidate before 2020.

    3. A view, voiced with increasing regularity by Boris, that May is compromising Brexit by failing to paint a vision of the future.

    4. General jostling amongst the potential replacements: notably, Williamson, Johnson and Hammond this week.

    Each dynamic alone would not be enough to topple her. It’s the interaction between them that makes it hard to read.

    The locals are in May. I cannot see the Tories doing well, and I’m not sure how May survives if the performance is very poor.
    May seems a long way away right now. So does April tbh. If DD is correct that the transition deal is going to be sorted out by the end of March it will be a question of whether a consensus can be reached on that. If it can't she's toast.
    I think May is OK on that. In fact it strengthens her position. The "transition" is take it or leave it. There's nothing to discuss. There is no way on earth we can leave it. It means total collapse of our trading system in twelve months time. Anyone who challenges May on that will be seen as extreme as Robespierre.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,772

    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    alex. said:

    So... if she's gone by the end of the week, who becomes PM?

    If she resigns, the cabinet votes for a name to give to HM. An elder statesman, ideally not in the race. Since their are no elder statesmen.

    Tricky. Gove or Hunt.
    Gove is currently wasted at Environment (even though he is doing a good job of shaping the post-Brexit policy there)

    I have long rated him as a thoughtful reformer - even though he does lack warmth and empathy.

    He does know his mind and what he wants - with the right team around him, he could deliver
    He's clever, innovative, analytical and driven. None of these attributes are exactly common in modern politics and he is an unusual combination. But he is also an iconoclast, pig headed and very reluctant to admit that he is wrong or to listen to advice once he has made his mind up about something. I think, properly marshalled, he could be an excellent number 2. Certainly no government in which he has a major role will be short of ideas. I find the idea of him being the leader more than a bit scary and I'm a fan.
    Gove is a far less scary than the Labour alternatives. A clear, strategic thinker as PM with a deputy with the popular touch might be our best option for the next few years.

    Better than a left-wing populist and his violence-condoning mates.
    Sure, but even Boris is better than that.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.
  • geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    The concept of Unionists having a sense of humour is certainly a novel one.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,772

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    alex. said:

    So... if she's gone by the end of the week, who becomes PM?

    If she resigns, the cabinet votes for a name to give to HM. An elder statesman, ideally not in the race. Since their are no elder statesmen.

    Tricky. Gove or Hunt.
    Surely if she resigns, she agrees to continue until a successor is selected?
    Yeh, that would be pretty normal.
    To be honest, if she is dumped like that, I can see her walking away completely. The behaviour of her parliamentary party has been (and continues to be) appalling.
    Tough.

    In retrospect, the reshuffle will be seen as critical. She had the opportunity to chasten Johnson and probably remove Hammond. She had the chance to promote the young Turks.

    By failing to do any of this, she’s letting Johnson position himself as the voice of the hungry younger generation of Tory MPs.

    She undoubtedly has a strong sense of duty. I really can't see her not remaining PM until a replacement is elected.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    alex. said:

    So... if she's gone by the end of the week, who becomes PM?

    If she resigns, the cabinet votes for a name to give to HM. An elder statesman, ideally not in the race. Since their are no elder statesmen.

    Tricky. Gove or Hunt.
    Surely if she resigns, she agrees to continue until a successor is selected?
    Yeh, that would be pretty normal.
    To be honest, if she is dumped like that, I can see her walking away completely. The behaviour of her parliamentary party has been (and continues to be) appalling.
    It isn't good, no.

    If she walked, Hague, Howard or (at a push) Liddington could maybe stand in? But I'd be very surprised.
    The onus is on the cabinet to make the call. Someone in the cabinet would have to propose an outsider if they can't agree one of their own number.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    alex. said:

    So... if she's gone by the end of the week, who becomes PM?

    If she resigns, the cabinet votes for a name to give to HM. An elder statesman, ideally not in the race. Since their are no elder statesmen.

    Tricky. Gove or Hunt.
    Surely if she resigns, she agrees to continue until a successor is selected?
    Yeh, that would be pretty normal.
    To be honest, if she is dumped like that, I can see her walking away completely. The behaviour of her parliamentary party has been (and continues to be) appalling.
    It isn't good, no.

    If she walked, Hague, Howard or (at a push) Liddington could maybe stand in? But I'd be very surprised.
    Dream on.

    Hague was actually pretty disappointing in office and is now too busy making money.

    Howard is too old, and possibly senile too, given his remarks about nuking Spain or whatever it was.

    As for Liddington he’s so anonymous, Keyser Soze has a better chance.
    Not as permanent replacements. Temporary leader and or PM.
  • MJW said:

    I'd agree with the general conclusion Corbyn will struggle to become PM, despite the Conservatives being one of the most ill-equipped governments taking on an impossible task. To see how he wins you have to ask yourself where he gets the voters to put him over the top - and he's probably the only thing keeping some economic and social liberals in the Tory camp, as the idea of him and McDonnell in charge horrified them as much as Brexiteer fantasists, meanwhile socially conservative pro-Brexit voters also find him a bad fit with his past.

    His idea of buying 9,000 houses and giving them to the homeless is intellectually bankrupt. How many tens of thousand more homeless would there be on a promise of housing, especially in London
    I'm surprised at you Big_G. You can't seriously think there's any but a very small proportion of rough sleepers who choose to do so? And where would the "tens of thousand more homeless" come from? If they're not homeless at the moment you're suggesting they'd make themselves homeless for a promise of... being housed!?

    PS As I understand it there's no question of "giving them to the homeless" - they'd be rented.
    Corbyn just gives sound bites without thinking it through. First of all he is going to put homeless people ahead of people waiting for homes. Secondly if you are struggling on your own and know a house is available to you if you become homeless, well yes that is some incentive. And I heard him on Marr today, these homes will be given to the homeless so who will pay the rent, especially in London.

  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    alex. said:

    So... if she's gone by the end of the week, who becomes PM?

    If she resigns, the cabinet votes for a name to give to HM. An elder statesman, ideally not in the race. Since their are no elder statesmen.

    Tricky. Gove or Hunt.
    Gove is currently wasted at Environment (even though he is doing a good job of shaping the post-Brexit policy there)

    I have long rated him as a thoughtful reformer - even though he does lack warmth and empathy.

    He does know his mind and what he wants - with the right team around him, he could deliver
    He's clever, innovative, analytical and driven. None of these attributes are exactly common in modern politics and he is an unusual combination. But he is also an iconoclast, pig headed and very reluctant to admit that he is wrong or to listen to advice once he has made his mind up about something. I think, properly marshalled, he could be an excellent number 2. Certainly no government in which he has a major role will be short of ideas. I find the idea of him being the leader more than a bit scary and I'm a fan.
    Gove is a far less scary than the Labour alternatives. A clear, strategic thinker as PM with a deputy with the popular touch might be our best option for the next few years.

    Better than a left-wing populist and his violence-condoning mates.
    Sure, but even Boris is better than that.
    I trust Gove one hell of a lot more than Boris
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    Sort of on topic:

    This article may just be wishful thinking on the Grauniad's part but, if it's not fake news, the following could be interesting if Labour do indeed put clear water between themselves and the Tories on the post-Brexit EU relationship...

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/27/jeremy-corbyn-pressure-change-of-direction-on-brexit
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    calum said:
    I tend to agree with others that it’s all talk and no trousers - for the moment.

    There appear to be several dynamics:

    1. Rees Mogg and the ERG losing patience with the Brexit policy

    2. A widespread feeling that May botched the reshuffle and can no longer be trusted to hand over to a viable candidate before 2020.

    3. A view, voiced with increasing regularity by Boris, that May is compromising Brexit by failing to paint a vision of the future.

    4. General jostling amongst the potential replacements: notably, Williamson, Johnson and Hammond this week.

    Each dynamic alone would not be enough to topple her. It’s the interaction between them that makes it hard to read.

    The locals are in May. I cannot see the Tories doing well, and I’m not sure how May survives if the performance is very poor.
    May seems a long way away right now. So does April tbh. If DD is correct that the transition deal is going to be sorted out by the end of March it will be a question of whether a consensus can be reached on that. If it can't she's toast.
    I think May is OK on that. In fact it strengthens her position. The "transition" is take it or leave it. There's nothing to discuss. There is no way on earth we can leave it. It means total collapse of our trading system in twelve months time. Anyone who challenges May on that will be seen as extreme as Robespierre.
    The cake-ists, led by Rees-Mogg, will not call for a clean break. I think full on WTO-ism is now down to a rump of Owen Paterson, Peter Bone, and the unholy remains of UKIP.

    Instead, they’ll argue to postpone A50 for time in order to prepare for and negotiate a proper Brexit.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Jonathan said:

    alex. said:

    So... if she's gone by the end of the week, who becomes PM?

    If she resigns, the cabinet votes for a name to give to HM. An elder statesman, ideally not in the race. Since their are no elder statesmen.

    Tricky. Gove or Hunt.
    Surely if she resigns, she agrees to continue until a successor is selected?
    Yeh, that would be pretty normal.
    To be honest, if she is dumped like that, I can see her walking away completely. The behaviour of her parliamentary party has been (and continues to be) appalling.
    It isn't good, no.

    If she walked, Hague, Howard or (at a push) Liddington could maybe stand in? But I'd be very surprised.
    Dream on.

    Hague was actually pretty disappointing in office and is now too busy making money.

    Howard is too old, and possibly senile too, given his remarks about nuking Spain or whatever it was.

    As for Liddington he’s so anonymous, Keyser Soze has a better chance.
    Have the Germans got a new leader?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    MJW said:

    I'd agree with the general conclusion Corbyn will struggle to become PM, despite the Conservatives being one of the most ill-equipped governments taking on an impossible task. To see how he wins you have to ask yourself where he gets the voters to put him over the top - and he's probably the only thing keeping some economic and social liberals in the Tory camp, as the idea of him and McDonnell in charge horrified them as much as Brexiteer fantasists, meanwhile socially conservative pro-Brexit voters also find him a bad fit with his past.

    His idea of buying 9,000 houses and giving them to the homeless is intellectually bankrupt. How many tens of thousand more homeless would there be on a promise of housing, especially in London
    I'm surprised at you Big_G. You can't seriously think there's any but a very small proportion of rough sleepers who choose to do so? And where would the "tens of thousand more homeless" come from? If they're not homeless at the moment you're suggesting they'd make themselves homeless for a promise of... being housed!?

    PS As I understand it there's no question of "giving them to the homeless" - they'd be rented.
    Corbyn just gives sound bites without thinking it through. First of all he is going to put homeless people ahead of people waiting for homes. Secondly if you are struggling on your own and know a house is available to you if you become homeless, well yes that is some incentive. And I heard him on Marr today, these homes will be given to the homeless so who will pay the rent, especially in London.

    If only he went for policy detail like "Red,white and blue Brexit"
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    calum said:
    I tend to agree with others that it’s all talk and no trousers - for the moment.

    There appear to be several dynamics:

    1. Rees Mogg and the ERG losing patience with the Brexit policy

    2. A widespread feeling that May botched the reshuffle and can no longer be trusted to hand over to a viable candidate before 2020.

    3. A view, voiced with increasing regularity by Boris, that May is compromising Brexit by failing to paint a vision of the future.

    4. General jostling amongst the potential replacements: notably, Williamson, Johnson and Hammond this week.

    Each dynamic alone would not be enough to topple her. It’s the interaction between them that makes it hard to read.

    The locals are in May. I cannot see the Tories doing well, and I’m not sure how May survives if the performance is very poor.
    2014 was not a good year for the Tories. If current polling and local election results are maintained, I'd expect them to gain modestly in May.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    calum said:
    I tend to agree with others that it’s all talk and no trousers - for the moment.

    There appear to be several dynamics:

    1. Rees Mogg and the ERG losing patience with the Brexit policy

    2. A widespread feeling that May botched the reshuffle and can no longer be trusted to hand over to a viable candidate before 2020.

    3. A view, voiced with increasing regularity by Boris, that May is compromising Brexit by failing to paint a vision of the future.

    4. General jostling amongst the potential replacements: notably, Williamson, Johnson and Hammond this week.

    Each dynamic alone would not be enough to topple her. It’s the interaction between them that makes it hard to read.

    The locals are in May. I cannot see the Tories doing well, and I’m not sure how May survives if the performance is very poor.
    May seems a long way away right now. So does April tbh. If DD is correct that the transition deal is going to be sorted out by the end of March it will be a question of whether a consensus can be reached on that. If it can't she's toast.
    I think May is OK on that. In fact it strengthens her position. The "transition" is take it or leave it. There's nothing to discuss. There is no way on earth we can leave it. It means total collapse of our trading system in twelve months time. Anyone who challenges May on that will be seen as extreme as Robespierre.
    Capital punishment on the ticket too?
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    I try to be consistent. The economic impact of Scotland leaving the UK would be greater than the impact of Brexit, that's inarguable. However, people do not always make decisions on purely economic grounds, to put it mildly. I think that's one of the fundamental mistakes Remainers and Unionists keep making.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    alex. said:

    So... if she's gone by the end of the week, who becomes PM?

    If she resigns, the cabinet votes for a name to give to HM. An elder statesman, ideally not in the race. Since their are no elder statesmen.

    Tricky. Gove or Hunt.
    Gove is currently wasted at Environment (even though he is doing a good job of shaping the post-Brexit policy there)

    I have long rated him as a thoughtful reformer - even though he does lack warmth and empathy.

    He does know his mind and what he wants - with the right team around him, he could deliver
    He's clever, innovative, analytical and driven. None of these attributes are exactly common in modern politics and he is an unusual combination. But he is also an iconoclast, pig headed and very reluctant to admit that he is wrong or to listen to advice once he has made his mind up about something. I think, properly marshalled, he could be an excellent number 2. Certainly no government in which he has a major role will be short of ideas. I find the idea of him being the leader more than a bit scary and I'm a fan.
    Gove is a far less scary than the Labour alternatives. A clear, strategic thinker as PM with a deputy with the popular touch might be our best option for the next few years.

    Better than a left-wing populist and his violence-condoning mates.
    Sure, but even Boris is better than that.
    I'm pushed to think of any non Corbynista who wouldn't be better than that.
  • Sort of on topic:

    This article may just be wishful thinking on the Grauniad's part but, if it's not fake news, the following could be interesting if Labour do indeed put clear water between themselves and the Tories on the post-Brexit EU relationship...

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/27/jeremy-corbyn-pressure-change-of-direction-on-brexit

    No sign of it on Marr today and he ruled out a second referendum
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921
    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    In Barnes maybe.

    In Dorset they're stronger than I can ever remember.

    Isn't politics interesting.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    edited January 2018

    MJW said:

    I'd agree with the general conclusion Corbyn will struggle to become PM, despite the Conservatives being one of the most ill-equipped governments taking on an impossible task. To see how he wins you have to ask yourself where he gets the voters to put him over the top - and he's probably the only thing keeping some economic and social liberals in the Tory camp, as the idea of him and McDonnell in charge horrified them as much as Brexiteer fantasists, meanwhile socially conservative pro-Brexit voters also find him a bad fit with his past.

    His idea of buying 9,000 houses and giving them to the homeless is intellectually bankrupt. How many tens of thousand more homeless would there be on a promise of housing, especially in London
    I'm surprised at you Big_G. You can't seriously think there's any but a very small proportion of rough sleepers who choose to do so? And where would the "tens of thousand more homeless" come from? If they're not homeless at the moment you're suggesting they'd make themselves homeless for a promise of... being housed!?

    PS As I understand it there's no question of "giving them to the homeless" - they'd be rented.
    Corbyn just gives sound bites without thinking it through. First of all he is going to put homeless people ahead of people waiting for homes. Secondly if you are struggling on your own and know a house is available to you if you become homeless, well yes that is some incentive. And I heard him on Marr today, these homes will be given to the homeless so who will pay the rent, especially in London.

    The fact is, the number of homeless people has gone up significantly in the last few years. What is this so-called government doing about it? Naff-all as far as I can see.

    No one is going to move out of their current accommodation into a cardboard box just so that they can get housed.

    On one level it's academic because as Mike's thread-header clearly and correctly articulates, JC is not going to be in power in the foreseeable future. (Although, given the recent track record I am confidently expecting this policy to be adopted by the Tories within two years :smile:)
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    Sean_F said:

    calum said:
    I tend to agree with others that it’s all talk and no trousers - for the moment.

    There appear to be several dynamics:

    1. Rees Mogg and the ERG losing patience with the Brexit policy

    2. A widespread feeling that May botched the reshuffle and can no longer be trusted to hand over to a viable candidate before 2020.

    3. A view, voiced with increasing regularity by Boris, that May is compromising Brexit by failing to paint a vision of the future.

    4. General jostling amongst the potential replacements: notably, Williamson, Johnson and Hammond this week.

    Each dynamic alone would not be enough to topple her. It’s the interaction between them that makes it hard to read.

    The locals are in May. I cannot see the Tories doing well, and I’m not sure how May survives if the performance is very poor.
    2014 was not a good year for the Tories. If current polling and local election results are maintained, I'd expect them to gain modestly in May.
    I voted Tory in the 2014 local elections, this time I am seriously thinking of voting Labour. A straw in the wind - yes. But I won't be the only one! The current government need a serious kick up the arse.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831

    MJW said:

    I'd agree with the general conclusion Corbyn will struggle to become PM, despite the Conservatives being one of the most ill-equipped governments taking on an impossible task. To see how he wins you have to ask yourself where he gets the voters to put him over the top - and he's probably the only thing keeping some economic and social liberals in the Tory camp, as the idea of him and McDonnell in charge horrified them as much as Brexiteer fantasists, meanwhile socially conservative pro-Brexit voters also find him a bad fit with his past.

    His idea of buying 9,000 houses and giving them to the homeless is intellectually bankrupt. How many tens of thousand more homeless would there be on a promise of housing, especially in London
    I'm surprised at you Big_G. You can't seriously think there's any but a very small proportion of rough sleepers who choose to do so? And where would the "tens of thousand more homeless" come from? If they're not homeless at the moment you're suggesting they'd make themselves homeless for a promise of... being housed!?

    PS As I understand it there's no question of "giving them to the homeless" - they'd be rented.
    Corbyn just gives sound bites without thinking it through. First of all he is going to put homeless people ahead of people waiting for homes. Secondly if you are struggling on your own and know a house is available to you if you become homeless, well yes that is some incentive. And I heard him on Marr today, these homes will be given to the homeless so who will pay the rent, especially in London.

    The state will buy the homes and then pay itself the housing benefit? That does appear to be his position.

    As I said earlier, it is just thought-free populism - cheap in terms of politics, expensive in terms of money and failing to address the real issues of housing inequality.
  • Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    And Corbyn has stuffed labour and the last time labour were going down this route it needed Kinnock to end it

    Where is today's Kinnock
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979
    edited January 2018
    Mortimer said:

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    In Barnes maybe.

    In Dorset they're stronger than I can ever remember.

    Isn't politics interesting.
    I'm thinking of Westminster. Keep whistling.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    Jonathan said:

    MJW said:

    I'd agree with the general conclusion Corbyn will struggle to become PM, despite the Conservatives being one of the most ill-equipped governments taking on an impossible task. To see how he wins you have to ask yourself where he gets the voters to put him over the top - and he's probably the only thing keeping some economic and social liberals in the Tory camp, as the idea of him and McDonnell in charge horrified them as much as Brexiteer fantasists, meanwhile socially conservative pro-Brexit voters also find him a bad fit with his past.

    His idea of buying 9,000 houses and giving them to the homeless is intellectually bankrupt. How many tens of thousand more homeless would there be on a promise of housing, especially in London
    I'm surprised at you Big_G. You can't seriously think there's any but a very small proportion of rough sleepers who choose to do so? And where would the "tens of thousand more homeless" come from? If they're not homeless at the moment you're suggesting they'd make themselves homeless for a promise of... being housed!?

    PS As I understand it there's no question of "giving them to the homeless" - they'd be rented.
    Corbyn just gives sound bites without thinking it through. First of all he is going to put homeless people ahead of people waiting for homes. Secondly if you are struggling on your own and know a house is available to you if you become homeless, well yes that is some incentive. And I heard him on Marr today, these homes will be given to the homeless so who will pay the rent, especially in London.

    If only he went for policy detail like "Red,white and blue Brexit"
    For many reasons, you've got too many colours
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    edited January 2018
    Mortimer said:

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    In Barnes maybe.

    In Dorset they're stronger than I can ever remember.

    Isn't politics interesting.
    I take it you missed the newly established North Dorset Momentum meeting last month? :wink:
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    And Corbyn has stuffed labour and the last time labour were going down this route it needed Kinnock to end it

    Where is today's Kinnock
    In the House of Lords and in the receipt of a fat EU pension! He is definitely alright!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765
    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    The Conservatives have been in far worse trouble in my lifetime than they are today,
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    So the prospect of a stuffed country seems amusing for you - not a good look
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921
    edited January 2018
    Barnesian said:

    Mortimer said:

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    In Barnes maybe.

    In Dorset they're stronger than I can ever remember.

    Isn't politics interesting.
    I'm thinking of Westminster. Keep whistling.
    Lib whos?

    Seriously, people are underestimating the Tories. You know what happens when they do that?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    Sean_F said:

    calum said:
    I tend to agree with others that it’s all talk and no trousers - for the moment.

    There appear to be several dynamics:

    1. Rees Mogg and the ERG losing patience with the Brexit policy

    2. A widespread feeling that May botched the reshuffle and can no longer be trusted to hand over to a viable candidate before 2020.

    3. A view, voiced with increasing regularity by Boris, that May is compromising Brexit by failing to paint a vision of the future.

    4. General jostling amongst the potential replacements: notably, Williamson, Johnson and Hammond this week.

    Each dynamic alone would not be enough to topple her. It’s the interaction between them that makes it hard to read.

    The locals are in May. I cannot see the Tories doing well, and I’m not sure how May survives if the performance is very poor.
    2014 was not a good year for the Tories. If current polling and local election results are maintained, I'd expect them to gain modestly in May.
    I voted Tory in the 2014 local elections, this time I am seriously thinking of voting Labour. A straw in the wind - yes. But I won't be the only one! The current government need a serious kick up the arse.
    The Conservatives got a NEV of 29%, to 31% for Labour. Both parties will do better in May.
  • Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    And Corbyn has stuffed labour and the last time labour were going down this route it needed Kinnock to end it

    Where is today's Kinnock
    In the House of Lords and in the receipt of a fat EU pension! He is definitely alright!
    To be fair he saved labour from oblivion
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921

    Mortimer said:

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    In Barnes maybe.

    In Dorset they're stronger than I can ever remember.

    Isn't politics interesting.
    I take it you missed the newly established North Dorset Momentum meeting last month? :wink:
    That would Dorset North where Simon Hoare has nearly 65% of the vote?

  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    Mortimer said:

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    In Barnes maybe.

    In Dorset they're stronger than I can ever remember.

    Isn't politics interesting.
    Given a wide spectrum, I agree.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    The really bad news is that you have complete political amnesia, if the Tories look stuffeder to you now than in let's say 1996.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    And Corbyn has stuffed labour and the last time labour were going down this route it needed Kinnock to end it

    Where is today's Kinnock
    on the back benches
  • chloechloe Posts: 308
    What May has failed to do is bring the two sides together and now the party is in open revolt. It is as if the 48% who voted remain don’t matter and can be ignored. If it was the other way round and remain had narrowly won and ignored the Brexiteers I bet the ulta Brexiteers would be unhappy. There is surely a deal that can be done with the EU that can satisfy most people.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    So the prospect of a stuffed country seems amusing for you - not a good look
    That's why I said I don't know why I'm smiling. I really shouldn't be. But it keeps breaking out.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    Most Leavers I know take the view it would be a shame to see Scotland leave, but if that’s the settled wish of a majority then so be it.

    But the plural of anecdote is not data
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    edited January 2018
    John_M said:

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    I try to be consistent. The economic impact of Scotland leaving the UK would be greater than the impact of Brexit, that's inarguable. However, people do not always make decisions on purely economic grounds, to put it mildly. I think that's one of the fundamental mistakes Remainers and Unionists keep making.
    I do love it whenever people invoke phrases like "that's inarguable" to support their arguments :smile: Anything to do with economics is always open to debate... that's inarguable!

    However, I agree with your second point, Brexit was never about the economics and we Remainers made a major error trying to argue on that basis. Sadly.

  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    calum said:
    I tend to agree with others that it’s all talk and no trousers - for the moment.

    There appear to be several dynamics:

    1. Rees Mogg and the ERG losing patience with the Brexit policy

    2. A widespread feeling that May botched the reshuffle and can no longer be trusted to hand over to a viable candidate before 2020.

    3. A view, voiced with increasing regularity by Boris, that May is compromising Brexit by failing to paint a vision of the future.

    4. General jostling amongst the potential replacements: notably, Williamson, Johnson and Hammond this week.

    Each dynamic alone would not be enough to topple her. It’s the interaction between them that makes it hard to read.

    The locals are in May. I cannot see the Tories doing well, and I’m not sure how May survives if the performance is very poor.
    May seems a long way away right now. So does April tbh. If DD is correct that the transition deal is going to be sorted out by the end of March it will be a question of whether a consensus can be reached on that. If it can't she's toast.
    I think May is OK on that. In fact it strengthens her position. The "transition" is take it or leave it. There's nothing to discuss. There is no way on earth we can leave it. It means total collapse of our trading system in twelve months time. Anyone who challenges May on that will be seen as extreme as Robespierre.
    You obviously work on the basis that if you make a grand and melodramatic statement ('total collapse of our trading system') then it absolves you of actually making an argument.

    A move to WTO rules in 12 months will be disruptive, due to the lack of preparation, but still manageable. As I have said repeatedly, we already trade on WTO terms so all customs need to do is increase their ability to manage volume. It is not in any way uncharted territory.

    And, of course, you imply that it would result in the 'total collapse' of the UK trading system whilst the EU will just carry on as before. Even though they are the ones with the huge trade surplus. Unlikely. If there is damage from a 'crash out' it would be evenly spread, so if you think the EU are prepared to take this risk ('take it or leave it') then clearly they don't think that it will be all that damaging either.

    The problem is not the transition deal - it is the fact that the EU are not going to agree anything on a trade deal this side of the A50 agreement. Therefore those who are actually analysing the situation (eg JRM) realise that the transition will be for nothing - we will be in exactly the same situation in 2 years time with another cliff edge approaching but not 40bn poorer. So logically it probably makes sense to take the pain now and keep the money.
  • chloe said:

    What May has failed to do is bring the two sides together and now the party is in open revolt. It is as if the 48% who voted remain don’t matter and can be ignored. If it was the other way round and remain had narrowly won and ignored the Brexiteers I bet the ulta Brexiteers would be unhappy. There is surely a deal that can be done with the EU that can satisfy most people.

    It has to be done one way or another but on this huge issue both main parties are seriously fractured
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    calum said:
    I tend to agree with others that it’s all talk and no trousers - for the moment.

    There appear to be several dynamics:

    1. Rees Mogg and the ERG losing patience with the Brexit policy

    2. A widespread feeling that May botched the reshuffle and can no longer be trusted to hand over to a viable candidate before 2020.

    3. A view, voiced with increasing regularity by Boris, that May is compromising Brexit by failing to paint a vision of the future.

    4. General jostling amongst the potential replacements: notably, Williamson, Johnson and Hammond this week.

    Each dynamic alone would not be enough to topple her. It’s the interaction between them that makes it hard to read.

    The locals are in May. I cannot see the Tories doing well, and I’m not sure how May survives if the performance is very poor.
    2014 was not a good year for the Tories. If current polling and local election results are maintained, I'd expect them to gain modestly in May.
    I voted Tory in the 2014 local elections, this time I am seriously thinking of voting Labour. A straw in the wind - yes. But I won't be the only one! The current government need a serious kick up the arse.
    The Conservatives got a NEV of 29%, to 31% for Labour. Both parties will do better in May.
    It was an odd set of council elections as it coincided with our Euro elections. May's Locals seem quite localised to London and Home Counties, S Midlands and Northern conurbations. It may not be easy to interpret not least where the kipper vote collapses to.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    ydoethur said:


    If he suddenly embraced the special relationship, for instance, or joined Trump in a war, I wouldn't just be shocked, I'd be astonished. Wouldn't you? By contrast, do you feel confident that Boris wouldn't do exactly that, if he thought it'd be popular?

    Frankly, the answer to your first question is no, if he thought it would be popular. Just one question to ponder. In 2015 he opposed welfare cuts and said the wealthy should be taxed more. In 2017 he supported welfare cuts to pay for free university tuition for millionaires. Is that the action of a man of principle?

    The key differences between Corbyn and Boris that I can see is that one has blond hair and a university degree. Otherwise I see two birds of the same feather and am not enamoured of either,
    To be fair, Corbyn spent most of is life on the back benches pursuing his ideological extremism with a small group of fellow travellers. Horrible man, but he didn’t deviate for careerist reasons. It’s only now, in the limelight, that the temptation to obfuscate (if not lie) is too great.

    Johnson on the other hand has shown himself time and time again to be utterly self-absorbed, coasting on his wit and connections.

    They are both shits, but shits of a different kind.
    Nah. Both the same. Just Corbyn never had the opportunity before.

    It’s like the old GBS story about the society beauty sitting next to him at a party
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    The really bad news is that you have complete political amnesia, if the Tories look stuffeder to you now than in let's say 1996.
    Is B old enough to remember that far back?
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    So the prospect of a stuffed country seems amusing for you - not a good look
    That's why I said I don't know why I'm smiling. I really shouldn't be. But it keeps breaking out.
    You make my point better than I did.
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612

    chloe said:

    What May has failed to do is bring the two sides together and now the party is in open revolt. It is as if the 48% who voted remain don’t matter and can be ignored. If it was the other way round and remain had narrowly won and ignored the Brexiteers I bet the ulta Brexiteers would be unhappy. There is surely a deal that can be done with the EU that can satisfy most people.

    It has to be done one way or another but on this huge issue both main parties are seriously fractured
    There is no middle ground - Brexit was a binary decision. You either implement it or you don't. That is what May has discovered - however much you waffle you can't ignore that reality. Leaving the EU and staying tied into its rules is not only against the referendum result but pointless. It has none of the advantages of Brexit and all the disadvantages and therefore only pleases the remainers (in part).

    There are only two realistic positions - hard Brexit (eg WTO or Canada plus services) or EEA. There is no logic in anything else. May needed to realise this and pick a side. She can't, so she will be out of office in very short order.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Jonathan said:

    MJW said:

    I'd agree with the general conclusion Corbyn will struggle to become PM, despite the Conservatives being one of the most ill-equipped governments taking on an impossible task. To see how he wins you have to ask yourself where he gets the voters to put him over the top - and he's probably the only thing keeping some economic and social liberals in the Tory camp, as the idea of him and McDonnell in charge horrified them as much as Brexiteer fantasists, meanwhile socially conservative pro-Brexit voters also find him a bad fit with his past.

    His idea of buying 9,000 houses and giving them to the homeless is intellectually bankrupt. How many tens of thousand more homeless would there be on a promise of housing, especially in London
    I'm surprised at you Big_G. You can't seriously think there's any but a very small proportion of rough sleepers who choose to do so? And where would the "tens of thousand more homeless" come from? If they're not homeless at the moment you're suggesting they'd make themselves homeless for a promise of... being housed!?

    PS As I understand it there's no question of "giving them to the homeless" - they'd be rented.
    Corbyn just gives sound bites without thinking it through. First of all he is going to put homeless people ahead of people waiting for homes. Secondly if you are struggling on your own and know a house is available to you if you become homeless, well yes that is some incentive. And I heard him on Marr today, these homes will be given to the homeless so who will pay the rent, especially in London.

    If only he went for policy detail like "Red,white and blue Brexit"
    How would you have answered the question “Mrs May, are you seeking a black Brexit or a gray Brexit?”

    (That was the question the journalist answered, in the context her response was quite witty)
  • chloechloe Posts: 308

    chloe said:

    What May has failed to do is bring the two sides together and now the party is in open revolt. It is as if the 48% who voted remain don’t matter and can be ignored. If it was the other way round and remain had narrowly won and ignored the Brexiteers I bet the ulta Brexiteers would be unhappy. There is surely a deal that can be done with the EU that can satisfy most people.

    It has to be done one way or another but on this huge issue both main parties are seriously fractured
    I agree it has to be done but it is not as simple as the leave campaign had us believe. I just hope that it ends well.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    edited January 2018
    Charles said:

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    Most Leavers I know take the view it would be a shame to see Scotland leave, but if that’s the settled wish of a majority then so be it.

    But the plural of anecdote is not data
    Agreed - certainly my sample of Leaver acquaintances is not statistically significant :smile:

    However, do you honestly think for example most Tory MPs in the ERG (a devout group of Leavers if ever there was one) take the view that "it would be a shame to see Scotland leave, but if that’s the settled wish of a majority then so be it"? I doubt it somehow.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    The really bad news is that you have complete political amnesia, if the Tories look stuffeder to you now than in let's say 1996.
    I remember 1996 vividly. The Tories were worn out. They knew they were going to lose to Blair and, in a way, welcomed the chance to recharge and regenerate. They were exhausted by all the infighting over Europe. They had come to a standstill.

    This time it feels different. OK they are fighting like rats in a sack over Europe again. But it's not just Europe but the threat of Corbyn. Corbyn is not a Tory-lite Blair. This could be a game changer more wide reaching that just the EU. There is much more at stake. Hence the passion and frustration. Throw in the personal ambition of you know who and it's greatly entertaining.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    calum said:

    I think May is OK on that. In fact it strengthens her position. The "transition" is take it or leave it. There's nothing to discuss. There is no way on earth we can leave it. It means total collapse of our trading system in twelve months time. Anyone who challenges May on that will be seen as extreme as Robespierre.
    You obviously work on the basis that if you make a grand and melodramatic statement ('total collapse of our trading system') then it absolves you of actually making an argument.

    A move to WTO rules in 12 months will be disruptive, due to the lack of preparation, but still manageable. As I have said repeatedly, we already trade on WTO terms so all customs need to do is increase their ability to manage volume. It is not in any way uncharted territory.

    And, of course, you imply that it would result in the 'total collapse' of the UK trading system whilst the EU will just carry on as before. Even though they are the ones with the huge trade surplus. Unlikely. If there is damage from a 'crash out' it would be evenly spread, so if you think the EU are prepared to take this risk ('take it or leave it') then clearly they don't think that it will be all that damaging either.

    The problem is not the transition deal - it is the fact that the EU are not going to agree anything on a trade deal this side of the A50 agreement. Therefore those who are actually analysing the situation (eg JRM) realise that the transition will be for nothing - we will be in exactly the same situation in 2 years time with another cliff edge approaching but not 40bn poorer. So logically it probably makes sense to take the pain now and keep the money.
    The people or organisations who trade by WTO rules might be different to the ones that have been trading within the EU. Therefore, it is unwise to think it will be easy just to change. The process might be completely different and EU trading organisations might have a skills gap in WTO rules. I hope a seamless transition occurs and like the Millennium bug it never bites!
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312

    John_M said:

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    I try to be consistent. The economic impact of Scotland leaving the UK would be greater than the impact of Brexit, that's inarguable. However, people do not always make decisions on purely economic grounds, to put it mildly. I think that's one of the fundamental mistakes Remainers and Unionists keep making.
    I do love it whenever people invoke phrases like "that's inarguable" to support their arguments :smile: Anything to do with economics is always open to debate... that's inarguable!

    However, I agree with your second point, Brexit was never about the economics and we Remainers made a major error trying to argue on that basis. Sadly.

    Being told by a Yank that I would go to the back of the queue (note, not the line) and by a privileged, posh prick that I would be financially punished, was quite an influence for me.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979
    edited January 2018

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    The really bad news is that you have complete political amnesia, if the Tories look stuffeder to you now than in let's say 1996.
    Is B old enough to remember that far back?
    I'm really very old! I clearly remember the election of 1951 and the passion it raised. I was told off at school for booing the mention of Churchill's name. I was politically active even back then.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    Most Leavers I know take the view it would be a shame to see Scotland leave, but if that’s the settled wish of a majority then so be it.

    But the plural of anecdote is not data
    Agreed - certainly my sample of Leaver acquaintances is not statistically significant :smile:

    However, do you honestly think for example most Tory MPs in the ERG (a devout group of Leavers if ever there was one) take the view that "it would be a shame to see Scotland leave, but if that’s the settled wish of a majority then so be it"? I doubt it somehow.
    If you can tell me who’s in the ERG I can ask around :wink:
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281

    John_M said:

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    I try to be consistent. The economic impact of Scotland leaving the UK would be greater than the impact of Brexit, that's inarguable. However, people do not always make decisions on purely economic grounds, to put it mildly. I think that's one of the fundamental mistakes Remainers and Unionists keep making.
    I do love it whenever people invoke phrases like "that's inarguable" to support their arguments :smile: Anything to do with economics is always open to debate... that's inarguable!

    However, I agree with your second point, Brexit was never about the economics and we Remainers made a major error trying to argue on that basis. Sadly.

    Being told by a Yank that I would go to the back of the queue (note, not the line) and by a privileged, posh prick that I would be financially punished, was quite an influence for me.
    You mean you were going to vote Remain if not for Obama and Osborne?
  • chloe said:

    What May has failed to do is bring the two sides together and now the party is in open revolt. It is as if the 48% who voted remain don’t matter and can be ignored. If it was the other way round and remain had narrowly won and ignored the Brexiteers I bet the ulta Brexiteers would be unhappy. There is surely a deal that can be done with the EU that can satisfy most people.

    It has to be done one way or another but on this huge issue both main parties are seriously fractured
    There is no middle ground - Brexit was a binary decision. You either implement it or you don't. That is what May has discovered - however much you waffle you can't ignore that reality. Leaving the EU and staying tied into its rules is not only against the referendum result but pointless. It has none of the advantages of Brexit and all the disadvantages and therefore only pleases the remainers (in part).

    There are only two realistic positions - hard Brexit (eg WTO or Canada plus services) or EEA. There is no logic in anything else. May needed to realise this and pick a side. She can't, so she will be out of office in very short order.
    But no one else can that would get through the HOC. Hard Brexit will not happen
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Barnesian said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    The really bad news is that you have complete political amnesia, if the Tories look stuffeder to you now than in let's say 1996.
    I remember 1996 vividly. The Tories were worn out. They knew they were going to lose to Blair and, in a way, welcomed the chance to recharge and regenerate. They were exhausted by all the infighting over Europe. They had come to a standstill.

    This time it feels different. OK they are fighting like rats in a sack over Europe again. But it's not just Europe but the threat of Corbyn. Corbyn is not a Tory-lite Blair. This could be a game changer more wide reaching that just the EU. There is much more at stake. Hence the passion and frustration. Throw in the personal ambition of you know who and it's greatly entertaining.
    Yet they are still at 40 points in the polls. What were they at in 1996?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,788
    edited January 2018
    Claire Perry calling them swivel-eyed is a downgrade from her previous jihadis comment.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    Barnesian said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    The really bad news is that you have complete political amnesia, if the Tories look stuffeder to you now than in let's say 1996.
    I remember 1996 vividly. The Tories were worn out. They knew they were going to lose to Blair and, in a way, welcomed the chance to recharge and regenerate. They were exhausted by all the infighting over Europe. They had come to a standstill.

    This time it feels different. OK they are fighting like rats in a sack over Europe again. But it's not just Europe but the threat of Corbyn. Corbyn is not a Tory-lite Blair. This could be a game changer more wide reaching that just the EU. There is much more at stake. Hence the passion and frustration. Throw in the personal ambition of you know who and it's greatly entertaining.
    you're obviously a very jolly fellow
  • chloe said:

    chloe said:

    What May has failed to do is bring the two sides together and now the party is in open revolt. It is as if the 48% who voted remain don’t matter and can be ignored. If it was the other way round and remain had narrowly won and ignored the Brexiteers I bet the ulta Brexiteers would be unhappy. There is surely a deal that can be done with the EU that can satisfy most people.

    It has to be done one way or another but on this huge issue both main parties are seriously fractured
    I agree it has to be done but it is not as simple as the leave campaign had us believe. I just hope that it ends well.
    Agreed
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    Most Leavers I know take the view it would be a shame to see Scotland leave, but if that’s the settled wish of a majority then so be it.

    But the plural of anecdote is not data
    Agreed - certainly my sample of Leaver acquaintances is not statistically significant :smile:

    However, do you honestly think for example most Tory MPs in the ERG (a devout group of Leavers if ever there was one) take the view that "it would be a shame to see Scotland leave, but if that’s the settled wish of a majority then so be it"? I doubt it somehow.
    If you can tell me who’s in the ERG I can ask around :wink:
    Here you go:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Research_Group#Members

    Good luck finding a "...so be it" supporter for SINDY amongst that lot!

    :smile:
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979
    RobD said:

    Barnesian said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    The really bad news is that you have complete political amnesia, if the Tories look stuffeder to you now than in let's say 1996.
    I remember 1996 vividly. The Tories were worn out. They knew they were going to lose to Blair and, in a way, welcomed the chance to recharge and regenerate. They were exhausted by all the infighting over Europe. They had come to a standstill.

    This time it feels different. OK they are fighting like rats in a sack over Europe again. But it's not just Europe but the threat of Corbyn. Corbyn is not a Tory-lite Blair. This could be a game changer more wide reaching that just the EU. There is much more at stake. Hence the passion and frustration. Throw in the personal ambition of you know who and it's greatly entertaining.
    Yet they are still at 40 points in the polls. What were they at in 1996?
    Much lower. They had given up. The fight had gone out of them. That's not the case now. It's much tighter and much more at stake.
  • http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/28/nearly-half-children-dangerously-overweight-parts-britain-first/

    I wonder how closely these obesity epidemic areas correlate to the food bank using areas.

    On a related note weren't we told last year by various LibDem PBers that the UK was about to suffer food shortages with widespread starvation imminent ?
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312

    John_M said:

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    I try to be consistent. The economic impact of Scotland leaving the UK would be greater than the impact of Brexit, that's inarguable. However, people do not always make decisions on purely economic grounds, to put it mildly. I think that's one of the fundamental mistakes Remainers and Unionists keep making.
    I do love it whenever people invoke phrases like "that's inarguable" to support their arguments :smile: Anything to do with economics is always open to debate... that's inarguable!

    However, I agree with your second point, Brexit was never about the economics and we Remainers made a major error trying to argue on that basis. Sadly.

    Being told by a Yank that I would go to the back of the queue (note, not the line) and by a privileged, posh prick that I would be financially punished, was quite an influence for me.
    You mean you were going to vote Remain if not for Obama and Osborne?
    No, but the international establishment threatening me was an "influence". My judgment was, and still is, narrowly for Leave. Those that make it a black or white issue either way do themselves no favours in the debate.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    John_M said:

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    I try to be consistent. The economic impact of Scotland leaving the UK would be greater than the impact of Brexit, that's inarguable. However, people do not always make decisions on purely economic grounds, to put it mildly. I think that's one of the fundamental mistakes Remainers and Unionists keep making.
    I do love it whenever people invoke phrases like "that's inarguable" to support their arguments :smile: Anything to do with economics is always open to debate... that's inarguable!

    However, I agree with your second point, Brexit was never about the economics and we Remainers made a major error trying to argue on that basis. Sadly.


    I didn't think I was making an argument, it was more a lead-in to the point I made. People are not rational. People do not behave as economists would have us behave. I'm not a Unionist (I'd be happy to see a united Ireland as well), and neither states, nor institutions nor political parties last forever.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    Piers Morgan interview with President Trump on ITV now
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    Most Leavers I know take the view it would be a shame to see Scotland leave, but if that’s the settled wish of a majority then so be it.

    But the plural of anecdote is not data
    Agreed - certainly my sample of Leaver acquaintances is not statistically significant :smile:

    However, do you honestly think for example most Tory MPs in the ERG (a devout group of Leavers if ever there was one) take the view that "it would be a shame to see Scotland leave, but if that’s the settled wish of a majority then so be it"? I doubt it somehow.
    If you can tell me who’s in the ERG I can ask around :wink:
    Here you go:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Research_Group#Members

    Good luck finding a "...so be it" supporter for SINDY amongst that lot!

    :smile:
    Jarvid and Gove for 2
  • RobD said:

    Barnesian said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Barnesian said:

    They need to put May out of her misery. This is ridiculous.

    I don't know why I'm smiling.

    The good news is that the Tories are more stuffed than I can ever remember, over many decades.

    The bad news is that they're the ones in charge, so the country might be stuffed too.
    The really bad news is that you have complete political amnesia, if the Tories look stuffeder to you now than in let's say 1996.
    I remember 1996 vividly. The Tories were worn out. They knew they were going to lose to Blair and, in a way, welcomed the chance to recharge and regenerate. They were exhausted by all the infighting over Europe. They had come to a standstill.

    This time it feels different. OK they are fighting like rats in a sack over Europe again. But it's not just Europe but the threat of Corbyn. Corbyn is not a Tory-lite Blair. This could be a game changer more wide reaching that just the EU. There is much more at stake. Hence the passion and frustration. Throw in the personal ambition of you know who and it's greatly entertaining.
    Yet they are still at 40 points in the polls. What were they at in 1996?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_local_elections,_1996

    Number of councils won:

    Labour 86
    LibDem 23
    Con 3

    I vaguely remember that Virginia Water was one of the key battlegrounds that year.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    John_M said:

    John_M said:

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    I try to be consistent. The economic impact of Scotland leaving the UK would be greater than the impact of Brexit, that's inarguable. However, people do not always make decisions on purely economic grounds, to put it mildly. I think that's one of the fundamental mistakes Remainers and Unionists keep making.
    I do love it whenever people invoke phrases like "that's inarguable" to support their arguments :smile: Anything to do with economics is always open to debate... that's inarguable!

    However, I agree with your second point, Brexit was never about the economics and we Remainers made a major error trying to argue on that basis. Sadly.


    I didn't think I was making an argument, it was more a lead-in to the point I made. People are not rational. People do not behave as economists would have us behave. I'm not a Unionist (I'd be happy to see a united Ireland as well), and neither states, nor institutions nor political parties last forever.
    Well, I won't fall out with you but is it really inarguable that the economic impact of Scotland leaving the UK would be greater than the impact of Brexit?

    I'd suggest not - though it almost certainly is unprovable. :smile:
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    John_M said:

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    I try to be consistent. The economic impact of Scotland leaving the UK would be greater than the impact of Brexit, that's inarguable. However, people do not always make decisions on purely economic grounds, to put it mildly. I think that's one of the fundamental mistakes Remainers and Unionists keep making.
    I do love it whenever people invoke phrases like "that's inarguable" to support their arguments :smile: Anything to do with economics is always open to debate... that's inarguable!

    However, I agree with your second point, Brexit was never about the economics and we Remainers made a major error trying to argue on that basis. Sadly.

    Being told by a Yank that I would go to the back of the queue (note, not the line) and by a privileged, posh prick that I would be financially punished, was quite an influence for me.
    You mean you were going to vote Remain if not for Obama and Osborne?
    What's your point? Remain chose who fronted their campaign, presumably on the grounds that they were personable and persuasive kinda guys. It turns out that they were in fact a bunch of complete horps. Turning round and saying ”omg you are so superficial if you let the personalities of our front men influence your vote”, which I think is your point, is an impressive bit of ferreting.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Just heard on Radio 4 that Rees Mogg invented the term BINO last week? Am sure it’s been used on here for ages?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    Most Leavers I know take the view it would be a shame to see Scotland leave, but if that’s the settled wish of a majority then so be it.

    But the plural of anecdote is not data
    Agreed - certainly my sample of Leaver acquaintances is not statistically significant :smile:

    However, do you honestly think for example most Tory MPs in the ERG (a devout group of Leavers if ever there was one) take the view that "it would be a shame to see Scotland leave, but if that’s the settled wish of a majority then so be it"? I doubt it somehow.
    If you can tell me who’s in the ERG I can ask around :wink:
    Here you go:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Research_Group#Members

    Good luck finding a "...so be it" supporter for SINDY amongst that lot!

    :smile:
    Jarvid and Gove for 2
    No they both argued against it:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/may/20/scottish-independence-threaten-banking-jobs

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/10934544/Michael-Gove-Scottish-independence-would-invigorate-Vladimir-Putin.html
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,400

    chloe said:

    What May has failed to do is bring the two sides together and now the party is in open revolt. It is as if the 48% who voted remain don’t matter and can be ignored. If it was the other way round and remain had narrowly won and ignored the Brexiteers I bet the ulta Brexiteers would be unhappy. There is surely a deal that can be done with the EU that can satisfy most people.

    It has to be done one way or another but on this huge issue both main parties are seriously fractured
    There is no middle ground - Brexit was a binary decision. You either implement it or you don't. That is what May has discovered - however much you waffle you can't ignore that reality. Leaving the EU and staying tied into its rules is not only against the referendum result but pointless. It has none of the advantages of Brexit and all the disadvantages and therefore only pleases the remainers (in part).

    There are only two realistic positions - hard Brexit (eg WTO or Canada plus services) or EEA. There is no logic in anything else. May needed to realise this and pick a side. She can't, so she will be out of office in very short order.
    But no one else can that would get through the HOC. Hard Brexit will not happen
    What matters is what the Hard Brexiteers will do if that is so. It was a guarantee the hard ones would not be happy, but it depends how much they cry about it.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    Charles said:

    Just heard on Radio 4 that Rees Mogg invented the term BINO last week? Am sure it’s been used on here for ages?

    I think our very own @SouthamObserver coined it.
  • Sky have just costed Corbyns 8,000 house purchase for the homeless at 1.8 billion but no worries someone else will pay
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    Ishmael_Z said:

    John_M said:

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    I try to be consistent. The economic impact of Scotland leaving the UK would be greater than the impact of Brexit, that's inarguable. However, people do not always make decisions on purely economic grounds, to put it mildly. I think that's one of the fundamental mistakes Remainers and Unionists keep making.
    I do love it whenever people invoke phrases like "that's inarguable" to support their arguments :smile: Anything to do with economics is always open to debate... that's inarguable!

    However, I agree with your second point, Brexit was never about the economics and we Remainers made a major error trying to argue on that basis. Sadly.

    Being told by a Yank that I would go to the back of the queue (note, not the line) and by a privileged, posh prick that I would be financially punished, was quite an influence for me.
    You mean you were going to vote Remain if not for Obama and Osborne?
    What's your point? Remain chose who fronted their campaign, presumably on the grounds that they were personable and persuasive kinda guys. It turns out that they were in fact a bunch of complete horps. Turning round and saying ”omg you are so superficial if you let the personalities of our front men influence your vote”, which I think is your point, is an impressive bit of ferreting.
    No, my point is you'd already decided - as most of us had to be fair. Things came along that reinforced our views - for you Obama and Osborne maybe, for me, on the other side, the £350m per week claim and the immigrant queue posters - but all in all it was a gut feel that drove most people's vote.

    And you guys won - so chill!
  • kle4 said:

    chloe said:

    What May has failed to do is bring the two sides together and now the party is in open revolt. It is as if the 48% who voted remain don’t matter and can be ignored. If it was the other way round and remain had narrowly won and ignored the Brexiteers I bet the ulta Brexiteers would be unhappy. There is surely a deal that can be done with the EU that can satisfy most people.

    It has to be done one way or another but on this huge issue both main parties are seriously fractured
    There is no middle ground - Brexit was a binary decision. You either implement it or you don't. That is what May has discovered - however much you waffle you can't ignore that reality. Leaving the EU and staying tied into its rules is not only against the referendum result but pointless. It has none of the advantages of Brexit and all the disadvantages and therefore only pleases the remainers (in part).

    There are only two realistic positions - hard Brexit (eg WTO or Canada plus services) or EEA. There is no logic in anything else. May needed to realise this and pick a side. She can't, so she will be out of office in very short order.
    But no one else can that would get through the HOC. Hard Brexit will not happen
    What matters is what the Hard Brexiteers will do if that is so. It was a guarantee the hard ones would not be happy, but it depends how much they cry about it.
    There are not enough in number
  • Sky have just costed Corbyns 8,000 house purchase for the homeless at 1.8 billion but no worries someone else will pay

    So not much more than the deal Theresa did with the DUP to keep her in power when she lost Cameron’s majority, is how the public will see it.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    Ishmael_Z said:

    John_M said:

    geoffw said:

    How to win a political argument with satirical humour. Case study: “Tabàrnia” in Catalonia.
    Tabàrnia (= mashup of Tarragona and Barcelona) is a hypothetical statelet comprising those comarques that voted for anti-separatist parties in the last election.

    Catalan separatists have no answers as their opponents turn their arguments for leaving Spain against them, arguing for Tabàrnia's independence from Catalonia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42777496

    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    I try to be consistent. The economic impact of Scotland leaving the UK would be greater than the impact of Brexit, that's inarguable. However, people do not always make decisions on purely economic grounds, to put it mildly. I think that's one of the fundamental mistakes Remainers and Unionists keep making.
    I do love it whenever people invoke phrases like "that's inarguable" to support their arguments :smile: Anything to do with economics is always open to debate... that's inarguable!

    However, I agree with your second point, Brexit was never about the economics and we Remainers made a major error trying to argue on that basis. Sadly.

    Being told by a Yank that I would go to the back of the queue (note, not the line) and by a privileged, posh prick that I would be financially punished, was quite an influence for me.
    You mean you were going to vote Remain if not for Obama and Osborne?
    What's your point? Remain chose who fronted their campaign, presumably on the grounds that they were personable and persuasive kinda guys. It turns out that they were in fact a bunch of complete horps. Turning round and saying ”omg you are so superficial if you let the personalities of our front men influence your vote”, which I think is your point, is an impressive bit of ferreting.
    No, my point is you'd already decided - as most of us had to be fair. Things came along that reinforced our views - for you Obama and Osborne maybe, for me, on the other side, the £350m per week claim and the immigrant queue posters - but all in all it was a gut feel that drove most people's vote.

    And you guys won - so chill!
    I didn't win. I voted remain. But I can absolutely sympathise with anyone who switched to leave because of Osborne and obaOb.
  • On topic, lest we forget the SNP voted to oust a Labour government and usher in 18 years of Tory rule
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    John_M said:

    geoffw said:


    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    I try to be consistent. The economic impact of Scotland leaving the UK would be greater than the impact of Brexit, that's inarguable. However, people do not always make decisions on purely economic grounds, to put it mildly. I think that's one of the fundamental mistakes Remainers and Unionists keep making.
    I do love it whenever people invoke phrases like "that's inarguable" to support their arguments :smile: Anything to do with economics is always open to debate... that's inarguable!

    However, I agree with your second point, Brexit was never about the economics and we Remainers made a major error trying to argue on that basis. Sadly.

    Being told by a Yank that I would go to the back of the queue (note, not the line) and by a privileged, posh prick that I would be financially punished, was quite an influence for me.
    You mean you were going to vote Remain if not for Obama and Osborne?
    What's your point? Remain chose who fronted their campaign, presumably on the grounds that they were personable and persuasive kinda guys. It turns out that they were in fact a bunch of complete horps. Turning round and saying ”omg you are so superficial if you let the personalities of our front men influence your vote”, which I think is your point, is an impressive bit of ferreting.
    No, my point is you'd already decided - as most of us had to be fair. Things came along that reinforced our views - for you Obama and Osborne maybe, for me, on the other side, the £350m per week claim and the immigrant queue posters - but all in all it was a gut feel that drove most people's vote.

    And you guys won - so chill!
    I didn't win. I voted remain. But I can absolutely sympathise with anyone who switched to leave because of Osborne and obaOb.
    obaOb ??
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,772

    Sky have just costed Corbyns 8,000 house purchase for the homeless at 1.8 billion but no worries someone else will pay

    So not much more than the deal Theresa did with the DUP to keep her in power when she lost Cameron’s majority, is how the public will see it.
    And the Housing Benefit on 8000 houses, mainly in London?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    edited January 2018

    kle4 said:

    chloe said:

    What May has failed to do is bring the two sides together and now the party is in open revolt. It is as if the 48% who voted remain don’t matter and can be ignored. If it was the other way round and remain had narrowly won and ignored the Brexiteers I bet the ulta Brexiteers would be unhappy. There is surely a deal that can be done with the EU that can satisfy most people.

    It has to be done one way or another but on this huge issue both main parties are seriously fractured
    There is no middle ground - Brexit was a binary decision. You either implement it or you don't. That is what May has discovered - however much you waffle you can't ignore that reality. Leaving the EU and staying tied into its rules is not only against the referendum result but pointless. It has none of the advantages of Brexit and all the disadvantages and therefore only pleases the remainers (in part).

    There are only two realistic positions - hard Brexit (eg WTO or Canada plus services) or EEA. There is no logic in anything else. May needed to realise this and pick a side. She can't, so she will be out of office in very short order.
    But no one else can that would get through the HOC. Hard Brexit will not happen
    What matters is what the Hard Brexiteers will do if that is so. It was a guarantee the hard ones would not be happy, but it depends how much they cry about it.
    There are not enough in number
    I agree there aren't enough Hard Brexiteers to defeat a soft Brexit deal in the HoC but there are enough Hard Brexiteer Tories to trigger a leadership election...

    Therein lies TM's challenge (literally!).
  • DavidL said:

    Sky have just costed Corbyns 8,000 house purchase for the homeless at 1.8 billion but no worries someone else will pay

    So not much more than the deal Theresa did with the DUP to keep her in power when she lost Cameron’s majority, is how the public will see it.
    And the Housing Benefit on 8000 houses, mainly in London?
    And the fairness when hard working families cannot afford to live in London but the homeless in London will be given their home and the tax payers, lots of whom are the same hard working families, pay their tax towards the cost
  • kle4 said:

    chloe said:

    What May has failed to do is bring the two sides together and now the party is in open revolt. It is as if the 48% who voted remain don’t matter and can be ignored. If it was the other way round and remain had narrowly won and ignored the Brexiteers I bet the ulta Brexiteers would be unhappy. There is surely a deal that can be done with the EU that can satisfy most people.

    It has to be done one way or another but on this huge issue both main parties are seriously fractured
    There is no middle ground - Brexit was a binary decision. You either implement it or you don't. That is what May has discovered - however much you waffle you can't ignore that reality. Leaving the EU and staying tied into its rules is not only against the referendum result but pointless. It has none of the advantages of Brexit and all the disadvantages and therefore only pleases the remainers (in part).

    There are only two realistic positions - hard Brexit (eg WTO or Canada plus services) or EEA. There is no logic in anything else. May needed to realise this and pick a side. She can't, so she will be out of office in very short order.
    But no one else can that would get through the HOC. Hard Brexit will not happen
    What matters is what the Hard Brexiteers will do if that is so. It was a guarantee the hard ones would not be happy, but it depends how much they cry about it.
    There are not enough in number
    I agree there aren't enough Hard Brexiteers to defeat a soft Brexit deal in the HoC but there are enough Hard Brexiteer Tories to trigger a leadership election...

    Therein lies TM's challenge (literally!).
    But it does not change the dynamics
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312

    Sky have just costed Corbyns 8,000 house purchase for the homeless at 1.8 billion but no worries someone else will pay

    So not much more than the deal Theresa did with the DUP to keep her in power when she lost Cameron’s majority, is how the public will see it.
    I don't think that that's analogous but I reckon that's how a lot of mejia will present it for consumption by the gullible.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281

    DavidL said:

    Sky have just costed Corbyns 8,000 house purchase for the homeless at 1.8 billion but no worries someone else will pay

    So not much more than the deal Theresa did with the DUP to keep her in power when she lost Cameron’s majority, is how the public will see it.
    And the Housing Benefit on 8000 houses, mainly in London?
    And the fairness when hard working families cannot afford to live in London but the homeless in London will be given their home and the tax payers, lots of whom are the same hard working families, pay their tax towards the cost
    By that logic why not stop all housing benefit and let's have a couple of million homeless? Obviously, there'd be a couple of million empty homes too but think of the savings!
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    John_M said:

    geoffw said:


    It's all about where you draw the line really isn't it? Most Leavers I know think it's right and indeed essential for Britain to assert its independence from Europe... but put to the them the idea that Scotland might want to do the same re the UK and their reaction is very different!
    I try to be consistent. The economic impact of Scotland leaving the UK would be greater than the impact of Brexit, that's inarguable. However, people do not always make decisions on purely economic grounds, to put it mildly. I think that's one of the fundamental mistakes Remainers and Unionists keep making.
    I do love it whenever people invoke phrases like "that's inarguable" to support their arguments :smile: Anything to do with economics is always open to debate... that's inarguable!

    However, I agree with your second point, Brexit was never about the economics and we Remainers made a major error trying to argue on that basis. Sadly.

    Being told by a Yank that I would go to the back of the queue (note, not the line) and by a privileged, posh prick that I would be financially punished, was quite an influence for me.
    You mean you were going to vote Remain if not for Obama and Osborne?
    What's your point? Remain chose who fronted their campaign, presumably on the grounds that they were personable and persuasive kinda guys. It turns out that they were in fact a bunch of complete horps. Turning round and saying ”omg you are so superficial if you let the personalities of our front men influence your vote”, which I think is your point, is an impressive bit of ferreting.
    No, my point is you'd already decided - as most of us had to be fair. Things came along that reinforced our views - for you Obama and Osborne maybe, for me, on the other side, the £350m per week claim and the immigrant queue posters - but all in all it was a gut feel that drove most people's vote.

    And you guys won - so chill!
    I didn't win. I voted remain. But I can absolutely sympathise with anyone who switched to leave because of Osborne and obaOb.
    obaOb ??
    Obama
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    edited January 2018
    DavidL said:

    Sky have just costed Corbyns 8,000 house purchase for the homeless at 1.8 billion but no worries someone else will pay

    So not much more than the deal Theresa did with the DUP to keep her in power when she lost Cameron’s majority, is how the public will see it.
    And the Housing Benefit on 8000 houses, mainly in London?
    It’ll be worth every penny.

    I saw a study a while back that found a significant proportion of the homeless were ex military/have mental health issues.

    I think Corbyn honouring the military covenant is great.

    Gavin Williamson take note.
This discussion has been closed.