Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tories go into Thursday’s locals in a much better national

24

Comments

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 9,829
    Hannan is such a blowhard.
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,072
    Abbas does the Palestinian people no favours and shows his unfitness for dialogue with Israel.Turkey's response maybe hostile either way.Peace remains in the distant horizon.Perhaps,the only call left is to ask China to mediate on behalf of the UN.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 3,311
    edited May 1
    Oh dear

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-43967600

    I thought he was supposed to be a “moderate”?

    edit: pipped to the post I now see...
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 5,672
    I am expecting the Tories to do ok on Thursday - just as they did in both 1960 & 1961 in the early part of the 1959 Parliament.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,931
    Zugzwang is a nasty, foreign sort of word, but likely to enter the English language in the coming year.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 11,541
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 12,004
    justin124 said:

    I am expecting the Tories to do ok on Thursday - just as they did in both 1960 & 1961 in the early part of the 1959 Parliament.

    If you're right in saying that there was a swing to the Conservatives in 1960 from 1959 then they did considerably better than 'ok' in 1960.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 40,186
    He has figured out that at least one form of Brexit is worse than remain.

    He may eventually realise that is true for all forms of Brexit, but not soon...
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 12,004
    More banking jobs to be lost:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43964273

    But yet again its only prole jobs in prole towns so no need for PB Remainers to be concerned.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,931
    Cyclefree said:
    http://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2018/04/30/cardinal-nichols-says-alfie-evans-case-used-for-political-aims/
    (nonpaywalled, for the impoverished). He is quite right, though when he says ‘used for political aims’ he means ‘used for religious aims.’
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,665

    More banking jobs to be lost:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43964273

    But yet again its only prole jobs in prole towns so no need for PB Remainers to be concerned.

    WTF? Are you suggesting this is the EU's fault?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 40,186
    The Fink on the vote last night. Sensible Brexiteers should take note. The first rule of politics is be able to count.

    In politics you have to assemble a majority where and when you need it. Shouting at people who fail to provide it may be cathartic, but beyond that it doesn’t get you anywhere. Better instead to calmly contemplate the parliamentary maths. Not the maths as you wish them to be, but the maths as they are.

    The Lords you can put to one side. The Lords won’t stop Brexit and will ultimately comply with the decision of MPs. So what matters is the maths in the Commons. And here the government simply doesn’t have the support to drive through the sort of Brexit that the most vocal leavers want.

    Some sort of compromise on customs arrangements will be necessary, as will sufficient compromises to get the EU to agree a deal. The Commons will not sign off on a no-deal Brexit. It’s fine to be angry about that if you wish and to argue that it defies the wishes of the voters (although, as it happens, I don’t think voters expressed a view on future customs arrangements). It’s fine, but pointless. Being cross doesn’t change the position.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/brexiteers-defining-battle-will-be-with-mps-zbmhw8l5z
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 12,004
    Pulpstar said:

    Since moving I signed up to the garden waste collection, we've missed it the last few weeks as we thought it was the same day as the recycling or landfill.
    Apparently it is Mondays D:

    Its one thing local councils having confusing bin collections.

    But why can't they all have identical confusing bin collections.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 11,541
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Cyclefree said:
    http://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2018/04/30/cardinal-nichols-says-alfie-evans-case-used-for-political-aims/
    (nonpaywalled, for the impoverished). He is quite right, though when he says ‘used for political aims’ he means ‘used for religious aims.’
    Quite. But good that he has spoken out. These loons who attach themselves to these very sad cases do the parents, let alone the poor children, no favours whatsoever. And they are being hugely unkind to the doctors and nurses involved. So good to see the Cardinal recognise their efforts and speak up for their medical expertise.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 12,004

    More banking jobs to be lost:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43964273

    But yet again its only prole jobs in prole towns so no need for PB Remainers to be concerned.

    WTF? Are you suggesting this is the EU's fault?
    Of course not.

    I'm merely contrasting the actual thousands of banking jobs lost year after year throughout the country without general concern with the huffing and puffing about potential banking job losses to Frankfurt. **

    ** And which is now down to a maximum of 5,000 it seems:

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-city-finance/5000-uk-finance-jobs-may-be-moved-by-brexit-half-earlier-forecast-reuters-idUKKBN1H40ZV
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,187
    Cyclefree said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Cyclefree said:
    http://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2018/04/30/cardinal-nichols-says-alfie-evans-case-used-for-political-aims/
    (nonpaywalled, for the impoverished). He is quite right, though when he says ‘used for political aims’ he means ‘used for religious aims.’
    Quite. But good that he has spoken out. These loons who attach themselves to these very sad cases do the parents, let alone the poor children, no favours whatsoever. And they are being hugely unkind to the doctors and nurses involved. So good to see the Cardinal recognise their efforts and speak up for their medical expertise.
    +1

    I have spoken highly of Pope Francis in the past. But he has utterly got this wrong, especially given his previous reported words on such topics.

    As a side issue, IMO in this country we need to have a big and difficult conversation about death and quality of life.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460
    Scott_P said:

    The Fink on the vote last night. Sensible Brexiteers should take note. The first rule of politics is be able to count.

    In politics you have to assemble a majority where and when you need it. Shouting at people who fail to provide it may be cathartic, but beyond that it doesn’t get you anywhere. Better instead to calmly contemplate the parliamentary maths. Not the maths as you wish them to be, but the maths as they are.

    The Lords you can put to one side. The Lords won’t stop Brexit and will ultimately comply with the decision of MPs. So what matters is the maths in the Commons. And here the government simply doesn’t have the support to drive through the sort of Brexit that the most vocal leavers want.

    Some sort of compromise on customs arrangements will be necessary, as will sufficient compromises to get the EU to agree a deal. The Commons will not sign off on a no-deal Brexit. It’s fine to be angry about that if you wish and to argue that it defies the wishes of the voters (although, as it happens, I don’t think voters expressed a view on future customs arrangements). It’s fine, but pointless. Being cross doesn’t change the position.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/brexiteers-defining-battle-will-be-with-mps-zbmhw8l5z

    I have largely been making that point over the last few days
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460

    More banking jobs to be lost:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43964273

    But yet again its only prole jobs in prole towns so no need for PB Remainers to be concerned.

    WTF? Are you suggesting this is the EU's fault?
    It is the march of online banking just like on line shopping
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 5,592
    Scott_P said:
    Not much seems to shift anything pollwise at the moment, just reinforces existing views.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 9,139
    edited May 1
    Beaten to it.

    Duplicate Com Res post.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 12,004
    Foxy said:

    Scott_P said:
    Not much seems to shift anything pollwise at the moment, just reinforces existing views.
    That they're all crap.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 40,186
    daniel clarke - @djoeclarke: Big story from @xtophercook and @LucindaCDay on @BBCNewsnight tonight - tune in at 2230
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 5,672

    justin124 said:

    I am expecting the Tories to do ok on Thursday - just as they did in both 1960 & 1961 in the early part of the 1959 Parliament.

    If you're right in saying that there was a swing to the Conservatives in 1960 from 1959 then they did considerably better than 'ok' in 1960.
    The Tories certainly made gains from Labour in 1960 and 1961. In the latter year there were actually two sets of local elections - the County Councils elected in April followed by Urban and Borough elections in May.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 5,672
    dr_spyn said:

    Beaten to it.

    Duplicate Com Res post.

    I have never been a great fan of Comres in the past.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 20,998
    rcs1000 said:

    In Islington I get my rubbish picked up five times a week.

    Please tell me that is a joke.

    On internet dating - didn't Mr Thomas of this parish once write about his interesting experiences of it. He once recommended to me (in about 2008) that I give it a try, a time when it wasn't quite considered 'normal.'
    Yes.

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Millions-Women-are-Waiting-Meet/dp/0747585563

    On internet dating, it's how I met my wife. It can work; it doesn't always.
    I met my wife on Match.com.
    Does she know yet?

    ;-)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,343
    Scott_P said:
    No matter how often I see such big disparities, it never ceases to amaze me. I know some very right wing younger people, and some increasingly very left wing older people, I'm sure we all do, and yet the splits are so huge overall.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 12,004
    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I am expecting the Tories to do ok on Thursday - just as they did in both 1960 & 1961 in the early part of the 1959 Parliament.

    If you're right in saying that there was a swing to the Conservatives in 1960 from 1959 then they did considerably better than 'ok' in 1960.
    The Tories certainly made gains from Labour in 1960 and 1961. In the latter year there were actually two sets of local elections - the County Councils elected in April followed by Urban and Borough elections in May.
    But making gains compared to the previous set of local elections in, I assume, 1956, 1957 or 1958 ie mid term during the 1955-1959 Conservative government.

    What we might see this week is a swing to the governing party from the last general election and that's something which is very unusual. Perhaps it happened in 1965 during the first Wilson government.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,665

    More banking jobs to be lost:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43964273

    But yet again its only prole jobs in prole towns so no need for PB Remainers to be concerned.

    WTF? Are you suggesting this is the EU's fault?
    It is the march of online banking just like on line shopping
    Indeed. Banks are likely to become solely on-line businesses withing 10-15 years imo.
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 1,384
    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    No matter how often I see such big disparities, it never ceases to amaze me. I know some very right wing younger people, and some increasingly very left wing older people, I'm sure we all do, and yet the splits are so huge overall.
    I expect there are quite big splits regionally. I bet the Labour lead amongst the young is much higher in London say than the midlands or soith west - and vice versa with pensioners.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 23,414
    Brexit was meant to be a moment of renewal, but it's been turned into a morale-sapping mess

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/05/01/brexit-meant-moment-renewal-turned-morale-sapping-mess/
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 6,133
    Pulpstar said:

    Cookie said:

    Quincel said:

    kle4 said:

    It seems incredible to think this is the case, given the shambles the government has been in for at least a year. Outside London set for a good night? I find it hard to believe.

    Barnesian said:

    Tories are going hard on dustbins. In many (all?) London contests, they are claiming Labour and LibDems are threatening weekly collections. That seems to be their main strategy. It might work, even though it is false. People really do care about their dustbin collections.

    LibDems are going for the EU national vote in protest at Brexit. In Barnes, the result is likely to be + or - 200 votes. There are 700 EU nationals in Barnes - many of whom have never voted in a UK election. We are putting them all on our shuttleworth. It could make all the difference - but we need to inform them how to vote. Three crosses etc.

    My (non-London) Tory council went 2 weekly for bins yonks ago, I kind of assumed most places already have it.
    I live in Tory Trafford, and tbh would vote for anyone other than the BNP if they promised a return to weekly bin collections. It's so bizarrely stressful how near the household comes to filling the wheelie bin each time. And Amazon deliveries with all the packaging!
    I also live in Trafford. The solution is to have a third child. The council give you an 80 litre grey bin.
    Seems a bit of an extreme solution.
    Indeed. Most people use cots for their newborns.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,343
    Scott_P said:

    hts://twitter.com/anthonyjwells/status/991425951497097218

    What a really odd headline. 'Here's some positive spin for you, Mrs May! But please god don't get carried away!'
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 12,004
    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    No matter how often I see such big disparities, it never ceases to amaze me. I know some very right wing younger people, and some increasingly very left wing older people, I'm sure we all do, and yet the splits are so huge overall.
    Home ownership.

    See chart 7:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41684812
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,343
    brendan16 said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    No matter how often I see such big disparities, it never ceases to amaze me. I know some very right wing younger people, and some increasingly very left wing older people, I'm sure we all do, and yet the splits are so huge overall.
    I expect there are quite big splits regionally. I bet the Labour lead amongst the young is much higher in London say than the midlands or soith west - and vice versa with pensioners.
    Labour are doing much better in the SW than they used to - I would not be surprised if the LDs have lost the anti-Tory vote among the young they probably used to get, and that will start to hit them in locals down the line.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 5,672
    edited May 1

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I am expecting the Tories to do ok on Thursday - just as they did in both 1960 & 1961 in the early part of the 1959 Parliament.

    If you're right in saying that there was a swing to the Conservatives in 1960 from 1959 then they did considerably better than 'ok' in 1960.
    The Tories certainly made gains from Labour in 1960 and 1961. In the latter year there were actually two sets of local elections - the County Councils elected in April followed by Urban and Borough elections in May.
    But making gains compared to the previous set of local elections in, I assume, 1956, 1957 or 1958 ie mid term during the 1955-1959 Conservative government.

    What we might see this week is a swing to the governing party from the last general election and that's something which is very unusual. Perhaps it happened in 1965 during the first Wilson government.
    Prior to the reform of local government in the early 1970s councillors were elected for 3 year - rather than 4 year terms.Every third year there were two sets of elections - ie for County Councils elected in April. Thus, the seats fought in 1960 & 1961 had last become vacant in 1957 & 1958..
    In May 1965 the Tories actually regained some of the ground lost in May 1962! May 1966 also saw significant Tory gains - despite the landslide Labour victory on 31st March a few weeks earlier.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 792
    Noticeable uptick for the Lib Dems in this week's polls.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,665
    Scott_P said:
    "Nearly half the voters (46%) think Britain's economy would be weaker if the Labour leader replaced her in Downing Street"

    Is that some kind of Trinity Mirror inspired spoof article?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460
    And tonight labour want to up the anti against TM on Windrush but all they are doing is confirming in voters eyes their opposition to controlling illegal immigration and immigration in general
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 11,006
    edited May 1
    Scott_P said:

    The Fink on the vote last night. Sensible Brexiteers should take note. The first rule of politics is be able to count.

    In politics you have to assemble a majority where and when you need it. Shouting at people who fail to provide it may be cathartic, but beyond that it doesn’t get you anywhere. Better instead to calmly contemplate the parliamentary maths. Not the maths as you wish them to be, but the maths as they are.

    The Lords you can put to one side. The Lords won’t stop Brexit and will ultimately comply with the decision of MPs. So what matters is the maths in the Commons. And here the government simply doesn’t have the support to drive through the sort of Brexit that the most vocal leavers want.

    Some sort of compromise on customs arrangements will be necessary, as will sufficient compromises to get the EU to agree a deal. The Commons will not sign off on a no-deal Brexit. It’s fine to be angry about that if you wish and to argue that it defies the wishes of the voters (although, as it happens, I don’t think voters expressed a view on future customs arrangements). It’s fine, but pointless. Being cross doesn’t change the position.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/brexiteers-defining-battle-will-be-with-mps-zbmhw8l5z

    There have been two votes on the customs union already.

    The Govt have won both.

    Apart from the pitch (and frequency) of some people's whining, what has changed?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 12,004
    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I am expecting the Tories to do ok on Thursday - just as they did in both 1960 & 1961 in the early part of the 1959 Parliament.

    If you're right in saying that there was a swing to the Conservatives in 1960 from 1959 then they did considerably better than 'ok' in 1960.
    The Tories certainly made gains from Labour in 1960 and 1961. In the latter year there were actually two sets of local elections - the County Councils elected in April followed by Urban and Borough elections in May.
    But making gains compared to the previous set of local elections in, I assume, 1956, 1957 or 1958 ie mid term during the 1955-1959 Conservative government.

    What we might see this week is a swing to the governing party from the last general election and that's something which is very unusual. Perhaps it happened in 1965 during the first Wilson government.
    Prior to the reform of local government in the early 1970s councillors were elected for 3 year - rather than 4 year terms.Every third year there were two sets of elections - ie for County Councils elected in April. Thus, the seats fought in 1960 & 1961 had last become vacant in 1957 & 1958..
    In May 1965 the Tories actually regained some of the ground lost in May 1962!
    Its certainly possible that there was a Labour to Conservative swing between LE1962 and LE1965 but a Conservative to Labour swing between GE1964 and LE1965.

    Likewise I imagine LE1957 would have been pretty bad for the Conservatives in the aftermath of the Suez debacle.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460

    Scott_P said:
    "Nearly half the voters (46%) think Britain's economy would be weaker if the Labour leader replaced her in Downing Street"

    Is that some kind of Trinity Mirror inspired spoof article?
    See the merger has been called in by the culture committee over plurality of the press
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 11,006

    And tonight labour want to up the anti against TM on Windrush but all they are doing is confirming in voters eyes their opposition to controlling illegal immigration and immigration in general

    Whisper it quietly, but I suspect @Danny555 is bang on when he suggests that the Windrush focus isn't going to help Labour in the Locals....
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 23,414
    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:

    The Fink on the vote last night. Sensible Brexiteers should take note. The first rule of politics is be able to count.

    In politics you have to assemble a majority where and when you need it. Shouting at people who fail to provide it may be cathartic, but beyond that it doesn’t get you anywhere. Better instead to calmly contemplate the parliamentary maths. Not the maths as you wish them to be, but the maths as they are.

    The Lords you can put to one side. The Lords won’t stop Brexit and will ultimately comply with the decision of MPs. So what matters is the maths in the Commons. And here the government simply doesn’t have the support to drive through the sort of Brexit that the most vocal leavers want.

    Some sort of compromise on customs arrangements will be necessary, as will sufficient compromises to get the EU to agree a deal. The Commons will not sign off on a no-deal Brexit. It’s fine to be angry about that if you wish and to argue that it defies the wishes of the voters (although, as it happens, I don’t think voters expressed a view on future customs arrangements). It’s fine, but pointless. Being cross doesn’t change the position.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/brexiteers-defining-battle-will-be-with-mps-zbmhw8l5z

    There have been two votes on the customs union already.

    The Govt have won both.

    Apart from the pitch (and frequency) of some people's whining, what has changed?
    I don't know, but you're right that the whining from the likes of Hannan, JRM, Jenkin, Fysh and IDS has reached fever pitch.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 5,592

    Scott_P said:
    "Nearly half the voters (46%) think Britain's economy would be weaker if the Labour leader replaced her in Downing Street"

    Is that some kind of Trinity Mirror inspired spoof article?
    So 54% think it will be the same or better under Jezza?
  • nunuonenunuone Posts: 624
    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    No matter how often I see such big disparities, it never ceases to amaze me. I know some very right wing younger people, and some increasingly very left wing older people, I'm sure we all do, and yet the splits are so huge overall.
    If the Tory lead with over 65's is really 11% bigger than Labour's lead with the yoof then more reason to expect them to overpreform expectations.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 5,672

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    I am expecting the Tories to do ok on Thursday - just as they did in both 1960 & 1961 in the early part of the 1959 Parliament.

    If you're right in saying that there was a swing to the Conservatives in 1960 from 1959 then they did considerably better than 'ok' in 1960.
    The Tories certainly made gains from Labour in 1960 and 1961. In the latter year there were actually two sets of local elections - the County Councils elected in April followed by Urban and Borough elections in May.
    But making gains compared to the previous set of local elections in, I assume, 1956, 1957 or 1958 ie mid term during the 1955-1959 Conservative government.

    What we might see this week is a swing to the governing party from the last general election and that's something which is very unusual. Perhaps it happened in 1965 during the first Wilson government.
    Prior to the reform of local government in the early 1970s councillors were elected for 3 year - rather than 4 year terms.Every third year there were two sets of elections - ie for County Councils elected in April. Thus, the seats fought in 1960 & 1961 had last become vacant in 1957 & 1958..
    In May 1965 the Tories actually regained some of the ground lost in May 1962!
    Its certainly possible that there was a Labour to Conservative swing between LE1962 and LE1965 but a Conservative to Labour swing between GE1964 and LE1965.

    Likewise I imagine LE1957 would have been pretty bad for the Conservatives in the aftermath of the Suez debacle.
    From memory, I don't believe that the local election results in the mid-60s coincided with the opinion polls to any great extent. However, that was also the case last year when the projected Tory lead of 11% was barely half what polls were recording at the time.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,343
    Foxy said:

    Scott_P said:
    "Nearly half the voters (46%) think Britain's economy would be weaker if the Labour leader replaced her in Downing Street"

    Is that some kind of Trinity Mirror inspired spoof article?
    So 54% think it will be the same or better under Jezza?
    Don't forget the DKs!
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,665
    Foxy said:

    Scott_P said:
    "Nearly half the voters (46%) think Britain's economy would be weaker if the Labour leader replaced her in Downing Street"

    Is that some kind of Trinity Mirror inspired spoof article?
    So 54% think it will be the same or better under Jezza?
    Tbf, I assume there are some don't knows.
  • nunuonenunuone Posts: 624

    Noticeable uptick for the Lib Dems in this week's polls.

    Yes, we usually see an uptick for them just before local elections.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:

    The Fink on the vote last night. Sensible Brexiteers should take note. The first rule of politics is be able to count.

    In politics you have to assemble a majority where and when you need it. Shouting at people who fail to provide it may be cathartic, but beyond that it doesn’t get you anywhere. Better instead to calmly contemplate the parliamentary maths. Not the maths as you wish them to be, but the maths as they are.

    The Lords you can put to one side. The Lords won’t stop Brexit and will ultimately comply with the decision of MPs. So what matters is the maths in the Commons. And here the government simply doesn’t have the support to drive through the sort of Brexit that the most vocal leavers want.

    Some sort of compromise on customs arrangements will be necessary, as will sufficient compromises to get the EU to agree a deal. The Commons will not sign off on a no-deal Brexit. It’s fine to be angry about that if you wish and to argue that it defies the wishes of the voters (although, as it happens, I don’t think voters expressed a view on future customs arrangements). It’s fine, but pointless. Being cross doesn’t change the position.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/brexiteers-defining-battle-will-be-with-mps-zbmhw8l5z

    There have been two votes on the customs union already.

    The Govt have won both.

    Apart from the pitch (and frequency) of some people's whining, what has changed?
    I don't know, but you're right that the whining from the likes of Hannan, JRM, Jenkin, Fysh and IDS has reached fever pitch.
    I do not agree with your love of all things EU but it is clear there is a coordinated move by the EU, some in the HOC and more in the HOL to prevent us cutting our ties with the EU and the parliamentary maths looks like they will get their way

    But the consequences could be very nasty as 17 million voters feel betrayed
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 5,592

    Foxy said:

    Scott_P said:
    "Nearly half the voters (46%) think Britain's economy would be weaker if the Labour leader replaced her in Downing Street"

    Is that some kind of Trinity Mirror inspired spoof article?
    So 54% think it will be the same or better under Jezza?
    Tbf, I assume there are some don't knows.
    Shh!, just trolling the PpB Tories :)
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 9,139
    edited May 1

    Scott_P said:
    "Nearly half the voters (46%) think Britain's economy would be weaker if the Labour leader replaced her in Downing Street"

    Is that some kind of Trinity Mirror inspired spoof article?
    See the merger has been called in by the culture committee over plurality of the press
    Earlier this evening news broke that The Mirror / Express deal was being referred.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43963099


    BBC Newsnight appear to be looking at Bercow and bullying allegations.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,665
    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_P said:
    "Nearly half the voters (46%) think Britain's economy would be weaker if the Labour leader replaced her in Downing Street"

    Is that some kind of Trinity Mirror inspired spoof article?
    So 54% think it will be the same or better under Jezza?
    Don't forget the DKs!
    In fact none of us know - but most are probably prepared to guess one way or the other.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460
    Foxy said:

    Scott_P said:
    "Nearly half the voters (46%) think Britain's economy would be weaker if the Labour leader replaced her in Downing Street"

    Is that some kind of Trinity Mirror inspired spoof article?
    So 54% think it will be the same or better under Jezza?
    Good try
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 23,414
    Just what the new Home Secretary needs... Advice from Nick Timothy.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6181138/being-home-secretary-full-of-political-risk/
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,179
    Foxy said:

    Scott_P said:
    "Nearly half the voters (46%) think Britain's economy would be weaker if the Labour leader replaced her in Downing Street"

    Is that some kind of Trinity Mirror inspired spoof article?
    So 54% think it will be the same or better under Jezza?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,665

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:

    The Fink on the vote last night. Sensible Brexiteers should take note. The first rule of politics is be able to count.

    In politics you have to assemble a majority where and when you need it. Shouting at people who fail to provide it may be cathartic, but beyond that it doesn’t get you anywhere. Better instead to calmly contemplate the parliamentary maths. Not the maths as you wish them to be, but the maths as they are.

    The Lords you can put to one side. The Lords won’t stop Brexit and will ultimately comply with the decision of MPs. So what matters is the maths in the Commons. And here the government simply doesn’t have the support to drive through the sort of Brexit that the most vocal leavers want.

    Some sort of compromise on customs arrangements will be necessary, as will sufficient compromises to get the EU to agree a deal. The Commons will not sign off on a no-deal Brexit. It’s fine to be angry about that if you wish and to argue that it defies the wishes of the voters (although, as it happens, I don’t think voters expressed a view on future customs arrangements). It’s fine, but pointless. Being cross doesn’t change the position.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/brexiteers-defining-battle-will-be-with-mps-zbmhw8l5z

    There have been two votes on the customs union already.

    The Govt have won both.

    Apart from the pitch (and frequency) of some people's whining, what has changed?
    I don't know, but you're right that the whining from the likes of Hannan, JRM, Jenkin, Fysh and IDS has reached fever pitch.
    I do not agree with your love of all things EU but it is clear there is a coordinated move by the EU, some in the HOC and more in the HOL to prevent us cutting our ties with the EU and the parliamentary maths looks like they will get their way

    But the consequences could be very nasty as 17 million voters feel betrayed
    Nasty in what way? We will leave the EU, which is what the 17 million voted for. Beyond that, it was never clear.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 16,004
    Scott_P said:

    He has figured out that at least one form of Brexit is worse than remain.

    He may eventually realise that is true for all forms of Brexit, but not soon...
    Only lunatics like you and Williamglenn think remaining in the EU would be a viable option.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 1,923
    Looks like Bercow may be sunk. His secretary is describing how badly he treated him.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,665

    Scott_P said:

    He has figured out that at least one form of Brexit is worse than remain.

    He may eventually realise that is true for all forms of Brexit, but not soon...
    Only lunatics like you and Williamglenn think remaining in the EU would be a viable option.
    Of course it's a 'viable option'. It's just not going to happen. Instead we will have BINO.
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,487

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:

    The Fink on the vote last night. Sensible Brexiteers should take note. The first rule of politics is be able to count.

    In politics you have to assemble a majority where and when you need it. Shouting at people who fail to provide it may be cathartic, but beyond that it doesn’t get you anywhere. Better instead to calmly contemplate the parliamentary maths. Not the maths as you wish them to be, but the maths as they are.

    The Lords you can put to one side. The Lords won’t stop Brexit and will ultimately comply with the decision of MPs. So what matters is the maths in the Commons. And here the government simply doesn’t have the support to drive through the sort of Brexit that the most vocal leavers want.

    Some sort of compromise on customs arrangements will be necessary, as will sufficient compromises to get the EU to agree a deal. The Commons will not sign off on a no-deal Brexit. It’s fine to be angry about that if you wish and to argue that it defies the wishes of the voters (although, as it happens, I don’t think voters expressed a view on future customs arrangements). It’s fine, but pointless. Being cross doesn’t change the position.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/brexiteers-defining-battle-will-be-with-mps-zbmhw8l5z

    There have been two votes on the customs union already.

    The Govt have won both.

    Apart from the pitch (and frequency) of some people's whining, what has changed?
    I don't know, but you're right that the whining from the likes of Hannan, JRM, Jenkin, Fysh and IDS has reached fever pitch.
    I do not agree with your love of all things EU but it is clear there is a coordinated move by the EU, some in the HOC and more in the HOL to prevent us cutting our ties with the EU and the parliamentary maths looks like they will get their way

    But the consequences could be very nasty as 17 million voters feel betrayed
    Nasty in what way? We will leave the EU, which is what the 17 million voted for. Beyond that, it was never clear.

    Leaving the CU was clearly stated as a consequence of Leave.

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 23,414

    Scott_P said:

    He has figured out that at least one form of Brexit is worse than remain.

    He may eventually realise that is true for all forms of Brexit, but not soon...
    Only lunatics like you and Williamglenn think remaining in the EU would be a viable option.
    Not only is it viable, it's inevitable.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,665

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:

    The Fink on the vote last night. Sensible Brexiteers should take note. The first rule of politics is be able to count.

    In politics you have to assemble a majority where and when you need it. Shouting at people who fail to provide it may be cathartic, but beyond that it doesn’t get you anywhere. Better instead to calmly contemplate the parliamentary maths. Not the maths as you wish them to be, but the maths as they are.

    The Lords you can put to one side. The Lords won’t stop Brexit and will ultimately comply with the decision of MPs. So what matters is the maths in the Commons. And here the government simply doesn’t have the support to drive through the sort of Brexit that the most vocal leavers want.

    Some sort of compromise on customs arrangements will be necessary, as will sufficient compromises to get the EU to agree a deal. The Commons will not sign off on a no-deal Brexit. It’s fine to be angry about that if you wish and to argue that it defies the wishes of the voters (although, as it happens, I don’t think voters expressed a view on future customs arrangements). It’s fine, but pointless. Being cross doesn’t change the position.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/brexiteers-defining-battle-will-be-with-mps-zbmhw8l5z

    There have been two votes on the customs union already.

    The Govt have won both.

    Apart from the pitch (and frequency) of some people's whining, what has changed?
    I don't know, but you're right that the whining from the likes of Hannan, JRM, Jenkin, Fysh and IDS has reached fever pitch.
    I do not agree with your love of all things EU but it is clear there is a coordinated move by the EU, some in the HOC and more in the HOL to prevent us cutting our ties with the EU and the parliamentary maths looks like they will get their way

    But the consequences could be very nasty as 17 million voters feel betrayed
    Nasty in what way? We will leave the EU, which is what the 17 million voted for. Beyond that, it was never clear.

    Leaving the CU was clearly stated as a consequence of Leave.

    So was £350m extra for the NHS and that's not going to happen either.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 9,139
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 5,592

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:

    The Fink on the vote last night. Sensible Brexiteers should take note. The first rule of politics is be able to count.

    In politics you have to assemble a majority where and when you need it. Shouting at people who fail to provide it may be cathartic, but beyond that it doesn’t get you anywhere. Better instead to calmly contemplate the parliamentary maths. Not the maths as you wish them to be, but the maths as they are.

    The Lords you can put to one side. The Lords won’t stop Brexit and will ultimately comply with the decision of MPs. So what matters is the maths in the Commons. And here the government simply doesn’t have the support to drive through the sort of Brexit that the most vocal leavers want.

    Some sort of compromise on customs arrangements will be necessary, as will sufficient compromises to get the EU to agree a deal. The Commons will not sign off on a no-deal Brexit. It’s fine to be angry about that if you wish and to argue that it defies the wishes of the voters (although, as it happens, I don’t think voters expressed a view on future customs arrangements). It’s fine, but pointless. Being cross doesn’t change the position.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/brexiteers-defining-battle-will-be-with-mps-zbmhw8l5z

    There have been two votes on the customs union already.

    The Govt have won both.

    Apart from the pitch (and frequency) of some people's whining, what has changed?
    I don't know, but you're right that the whining from the likes of Hannan, JRM, Jenkin, Fysh and IDS has reached fever pitch.
    I do not agree with your love of all things EU but it is clear there is a coordinated move by the EU, some in the HOC and more in the HOL to prevent us cutting our ties with the EU and the parliamentary maths looks like they will get their way

    But the consequences could be very nasty as 17 million voters feel betrayed
    Nasty in what way? We will leave the EU, which is what the 17 million voted for. Beyond that, it was never clear.

    Leaving the CU was clearly stated as a consequence of Leave.

    Not by everyone. Indeed it was widely discussed along with EFTA as a solution.

    The referendum result covered everything from soft as silk Brexit to hard as diamonds Brexit and everything inbetween.
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,591

    Scott_P said:

    He has figured out that at least one form of Brexit is worse than remain.

    He may eventually realise that is true for all forms of Brexit, but not soon...
    Only lunatics like you and Williamglenn think remaining in the EU would be a viable option.
    Not only is it viable, it's inevitable.
    I look forward to your crocodile tears when your rose tinted spectacle EU wet dream comes crashing down in flames - well it already is in many regards.
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,487

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:

    The Fink on the vote last night. Sensible Brexiteers should take note. The first rule of politics is be able to count.

    In politics you have to assemble a majority where and when you need it. Shouting at people who fail to provide it may be cathartic, but beyond that it doesn’t get you anywhere. Better instead to calmly contemplate the parliamentary maths. Not the maths as you wish them to be, but the maths as they are.

    The Lords you can put to one side. The Lords won’t stop Brexit and will ultimately comply with the decision of MPs. So what matters is the maths in the Commons. And here the government simply doesn’t have the support to drive through the sort of Brexit that the most vocal leavers want.

    Some sort of compromise on customs arrangements will be necessary, as will sufficient compromises to get the EU to agree a deal. The Commons will not sign off on a no-deal Brexit. It’s fine to be angry about that if you wish and to argue that it defies the wishes of the voters (although, as it happens, I don’t think voters expressed a view on future customs arrangements). It’s fine, but pointless. Being cross doesn’t change the position.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/brexiteers-defining-battle-will-be-with-mps-zbmhw8l5z

    There have been two votes on the customs union already.

    The Govt have won both.

    Apart from the pitch (and frequency) of some people's whining, what has changed?
    I don't know, but you're right that the whining from the likes of Hannan, JRM, Jenkin, Fysh and IDS has reached fever pitch.
    I do not agree with your love of all things EU but it is clear there is a coordinated move by the EU, some in the HOC and more in the HOL to prevent us cutting our ties with the EU and the parliamentary maths looks like they will get their way

    But the consequences could be very nasty as 17 million voters feel betrayed
    Nasty in what way? We will leave the EU, which is what the 17 million voted for. Beyond that, it was never clear.

    Leaving the CU was clearly stated as a consequence of Leave.

    So was £350m extra for the NHS and that's not going to happen either.

    Leaving the CU was the government's official position, as a consequence of Brexit. I do still have the leaflet they sent out to everyone.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,343
    Scott_P said:

    hps://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/991432500613386247

    The express talking her up but warning not to go to a GE, the Mail talking up her admirable instincts but warning her not to fudge things. I'm sensing a pattern.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 23,414
    By election in Buckingham?
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 1,923
    So two private secretaries to Bercow, one, a former submariner has strongly accused Bercow of being a bully, and the second retired with PTSD after less than a year.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,343
    hunchman said:

    Scott_P said:

    He has figured out that at least one form of Brexit is worse than remain.

    He may eventually realise that is true for all forms of Brexit, but not soon...
    Only lunatics like you and Williamglenn think remaining in the EU would be a viable option.
    Not only is it viable, it's inevitable.
    I look forward to your crocodile tears when your rose tinted spectacle EU wet dream comes crashing down in flames - well it already is in many regards.
    I admire william keeping good humour at least, unlike too many.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 11,006
    Scott_P said:
    My first indication today that the Customs Partnership idea was sunk was when I heard on waking that Hammond was supporting it. Kiss of death for most Brexit related ideas so far...

    The ERG won't have it, the press are against it, the people won't wear it. Guess that cabinet sub committee meeting will be short...
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 14,916

    Scott_P said:

    He has figured out that at least one form of Brexit is worse than remain.

    He may eventually realise that is true for all forms of Brexit, but not soon...
    Only lunatics like you and Williamglenn think remaining in the EU would be a viable option.
    Of course it's a 'viable option'. It's just not going to happen. Instead we will have BINO.
    It's not politically viable. Nor morally. But for practical purposes, it's the political one that matters.
  • nunuonenunuone Posts: 624
    Scott_P said:
    Is anyone surprised that he is a bully?
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,591
    Mortimer said:

    And tonight labour want to up the anti against TM on Windrush but all they are doing is confirming in voters eyes their opposition to controlling illegal immigration and immigration in general

    Whisper it quietly, but I suspect @Danny555 is bang on when he suggests that the Windrush focus isn't going to help Labour in the Locals....
    Agreed - usually Tories come off best when the focus is on immigration as it has been over the past week, even with the wretched former Home Secretary gone.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,343

    Scott_P said:

    He has figured out that at least one form of Brexit is worse than remain.

    He may eventually realise that is true for all forms of Brexit, but not soon...
    Only lunatics like you and Williamglenn think remaining in the EU would be a viable option.
    Not only is it viable, it's inevitable.
    The EU needs more going for it than crushing inevitability, I continue to be baffled why you consider describing it in such a way is a good thing - it certainly doesn't help people accept that inevitability, which just frustrates matters.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 5,592
    edited May 1
    hunchman said:

    Mortimer said:

    And tonight labour want to up the anti against TM on Windrush but all they are doing is confirming in voters eyes their opposition to controlling illegal immigration and immigration in general

    Whisper it quietly, but I suspect @Danny555 is bang on when he suggests that the Windrush focus isn't going to help Labour in the Locals....
    Agreed - usually Tories come off best when the focus is on immigration as it has been over the past week, even with the wretched former Home Secretary gone.
    I think that you may be right in parts of the country. Less so in others. The divide showed well in the Channel 4 news piece with Chuka and Gale:

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,343
    dr_spyn said:
    Seems like if he really has behaved in such a way there will soon be plenty of others to corroborate it, since if you behave that way with one, you probably do with others. If he has gone on angry, foul mouthed tirades and the like, but is denying it because he doesn't think that counted as bullying, then he might be in trouble I suppose.
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,591
    I have a choice between Tory, Labour, Lib Dem and Green on Thursday. Who do you vote for if you're broadly centre right, detest the Tories for a) financial and moral corruption, b) foreign policy, detest the Lib Dems for their EU fanaticism, detest Labour for most things, not least socialism as a completely flawed ideology and detest the Greens for their man made climate change nonsense?
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,743
    edited May 1
    My pet kangaroo is jumping up and down on top of my harpsichord

    boing boing boing

    But the stuff about Bercow is obvious

    By the way, does Harry Hayfield still think that Orfhlaith Begley is a man? Or did he just not do any research on the matter?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 5,665
    edited May 1
    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:
    My first indication today that the Customs Partnership idea was sunk was when I heard on waking that Hammond was supporting it. Kiss of death for most Brexit related ideas so far...

    The ERG won't have it, the press are against it, the people won't wear it. Guess that cabinet sub committee meeting will be short...
    And then what? Parliament won't support no deal or a hard Brexit, as TMay knows, hence the search for a CU in all but name.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 19,460

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_P said:

    The Fink on the vote last night. Sensible Brexiteers should take note. The first rule of politics is be able to count.

    In politics you have to assemble a majority where and when you need it. Shouting at people who fail to provide it may be cathartic, but beyond that it doesn’t get you anywhere. Better instead to calmly contemplate the parliamentary maths. Not the maths as you wish them to be, but the maths as they are.

    The Lords you can put to one side. The Lords won’t stop Brexit and will ultimately comply with the decision of MPs. So what matters is the maths in the Commons. And here the government simply doesn’t have the support to drive through the sort of Brexit that the most vocal leavers want.

    Some sort of compromise on customs arrangements will be necessary, as will sufficient compromises to get the EU to agree a deal. The Commons will not sign off on a no-deal Brexit. It’s fine to be angry about that if you wish and to argue that it defies the wishes of the voters (although, as it happens, I don’t think voters expressed a view on future customs arrangements). It’s fine, but pointless. Being cross doesn’t change the position.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/brexiteers-defining-battle-will-be-with-mps-zbmhw8l5z

    There have been two votes on the customs union already.

    The Govt have won both.

    Apart from the pitch (and frequency) of some people's whining, what has changed?
    I don't know, but you're right that the whining from the likes of Hannan, JRM, Jenkin, Fysh and IDS has reached fever pitch.
    I do not agree with your love of all things EU but it is clear there is a coordinated move by the EU, some in the HOC and more in the HOL to prevent us cutting our ties with the EU and the parliamentary maths looks like they will get their way

    But the consequences could be very nasty as 17 million voters feel betrayed
    Nasty in what way? We will leave the EU, which is what the 17 million voted for. Beyond that, it was never clear.
    If we still come under the ECJ, pay into the EU, and the EU do our trade deals for us, it will get nasty
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 36,343
    hunchman said:

    I have a choice between Tory, Labour, Lib Dem and Green on Thursday. Who do you vote for if you're broadly centre right, detest the Tories for a) financial and moral corruption, b) foreign policy, detest the Lib Dems for their EU fanaticism, detest Labour for most things, not least socialism as a completely flawed ideology and detest the Greens for their man made climate change nonsense?

    If you feel obliged to cast a vote at all, and there are no sane independents to vote for, vote for whoever worked hardest for your vote in the ward - it sounds like you don't care for any of the options, and local councils won't have an impact on most of them anyway due to their focus, so reward those who at least tried hardest.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 14,916
    hunchman said:

    I have a choice between Tory, Labour, Lib Dem and Green on Thursday. Who do you vote for if you're broadly centre right, detest the Tories for a) financial and moral corruption, b) foreign policy, detest the Lib Dems for their EU fanaticism, detest Labour for most things, not least socialism as a completely flawed ideology and detest the Greens for their man made climate change nonsense?

    You stop being so picky.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 11,805
    hunchman said:

    I have a choice between Tory, Labour, Lib Dem and Green on Thursday. Who do you vote for if you're broadly centre right, detest the Tories for a) financial and moral corruption, b) foreign policy, detest the Lib Dems for their EU fanaticism, detest Labour for most things, not least socialism as a completely flawed ideology and detest the Greens for their man made climate change nonsense?

    You find out a bit about the candidates and vote for the best most hard working one(s).
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,591

    By election in Buckingham?

    Lets hope so. Bercow said he wouldn't serve more than 9 years anyway from June 2009 when he became speaker, so if he keeps his word(?!) he should be gone by the end of June
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,547
    Foxy said:

    hunchman said:

    Mortimer said:

    And tonight labour want to up the anti against TM on Windrush but all they are doing is confirming in voters eyes their opposition to controlling illegal immigration and immigration in general

    Whisper it quietly, but I suspect @Danny555 is bang on when he suggests that the Windrush focus isn't going to help Labour in the Locals....
    Agreed - usually Tories come off best when the focus is on immigration as it has been over the past week, even with the wretched former Home Secretary gone.
    I think that you may be right in parts of the country. Less so in others. The divide showed well in the Channel 4 news piece with Chuka and Gale:

    Yeah, that interview was a mess.
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,591
    IanB2 said:

    hunchman said:

    I have a choice between Tory, Labour, Lib Dem and Green on Thursday. Who do you vote for if you're broadly centre right, detest the Tories for a) financial and moral corruption, b) foreign policy, detest the Lib Dems for their EU fanaticism, detest Labour for most things, not least socialism as a completely flawed ideology and detest the Greens for their man made climate change nonsense?

    You find out a bit about the candidates and vote for the best most hard working one(s).
    I've been trying to do that, but given its a safe Tory ward all we've had is a Tory leaflet, so that doesn't say a lot for the efforts of the others! I simply cannot in my right mind vote Tory these days given everything I know about their corruption historically based on 'that road' in the borough of Barnet.

    I will still go to the polling station even if I end up spoiling my ballot paper though, as I believe that is better than just wimping out and not turning up at all - that in my book is at least some mark of respect to the Suffragettes. And I'll put something pretty hard hitting about the corruption for everyone to see if I do indeed spoil my ballot paper.
This discussion has been closed.