Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » On the eve of the critical Mississippi senate election Trump’s

2

Comments

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 28,300
    Newsnight: all parties agree Theresa May heading for serious defeat with Brexit vote.
  • Apparently Hunt suggested May should debate with Blair and frame it as her deal versus Remain.

    Mmmm... Blair might win that one. (But maybe that's what Hunt intended?)

    Better by far, from her perspective, to debate with Corbyn - she'll run rings round him on the detail.
    The public don't care about detail. They look for leadership and an aura of competence, failing that then authenticity. There is no upside for May.

    Well, it's a view. You might be right but anecdotally, people I've been speaking to (Tory & Labour, Leavers & Remainers) generally want May to get on with it and can't see what Jezza's bleating on about.
    Most of the people we all know are either political nerds or put up with us talking about it. We are not a normal cross section of society. Most voters respond to what they see. TM is not comfortable in her skin on TV and does not evoke confidence in her audience. That is a huge downside.
  • GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:



    This will go down as her finest hour


    Her finest hour will be a crushing defeat on the floor of the Commons?
    It will show up who the real scum are in the Tory Party. I don't want to be in a party that has such awful people in it. I am going to be one of the, "no idea who to vote for" if the Tory Party does not support its leader.
    And that's exactly why the Cabinet would be well advised to threaten a complete walk out if Mrs May doesn't resign and take her deal with her before Dec 11th.
    Really.. Its the ERG and other MP's who are being treacherous. Frankly they are just the sort of "bastards" that John Major had to deal with.
    Did it never occur to you that those 'Bastards' were actually right and if they had won we probably wouldn't be in this situation now. It was people like Major lying through their back teeth and pushing through successive treaties without consulting the people that massively contributed to Brexit in the first place.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 26,591

    kle4 said:

    May could end up setting a record - biggest ever defeat for a government?

    This is why I continue to believe that she is badly advised, any sensible person in her team would advise not to put this to a vote. It is very bad party management to alienate the two opposing sides leaving just the payroll vote in support.
    She has to put it to a vote.

    Everyone must make their position publicly known.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 6,293

    Foxy said:

    Apparently Hunt suggested May should debate with Blair and frame it as her deal versus Remain.

    Mmmm... Blair might win that one. (But maybe that's what Hunt intended?)

    Better by far, from her perspective, to debate with Corbyn - she'll run rings round him on the detail.
    Possibly, but he will nail her on the rhetoric and soundbites. No-one is interested in tractor stats delivered by a speak your weight machine.

    Debates are about theatre, if you want facts and analysis, look elsewhere.
    I do get that but there's surely only so much fluff and nonesense about Brexit that Corbyn can get away with? Plus he could lose his cool whihc is always amusing.

    I am still coming at this with a view that wonders what it is precisely about May's transition Deal that Corbyn would actually want to change?
    Rule #1 of politics post 2015. Corbyn exceeds expectations.
    You may not like it. But there it is.
  • Scott_P said:
    I'm PM get me out of here etc etc etc...
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 9,694

    Apparently Hunt suggested May should debate with Blair and frame it as her deal versus Remain.

    Mmmm... Blair might win that one. (But maybe that's what Hunt intended?)

    Better by far, from her perspective, to debate with Corbyn - she'll run rings round him on the detail.
    The public don't care about detail. They look for leadership and an aura of competence, failing that then authenticity. There is no upside for May.

    Well, it's a view. You might be right but anecdotally, people I've been speaking to (Tory & Labour, Leavers & Remainers) generally want May to get on with it and can't see what Jezza's bleating on about.
    Most of the people we all know are either political nerds or put up with us talking about it. We are not a normal cross section of society. Most voters respond to what they see. TM is not comfortable in her skin on TV and does not evoke confidence in her audience. That is a huge downside.
    People do recognise her qualities though... resilience, perseverance, sense of duty, etc.

    It's probably not enough but many people do rate her for those things.

    I say that as someone who never has and probably never will vote Tory. I do have a grudging admiration for her though.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 12,982

    Apparently Hunt suggested May should debate with Blair and frame it as her deal versus Remain.

    Mmmm... Blair might win that one. (But maybe that's what Hunt intended?)

    Better by far, from her perspective, to debate with Corbyn - she'll run rings round him on the detail.
    He's up for it, she has apparently backed off.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 49,958
    rcs1000 said:

    She has to put it to a vote.

    Everyone must make their position publicly known.

    Yes, every MP must dip their hand in the blood, either of a deal nobody likes or the chaos that follows.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 26,591
    I was going to post about how the UK and the EU could easily agree a unilateral exit from the backstop, if endorsed by the people of Northern Ireland. That is, if the people of Ulster choose to vote to leave it, then they should have that right.

    But then I though, while it might well be acceptable to the EU, it would reduce the UK's long-term position even further. It would prevent the UK from simply announcing it would no longer be bound by the treaty - as President Trump threatened with NAFTA - as a unilateral decision by Westminster would be overruling the majority opinion in Northern Ireland.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 9,694
    edited November 2018
    dixiedean said:

    Foxy said:

    Apparently Hunt suggested May should debate with Blair and frame it as her deal versus Remain.

    Mmmm... Blair might win that one. (But maybe that's what Hunt intended?)

    Better by far, from her perspective, to debate with Corbyn - she'll run rings round him on the detail.
    Possibly, but he will nail her on the rhetoric and soundbites. No-one is interested in tractor stats delivered by a speak your weight machine.

    Debates are about theatre, if you want facts and analysis, look elsewhere.
    I do get that but there's surely only so much fluff and nonesense about Brexit that Corbyn can get away with? Plus he could lose his cool whihc is always amusing.

    I am still coming at this with a view that wonders what it is precisely about May's transition Deal that Corbyn would actually want to change?
    Rule #1 of politics post 2015. Corbyn exceeds expectations.
    You may not like it. But there it is.
    No, I generally do like it. And on the economy, social justice, public services etc. he's on strong ground.

    On Brexit though he's walking on quicksand; I don't think he has a scooby-doo.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 61,221

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:



    This will go down as her finest hour


    Her finest hour will be a crushing defeat on the floor of the Commons?
    It will show up who the real scum are in the Tory Party. I don't want to be in a party that has such awful people in it. I am going to be one of the, "no idea who to vote for" if the Tory Party does not support its leader.
    And that's exactly why the Cabinet would be well advised to threaten a complete walk out if Mrs May doesn't resign and take her deal with her before Dec 11th.
    Hammond, Clarke, Lidington etc are apparently already ready to demand May switches to backing permanent UK membership of the Customs Union to get Labour MPs and potentially Corbyn's support if May cannot get her Deal through as it stands
    They they have rocks for brains.
    No, it is reality, after all the Commons only voted by 307 to 301 votes against staying in the Customs Union in July. That was a closer vote than the vote to invoke Article 50 to leave the EU and the vote to leave the Single Market and will likely be closer than the vote on May's Deal as it stands
    That vote was because the Labour Party were causing trouble and the ERG backed May. Do the same now and the Labour Party would still want to cause trouble so they would vote against and the DUP and ERG would join them. Big defeat for May.
    Wrong. The Labour Party official policy is to back permanent Customs Union membership, if May switches to their policy Labour will then back the Deal. Once the Deal passes though the cost of course for the government is Labour will then force a VONC which the DUP will back and we go to a general election.

    However to be frank it is difficult to see any other way to get a Deal through
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 26,591

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:



    This will go down as her finest hour


    Her finest hour will be a crushing defeat on the floor of the Commons?
    It will show up who the real scum are in the Tory Party. I don't want to be in a party that has such awful people in it. I am going to be one of the, "no idea who to vote for" if the Tory Party does not support its leader.
    And that's exactly why the Cabinet would be well advised to threaten a complete walk out if Mrs May doesn't resign and take her deal with her before Dec 11th.
    Really.. Its the ERG and other MP's who are being treacherous. Frankly they are just the sort of "bastards" that John Major had to deal with.
    I don't think you can blame it all on the ERG. It seems the vast majority of MP's on all sides of the House and on all wings of the Tory Party are repulsed by the backstop.

    Theresa May should have known she couldn't possibly get this through without some sort of end date or other provision particularly as her government is relying on the DUP to survive...
    That's piffle! A vociferous minority of the Tory party + the DUP are repulsed by the backstop. Pretty much all the other opponents of the deal want (misguidedly in my view) a 2nd referendum leading to Remain.
    Sadly, I think you're right.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 1,744

    I wonder whether the mooted plan to have a second vote after a TARP-style market reaction to the first vote going down might have one fatal flaw. The markets surely expect the vote to fail and thus its failure will already be priced in to market rates thus any reaction would be minimal.

    TARP was expected by the markets to be passed, its failure was unexpected. Just as the markets had expected a remain vote. Its when things go against expectations that we see dramatic changes.

    It would be even funnier if the house voted down the WDA and the pound rose because the markets thought that some sensible people do actually inhabit the place.
    Unicorn alert!
    We will find out in a couple of weeks time.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,547

    I wonder whether the mooted plan to have a second vote after a TARP-style market reaction to the first vote going down might have one fatal flaw. The markets surely expect the vote to fail and thus its failure will already be priced in to market rates thus any reaction would be minimal.

    TARP was expected by the markets to be passed, its failure was unexpected. Just as the markets had expected a remain vote. Its when things go against expectations that we see dramatic changes.

    It would be even funnier if the house voted down the WDA and the pound rose because the markets thought that some sensible people do actually inhabit the place.
    Seriously bad loss will already be priced in.
  • I wonder whether the mooted plan to have a second vote after a TARP-style market reaction to the first vote going down might have one fatal flaw. The markets surely expect the vote to fail and thus its failure will already be priced in to market rates thus any reaction would be minimal.

    TARP was expected by the markets to be passed, its failure was unexpected. Just as the markets had expected a remain vote. Its when things go against expectations that we see dramatic changes.

    It would be even funnier if the house voted down the WDA and the pound rose because the markets thought that some sensible people do actually inhabit the place.
    Unicorn alert!
    Absolutely. I am too polite to comment on that previous observation other than 'are you real'
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 61,221

    I wonder whether the mooted plan to have a second vote after a TARP-style market reaction to the first vote going down might have one fatal flaw. The markets surely expect the vote to fail and thus its failure will already be priced in to market rates thus any reaction would be minimal.

    TARP was expected by the markets to be passed, its failure was unexpected. Just as the markets had expected a remain vote. Its when things go against expectations that we see dramatic changes.

    The market will obviously fall given the economic damage of the threat of No Deal, though the catastrophic fall in the market may have to wait until if a second Deal vote fails, then of course May might still try for a third vote
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 9,694
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:



    This will go down as her finest hour


    Her finest hour will be a crushing defeat on the floor of the Commons?
    It will show up who the real scum are in the Tory Party. I don't want to be in a party that has such awful people in it. I am going to be one of the, "no idea who to vote for" if the Tory Party does not support its leader.
    And that's exactly why the Cabinet would be well advised to threaten a complete walk out if Mrs May doesn't resign and take her deal with her before Dec 11th.
    Hammond, Clarke, Lidington etc are apparently already ready to demand May switches to backing permanent UK membership of the Customs Union to get Labour MPs and potentially Corbyn's support if May cannot get her Deal through as it stands
    They they have rocks for brains.
    No, it is reality, after all the Commons only voted by 307 to 301 votes against staying in the Customs Union in July. That was a closer vote than the vote to invoke Article 50 to leave the EU and the vote to leave the Single Market and will likely be closer than the vote on May's Deal as it stands
    That vote was because the Labour Party were causing trouble and the ERG backed May. Do the same now and the Labour Party would still want to cause trouble so they would vote against and the DUP and ERG would join them. Big defeat for May.
    Wrong. The Labour Party official policy is to back permanent Customs Union membership, if May switches to their policy Labour will then back the Deal. Once the Deal passes though the cost of course for the government is Labour will then force a VONC which the DUP will back and we go to a general election.

    However to be frank it is difficult to see any other way to get a Deal through
    Which makes me wonder, as I asked a few days ago, why Labour just doesn't back May on the Deal, then call a VoNC which the DUP would back if the "Backstop Deal' has gone through?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 61,221
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:



    This will go down as her finest hour


    Her finest hour will be a crushing defeat on the floor of the Commons?
    It will show up who the real scum are in the Tory Party. I don't want to be in a party that has such awful people in it. I am going to be one of the, "no idea who to vote for" if the Tory Party does not support its leader.
    And that's exactly why the Cabinet would be well advised to threaten a complete walk out if Mrs May doesn't resign and take her deal with her before Dec 11th.
    Hammond, Clarke, Lidington etc are apparently already ready to demand May switches to backing permanent UK membership of the Customs Union to get Labour MPs and potentially Corbyn's support if May cannot get her Deal through as it stands
    They they have rocks for brains.
    No, it is reality, after all the Commons only voted by 307 to 301 votes against staying in the Customs Union in July. That was a closer vote than the vote to invoke Article 50 to leave the EU and the vote to leave the Single Market and will likely be closer than the vote on May's Deal as it stands
    Was that not the vote when pairing agreements were broken by the Tories? If so, the real majority was even smaller.
    Which just reinforces the point
  • AndyJS said:

    Newsnight: all parties agree Theresa May heading for serious defeat with Brexit vote.

    Stating the obvious


  • It will show up who the real scum are in the Tory Party. I don't want to be in a party that has such awful people in it. I am going to be one of the, "no idea who to vote for" if the Tory Party does not support its leader.

    I will be in that position if the deal goes through. Sounds like the Tories are in a difficult spot!
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 9,694

    Apparently Hunt suggested May should debate with Blair and frame it as her deal versus Remain.

    Mmmm... Blair might win that one. (But maybe that's what Hunt intended?)

    Better by far, from her perspective, to debate with Corbyn - she'll run rings round him on the detail.
    He's up for it, she has apparently backed off.
    Not according to The Sun.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/7834426/theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-live-tv-debate-same-night-im-a-celebrity/
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 9,694
    Good night all - another quiet day in Brexitland eh!
  • dixiedean said:

    Foxy said:

    Apparently Hunt suggested May should debate with Blair and frame it as her deal versus Remain.

    Mmmm... Blair might win that one. (But maybe that's what Hunt intended?)

    Better by far, from her perspective, to debate with Corbyn - she'll run rings round him on the detail.
    Possibly, but he will nail her on the rhetoric and soundbites. No-one is interested in tractor stats delivered by a speak your weight machine.

    Debates are about theatre, if you want facts and analysis, look elsewhere.
    I do get that but there's surely only so much fluff and nonesense about Brexit that Corbyn can get away with? Plus he could lose his cool whihc is always amusing.

    I am still coming at this with a view that wonders what it is precisely about May's transition Deal that Corbyn would actually want to change?
    Rule #1 of politics post 2015. Corbyn exceeds expectations.
    You may not like it. But there it is.
    And there is a time coming when he doesn't.

    See Gina Miller is going for him big time demanding her referendum. Sadly she has no way of knowing the demons that would release
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 6,293

    dixiedean said:

    Foxy said:

    Apparently Hunt suggested May should debate with Blair and frame it as her deal versus Remain.

    Mmmm... Blair might win that one. (But maybe that's what Hunt intended?)

    Better by far, from her perspective, to debate with Corbyn - she'll run rings round him on the detail.
    Possibly, but he will nail her on the rhetoric and soundbites. No-one is interested in tractor stats delivered by a speak your weight machine.

    Debates are about theatre, if you want facts and analysis, look elsewhere.
    I do get that but there's surely only so much fluff and nonesense about Brexit that Corbyn can get away with? Plus he could lose his cool whihc is always amusing.

    I am still coming at this with a view that wonders what it is precisely about May's transition Deal that Corbyn would actually want to change?
    Rule #1 of politics post 2015. Corbyn exceeds expectations.
    You may not like it. But there it is.
    No, I generally do like it. And on the economy, social justice, public services etc. he's on strong ground.

    On Brexit though he's walking on quicksand; I don't think he has a scooby-doo.
    Oops. Mistook you for another poster. My point is, though, that May thinking she can go on TV and duff Corbyn up is yet another example of no 10's magical thinking.
    He will do far, far better than the Tories expect. Tories will think May won. Labour will think Corbyn won.
    May will know all the details, sending everyone to sleep.
    Corbyn will enrage half and enthuse the other half by raising every other issue under the Sun.
    As before.
  • Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big problem with deposing May is that it means that the government can't do anything for about two months while the Tories sort themselves out - and very probably not afterwards either as a Con leadership election could only be won on a Hard Brexit mandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 61,221

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:



    This will go down as her finest hour


    Her finest hour will be a crushing defeat on the floor of the Commons?
    It will show up who the real scum are in the Tory Party. I don't want to be in a party that has such awful people in it. I am going to be one of the, "no idea who to vote for" if the Tory Party does not support its leader.
    And that's exactly why the Cabinet would be well advised to threaten a complete walk out if Mrs May doesn't resign and take her deal with her before Dec 11th.
    Hammond, Clarke, Lidington etc are apparently already ready to demand May switches to backing permanent UK membership of the Customs Union to get Labour MPs and potentially Corbyn's support if May cannot get her Deal through as it stands
    They they have rocks for brains.
    No, it is reality, after all the Commons only voted by 307 to 301 votes against staying in the Customs Union in July. That was a closer vote than the vote to invoke Article 50 to leave the EU and the vote to leave the Single Market and will likely be closer than the vote on May's Deal as it stands
    That vote was because the Labour Party were causing trouble and the ERG backed May. Do the same now and the Labour Party would still want to cause trouble so they would vote against and the DUP and ERG would join them. Big defeat for May.
    Wrong. The Labour Party official policy is to back permanent Customs Union membership, if May switches to their policy Labour will then back the Deal. Once the Deal passes though the cost of course for the government is Labour will then force a VONC which the DUP will back and we go to a general election.

    However to be frank it is difficult to see any other way to get a Deal through
    Which makes me wonder, as I asked a few days ago, why Labour just doesn't back May on the Deal, then call a VoNC which the DUP would back if the "Backstop Deal' has gone through?
    Not impossible I think Corbyn will defeat it on the first vote then allow enough Labour MPs to back the Deal for it to pass on the second vote (he does not want to become PM under a No Deal scenario) then after it passes force a VONC which he wins with support of the DUP.

    He will then aim to become PM and just agree with the EU to make the customs union permanent.


    So the DUP and ERG may end up achieving nothing by opposing the Deal but a Corbyn premiership and making the customs union permanent not temporary
  • HYUFD said:

    I wonder whether the mooted plan to have a second vote after a TARP-style market reaction to the first vote going down might have one fatal flaw. The markets surely expect the vote to fail and thus its failure will already be priced in to market rates thus any reaction would be minimal.

    TARP was expected by the markets to be passed, its failure was unexpected. Just as the markets had expected a remain vote. Its when things go against expectations that we see dramatic changes.

    The market will obviously fall given the economic damage of the threat of No Deal, though the catastrophic fall in the market may have to wait until if a second Deal vote fails, then of course May might still try for a third vote
    She will not be there for a third vote.

    As much as I support TM I would say her chances of surviving a voting massacre must be quite small
  • Apparently Hunt suggested May should debate with Blair and frame it as her deal versus Remain.

    Mmmm... Blair might win that one. (But maybe that's what Hunt intended?)

    Better by far, from her perspective, to debate with Corbyn - she'll run rings round him on the detail.
    He's up for it, she has apparently backed off.
    Not according to The Sun.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/7834426/theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-live-tv-debate-same-night-im-a-celebrity/
    At least May vs Blair debate would give us what would have happened in 2016 if Blair was still seriously around as a front rank pol and Jez 'I'm might be Remain, wink, wink, but then again' Corbyn wasn't LOTO.
  • rcs1000 said:
    He appears to have Trump's mouth grafted onto his abdomen.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 14,484
    What’s Trump’s approval rating in Mississippi, though ?
    (Was 59/36 approve/disapprove in October)
    He’s holding a couple of rallies there, FWIW.

    Meantime O’Rourke run probably on:
    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/418313-beto-orourke-now-says-he-wont-rule-out-2020-white-house-bid
  • Scott_P said:
    Most of them English who suddenly found that an Irish grandparent was mighty handy in the brave new world... :lol:
  • dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Foxy said:

    Apparently Hunt suggested May should debate with Blair and frame it as her deal versus Remain.

    Mmmm... Blair might win that one. (But maybe that's what Hunt intended?)

    Better by far, from her perspective, to debate with Corbyn - she'll run rings round him on the detail.
    Possibly, but he will nail her on the rhetoric and soundbites. No-one is interested in tractor stats delivered by a speak your weight machine.

    Debates are about theatre, if you want facts and analysis, look elsewhere.
    I do get that but there's surely only so much fluff and nonesense about Brexit that Corbyn can get away with? Plus he could lose his cool whihc is always amusing.

    I am still coming at this with a view that wonders what it is precisely about May's transition Deal that Corbyn would actually want to change?
    Rule #1 of politics post 2015. Corbyn exceeds expectations.
    You may not like it. But there it is.
    No, I generally do like it. And on the economy, social justice, public services etc. he's on strong ground.

    On Brexit though he's walking on quicksand; I don't think he has a scooby-doo.
    Oops. Mistook you for another poster. My point is, though, that May thinking she can go on TV and duff Corbyn up is yet another example of no 10's magical thinking.
    He will do far, far better than the Tories expect. Tories will think May won. Labour will think Corbyn won.
    May will know all the details, sending everyone to sleep.
    Corbyn will enrage half and enthuse the other half by raising every other issue under the Sun.
    As before.
    +1
  • Scott_P said:
    Good. I don't want a trade deal with Trump's paradise.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 8,236

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big problem with deposing May is that it means that the government can't do anything for about two months while the Tories sort themselves out - and very probably not afterwards either as a Con leadership election could only be won on a Hard Brexit mandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.

    I believe that the LibDem Stephen Lloyd has come out in support of May's deal. Also some speculation re- Norman Lamb's intentions.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 12,982

    Apparently Hunt suggested May should debate with Blair and frame it as her deal versus Remain.

    Mmmm... Blair might win that one. (But maybe that's what Hunt intended?)

    Better by far, from her perspective, to debate with Corbyn - she'll run rings round him on the detail.
    He's up for it, she has apparently backed off.
    Not according to The Sun.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/7834426/theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-live-tv-debate-same-night-im-a-celebrity/
    Oh, good. The Times reported No 10 saying it was "unlikely".
  • The last 20 minutes of Newsnight are probably the most persuasive argument I've ever seen for the abolition of the licence fee.

    Who the f%*k thought it was a good idea to turn the most complicated political decision in half a century, into a 60 second elevator pitch by multiple MPs?!

    Can't really believe this is the same show that Peter Snow used to present.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 2,120

    Scott_P said:
    Most of them English who suddenly found that an Irish grandparent was mighty handy in the brave new world... :lol:
    No, they don’t need to naturalize or take an oath, if their parent is an Irish citizen, which would be automatic from birth for anyone with a parent born in Ireland before 2005, then they simply take up their Irish citizenship by registering with their nearest consulate.
  • The last 20 minutes of Newsnight are probably the most persuasive argument I've ever seen for the abolition of the licence fee.

    Who the f%*k thought it was a good idea to turn the most complicated political decision in half a century, into a 60 second elevator pitch by multiple MPs?!

    Can't really believe this is the same show that Peter Snow used to present.

    Newsnight and QT need taking out back and shot.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 12,982

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big problem with deposing May is that it means that the government can't do anything for about two months while the Tories sort themselves out - and very probably not afterwards either as a Con leadership election could only be won on a Hard Brexit mandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.

    I think it'll be a bit less solid than that, but should be three figures. What she needs is a plan B that is similar enough to the Deal to get weary acquiescence from Brussels yet different enough for dissident Tories and some Labour to declare victory and accept it. A permanent customs union plus regulatory alignment looks a candidate - it's hard for Labour to oppose since it's the main substantive point of difference, and voters will accept it as sounding reasonable. It's compatible with the deal. It will annoy the ERG (shrug) but not the DUP. It is open to the "I can't believe it's not membership" jibe, but by that time everyone will be past caring. It means no new trade deals with Trump, but that's probably a headache best avoided anyway.
  • The last 20 minutes of Newsnight are probably the most persuasive argument I've ever seen for the abolition of the licence fee.

    Who the f%*k thought it was a good idea to turn the most complicated political decision in half a century, into a 60 second elevator pitch by multiple MPs?!

    Can't really believe this is the same show that Peter Snow used to present.

    Newsnight and QT need taking out back and shot.
    Do we have 1 decent analytical news show on British television? I know she's a liberal but the detail and work that goes into Rachel Maddow's show on MSNBC really puts our news coverage to shame.

    On the subject of QT, I have to avoid it now for fear it'll bring me out in hives. Any Questions on R4 is still relatively listenable though.
  • The last 20 minutes of Newsnight are probably the most persuasive argument I've ever seen for the abolition of the licence fee.

    Who the f%*k thought it was a good idea to turn the most complicated political decision in half a century, into a 60 second elevator pitch by multiple MPs?!

    Can't really believe this is the same show that Peter Snow used to present.

    Newsnight and QT need taking out back and shot.
    I stopped watching them years ago
  • Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big problem with deposing May is that it means that the government can't do anything for about two months while the Tories sort themselves out - and very probably not afterwards either as a Con leadership election could only be won on a Hard Brexit mandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.

    I think it'll be a bit less solid than that, but should be three figures. What she needs is a plan B that is similar enough to the Deal to get weary acquiescence from Brussels yet different enough for dissident Tories and some Labour to declare victory and accept it. A permanent customs union plus regulatory alignment looks a candidate - it's hard for Labour to oppose since it's the main substantive point of difference, and voters will accept it as sounding reasonable. It's compatible with the deal. It will annoy the ERG (shrug) but not the DUP. It is open to the "I can't believe it's not membership" jibe, but by that time everyone will be past caring. It means no new trade deals with Trump, but that's probably a headache best avoided anyway.
    If it means the last point on US, then I'm all for it. Who on earth, other than Atlantic seafaring unicorn dreamers like Fox, would think that was a good idea at this time given who is POTUS?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 46,917
    edited November 2018

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?
    .

    1 of 2

    I think your estimate is broadly correct. If it is not quite that large it will be in that kind of range.

    If it goes down by much I think May goes immediately. As sad as it would be to try to sell losing by less than a hundred as some kind of victory there is at least a potential path for her to press on, shoot down other ideas, then see if she can get them to switch on a second vote. I don't think that has any hope of success whatsoever and would be a massive waste of time - the reasons Lab and Tory rebels are giving for voting against apply just as much on a second vote, and their rejection is too strong to be spooked by some market trouble, particularly when the markets must know the deal is dead on the first vote at the least - but I could see her trying it if she is not removed, which is of course still possible.

    If May stands down (or announces her intention to do so or something) then I would think the government could survive a VONC in the House. The DUP and the Tories would hold together long enough, as it would be unclear who the successor would be and it might be acceptable to the former and enough of the latter.

    However I think you do raise one of the fundamental problems with the Tory rebel narrative of sorting things out, in that clearly the party is not united on this issue and they will not unify behind a successor, so it would lead to a long delay. Maybe there are ways to expedite that process as I believe you have raised but on top of everything else it seems unlikely. So it is just more wasting time in which an extension is needed, but seriously why would the EU agree to that when they don't know who the leader will be and therefore what they might be asking for instead? Given the delays it would cause it also undermines criticism of Labour's proposal of a GE, since if you're going to be delayed two months might as well make it four, or five, and get a new Tory leader and then a GE with both sides duking it out.

    All of which is a convoluted way of saying that while May is a problem for the Tories, she is not the only problem and a lot of people are pretending she is. The pressures and timescales remain.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 46,917

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?
    .

    2 of 2

    I find it hard to see how May gets past the first deal vote loss, because if she pushes on I could see the DUP voting with Labour on a vote of no confidence or abstaining. But equally I don't see how a Tory leadership contest helps give the inevitable delays on an uncertain prospect of renegotiation. Corbyn may be being irresponsibly blase about the risks of promising milk and honey through expecting the EU to give Labour whatever they want, but at least if he took over now he could begin that process immediately.

    May proposing a referendum to break the deadlock seems the least worst way to try to move forward, but even achieving that just looks difficult. Frankly at this point the Tories probably should let Labour take over - the Tories may have more MPs, but Labour can actually get most of theirs to vote the same way on Brexit, for now at least.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 35,311
    edited November 2018

    The last 20 minutes of Newsnight are probably the most persuasive argument I've ever seen for the abolition of the licence fee.

    Who the f%*k thought it was a good idea to turn the most complicated political decision in half a century, into a 60 second elevator pitch by multiple MPs?!

    Can't really believe this is the same show that Peter Snow used to present.

    Newsnight and QT need taking out back and shot.
    Do we have 1 decent analytical news show on British television? I know she's a liberal but the detail and work that goes into Rachel Maddow's show on MSNBC really puts our news coverage to shame.

    On the subject of QT, I have to avoid it now for fear it'll bring me out in hives. Any Questions on R4 is still relatively listenable though.
    Panorama is also a shadow of its former self every since it went to 30mins. And we never have long form interviews anymore.

    Where as on the internet, long form interviews are really popular with the likes of Sam Harris, Joe Rogan and Dave Rubin having very large audiences.

    Does BBC News still do Hard Talk?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 8,087

    Scott_P said:
    I'm PM get me out of here etc etc etc...
    Not long now Tezza.....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 46,917



    Which makes me wonder, as I asked a few days ago, why Labour just doesn't back May on the Deal, then call a VoNC which the DUP would back if the "Backstop Deal' has gone through?

    They don't want to vote for any Tory Brexit. Tactically I think your suggestion is sound, since the government would be destroyed, and riven with splits, and in those circumstances if a GE happens Labour would likely win it, but no matter how far Labour bend they are not going to lend votes to the Tories. Precisely because too many appear to be thinking of it in those terms, not an issue that is more important than partisan politics (they certainly are not the only ones). Having said this deal is crap they are now committed to oppose it even if it passing destroys the government.

    Besides, this government is on its dying breath regardless. Some new leader coming in to renegotiate a deal when the EU says they are unwilling will make it all ok? At best it limps on until Brexit day.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 1,981
    justin124 said:

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big problem with deposing May is that it means that the government can't do anything for about two months while the Tories sort themselves out - and very probably not afterwards either as a Con leadership election could only be won on a Hard Brexit mandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.

    I believe that the LibDem Stephen Lloyd has come out in support of May's deal. Also some speculation re- Norman Lamb's intentions.
    Lamb's come out against the deal tonight.

  • If as seems likely the vote is lost by 3 figures the mood of the Commons will almost certainly be "you wasted two weeks we didn't have". May won't be given another two days never mind another two votes.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 9,883

    On topic - but just barely: that graph looks like a fish.

    Incisive analysis from solarflare

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisson_distribution

    I made a funny (though inaccurate!) joke.

    :)
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,132

    HYUFD said:

    I wonder whether the mooted plan to have a second vote after a TARP-style market reaction to the first vote going down might have one fatal flaw. The markets surely expect the vote to fail and thus its failure will already be priced in to market rates thus any reaction would be minimal.

    TARP was expected by the markets to be passed, its failure was unexpected. Just as the markets had expected a remain vote. Its when things go against expectations that we see dramatic changes.

    The market will obviously fall given the economic damage of the threat of No Deal, though the catastrophic fall in the market may have to wait until if a second Deal vote fails, then of course May might still try for a third vote
    She will not be there for a third vote.

    As much as I support TM I would say her chances of surviving a voting massacre must be quite small
    If the deal goes down by a 3 figure majority it's very hard to see how it could be brought back for a second vote. If that happens it will be the people who end up with a second vote I think.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 61,221
    edited November 2018

    HYUFD said:

    I wonder whether the mooted plan to have a second vote after a TARP-style market reaction to the first vote going down might have one fatal flaw. The markets surely expect the vote to fail and thus its failure will already be priced in to market rates thus any reaction would be minimal.

    TARP was expected by the markets to be passed, its failure was unexpected. Just as the markets had expected a remain vote. Its when things go against expectations that we see dramatic changes.

    The market will obviously fall given the economic damage of the threat of No Deal, though the catastrophic fall in the market may have to wait until if a second Deal vote fails, then of course May might still try for a third vote
    She will not be there for a third vote.

    As much as I support TM I would say her chances of surviving a voting massacre must be quite small
    I think she will survive, do not forget over 200 Tory MPs out of 318 MPs back her Deal and as Juncker has made clear there is no alternative from the EU side and no other PM will be able to negotiate a better Deal.

    If we do not get May's Brexit Deal the ERG will likely end up with Corbyn's Brexit Deal ie permanent customs union and even less Brexit than May is offering them
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 26,591

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big problem with deposing May is that it means that the government can't do anything for about two months while the Tories sort themselves out - and very probably not afterwards either as a Con leadership election could only be won on a Hard Brexit mandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.

    I think your Labour abstain number is probably light by 40-50 votes. And I also suspect that of the 100 Conservatives opposed to the deal, it'll be more like 60 voting against, 40 abstaining. I also think you've likely got 2 LibDems in favour.
  • trawltrawl Posts: 137
    Scott_P said:
    120,000 since 2011?
    No then, I can’t imagine May tweeting something like that. Nor Cameron for that matter.

  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 9,883

    I wonder whether the mooted plan to have a second vote after a TARP-style market reaction to the first vote going down might have one fatal flaw. The markets surely expect the vote to fail and thus its failure will already be priced in to market rates thus any reaction would be minimal.

    TARP was expected by the markets to be passed, its failure was unexpected. Just as the markets had expected a remain vote. Its when things go against expectations that we see dramatic changes.

    It would be even funnier if the house voted down the WDA and the pound rose because the markets thought that some sensible people do actually inhabit the place.
    I am horribly aware of this possibility on the "buy on the rumour sell on the fact" basis.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 46,917
    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    May could end up setting a record - biggest ever defeat for a government?

    This is why I continue to believe that she is badly advised, any sensible person in her team would advise not to put this to a vote. It is very bad party management to alienate the two opposing sides leaving just the payroll vote in support.
    She has to put it to a vote.

    Everyone must make their position publicly known.
    Absolutely. I'll grant I can get as entrenched in a view as anyone, but I have seen no compelling argument as to why that is not a good idea, other than potential impacts for the Tory party. Which doesn't make sense anyway because the splits in the party exist already, and trying to avoid upsetting the various sides too much was one reason it took far too long for the government to come to a position in the first place. The vote won't create the splits, it will reveal the size of them. The party needs to know that, and so do the public.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 46,917

    HYUFD said:

    I wonder whether the mooted plan to have a second vote after a TARP-style market reaction to the first vote going down might have one fatal flaw. The markets surely expect the vote to fail and thus its failure will already be priced in to market rates thus any reaction would be minimal.

    TARP was expected by the markets to be passed, its failure was unexpected. Just as the markets had expected a remain vote. Its when things go against expectations that we see dramatic changes.

    The market will obviously fall given the economic damage of the threat of No Deal, though the catastrophic fall in the market may have to wait until if a second Deal vote fails, then of course May might still try for a third vote
    She will not be there for a third vote.

    As much as I support TM I would say her chances of surviving a voting massacre must be quite small
    If the deal goes down by a 3 figure majority it's very hard to see how it could be brought back for a second vote. If that happens it will be the people who end up with a second vote I think.
    I think the biggest consequence of a 3 figure majority against, other than the immediate one that I think it forces May to go at last, is on a theoretical second referendum. If the deal is so thoroughly trashed in the Commons there seems absolutely no point in including it in a public referendum - even some who voted for it (Cabinet Members for instance) would be disavowing it, so virtually no one would speak for it and both left and right would be saying it was far worse than any other option.

    Less than 100 and maybe it is close enough that, while the same problem in finding someone to defend it exists, it is not so amazingly defeated that including it on the ballot does not look like a joke.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 1,981

    GIN1138 said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    It's the main reason and always has been.
    I wonder if the voters will start to murmur murderously though, I think a lot of them are just assuming that somebody will work something out.
    I thought for a second it was SeanT rather than SeanJones!
    I think Sean T has other things on his mind on Twitter today... ;)
    “Theresa May is like some pathetic new liberal vicar in a rural village, accidentally summoning ancient demons by having a Be Nice To Rats car boot sale on top of a plague pit.”

    You can see how he does this writing gig for a living!
    I live three miles from the church where Theresa May grew up as the vicar's daughter.

    The church is now proudly signed up to the Inclusive Church movement. I guess that counts as "liberal". The parishioners that I know are fully behind it. That's how the Cotswolds roll these days, Sean old chap.

    Three of the neighbouring division have flipped Con->LibDem in the last couple of years and I fully expect Theresa's old division to be the next. Much though I love PB's favourite degenerate, his prejudices are about 50 years behind the times.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 7,863
    Catching up on Newsnight now.. Christ, that Marcus Fysh is a terrible speaker.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,132
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    I wonder whether the mooted plan to have a second vote after a TARP-style market reaction to the first vote going down might have one fatal flaw. The markets surely expect the vote to fail and thus its failure will already be priced in to market rates thus any reaction would be minimal.

    TARP was expected by the markets to be passed, its failure was unexpected. Just as the markets had expected a remain vote. Its when things go against expectations that we see dramatic changes.

    The market will obviously fall given the economic damage of the threat of No Deal, though the catastrophic fall in the market may have to wait until if a second Deal vote fails, then of course May might still try for a third vote
    She will not be there for a third vote.

    As much as I support TM I would say her chances of surviving a voting massacre must be quite small
    If the deal goes down by a 3 figure majority it's very hard to see how it could be brought back for a second vote. If that happens it will be the people who end up with a second vote I think.
    I think the biggest consequence of a 3 figure majority against, other than the immediate one that I think it forces May to go at last, is on a theoretical second referendum. If the deal is so thoroughly trashed in the Commons there seems absolutely no point in including it in a public referendum - even some who voted for it (Cabinet Members for instance) would be disavowing it, so virtually no one would speak for it and both left and right would be saying it was far worse than any other option.

    Less than 100 and maybe it is close enough that, while the same problem in finding someone to defend it exists, it is not so amazingly defeated that including it on the ballot does not look like a joke.
    I think it likely that the second referendum will be a carbon copy of the first, leave/remain with Leave meaning no deal. And I expect remain to win comfortably.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 61,221
    Danny565 said:

    Catching up on Newsnight now.. Christ, that Marcus Fysh is a terrible speaker.

    That is the quality of May's opponents and they think they can get a better Deal with the EU than she did
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,547

    If as seems likely the vote is lost by 3 figures the mood of the Commons will almost certainly be "you wasted two weeks we didn't have". May won't be given another two days never mind another two votes.

    It's the wasted two years that will do for her.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 46,917
    edited November 2018
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I wonder whether the mooted plan to have a second vote after a TARP-style market reaction to the first vote going down might have one fatal flaw. The markets surely expect the vote to fail and thus its failure will already be priced in to market rates thus any reaction would be minimal.

    TARP was expected by the markets to be passed, its failure was unexpected. Just as the markets had expected a remain vote. Its when things go against expectations that we see dramatic changes.

    The market will obviously fall given the economic damage of the threat of No Deal, though the catastrophic fall in the market may have to wait until if a second Deal vote fails, then of course May might still try for a third vote
    She will not be there for a third vote.

    As much as I support TM I would say her chances of surviving a voting massacre must be quite small
    I think she will survive, do not forget over 200 Tory MPs out of 318 MPs back her Deal and as Juncker has made clear there is no alternative from the EU side and no other PM will be able to negotiate a better Deal.

    If we do not get May's Brexit Deal the ERG will likely end up with Corbyn's Brexit Deal ie permanent customs union and even less Brexit than May is offering them
    On the basis that many Brexiteers now believe remaining is better than this brexit, presumably they may also think Corbyn Brexit is better than this brexit. They're probably not wrong - Corbyn would have a better chance of getting things through the House than the government now.

    On the first point, I don't think you can assume someone voting for the deal would back her in a vote. Half the Cabinet do not really back her plan, as public and leaked comments have revealed, I doubt they would vote for her once her deal has been comprehensively, humiliatingly, defeated. They'd say they gave her a chance and gave it a go but a new leader and approach is needed. Many others would I think do the same.

    It doesn't matter whether the EU won't give us a better deal. Labour don't believe it, most of the Tory party don't believe it (those voting against, plus people like Gove et al and presumably therefore some number of loyalists planning to vote for the present deal), so we will now attempt it or else put it to the people somehow.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 1,981
    HYUFD said:

    I think she will survive, do not forget over 200 Tory MPs out of 318 MPs back her Deal

    Dude, that's a terrible statistic. There are 650 MPs in the HoC. Not 318.
    and as Juncker has made clear there is no alternative from the EU side and no other PM will be able to negotiate a better Deal.
    Oh yeah. So if the UK comes back abashed asking for Norway, Juncker is going to say "sorry, no, you can only have the deal chosen by your red line-drawing, FoM-hating, single market-rejecting Theresa May"? Come off it.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 61,221

    justin124 said:

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big problem with deposing May is that it means that the government can't do anything for about two months while the Tories sort themselves out - and very probably not afterwards either as a Con leadership election could only be won on a Hard Brexit mandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.

    I believe that the LibDem Stephen Lloyd has come out in support of May's deal. Also some speculation re- Norman Lamb's intentions.
    Lamb's come out against the deal tonight.

    'This Deal will not heal the nation' - Well it will do a damn sight better than a No Deal v Remain civil war!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 46,917

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    I wonder whether the mooted plan to have a second vote after a TARP-style market reaction to the first vote going down might have one fatal flaw. The markets surely expect the vote to fail and thus its failure will already be priced in to market rates thus any reaction would be minimal.

    TARP was expected by the markets to be passed, its failure was unexpected. Just as the markets had expected a remain vote. Its when things go against expectations that we see dramatic changes.

    The market will obviously fall given the economic damage of the threat of No Deal, though the catastrophic fall in the market may have to wait until if a second Deal vote fails, then of course May might still try for a third vote
    She will not be there for a third vote.

    As much as I support TM I would say her chances of surviving a voting massacre must be quite small
    If the deal goes down by a 3 figure majority it's very hard to see how it could be brought back for a second vote. If that happens it will be the people who end up with a second vote I think.
    I think the biggest consequence of a 3 figure majority against, other than the immediate one that I think it forces May to go at last, is on a theoretical second referendum. If the deal is so thoroughly trashed in the Commons there seems absolutely no point in including it in a public referendum - even some who voted for it (Cabinet Members for instance) would be disavowing it, so virtually no one would speak for it and both left and right would be saying it was far worse than any other option.

    Less than 100 and maybe it is close enough that, while the same problem in finding someone to defend it exists, it is not so amazingly defeated that including it on the ballot does not look like a joke.
    I think it likely that the second referendum will be a carbon copy of the first, leave/remain with Leave meaning no deal. And I expect remain to win comfortably.
    I expect Remain to win no matter what the question is (assuming remain was one of the options, obviously, and I don't see parliament approving one which does not). The killer blow was Brexiteers saying remaining was better than this deal. If even they think that, why the heck should people not also get that chance to agree goes the cry. It means even if you have deal vs no deal vs remain, leave would be too split, too many no dealers would transfer to remain rather than the deal etc.
  • HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big problem with deposing May is that it means that the government can't do anything for about two months while the Tories sort themselves out - and very probably not afterwards either as a Con leadership election could only be won on a Hard Brexit mandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.

    I believe that the LibDem Stephen Lloyd has come out in support of May's deal. Also some speculation re- Norman Lamb's intentions.
    Lamb's come out against the deal tonight.

    'This Deal will not heal the nation' - Well it will do a damn sight better than a No Deal v Remain civil war!
    I think this is where momentum on the deal being defeated is becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. If this looked close, circa 300+ each way, then I think Lamb would be more tempted to back the deal to put this to bed. But there's no incentive on him to back a doomed deal in a failed vote.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 14,484
    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big problem with deposing May is that it means that the government can't do anything for about two months while the Tories sort themselves out - and very probably not afterwards either as a Con leadership election could only be won on a Hard Brexit mandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.

    I believe that the LibDem Stephen Lloyd has come out in support of May's deal. Also some speculation re- Norman Lamb's intentions.
    Lamb's come out against the deal tonight.

    'This Deal will not heal the nation' - Well it will do a damn sight better than a No Deal v Remain civil war!
    For once, I agree with you.
    There isn’t a deal which will ‘heal the nation’, in any event.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 46,917
    edited November 2018
    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big pable.

    I believe that the LibDem Stephen Lloyd has come out in support of May's deal. Also some speculation re- Norman Lamb's intentions.
    Lamb's come out against the deal tonight.

    'This Deal will not heal the nation' - Well it will do a damn sight better than a No Deal v Remain civil war!
    I fully respect that people could see it not being in the national interest to vote for this deal, but the idea the key point is it will not heal the nation is perhaps the most absurd reason I have yet heard. I very much hope no civil war or even a level of anger one could metaphorically relate to one, but as you point out a bitter argument between no deal and remain is not healing anything, nor is extending the debate still further in circular arguments with the EU about what is or is not acceptable.

    That is an incredibly lame reason, I thought Lamb was better than that (not 'better' as in 'would vote for the deal', just in the reasoning), so as I read it now I hope the rest of his article makes more sense.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 61,221
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I wonder whether the mooted plan to have a second vote after a TARP-style market reaction to the first vote going down might have one fatal flaw. The markets surely expect the vote to fail and thus its failure will already be priced in to market rates thus any reaction would be minimal.

    TARP was expected by the markets to be passed, its failure was unexpected. Just as the markets had expected a remain vote. Its when things go against expectations that we see dramatic changes.

    The market will obviously fall given the economic damage of the threat of No Deal, though the catastrophic fall in the market may have to wait until if a second Deal vote fails, then of course May might still try for a third vote
    She will not be there for a third vote.

    As much as I support TM I would say her chances of surviving a voting massacre must be quite small
    I think she will survive, do not forgess Brexit than May is offering them
    On the basis that many Brexiteers now believe remaining is better than this brexit, presumably they may also think Corbyn Brexit is better than this brexit. They're probably not wrong - Corbyn would have a better chance of getting things through the House than the government now.

    On the first point, I don't think you can assume someone voting for the deal would back her in a vote. Half the Cabinet do not really back her plan, as public and leaked comments have revealed, I doubt they would vote for her once her deal has been comprehensively, humiliatingly, defeated. They'd say they gave her a chance and gave it a go but a new leader and approach is needed. Many others would I think do the same.

    It doesn't matter whether the EU won't give us a better deal. Labour don't believe it, most of the Tory party don't believe it (those voting against, plus people like Gove et al and presumably therefore some number of loyalists planning to vote for the present deal), so we will now attempt it or else put it to the people somehow.
    Nope, a new leader achieves nothing else, zilch, nada, nothing, the EU have been abundantly clear it is this Deal or No Deal hence most Tory MPs still back her.

    If idiots in the Tory Party and Labour Party are really going to vote down the only Deal on the table they deserve nothing but contempt. The only people who will suffer are the workers who will lose their jobs and wages with No Deal. Either that or further caving through permanent Customs Union or EUref2 and Remain and the clueless ERG get even less Brexit than under May's Deal
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 61,221
    edited November 2018

    HYUFD said:

    I think she will survive, do not forget over 200 Tory MPs out of 318 MPs back her Deal

    Dude, that's a terrible statistic. There are 650 MPs in the HoC. Not 318.
    and as Juncker has made clear there is no alternative from the EU side and no other PM will be able to negotiate a better Deal.
    'Oh yeah. So if the UK comes back abashed asking for Norway, Juncker is going to say "sorry, no, you can only have the deal chosen by your red line-drawing, FoM-hating, single market-rejecting Theresa May"? Come off it.'

    We cannot get Norway alone as we need EFTA approval for it which will take time, as we need the Customs Union too for the backstop and Labour oppose it anyway, so wrong
  • rcs1000 said:

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big problem with deposing May is that it means that the government can't do anything for about two months while the Tories sort themselves out - and very probably not afterwards either as a Con leadership election could only be won on a Hard Brexit mandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.

    I think your Labour abstain number is probably light by 40-50 votes. And I also suspect that of the 100 Conservatives opposed to the deal, it'll be more like 60 voting against, 40 abstaining. I also think you've likely got 2 LibDems in favour.
    The interesting constitutional position is what happens if she loses? If she chooses not to call a second referendum (knowing it would destroy her party) and chooses not to resign she can effectively sit there and watch the clock count down. Can Parliament actually do anything to stop her if her own party will not get rid of her?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 61,221

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big problem with deposing May is that it means that the government can't do anything for about two months while the Tories sort themselves out - and very probably not afterwards either as a Con leadership election could only be won on a Hard Brexit mandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.

    I believe that the LibDem Stephen Lloyd has come out in support of May's deal. Also some speculation re- Norman Lamb's intentions.
    Lamb's come out against the deal tonight.

    'This Deal will not heal the nation' - Well it will do a damn sight better than a No Deal v Remain civil war!
    I think this is where momentum on the deal being defeated is becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. If this looked close, circa 300+ each way, then I think Lamb would be more tempted to back the deal to put this to bed. But there's no incentive on him to back a doomed deal in a failed vote.
    Lamb is just another party hack, the only LD I have any respect for on this is Stephen Lloyd who is willing to put country before party
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 12,982
    edited November 2018
    rcs1000 said:



    I think your Labour abstain number is probably light by 40-50 votes. And I also suspect that of the 100 Conservatives opposed to the deal, it'll be more like 60 voting against, 40 abstaining. I also think you've likely got 2 LibDems in favour.

    I can't see much sense in a Labour MP abstaining - they will piss off both Corbynites and Europhiles (and when you've said that you've covered 90% of members) without even supporting the thing.

    More generally, unless the current mood changes, I think there will be a general feeling that voting this down is a free pass - it establishes you as an independent-minded person of principle, and it's obviously going to crash and burn anyway, so why stick your neck out for it?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 46,917

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The able.

    I believe that the LibDem Stephen Lloyd has come out in support of May's deal. Also some speculation re- Norman Lamb's intentions.
    Lamb's come out against the deal tonight.

    'This Deal will not heal the nation' - Well it will do a damn sight better than a No Deal v Remain civil war!
    I think this is where momentum on the deal being defeated is becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. If this looked close, circa 300+ each way, then I think Lamb would be more tempted to back the deal to put this to bed. But there's no incentive on him to back a doomed deal in a failed vote.
    That was the dagger blow right from the start. Too much Tory opposition right away meant it looked very improbable, which meant wavering remainers and labour figures had little incentive to do so and every reason to back a hail mary attempt to remain after all/not defy the labour whip on a doomed vote.

    If May could have carried more of her own MPs then it might still have fallen in the first vote as many expected, but it was potentially salvageable. But they didn't and she couldn't, and it's as dead as a very depressed dodo.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 61,221
    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big problem with deposing May is that it means that the government can't do anything for about two months while the Tories sort themselves out - and very probably not afterwards either as a Con leadership election could only be won on a Hard Brexit mandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.

    I believe that the LibDem Stephen Lloyd has come out in support of May's deal. Also some speculation re- Norman Lamb's intentions.
    Lamb's come out against the deal tonight.

    'This Deal will not heal the nation' - Well it will do a damn sight better than a No Deal v Remain civil war!
    For once, I agree with you.
    There isn’t a deal which will ‘heal the nation’, in any event.

    No but this is the best there is. The alternative is the country rips itself to shreds in either EUref2 and a narrow Remain win or a No Deal economic disaster and possible break up of the Union
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 61,221
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big pable.

    I believe that the LibDem Stephen Lloyd has come out in support of May's deal. Also some speculation re- Norman Lamb's intentions.
    Lamb's come out against the deal tonight.

    'This Deal will not heal the nation' - Well it will do a damn sight better than a No Deal v Remain civil war!
    I fully respect that people could see it not being in the national interest to vote for this deal, but the idea the key point is it will not heal the nation is perhaps the most absurd reason I have yet heard. I very much hope no civil war or even a level of anger one could metaphorically relate to one, but as you point out a bitter argument between no deal and remain is not healing anything, nor is extending the debate still further in circular arguments with the EU about what is or is not acceptable.

    That is an incredibly lame reason, I thought Lamb was better than that (not 'better' as in 'would vote for the deal', just in the reasoning), so as I read it now I hope the rest of his article makes more sense.
    I am afraid I have zero respect for Lamb after this, just pathetic reasoning for a partisan vote
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,455
    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence votemandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.

    I believe that the LibDem Stephen Lloyd has come out in support of May's deal. Also some speculation re- Norman Lamb's intentions.
    Lamb's come out against the deal tonight.

    'This Deal will not heal the nation' - Well it will do a damn sight better than a No Deal v Remain civil war!
    For once, I agree with you.
    There isn’t a deal which will ‘heal the nation’, in any event.

    No but this is the best there is. The alternative is the country rips itself to shreds in either EUref2 and a narrow Remain win or a No Deal economic disaster and possible break up of the Union
    Remain could win in a landslide. The tabloids will be behind it and the Brexiteers are throwing in the towel.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,191

    rcs1000 said:

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence vote but after the government sees it off (as it should) - then what?

    The big problem with deposing May is that it means that the government can't do anything for about two months while the Tories sort themselves out - and very probably not afterwards either as a Con leadership election could only be won on a Hard Brexit mandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.

    I think your Labour abstain number is probably light by 40-50 votes. And I also suspect that of the 100 Conservatives opposed to the deal, it'll be more like 60 voting against, 40 abstaining. I also think you've likely got 2 LibDems in favour.
    The interesting constitutional position is what happens if she loses? If she chooses not to call a second referendum (knowing it would destroy her party) and chooses not to resign she can effectively sit there and watch the clock count down. Can Parliament actually do anything to stop her if her own party will not get rid of her?
    She'd doubtless claim (and honestly believe) to be the best person to handle the "no deal" situation and carry on.

    Short of the party rolling her or the DUP abandoning her in a VONC she'd just truck along
  • HYUFD said:

    No but this is the best there is. The alternative is the country rips itself to shreds in either EUref2 and a narrow Remain win or a No Deal economic disaster and possible break up of the Union

    No the better alternative is that the UK shows some backbone and we get a better deal.

    HYUFD: "Ah but the EU have said this is as good as it gets"
    Philip_Thompson: "Well they would, wouldn't they?"
    HYUFD: "Ah but the EU have said this is as good as it gets"

    Fade to black.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 46,917
    HYUFD said:



    Nope, a new leader achieves nothing else, zilch, nada, nothing, the EU have been abundantly clear it is this Deal or No Deal hence most Tory MPs still back her.

    If idiots in the Tory Party and Labour Party are really going to vote down the only Deal on the table they deserve nothing but contempt. The only people who will suffer are the workers who will lose their jobs and wages with No Deal. Either that or further caving through permanent Customs Union or EUref2 and Remain and the clueless ERG get even less Brexit than under May's Deal

    I don't think it is a risk that should be taken either, and agree that the options are an even less brexity brexit, remain or, in my opinion, unacceptable levels of chaos.

    But that's irrelevant if MPs do not believe it. Cabinet members publicly do not believe it, so of course no one else does. Labour are going to at least try to attempt it if they get into power somehow. 200 loyalists at least some of whom are lukewarm on the deal at best (Gove and co again) does not mean they all actually accept it is indeed this deal or no deal, and even if most of them do believe that, May cannot get the deal through and there are paths she would not be able to take us down as leader, so Tory Mps will have to pick someone else - and no matter what the majority think, if her deal has been rejected by 150 votes in the Commons, there's no point picking someone who says 'I'm going to try May's deal again', so the only options will be no dealers or renegotiaters.

    I don't think changing leader actually alters the facts or numbers in play here. But if the Commons won't back May's plan it and the Tory party will have to decide how to react. Attempting an unreaslistic option appears to be what they will choose.
  • HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Am I missing something or is it really likely that the government could lose by 150-170 votes?

    I'm thinking of something like :

    Aye - 217

    Con 214
    Lab 2
    Ind 1

    No - 378

    Con 75
    Lab 238
    SNP 35
    LD 12
    DUP 10
    Plaid 4
    Green 1
    Ind 3

    Abstain - 42

    Con 25
    Lab 15
    Ind 2

    (Don't ask who the Lab rebels are. They could be Eurosceptics; they could be 'mandate' voters believing they had to back such Brexit as is on offer; they could be so worried that they see what's on the table as the best - indeed, only - way of avoiding No Deal. It doesn't really matter - I doubt there'll be many at all but there is a fair possibility of a handful).

    I can't really see why any SNP or LDs would break ranks and I can't see pairing operating on such a critical vote (not that that should make any difference anyway).

    If the deal does go down by 161 or so, what does that mean for May? There will of course be calls for her to resign and I'd expect Lab to table an immediate VoNC. How she handles the 24 hours after the Brexit vote (and in particular, the 3 hours after it, to set the narrative), will be critical. Labour's VoNC should be enough to prevent an immediate Tory Confidence votemandate. That might be fine if you're after a No Deal Brexit but few of the Con MPs are - and those that aren't should be able to do the numbers sufficiently to realise that there's a good chance that they couldn't carry a confidence vote for that very reason. Besides, as long as there's no Plan B, they might end up with a No Deal outcome anyway, except that they would appear a lot less culpable.

    I believe that the LibDem Stephen Lloyd has come out in support of May's deal. Also some speculation re- Norman Lamb's intentions.
    Lamb's come out against the deal tonight.

    'This Deal will not heal the nation' - Well it will do a damn sight better than a No Deal v Remain civil war!
    For once, I agree with you.
    There isn’t a deal which will ‘heal the nation’, in any event.

    No but this is the best there is. The alternative is the country rips itself to shreds in either EUref2 and a narrow Remain win or a No Deal economic disaster and possible break up of the Union
    Remain could win in a landslide. The tabloids will be behind it and the Brexiteers are throwing in the towel.
    Ah the delusions of Mr Glenn. Always good for a laugh.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 12,982



    The interesting constitutional position is what happens if she loses? If she chooses not to call a second referendum (knowing it would destroy her party) and chooses not to resign she can effectively sit there and watch the clock count down. Can Parliament actually do anything to stop her if her own party will not get rid of her?

    If she really pushed it to that point, I think a VONC against her in the Commons would actually succeed. Virtually nobody wants the total bloodbath of No Deal At All.

  • She'd doubtless claim (and honestly believe) to be the best person to handle the "no deal" situation and carry on.

    Short of the party rolling her or the DUP abandoning her in a VONC she'd just truck along

    That is my impression as well. It is a strange quirk of Parliamentary arithmetic at the moment.


  • The interesting constitutional position is what happens if she loses? If she chooses not to call a second referendum (knowing it would destroy her party) and chooses not to resign she can effectively sit there and watch the clock count down. Can Parliament actually do anything to stop her if her own party will not get rid of her?

    If she really pushed it to that point, I think a VONC against her in the Commons would actually succeed. Virtually nobody wants the total bloodbath of No Deal At All.
    I am not so sure. The total bloodbath (to use your terminology) of reversing the referendum would be equally disastrous for both Parliament and the country.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,455



    The interesting constitutional position is what happens if she loses? If she chooses not to call a second referendum (knowing it would destroy her party) and chooses not to resign she can effectively sit there and watch the clock count down. Can Parliament actually do anything to stop her if her own party will not get rid of her?

    If she really pushed it to that point, I think a VONC against her in the Commons would actually succeed. Virtually nobody wants the total bloodbath of No Deal At All.
    I am not so sure. The total bloodbath (to use your terminology) of reversing the referendum would be equally disastrous for both Parliament and the country.
    The will of the people at the time it’s happening overrides the will of the people in 2016.
  • kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:



    Nope, a new leader achieves nothing else, zilch, nada, nothing, the EU have been abundantly clear it is this Deal or No Deal hence most Tory MPs still back her.

    If idiots in the Tory Party and Labour Party are really going to vote down the only Deal on the table they deserve nothing but contempt. The only people who will suffer are the workers who will lose their jobs and wages with No Deal. Either that or further caving through permanent Customs Union or EUref2 and Remain and the clueless ERG get even less Brexit than under May's Deal

    I don't think it is a risk that should be taken either, and agree that the options are an even less brexity brexit, remain or, in my opinion, unacceptable levels of chaos.

    But that's irrelevant if MPs do not believe it. Cabinet members publicly do not believe it, so of course no one else does. Labour are going to at least try to attempt it if they get into power somehow. 200 loyalists at least some of whom are lukewarm on the deal at best (Gove and co again) does not mean they all actually accept it is indeed this deal or no deal, and even if most of them do believe that, May cannot get the deal through and there are paths she would not be able to take us down as leader, so Tory Mps will have to pick someone else - and no matter what the majority think, if her deal has been rejected by 150 votes in the Commons, there's no point picking someone who says 'I'm going to try May's deal again', so the only options will be no dealers or renegotiaters.

    I don't think changing leader actually alters the facts or numbers in play here. But if the Commons won't back May's plan it and the Tory party will have to decide how to react. Attempting an unreaslistic option appears to be what they will choose.
    Of course attempting an unrealistic option may just make it realistic and may just solve this mess!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 46,917

    rcs1000 said:



    I think your Labour abstain number is probably light by 40-50 votes. And I also suspect that of the 100 Conservatives opposed to the deal, it'll be more like 60 voting against, 40 abstaining. I also think you've likely got 2 LibDems in favour.

    I can't see much sense in a Labour MP abstaining - they will piss off both Corbynites and Europhiles (and when you've said that you've covered 90% of members) without even supporting the thing.

    More generally, unless the current mood changes, I think there will be a general feeling that voting this down is a free pass - it establishes you as an independent-minded person of principle, and it's obviously going to crash and burn anyway, so why stick your neck out for it?
    Well quite. There's so much cover for this with oodles of Tories voting against it that there's no need to halfway house it and abstain unless, privately, dozens upon dozens of Labour and Tory MPs are thinking it will come back for a second vote and they might need to change tack. And, to put it lightly, that looks extremely unlikely, since something that loses so much is not coming back, and the reasons people are giving for voting against are too strong to justify voting for it on a second go, so no point to abstaining at all.

    We're all just hoping the next PM discovers the EU really are lying. I hope it's Corbyn who somehow has a go - I think the Tories have had their chance, frankly, and show no possibility of resolving their issues for a second go. A new Tory PM faces the same issues and likely cannot get it through. They'd probably be closer if they can secure some concessions (but at what price) but still fail.

    Corbyn would probably fail too, but might as well try a completely different tack. If only there were time (I don't think the EU will give us enough, which is another reason I think Labour and even Corbyn will pivot to remain, particularly as polls turn more to that option as I expect 'We wanted to Brext, we even wanted to renegotiate brexit to be better for all, but the Tories mucked it up and left it too late, and now the people are clear what they want'.


  • The interesting constitutional position is what happens if she loses? If she chooses not to call a second referendum (knowing it would destroy her party) and chooses not to resign she can effectively sit there and watch the clock count down. Can Parliament actually do anything to stop her if her own party will not get rid of her?

    If she really pushed it to that point, I think a VONC against her in the Commons would actually succeed. Virtually nobody wants the total bloodbath of No Deal At All.
    I am not so sure. The total bloodbath (to use your terminology) of reversing the referendum would be equally disastrous for both Parliament and the country.
    The will of the people at the time it’s happening overrides the will of the people in 2016.
    Which will just bring calls that the will of the people in 2022 trumps 2019. When does it end?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,455



    The interesting constitutional position is what happens if she loses? If she chooses not to call a second referendum (knowing it would destroy her party) and chooses not to resign she can effectively sit there and watch the clock count down. Can Parliament actually do anything to stop her if her own party will not get rid of her?

    If she really pushed it to that point, I think a VONC against her in the Commons would actually succeed. Virtually nobody wants the total bloodbath of No Deal At All.
    I am not so sure. The total bloodbath (to use your terminology) of reversing the referendum would be equally disastrous for both Parliament and the country.
    The will of the people at the time it’s happening overrides the will of the people in 2016.
    Which will just bring calls that the will of the people in 2022 trumps 2019. When does it end?
    That depends what people think in 2022. I think it will be a hard sell to ask people to go through this again.


  • The interesting constitutional position is what happens if she loses? If she chooses not to call a second referendum (knowing it would destroy her party) and chooses not to resign she can effectively sit there and watch the clock count down. Can Parliament actually do anything to stop her if her own party will not get rid of her?

    If she really pushed it to that point, I think a VONC against her in the Commons would actually succeed. Virtually nobody wants the total bloodbath of No Deal At All.
    I am not so sure. The total bloodbath (to use your terminology) of reversing the referendum would be equally disastrous for both Parliament and the country.
    The will of the people at the time it’s happening overrides the will of the people in 2016.
    Not when the will of the people of 2016 has not even been enacted. You really don't understand the shit storm that will be created by this do you?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 46,917

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:



    Nope, a new leader achieves nothing else, zilch, nada, nothing, the EU have been abundantly clear it is this Deal or No Deal hence most Tory MPs still back her.

    If idiots in the Tory Party and Labour Party are really going to vote down the only Deal on the table they deserve nothing but contempt. The only people who will suffer are the workers who will lose their jobs and wages with No Deal. Either that or further caving through permanent Customs Union or EUref2 and Remain and the clueless ERG get even less Brexit than under May's Deal

    I don't think it is a risk that should be taken either, and agree that the options are an even less brexity brexit, remain or, in my opinion, unacceptable levels of chaos.

    But that's irrelevant if MPs do not believe it. Cabinet members publicly do not believe it, so of course no one else does. Labour are going to at least try to attempt it if they get into power somehow. 200 loyalists at least some of whom are lukewarm on the deal at best (Gove and co again) does not mean they all actually accept it is indeed this deal or no deal, and even if most of them do believe that, May cannot get the deal through and there are paths she would not be able to take us down as leader, so Tory Mps will have to pick someone else - and no matter what the majority think, if her deal has been rejected by 150 votes in the Commons, there's no point picking someone who says 'I'm going to try May's deal again', so the only options will be no dealers or renegotiaters.

    I don't think changing leader actually alters the facts or numbers in play here. But if the Commons won't back May's plan it and the Tory party will have to decide how to react. Attempting an unreaslistic option appears to be what they will choose.
    Of course attempting an unrealistic option may just make it realistic and may just solve this mess!
    And we do that in a few months how or the EU decide to let us weaken their position by extending the time because...they are liars who will be nice to us now because they want a deal so bad? But not so bad that they didn't lend us a hand sooner?

    I hope you are right because it looks like what we will try next, I could even believe the EU will make some changes, but if a new Tory leader tries to sell some minor shift as seismic then I will hold them in utter contempt.
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 1,760
    Apparently Mueller is saying he's caught Manafort in multiple lies.
This discussion has been closed.