Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After a dramatic day in the Commons punters on Betfair make it

2»

Comments

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,771

    dixiedean said:

    Do you know. I wouldn't put another delay on the vote past them.

    It's going to be that, isn't it.
    That would be hilarious. Sure, it would make May a liar, but given Corbyn's own ridiculous position seems to require the vote to happen before he will contemplate shifting that position (which his MPs and members desperately want) yet another delay from May to see if he would crack might be worth seeing (she at least has an option ready to go, even though it is reckless to keep pretending it is not dead, whereas he is still in unicorn land).
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 1,572
    Does anyone else find it ironic that we seemingly want MPs who are willing to compromise in a serious situation, but when the Libdems compromised in 2010 in the face of a serious situation they got mullered in the next election
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    why though

    image
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 28,500

    Does anyone else find it ironic that we seemingly want MPs who are willing to compromise in a serious situation, but when the Libdems compromised in 2010 in the face of a serious situation they got mullered in the next election

    We can blame the former LD voters who refused to support the party in 2015 for that.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234

    Does anyone else find it ironic that we seemingly want MPs who are willing to compromise in a serious situation, but when the Libdems compromised in 2010 in the face of a serious situation they got mullered in the next election

    The problem with MPs that compromise is you know you can't trust them.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 4,638

    What's been so interesting about Brexit is that for ages now literally every possibility has seemed as unlikely and impossible as all other options, but one of them must be the thing that ACTUALLY happens.

    Unless the Universe plans to fold itself up into 13 dimensional space and then vanish in a puff of smoke on the 28th March.

    "It is an old maxim of mine that when you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." Sherlock Holmes.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,771

    Does anyone else find it ironic that we seemingly want MPs who are willing to compromise in a serious situation, but when the Libdems compromised in 2010 in the face of a serious situation they got mullered in the next election

    MPs who will compromise and parties not putting themselves above the nation (or conflating the two) are one of those things we the public say we want, until it ever happens. Then it is betrayal, capitulation, and so on. We know that to be the case too, since half the LD vote went long before there was even a chance to see if the concessions they got for coalition were worth the cost.

    MPs grandstand and play to the extremes because that is what we actually want.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 802
    Barnesian said:

    What's been so interesting about Brexit is that for ages now literally every possibility has seemed as unlikely and impossible as all other options, but one of them must be the thing that ACTUALLY happens.

    Unless the Universe plans to fold itself up into 13 dimensional space and then vanish in a puff of smoke on the 28th March.

    "It is an old maxim of mine that when you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." Sherlock Holmes.
    So we're going with the universe folding up theory then? Seems reasonable right now.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    edited January 8

    Barnesian said:

    What's been so interesting about Brexit is that for ages now literally every possibility has seemed as unlikely and impossible as all other options, but one of them must be the thing that ACTUALLY happens.

    Unless the Universe plans to fold itself up into 13 dimensional space and then vanish in a puff of smoke on the 28th March.

    "It is an old maxim of mine that when you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." Sherlock Holmes.
    So we're going with the universe folding up theory then? Seems reasonable right now.
    Of all the magic unicorns I think it's the one that shows most promise as a viable permanent solution to the Brexit fiasco.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256


    I certainly no longer trust them whether they deliver or not. Their actions to date have damaged them beyond redemption as far as I am concerned.

    That's because you're a die-hard remainer.
    At least you know where you stand with me - unlike the govt which is all over the place and in 20 factions.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 16,330
    dixiedean said:

    Do you know. I wouldn't put another delay on the vote past them.

    If there's one thing we know about Theresa May is that she's a fine can kicker. :D
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,022
    edited January 8
    Anazina said:

    Barnesian said:

    Have the betting markets got this right? Admittedly. logic, economic reality, common sense, national interest etc all point towards us not leaving the EU in chaos in less than 12 weeks' time. But how, starting from here, do logic, economic reality, common sense, and the national interest prevent MPs from leading us into that chaos by refusing to take the one, simple and available step which would avoid it?

    It can't be said too often: the choice is revoke Article 50 (possibly after a referendum), the EU's deal, or no deal. MPs are very keen to tell us what they don't want. Perhaps they should start turning their minds - if they have any - towards which of the three possibilities they do want.

    We are heading for "uncharted waters". Although I believe the PM has promised her cabinet that she will make an immediate statement about Plan B if she loses the vote next Tuesday.
    In all fairness, May’s big statements usually amount to the cube root of fuck all
    I wonder how small a circle around May actually know what May's intentions, back-up plans etc really are - and whether that group actually extends to any of the cabinet. From past form I have the suspicion that even the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Brexit secretary might be in the dark about it.

    She seems to hold her cards very close to her chest, with the net result that nobody can truly trust her while too many people on completely different sides of the argument share the strong impression that, when push comes to shove, she'll go with what they were wishfully thinking - hence whatever her proclamations, it's worth calling her bluff. The no-dealers seem to think she'll push ahead with Brexit anyway so feel safe to vote down the deal, the remainers seem to think she won't No-Deal so she may yet be bounced into a course of action leading to a referendum or revocation, so feel safe to vote down the deal, the Dealers think she'll push and push until she pushes it through...

    I wonder whether there are any "Deep-down Dealers" who feel, for appearances, for future leadership frays or for constituency party membership relations, they need to be seen to vote down the deal at least once, and assume they'll get a second bite of the cherry with some added backstop reassurances that will justify them backing the "new" deal. I wonder how accurate such assumptions are. I presume this kind of MP is one that May's team is desperately trying to sway, presumably in part by informing them that their assumptions are wrong, but I can't imagine such an argument being persuasive.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 6,293
    edited January 8

    why though

    image

    You would think, in such a circumstance, that the fragrant Ms Johansson would choose rather to cover her face to hide her shame. 4 tits exposed.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 5,561
    My plan for Theresa. Tell the DUP that if they don't back the deal then she'll order the publication of the source of the £600,000 donation received just before the referendum
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 802
    I'm afraid that picture is going to infect my dreams tonight.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,955

    My plan for Theresa. Tell the DUP that if they don't back the deal then she'll order the publication of the source of the £600,000 donation received just before the referendum

  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 8,491

    Does anyone else find it ironic that we seemingly want MPs who are willing to compromise in a serious situation, but when the Libdems compromised in 2010 in the face of a serious situation they got mullered in the next election

    Well, the Tories did quite well out of their compromises. They enthusiastically supported some of the Lib Dem policies they were forced to adopt (like the pupil premium and the increase in the personal tax allowance). They fought a strong campaign to win the AV referendum. They weren't punished for compromising because they did it well.

    The Lib Dems made a complete horlicks of the situation. Their leader took a non-job as Deputy PM. They negotiated away a pledge that they had their candidates sign which was inept. Then they decided to take the cabinet post with the responsibility of breaking that pledge, and so ended up even abandoning the right to abstain on the policy. They negotiated the grand concession of a referendum on an electoral reform they didn't really want and weren't able to win.

    Basically the Lib Dems showed that they are really bad at making compromises.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 3,878
    edited January 8
    .
    kle4 said:

    In other words, leaving is hard and we must always remain.
    Leaving is easy. Leaving while retaining some of the privileges of membership is proving impossible.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 13,120

    I voted for chaos with Ed Miliband. :(

    Well, you were warned - if you voted Labour, you'd get a coalition of chaos. You did, and see what happened! All your fault.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,813

    My plan for Theresa. Tell the DUP that if they don't back the deal then she'll order the publication of the source of the £600,000 donation received just before the referendum

    And we think May will risk this?
    No, she will not No Deal.

    All logic and mathematics now dictate that after losing the vote and winning a VONC, that she will concede to a referendum on her Deal.

    She will direct Tory supporter ire at Labour and Parliament for forcing her hand.

    I confess that having long advocated a second referendum, I do not relish it. I just watched the Brexit movie, and it plays like an episode of “Black Mirror”.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,771
    edited January 8

    Anazina said:

    Barnesian said:

    Have the betting markets got this right? Admittedly. logic, economic reality, common sense, national interest etc all point towards us not leaving the EU in chaos in less than 12 weeks' time. But how, starting from here, do logic, economic reality, common sense, and the national interest prevent MPs from leading us into that chaos by refusing to take the one, simple and available step which would avoid it?

    It can't be said too often: the choice is revoke Article 50 (possibly after a referendum), the EU's deal, or no deal. MPs are very keen to tell us what they don't want. Perhaps they should start turning their minds - if they have any - towards which of the three possibilities they do want.

    We are heading for "uncharted waters". Although I believe the PM has promised her cabinet that she will make an immediate statement about Plan B if she loses the vote next Tuesday.
    In all fairness, May’s big statements usually amount to the cube root of fuck all
    I wonder whether there are any "Deep-down Dealers" who feel, for appearances, for future leadership frays or for constituency party membership relations, they need to be seen to vote down the deal at least once, and assume they'll get a second bite of the cherry with some added backstop reassurances that will justify them backing the "new" deal. I wonder how accurate such assumptions are. I presume this kind of MP is one that May's team is desperately trying to sway, presumably in part by informing them that their assumptions are wrong, but I can't imagine such an argument being persuasive.
    I assume there are at least a few, since not all those opposed are no dealers, to begin with at least plenty appeared to be newdealers, or unicorn supporters as we now call them. I can easily imagine such a person feeling the need to demonstrate they really really do not like the deal, but being willing to vote for it in the end to prevent no deal, without being an out remainer like, say, JoJo, who are opposed because they see a chance to get remain more than anything else.

    But anyone making that assumption seems to be believing No.10 that they will get a second chance, and that other chances will see the vote succeed as a result. But when the vote is defeated by well over 100, with no substantive changes able to be made to it and all the alternative options already talked to death, the idea masses of them will switch and be enough to overcome the no dealers is, to put it likely, wildly optimistic.

    And that is without even tallying up how many such people there are, as it would require several dozen Labour MPs to overcome the ERG no dealers and the DUP.

    It's deal or remain, they need to stop cocking about and accept that, or else make a final play for no deal.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 24,534

    My plan for Theresa. Tell the DUP that if they don't back the deal then she'll order the publication of the source of the £600,000 donation received just before the referendum

    I assume you're joking but does she have that power? Seems highly inappropriate for a PM to be able to bully another party by a means like that.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,003
    edited January 8



    The Lib Dems made a complete horlicks of the situation. Their leader took a non-job as Deputy PM. They negotiated away a pledge that they had their candidates sign which was inept. Then they decided to take the cabinet post with the responsibility of breaking that pledge, and so ended up even abandoning the right to abstain on the policy. They negotiated the grand concession of a referendum on an electoral reform they didn't really want and weren't able to win.

    Don't forget the Fixed Term Parliament Act, which the LibDems assured us would mean a Prime Minister couldn't choose to hold an election whenever they wanted one.

    Erm...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 62,888
    edited January 8
    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 62,888

    After giving a lecture on how the Anglo Saxons reinvented Britain
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,771

    My plan for Theresa. Tell the DUP that if they don't back the deal then she'll order the publication of the source of the £600,000 donation received just before the referendum

    And we think May will risk this?
    No, she will not No Deal.

    All logic and mathematics now dictate that after losing the vote and winning a VONC, that she will concede to a referendum on her Deal.

    She will direct Tory supporter ire at Labour and Parliament for forcing her hand.
    I don't quite know how she will square her language against one with the need, post MV defeat, to do it anyway, but given it is what Labour members are pressuring for Corbyn to do as well, it seems like the two people most opposed to it, May and Corbyn, may have little choice.

    Still the tricky issue of the question and whether the authorising act makes it binding. Sure, May cannot be replaced as Tory leader and there are probably enough Tory MPs who either want to remain or also believe a referendum is the only way to get a deal, but since the ERG and DUP would be against the government would basically have to accept whatever question Labour wanted, which might be problematic.

    EIther way, Remain will easily beat the deal in a heads up. Yeah yeah, polls and what not, but come on - Labour members will almost all campaign for remain, as will all other parties bar the Tories and maybe the DUP? (I guess they might just sit it out if the options are remain or deal, since they won't back deal). Huge numbers of Tories will not put in any effort if remain and deal are the only options, including their most charismatic campaigners, and the remain campaign will have statement after statement from prominent leavers saying how bad the deal is from a leave perspective to call upon.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,813
    HYUFD said:

    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year

    Glad you are on board.

    Yes, the No Dealers will be homeless. I would not be surprised to see boycotting advocated by some. Others will actively push for a “Remain, and Leave Later”.
    The next Tory leader will surely be a No Dealer.

    In any referendum, it will be interesting to see who will lead each side. The problem Deal will have is lacklustre support. Remain runs the risk of looking like an establishment coup.
    It will be close.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,955
    HYUFD said:

    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year

    For argument's sake, imagine Remain won convincingly (for example, getting more than 17.4 million votes and something like 60/40 overall). Don't you think "Brexit all over again" would become a toxic platform for any mainstream party? This is not to say that the discontent that was channelled into Brexit will magically go away, just than politicians attempting the same trick twice may be given short shrift by the same voters.
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,022
    kle4 said:


    I wonder whether there are any "Deep-down Dealers" who feel, for appearances, for future leadership frays or for constituency party membership relations, they need to be seen to vote down the deal at least once, and assume they'll get a second bite of the cherry with some added backstop reassurances that will justify them backing the "new" deal. I wonder how accurate such assumptions are. I presume this kind of MP is one that May's team is desperately trying to sway, presumably in part by informing them that their assumptions are wrong, but I can't imagine such an argument being persuasive.

    I assume there are at least a few, since not all those opposed are no dealers, to begin with at least plenty appeared to be newdealers, or unicorn supporters as we now call them. I can easily imagine such a person feeling the need to demonstrate they really really do not like the deal, but being willing to vote for it in the end to prevent no deal, without being an out remainer like, say, JoJo, who are opposed because they see a chance to get remain more than anything else.

    But anyone making that assumption seems to be believing No.10 that they will get a second chance, and that other chances will see the vote succeed as a result. But when the vote is defeated by well over 100, with no substantive changes able to be made to it and all the alternative options already talked to death, the idea masses of them will switch and be enough to overcome the no dealers is, to put it likely, wildly optimistic.

    And that is without even tallying up how many such people there are, as it would require several dozen Labour MPs to overcome the ERG no dealers and the DUP.

    It's deal or remain, they need to stop cocking about and accept that, or else make a final play for no deal.
    Thing is that although ERG and pals are small numerically, they seem to feel they have the best card in the game - their preference is the legal default so long as they make sure nobody else wins. A "final play" from that point of view just means being a royal pain in the backside to anyone trying to achieve anything else. I think you are right, though, that their best chance had already passed when they failed to depose May and get one of their ilk presented to the party membership. But they may beg to differ, particularly if they doubt May would dare reneging on Brexit altogether. The obliqueness of May's intentions is not helping her on this one.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,771
    Danny565 said:



    The Lib Dems made a complete horlicks of the situation. Their leader took a non-job as Deputy PM. They negotiated away a pledge that they had their candidates sign which was inept. Then they decided to take the cabinet post with the responsibility of breaking that pledge, and so ended up even abandoning the right to abstain on the policy. They negotiated the grand concession of a referendum on an electoral reform they didn't really want and weren't able to win.

    Don't forget the Fixed Term Parliament Act, which the LibDems assured us would mean a Prime Minister couldn't choose to hold an election whenever they wanted one.

    Erm...
    I don't follow you. They can't. Whether in practice an opposition would find it hard to say no doesn't change that PMs have to ask permission of the Commons and so can be constrained from having one.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,771

    I voted for chaos with Ed Miliband. :(

    Well, you were warned - if you voted Labour, you'd get a coalition of chaos. You did, and see what happened! All your fault.
    We had a majority government of chaos and then a minority government with confidence and supply arrangements with chaos, totally different to a coalition of chaos.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 62,888

    My plan for Theresa. Tell the DUP that if they don't back the deal then she'll order the publication of the source of the £600,000 donation received just before the referendum

    If NI voted for Irish Unity that would then of course enable a Canada style FTA
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487

    My plan for Theresa. Tell the DUP that if they don't back the deal then she'll order the publication of the source of the £600,000 donation received just before the referendum

    I assume you're joking but does she have that power? Seems highly inappropriate for a PM to be able to bully another party by a means like that.
    The Duppers have been blackmailing the rest of us for years, so some might consider the move tough justice.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,955
    HYUFD said:

    My plan for Theresa. Tell the DUP that if they don't back the deal then she'll order the publication of the source of the £600,000 donation received just before the referendum

    If NI voted for Irish Unity that would then of course enable a Canada style FTA
    It would remove the DUP's opposition to one, but also remove their votes, and wouldn't mitigate any of the economic downsides.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    kle4 said:

    Danny565 said:



    The Lib Dems made a complete horlicks of the situation. Their leader took a non-job as Deputy PM. They negotiated away a pledge that they had their candidates sign which was inept. Then they decided to take the cabinet post with the responsibility of breaking that pledge, and so ended up even abandoning the right to abstain on the policy. They negotiated the grand concession of a referendum on an electoral reform they didn't really want and weren't able to win.

    Don't forget the Fixed Term Parliament Act, which the LibDems assured us would mean a Prime Minister couldn't choose to hold an election whenever they wanted one.

    Erm...
    I don't follow you. They can't. Whether in practice an opposition would find it hard to say no doesn't change that PMs have to ask permission of the Commons and so can be constrained from having one.
    You have just neatly explained why it works in theory but not in practice.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,771
    edited January 8

    HYUFD said:

    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year

    Glad you are on board.

    Yes, the No Dealers will be homeless. I would not be surprised to see boycotting advocated by some. Others will actively push for a “Remain, and Leave Later”.
    The next Tory leader will surely be a No Dealer.

    In any referendum, it will be interesting to see who will lead each side. The problem Deal will have is lacklustre support. Remain runs the risk of looking like an establishment coup.
    It will be close.
    I don't think so. With virtually no enthusiastic support for it among the political elite it would be relying on those public who are enthusiastic about it, those that don't mind it, and those who think it has to be done because of 2016, even though the public might say differently now and so many leavers will be disappointed with what they are being offered.

    Remain, by contrast, will be fired up as all hell, and this time they will be selling the positive vision of an end to the chaos and damage. Doesn't matter if remain also has issues given how many people really want to leave, the main pitch of the deal campaign would be 'It's better than nothing, and we have to do this' while remain's would be 'Seize the chance to restore our reputation and prosperity' or some such.

    Sure, some deal people will be positive, some remain ones probably were too, but the overall messages will be very distinct.
    Anazina said:

    kle4 said:

    Danny565 said:



    Thewin.

    Don't forget the Fixed Term Parliament Act, which the LibDems assured us would mean a Prime Minister couldn't choose to hold an election whenever they wanted one.

    Erm...
    I don't follow you. They can't. Whether in practice an opposition would find it hard to say no doesn't change that PMs have to ask permission of the Commons and so can be constrained from having one.
    You have just neatly explained why it works in theory but not in practice.
    Right. But just because they would find it hard to say doesn't mean they could not. It should be for emergencies, but if politicians don't follow the spirit of it that's their problem, not a problem of the Act.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 24,534
    HYUFD said:

    My plan for Theresa. Tell the DUP that if they don't back the deal then she'll order the publication of the source of the £600,000 donation received just before the referendum

    If NI voted for Irish Unity that would then of course enable a Canada style FTA
    Make it easier for us to reach a budget surplus too, though how much Eire would appreciate it is less certain.
  • Does anyone else find it ironic that we seemingly want MPs who are willing to compromise in a serious situation, but when the Libdems compromised in 2010 in the face of a serious situation they got mullered in the next election

    Well, the Tories did quite well out of their compromises. They enthusiastically supported some of the Lib Dem policies they were forced to adopt (like the pupil premium and the increase in the personal tax allowance). They fought a strong campaign to win the AV referendum. They weren't punished for compromising because they did it well.

    The Lib Dems made a complete horlicks of the situation. Their leader took a non-job as Deputy PM. They negotiated away a pledge that they had their candidates sign which was inept. Then they decided to take the cabinet post with the responsibility of breaking that pledge, and so ended up even abandoning the right to abstain on the policy. They negotiated the grand concession of a referendum on an electoral reform they didn't really want and weren't able to win.

    Basically the Lib Dems showed that they are really bad at making compromises.
    They also forgot that many people voted LibDem because they saw them as the most likely to beat the Conservatives in their particular constituency. Once Cleggy coalesced with the Tories those supporters were gone.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,215
    If we have a Deal vs Remain referendum, a portion of the Tory/UKIP vote will go on strike for good.

    It could shift the centre of political debate in the liberal/left direction.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,003
    edited January 8
    RoyalBlue said:

    If we have a Deal vs Remain referendum, a portion of the Tory/UKIP vote will go on strike for good.

    It could shift the centre of political debate in the liberal/left direction.

    Surely there MUST be a downside? :D
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,955
    RoyalBlue said:

    If we have a Deal vs Remain referendum, a portion of the Tory/UKIP vote will go on strike for good.

    It could shift the centre of political debate in the liberal/left direction.

    It would be unpredictable. The Tories could be liberated to be more radical economically if they no longer had the patriotic pensioner vote to fall back on.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,771
    Danny565 said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    If we have a Deal vs Remain referendum, a portion of the Tory/UKIP vote will go on strike for good.

    It could shift the centre of political debate in the liberal/left direction.

    Surely there MUST be a downside? :D
    Well, lower participation is technically a downside in a democracy, but staying at home is a valid choice after all.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,380

    HYUFD said:

    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year

    For argument's sake, imagine Remain won convincingly (for example, getting more than 17.4 million votes and something like 60/40 overall). Don't you think "Brexit all over again" would become a toxic platform for any mainstream party? This is not to say that the discontent that was channelled into Brexit will magically go away, just than politicians attempting the same trick twice may be given short shrift by the same voters.
    Right, so if you're TMay and you agree to a referendum:
    30% Leave with deal wins, you are triumphant and vindicated, you carry on forever
    35% Remain wins so convincingly the ultras are marginalized, you carry on forever
    35% Remain wins but it's tight, your party is mad at you, could be bad

    Considering she's staring at the end of her career anyhow, this seems like pretty good odds.

  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,022
    edited January 9
    RoyalBlue said:

    If we have a Deal vs Remain referendum, a portion of the Tory/UKIP vote will go on strike for good.

    It could shift the centre of political debate in the liberal/left direction.

    Despite the moderating effects of FPTP, we could end up becoming much more like many of our European neighbours - with 10-20% of votes regularly going to extremist parties.

    (I say this as someone who has voted Communist out of my absolute detest for the Labour party's reaffiliation with Europhilia particularly from New Labour onwards, and who voted for Corbyn in the Labour leadership contest in large part because of his - historic, at least - euroscepticism. But I suspect fellow "betrayed Brextremists" might be rather more attracted to a non-mainstream party rather further to the right...)
  • RoyalBlue said:

    If we have a Deal vs Remain referendum, a portion of the Tory/UKIP vote will go on strike for good.

    It could shift the centre of political debate in the liberal/left direction.

    Is it not already historically liberal/left? TMay's policies in the last manifesto had quite a few nods to Labour. Would the Conservative party really shift there or more so?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 62,888

    RoyalBlue said:

    If we have a Deal vs Remain referendum, a portion of the Tory/UKIP vote will go on strike for good.

    It could shift the centre of political debate in the liberal/left direction.

    It would be unpredictable. The Tories could be liberated to be more radical economically if they no longer had the patriotic pensioner vote to fall back on.
    The Tories are not going to win on a quasi libertarian platform, the support the UK Libertarian Party or the LDs got in 2015 is evidence of that, more likely Tory members elect Boris or another No Dealer leader soon enough to get No Dealers back in the tent
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 62,888

    HYUFD said:

    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year

    Glad you are on board.

    Yes, the No Dealers will be homeless. I would not be surprised to see boycotting advocated by some. Others will actively push for a “Remain, and Leave Later”.
    The next Tory leader will surely be a No Dealer.

    In any referendum, it will be interesting to see who will lead each side. The problem Deal will have is lacklustre support. Remain runs the risk of looking like an establishment coup.
    It will be close.
    It would be seen as a choice between 2 establishment options and yes the next Tory leader would very likely be a No Dealer. Personally I think there has to be a No Deal option in any referendum
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,380


    Despite the moderating effects of FPTP, we could end up becoming much more like many of our European neighbours - with 10-20% of votes regularly going to extremist parties.

    Seems like an improvement on the current 80%
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,955
    HYUFD said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    If we have a Deal vs Remain referendum, a portion of the Tory/UKIP vote will go on strike for good.

    It could shift the centre of political debate in the liberal/left direction.

    It would be unpredictable. The Tories could be liberated to be more radical economically if they no longer had the patriotic pensioner vote to fall back on.
    The Tories are not going to win on a quasi libertarian platform, the support the UK Libertarian Party or the LDs got in 2015 is evidence of that, more likely Tory members elect Boris or another No Dealer leader soon enough to get No Dealers back in the tent
    I said radical, not quasi-libertarian. Things that would appeal to young aspirational voters that would currently be considered toxic for their core vote.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 62,888

    HYUFD said:

    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year

    For argument's sake, imagine Remain won convincingly (for example, getting more than 17.4 million votes and something like 60/40 overall). Don't you think "Brexit all over again" would become a toxic platform for any mainstream party? This is not to say that the discontent that was channelled into Brexit will magically go away, just than politicians attempting the same trick twice may be given short shrift by the same voters.
    YouGov had it Remain 50 50 after preferences, Deltapoll the Deal ahead, People's Vote Remain ahead it could go either way but whichever won No Dealers would say they were denied a choice and not accept the result
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,270
    edited January 9
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year

    Glad you are on board.

    Yes, the No Dealers will be homeless. I would not be surprised to see boycotting advocated by some. Others will actively push for a “Remain, and Leave Later”.
    The next Tory leader will surely be a No Dealer.

    In any referendum, it will be interesting to see who will lead each side. The problem Deal will have is lacklustre support. Remain runs the risk of looking like an establishment coup.
    It will be close.
    It would be seen as a choice between 2 establishment options and yes the next Tory leader would very likely be a No Dealer. Personally I think there has to be a No Deal option in any referendum
    A threeway will always give Remain the win as it essentially splits the Leave vote. It has to be either Remain v The Deal or Remain v No Deal.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 2,352

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year

    Glad you are on board.

    Yes, the No Dealers will be homeless. I would not be surprised to see boycotting advocated by some. Others will actively push for a “Remain, and Leave Later”.
    The next Tory leader will surely be a No Dealer.

    In any referendum, it will be interesting to see who will lead each side. The problem Deal will have is lacklustre support. Remain runs the risk of looking like an establishment coup.
    It will be close.
    It would be seen as a choice between 2 establishment options and yes the next Tory leader would very likely be a No Dealer. Personally I think there has to be a No Deal option in any referendum
    A threeway will always give Remain the win as it essentially splits the Leave vote. It has to be either Remain v The Deal or Remain v No Deal.
    Isn't this precisely the situation preferential systems like AV were invented for?
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,270
    Quincel said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year

    Glad you are on board.

    Yes, the No Dealers will be homeless. I would not be surprised to see boycotting advocated by some. Others will actively push for a “Remain, and Leave Later”.
    The next Tory leader will surely be a No Dealer.

    In any referendum, it will be interesting to see who will lead each side. The problem Deal will have is lacklustre support. Remain runs the risk of looking like an establishment coup.
    It will be close.
    It would be seen as a choice between 2 establishment options and yes the next Tory leader would very likely be a No Dealer. Personally I think there has to be a No Deal option in any referendum
    A threeway will always give Remain the win as it essentially splits the Leave vote. It has to be either Remain v The Deal or Remain v No Deal.
    Isn't this precisely the situation preferential systems like AV were invented for?
    Yes but the chances of that being the method by which the vote is carried out?

    May's deal would surely win thanks to second preference voting. Because, despite all the talking, her deal is the compromise candidate and will thus probably win through in the end.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 15,200

    What's been so interesting about Brexit is that for ages now literally every possibility has seemed as unlikely and impossible as all other options, but one of them must be the thing that ACTUALLY happens.

    Unless the Universe plans to fold itself up into 13 dimensional space and then vanish in a puff of smoke on the 28th March.

    Well it’s not entirely unreasonable to think that, if the reality we inhabit is, as some physicists postulate, a large simulation, the way Brexit has turned out would be quite likely to persuade whoever is running it to wind the whole thing up.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 15,200
    What Carlos Ghosn is facing:
    https://gaijinass.com/2017/03/30/brutal-realities-of-prison-in-japan/

    I have some sympathy for him.
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,022
    edited January 9

    Quincel said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year

    Glad you are on board.

    Yes, the No Dealers will be homeless. I would not be surprised to see boycotting advocated by some. Others will actively push for a “Remain, and Leave Later”.
    The next Tory leader will surely be a No Dealer.

    In any referendum, it will be interesting to see who will lead each side. The problem Deal will have is lacklustre support. Remain runs the risk of looking like an establishment coup.
    It will be close.
    It would be seen as a choice between 2 establishment options and yes the next Tory leader would very likely be a No Dealer. Personally I think there has to be a No Deal option in any referendum
    A threeway will always give Remain the win as it essentially splits the Leave vote. It has to be either Remain v The Deal or Remain v No Deal.
    Isn't this precisely the situation preferential systems like AV were invented for?
    Yes but the chances of that being the method by which the vote is carried out?

    May's deal would surely win thanks to second preference voting. Because, despite all the talking, her deal is the compromise candidate and will thus probably win through in the end.
    This logic only applies if Deal makes it through to the final two though, and in a tight three-way tie this would be arbitrary and pretty much random. Since the result of a referendum under AV would largely be determined by which option went out in the first round, there'd be a tactical dimension to voting - you wouldn't necessarily put your number one preference down as number one vote (say you prefer No Deal to Deal but completely hate the idea of Remain, and the polling indicates the first-round result could be close but that a Remain vs No Deal final round will go conclusively to Remain, then you need to make sure that Deal makes it to round two and a vote for No Deal as your number one might prevent that). So it isn't clear that AV would present the "correct" result, or even that AV would free voters to opt for their true preferences. In fact Brexit could well be one of those Condorcet paradoxes where it isn't even clear, philosophically, that there is a "correct" result.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 31,733

    Third, like Tories at the next election if we don't Brexit......

    I don't follow your logic.
    The Tories will be broken by not delivering Brexit. Their support base will fracture, their foot soldiers will turn their back, as will many councillors. Tories will face an aggressive NUKIP/Anti-establishment Party threat, which will attract a significant portion of those foot soldiers. (I expect it will also attract significant support from former Labour voters too.)
    But the Tories will have not turned away from it themselves, they will have been frustrated by a small number of their own MPs and the opposition. If UKIP had held steady there could possibly be an issue. I’m not saying the party won’t implode but lots of unforeseen are possible
    Voters for whom this is a decisive issue (not me) would no longer trust the Tories to deliver though.
    I certainly no longer trust them whether they deliver or not. Their actions to date have damaged them beyond redemption as far as I am concerned.
    That's because you're a die-hard remainer.

    If they lose both the die-hard remainers and the die-hard leavers then that leaves a massive proportion of the population who won't vote for them.
    "Hey babe, I negotiate million dollar deals for breakfast. I think I can handle this Eurotrash."
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 62,888

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year

    Glad you are on board.

    Yes, the No Dealers will be homeless. I would not be surprised to see boycotting advocated by some. Others will actively push for a “Remain, and Leave Later”.
    The next Tory leader will surely be a No Dealer.

    In any referendum, it will be interesting to see who will lead each side. The problem Deal will have is lacklustre support. Remain runs the risk of looking like an establishment coup.
    It will be close.
    It would be seen as a choice between 2 establishment options and yes the next Tory leader would very likely be a No Dealer. Personally I think there has to be a No Deal option in any referendum
    A threeway will always give Remain the win as it essentially splits the Leave vote. It has to be either Remain v The Deal or Remain v No Deal.
    No, not if it is Remain v Leave and if Leave wins that then a Leave with Deal v Leave with No Deal question.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,511

    My plan for Theresa. Tell the DUP that if they don't back the deal then she'll order the publication of the source of the £600,000 donation received just before the referendum

    Plus a border poll straight after legislating for gay marriage and abortion on demand, plus a SFO investigation into the family connections of all DUP elected members and spads in relation to RHI (cash for ash) recipients.

    Should focus a few minds.

    Sorry not to post much recently. New job is both hard work and can't yet post from office, hope all are well x
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 8,271
    My neighbour has just decided to move to Spain

    Her husband will travel back to uk two weeks out of four to work here.

    Despite Brexit........
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 2,352
    edited January 9



    Yes but the chances of that being the method by which the vote is carried out?

    May's deal would surely win thanks to second preference voting. Because, despite all the talking, her deal is the compromise candidate and will thus probably win through in the end.

    Personally I think that if we're in a world where a second referendum is happening all bets are off for the options and voting system. A second vote is unlikely, but a second vote using AV doesn't seem particularly more unlikely to me. I may be wrong though.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,380
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year

    For argument's sake, imagine Remain won convincingly (for example, getting more than 17.4 million votes and something like 60/40 overall). Don't you think "Brexit all over again" would become a toxic platform for any mainstream party? This is not to say that the discontent that was channelled into Brexit will magically go away, just than politicians attempting the same trick twice may be given short shrift by the same voters.
    YouGov had it Remain 50 50 after preferences, Deltapoll the Deal ahead, People's Vote Remain ahead it could go either way but whichever won No Dealers would say they were denied a choice and not accept the result
    Why are you quoting the weird AV-esque ranking YouGov question when there are more recent simple Remain vs Deal polls from the same pollster?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 28,500

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year

    Glad you are on board.

    Yes, the No Dealers will be homeless. I would not be surprised to see boycotting advocated by some. Others will actively push for a “Remain, and Leave Later”.
    The next Tory leader will surely be a No Dealer.

    In any referendum, it will be interesting to see who will lead each side. The problem Deal will have is lacklustre support. Remain runs the risk of looking like an establishment coup.
    It will be close.
    It would be seen as a choice between 2 establishment options and yes the next Tory leader would very likely be a No Dealer. Personally I think there has to be a No Deal option in any referendum
    A threeway will always give Remain the win as it essentially splits the Leave vote. It has to be either Remain v The Deal or Remain v No Deal.
    Why wouldn't the referendum be Deal v No Deal? Remain has already been rejected in the June 2016 referendum.
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,270
    edited January 9
    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    It is possible now that there could be a Remain v Deal referendum if the Commons votes for it and May then accepts it as the only way of getting the Deal through, saying Parliament forced her hand. However whichever one won but especially of Remain emerged victorious No Dealers would be furious, whether that manifested itself in a move to UKIP or a new Farage Party or an attempt to get rid of May and replace her with a No Dealer by the end of the year

    Glad you are on board.

    Yes, the No Dealers will be homeless. I would not be surprised to see boycotting advocated by some. Others will actively push for a “Remain, and Leave Later”.
    The next Tory leader will surely be a No Dealer.

    In any referendum, it will be interesting to see who will lead each side. The problem Deal will have is lacklustre support. Remain runs the risk of looking like an establishment coup.
    It will be close.
    It would be seen as a choice between 2 establishment options and yes the next Tory leader would very likely be a No Dealer. Personally I think there has to be a No Deal option in any referendum
    A threeway will always give Remain the win as it essentially splits the Leave vote. It has to be either Remain v The Deal or Remain v No Deal.
    Why wouldn't the referendum be Deal v No Deal? Remain has already been rejected in the June 2016 referendum.
    In a logical world yes, and I'd be all for it, but we all know should there be another referendum Remain will be on the ballot.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 28,500
    O/T

    "The outlook is dim for Americans without college degrees

    A major economic conference hears new evidence on the rough end of the labour market"

    https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2019/01/08/the-outlook-is-dim-for-americans-without-college-degrees
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,380
    edited January 9


    Yes but the chances of that being the method by which the vote is carried out?

    May's deal would surely win thanks to second preference voting. Because, despite all the talking, her deal is the compromise candidate and will thus probably win through in the end.

    AV doesn't *necessarily* get the compromise candidate. In this case I think if Remain failed to clear 50% in the first round, Deal would get knocked out and it would go to Remain vs No Deal, unless the No Deal fans boycotted the whole thing.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 27,003
    tpfkar said:

    My plan for Theresa. Tell the DUP that if they don't back the deal then she'll order the publication of the source of the £600,000 donation received just before the referendum

    Plus a border poll straight after legislating for gay marriage and abortion on demand, plus a SFO investigation into the family connections of all DUP elected members and spads in relation to RHI (cash for ash) recipients.

    Should focus a few minds.

    Sorry not to post much recently. New job is both hard work and can't yet post from office, hope all are well x
    You can't post???
    Is pb blocked?
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 5,065
    Per The Times:

    YOUGOV SCOTLAND POLL:

    SNP 40
    Con 25
    Lab 21
    LD 8

    Sample = 2,000, Dec 21 to Jan 4

    Hypothetical Q: If Brexit Deal passes with Lab support, Lab falls to 15.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 28,500
    edited January 9
    "German far-right politician Frank Magnitz has been beaten up and severely injured in an attack seen by police as politically motivated.
    The leader of Alternative for Germany (AfD) in Bremen was attacked by at least three masked men in the centre of the northern city on Monday.
    The attackers knocked him unconscious with a piece of wood and kicked him in the head, AfD officials said.
    The government and politicians across the spectrum condemned the attack."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46792556
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 8,619
    MikeL said:

    Per The Times:

    YOUGOV SCOTLAND POLL:

    SNP 40
    Con 25
    Lab 21
    LD 8

    Sample = 2,000, Dec 21 to Jan 4

    Hypothetical Q: If Brexit Deal passes with Lab support, Lab falls to 15.

    That looks to be part of the 25,000 GB poll conducted over the Bank Holiday covering a two week.period . The sample dates certainly match.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 25,081
    Anazina said:

    Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    Have the betting markets got this right? Admittedly. logic, economic reality, common sense, national interest etc all point towards us not leaving the EU in chaos in less than 12 weeks' time. But how, starting from here, do logic, economic reality, common sense, and the national interest prevent MPs from leading us into that chaos by refusing to take the one, simple and available step which would avoid it?

    It can't be said too often: the choice is revoke Article 50 (possibly after a referendum), the EU's deal, or no deal. MPs are very keen to tell us what they don't want. Perhaps they should start turning their minds - if they have any - towards which of the three possibilities they do want.

    We are heading for "uncharted waters". Although I believe the PM has promised her cabinet that she will make an immediate statement about Plan B if she loses the vote next Tuesday.
    :lol: Yeh, right...
    "But sources also said she did acknowledge she would have to “swiftly” lay out the next steps if her deal is voted down and promised to make an immediate statement to the Commons."

    The Sun tomorrow.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/8150405/cabinet-brexit-chaos-theresa-may-michael-gove/
    More on the Gove swinging story.

    https://goo.gl/images/b6Shfg
    Never believe John Evelyn. It’s usually made up, and comprises politically motivated malicious gossip from the Union Bar.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 27,003
    So, who watched Der Prez?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 11,033
    Dura_Ace said:

    .

    kle4 said:

    In other words, leaving is hard and we must always remain.
    Leaving is easy. Leaving while retaining some of the privileges of membership is proving impossible.
    Which seems to be a surprise to Leavers. Who could have predicted that leaving a club means not being able to benefit from the facilities or change the club rules?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 11,033
    Floater said:

    My neighbour has just decided to move to Spain

    Her husband will travel back to uk two weeks out of four to work here.

    Despite Brexit........

    She still can, under current rules, but will she be able to in April?

    One of my staff has a flat on one of the Costas and announced yesterday that she is retiring in 12 months there. I asked if she had considered whether she would be able to after Brexit, the thought that she might not have that FoM hadn't even crossed her mind.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,380
    rcs1000 said:

    So, who watched Der Prez?

    Me, and I feel substantially stupider for it. I also watched the response, which the Dems foolishly delegated to the badass-but-presentationally-awful Pelosi and the ok-but-slightly-creepy-looking Schumer, when they should have given the job to KLOBUCHAR:


  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,546
    rcs1000 said:

    tpfkar said:

    My plan for Theresa. Tell the DUP that if they don't back the deal then she'll order the publication of the source of the £600,000 donation received just before the referendum

    Plus a border poll straight after legislating for gay marriage and abortion on demand, plus a SFO investigation into the family connections of all DUP elected members and spads in relation to RHI (cash for ash) recipients.

    Should focus a few minds.

    Sorry not to post much recently. New job is both hard work and can't yet post from office, hope all are well x
    You can't post???
    Is pb blocked?
    I think it is more of a standard case of oppression of the proletariat by the bourgeois. /s
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,007
    rcs1000 said:

    So, who watched Der Prez?

    Managed to get through it without throwing anything at the TV. Perhaps my greatest show of self restraint ever.

    Sadly, Pelosi and Schummer played directly into Trump's game, confirming to his base that they are just playing politics (while being blind of course to Trump's own politicking). I mourn the lost centre.

    What I hate most about Trump is he makes me want Pelosi and Schummer to be better ...
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,223
    rcs1000 said:

    So, who watched Der Prez?

    I thought he was pretty good, sounds like there's some real bad hombres on the southern border that need stopping
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 27,003

    rcs1000 said:

    So, who watched Der Prez?

    I thought he was pretty good, sounds like there's some real bad hombres on the southern border that need stopping
    Did he mention that most illegal immigrants follow the traditional path - as used by Albanians in the UK - of coming legally and then... errr... not leaving?

    You know, I have no particular issue with a wall. Countries should be free to secure their borders.

    But this has become - like Brexit - a battle between two groups of extremists. On the one side, there is the President who seems to think that drugs and illegal immigrants would be largely stopped by a wall. On the other, you have a group who think it is immoral to even try and secure the Southern border.

    It is impossible to make any border 100% secure. There will be parts of the border sufficiently remote and inhospitable that drones and patrols will stop 99% of crossings for 1% of the cost.

    But that doesn't make the wall immoral.

    President Trump is lying when he says that it will make a massive difference. It won't. It will make a small difference. The Democrats are lying when they say it won't make any difference.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,007

    rcs1000 said:

    So, who watched Der Prez?

    I thought he was pretty good, sounds like there's some real bad hombres on the southern border that need stopping
    The case he mentioned in Maryland, the dead teenager was also a Gang member, and it was an inter-gang thing, not some random killing of a teenager. It is not clear that anyone involved was an illegal immigrant.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,086
    @TSE I don't see where the numbers for a GONU come from.

    You've got 11 Lib Dem, plus Lady Hermon. It would probably be tolerated by SNP and Plaid. But you still need c.280 Con and Lab. MP's to break ranks.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,223
    edited January 9
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    So, who watched Der Prez?

    I thought he was pretty good, sounds like there's some real bad hombres on the southern border that need stopping
    Did he mention that most illegal immigrants follow the traditional path - as used by Albanians in the UK - of coming legally and then... errr... not leaving?

    You know, I have no particular issue with a wall. Countries should be free to secure their borders.

    But this has become - like Brexit - a battle between two groups of extremists. On the one side, there is the President who seems to think that drugs and illegal immigrants would be largely stopped by a wall. On the other, you have a group who think it is immoral to even try and secure the Southern border.

    It is impossible to make any border 100% secure. There will be parts of the border sufficiently remote and inhospitable that drones and patrols will stop 99% of crossings for 1% of the cost.

    But that doesn't make the wall immoral.

    President Trump is lying when he says that it will make a massive difference. It won't. It will make a small difference. The Democrats are lying when they say it won't make any difference.
    Obviously I was slightly facetious in my last post, but it will have played well to his fact shy base.

    No, he skipped the point that most illegals enter at JFK on a tourist visa and never leave, he gave the clear impression that every illegal sneaked in through the desert at night. Same with the drugs.

    Agree on the Brexit analogy, I'm convinced the least worst thing is to give him the $5.7bn and let him build his wall, his mandate, such asit is, requires to be honoured. To not do so is hurtful to the public trust in the election process.

    The wall is pretty consequence free, Brexit maybe not so much, but again I think following through is the least bad option overall

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,380
    rcs1000 said:


    President Trump is lying when he says that it will make a massive difference. It won't. It will make a small difference. The Democrats are lying when they say it won't make any difference.

    Not saying you're wrong but is there some evidence for that? I mean, among other things previous attempts at building walls on that border seem to have increased net illegal immigration (because it's harder to leave) and there are a bunch of other effects like reduced visibility, pissing off local people who would otherwise be helpful, etc. And they've already got quite a bit of fencing in places where it seems useful, so we're talking about adding to the places where it's less useful. From a security point of view, a security system that has little or no beneficial effect is better not to have, because you add complexity and maintenance cost.

    I don't know either way, but it's at least not *obvious* that it will help solve the problems it's supposed to help with.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,380


    Agree on the Brexit analogy, I'm convinced the least worst thing is to give him the $5.7bn and let him build his wall, his mandate, such asit is, requires to be honoured. To not do so is hurtful to the public trust in the election process.

    He didn't promise to make American taxpayers pay for a wall. He promised quite explicitly that someone other than American taxpayers would be paying for the wall.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,223


    Agree on the Brexit analogy, I'm convinced the least worst thing is to give him the $5.7bn and let him build his wall, his mandate, such asit is, requires to be honoured. To not do so is hurtful to the public trust in the election process.

    He didn't promise to make American taxpayers pay for a wall. He promised quite explicitly that someone other than American taxpayers would be paying for the wall.
    At the end of the day, who pays for the wall is an accounting detail that can be spun either way. The key point is the actual "great southern wall" be built.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 3,878



    At the end of the day, who pays for the wall is an accounting detail that can be spun either way.

    No it isn't. His policy and electoral pledge was that Mexico would pay for it. Now that Mexico has told him que te den por culo he's asking the US taxpayers for the money contrary to his initial promise. That's not an "accounting detail".
  • I think OGH is right on this. The DUP are in way over their heads and are in a much weaker negotiating position than it looks.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,380


    Agree on the Brexit analogy, I'm convinced the least worst thing is to give him the $5.7bn and let him build his wall, his mandate, such asit is, requires to be honoured. To not do so is hurtful to the public trust in the election process.

    He didn't promise to make American taxpayers pay for a wall. He promised quite explicitly that someone other than American taxpayers would be paying for the wall.
    At the end of the day, who pays for the wall is an accounting detail that can be spun either way. The key point is the actual "great southern wall" be built.
    It's not an accounting detail, it's a key part of the promise. It would have been far less attractive without it. That's why he didn't have them chanting:

    Who's going to pay for the wall?
    I AM!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,955


    Agree on the Brexit analogy, I'm convinced the least worst thing is to give him the $5.7bn and let him build his wall, his mandate, such asit is, requires to be honoured. To not do so is hurtful to the public trust in the election process.

    He didn't promise to make American taxpayers pay for a wall. He promised quite explicitly that someone other than American taxpayers would be paying for the wall.
    At the end of the day, who pays for the wall is an accounting detail that can be spun either way. The key point is the actual "great southern wall" be built.
    It's not an accounting detail, it's a key part of the promise. It would have been far less attractive without it. That's why he didn't have them chanting:

    Who's going to pay for the wall?
    I AM!
    Ted Cruz is now campaigning for El Chapo to pay for it.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,380


    Agree on the Brexit analogy, I'm convinced the least worst thing is to give him the $5.7bn and let him build his wall, his mandate, such asit is, requires to be honoured. To not do so is hurtful to the public trust in the election process.

    He didn't promise to make American taxpayers pay for a wall. He promised quite explicitly that someone other than American taxpayers would be paying for the wall.
    At the end of the day, who pays for the wall is an accounting detail that can be spun either way. The key point is the actual "great southern wall" be built.
    Also, they can't build the "great southern wall" for $5.7 bn. Homeland Security reckoned it would be more like $21.6 bn.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,007
    Today about 1 million Floridians - conviicted felons - regained the right to vote. It will be fascinating to see how this affects the State's voting in national elections, given the demographics of the felon population and given Florida's key swing state position.

    It has just become a lot harder for Trump to win re-election, in my view.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,025
    The president is wearing an American tie (often he wears a British-style one) whose stripes and colours echo the American flag behind him. Top marks for his stylist.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 15,200

    The president is wearing an American tie (often he wears a British-style one) whose stripes and colours echo the American flag behind him. Top marks for his stylist.
    And zero marks for honesty.
    https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/08/fact-check-trumps-speech-on-the-border-crisis-1069539
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 11,516

    Alistair said:

    AndyJS said:

    I'd be pretty surprised if we don't leave on 29th March. I tend to believe whatever Mrs May says on this subject.

    She said back in 2016 that there would be a second Scottish Independence referendum if Scotland voted Remain and the UK voted Leave.
    Source?

    Alistair said:

    AndyJS said:

    I'd be pretty surprised if we don't leave on 29th March. I tend to believe whatever Mrs May says on this subject.

    She said back in 2016 that there would be a second Scottish Independence referendum if Scotland voted Remain and the UK voted Leave.
    Source?
    https://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2016/04/theresa-mays-speech-on-brexit-full-text.html

    But if Brexit isn’t fatal to the European Union, we might find that it is fatal to the Union with Scotland. The SNP have already said that in the event that Britain votes to leave but Scotland votes to remain in the EU, they will press for another Scottish independence referendum. And the opinion polls show consistently that the Scottish people are more likely to be in favour of EU membership than the people of England and Wales.

    If the people of Scotland are forced to choose between the United Kingdom and the European Union we do not know what the result would be.
    That doesn't technically say there would be a second referendum, just that the SNP would press for another, which they did. The SNP had a major setback though in the 2017 election which killed that off. The people of Scotland weren't forced in the end to make that choice.
    You are in for a suprise when May's deal is voted on.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 11,516

    Does anyone else find it ironic that we seemingly want MPs who are willing to compromise in a serious situation, but when the Libdems compromised in 2010 in the face of a serious situation they got mullered in the next election

    They chose the wrong things to compromise on.
This discussion has been closed.