> @brendan16 said: > > @justin124 said: > > > @Quincel said: > > > > @nico67 said: > > > > > @Scott_P said: > > > > > Oh, Jeremy Corbyn... > > > > > > > > > > https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1131902885766356992 > > > > > > > > Lmao! If Labour can’t beat the Lib Dems in Corbyns own seat then London is going to be a complete disaster for them . > > > > > > > > Without that Survation poll showing the Lib Dems on just 12% and Labour on 23% UK wide I’d be sure it’s going to be a disaster for Labour but how on earth can a poll done the night before be so wrong . > > > > > > Anyone know what the LDs are basing this on? > > > > Possibly based on observation at the verification stage of the count today. > > In Islington south and Finsbury or Islington north? The former used to be a Lib Dem Labour marginal and Thornberry came close to losing it in 2005 when she held on by less than 500 votes. The LDs used to run the council too pre the coalition. And during all that time Corbyn won his more down at heel north seat easily. > > Lib Dems doing well in Islington is just reverting to trend pre coalition? > > It’s remainer central anyway!
If you could pick one place in the country for remain to win it would probably be Islington. If Libs beat Labour in Sunderland or Newcastle then that would be very encouraging for the yellows.
Outside London though there are far more leave than remain areas and in those remain areas there are still a lot of leavers who will we assume break for the BP whereas remainers have more ways to split their vote.
Even in London over 40 per cent voted leave.
We don’t actually know who turned out and how they split their vote which is quite key under dHondt?
> @Brom said: > > @brendan16 said: > > > @justin124 said: > > > > @Quincel said: > > > > > @nico67 said: > > > > > > @Scott_P said: > > > > > > Oh, Jeremy Corbyn... > > > > > > > > > > > > https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1131902885766356992 > > > > > > > > > > Lmao! If Labour can’t beat the Lib Dems in Corbyns own seat then London is going to be a complete disaster for them . > > > > > > > > > > Without that Survation poll showing the Lib Dems on just 12% and Labour on 23% UK wide I’d be sure it’s going to be a disaster for Labour but how on earth can a poll done the night before be so wrong . > > > > > > > > Anyone know what the LDs are basing this on? > > > > > > Possibly based on observation at the verification stage of the count today. > > > > In Islington south and Finsbury or Islington north? The former used to be a Lib Dem Labour marginal and Thornberry came close to losing it in 2005 when she held on by less than 500 votes. The LDs used to run the council too pre the coalition. And during all that time Corbyn won his more down at heel north seat easily. > > > > Lib Dems doing well in Islington is just reverting to trend pre coalition? > > > > It’s remainer central anyway! > > If you could pick one place in the country for remain to win it would probably be Islington. If Libs beat Labour in Sunderland or Newcastle then that would be very encouraging for the yellows.
Newcastle voted Remain. I would not be surprised. Sunderland would be a turn up, yes.
> @Byronic said: > > @Barnesian said: > > > @Scott_P said: > > > https://twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1131910015982419970 > > > > Gosh. He sounds just like Theresa May!< > > +++++ > > Quite. What a stupid opening move from Boris. Day 1 of the campaign.... and he's just made a Teresa May-like mistake, giving himself an unnecessary red line, and handing over a whacking great hostage to fortune. > > How can he not have learned from her disastrous inflexibility? To have any chance of delivering Brexit, you need to maintain maximum agility, keep open as much room for compromise, as possible. > > I thought he was meant to be cunning, at least?
Rubbish, if we do not leave in October the Brexit Party will slaughter the Tories (and indeed Labour too in Leave areas).
Enough. If the Commons refuses to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement as is and the EU refuses to amend the backstop No Deal it has to be
Surely this ongoing debate about who is and is not a facist shows that it's not a terribly well defined or helpful word (although given its connotations it's clear why some people are so keen to be able to daub it on their opponants).
> @brendan16 said: > > @marke09 said: > > estimated declaration times for Sunday night > > > > East Midlands – 2330 Sunday (2320 in 2014) > > Eastern – 2330 Sunday (2230 in 2014) > > London – 0200 Monday (0306 in 2014) > > North East – 2230 Sunday (2215 in 2014) > > North West – 0030 Monday (0024 in 2014) > > Scotland – 1100 Monday (1235 in 2014). NB Seats allocation for Scotland will be known from overnight local counts but the Western Isles count taking place in the day delays the final declaration. > > Wales – 0001 Monday (2338 Sunday in 2014) > > South East – 0100 Monday (0046 in 2014) > > South West – 2300 Sunday (2338 in 2014) > > West Midlands – 0001 Monday (0030 in 2014) > > Yorkshire & The Humber – 2300 Sunday (2328 in 2014) > > Why is the count in London so Slow and so late? It has one of the lowest number of local authority areas to report - only 33?
Do we get the regions all at once? Or do the component LA's announce as and when they are ready?
> @isam said: > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still?
Because if turnout is only slightly up on 5 years ago how are the Libs going to get an extra 3.5 million votes to overtake The Brexit Party (assuming they will at least match UKIP's total).
> @RobD said: > > @Streeter said: > > “Her successor will have exactly the same choice: face up to the lie, or face failure.” > > Yes, this isn't going to be the panacea that some seem to think.
I'm reminded of the "The Cat In The Hat": 'that is good,' said the fish. 'he has gone away. yes. but your mother will come. she will find this big mess! and this mess is so big and so deep and so tall, we can not pick it up. there is no way at all!'
> @MikeL said: > I know it's a big if, but IF say four MPs were put to the Con members ballot, would it be FPTP or AV? > > Surely next PM wouldn't be chosen by just over 25% of Con members?
The rules (in the party constitution, so harder to change than the MP section) require a 50%+ winner with the members, so if more than 2 candidates progress there will need to be transferable votes.
Mr. Wheel, why do you think a second referendum is likelier?
Because the turnout from this election shows Remain would win. The strategy of dragging this out as long as possible has been successful. The only reason for parliament's reticence over a vote has been they may not win.
> > Rubbish, if we do not leave in October the Brexit Party will slaughter the Tories (and indeed Labour too in Leave areas). > > Enough. If the Commons refuses to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement as is and the EU refuses to amend the backstop No Deal it has to be <
+++++
Like T May, Boris will face a parliament with a large majority against No Deal. Can he just steamroll over them?
Once the euros are over, Farage's influence, for a while, fades significantly (unless Boris calls a GE).
It looks to me like Boris is just trying to be Teresa May, but with added "self confidence" because he is Boris. HIS mighty willpower and charisma will defeat the awful people in Brussels, just as she thought her determination would prevail.
Surely this ongoing debate about who is and is not a facist shows that it's not a terribly well defined or helpful word (although given its connotations it's clear why some people are so keen to be able to daub it on their opponants).
People who get milk shakes thrown at them are fascists
> @isam said: > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still? > > Although, has the turnout massively favoured Remain? > > Where turnout is up 4% or more there are more Leave areas
But remain areas generally have more voters, and if remain areas of London also have bigger turnout increases I think we can say that the Lib Dems will be on course to do well and probably come a good second to BP.
Not sure a long leadership contest is in the interests of the Tory party. The talent is not exactly great, they are unlikely to agree and the vast majority of us are not invited. It will look like a private stitch up to decide who is PM, which in this anti-establishment age is not a great look.
> @nico67 said: > > @isam said: > > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still? > > I wouldn’t say massively . Some Leave areas have shown increases aswell . I’m 100% certain the BP will win . > > The Remain votes are split . It would be different if there was just one Remain Alliance . > > As much as the polls have been all over the place with the other parties the BP has been well ahead . > > I wouldn’t lose any sleep over the turnout figures if you support the BP , they’re a shoe in for top spot. > > The interest is really the other placings.
Exactly, if the European elections were conducted under FPTP rather than PR it would be a Brexit Party landslide.
It is only PR makes totting up the Remain and Leave parties totals relevant, for a Westminster election it would have no relevance at all as the SNP proved in 2013 winning 56 out of 59 Scottish MPs despite only winning half the Scottish vote or in 2017 when the SNP won a clear majority of Scottish seats on just 38% of the vote
> @isam said: > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still? > > Although, has the turnout massively favoured Remain? > > Where turnout is up 4% or more there are more Leave areas
That's a completely artificial metric to use. Why 4%? Why treat "Leave" areas the same whether they were 51% Leave or 65% Leave? No sensible statistician would use that approach.
The obvious, statistically proper measure is to correlate change in turnout (2019 minus 2014) with 2016 Brexit vote. There you get a reasonably strong (r2=0.44), statistically robust (p<0.001) negative correlation - that is a very clear, reasonably strong (but not massive) picture where turnout change is higher in more Remain areas.
"So the way to get a good deal is to spend lots of money preparing for a truly terrible deal, then when that truly terrible deal happens, and the economy goes into shock, we can then carefully prepare for a deep recession, the likely break-up of the UK, renewed violence in Ulster, and the victory of a Marxist in the next General Election."
Have I got Bojo's manifesto right? It's certainly brave.
> @maaarsh said: > > @MikeL said: > > I know it's a big if, but IF say four MPs were put to the Con members ballot, would it be FPTP or AV? > > > > Surely next PM wouldn't be chosen by just over 25% of Con members? > > The rules (in the party constitution, so harder to change than the MP section) require a 50%+ winner with the members, so if more than 2 candidates progress there will need to be transferable votes.
> @brokenwheel said: > Anyway, looks like a second referendum has gotten a lot more likely. What fun that will be.
The pretext for finally defenestrating May was her inching closer to facilitating a second referendum. Suggest that makes a second referendum much less likely, but with May no longer leading the Tories another GE becomes much more likely.
> @BillyBlake said: > Its be a long while since I've commented as I grew tired of all the nonsense written about EU withdrawal and three years on nothing has changed except that the ramblings of the so called 'liberal consensus' have become even more desperate, hackneyed and outdated. > > 'Fascist' they cry in their fervoured sanctimonious self justification but is it the 'fascists' who repeatedly over the years have attempted to impose their faux democratic party political systems on other nations? Is it 'the fascists' who have determinedly attempted to subvert a properly conducted referendum because basically they didn't get their way and their precious tender egos can't stand the rejection and in doing so have callously done more damage to this nation than Brexit ever would have? > > The reality is that the label 'fascist' (which seems now to refer to anyone who upsets the narrow minded sensitivities of the so called liberal consensus) is as tired and outdated as its compatriot 'communist' and indeed the worldview of the so called Liberal Consensus (big is not always better and progress has stopped being progressive). Today you are either with the people or you are with the ruling elite and its clear that the so called now inappropriately named Liberal Consensus are only for the elite. > > Of course there is a problem with being for the elite. Elites ultimately only involve the few, never the many and as the liberal elite's numbers dwindle so they circle the wagons ever closer and cry 'fascists' again and again with McCarthyite enthusiasm as the gulf between them and the rest grows ever wider.......
Ok I wouldn't use the word "fascist" but you're not helping your case when you say
"Today you are either with the people or you are with the ruling elite"
it implies that any people who disagree with you are against "the people"
> @SirNorfolkPassmore said: > > @isam said: > > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still? > > > > Although, has the turnout massively favoured Remain? > > > > Where turnout is up 4% or more there are more Leave areas > > That's a completely artificial metric to use. Why 4%? Why treat "Leave" areas the same whether they were 51% Leave or 65% Leave? No sensible statistician would use that approach. > > The obvious, statistically proper measure is to correlate change in turnout (2019 minus 2014) with 2016 Brexit vote. There you get a reasonably strong (r2=0.44), statistically robust (p<0.001) negative correlation - that is a very clear, reasonably strong (but not massive) picture where turnout change is higher in more Remain areas.
But how much that will effect the outcome depends on the relative frequency of leave/remain areas, which I think is isam's point?
> @isam said: > > @isam said: > > > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still? > > > > I wouldn’t say massively . Some Leave areas have shown increases aswell . I’m 100% certain the BP will win . > > > > The Remain votes are split . It would be different if there was just one Remain Alliance . > > > > As much as the polls have been all over the place with the other parties the BP has been well ahead . > > > > I wouldn’t lose any sleep over the turnout figures if you support the BP , they’re a shoe in for top spot. > > > > The interest is really the other placings. > > I think BXP+UKIP needs to beat the others not inc Lab and Con for a 2nd referendum or revoke to be killed off
The way to kill off a second EU ref is for MPs to agree a compromise . If Bozo goes full on no deal that’s more likely to increase support because there is no mandate for no deal.
That message is going to be driven relentlessly by more moderate pro EU Tories and the opposition .
And some Leavers don’t want no deal . I’m afraid we’re going to end up with either a GE or another EU ref unless some sanity returns to the Commons .
> @Byronic said: > > @Scott_P said: > > https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1131918251234136066<; > > ++++ > > "So the way to get a good deal is to spend lots of money preparing for a truly terrible deal, then when that truly terrible deal happens, and the economy goes into shock, we can then carefully prepare for a deep recession, the likely break-up of the UK, renewed violence in Ulster, and the victory of a Marxist in the next General Election." > > Have I got Bojo's manifesto right? It's certainly brave.
No Deal is what increasingly the voters want, certainly Leave voters and Boris can beat Corbyn on a hard Brexit platform in the autumn to get a mandate for it under FPTP
Madness from Boris. He's just reheating Theresa's 'No Deal is better than a bad deal'. He'll never get anything past Nigel and the ERG before November, so he's essentially bound himself to a crash out. He's stuffed.
Quite. The only logic that I can see in Boris's insane early positioning is that he is doing it to win the leadership, and shoot Farage's fox at the same time: then as the BXPers return he will call a GE and get a mandate.....
> @Stark_Dawning said: > Madness from Boris. He's just reheating Theresa's 'No Deal is better than a bad deal'. He'll never get anything past Nigel and the ERG before November, so he's essentially bound himself to a crash out. He's stuffed.
Not madness at all, Boris will go for No Deal if the EU will not amend the backstop as the vast majority of Leave voters and 2017 Tory voters now want and win back voters from the Brexit Party and win an autumn general election on that platform if necessary.
While Boris unites Leavers behind him, Corbyn is increasingly losing Remainers to the LDs and Greens, fatal under FPTP
> @Byronic said: > > @nico67 said: > > A Brexiter must be new PM. > > > > No more whining from the ERG death cult that if only a true believer was in charge .< > > ++++ > > Yes. Absolutely. Brexiteers have to take control of Brexit, and own it, for good or bad, otherwise we might develop some appalling stab-in-the-back myth like Weimar Germany. > > If Brexit faills, then it will be the Brexiteers' fault, and they won't be able to whine about saboteurs. If it succeeds, well, good for them, and thank God we somehow dodged a terrible bullet. > > That means we can rule out all Remainers (like Hunt or Javid). So it will be Gove, Johnson, Raab, or - at a stretch - Mordaunt (she should be a leading candidate, in my mind, but I doubt the Tories will pick two women in a row).
But they all fail a strict purity test. Johnson due to opportunism in general, Gove remained in cabinet, Raab joined cabinet *after* Chequers, etc. Of the declared candidates only Baker appears pure, but I'm sure he has his own pro-EU skeletons in his closet. He'd end up being a kowtowing traitor like the rest of them.
> @Pulpstar said: > D'Hondt favours big parties because a vote loses 50%, 16.6%, 8.3%, 5%, 3.3% of it's power for following seats ? > > 50 - 24 - 24 - 2 6 seats > > 50 - > 25 -> 16.6 -> 12.5 > 24 -> 12 > > 4: 2 split > > 50 - 48 - 2 is 3:3
It certainly does, especially in regions with a small number of seats. For instance, Labour won 2 out of 3 seats in the North East in 2014 with 36.5% of the vote.
> Anyway, looks like a second referendum has gotten a lot more likely. What fun that will be.
The pretext for finally defenestrating May was her inching closer to facilitating a second referendum. Suggest that makes a second referendum much less likely, but with May no longer leading the Tories another GE becomes much more likely.
That there may be a GE soon does not invalidate the point that it would likely lead to a second referendum...
If Boris wins the leadership with this stance - happy to go out with No Deal, then the pressure will be on Corbyn to call for a new vote, no ifs or buts.
I suspect Corbyn will cave and do that.
If Corbyn refuses, we could see the rise and rise of the LDs, as all the Remainers and anti No Dealers flock to Vince. They could actually win the next GE.
It's worth remembering that the one thing which is guaranteed to make the EU even more insistent on a cast-iron Irish backstop is the appointment of a PM they don't trust.
> @HYUFD said: > > @Stark_Dawning said: > > Madness from Boris. He's just reheating Theresa's 'No Deal is better than a bad deal'. He'll never get anything past Nigel and the ERG before November, so he's essentially bound himself to a crash out. He's stuffed. > > Not madness at all, Boris will go for No Deal if the EU will not amend the backstop as the vast majority of Leave voters and 2017 Tory voters now want and win back voters from the Brexit Party and win an autumn general election on that platform if necessary. > > While Boris unites Leavers behind him, Corbyn is increasingly losing Remainers to the LDs and Greens, fatal under FPTP <
++++
You seem to be ignoring the consequences of No Deal, which are, to put it politely, less than optimal. PM Boris would preside over total chaos.
> @HYUFD said: > > @Stark_Dawning said: > > Madness from Boris. He's just reheating Theresa's 'No Deal is better than a bad deal'. He'll never get anything past Nigel and the ERG before November, so he's essentially bound himself to a crash out. He's stuffed. > > Not madness at all, he will go for No Deal if the EU will not amend the backstop as the vast majority of Leave voters and 2017 Tory voters now want and win back voters from the Brexit Party. > > While Boris unites Leavers behind him, Corbyn is increasingly losing Remainers to the LDs and Greens, fatal under FPTP
As a Reluctant Remainer, I do think Boris is fundamentally right - as a negotiating stance. We will only get the backstop reworked (a massive "if" I concede) if we make them all think we are leaving with No Deal. Basic rules of negotiation. One of the principal reasons for us getting a very EU-favoured Withdrawal Deal was the failure of the Govt to be seen to pursue that strategy.
So I think Boris pursuing a tough line from July and saying it's either a better deal or we will just run down the clock to 31st Oct having made preparations for a No Deal - and by the way, what are your proposals Leo for that hard border your EU masters say you need to erect - would potentially be the game changer that TM was not prepared to deploy.
But I am not sure it would work. And we might very well crash out, unless the Grieves of this world VONC their own Government and bring about a GE first.
> @AndyJS said: > > @Pulpstar said: > > D'Hondt favours big parties because a vote loses 50%, 16.6%, 8.3%, 5%, 3.3% of it's power for following seats ? > > > > 50 - 24 - 24 - 2 6 seats > > > > 50 - > 25 -> 16.6 -> 12.5 > > 24 -> 12 > > > > 4: 2 split > > > > 50 - 48 - 2 is 3:3 > > It certainly does, especially in regions with a small number of seats. For instance, Labour won 2 out of 3 seats in the North East in 2014 with 36.5% of the vote. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_East_England_(European_Parliament_constituency)
Yes because having won the first seat, UKIP got the second and 18.25% of the vote was higher than the 17.7% the Tory party got.
I suspect it will be the same this time around unless the Lib Dems (who didn't send me nor my wife a leaflet) have really surged. Whoever gets the most votes out of Brexit and Labour will win the 3rd seat...
Quite. The only logic that I can see in Boris's insane early positioning is that he is doing it to win the leadership, and shoot Farage's fox at the same time: then as the BXPers return he will call a GE and get a mandate.....
.... but for what? No deal???
Won't his inflexible positioning make it harder for him to get on the ballot? I really don't grasp his strategy here.
Boris is discovering that criticising other is the easy part. When they're gone and you have to come up with ideas of your own, it's a whole different ball game.
> > > Quite. The only logic that I can see in Boris's insane early positioning is that he is doing it to win the leadership, and shoot Farage's fox at the same time: then as the BXPers return he will call a GE and get a mandate..... > > > > .... but for what? No deal??? > > Won't his inflexible positioning make it harder for him to get on the ballot? I really don't grasp his strategy here.<
+++++
Me neither. As I've said, this looks like a major unforced error from Boris. Bizarre.
It's worth remembering that the one thing which is guaranteed to make the EU even more insistent on a cast-iron Irish backstop is the appointment of a PM they don't trust.
Richard – you are a serious analyst and know the Tory Party inside out. Can you please explain Boris' strategy to me? My sense is his early position makes it much harder for him to make the ballot, and even more difficult to negotiate with the EU. If he doesn't make the ballot, his popularity in the party is irrelevant. Am I missing something?
> @_Anazina_ said: > > @Scott_P said: > > > https://twitter.com/jameskirkup/status/1131925334125961217 > > > > > > +++++ > > > > Quite. The only logic that I can see in Boris's insane early positioning is that he is doing it to win the leadership, and shoot Farage's fox at the same time: then as the BXPers return he will call a GE and get a mandate..... > > > > .... but for what? No deal??? > > Won't his inflexible positioning make it harder for him to get on the ballot? I really don't grasp his strategy here.
Nope, it is what most Tory members and 2017 Tory voters want and they will only vote for a candidate who delivers it, there are not enough Tory Remain MPs to get 2 Remainers in the final 2
> @HYUFD said: > > @Stark_Dawning said: > > Madness from Boris. He's just reheating Theresa's 'No Deal is better than a bad deal'. He'll never get anything past Nigel and the ERG before November, so he's essentially bound himself to a crash out. He's stuffed. > > Not madness at all, Boris will go for No Deal if the EU will not amend the backstop as the vast majority of Leave voters and 2017 Tory voters now want and win back voters from the Brexit Party and win an autumn general election on that platform if necessary. > > While Boris unites Leavers behind him, Corbyn is increasingly losing Remainers to the LDs and Greens, fatal under FPTP
Right - you think "No Deal" might win a general election where it wouldn't win a straight referendum, because of FPTP.
> @Byronic said: > > @HYUFD said: > > > @Stark_Dawning said: > > > Madness from Boris. He's just reheating Theresa's 'No Deal is better than a bad deal'. He'll never get anything past Nigel and the ERG before November, so he's essentially bound himself to a crash out. He's stuffed. > > > > Not madness at all, Boris will go for No Deal if the EU will not amend the backstop as the vast majority of Leave voters and 2017 Tory voters now want and win back voters from the Brexit Party and win an autumn general election on that platform if necessary. > > > > While Boris unites Leavers behind him, Corbyn is increasingly losing Remainers to the LDs and Greens, fatal under FPTP < > > ++++ > > You seem to be ignoring the consequences of No Deal, which are, to put it politely, less than optimal. PM Boris would preside over total chaos. > >
PM Boris will only go to No Deal if he wins a general election and defeats Corbyn on that platform in October. He then has 5 years as PM to deal with No Deal with a Tory majority if he does so
> @RobD said: > > @SirNorfolkPassmore said: > > > @isam said: > > > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still? > > > > > > Although, has the turnout massively favoured Remain? > > > > > > Where turnout is up 4% or more there are more Leave areas > > > > That's a completely artificial metric to use. Why 4%? Why treat "Leave" areas the same whether they were 51% Leave or 65% Leave? No sensible statistician would use that approach. > > > > The obvious, statistically proper measure is to correlate change in turnout (2019 minus 2014) with 2016 Brexit vote. There you get a reasonably strong (r2=0.44), statistically robust (p<0.001) negative correlation - that is a very clear, reasonably strong (but not massive) picture where turnout change is higher in more Remain areas. > > But how much that will effect the outcome depends on the relative frequency of leave/remain areas, which I think is isam's point?
I don't think that's a sensible approach as there is little commonality between an area that voted 50.1% Leave and one which voted 70% leave. Higher turnout in the latter area is fairly plainly good for the Brexit Party. Higher turnout in the latter isn't - it's more or less a wash (and of course could be driven by higher turnout from the 49.9%).
You lose all statistical power if you reduce it (completely unnecessarily) to a categorical "Brexit or Remain" measure. Anyone sensible wants to get the full range - does a 70% Brexit area have a higher or lower turnout change than a 55% Brexit one? How does that compare with 55% remain, or 70% Remain?
As a Reluctant Remainer, I do think Boris is fundamentally right - as a negotiating stance. We will only get the backstop reworked (a massive "if" I concede) if we make them all think we are leaving with No Deal.
> Quite. The only logic that I can see in Boris's insane early positioning is that he is doing it to win the leadership, and shoot Farage's fox at the same time: then as the BXPers return he will call a GE and get a mandate.....
>
>
>
> .... but for what? No deal???
>
> Won't his inflexible positioning make it harder for him to get on the ballot? I really don't grasp his strategy here.
Nope, it is what most Tory members and 2017 Tory voters want and they will only vote for a candidate who delivers it, there are not enough Tory Remain MPs to get 2 Remainers in the final 2
Perhaps so, but are there enough anti-Boris Tory MPs to prevent Boris being the Leave candidate?
> @SirNorfolkPassmore said: > > @RobD said: > > > @SirNorfolkPassmore said: > > > > @isam said: > > > > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still? > > > > > > > > Although, has the turnout massively favoured Remain? > > > > > > > > Where turnout is up 4% or more there are more Leave areas > > > > > > That's a completely artificial metric to use. Why 4%? Why treat "Leave" areas the same whether they were 51% Leave or 65% Leave? No sensible statistician would use that approach. > > > > > > The obvious, statistically proper measure is to correlate change in turnout (2019 minus 2014) with 2016 Brexit vote. There you get a reasonably strong (r2=0.44), statistically robust (p<0.001) negative correlation - that is a very clear, reasonably strong (but not massive) picture where turnout change is higher in more Remain areas. > > > > But how much that will effect the outcome depends on the relative frequency of leave/remain areas, which I think is isam's point? > > I don't think that's a sensible approach as there is little commonality between an area that voted 50.1% Leave and one which voted 70% leave. Higher turnout in the latter area is fairly plainly good for the Brexit Party. Higher turnout in the latter isn't - it's more or less a wash (and of course could be driven by higher turnout from the 49.9%). > > You lose all statistical power if you reduce it (completely unnecessarily) to a categorical "Brexit or Remain" measure. Anyone sensible wants to get the full range - does a 70% Brexit area have a higher or lower turnout change than a 55% Brexit one? How does that compare with 55% remain, or 70% Remain?
Not arguing that point, but you can have a strong correlation with a million leave areas of low turnout and one remain area of high turnout. In that scenario, it wouldn't matter at all because of the sheer number of leave areas.
> @Pulpstar said: > > @AndyJS said: > > Basildon seems to have posted the lowest turnout so far at 25.71% which is down by 4.80 points. > > Perhaps both Labour and the Tories have collapsed completely ?
Maybe, or it could just be lack of interest on all sides.
Well the pressure is now on the other Tory candidates - especially front-running Leavers like Raab and Gove - to come up with something DIFFERENT to Boris's kamikaze approach.
Richard – you are a serious analyst and know the Tory Party inside out. Can you please explain Boris' strategy to me? My sense is his early position makes it much harder for him to make the ballot, and even more difficult to negotiate with the EU. If he doesn't make the ballot, his popularity in the party is irrelevant. Am I missing something?
I wouldn't claim to know the party inside out - David Herdson or JohnO know much more than me about it - but FWIW I think your point is correct. However, Boris might be calculating that he has so much momentum that he will make it to the final two anyway, and that the most important thing is to maximise his support amongst members (who unfortunately have largely swallowed the naive line that no deal would be harmless).
> @Scott_P said: > As a Reluctant Remainer, I do think Boris is fundamentally right - as a negotiating stance. We will only get the backstop reworked (a massive "if" I concede) if we make them all think we are leaving with No Deal. > > No, we really won't
Absolutely. The correct approach to negotiations would have been to first build trust, but May set out to destroy it.
Johnson will probably be even worse. His reputation here in Germany is about as low as you can get. The only improvement will be IF he decides to pretend he has negotiated a fantastic deal (which is in reality exactly the same as May's), he would do a better job of selling it to the tory membership.
> @HYUFD said: > > @Richard_Nabavi said: > > https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1131926527418019840 > > > > > > > > Yes, that is exactly right. It's a major blunder by Boris, and a massive hostage to fortune if he does become PM. > > No, Boris is right, now May has gone he has to tell the EU to compromise on the backstop or he is ready to go to No Deal
I think you're as right about his chances of doing that as you were about the chances of May's fourth attempt with the WA.
Comments
> > @justin124 said:
> > > @Quincel said:
> > > > @nico67 said:
> > > > > @Scott_P said:
> > > > > Oh, Jeremy Corbyn...
> > > > >
> > > > > https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1131902885766356992
> > > >
> > > > Lmao! If Labour can’t beat the Lib Dems in Corbyns own seat then London is going to be a complete disaster for them .
> > > >
> > > > Without that Survation poll showing the Lib Dems on just 12% and Labour on 23% UK wide I’d be sure it’s going to be a disaster for Labour but how on earth can a poll done the night before be so wrong .
> > >
> > > Anyone know what the LDs are basing this on?
> >
> > Possibly based on observation at the verification stage of the count today.
>
> In Islington south and Finsbury or Islington north? The former used to be a Lib Dem Labour marginal and Thornberry came close to losing it in 2005 when she held on by less than 500 votes. The LDs used to run the council too pre the coalition. And during all that time Corbyn won his more down at heel north seat easily.
>
> Lib Dems doing well in Islington is just reverting to trend pre coalition?
>
> It’s remainer central anyway!
If you could pick one place in the country for remain to win it would probably be Islington. If Libs beat Labour in Sunderland or Newcastle then that would be very encouraging for the yellows.
> > @AndyJS said:
> > Thanks to whoever has done this spreadsheet with all the latest turnout information. I think it's Tim Joyce (@timjoyce11 on Twitter).
> >
> > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V-hS14v2F-ez5hKU_Lt9RIyUt_As4XgVkShtCXodzwc/edit#gid=676638115
> >
> > https://twitter.com/timjoyce11/status/1131907202846007297
>
> The average increase in turnout in remain areas is almost 5% whereas in leave areas it's only 0.1%. And in general remain areas contain larger numbers of voters than leave areas.
Outside London though there are far more leave than remain areas and in those remain areas there are still a lot of leavers who will we assume break for the BP whereas remainers have more ways to split their vote.
Even in London over 40 per cent voted leave.
We don’t actually know who turned out and how they split their vote which is quite key under dHondt?
> > @brendan16 said:
> > > @justin124 said:
> > > > @Quincel said:
> > > > > @nico67 said:
> > > > > > @Scott_P said:
> > > > > > Oh, Jeremy Corbyn...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1131902885766356992
> > > > >
> > > > > Lmao! If Labour can’t beat the Lib Dems in Corbyns own seat then London is going to be a complete disaster for them .
> > > > >
> > > > > Without that Survation poll showing the Lib Dems on just 12% and Labour on 23% UK wide I’d be sure it’s going to be a disaster for Labour but how on earth can a poll done the night before be so wrong .
> > > >
> > > > Anyone know what the LDs are basing this on?
> > >
> > > Possibly based on observation at the verification stage of the count today.
> >
> > In Islington south and Finsbury or Islington north? The former used to be a Lib Dem Labour marginal and Thornberry came close to losing it in 2005 when she held on by less than 500 votes. The LDs used to run the council too pre the coalition. And during all that time Corbyn won his more down at heel north seat easily.
> >
> > Lib Dems doing well in Islington is just reverting to trend pre coalition?
> >
> > It’s remainer central anyway!
>
> If you could pick one place in the country for remain to win it would probably be Islington. If Libs beat Labour in Sunderland or Newcastle then that would be very encouraging for the yellows.
Newcastle voted Remain. I would not be surprised. Sunderland would be a turn up, yes.
> > @Barnesian said:
> > > @Scott_P said:
> > > https://twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1131910015982419970
> >
> > Gosh. He sounds just like Theresa May!<
>
> +++++
>
> Quite. What a stupid opening move from Boris. Day 1 of the campaign.... and he's just made a Teresa May-like mistake, giving himself an unnecessary red line, and handing over a whacking great hostage to fortune.
>
> How can he not have learned from her disastrous inflexibility? To have any chance of delivering Brexit, you need to maintain maximum agility, keep open as much room for compromise, as possible.
>
> I thought he was meant to be cunning, at least?
Rubbish, if we do not leave in October the Brexit Party will slaughter the Tories (and indeed Labour too in Leave areas).
Enough. If the Commons refuses to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement as is and the EU refuses to amend the backstop No Deal it has to be
> > @marke09 said:
> > estimated declaration times for Sunday night
> >
> > East Midlands – 2330 Sunday (2320 in 2014)
> > Eastern – 2330 Sunday (2230 in 2014)
> > London – 0200 Monday (0306 in 2014)
> > North East – 2230 Sunday (2215 in 2014)
> > North West – 0030 Monday (0024 in 2014)
> > Scotland – 1100 Monday (1235 in 2014). NB Seats allocation for Scotland will be known from overnight local counts but the Western Isles count taking place in the day delays the final declaration.
> > Wales – 0001 Monday (2338 Sunday in 2014)
> > South East – 0100 Monday (0046 in 2014)
> > South West – 2300 Sunday (2338 in 2014)
> > West Midlands – 0001 Monday (0030 in 2014)
> > Yorkshire & The Humber – 2300 Sunday (2328 in 2014)
>
> Why is the count in London so Slow and so late? It has one of the lowest number of local authority areas to report - only 33?
Do we get the regions all at once? Or do the component LA's announce as and when they are ready?
Surely next PM wouldn't be chosen by just over 25% of Con members?
> It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still?
Because if turnout is only slightly up on 5 years ago how are the Libs going to get an extra 3.5 million votes to overtake The Brexit Party (assuming they will at least match UKIP's total).
> > @Streeter said:
> > “Her successor will have exactly the same choice: face up to the lie, or face failure.”
>
> Yes, this isn't going to be the panacea that some seem to think.
I'm reminded of the "The Cat In The Hat":
'that is good,' said the fish.
'he has gone away. yes.
but your mother will come.
she will find this big mess!
and this mess is so big
and so deep and so tall,
we can not pick it up.
there is no way at all!'
> It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still?
Because the polls show overwhelming victory for BXP and the Remain vote is split many ways
Where turnout is up 4% or more there are more Leave areas
> I know it's a big if, but IF say four MPs were put to the Con members ballot, would it be FPTP or AV?
>
> Surely next PM wouldn't be chosen by just over 25% of Con members?
The rules (in the party constitution, so harder to change than the MP section) require a 50%+ winner with the members, so if more than 2 candidates progress there will need to be transferable votes.
Brexit Date H2 2019: 2.68 / 3.3
GE now favourite to happen before Brexit.
>
> Rubbish, if we do not leave in October the Brexit Party will slaughter the Tories (and indeed Labour too in Leave areas).
>
> Enough. If the Commons refuses to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement as is and the EU refuses to amend the backstop No Deal it has to be <
+++++
Like T May, Boris will face a parliament with a large majority against No Deal. Can he just steamroll over them?
Once the euros are over, Farage's influence, for a while, fades significantly (unless Boris calls a GE).
It looks to me like Boris is just trying to be Teresa May, but with added "self confidence" because he is Boris. HIS mighty willpower and charisma will defeat the awful people in Brussels, just as she thought her determination would prevail.
God help us.
> It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still?
I wouldn’t say massively . Some Leave areas have shown increases aswell . I’m 100% certain the BP will win .
The Remain votes are split . It would be different if there was just one Remain Alliance .
As much as the polls have been all over the place with the other parties the BP has been well ahead .
I wouldn’t lose any sleep over the turnout figures if you support the BP , they’re a shoe in for top spot.
The interest is really the other placings.
People who get milk shakes thrown at them are fascists
> It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still?
>
> Although, has the turnout massively favoured Remain?
>
> Where turnout is up 4% or more there are more Leave areas
But remain areas generally have more voters, and if remain areas of London also have bigger turnout increases I think we can say that the Lib Dems will be on course to do well and probably come a good second to BP.
> > @isam said:
> > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still?
>
> I wouldn’t say massively . Some Leave areas have shown increases aswell . I’m 100% certain the BP will win .
>
> The Remain votes are split . It would be different if there was just one Remain Alliance .
>
> As much as the polls have been all over the place with the other parties the BP has been well ahead .
>
> I wouldn’t lose any sleep over the turnout figures if you support the BP , they’re a shoe in for top spot.
>
> The interest is really the other placings.
Exactly, if the European elections were conducted under FPTP rather than PR it would be a Brexit Party landslide.
It is only PR makes totting up the Remain and Leave parties totals relevant, for a Westminster election it would have no relevance at all as the SNP proved in 2013 winning 56 out of 59 Scottish MPs despite only winning half the Scottish vote or in 2017 when the SNP won a clear majority of Scottish seats on just 38% of the vote
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/05/24/european-elections-2019-results-exit-polls-uk/
We'll see if that happens.
> It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still?
>
> Although, has the turnout massively favoured Remain?
>
> Where turnout is up 4% or more there are more Leave areas
That's a completely artificial metric to use. Why 4%? Why treat "Leave" areas the same whether they were 51% Leave or 65% Leave? No sensible statistician would use that approach.
The obvious, statistically proper measure is to correlate change in turnout (2019 minus 2014) with 2016 Brexit vote. There you get a reasonably strong (r2=0.44), statistically robust (p<0.001) negative correlation - that is a very clear, reasonably strong (but not massive) picture where turnout change is higher in more Remain areas.
> https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1131918251234136066<;
++++
"So the way to get a good deal is to spend lots of money preparing for a truly terrible deal, then when that truly terrible deal happens, and the economy goes into shock, we can then carefully prepare for a deep recession, the likely break-up of the UK, renewed violence in Ulster, and the victory of a Marxist in the next General Election."
Have I got Bojo's manifesto right? It's certainly brave.
> > @MikeL said:
> > I know it's a big if, but IF say four MPs were put to the Con members ballot, would it be FPTP or AV?
> >
> > Surely next PM wouldn't be chosen by just over 25% of Con members?
>
> The rules (in the party constitution, so harder to change than the MP section) require a 50%+ winner with the members, so if more than 2 candidates progress there will need to be transferable votes.
Helpful to Gove and Raab surely?
> Anyway, looks like a second referendum has gotten a lot more likely. What fun that will be.
The pretext for finally defenestrating May was her inching closer to facilitating a second referendum. Suggest that makes a second referendum much less likely, but with May no longer leading the Tories another GE becomes much more likely.
> Have any of the parties given indications of how they think they have got on during the Euro elections yet?
The LDs think they may have beaten Labour in Islington.
> Its be a long while since I've commented as I grew tired of all the nonsense written about EU withdrawal and three years on nothing has changed except that the ramblings of the so called 'liberal consensus' have become even more desperate, hackneyed and outdated.
>
> 'Fascist' they cry in their fervoured sanctimonious self justification but is it the 'fascists' who repeatedly over the years have attempted to impose their faux democratic party political systems on other nations? Is it 'the fascists' who have determinedly attempted to subvert a properly conducted referendum because basically they didn't get their way and their precious tender egos can't stand the rejection and in doing so have callously done more damage to this nation than Brexit ever would have?
>
> The reality is that the label 'fascist' (which seems now to refer to anyone who upsets the narrow minded sensitivities of the so called liberal consensus) is as tired and outdated as its compatriot 'communist' and indeed the worldview of the so called Liberal Consensus (big is not always better and progress has stopped being progressive). Today you are either with the people or you are with the ruling elite and its clear that the so called now inappropriately named Liberal Consensus are only for the elite.
>
> Of course there is a problem with being for the elite. Elites ultimately only involve the few, never the many and as the liberal elite's numbers dwindle so they circle the wagons ever closer and cry 'fascists' again and again with McCarthyite enthusiasm as the gulf between them and the rest grows ever wider.......
Ok I wouldn't use the word "fascist" but you're not helping your case when you say
"Today you are either with the people or you are with the ruling elite"
it implies that any people who disagree with you are against "the people"
which is indeed the first step towards fascism.
50 - 24 - 24 - 2 6 seats
50 - > 25 -> 16.6 -> 12.5
24 -> 12
4: 2 split
50 - 48 - 2 is 3:3
> > @isam said:
> > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still?
> >
> > Although, has the turnout massively favoured Remain?
> >
> > Where turnout is up 4% or more there are more Leave areas
>
> That's a completely artificial metric to use. Why 4%? Why treat "Leave" areas the same whether they were 51% Leave or 65% Leave? No sensible statistician would use that approach.
>
> The obvious, statistically proper measure is to correlate change in turnout (2019 minus 2014) with 2016 Brexit vote. There you get a reasonably strong (r2=0.44), statistically robust (p<0.001) negative correlation - that is a very clear, reasonably strong (but not massive) picture where turnout change is higher in more Remain areas.
But how much that will effect the outcome depends on the relative frequency of leave/remain areas, which I think is isam's point?
> > @isam said:
>
> > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still?
>
>
>
> I wouldn’t say massively . Some Leave areas have shown increases aswell . I’m 100% certain the BP will win .
>
>
>
> The Remain votes are split . It would be different if there was just one Remain Alliance .
>
>
>
> As much as the polls have been all over the place with the other parties the BP has been well ahead .
>
>
>
> I wouldn’t lose any sleep over the turnout figures if you support the BP , they’re a shoe in for top spot.
>
>
>
> The interest is really the other placings.
>
> I think BXP+UKIP needs to beat the others not inc Lab and Con for a 2nd referendum or revoke to be killed off
The way to kill off a second EU ref is for MPs to agree a compromise . If Bozo goes full on no deal that’s more likely to increase support because there is no mandate for no deal.
That message is going to be driven relentlessly by more moderate pro EU Tories and the opposition .
And some Leavers don’t want no deal . I’m afraid we’re going to end up with either a GE or another EU ref unless some sanity returns to the Commons .
> > @Scott_P said:
> > https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1131918251234136066<;
>
> ++++
>
> "So the way to get a good deal is to spend lots of money preparing for a truly terrible deal, then when that truly terrible deal happens, and the economy goes into shock, we can then carefully prepare for a deep recession, the likely break-up of the UK, renewed violence in Ulster, and the victory of a Marxist in the next General Election."
>
> Have I got Bojo's manifesto right? It's certainly brave.
No Deal is what increasingly the voters want, certainly Leave voters and Boris can beat Corbyn on a hard Brexit platform in the autumn to get a mandate for it under FPTP
> https://twitter.com/jameskirkup/status/1131925334125961217<;
+++++
Quite. The only logic that I can see in Boris's insane early positioning is that he is doing it to win the leadership, and shoot Farage's fox at the same time: then as the BXPers return he will call a GE and get a mandate.....
.... but for what? No deal???
> Madness from Boris. He's just reheating Theresa's 'No Deal is better than a bad deal'. He'll never get anything past Nigel and the ERG before November, so he's essentially bound himself to a crash out. He's stuffed.
Not madness at all, Boris will go for No Deal if the EU will not amend the backstop as the vast majority of Leave voters and 2017 Tory voters now want and win back voters from the Brexit Party and win an autumn general election on that platform if necessary.
While Boris unites Leavers behind him, Corbyn is increasingly losing Remainers to the LDs and Greens, fatal under FPTP
> > @nico67 said:
> > A Brexiter must be new PM.
> >
> > No more whining from the ERG death cult that if only a true believer was in charge .<
>
> ++++
>
> Yes. Absolutely. Brexiteers have to take control of Brexit, and own it, for good or bad, otherwise we might develop some appalling stab-in-the-back myth like Weimar Germany.
>
> If Brexit faills, then it will be the Brexiteers' fault, and they won't be able to whine about saboteurs. If it succeeds, well, good for them, and thank God we somehow dodged a terrible bullet.
>
> That means we can rule out all Remainers (like Hunt or Javid). So it will be Gove, Johnson, Raab, or - at a stretch - Mordaunt (she should be a leading candidate, in my mind, but I doubt the Tories will pick two women in a row).
But they all fail a strict purity test. Johnson due to opportunism in general, Gove remained in cabinet, Raab joined cabinet *after* Chequers, etc. Of the declared candidates only Baker appears pure, but I'm sure he has his own pro-EU skeletons in his closet. He'd end up being a kowtowing traitor like the rest of them.
> D'Hondt favours big parties because a vote loses 50%, 16.6%, 8.3%, 5%, 3.3% of it's power for following seats ?
>
> 50 - 24 - 24 - 2 6 seats
>
> 50 - > 25 -> 16.6 -> 12.5
> 24 -> 12
>
> 4: 2 split
>
> 50 - 48 - 2 is 3:3
It certainly does, especially in regions with a small number of seats. For instance, Labour won 2 out of 3 seats in the North East in 2014 with 36.5% of the vote.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_East_England_(European_Parliament_constituency)
> Basildon seems to have posted the lowest turnout so far at 25.71% which is down by 4.80 points.
Perhaps both Labour and the Tories have collapsed completely ?
I suspect Corbyn will cave and do that.
If Corbyn refuses, we could see the rise and rise of the LDs, as all the Remainers and anti No Dealers flock to Vince. They could actually win the next GE.
Let’s just say business panics and we see a large manufacturer pull the plug on the UK.
So in interviews.
PM your course of action is now leading to the loss of those jobs , what do you say to those people.
No dealers in the public will soon turn on the Tories .
> > @Stark_Dawning said:
> > Madness from Boris. He's just reheating Theresa's 'No Deal is better than a bad deal'. He'll never get anything past Nigel and the ERG before November, so he's essentially bound himself to a crash out. He's stuffed.
>
> Not madness at all, Boris will go for No Deal if the EU will not amend the backstop as the vast majority of Leave voters and 2017 Tory voters now want and win back voters from the Brexit Party and win an autumn general election on that platform if necessary.
>
> While Boris unites Leavers behind him, Corbyn is increasingly losing Remainers to the LDs and Greens, fatal under FPTP <
++++
You seem to be ignoring the consequences of No Deal, which are, to put it politely, less than optimal. PM Boris would preside over total chaos.
> > @Stark_Dawning said:
> > Madness from Boris. He's just reheating Theresa's 'No Deal is better than a bad deal'. He'll never get anything past Nigel and the ERG before November, so he's essentially bound himself to a crash out. He's stuffed.
>
> Not madness at all, he will go for No Deal if the EU will not amend the backstop as the vast majority of Leave voters and 2017 Tory voters now want and win back voters from the Brexit Party.
>
> While Boris unites Leavers behind him, Corbyn is increasingly losing Remainers to the LDs and Greens, fatal under FPTP
As a Reluctant Remainer, I do think Boris is fundamentally right - as a negotiating stance. We will only get the backstop reworked (a massive "if" I concede) if we make them all think we are leaving with No Deal. Basic rules of negotiation. One of the principal reasons for us getting a very EU-favoured Withdrawal Deal was the failure of the Govt to be seen to pursue that strategy.
So I think Boris pursuing a tough line from July and saying it's either a better deal or we will just run down the clock to 31st Oct having made preparations for a No Deal - and by the way, what are your proposals Leo for that hard border your EU masters say you need to erect - would potentially be the game changer that TM was not prepared to deploy.
But I am not sure it would work. And we might very well crash out, unless the Grieves of this world VONC their own Government and bring about a GE first.
Which is not inconceivable....
> > @Pulpstar said:
> > D'Hondt favours big parties because a vote loses 50%, 16.6%, 8.3%, 5%, 3.3% of it's power for following seats ?
> >
> > 50 - 24 - 24 - 2 6 seats
> >
> > 50 - > 25 -> 16.6 -> 12.5
> > 24 -> 12
> >
> > 4: 2 split
> >
> > 50 - 48 - 2 is 3:3
>
> It certainly does, especially in regions with a small number of seats. For instance, Labour won 2 out of 3 seats in the North East in 2014 with 36.5% of the vote.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_East_England_(European_Parliament_constituency)
Yes because having won the first seat, UKIP got the second and 18.25% of the vote was higher than the 17.7% the Tory party got.
I suspect it will be the same this time around unless the Lib Dems (who didn't send me nor my wife a leaflet) have really surged. Whoever gets the most votes out of Brexit and Labour will win the 3rd seat...
> That there may be a GE soon does not invalidate the point that it would likely lead to a second referendum...
Oh. Yes. Now I see.
>
>
> Quite. The only logic that I can see in Boris's insane early positioning is that he is doing it to win the leadership, and shoot Farage's fox at the same time: then as the BXPers return he will call a GE and get a mandate.....
>
>
>
> .... but for what? No deal???
>
> Won't his inflexible positioning make it harder for him to get on the ballot? I really don't grasp his strategy here.<
+++++
Me neither. As I've said, this looks like a major unforced error from Boris.
Bizarre.
Richard – you are a serious analyst and know the Tory Party inside out. Can you please explain Boris' strategy to me? My sense is his early position makes it much harder for him to make the ballot, and even more difficult to negotiate with the EU. If he doesn't make the ballot, his popularity in the party is irrelevant. Am I missing something?
> > @Scott_P said:
>
> > https://twitter.com/jameskirkup/status/1131925334125961217
>
>
>
>
>
> +++++
>
>
>
> Quite. The only logic that I can see in Boris's insane early positioning is that he is doing it to win the leadership, and shoot Farage's fox at the same time: then as the BXPers return he will call a GE and get a mandate.....
>
>
>
> .... but for what? No deal???
>
> Won't his inflexible positioning make it harder for him to get on the ballot? I really don't grasp his strategy here.
Nope, it is what most Tory members and 2017 Tory voters want and they will only vote for a candidate who delivers it, there are not enough Tory Remain MPs to get 2 Remainers in the final 2
I wonder if there's scope for a deal Leaver, if you like, to get the Leave MPs, and the Remainers will go for a Hunt type.
It'd be nice if Boris got nowhere, though he's the current favourite.
> > @Stark_Dawning said:
> > Madness from Boris. He's just reheating Theresa's 'No Deal is better than a bad deal'. He'll never get anything past Nigel and the ERG before November, so he's essentially bound himself to a crash out. He's stuffed.
>
> Not madness at all, Boris will go for No Deal if the EU will not amend the backstop as the vast majority of Leave voters and 2017 Tory voters now want and win back voters from the Brexit Party and win an autumn general election on that platform if necessary.
>
> While Boris unites Leavers behind him, Corbyn is increasingly losing Remainers to the LDs and Greens, fatal under FPTP
Right - you think "No Deal" might win a general election where it wouldn't win a straight referendum, because of FPTP.
> > @HYUFD said:
> > > @Stark_Dawning said:
> > > Madness from Boris. He's just reheating Theresa's 'No Deal is better than a bad deal'. He'll never get anything past Nigel and the ERG before November, so he's essentially bound himself to a crash out. He's stuffed.
> >
> > Not madness at all, Boris will go for No Deal if the EU will not amend the backstop as the vast majority of Leave voters and 2017 Tory voters now want and win back voters from the Brexit Party and win an autumn general election on that platform if necessary.
> >
> > While Boris unites Leavers behind him, Corbyn is increasingly losing Remainers to the LDs and Greens, fatal under FPTP <
>
> ++++
>
> You seem to be ignoring the consequences of No Deal, which are, to put it politely, less than optimal. PM Boris would preside over total chaos.
>
>
PM Boris will only go to No Deal if he wins a general election and defeats Corbyn on that platform in October. He then has 5 years as PM to deal with No Deal with a Tory majority if he does so
https://twitter.com/redhistorian/status/1131927340664184832
[Theresa May] was diligent, serious and incorruptible in her approach — qualities we all take for granted, until a future premier lacks them.
> > @SirNorfolkPassmore said:
> > > @isam said:
> > > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still?
> > >
> > > Although, has the turnout massively favoured Remain?
> > >
> > > Where turnout is up 4% or more there are more Leave areas
> >
> > That's a completely artificial metric to use. Why 4%? Why treat "Leave" areas the same whether they were 51% Leave or 65% Leave? No sensible statistician would use that approach.
> >
> > The obvious, statistically proper measure is to correlate change in turnout (2019 minus 2014) with 2016 Brexit vote. There you get a reasonably strong (r2=0.44), statistically robust (p<0.001) negative correlation - that is a very clear, reasonably strong (but not massive) picture where turnout change is higher in more Remain areas.
>
> But how much that will effect the outcome depends on the relative frequency of leave/remain areas, which I think is isam's point?
I don't think that's a sensible approach as there is little commonality between an area that voted 50.1% Leave and one which voted 70% leave. Higher turnout in the latter area is fairly plainly good for the Brexit Party. Higher turnout in the latter isn't - it's more or less a wash (and of course could be driven by higher turnout from the 49.9%).
You lose all statistical power if you reduce it (completely unnecessarily) to a categorical "Brexit or Remain" measure. Anyone sensible wants to get the full range - does a 70% Brexit area have a higher or lower turnout change than a 55% Brexit one? How does that compare with 55% remain, or 70% Remain?
> https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1131926527418019840
>
>
>
> Yes, that is exactly right. It's a major blunder by Boris, and a massive hostage to fortune if he does become PM.
No, Boris is right, now May has gone he has to tell the EU to compromise on the backstop or he is ready to go to No Deal
> > @RobD said:
> > > @SirNorfolkPassmore said:
> > > > @isam said:
> > > > It seems like the turnout massively favours Remain... so why are BXP 1.02-1.03 still?
> > > >
> > > > Although, has the turnout massively favoured Remain?
> > > >
> > > > Where turnout is up 4% or more there are more Leave areas
> > >
> > > That's a completely artificial metric to use. Why 4%? Why treat "Leave" areas the same whether they were 51% Leave or 65% Leave? No sensible statistician would use that approach.
> > >
> > > The obvious, statistically proper measure is to correlate change in turnout (2019 minus 2014) with 2016 Brexit vote. There you get a reasonably strong (r2=0.44), statistically robust (p<0.001) negative correlation - that is a very clear, reasonably strong (but not massive) picture where turnout change is higher in more Remain areas.
> >
> > But how much that will effect the outcome depends on the relative frequency of leave/remain areas, which I think is isam's point?
>
> I don't think that's a sensible approach as there is little commonality between an area that voted 50.1% Leave and one which voted 70% leave. Higher turnout in the latter area is fairly plainly good for the Brexit Party. Higher turnout in the latter isn't - it's more or less a wash (and of course could be driven by higher turnout from the 49.9%).
>
> You lose all statistical power if you reduce it (completely unnecessarily) to a categorical "Brexit or Remain" measure. Anyone sensible wants to get the full range - does a 70% Brexit area have a higher or lower turnout change than a 55% Brexit one? How does that compare with 55% remain, or 70% Remain?
Not arguing that point, but you can have a strong correlation with a million leave areas of low turnout and one remain area of high turnout. In that scenario, it wouldn't matter at all because of the sheer number of leave areas.
> > @AndyJS said:
> > Basildon seems to have posted the lowest turnout so far at 25.71% which is down by 4.80 points.
>
> Perhaps both Labour and the Tories have collapsed completely ?
Maybe, or it could just be lack of interest on all sides.
Should be interesting.
> Important thread
>
> https://twitter.com/redhistorian/status/1131927340664184832
That's actually very good.
> PM Boris won't go to no deal. Take it as read.<
++++
Show us your workings?
https://twitter.com/PJHeneghan
> As a Reluctant Remainer, I do think Boris is fundamentally right - as a negotiating stance. We will only get the backstop reworked (a massive "if" I concede) if we make them all think we are leaving with No Deal.
>
> No, we really won't
Absolutely. The correct approach to negotiations would have been to first build trust, but May set out to destroy it.
Johnson will probably be even worse. His reputation here in Germany is about as low as you can get. The only improvement will be IF he decides to pretend he has negotiated a fantastic deal (which is in reality exactly the same as May's), he would do a better job of selling it to the tory membership.
> https://twitter.com/NinaDSchick/status/1131930325968478210 <
+++++
Hah. We are close to a parallel universe. Except Macron wouldn't tolerate this.
> > @Richard_Nabavi said:
> > https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1131926527418019840
> >
> >
> >
> > Yes, that is exactly right. It's a major blunder by Boris, and a massive hostage to fortune if he does become PM.
>
> No, Boris is right, now May has gone he has to tell the EU to compromise on the backstop or he is ready to go to No Deal
I think you're as right about his chances of doing that as you were about the chances of May's fourth attempt with the WA.
> https://twitter.com/NinaDSchick/status/1131930325968478210
That's irrelevant unless <b>all</b> of them back it. Any extension has to be agreed unanimously.