Highly tempted by that 5/1 on BJ to lose his seat.
10/1 to change seat is better
Leadership interviews - ran away Leadership debates - ran away Parliamentary scrutiny - prorogues Deal with rebels - not talking to them and kick them out
A coward only interested in himself.
Some rumours heard at the weekend Boris will be dropped into Beckenham replacing Bob Stewart who will be off to the Lords
Ooh, I could apply for that. It's where I grew up. I'm not sure the members would vote for me over BJ, though.
It is however quite a bit more Remainy than Uxbridge, larger majority nothwithstanding...
I’ve contacted Phil Hammond and a few other anti No Dealers asking them to include in their anti No Deal legislation a clause banning OGH from taking foreign holidays.
If that includes Christmas holidays, would that be a Santa clause?
Wouldn’t it be fun if after yet another GE we still end up with a hung Parliament?
No please no
A hung parliament is very likely imo. Both in party terms and Brexit resolution terms. Which is why Brexiteers best chances of Brexit have always been a 2nd referendum or voting for the deal, neither of which they are willing to do.
Is HYUFD waiting to be briefed on the new line ? Unusually quiet.
No, a general election suits Boris fine, as does a minority government of diehard Remainers leaving him with Leavers united behind him.
In Uxbridge on present polling Boris will increase his majority, remember Hillingdon where Uxbridge lies voted Leave and many 2017 Labour Remainers will vote LD this time splitting the anti Boris vote
So he would be happy out of power as the Leavers would be united behind him?
Temporarily as he would win a landslide at the next general election maybe
Very interested to see what Farage does in the event of an election coming into view this week. Stand down the Brexit party is obviously the best way to get a government back that are likely to implement some sort of brexit.
Or go for it split the blue vote and have a lucrative career as the brexit prince over the water for another 20 years.
Highly tempted by that 5/1 on BJ to lose his seat.
10/1 to change seat is better
Leadership interviews - ran away Leadership debates - ran away Parliamentary scrutiny - prorogues Deal with rebels - not talking to them and kick them out
A coward only interested in himself.
I find it bizarre that people are still accusing Boris of being a coward. He may be reckless or incompetent or wrong but he has shown a determination and focus since becoming PM. Having an election now and risking being the briefest PM in history is not the act of a coward. It may well be what Yes Minister might have called "brave".
He's simply at the mercy of events, having made the initial spectacular error of tying himself to the October 31st date.
I think that is too simple. The extension to 31st October has been a disaster. We should have left in March. It has damaged our economy, damaged our politics and damaged the Conservative party. I can see no evidence at all that any further extension would not be even worse. Parliament must choose and if it won't we need a different Parliament.
Further extension if allowed by Boris likely puts Farage in Downing Street or Corbyn in Downing Street with a split Leaver vote
If Ed Milliband had won we would be sharing pictures of our free owls now. LoO Osborne would be having fun at the EdStones expenses. Boris Johnson would be about to debut on Strictly. Farage would be a witness in the trial of once presidential hopeful Trump.
SLab at 35% Scon at 25% SLD at 20% SNP at 15%.
Ed Miliband, saviour of the Union.
Under Ed Miliband Slab lost all but 1 of their seats in 2015
Highly tempted by that 5/1 on BJ to lose his seat.
10/1 to change seat is better
Leadership interviews - ran away Leadership debates - ran away Parliamentary scrutiny - prorogues Deal with rebels - not talking to them and kick them out
A coward only interested in himself.
I find it bizarre that people are still accusing Boris of being a coward. He may be reckless or incompetent or wrong but he has shown a determination and focus since becoming PM. Having an election now and risking being the briefest PM in history is not the act of a coward. It may well be what Yes Minister might have called "brave".
He's simply at the mercy of events, having made the initial spectacular error of tying himself to the October 31st date.
I think that is too simple. The extension to 31st October has been a disaster. We should have left in March. It has damaged our economy, damaged our politics and damaged the Conservative party. I can see no evidence at all that any further extension would not be even worse. Parliament must choose and if it won't we need a different Parliament.
Further extension if allowed by Boris likely puts Farage in Downing Street or Corbyn in Downing Street with a split Leaver vote
What would you do then?
Not extend under any circumstances whatsoever
I mean, in the event that Corbyn is in Downing Street. What would you do?
Certainly amending the FTPA to remove the PM's power to postpone the election date for as long as s/he wanted would be one of the simpler things the sane majority in the Commons could do.
Brexit may be Cameron's legacy, but the FTPA is Clegg's.
Is HYUFD waiting to be briefed on the new line ? Unusually quiet.
No, a general election suits Boris fine, as does a minority government of diehard Remainers leaving him with Leavers united behind him.
In Uxbridge on present polling Boris will increase his majority, remember Hillingdon where Uxbridge lies voted Leave and many 2017 Labour Remainers will vote LD this time splitting the anti Boris vote
So he would be happy out of power as the Leavers would be united behind him?
Temporarily as he would win a landslide at the next general election maybe
Wouldn’t the purdah rules make it very difficult for the government to take the necessary action to deal with any problems? So they could face a No Deal exit, some sort of crisis, an inability to deal with it properly, said crisis getting worse and having a disastrous effect on the Tories’ electoral chances. It might even lead to the Tories getting No Deal but losing the election.
Is that really what Boris wants?
Usually no. For example the volcano ash business hit during the 2010 campaign and all sorts of things needed to be done. However if everyone is sane and you notify the opposition via the usual channels no one argues with emergency activity.
However you do have a point that it might look a bit different if the crisis is Brexit. Do you want to tell the opposition what all the issues are? If you did then they’d surely use them against you, but if you don’t then you might find some limits on what you can do. There again that’s probably only by convention and we’ve chucked all of them now haven’t we?
Highly tempted by that 5/1 on BJ to lose his seat.
10/1 to change seat is better
Leadership interviews - ran away Leadership debates - ran away Parliamentary scrutiny - prorogues Deal with rebels - not talking to them and kick them out
A coward only interested in himself.
I find it bizarre that people are still accusing Boris of being a coward. He may be reckless or incompetent or wrong but he has shown a determination and focus since becoming PM. Having an election now and risking being the briefest PM in history is not the act of a coward. It may well be what Yes Minister might have called "brave".
He's simply at the mercy of events, having made the initial spectacular error of tying himself to the October 31st date.
I think that is too simple. The extension to 31st October has been a disaster. We should have left in March. It has damaged our economy, damaged our politics and damaged the Conservative party. I can see no evidence at all that any further extension would not be even worse. Parliament must choose and if it won't we need a different Parliament.
Further extension if allowed by Boris likely puts Farage in Downing Street or Corbyn in Downing Street with a split Leaver vote
Highly tempted by that 5/1 on BJ to lose his seat.
10/1 to change seat is better
Leadership interviews - ran away Leadership debates - ran away Parliamentary scrutiny - prorogues Deal with rebels - not talking to them and kick them out
A coward only interested in himself.
I find it bizarre that people are still accusing Boris of being a coward. He may be reckless or incompetent or wrong but he has shown a determination and focus since becoming PM. Having an election now and risking being the briefest PM in history is not the act of a coward. It may well be what Yes Minister might have called "brave".
He's simply at the mercy of events, having made the initial spectacular error of tying himself to the October 31st date.
I think that is too simple. The extension to 31st October has been a disaster. We should have left in March. It has damaged our economy, damaged our politics and damaged the Conservative party. I can see no evidence at all that any further extension would not be even worse. Parliament must choose and if it won't we need a different Parliament.
Further extension if allowed by Boris likely puts Farage in Downing Street or Corbyn in Downing Street with a split Leaver vote
What would you do then?
Not extend under any circumstances whatsoever
I mean, in the event that Corbyn is in Downing Street. What would you do?
Corbyn won't get to Downing Street without forcing Boris to extend again, which he won't and getting Swinson's support, which she won't give
FWIW I think that Boris will win a majority. Probably lose 7-9 seats to the SNP, a dozen or so to the Lib Dems but gain 40+ from Labour. Whether that actually amounts to a majority will very much depend on how many of the 22 are still there.
I’ve contacted Phil Hammond and a few other anti No Dealers asking them to include in their anti No Deal legislation a clause banning OGH from taking foreign holidays.
If that includes Christmas holidays, would that be a Santa clause?
You win the 2019 Ydoethur pun award.
You perhaps missed my epic description of Byronic’s highfalutin, bibulous Mediterranean musings as ‘wine dark prose’.
Highly tempted by that 5/1 on BJ to lose his seat.
10/1 to change seat is better
Leadership interviews - ran away Leadership debates - ran away Parliamentary scrutiny - prorogues Deal with rebels - not talking to them and kick them out
A coward only interested in himself.
I find it bizarre that people are still accusing Boris of being a coward. He may be reckless or incompetent or wrong but he has shown a determination and focus since becoming PM. Having an election now and risking being the briefest PM in history is not the act of a coward. It may well be what Yes Minister might have called "brave".
He's simply at the mercy of events, having made the initial spectacular error of tying himself to the October 31st date.
I think that is too simple. The extension to 31st October has been a disaster. We should have left in March. It has damaged our economy, damaged our politics and damaged the Conservative party. I can see no evidence at all that any further extension would not be even worse. Parliament must choose and if it won't we need a different Parliament.
Further extension if allowed by Boris likely puts Farage in Downing Street or Corbyn in Downing Street with a split Leaver vote
What would you do then?
Not extend under any circumstances whatsoever
I mean, in the event that Corbyn is in Downing Street. What would you do?
Corbyn won't get to Downing Street without forcing Boris to extend again, which he won't and getting Swinson's support, which she won't give
Wouldn’t it be fun if after yet another GE we still end up with a hung Parliament?
No please no
A hung parliament is very likely imo. Both in party terms and Brexit resolution terms. Which is why Brexiteers best chances of Brexit have always been a 2nd referendum or voting for the deal, neither of which they are willing to do.
Another hung parliament would almost certainly be the end of Brexit. A hung parliament will never agree a deal or no deal, therefore remain will become the default outcome. Very hard to see why Johnson is rushing into an election - his chances of gaining a majority for no deal are slim.
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Highly tempted by that 5/1 on BJ to lose his seat.
10/1 to change seat is better
Leadership interviews - ran away Leadership debates - ran away Parliamentary scrutiny - prorogues Deal with rebels - not talking to them and kick them out
A coward only interested in himself.
I find it bizarre that people are still accusing Boris of being a coward. He may be reckless or incompetent or wrong but he has shown a determination and focus since becoming PM. Having an election now and risking being the briefest PM in history is not the act of a coward. It may well be what Yes Minister might have called "brave".
He's simply at the mercy of events, having made the initial spectacular error of tying himself to the October 31st date.
I think that is too simple. The extension to 31st October has been a disaster. We should have left in March. It has damaged our economy, damaged our politics and damaged the Conservative party. I can see no evidence at all that any further extension would not be even worse. Parliament must choose and if it won't we need a different Parliament.
Further extension if allowed by Boris likely puts Farage in Downing Street or Corbyn in Downing Street with a split Leaver vote
The fact that we are discussing this is not an indictment on BJ, his advisers and his Premiership. It is an indictment of the mess he inherited from chicken s##t Theresa May who threw away a more than 20 point lead in the polls, was too chicken to face the public in the election, too chicken to go to the debates then when facing the biggest humiliation in the Commons in the modern era was too chicken to make this a matter of confidence.
Johnson is doing exactly what May should have done but was too much of a coward to do.
Is HYUFD waiting to be briefed on the new line ? Unusually quiet.
No, a general election suits Boris fine, as does a minority government of diehard Remainers leaving him with Leavers united behind him.
In Uxbridge on present polling Boris will increase his majority, remember Hillingdon where Uxbridge lies voted Leave and many 2017 Labour Remainers will vote LD this time splitting the anti Boris vote
Why would those 2017 Labour Remainers vote LD? Its not a seat the LDs expect to win and every remainer there knows its the PMs own seat, Labour would campaign hard there, so tactical voting would likely squeeze LD vote even further (although given the vote is non-existent there it probably can't go much further down). The Lib Lab split is being overdone. Push comes to shove anyone wanting to stop no deal will hold a peg over their nose and vote for whichever is best placed to stop the tories in a pre brexit GE. No-one will believe that Labour can get a majority so people will be less scared of Corbyn.
However I don't think it will be enough for Labour to take the seat.
I think this is a big tactical mistake from Bluekip. By acting so recklessly and unconstitionally they are making it very easy for those who have switched preference from Lab to LD to vote Lab in Lab-Tory marginals, whilst simulaenously depressing Tory turnout amongst remain/anti no deal Tories in LD/Tory marginals.
Is HYUFD waiting to be briefed on the new line ? Unusually quiet.
No, a general election suits Boris fine, as does a minority government of diehard Remainers leaving him with Leavers united behind him.
In Uxbridge on present polling Boris will increase his majority, remember Hillingdon where Uxbridge lies voted Leave and many 2017 Labour Remainers will vote LD this time splitting the anti Boris vote
So he would be happy out of power as the Leavers would be united behind him?
Temporarily as he would win a landslide at the next general election maybe
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Not this comment again.
The comment is right, 100% right, that you're too ignorant to figure it out says more about you than the comment.
We are now in the fourth year since we voted to Leave, we are well in the third year of the two year Article 50 period. Enough is enough.
If Ed Milliband had won we would be sharing pictures of our free owls now. LoO Osborne would be having fun at the EdStones expenses. Boris Johnson would be about to debut on Strictly. Farage would be a witness in the trial of once presidential hopeful Trump.
That sounds like the kind of coalition of chaos I could endorse.
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Not this comment again.
The comment is right, 100% right, that you're too ignorant to figure it out says more about you than the comment.
We are now in the fourth year since we voted to Leave, we are well in the third year of the two year Article 50 period. Enough is enough.
The fact that we are discussing this is not an indictment on BJ, his advisers and his Premiership. It is an indictment of the mess he inherited from chicken s##t Theresa May who threw away a more than 20 point lead in the polls, was too chicken to face the public in the election, too chicken to go to the debates then when facing the biggest humiliation in the Commons in the modern era was too chicken to make this a matter of confidence.
Johnson is doing exactly what May should have done but was too much of a coward to do.
If discussing cowardice, we should remember May became prime minister because Boris ran away at the first whiff of grapeshot.
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
So he destroys the Conservative party to save himself. A selfish coward.
That would be ... kharmic.
He is honouring the outcome of the referendum. Which let us not forget ALL parties agreed to honour.
Article 50 was triggered by Parliament with an overwhelming majority.
Both are awkward facts for remain fanatics...
They are awkward facts for the Labour Party, and for the PM and other ERG-style Conservatives who went through the lobbies with Labour. They are not awkward facts for the the SNP or the LibDems (who voted against Article 50), nor for the sensible Conservatives who supported the referendum, agreed to implement its result by voting for Article 50, and who voted three times for an orderly exit on March 29th.
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Actually, it's the Conservatives who've ben trying to get a deal. Theresa May wouldn't listen to any of parliament's ideas. No consultation, no votes on negotiating position. Then begging opponents to back a deal based on a negotiating position they always disagreed with.
Blame Theresa May all you like. Parliament is doing its job.
Wouldn’t the purdah rules make it very difficult for the government to take the necessary action to deal with any problems? So they could face a No Deal exit, some sort of crisis, an inability to deal with it properly, said crisis getting worse and having a disastrous effect on the Tories’ electoral chances. It might even lead to the Tories getting No Deal but losing the election.
Is that really what Boris wants?
Usually no. For example the volcano ash business hit during the 2010 campaign and all sorts of things needed to be done. However if everyone is sane and you notify the opposition via the usual channels no one argues with emergency activity.
However you do have a point that it might look a bit different if the crisis is Brexit. Do you want to tell the opposition what all the issues are? If you did then they’d surely use them against you, but if you don’t then you might find some limits on what you can do. There again that’s probably only by convention and we’ve chucked all of them now haven’t we?
The volcano ash business was an Act of God. Very different from something arising as a direct consequence of government policy which is itself the reason for the GE.
But imagine if it is a life-threatening emergency. Or if some emergency legislation is needed. What then?
FWIW I think that Boris will win a majority. Probably lose 7-9 seats to the SNP, a dozen or so to the Lib Dems but gain 40+ from Labour. Whether that actually amounts to a majority will very much depend on how many of the 22 are still there.
Both sides seem convinced they are about to win a GE. So it probably does need testing. I can't quite see where 40 gains for the Tories from Labour come from to be honest - care to suggest a few? Even the likes of Canterbury won't be easy.
Tories under attack from SNP, grevious attack from Lib Dems, and even seats like SW Herts which could be Gauke/Tories/Brexit all on the leave side, usually a safe seat but anything could happen this time.
Very interested to see what Farage does in the event of an election coming into view this week. Stand down the Brexit party is obviously the best way to get a government back that are likely to implement some sort of brexit.
Or go for it split the blue vote and have a lucrative career as the brexit prince over the water for another 20 years.
Certainly amending the FTPA to remove the PM's power to postpone the election date for as long as s/he wanted would be one of the simpler things the sane majority in the Commons could do.
Brexit may be Cameron's legacy, but the FTPA is Clegg's.
That and the decimation of the Liberal Democrat party.
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Not this comment again.
Awkward facts, as i said.
I note no attempt on your part to refute them.
Various facts are wrong:
Fact 1: Article 50 was not triggered until 29 March 2017. Two and a half not three years ago.
Fact 2: the deal which was negotiated was first put to Parliament in December, first voted on in January 2019, with the third vote occurring on 29 March 2019.
So the period during which Parliament failed to agree a deal was 4 months. If you include the subsequent indicative votes that just adds a further 2 months.
The period during which Parliament has had time to consider and vote on any sort of deal has, in reality, been a quite short concentrated period. Not over three years at all.
If Johnson expels from the party any hardline Remainers then that should be sufficient to show he is serious about Brexit.
But that's not what Farage has demanded.
"Commit TOTALLY to No Deal", said Britain's most unsuccessful Parliamentary election organiser to Johnson ever last week, "Or I'll put 650 candidates up against you".
So either Farage admits he was posturing - or loses his deposit in the overwhelming majority of those 650 seats and hands practically all the others over to the opposition. Remember: EVERY election since the Euros that Brexit have stood in has resulted in Labour or the LDs winning a seat they'd have lost without Farage's help.
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Not this comment again.
Awkward facts, as i said.
I note no attempt on your part to refute them.
Various facts are wrong:
Fact 1: Article 50 was not triggered until 29 March 2017. Two and a half not three years ago.
Fact 2: the deal which was negotiated was first put to Parliament in December, first voted in January 2019, with the third vote occurring on 29 March 2019.
So the period during which Parliament failed to agree a deal was 4 months. If you include the subsequent indicative votes that just adds a further 2 months.
The period during which Parliament has had time to consider and vote on any sort of deal has, in reality, been a quite short concentrated period. Not over three years at all.
The vote to leave the EU was made in June 2016 more than 3 years ago.
The fact that Parliament didn't have relatively that long to debate May's finalised deal didn't mean that Parliament had no time to debate Brexit in that period.
Parliament still hasn't come up with a proposal it can unite behind more than three years after Brexit. Except one - no deal was set as our legal default when we triggered Article 50. That made me think our MPs would accept any deal as better than no deal, but I was wrong.
If Johnson expels from the party any hardline Remainers then that should be sufficient to show he is serious about Brexit.
But that's not what Farage has demanded.
"Commit TOTALLY to No Deal", said Britain's most unsuccessful Parliamentary election organiser to Johnson ever last week, "Or I'll put 650 candidates up against you".
So either Farage admits he was posturing - or loses his deposit in the overwhelming majority of those 650 seats and hands practically all the others over to the opposition. Remember: EVERY election since the Euros that Brexit have stood in has resulted in Labour or the LDs winning a seat they'd have lost without Farage's help.
Farage is one man. An influential man, but just one man. Cameron won a majority while Farage was running against him even though he was a Remainer.
If the election campaign is triggered by Parliament blocking Brexit, by those blocking Brexit being expelled from the party by Boris . . . then even if Farage runs MPs I would expect the vast bulk of Brexiteers to back the government to finish the job.
FWIW I think that Boris will win a majority. Probably lose 7-9 seats to the SNP, a dozen or so to the Lib Dems but gain 40+ from Labour. Whether that actually amounts to a majority will very much depend on how many of the 22 are still there.
Both sides seem convinced they are about to win a GE. So it probably does need testing. I can't quite see where 40 gains for the Tories from Labour come from to be honest - care to suggest a few? Even the likes of Canterbury won't be easy.
Tories under attack from SNP, grevious attack from Lib Dems, and even seats like SW Herts which could be Gauke/Tories/Brexit all on the leave side, usually a safe seat but anything could happen this time.
Of course this time around UNS will probably be as much use as a chocolate tea pot but a lot of these are in the east midlands and I suspect that they will be particularly vulnerable.
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Parliament was completely sidelined until the first meaningful vote in January. Not even nine months ago.
Boris is starting to make himself look like an obsessive No Deal nut with this. The nod-and-wink strategy - that it was all a ruse to make the EU waver on the backstop - was okay as far as it went; this smacks of imposing No Deal just because Boris is miffed with his critics. This can only end with Boris and the Tories' being shackled to the rotting corpse of No Deal. Why do they want to go there?
I think Corbyn will go for the confidence route this time .Unlike he did with May. That will get the 14 days to find a government. Johnson might have to no confidence himself to get an election.
Plastic Churchill Boris Johnson is going to throw Winston Churchill's grandson out of the Conservative party. The symbolism is magnificent. And there wil be many loons on here and in the country who will applaud it.
Plastic Churchill Boris Johnson is going to throw Winston Churchill's grandson out of the Conservative party. The symbolism is magnificent. And there wil be many loons on here and in the country who will applaud it.
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Parliament was completely sidelined until the first meaningful vote in January. Not even nine months ago.
Really? So there was no Parliamentary Select Committee on Brexit?
What exactly has Hillary Benn been doing if Parliament wasn't debating Brexit until the first meaningful vote?
Plastic Churchill Boris Johnson is going to throw Winston Churchill's grandson out of the Conservative party. The symbolism is magnificent. And there wil be many loons on here and in the country who will applaud it.
It's what Winston would have done.
Is it? It is what was done to him. Stanley Baldwin tried to get Winston Churchill deselected.
FWIW I think that Boris will win a majority. Probably lose 7-9 seats to the SNP, a dozen or so to the Lib Dems but gain 40+ from Labour. Whether that actually amounts to a majority will very much depend on how many of the 22 are still there.
Both sides seem convinced they are about to win a GE. So it probably does need testing. I can't quite see where 40 gains for the Tories from Labour come from to be honest - care to suggest a few? Even the likes of Canterbury won't be easy.
Tories under attack from SNP, grevious attack from Lib Dems, and even seats like SW Herts which could be Gauke/Tories/Brexit all on the leave side, usually a safe seat but anything could happen this time.
Of course this time around UNS will probably be as much use as a chocolate tea pot but a lot of these are in the east midlands and I suspect that they will be particularly vulnerable.
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Parliament was completely sidelined until the first meaningful vote in January. Not even nine months ago.
Really? So there was no Parliamentary Select Committee on Brexit?
What exactly has Hillary Benn been doing if Parliament wasn't debating Brexit until the first meaningful vote?
How many statements were there by both the PM and the Brexit Secretary of the day? It seemed interminable.
Boris is starting to make himself look like an obsessive No Deal nut with this. The nod-and-wink strategy - that it was all a ruse to make the EU waver on the backstop - was okay as far as it went; this smacks of imposing No Deal just because Boris is miffed with his critics. This can only end with Boris and the Tories' being shackled to the rotting corpse of No Deal. Why do they want to go there?
Boris doesn’t want No Deal. Not unless there is no alternative.
He wants to get a deal or, failing that, to be forced into an extension, and/or a new election, where he can be on the side of “the people”.
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Not this comment again.
Awkward facts, as i said.
I note no attempt on your part to refute them.
Various facts are wrong:
Fact 1: Article 50 was not triggered until 29 March 2017. Two and a half not three years ago.
Fact 2: the deal which was negotiated was first put to Parliament in December, first voted on in January 2019, with the third vote occurring on 29 March 2019.
So the period during which Parliament failed to agree a deal was 4 months. If you include the subsequent indicative votes that just adds a further 2 months.
The period during which Parliament has had time to consider and vote on any sort of deal has, in reality, been a quite short concentrated period. Not over three years at all.
so if theyre so short of time, did they cancel their holidays ? Have they stopped the conference season ? Have they said they will work weekends ?
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Parliament was completely sidelined until the first meaningful vote in January. Not even nine months ago.
Really? So there was no Parliamentary Select Committee on Brexit?
What exactly has Hillary Benn been doing if Parliament wasn't debating Brexit until the first meaningful vote?
Select Committees don’t make legislation, as you well know. Select Committees don’t debate. They take evidence, issue reports, question Ministers.
The only period during which Parliament had any role to agree or not a deal was over a 4 month (possibly 6 months, if you want to be generous) period.
Given how important a decision Brexit is, that is far too little. But both May and Johnson have this in common: a wish to sideline Parliament.
FWIW I think that Boris will win a majority. Probably lose 7-9 seats to the SNP, a dozen or so to the Lib Dems but gain 40+ from Labour. Whether that actually amounts to a majority will very much depend on how many of the 22 are still there.
Both sides seem convinced they are about to win a GE. So it probably does need testing. I can't quite see where 40 gains for the Tories from Labour come from to be honest - care to suggest a few? Even the likes of Canterbury won't be easy.
Tories under attack from SNP, grevious attack from Lib Dems, and even seats like SW Herts which could be Gauke/Tories/Brexit all on the leave side, usually a safe seat but anything could happen this time.
Of course this time around UNS will probably be as much use as a chocolate tea pot but a lot of these are in the east midlands and I suspect that they will be particularly vulnerable.
The "Tory Landslide" ers are out again.
Made me a fortune at GE 2017 that attitude
Your comment is not supported by the bookies, who tend to be better at these things than you are...
Certainly amending the FTPA to remove the PM's power to postpone the election date for as long as s/he wanted would be one of the simpler things the sane majority in the Commons could do.
Brexit may be Cameron's legacy, but the FTPA is Clegg's.
That and the decimation of the Liberal Democrat party.
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Not this comment again.
Awkward facts, as i said.
I note no attempt on your part to refute them.
Various facts are wrong:
Fact 1: Article 50 was not triggered until 29 March 2017. Two and a half not three years ago.
Fact 2: the deal which was negotiated was first put to Parliament in December, first voted on in January 2019, with the third vote occurring on 29 March 2019.
So the period during which Parliament failed to agree a deal was 4 months. If you include the subsequent indicative votes that just adds a further 2 months.
The period during which Parliament has had time to consider and vote on any sort of deal has, in reality, been a quite short concentrated period. Not over three years at all.
so if theyre so short of time, did they cancel their holidays ? Have they stopped the conference season ? Have they said they will work weekends ?
They haven’t been given the chance to cancel the conference season thanks to Boris. They have also indicated they will work weekends yeah.
Plastic Churchill Boris Johnson is going to throw Winston Churchill's grandson out of the Conservative party. The symbolism is magnificent. And there wil be many loons on here and in the country who will applaud it.
It's what Winston would have done.
Winston would have signed us up to the Euro.
I very very much doubt that.
what is your evidence for this startling suggestion?
If Johnson expels from the party any hardline Remainers then that should be sufficient to show he is serious about Brexit.
But that's not what Farage has demanded.
"Commit TOTALLY to No Deal", said Britain's most unsuccessful Parliamentary election organiser to Johnson ever last week, "Or I'll put 650 candidates up against you".
So either Farage admits he was posturing - or loses his deposit in the overwhelming majority of those 650 seats and hands practically all the others over to the opposition. Remember: EVERY election since the Euros that Brexit have stood in has resulted in Labour or the LDs winning a seat they'd have lost without Farage's help.
Farage is one man. An influential man, but just one man. Cameron won a majority while Farage was running against him even though he was a Remainer.
If the election campaign is triggered by Parliament blocking Brexit, by those blocking Brexit being expelled from the party by Boris . . . then even if Farage runs MPs I would expect the vast bulk of Brexiteers to back the government to finish the job.
Of the 52% who wanted a form of Brexit, how many were for No Deal?
FWIW I think that Boris will win a majority. Probably lose 7-9 seats to the SNP, a dozen or so to the Lib Dems but gain 40+ from Labour. Whether that actually amounts to a majority will very much depend on how many of the 22 are still there.
Both sides seem convinced they are about to win a GE. So it probably does need testing. I can't quite see where 40 gains for the Tories from Labour come from to be honest - care to suggest a few? Even the likes of Canterbury won't be easy.
Tories under attack from SNP, grevious attack from Lib Dems, and even seats like SW Herts which could be Gauke/Tories/Brexit all on the leave side, usually a safe seat but anything could happen this time.
Of course this time around UNS will probably be as much use as a chocolate tea pot but a lot of these are in the east midlands and I suspect that they will be particularly vulnerable.
The "Tory Landslide" ers are out again.
Made me a fortune at GE 2017 that attitude
A majority of around 30 is hardly a landside. It will be close.
Plastic Churchill Boris Johnson is going to throw Winston Churchill's grandson out of the Conservative party. The symbolism is magnificent. And there wil be many loons on here and in the country who will applaud it.
It's what Winston would have done.
Winston would have signed us up to the Euro.
I very very much doubt that.
what is your evidence for this startling suggestion?
“In his famous Zurich speech of 1946, Churchill said, ‘We must build a kind of United States of Europe.. The structure of the United States of Europe, if well and truly built, will be such as to make the material strength of a single state less important.. If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join the Union, we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and those who can.’”
Highly tempted by that 5/1 on BJ to lose his seat.
10/1 to change seat is better
Leadership interviews - ran away Leadership debates - ran away Parliamentary scrutiny - prorogues Deal with rebels - not talking to them and kick them out
A coward only interested in himself.
I find it bizarre that people are still accusing Boris of being a coward. He may be reckless or incompetent or wrong but he has shown a determination and focus since becoming PM. Having an election now and risking being the briefest PM in history is not the act of a coward. It may well be what Yes Minister might have called "brave".
He's simply at the mercy of events, having made the initial spectacular error of tying himself to the October 31st date.
I think that is too simple. The extension to 31st October has been a disaster. We should have left in March. It has damaged our economy, damaged our politics and damaged the Conservative party. I can see no evidence at all that any further extension would not be even worse. Parliament must choose and if it won't we need a different Parliament.
Further extension if allowed by Boris likely puts Farage in Downing Street or Corbyn in Downing Street with a split Leaver vote
Can you get any worse, Farage will never ever even as toilet cleaner be near Downing street
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Not this comment again.
Awkward facts, as i said.
I note no attempt on your part to refute them.
Various facts are wrong:
Fact 1: Article 50 was not triggered until 29 March 2017. Two and a half not three years ago.
Fact 2: the deal which was negotiated was first put to Parliament in December, first voted on in January 2019, with the third vote occurring on 29 March 2019.
So the period during which Parliament failed to agree a deal was 4 months. If you include the subsequent indicative votes that just adds a further 2 months.
The period during which Parliament has had time to consider and vote on any sort of deal has, in reality, been a quite short concentrated period. Not over three years at all.
Your points is sophistry. The vote was over three years ago.
Parliament was "debating" Brexit long before the WA was put to it and has been unable to unite around any alternative. There is no majority in Parliament for a deal and so "no deal" is the dafult.
Sorry, but these are facts. Your post smacks of desperation.
FWIW I think that Boris will win a majority. Probably lose 7-9 seats to the SNP, a dozen or so to the Lib Dems but gain 40+ from Labour. Whether that actually amounts to a majority will very much depend on how many of the 22 are still there.
Both sides seem convinced they are about to win a GE. So it probably does need testing. I can't quite see where 40 gains for the Tories from Labour come from to be honest - care to suggest a few? Even the likes of Canterbury won't be easy.
Tories under attack from SNP, grevious attack from Lib Dems, and even seats like SW Herts which could be Gauke/Tories/Brexit all on the leave side, usually a safe seat but anything could happen this time.
Yep, it looks like a huge risk on Boris's part but does he really have a choice? The alternative it to limp along losing authority.
This way, he either wins (hurrah!) - or doesn't in which case we all know who will be blamed and PM Corbyn will be operating a in a very febrile environment not conducive to a long premiership, with Boris as nailed-on Tory opposition leader seeking to get back into power.
Parliament has had THREE years to agree a deal. And it has failed to do so.
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Not this comment again.
Awkward facts, as i said.
I note no attempt on your part to refute them.
Various facts are wrong:
Fact 1: Article 50 was not triggered until 29 March 2017. Two and a half not three years ago.
Fact 2: the deal which was negotiated was first put to Parliament in December, first voted on in January 2019, with the third vote occurring on 29 March 2019.
So the period during which Parliament failed to agree a deal was 4 months. If you include the subsequent indicative votes that just adds a further 2 months.
The period during which Parliament has had time to consider and vote on any sort of deal has, in reality, been a quite short concentrated period. Not over three years at all.
so if theyre so short of time, did they cancel their holidays ? Have they stopped the conference season ? Have they said they will work weekends ?
They haven’t been given the chance to cancel the conference season thanks to Boris. They have also indicated they will work weekends yeah.
They dont have to wait on BoJo to cancel the conferences, they should be doing it now.
As for weekends well so you say. I listened to one Tory remainer on R4 last week and it was clear he wasnt really that keen.
Plastic Churchill Boris Johnson is going to throw Winston Churchill's grandson out of the Conservative party. The symbolism is magnificent. And there wil be many loons on here and in the country who will applaud it.
It's what Winston would have done.
Winston would have signed us up to the Euro.
I very very much doubt that.
what is your evidence for this startling suggestion?
“In his famous Zurich speech of 1946, Churchill said, ‘We must build a kind of United States of Europe.. The structure of the United States of Europe, if well and truly built, will be such as to make the material strength of a single state less important.. If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join the Union, we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and those who can.’”
Christ. Why lie so obviously? This isn’t GUIDO. This is PB. We know our history, we know that Churchill qualified those remarks by saying Britain would and should stand apart from such a united Europe, because we are different.
Comments
Brexit may be Cameron's legacy, but the FTPA is Clegg's.
Article 50 was triggered by Parliament with an overwhelming majority.
Both are awkward facts for remain fanatics...
However you do have a point that it might look a bit different if the crisis is Brexit. Do you want to tell the opposition what all the issues are? If you did then they’d surely use them against you, but if you don’t then you might find some limits on what you can do. There again that’s probably only by convention and we’ve chucked all of them now haven’t we?
The corollary is that we leave without a deal.
The public seem to understand this rather better than the self-appointed guardians of moral and political rectitude on the remain side seem to realise.
Johnson is doing exactly what May should have done but was too much of a coward to do.
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-uk-general-election/overall-majority
We are now in the fourth year since we voted to Leave, we are well in the third year of the two year Article 50 period. Enough is enough.
I note no attempt on your part to refute them.
Do I just have to take the hit?
Blame Theresa May all you like. Parliament is doing its job.
But imagine if it is a life-threatening emergency. Or if some emergency legislation is needed. What then?
Tories under attack from SNP, grevious attack from Lib Dems, and even seats like SW Herts which could be Gauke/Tories/Brexit all on the leave side, usually a safe seat but anything could happen this time.
(yes, yes, yes, I know, one in ten etc. etc.)
Fact 1: Article 50 was not triggered until 29 March 2017. Two and a half not three years ago.
Fact 2: the deal which was negotiated was first put to Parliament in December, first voted on in January 2019, with the third vote occurring on 29 March 2019.
So the period during which Parliament failed to agree a deal was 4 months. If you include the subsequent indicative votes that just adds a further 2 months.
The period during which Parliament has had time to consider and vote on any sort of deal has, in reality, been a quite short concentrated period. Not over three years at all.
The fact that Parliament didn't have relatively that long to debate May's finalised deal didn't mean that Parliament had no time to debate Brexit in that period.
Parliament still hasn't come up with a proposal it can unite behind more than three years after Brexit. Except one - no deal was set as our legal default when we triggered Article 50. That made me think our MPs would accept any deal as better than no deal, but I was wrong.
Is it rumoured that Geo Osborne gave Boris a blow job?
If the election campaign is triggered by Parliament blocking Brexit, by those blocking Brexit being expelled from the party by Boris . . . then even if Farage runs MPs I would expect the vast bulk of Brexiteers to back the government to finish the job.
Of course this time around UNS will probably be as much use as a chocolate tea pot but a lot of these are in the east midlands and I suspect that they will be particularly vulnerable.
That will get the 14 days to find a government.
Johnson might have to no confidence himself to get an election.
What exactly has Hillary Benn been doing if Parliament wasn't debating Brexit until the first meaningful vote?
https://twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1168519844528046080?s=21
Made me a fortune at GE 2017 that attitude
He wants to get a deal or, failing that, to be forced into an extension, and/or a new election, where he can be on the side of “the people”.
The only period during which Parliament had any role to agree or not a deal was over a 4 month (possibly 6 months, if you want to be generous) period.
Given how important a decision Brexit is, that is far too little. But both May and Johnson have this in common: a wish to sideline Parliament.
what is your evidence for this startling suggestion?
https://eu-rope.ideasoneurope.eu/2013/11/10/winston-churchill-a-founder-of-the-european-union/
Parliament was "debating" Brexit long before the WA was put to it and has been unable to unite around any alternative. There is no majority in Parliament for a deal and so "no deal" is the dafult.
Sorry, but these are facts. Your post smacks of desperation.
This way, he either wins (hurrah!) - or doesn't in which case we all know who will be blamed and PM Corbyn will be operating a in a very febrile environment not conducive to a long premiership, with Boris as nailed-on Tory opposition leader seeking to get back into power.
As for weekends well so you say. I listened to one Tory remainer on R4 last week and it was clear he wasnt really that keen.
Those are the facts.