UK Politics: The Malice in the Chalice held by the Pfeffel with the Piffle is the Brexit that is true.

[williamjm]

1 hour ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

@williamjm

That's a bit too simplistic imho. And basically the same flawed logic that has lead Labour astray with their chase after those Northern seats.

Try to think of the vote shares as Venn-Diagrams. That big overlap is (very likely) between the Tory votes and leave votes (not the remain votes, they are mostly to be found at other parties). If the Tories in question were to survive that, they'd need to get involved into a remain pact with LibDems, ChUK (too lazy to check what they are currently called), Greens, and possibly one of the local parties and if possible with Labour. That's what brought that seat in the latest by-election in Wales. Tories and NuKIP took votes off each other in sufficent numbers, and the remain parties fielded one clear candidate, with Labour being widely ignored by voters.

You're right that it is a bit simplistic and the Brexit Party could win in Remain-backing constituencies, but I don't think they're going to be their most promising targets. If we take an example like Justine Greening's constituency in Putney, it apparently voted 72% Remain. Even if the Brexit Party get all the 28% who voted Leave, they're still going to need some sort of unfortunate (although certainly not impossible) three-way split among the other parties to be able to win.

Now, if it was a constituency that was more like 55% Remain then there would be a much bigger danger of the Remain parties tripping over each other.

[The Anti-Targ]

6 hours ago, Which Tyler said:

I think I MIGHT have worked out the play.

He'll deselect the 21 / 24 rebel conservative MPs (whether or not he has that authority) and NOT replace them. Put up no candidate (we couldn't find and vet anyone at such short notice), or at best a joke, and cede those seats to Farage with an understanding that the BnP concentrate their campaigning in those 21 / 24 seats and form a coalition if necessary.

 

 

You think Brexit Party has much of a chance in the electorates the rebels come from if the rebels stand as independents? I would think if the Tory party doesn't stand anyone, or just stands patsies with very large nods and winks to Brexit party candidates almost all of the conservative voters in those electorates will vote for the independent former Tory. It will either split the vote and Labour or Lib Dem will win, or the Independent will get 95% of the conservative vote and win.

For a let the Brexit Party in strategy they would need to not stand candidates in hard Brexit electorates, and then do everything they can to win their remain electorates and hope to pick up some other electorates so that they don't just do a straight swap with Brexit and have more than a 1 seat majority only with 2 belligerent nationalist parties as coalition partners instead of just 1. 

[ants]

10 hours ago, Which Tyler said:

I think I MIGHT have worked out the play.

He'll deselect the 21 / 24 rebel conservative MPs (whether or not he has that authority) and NOT replace them. Put up no candidate (we couldn't find and vet anyone at such short notice), or at best a joke, and cede those seats to Farage with an understanding that the BnP concentrate their campaigning in those 21 / 24 seats and form a coalition if necessary.

.......

This seems like a terrible move.  39% of Tories voted Remain in the 2015 referendum.  That could potentially have increased if many of those were against a no-deal exit. 

If these MPs come from seats which are pro-Remain, or very anti-No Deal, and their MPs are deselected and run as independents or Lib Dems that is a nightmare for the Tories.  Especially the Lib Dem.  Many people look at them and see them as Tory lite in respect of many of their policies, especially after their coalition.  I suspect there would be plenty of Tory Remain voters who given the choice of their old Tory candidate as a Lib Dem, or a Brexit party member or terrible Tory choice, would go the current MP.  Which would significantly reduce the chance of Boris winning a majority.

But then, from what I gather he backed away from saying he would deselect them.  Probably for the above reasons.  

Boris's main path to victory is to keep his current seats even if they're Remain with minimal losses to the Lib Dems, and pinch some of the Labour Leave seats.  Handing a chunk of his Remain seats to the Lib Dems with minimal fight is a disaster for him. 

[ants]

7 hours ago, The Mother of The Others said:

It's like England's EU membership is your national Timeshare Vacation deal that you signed an ironclad contract for because the initial salesperson was wearing a low cut blouse and trapped you in a convention room for 3 hours worth of brainwashing before giving you the free prize promised in the newspaper ad for attending the seminar.   And now the UK can't get out of this debacle that looms over the estate.   Will breaking this deal be a historical dealbreaker for the nation's aspirations ?!?!    Or will this much maligned oaf of yours be remembered as a Daenerys type breaker of the chains that were dragging you down into a Euro fate as the EU winds down like a wind-up toy that's... winding down.   

,......

Um, no.  The problem isn't that its hard to get out.  Its actually incredibly easy.  The issue is that the benefits from being inside are so good that nobody really wants to fully leave beyond a small proportion of the country, and that the UK made promises to a number of groups (such as Ireland) assuming they would be always inside.  

The better comparison would be that England got a great house deal with everything they wanted and some major perks, but have subsequently found they don't like everyone else who has moved onto their neighbourhood (cough, Eastern Europeans, cough) and a few new rules around the communal benefits.  So now want to block off their end of the street, but want to keep all the public amenities that are provided by the communal group, but take none of the rules.  

[The Anti-Targ]

19 minutes ago, ants said:

Um, no.  The problem isn't that its hard to get out.  Its actually incredibly easy.  The issue is that the benefits from being inside are so good that nobody really wants to fully leave beyond a small proportion of the country, and that the UK made promises to a number of groups (such as Ireland) assuming they would be always inside.  

The better comparison would be that England got a great house deal with everything they wanted and some major perks, but have subsequently found they don't like everyone else who has moved onto their neighbourhood (cough, Eastern Europeans, cough) and a few new rules around the communal benefits.  So now want to block off their end of the street, but want to keep all the public amenities that are provided by the communal group, but take none of the rules.  

Or to put it in terms he might understand. The UK leaving the EU makes about as much sense as Texas threatening to leave the Union every time a Democrat is elected President over there (Or California leaving the Union every time a Republican is elected). The difference is that it's much harder for Texas to leave the Union (and pretty much impossible for California) than it is for the UK to leave the EU.

[The Mother of The Others]

  I've been hearing about british exit for so long it qualifies as hard.    Like when you're fighting constipation with everything you've got but it's been a long time without any exiting.   That was a good dumbing down though.  This topic was way erudite.  Other posters clearly have knowledge of British parlimentary procedures, too, which is unfair.   Texas was given better odds of breaking away because they're more competent?   True enough.   California's already gone, though.  Full on banana republic.   They bypassed the secesssion process.   Cali grows their own nuts, so technically they didn't have to 'go nuts.'   The nuts were already there.

Let's hope the chunnel is unaffected by all this upheaval.   And remember not to piss off Germany too much.   They can get testy.

[Jeor]

I'm with Tony Blair on this one. Boris is clearly okay with calling an election because he knows he's going to be running opposite Corbyn. Having an election after October 31 would be very dicey (he might have the balls to think initially it will be okay if the sky doesn't fall in and he can convince everyone it's all fine), but if he's forced to have an election before October 31 he may as well since he gets the Corbyn bonus. Plus, as much as the Tories are in disarray, at a national and public level the party platform is pretty clear for Boris to parrot - Tories are for Brexit and the "will of the people" and taking decisive action, whereas Labour are all wishy-washy and that nasty Corbyn fella is really weird.

On that basis I think the likelihood of an election is pretty high. I think Boris secretly wants one, and there's no doubt that Corbyn publicly wants one and the Lib-Dems would definitely be enthusiastic about one...so it's probably only a matter of time and political maneuvering.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

8 hours ago, williamjm said:

You're right that it is a bit simplistic and the Brexit Party could win in Remain-backing constituencies, but I don't think they're going to be their most promising targets. If we take an example like Justine Greening's constituency in Putney, it apparently voted 72% Remain. Even if the Brexit Party get all the 28% who voted Leave, they're still going to need some sort of unfortunate (although certainly not impossible) three-way split among the other parties to be able to win.

Now, if it was a constituency that was more like 55% Remain then there would be a much bigger danger of the Remain parties tripping over each other.

I think I said it in the last thread. I actually thought Greening would be one of the firsts out after  Johnson became PM, as I don't see how she fits into the party of Johnson and JRM. So I am really expecting her to defect to the LibDems before too long. 

 

Since I haven't posted a link in a while. Ivan Rogers. Spectator link, yet worth reaeding all the same.

[ants]

2 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

I think I said it in the last thread. I actually thought Greening would be one of the firsts out after  Johnson became PM, as I don't see how she fits into the party of Johnson and JRM. So I am really expecting her to defect to the LibDems before too long. 

 

Since I haven't posted a link in a while. Ivan Rogers. Spectator link, yet worth reaeding all the same.

Thanks. Really good article that although written by a Leaver, really spells out a lot of the issues and consequences.  I really liked the part where he pointed out Norway and Sweden have a closer relationship than a post deal UK/EU have, yet still need a hard border.  If these "solutions" the Tories claim exist did exist, they' be being implemented/in place now.  He really sets out why the backstop (or something like it) is necessary. 

[Which Tyler]

3 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

I think I said it in the last thread. I actually thought Greening would be one of the firsts out after  Johnson became PM, as I don't see how she fits into the party of Johnson and JRM. So I am really expecting her to defect to the LibDems before too long.

She's simply leaving parliament. Won't stand for re-election as she wants to do more important things like campaigning for social mobility, not sitting in parliament, even as an independent, voting on intractable trade deals for the foreseeable future.

[The Anti-Targ]

 

4 hours ago, Jeor said:

I'm with Tony Blair on this one. Boris is clearly okay with calling an election because he knows he's going to be running opposite Corbyn. Having an election after October 31 would be very dicey (he might have the balls to think initially it will be okay if the sky doesn't fall in and he can convince everyone it's all fine), but if he's forced to have an election before October 31 he may as well since he gets the Corbyn bonus. Plus, as much as the Tories are in disarray, at a national and public level the party platform is pretty clear for Boris to parrot - Tories are for Brexit and the "will of the people" and taking decisive action, whereas Labour are all wishy-washy and that nasty Corbyn fella is really weird.

On that basis I think the likelihood of an election is pretty high. I think Boris secretly wants one, and there's no doubt that Corbyn publicly wants one and the Lib-Dems would definitely be enthusiastic about one...so it's probably only a matter of time and political maneuvering.

If certain youtubists are telling it right Boris can't actually call an election. A snap election needs a 75% (2/3?)) parliament vote. So actually Boris can't just decide to have an election Corbyn needs to be just crazy enough to go along with it. But you know what? If Corbyn says: "Sure lets have an election BUT before Labour will give you the votes to get to 2/3 / 75% first we need to get a Brexit extension. No Brexit extension, no election." I think most people would be OK with that. Because either Boris agrees to the extension, in which case he's failed on the one thing he said would happen by hook or by crook and so he's in a weakened position in the GE, with the Brexit party really gunning for him, and the Tory rebels didn't need to do anything to get themselves deselected. Though they might just defect anyway, probably not though. Or he refuses to get an extension so no GE, and that really focuses the minds for 31 Oct.

A Corbyn gambit to call Boris out with a demand for an extension as the condition for a GE is not a bad strategy.

[Derfel Cadarn]

A good strategy, as it would force BJ to miss his hell or high water date to leave EU, and he’d lose a lot of voters to Brexit party

[Which Tyler]

1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said:

 

If certain youtubists are telling it right Boris can't actually call an election. A snap election needs a 75% (2/3?)) parliament vote. So actually Boris can't just decide to have an election Corbyn needs to be just crazy enough to go along with it. But you know what? If Corbyn says: "Sure lets have an election BUT before Labour will give you the votes to get to 2/3 / 75% first we need to get a Brexit extension. No Brexit extension, no election." I think most people would be OK with that. Because either Boris agrees to the extension, in which case he's failed on the one thing he said would happen by hook or by crook and so he's in a weakened position in the GE, with the Brexit party really gunning for him, and the Tory rebels didn't need to do anything to get themselves deselected. Though they might just defect anyway, probably not though. Or he refuses to get an extension so no GE, and that really focuses the minds for 31 Oct.

A Corbyn gambit to call Boris out with a demand for an extension as the condition for a GE is not a bad strategy.

 

2/3 majority needed u der the Fixed Term Parliament Act 2011.

50%+1 needed after a vote of no confidence (which he can call against himself and whip Tory support for).

Elsewhere, this is a good article on the remain position: https://www.quora.com/Why-are-Remainers-so-convinced-that-staying-in-the-European-Union-is-what-is-best-for-the-UK/answers/154093759?

[Werthead]

The interesting play, which the LibDems have now confirmed they're following and Labour may as well, would be to pass the bill today forcing the government to rule out a No-Deal Brexit and then refusing to vote for a snap election. The government would be put in the impossible (unprecedented?) position of being forced to follow a law they had not voted for. The only way out of that would be for the government to call a vote of no confidence in itself and hope that they can bring themselves down (!) to trigger an election.

[Pebble thats Stubby]

11 minutes ago, Werthead said:

The interesting play, which the LibDems have now confirmed they're following and Labour may as well, would be to pass the bill today forcing the government to rule out a No-Deal Brexit and then refusing to vote for a snap election. The government would be put in the impossible (unprecedented?) position of being forced to follow a law they had not voted for. The only way out of that would be for the government to call a vote of no confidence in itself and hope that they can bring themselves down (!) to trigger an election.

that could result in the amusing circumstances of Lib Dem, labour and Tory rebels voting in favour of the government, while Boris fans vote for no confidence in themselves.  

[Maltaran]

Makes sense, given Johnson’s general untrustworthiness. If they vote for an election because he says it will be on October 14, he could easily then go to the Queen and call it for November instead. Getting the anti-no deal law passed beforehand removes that risk.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

4 hours ago, ants said:

Thanks. Really good article that although written by a Leaver, really spells out a lot of the issues and consequences.  I really liked the part where he pointed out Norway and Sweden have a closer relationship than a post deal UK/EU have, yet still need a hard border.  If these "solutions" the Tories claim exist did exist, they' be being implemented/in place now.  He really sets out why the backstop (or something like it) is necessary. 

Rogers isn't a Leaver. He has worked as a civil servant under both Blair and Cameron. He worked at the EU and just knows his shit when it comes to the EU and its workings. Like often in life, knowledge and faith don't mix. So he was dismissed by May pretty early on in the Brexit process for telling her about the costs of Brexit and providing her early on with reality checks - and thus showing a lack of faith in the Brexit process. 

[Werthead]

1 hour ago, Maltaran said:

Makes sense, given Johnson’s general untrustworthiness. If they vote for an election because he says it will be on October 14, he could easily then go to the Queen and call it for November instead. Getting the anti-no deal law passed beforehand removes that risk.

Johnson and Gove have said they could just ignore that legislation, but the EU might then extend the deadline unilaterally on the grounds that it's respecting the British Parliamentary vote and we could end up in a playground situation where some people are saying we're in the EU and others say we're not.

The definition of omnishambles is going to need updating and maybe replacing. Unishambles?

[Werthead]

Philip Lee just quit and joined the Liberal Democrats, removing the government's majority. The UK now has a minority government.

[Derfel Cadarn]

Given all the party-jumping, do people standing for parliament just pick a party that lets them in and has a chance of winning a constituency, rather than agreeing with that party’s policies?

At this rate, many of the libdem MP’s will have been elected as Tories or Labour.