UK Politics: Spaffed up the wall while chuntering from a sedentary position

[The Anti-Targ]

18 hours ago, Zorral said:

"The Real Meaning of the Brexit Debate"

THE POLITICS OF PAIN
Postwar England and the Rise of Nationalism
By Fintan O’Toole

Author is Irish.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/08/books/review/the-real-meaning-of-the-brexit-debate.html

 

I wonder how they will feel when they become just one ordinary middle-sized nation among 180 others.

[Gaston de Foix]

As a strategic matter, Farage folding like this seems like a mistake.  After pulling out the big guns (having Donald Trump on his radio show touting an alliance etc). the Tories now know they have no reason to make any concessions to the Brexit party in any seats.  And I bet they won't. 

So where exactly will the Brexit party win seats?  Is Farage hoping that Boris will refuse to field candidates in Labour Leave seats? Because the Tory electoral strategy is precisely to pick up those seats to counterbalance losses in Scotland. 

[mormont]

I think the indications were, right from the start, that the Brexit party don't have the resources to stand in every seat. They were scraping the barrel but couldn't find 600 remotely sane candidates, for a start. 

This more or less guarantees there will be no Brexit party MPs elected. While opinions vary on the numbers of Labour Brexit voters out there, there aren't enough to win a seat. So really, what Farage is announcing is his party's complete irrelevance. 

[The Marquis de Leech]

A little confused as to why Farage is standing down in all Tory seats, considering that he knows full-well that there are more than a few Tory Remainer MPs.

[Heartofice]

The Brexit Party have only ever been a pressure / protest party anyway, remember they really only formed as a response to Parliament pushing Brexit back.

Doubt Farage cares about the future of his party, it might surprise some here but he does seem genuinely interested in making sure Brexit happens.

This move has made that more likely now 

[Which Tyler]

40 minutes ago, mormont said:

I think the indications were, right from the start, that the Brexit party don't have the resources to stand in every seat. They were scraping the barrel but couldn't find any remotely sane candidates, for a start.

FTFY

 

And, I haven't been wanting to spread this, especially today - but "my" Tory / ERG MP posted a picture of a wreathe with the BnP logo front and centre yesterday - unconfirmed rumours that he may even have laid it!

So this has already been politicised

 

[Gaston de Foix]

42 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Doubt Farage cares about the future of his party, it might surprise some here but he does seem genuinely interested in making sure Brexit happens.

This move has made that more likely now 

Not disputing that but he also seems very invested in his "clean break Brexit".  Maybe the idea is to lay low strategically now while BoJo confronts realities of governing/trade-offs required to make a trade deal with EU and then pop back up like a frog faced Cassandra?

[Heartofice]

15 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

Not disputing that but he also seems very invested in his "clean break Brexit".  Maybe the idea is to lay low strategically now while BoJo confronts realities of governing/trade-offs required to make a trade deal with EU and then pop back up like a frog faced Cassandra?

Maybe. His main purpose is to put pressure on the government to deliver on Brexit and not to back track towards a more BRINOy Brexit.

[Ser Hedge]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

Good news for the Tories that. Especially as some recent polls had shown an uptick in Brexit party votes against them.

It helps obviously, but he's retained a good amount of leverage still. The Tories will lose some Remain seats in England and many of their seats in Scotland as well, and needed to pick up 10+ additional seats anyway for a majority. Now they'll still have to fight for the Leave vote in 35-40 'Red Wall' seats, while opening themselves up to 'Far Right' alliance attacks.

[Werthead]

20 hours ago, SeanF said:

A straw man.  It's based on much the same arguments that were made in 1975, by people who were mainly on your side of the political spectrum then, like Tony Benn, and Peter Shore, that the UK is capable of governing itself.

This is in itself a strawman. The issue is not that Britain would be incapable of governing itself, it would just not be capable of continuing at its current level of economic success, and Britain will be a poorer, weaker and less influential country moving forwards, not that we would immediately descend to Children of Men levels of dystopia.

Something I am expecting to happen soon - or immediately - after Brexit is for countries to start calling on the UK's permanent seat on the UN Security Council to be revoked. As a member state of the EU, representing EU interests where necessary alongside France, and as the world's 5th largest economy, our place on the council could be argued for. After Brexit, and with us already relegated to the world's 6th largest economy and dropping, the argument will be strong for a country like India to take over that seat (or perhaps the occasionally mooted idea of a permanent South American or African seat rotating through several countries). Our argument for having it will become purely historical.

Quote

Visiting this space after a while and surprised the debate has shifted to Israel rather than upcoming general election.  But q. for everyone in Blighty: what's the mood like? Is the GE still operating as a Leave v Remain or is it about other stuff?

I think there's a lot of exhaustion. Normally we vote once in a GE every 5 years (sometimes 4) and then we can put politics on the backburner. This will be the 4th vote in four years (5th in 5 if you're Scottish). Whether you're Labour, Tory, Remainer or Brexiter, I think people are really worn out and just hoping once this is done we can put the political mess to one side for at least a few years. British people are uncomfortable talking about politics in RL, I think, and certainly in families there are very strong divisions over inequality, Brexit, NHS funding etc (the boomer/Gen-X/millennial divide from US politics is also present here) which have driven arguments and discussions for half a decade straight which people will be glad to put on ice for a while.

Quote

Doubt Farage cares about the future of his party, it might surprise some here but he does seem genuinely interested in making sure Brexit happens.

If he did, he would have supported a customs union or continued membership of the single market or Norway+ as he did a few years ago after the referendum. Instead, he's continuously moved the goalposts backwards every time he's taken a position, so no version of Brexit is good enough for him and he has to "reluctantly" rejoin the fight to make sure Brexit isn't betrayed etc. That's not the stance of someone taking a principled position, that's the stance of a PR man trying to maintain his relevance for as long as possible to ensure he can charge as much as possible on the US after-dinner speaking circuit. He wants to "win" Brexit as completely as possible to ensure that.

I suspect part of the problem there is that there are people willing to bankroll him who've been pushing for an ever-harder Brexit and Farage has been running to stay ahead of them, whereas if they hadn't he may have accepted a more reasonable form of Brexit and declared mission accomplished years ago.

Quote

It helps obviously, but he's retained a good amount of leverage still. The Tories will lose some Remain seats in England and many of their seats in Scotland as well, and needed to pick up 10+ additional seats anyway for a majority. Now they'll still have to fight for the Leave vote in 35-40 'Red Wall' seats, while opening themselves up to 'Far Right' alliance attacks.

Yeah, strategically this doesn't help the Brexit Party but benefits the Tories (meaning several seats that could be split between two Brexit votes will now only get one). However, it causes problems in some of the targeted Labour seats by splitting the hard Brexit vote at least two ways, possibly three with lifelong Labour-supporters who voted for Brexit not being able to stomach voting Tory, or for the Brexit Party knowing they'd support the Tories. 2017 showed that relatively few Brexit-supporting Labour swapped sides to the Conservatives or UKIP. That may be because Brexit was less of an imminent issue, but I think lifelong Labour supporters whose priorities are jobs, the NHS and policing may hesitate to vote Tory because of Brexit alone. They might choose to not vote at all, of course.

[A wilding]

 

7 minutes ago, Werthead said:

 

Quote

Doubt Farage cares about the future of his party, it might surprise some here but he does seem genuinely interested in making sure Brexit happens.

If he did, he would have supported a customs union or continued membership of the single market or Norway+ as he did a few years ago after Brexit. Instead, he's continuously moved the goalposts backwards every time he's taken a position, so no version of Brexit is good enough for him and he has to "reluctantly" rejoin the fight to make sure Brexit isn't betrayed etc. That's not the stance of someone taking a principled position, that's the stance of a PR man trying to maintain his relevance for as long as possible to ensure he can charge as much as possible on the US after-dinner speaking circuit. He wants to "win" Brexit as completely as possible to ensure that. 

Absolutely this.

[Chaircat Meow]

7 hours ago, Heartofice said:

When I say move forward, I am referring to a point at which we aren't stuck in this form of stasis where its not even clear whether we are leaving or not. We still aren't there yet, and there are still people trying to cancel Brexit and Labour is still banging on about its unicorn 'not really Brexit' deal. 

So I'm hoping Boris wins big, and we do in fact leave. And yes, then we can start 'moving forwards', and away from the EU. Of course the process isn't over and it will take a few years to get their (longer with the EU considering how snail-like they are at doing trade deals) but I think thats kind of accepted. 

Anyone who thinks 'we get out' if Johnson wins and 'Brexit gets done' is the victim of a gross piece of charlatanry. 

[Ser Hedge]

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

Something I am expecting to happen soon - or immediately - after Brexit is for countries to start calling on the UK's permanent seat on the UN Security Council to be revoked.

A very good point certainly.

But we might just keep the seat purely because the RoW can't agree on a replacement. If you look at the objectors to each option:

1. India: China and Pakistan (who in turn have powerful allies to the west)

2. An EU seat: France

3. Japan: China and S Korea

4. Germany: I think the UK can round up the Anglo-commonwealth on this one.

5. Brazil, Mexico: India

A rotating G-20 might work, but then an argument can be made why have 4 other permanent members at all?

I really don't think France wants the status quo shaken up, and the moment the US would still back us. Also the symmetry of the 5 'official' nuclear powers as permanent members works for Russia and China too.

[Chaircat Meow]

Pretty grim news about the Tory-Brexit pact. 

It shores up the Tories against the Liberals in the south and may even offer them some aid in Scotland in one or two tight contests. And of course it was Liberal and SNP gains people were depending on to deprive Boris of his majority. True it won't affect many seats but then it doesn't have to.

And this may just be the beginning, the start of a long retreat as Brexit candidates in the all important Labour-Tory marginals are pulled as we approach 12 December. 

 

[Chaircat Meow]

It is possible though that most of the potential-Tory voters who could be squeezed out of the Brexit already were already anyway, and the ones who are left, and are now being stood down, will not vote. 

[Werthead]

Part of the report suppressed by Boris has leaked.

It confirms that nine Russian businessmen and investors with ties to the Kremlin and the Russian security apparatus have donated several million pounds to the Conservative Party over the last seven years. Some of the information isn't new - Boris having a tennis match with a donor's wife in return after a donation was widely reported several years ago - but some of it is, such as that donations from Russian sources to the Tory Party reached half a million this year (up significantly from last year).

The US Senate (!) expressing concern over a known Russian agent hanging out with Boris Johnson.

[mormont]

1 hour ago, Chaircat Meow said:

Pretty grim news about the Tory-Brexit pact. 

It shores up the Tories against the Liberals in the south and may even offer them some aid in Scotland in one or two tight contests. And of course it was Liberal and SNP gains people were depending on to deprive Boris of his majority. True it won't affect many seats but then it doesn't have to.

Uh... which contests would those be?

UKIP only stood in ten seats in Scotland last time out and lost their deposit in each. None of them were the constituencies that elected Conservative MPs: not one of those thirteen faced a UKIP opponent. This means literally nothing in Scotland.

[Chaircat Meow]

5 minutes ago, mormont said:

Uh... which contests would those be?

UKIP only stood in ten seats in Scotland last time out and lost their deposit in each. None of them were the constituencies that elected Conservative MPs: not one of those thirteen faced a UKIP opponent. This means literally nothing in Scotland.

Well the BXP party are/were polling more than UKIP were in Scotland, at about 5-6% or something. So if say 1/2 go Tory that could help them a bit.  

Apparently, according to Prof Rob Ford removing the BXP from contention would mean 1/2 their voters don't vote, 5/6 of the ones who do go Tory and 1/6 go Labour. 

[mormont]

7 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

Well the BXP party are/were polling more than UKIP were in Scotland, at about 5-6% or something. So if say 1/2 go Tory that could help them a bit.  

Apparently, according to Prof Rob Ford removing the BXP from contention would mean 1/2 their voters don't vote, 5/6 of the ones who do go Tory and 1/6 go Labour. 

This is based on the twin assumptions that those voters being polled a, did not say they were going to vote UKIP last time and b, would in fact have voted for the Brexit party. As I recall, UKIP were polling around 3-4% last time and wound up with 0.2%. So a lot more than half of them probably went Tory last time.

In any case, it seems Farage has annoyed his own party, not least by refusing to refund the expenses of candidates he now won't back.

[The Anti-Targ]

I don't see the UK's Security Council seat being up for discussion. None of the other 4 members will want any kind of change to the status quo, because they don't want to invite anyone else to the party for different reasons, but still they don't want anyone else. And between the 5 of them they will have enough influence over other countries for any vote in the GA to be defeated.

The permanent seats just need to get gone. Or at least have the veto power removed even if they get to remain permanent members.