Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Stop moaning ffs

fly_agaric wrote: »

Not assuming (might be foolish to try and predict anything, let alone assume) but it not impossible they will be back in power after the next election despite all that's happened in the last few years!

All we know from this ongoing saga is to expect the worst most ridiculous unexpected outcome possible. Nothing is guaranteed except the ridiculous.

I expect that to continue.

Unless in the words of Churchill to actor David Niven (on the US not participating in WWII) ‘a cataclysm will occur and they will be forced to engage’ then pearl harbour happened.

Paraphrasing but that was the gist.

We could all do with an event that slaps the stupidity hard in the face and forces it to focus.

4068ac1elhodqr

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Very true, hard to say anything is outside the realm of possibility in these near insane times. As I read it, TBP is a perfect fit with the Europe far right bloc but he knows that kind of stuff won't go down electorally in the uk so he's carefully trying to steer a different, more subtle path but I think that will only get him so far and not through a protracted GE campaign. And i still find it very hard to foresee a scenario in which Farage gets to decide to join the Tory party when I would imagine there's at least half that party that would want absolutely nothing to do with him under any circumstances.

A spark to this type of sceanrio would the (likely soon) tabloid press spread of the trio (boris/nf/trump) having a hand shaking and backpatting 'deal making' type of gathering.

Then a major uk-us trade deal on the horizon, pre-October.

After all there is probably more cultural similaraties between someone from one of the x29 Bristols in the US, than there would be with someone from Brussels/Bern/Bratislava.

Any split would be in the form of new Tory-TBP alliance up against a LD-led alliance (with boosts from other tories & labour). Labour may as well disperse, and reform at some later date.

Enzokk

Jazmine Big Dragonfly wrote: »

Crickey, further shortening on the market for Nigel to become a PM during 2019 at just 9/1.
(This was 66/1 last month, and 20/1 days ago).

It's also now just 6/1 for TBP to win any GE.

However reckon NF/TBP will actually join or merge with a Boris's Torys if they take a hard-fast brexit stance.
Meanwhile Labour themselves might well start voting for the LDs if they want things soft.

Scotland may as well get a head start on their Indie proceedings.

Odds are as much determined by the change in circumstance as the money put on a bet, right? So while the elections have changed the dynamic somewhat the fact that more people are betting on him and his party will also change the odds while nothing material has changed to reflect this, other than bookies wanting to hedge their bets.

As for Labour actually changing position, seems we have to put a brake on that again.

Corbyn in Dublin says he could renegotiate Brexit as prime minister

Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of Britain’s Labour Party, has suggested he could renegotiate the UK’s exit deal from the EU as prime minister, despite the EU repeatedly ruling out any re-opening of the withdrawal agreement.

Speaking in Dublin, Mr Corbyn also said any second Brexit referendum should not be a repeat of the 2016 vote in the UK but instead a referendum on a new deal with Europe.

If I had hair left I would have ripped them all out by now. Who is he going to negotiate with? What assurance can he get about state aid that will allow the UK to pour money into utilities that they want to return to be run and owned by the state and not fall foul of single market rules as they want as close a relationship as possible?

Then I think his message is quite clear as well. He wants to leave the EU with his deal. He is no remainer and I think he will burn down the Labour party to get his way. I think, on reflection, those odds I posted about above is good to get onto even now. If Labour doesn't change tack and with the Tories in the impossible bind that they are we are in a situation where Farage will walk into Downing Street due to the incompetence of Labour.

“We’re meeting the Taoiseach tomorrow to discuss our ideas about a customs union with the European Union, which we would put to the House of Commons as well as protections of all of the rights, the dynamic protection of all of the rights, that have been obtained through EU membership,” he said.

“The Labour Party is of the position that we should be quite prepared to put this to a public vote subsequently.”

If he is able to negotiate a deal with the EU he is happy with, he is not going to be campaigning against it.

Headshot

Just listening to Rory Stewart on Sky News

The only conservative that actually like tbh

54and56

Just watched Rory Stewart interview on All Out Politics on Sky News and I have to say that in my view he is an incredibly smart and calm politician who has integrity and would be a very credible leader for any country. He doesn't shirk the hard questions and doesn't play the soundbite/tabloid game so probably has zero chance of becoming the leader of the Tory party. That's a poor reflection on them and their loss. They'll no doubt get the leader they deserve.

ancapailldorcha

Headshot wrote: »

Just listening to Rory Stewart on Sky News

The only conservative that actually like tbh

This is part of the problem. The people who like Rory Stewart seem to be either very liberal Conservatives or non-Conservatives. I think he could crush Labour in an election but I can't see the membership voting for him.

54and56

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

This is part of the problem. The people who like Rory Stewart seem to be either very liberal Conservatives or non-Conservatives. I think he could crush Labour in an election but I can't see the membership voting for him.

Rory Stewart isn't "Red Meat" enough for the Tory membership. Sadly (for them and their country) that trumps intellect and honest analysis.

Leroy42

Strikes me as another Ed Milliband tbh. Edit - nothing wrong per se with that, just that he will be torn apart by the media.

He schick "lets all just get along" will wear pretty thin pretty quickly as he wil either never make any decisions or simply revert to type and ignore others.

He needs to be questioned what part of government strategy over the last 8 years has he supported and what areas he hasn't. Why has he continued to support a government when food bank use has increased for example.

Professor Moriarty

54&56 wrote: »

Just watched Rory Stewart interview on All Out Politics on Sky News and I have to say that in my view he is an incredibly smart and calm politician who has integrity and would be a very credible leader for any country. He doesn't shirk the hard questions and doesn't play the soundbite/tabloid game so probably has zero chance of becoming the leader of the Tory party. That's a poor reflection on them and their loss. They'll no doubt get the leader they deserve.

He's an extremely interesting character. Well worth checking out his bio. One of a handful of Tory MPs who voted for a customs union.

Peregrinus

Leroy42 wrote: »

Strikes me as another Ed Milliband tbh.

He schick "lets all just get along" will wear pretty thin pretty quickly as he wil either never make any decisions or simply revert to type and ignore others.

He needs to be questioned what part of government strategy over the last 8 years has he supported and what areas he hasn't. Why has he continued to support a government when food bank use has increased for example.

While this has the merit of purity and making us feel good, such questions would necessarily eliminate all possible candidates for the Tory leadership, since it's only Tory MPs who are eligible for the position, and they are all complicit in whatever the Tories have done. In this context, therefore, questions like this are not a lot of use.

quokula

Peregrinus wrote: »

While this has the merit of purity and making us feel good, such questions would necessarily eliminate all possible candidates for the Tory leadership, since it's only Tory MPs who are eligible for the position, and they are all complicit in whatever the Tories have done. In this context, therefore, questions like this are not a lot of use.

Agree with that from the perspective of the leadership battle, but from the wider public POV he should be grilled on that because I'm seeing him increasingly being portrayed as some kind of liberal hero because of a few things he's said in interviews, but his voting record is as bad as the rest of them.

Also curious to see him praised so much for supporting a customs union, by the same people who slate Corbyn for supporting a customs union.

54and56

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Possibly. The issue is that you're splitting the leave vote. I can't that anyone voting Remain would vote either of the other two options as second preference. Also, the No to AV campaign from 2011 did a fairly solid job of poisoning the well when it comes to PR or AV.

I do like your idea but I can see there being significant problems even in the conceptualization stage. For instance, a lot of people here were told that someone who wins less than the majority of votes can win the seat they are running in.

It would ultimately be a disaster of catastrophic proportions if the crashout option was on the ballot. Few MP's would have the courage to actually vote for this to be on the ballot card.

Quite the opposite Ancapailldorcha, my proposal would actually combine both WA and WTO into a single "umbrella" leave vote Vs remain and should the umbrella leave vote prevail the preferred flavour of the winning leave voters i.e. WA or WTO would then be implemented, end of.

ancapailldorcha

quokula wrote: »

Agree with that from the perspective of the leadership battle, but from the wider public POV he should be grilled on that because I'm seeing him increasingly being portrayed as some kind of liberal hero because of a few things he's said in interviews, but his voting record is as bad as the rest of them.

Also curious to see him praised so much for supporting a customs union, by the same people who slate Corbyn for supporting a customs union.

He is a Conservative at the end of the day though. At present, he seems to be the best of a bad bunch. I'd say I'd find plenty to despair about if I looked at Dominic Grieve's voting record as well.

54&56 wrote: »

Quite the opposite Ancapailldorcha, my proposal would actually combine both WA and WTO into a single "umbrella" leave vote Vs remain and should the umbrella leave vote prevail the preferred flavour of the winning leave voters i.e. WA or WTO would then be implemented, end of.

It would but would the electorate understand this? The ardent leavers hate the WA. Well, everyone does but that's not my point. My point is that they will likely try to spread misinformation about it as they did with the Leave vote in 2016. Then there's getting it through Parliament. There are a lot of ways for this to fail.

Zubeneschamali

54&56 wrote: »

WA or WTO would then be implemented, end of.

Implementing either would not be "end of", it would be just the beginning of utterly humiliating negotiations from a position of weakness to try and claw back some of what would be lost.

jm08

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

He's an extremely interesting character. Well worth checking out his bio. One of a handful of Tory MPs who voted for a customs union.

joe.co.uk interview with him. He does know his stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fB6VAt9qGro

Conservative Home are listing support for PM candidates.
While Hunt etc. all have 25+ mp support, Stewart has the support of two MPs!

https://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2019/05/leadership-election-candidate-support-numbers-hunt-27-johnson-19-raab-13-gove-12-javid-10.html

Professor Moriarty

jm08 wrote: »

joe.co.uk interview with him. He does know his stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fB6VAt9qGro

Conservative Home are listing support for PM candidates.
While Hunt etc. all have 25+ mp support, Stewart has the support of two MPs!

https://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2019/05/leadership-election-candidate-support-numbers-hunt-27-johnson-19-raab-13-gove-12-javid-10.html

He's a Tory through and through but not so much of a Brexiteer and won't buy into the ERG/Farage lunacy. So, at best, he's presenting an argument against No Deal in the face of the likes of Raab, Leadsom and McVey. Who truly are loathsome.

robinph

54&56 wrote: »

Quite the opposite Ancapailldorcha, my proposal would actually combine both WA and WTO into a single "umbrella" leave vote Vs remain and should the umbrella leave vote prevail the preferred flavour of the winning leave voters i.e. WA or WTO would then be implemented, end of.

But what happens if you have:
40% remain (2nd pref 6%+ WA)
20% WA (2nd pref 10% remain, 10% WTO)
25% WTO

In your method you remove the most popular remain option and pick the complete opposite of WTO.
In an alternative vote system you would pick remain after transferring the 2nd preferences from the WA pile.
In a variation of your method but using the 2nd preferences you'd discount remain and count their 2nd preferences and so pick the WA.

Enzokk

robinph wrote: »

But what happens if you have:
40% remain (2nd pref 6%+ WA)
20% WA (2nd pref 10% remain, 10% WTO)
25% WTO

In your method you remove the most popular remain option and pick the complete opposite of WTO.
In an alternative vote system you would pick remain after transferring the 2nd preferences from the WA pile.
In a variation of your method but using the 2nd preferences you'd discount remain and count their 2nd preferences and so pick the WA.

I think he is suggesting adding an option to the leave option. If you vote leave then there is an additional vote in there on what type of leave you want. But that would mean you cut out 45-55% of your electorate and would not be democratic. You could allow those that vote remain to have a say as well, but then the WA would win handily so it is no use adding it.

You could add a third option, leave but within the single market and customs union, then again that would win easily over the other 2 options even if leave wins the overall vote.

This is making my head hurt. The only options you could do is the WA vs remain, because the relationship will still need to be negotiated so a Brexiteer could still get in there and make the future relationship as hard as possible once they have left. At least that way they leave if they still want to and you are laying out what leaving will be like, especially if you consider that the EU will not open the WA for renegotiation.

Edit: On reading his post again he is suggesting as you say. But that would allow a small percentage of the electorate to dictate the path of the country and that would be dangerous. How can 26% of 51% decide such a crucial question.

Inquitus

54&56 wrote: »

Rory Stewart isn't "Red Meat" enough for the Tory membership. Sadly (for them and their country) that trumps intellect and honest analysis.

Aye the 124,000 rabid Brexiteers, mostly over 60, who will decide between the final 2 will go for the most nuclear option, which is why most of the leading candidates and become hardcore Brexiteers for WTO overnight. Very sad, shame they changed the rules, I'd feel safer if it were totally in the hands of the Tory MPs.

robinph

Inquitus wrote: »

Aye the 124,000 rabid Brexiteers, mostly over 60, who will decide between the final 2 will go for the most nuclear option, which is why most of the leading candidates and become hardcore Brexiteers for WTO overnight. Very sad, shame they changed the rules, I'd feel safer if it were totally in the hands of the Tory MPs.

The MP's could still select the two least hardcore candidates, and then persuade the more hardcore one of them to drop out, which would keep things in their hands and nothing to do with the party membership.

Sam Russell

robinph wrote: »

The MP's could still select the two least hardcore candidates, and then persuade the more hardcore one of them to drop out, which would keep things in their hands and nothing to do with the party membership.

Is that not what happened last time?

May God help us.

Inquitus

robinph wrote: »

The MP's could still select the two least hardcore candidates, and then persuade the more hardcore one of them to drop out, which would keep things in their hands and nothing to do with the party membership.

How would you persuade a hardcore Brexiteer who makes it to the final 2 to stand aside when he knows the Tory Party members will make him PM, take Bojo for example.

robinph

Inquitus wrote: »

How would you persuade a hardcore Brexiteer who makes it to the final 2 to stand aside when he knows the Tory Party members will make him PM, take Bojo for example.

Not sure, I didn't think through that part of the plot.

ArmaniJeanss

Even if a hardcore candidate gets eliminated in every round, eventually there'll only be one left at which time ERG will surely vote for that person en masse.
ERG's estimated voting strength is somewhere from 70 to 95. That's a serious bloc when 106 mathematically gets you into the final 2. (316 Tory MPs, 1/3 + 1 is the 'quota'.).

funkey_monkey

Not sure of the love for Rory Stewart. His voting record is nothing to admire:

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24964/rory_stewart/penrith_and_the_border/votes

• Almost always voted for use of UK military forces in combat operations overseas
• Voted against investigations into the Iraq war
• Generally voted against more EU integration
• Generally voted against UK membership of the EU
• Consistently voted against raising welfare benefits at least in line with prices
• Almost always voted against paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability
• Generally voted against spending public money to create guaranteed jobs for young people who have spent a long time unemployed
• Almost always voted against increasing the tax rate applied to income over £150,000
• Almost always voted for more restrictive regulation of trade union activity
• Voted for raising England’s undergraduate tuition fee cap to £9,000 per year
• Generally voted against a more proportional system for electing MPs
• Consistently voted against removing hereditary peers from the House of Lords
• Consistently voted for mass surveillance of people’s communications and activities
• Generally voted against measures to prevent climate change
• Generally voted against greater regulation of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) to extract shale gas

Still a Tory...

robinph

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Even if a hardcore candidate gets eliminated in every round, eventually there'll only be one left at which time ERG will surely vote for that person en masse.
ERG's estimated voting strength is somewhere from 70 to 95. That's a serious bloc when 106 mathematically gets you into the final 2. (316 Tory MPs, 1/3 + 1 is the 'quota'.).

Obviously not going to happen, but in theory couldn't the other 210 Tory MP's then immediately have a vote of no-confidence against them and have them kicked out of the PM's job on day 1?

ArmaniJeanss

funkey_monkey wrote: »

Not sure of the love for Rory Stewart. His voting record is nothing to admire:

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24964/rory_stewart/penrith_and_the_border/votes

Still a Tory...

He's in the party, so therefore he will have voted with the party position 98+% of the time. I think it's slightly churlish to hold someone's voting record against them in this way, much as I (personally) would like to see someone with a liberal leftist attitude being at the forefront of the race. But those people tend not to join the Tories in the first place.

robinph wrote: »

Obviously not going to happen, but in theory couldn't the other 210 Tory MP's then immediately have a vote of no-confidence against them and have them kicked out of the PM's job on day 1?

Yes, but in realpolitik on Day 1 you reach out by offering Foreign Secretary, Defence, Culture, Environment etc to a few influential people on the 'other side' of the party, and those whom you defeated in the contest. And junior positions to their minions etc. And remind everyone that the members have voted overwhelmingly for you etc etc.

54and56

jm08 wrote: »

joe.co.uk interview with him. He does know his stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fB6VAt9qGro

Conservative Home are listing support for PM candidates.
While Hunt etc. all have 25+ mp support, Stewart has the support of two MPs!

https://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2019/05/leadership-election-candidate-support-numbers-hunt-27-johnson-19-raab-13-gove-12-javid-10.html

Rory Stewart is 14/1 on Paddy Power to be the next Tory leader but is 8/1 to make it to the final 2. I think 8/1 is a good price on him to be the candidate the non ERG/WTO MP's end up going with as the person who can best represent all of the Tory party and who can actually get enough into the Political Declaration for the WA to get through.

54and56

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

He's a Tory through and through but not so much of a Brexiteer and won't buy into the ERG/Farage lunacy. So, at best, he's presenting an argument against No Deal in the face of the likes of Raab, Leadsom and McVey. Who truly are loathsome.

Apart from the period he spent as a member of the Labour Party!!

54and56

robinph wrote: »

But what happens if you have:
40% remain (2nd pref 6%+ WA)
20% WA (2nd pref 10% remain, 10% WTO)
25% WTO

In your method you remove the most popular remain option and pick the complete opposite of WTO.
In an alternative vote system you would pick remain after transferring the 2nd preferences from the WA pile.
In a variation of your method but using the 2nd preferences you'd discount remain and count their 2nd preferences and so pick the WA.

First of all the total number of valid votes cast must always = 100% and there are no 2nd preferences.

In my proposal there is a straightforward two step process:-

1. The votes for Remain are counted Vs the combined votes for WA/WTO.

If Remain secures more than 50% it's game over.

If Remain secures less than 50% it loses and the combined WA/WTO votes are split into sub counts of WA and WTO respectively. Whichever has the higher number of votes is deemed the winner and that course of action is followed i.e. if WA wins the WA passes and everyone can move on to the 2nd phase of Brexit or if WTO wins a WTO exit is actively implemented.