[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[Neville's Breakfast]

I don't think [MENTION=34242]Neville's Breakfast[/MENTION] has declared that Brexit is going well, has he?

I was a massive remainer, and expect Brexit to end badly (for a while at least, and it was all needless) but nothing much has happened yet and it's too early to be certain. The state of the economy now can plausibly (I am not saying correctly here, too early to say, but it is plausibly) be blamed on Covid. We will be able to judge the likely impact of Brexit when we compare the change in social and economic indicators between 2 years ago and, say, in 5 years time and compare that with the same rajectory for Germany, France and a few other nations. So if anyone wishes to claim that Brexit has not had any bad effects (yet) one can't 'prove' this is incorrect.

There are and will be bigger fights to be had, and with other people who are genuinely strident Boris fan boys, I feel. Powder dry, and all that

I gave him a one word ‘yes’ when he rather aggressively asked if Brexit was going well. He has a tendency to dish out abuse to anybody who disagrees. I agree with your summary. Too early to tell but still happy with my vote as are you.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

They are making it up as they go along.

[tweet]1481592352208785411[/tweet]

 

[Monkey Man]

Yep.

Tories way behind now in the polls, but once they get a new leader and get behind him in a way that Labour seem unable to do, they'll win the next election.

That of course is the worry. The glimmer of hope is that there seem to be more voices now talking in terms of a progressive tactical vote, to unseat Tories wherever this looks like a realistic possibility.

I don't imagine that the Labour Party can or will endorse this officially but maybe if the campaign is seen to be coordinated by people ostensibly outside politics (names like Armando Iannucci and Hugh Grant would perhaps be part of this) there would be a chance of non-Tory voters switching to whatever left of centre party is best placed locally.

At the moment the Tories are laughing because they occupy almost all of the right-of-centre space. Their opponents outnumber them but the vote is too fragmented.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Anyone who still thinks that Brexit is going well at this stage is trying to justify their incorrect choice and is not using measured judgement.

I don't think [MENTION=34242]Neville's Breakfast[/MENTION] has declared that Brexit is going well, has he?

I was a massive remainer, and expect Brexit to end badly (for a while at least, and it was all needless) but nothing much has happened yet and it's too early to be certain. The state of the economy now can plausibly (I am not saying correctly here, too early to say, but it is plausibly) be blamed on Covid. We will be able to judge the likely impact of Brexit when we compare the change in social and economic indicators between 2 years ago and, say, in 5 years time and compare that with the same rajectory for Germany, France and a few other nations. So if anyone wishes to claim that Brexit has not had any bad effects (yet) one can't 'prove' this is incorrect.

There are and will be bigger fights to be had, and with other people who are genuinely strident Boris fan boys, I feel. Powder dry, and all that

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Astonishing lack of awareness, it's not just that he thinks he can get away with it, he thinks he's entitled to get away with it.

First rule of the psychopath - believe your own lies. I have seen it with some 'colleagues'.

And Boris is most certainly a psychopath. Absolutely no conscience and absolutely convinced of his own virtue.

Although it may benefit labour for Boris to stay as PM, I would gladly see him replaced by a decent tory immediately. Gladly, even if it kept labour out in 3 years. And I'm a labour party member.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I don't think [MENTION=34242]Neville's Breakfast[/MENTION] has declared that Brexit is going well, has he?

I was a massive remainer, and expect Brexit to end badly (for a while at least, and it was all needless) but nothing much has happened yet and it's too early to be certain. The state of the economy now can plausibly (I am not saying correctly here, too early to say, but it is plausibly) be blamed on Covid. We will be able to judge the likely impact of Brexit when we compare the change in social and economic indicators between 2 years ago and, say, in 5 years time and compare that with the same rajectory for Germany, France and a few other nations. So if anyone wishes to claim that Brexit has not had any bad effects (yet) one can't 'prove' this is incorrect.

There are and will be bigger fights to be had, and with other people who are genuinely strident Boris fan boys, I feel. Powder dry, and all that

This is spot on, some where quite to jump on the empty fish warehouses last year, why would anyone be buying fish for resturants etc when everything was shut?

I am sure it will end badly as well, but trying to blame everything on Brexit when it clearly isnt doesnt help the cause.

 

[nwgull]

I don't think [MENTION=34242]Neville's Breakfast[/MENTION] has declared that Brexit is going well, has he?

I was a massive remainer, and expect Brexit to end badly (for a while at least, and it was all needless) but nothing much has happened yet and it's too early to be certain. The state of the economy now can plausibly (I am not saying correctly here, too early to say, but it is plausibly) be blamed on Covid. We will be able to judge the likely impact of Brexit when we compare the change in social and economic indicators between 2 years ago and, say, in 5 years time and compare that with the same rajectory for Germany, France and a few other nations. So if anyone wishes to claim that Brexit has not had any bad effects (yet) one can't 'prove' this is incorrect.

There are and will be bigger fights to be had, and with other people who are genuinely strident Boris fan boys, I feel. Powder dry, and all that

He did a few pages back, which is a delusional head-in-sand opinion that flies in the face of all objective analysis and real-life issues that Brexit has created.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

That of course is the worry. The glimmer of hope is that there seem to be more voices now talking in terms of a progressive tactical vote, to unseat Tories wherever this looks like a realistic possibility.

Won't happen when it gets to a GE. Labour and LibDems won't be able agree on where to stand aside.

In addition, the LibDems would want some form of assurance that there would be a referendum with regards to PR - something the Labour Party will never agree to - why would they when they believe they can (and have) won overall majorities before?

 

[Glawstergull]

You may not be, but generally people vote for the party rather than the local candidate. There are some seats where this isn't true, places with particularly good local MPs who win even if general trends suggest they shouldn't, but in general people vote for the party. The party leaders for Labour and the Conservatives are comfortably their most significant figures, although this can be different in the smaller parties (Clegg is probably still more well known than Ed Davey or Jo Swinson for example). That leader does have an effect, regardless of whether it should or not.

I think the point i was trying to make was that it is difficult to support a party or its place in the spectrum and not endorse the leader. In an election anyway. Many of Johnsons and Tory bashers are more energised by the ETON look and the idea on institutionalised wealth. If May/Thatcher or anyone less plummy were the target would they froth at the mouth so?
I didnt hate Corbyn or foot to that extent. I don't cry for a lynch mob every time a non Tory MP gets caught out.
Hasn't it always been the way that power corrupts.

 

[highflyer]

It's clearly not, regardless of how much you want it to be, alas.

I've stated on here, repeaedly, how bad I think Johnson has been.

And whilst I have no idea how Corbyn would have faired as PM, it's hard to imagine anyone could have been worse than what we've had. So I'm certainly willing to guess that Corbyn would have done a better job. (Sorry for saying that, as I know it's just blown your narrative about me.)

But, again, that's not the point. Corbyn was NEVER going to win a General Election in this country, but by being on the ballot paper it effectively handed Johnson the keys to Number 10.

I supported Corbyn, but was fully aware of his many flaws. Most important of which were how weak and isolated he was within his own party, the fact that decades of rebelling made it very hard to enforce discipline, the failure to deal early with ant-semitism, the lack of experience he had of a position that requires strategy and compromise rather than moral perfection and the fact that he had a team around him that were for the most part, equally inexperienced in running a general election campaign (on account of the fact that those in the party with experience mostly hated him).

Despite all that though, the 2017 results do not support the hypothesis that he was 'unelectable'. He blew it. And we will all have our own views on the factors involved. But I think he COULD have won, given the situation and the opposition. Or more accurately I think he could have ended up as PM in coalition with the SNP.

Personally, I think going against his instincts and succumbing to the pressure from within to support a second referendum was the killer blow. A tactical disaster, and I know he didnt want to but I suspect he had little choice as not doing so would have left him exposed to even more internal sabotage from the centre right remainer fanatics. It was a terrible look in the traditional Labour, brexit voting seats. But then (despite voting remain) I've never been overly enthused about the EU as some kind of lefty-liberal paradise. Had the Lib-Dems and many labour MPs not refused to play ball, the opportunity was there to overturn May's government, set up an interim government to push through the softest possible Brexit and then hold a general election with the Tories greatest weapon neutralised.
.
The idea (much touted on here) that having Starmer in his place would have ensured instant victory has hardly played out in the polls. They have moved hard against Johnson but even with such extreme levels of demonstrated awfulness there is stll stubborn levels of support for the Tories and the lost votes mainly do not seem to be going to Labour. What is missing in my view is any real vision or alternative from Labour which can excite and motivate. Instead they are relying on saying very little, playing safe and waiting for the Tories to self-destruct. I think that is very dangerous. Johnson will self destruct, but most of the sh*t will stick to him and the Tories will still be strong. In the meantime Labour will have done nothing to pursuade people to vote for them rather than Sunak when the time comes.

The push for dopping VAT and imposing a windfall tax on energy companies was good as a policy, but is not presented as part of a coherent vision. Just a single one-off which makes it feel almost apologetic.

Rant over.
Back to work.

.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Won't happen when it gets to a GE. Labour and LibDems won't be able agree on where to stand aside.

In addition, the LibDems would want some form of assurance that there would be a referendum with regards to PR - something the Labour Party will never agree to - why would they when they believe they can (and have) won overall majorities before?

Only if there was a formal agreement, which there never would be.

I can foresee a GE with a continuation of what we've seen at By Elections. With some sort of tacit unspoken acceptance that Lab and Lib are going to remove time and resources on seats which their attempt to go from 3rd to second will only ensure a Tory victory.

The public won't like a stich up, so i'd expect Lab to strongly slate lib dem and vice versa in the build up. But that will just be panto

 

[Monkey Man]

Won't happen when it gets to a GE. Labour and LibDems won't be able agree on where to stand aside.

In addition, the LibDems would want some form of assurance that there would be a referendum with regards to PR - something the Labour Party will never agree to - why would they when they believe they can (and have) won overall majorities before?

I think it would all be done at an unofficial level and it wouldn't be without its controversies. But I think there was something similar going on with the Lib Dems and Labour in the most recent by-elections. Labour were very quiet in North Shropshire and the Liberals were very quiet in Old Bexley. The voting reflected that.

Problem for Labour is that its previous GE majorities required a solid return from Scotland, which is now an electoral desert for them.

 

[Bob!]

Won't happen when it gets to a GE. Labour and LibDems won't be able agree on where to stand aside.

In addition, the LibDems would want some form of assurance that there would be a referendum with regards to PR - something the Labour Party will never agree to - why would they when they believe they can (and have) won overall majorities before?

But

IF Scotland gets Independence the likelihood of an overall majority all but vanishes.
The Labour Party may well need PR to have any hope of any power in the future.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

I think it would all be done at an unofficial level and it wouldn't be without its controversies. But I think there was something similar going on with the Lib Dems and Labour in the most recent by-elections. Labour were very quiet in North Shropshire and the Liberals were very quiet in Old Bexley. The voting reflected that.

Problem for Labour is that its previous GE majorities required a solid return from Scotland, which is now an electoral desert for them.

Yes. To get a majority they will need to turn rock solid tory seats in England red.

I don't see a lot of tory voters voting labour, but I think a lot will stay at home

Some sort of hung parliament, still the most likely

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

He did a few pages back, which is a delusional head-in-sand opinion that flies in the face of all objective analysis and real-life issues that Brexit has created.

I haven't read the whole thread but in my experience NB is nuanced and can be easily misunderstood.

But, apologies if I'm being annoying. I have been listening to student presentations this morning and have been having to force myself to seek virtue and value in umpromising terrains, so I'm all a bit Arnold Rimmer after the polymorth stole his more spikey personality traits at the moment.

I'm sure I'll revert to my normal titsy self later

 

[Pevenseagull]

The Tory MP on Politics Live today was pretty funny. First pulled the old 'people are bored of this' line and later followed up with saying any Tories against Johnson are just doing it to try and reverse brexit.

Desperate.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

But

IF Scotland gets Independence the likelihood of an overall majority all but vanishes.
The Labour Party may well need PR to have any hope of any power in the future.

All parties will strongly resist another independence referendum.

I reckon this will drag on for decades more

 

[Eric the meek]

Sorry not sorry.

[tweet]1481543117887188996[/tweet]

I'm dumbfounded by this.

Having just made his 'apology' to the House of Commons, Boris tells friends in the tea room, that he hadn't actually done anything wrong.

Isn't that being disingenuous? Misleading the House, even in his apology?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

But

IF Scotland gets Independence the likelihood of an overall majority all but vanishes.
The Labour Party may well need PR to have any hope of any power in the future.

I had this conversation with a pal yesterday. He thinks Labour should offer PR as part of their manifesto, and look to facilitate tactical voting. I'm not sure all this will be necessary, the way the rories are headed. If Brexit turns sour too (not wishing it, BTW) then it will be a foregone conclusion.

Besides, I am not a fan of coalitions at the best of times - when the junior partner always leaves the arrangement (they are all temporary by definition) they always do so with a damaged (virtual) anal sphyncter. However, my political judgement is not good (I regard this as a virtue, by the way - being politically astute requires the surgical removal of part, if not all, of the soul) so I could be wrong.

 

[beorhthelm]

Only if there was a formal agreement, which there never would be.

I can foresee a GE with a continuation of what we've seen at By Elections. With some sort of tacit unspoken acceptance that Lab and Lib are going to remove time and resources on seats which their attempt to go from 3rd to second will only ensure a Tory victory.

The public won't like a stich up, so i'd expect Lab to strongly slate lib dem and vice versa in the build up. But that will just be panto

thats been talked about as long as i remember, doesnt happen outside a few by elections. what proponents always ignore is the local constituency members, the activists. will they be happy sitting out an election campaign as their seat was chosen as sacrifice? why run a candidate at all? now your risking spliting local parties. a national party putting forward a candidate in every seat cant endorse tactical voting in some seats without consequences to their support in others. a national party no putting forawrd candidates in every seat risks an alternative emerging.