Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Lib Dems can do it on a drizzly Thursday in February – but wha

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited February 17 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Lib Dems can do it on a drizzly Thursday in February – but what about on 3 May?

Up until last year, Sunderland had carved out for itself one, and only one, niche in British political life: it counted its votes at general elections faster than anywhere else. For six successive elections from 1992 to 2015, the southern Sunderland seat was the first to declare in the country. Other than that, the city was politically unremarkable: it’s returned two Labour MPs ever since the 1960s and the Red team is similarly dominant at local level.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,435
    First
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,435
    It rather depends how the voters read the "fake news" LD bar charts.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 41,900
    Said it before, but Corbyn's an anchor for both main parties. If he were replaced by someone who hasn't been accused of being an eastern bloc spy/declared himself a friend of Hamas, it'd help both Labour and the Lib Dems.

    The reds would lose Rik vote, but gain in the centre, and those of us who are certain to vote blue if the alternative is Corbyn would have to actually consider which way to vote.

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,425
    The byelections show the Lib Dems can make dramatic gains where they have infrastructure on the ground. The great political mystery right now is why the Lib Dems aren't doing better against two main parties that are so dire.

    Two problems for the Lib Dems. They lack that infrastructure in many places, having been hollowed out by their coalition years. Their national campaign is making no impression whatever.

    Curiously, Lib Dems must be picking up ex-UKIP voters.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 2,726
    I think that the lower the turnout the better the Lib dems will do.

    What is the average turnout in the Locals (as a benchmark)?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,077
    edited February 17
    FF43 said:

    The byelections show the Lib Dems can make dramatic gains where they have infrastructure on the ground. The great political mystery right now is why the Lib Dems aren't doing better against two main parties that are so dire.

    Two problems for the Lib Dems. They lack that infrastructure in many places, having been hollowed out by their coalition years. Their national campaign is making no impression whatever.

    Curiously, Lib Dems must be picking up ex-UKIP voters.

    The LibDems main aim must be to simply stay in the game, until fortunes turn again.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 660
    edited February 17
    Said it before, but Corbyn's an anchor for both main parties. If he were replaced by someone who hasn't been accused of being an eastern bloc spy/declared himself a friend of Hamas, it'd help both Labour and the Lib Dems.
    ..........................................................................

    I hear it repeated often but with very little evidence provided for it. I can't see another Labour leader polling better than the current one, it seems to be mainly said by people who themselves would prefer a different Labour leader.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,752
    FF43 said:

    The byelections show the Lib Dems can make dramatic gains where they have infrastructure on the ground. The great political mystery right now is why the Lib Dems aren't doing better against two main parties that are so dire.

    Two problems for the Lib Dems. They lack that infrastructure in many places, having been hollowed out by their coalition years. Their national campaign is making no impression whatever.

    Curiously, Lib Dems must be picking up ex-UKIP voters.

    The Lib Dems are doing well in Eastbourne largely by virtue of having a really good organisation. 17 miles away in Hastings - you can see one town from the other across Normans Bay - Labour are pulling off the same trick of getting support by pounding the pavements. Both towns are sort of naturally Conservative. It isn't hard to imagine the Lib Dems finding a couple of dozen Eastbournes around the country which would be enough to give the pollsters another bloody nose at the next General Election.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,077

    Said it before, but Corbyn's an anchor for both main parties. If he were replaced by someone who hasn't been accused of being an eastern bloc spy/declared himself a friend of Hamas, it'd help both Labour and the Lib Dems.
    ..........................................................................

    I hear it repeated often but with very little evidence provided for it. I can't see another Labour leader polling better than the current one, it seems to be mainly said by people who themselves would prefer a different Labour leader.

    I think the evidence is that oppositions normally poll ahead of governments. No matter who is leading.
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 1,922
    It's worth recalling the LDs have no LD/Labour parliamentary marginals to fight any more.Lab has effectively crushed any chance of them taking Labour seats.The real battle for the LDs is with the Tories,who have also been very effective with their decapitation strategy and who continue to dominate.Not to say this isn't very important for Labour who need the LDs to eat into some of those Tory votes but the real battlefield is between the Libs and the Tories.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,077

    It's worth recalling the LDs have no LD/Labour parliamentary marginals to fight any more.Lab has effectively crushed any chance of them taking Labour seats.The real battle for the LDs is with the Tories,who have also been very effective with their decapitation strategy and who continue to dominate.Not to say this isn't very important for Labour who need the LDs to eat into some of those Tory votes but the real battlefield is between the Libs and the Tories.

    Sheffield Hallam.
  • Said it before, but Corbyn's an anchor for both main parties. If he were replaced by someone who hasn't been accused of being an eastern bloc spy/declared himself a friend of Hamas, it'd help both Labour and the Lib Dems.
    ..........................................................................

    I hear it repeated often but with very little evidence provided for it. I can't see another Labour leader polling better than the current one, it seems to be mainly said by people who themselves would prefer a different Labour leader.

    I can, people on the centre left, who dislike the Tories with a passion find themselves considering a vote for the Blue team because the prospect of a Corbyn premiership is so unthinkable. The Tories are of course attempting to neutralise this by proposing JRM, Davis, Gove or Johnson as leader.

    A JRM v Corbyn GE makes a LD revival all the more likely.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,082
    edited February 17
    I would certainly vote LibDem in any local election.

    The GE is a different matter. If a right wing English nationalist like Johnson or Rees Mogg is leading the Tories I will be forced into voting to keep the Labour marginal I live in out of Tory hands. Otherwise, it’ll probably be the LibDems once more.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,465

    It's worth recalling the LDs have no LD/Labour parliamentary marginals to fight any more.Lab has effectively crushed any chance of them taking Labour seats.The real battle for the LDs is with the Tories,who have also been very effective with their decapitation strategy and who continue to dominate.Not to say this isn't very important for Labour who need the LDs to eat into some of those Tory votes but the real battlefield is between the Libs and the Tories.

    Where vote for Moribund Vince, get Agent COB is a difficult hurdle for the LibDems to overcome.

    The Pointing At Potholes Party is something you can have take a punt with. But not nationally.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 660
    edited February 17

    Said it before, but Corbyn's an anchor for both main parties. If he were replaced by someone who hasn't been accused of being an eastern bloc spy/declared himself a friend of Hamas, it'd help both Labour and the Lib Dems.
    ..........................................................................

    I hear it repeated often but with very little evidence provided for it. I can't see another Labour leader polling better than the current one, it seems to be mainly said by people who themselves would prefer a different Labour leader.

    I think the evidence is that oppositions normally poll ahead of governments. No matter who is leading.
    How did this collective 'wisdom' work out regarding the recent election?

    There are big splits on a number of issues in the electorate, the idea a new Labour leader would magically unite these splits is fanciful IMO, people pine for a new Labour candidate in the same way they pine for a new centre party, because it would appeal to them. The problem is the electorate is composed slightly differently to how a lot of PB users would like it.

    If the one or two people such as Morris would only consider voting Labour and they would lose many other votes moving back to a Millliband type position then electorally it isn't worth it. If a Milliband type position was more popular more people would have voted for it...

    The truth is Corbyn won within Labour because very few people believed in what Labour had become anymore. Those who complain who didn't vote for it before can't really complain that it changed to attract voters who would vote for it. In purely electoral terms Corbyn has been a boost to Labour, we were in terrible shape after the last election now we would probably be favourites to form the next government. Those who don't want Corbyn in charge of Labour don't want Corbyn as PM rather* than having genuine concerns for the Labour party winning power.

    *One or two aside but most on here.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,425
    edited February 17

    FF43 said:

    The byelections show the Lib Dems can make dramatic gains where they have infrastructure on the ground. The great political mystery right now is why the Lib Dems aren't doing better against two main parties that are so dire.

    Two problems for the Lib Dems. They lack that infrastructure in many places, having been hollowed out by their coalition years. Their national campaign is making no impression whatever.

    Curiously, Lib Dems must be picking up ex-UKIP voters.

    The LibDems main aim must be to simply stay in the game, until fortunes turn again.
    I don't think holding on is working for them. There's a possibility to reinvent themselves as the party of opportunity, international connection and liberal values. Brexit is the catalyst rather than the be all and end all. The two main parties have become very inward looking so that's the LD's chance. Worth them risking it in my view
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 41,900
    Mr. Observer, must say I'm somewhat surprised by that, given your (entirely understandable) loathing of Corbyn.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,752
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    The byelections show the Lib Dems can make dramatic gains where they have infrastructure on the ground. The great political mystery right now is why the Lib Dems aren't doing better against two main parties that are so dire.

    Two problems for the Lib Dems. They lack that infrastructure in many places, having been hollowed out by their coalition years. Their national campaign is making no impression whatever.

    Curiously, Lib Dems must be picking up ex-UKIP voters.

    The LibDems main aim must be to simply stay in the game, until fortunes turn again.
    I don't think holding on is working for them. There's a possibility to reinvent themselves as the party of opportunity, international connection and liberal values. Brexit is the catalyst rather than the be all and end all. The two main parties have become very inward looking so that's the LD's chance. Worth them risking it in my view
    I've no idea how they do it, but they've got a big opportunity to become the party of small business. A lot of small businesses are really really pissed off about Brexit.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,224
    edited February 17
    A nice theme for PB, where our discussions remain generally pretty civilised:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/17/language-public-social-media-politics-repercussions

    The rise of polite politicians who quietly put their case, from Corbyn to Gove to Rees-Mogg, shows some real electoral potential, not least as armour against the routine assaults of the tabloids. If I read that Rees-Mogg was alleged to have had a drunken orgy, I'd simply dismiss it as obvious nonsense, in a way that I wouldn't if I read it about Trump. I don't think I share many views with him, but the civil manner puts him in the same room. Similarly, Corbyn is protected against the idea that he was greedily amassing money from the Czechs to tell them secrets that he'd somehow acquired because it just doesn't seem credible, as it might for a more flamboyant left-winger.

    By general consensus we are in an awkward position as a society and a country at the moment, and it's likely that the solutions will still be sub-optimal. It's worth recognising that none of us are likely to be entirely right as we look for the way forward, and that's a useful starting point for any discussion.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,425

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    The byelections show the Lib Dems can make dramatic gains where they have infrastructure on the ground. The great political mystery right now is why the Lib Dems aren't doing better against two main parties that are so dire.

    Two problems for the Lib Dems. They lack that infrastructure in many places, having been hollowed out by their coalition years. Their national campaign is making no impression whatever.

    Curiously, Lib Dems must be picking up ex-UKIP voters.

    The LibDems main aim must be to simply stay in the game, until fortunes turn again.
    I don't think holding on is working for them. There's a possibility to reinvent themselves as the party of opportunity, international connection and liberal values. Brexit is the catalyst rather than the be all and end all. The two main parties have become very inward looking so that's the LD's chance. Worth them risking it in my view
    I've no idea how they do it, but they've got a big opportunity to become the party of small business. A lot of small businesses are really really pissed off about Brexit.
    The risk for Lib Dems going on an internationalist ticket is they lose their rural bastions. But sticking to the status quo dooms them to irrelevance.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 1,788
    edited February 17

    I would certainly vote LibDem in any local election.

    The GE is a different matter. If a right wing English nationalist like Johnson or Rees Mogg is leading the Tories I will be forced into voting to keep the Labour marginal I live in out of Tory hands. Otherwise, it’ll probably be the LibDems once more.

    No elections for me this May, but I think modest LD gains in the locals.

    It was a mistake for Farron to go when he did. Pavement politics was his strength, not sure Cable has one. I expect a new LD leader within a year. I would like Lamb, but happy with Swinson or Moran.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,339
    May in Munich begging the EU not to put ideology before pragmatism; like she does...

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 20,730
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    The byelections show the Lib Dems can make dramatic gains where they have infrastructure on the ground. The great political mystery right now is why the Lib Dems aren't doing better against two main parties that are so dire.

    Two problems for the Lib Dems. They lack that infrastructure in many places, having been hollowed out by their coalition years. Their national campaign is making no impression whatever.

    Curiously, Lib Dems must be picking up ex-UKIP voters.

    The LibDems main aim must be to simply stay in the game, until fortunes turn again.
    I don't think holding on is working for them. There's a possibility to reinvent themselves as the party of opportunity, international connection and liberal values. Brexit is the catalyst rather than the be all and end all. The two main parties have become very inward looking so that's the LD's chance. Worth them risking it in my view
    I've no idea how they do it, but they've got a big opportunity to become the party of small business. A lot of small businesses are really really pissed off about Brexit.
    The risk for Lib Dems going on an internationalist ticket is they lose their rural bastions. But sticking to the status quo dooms them to irrelevance.
    It's probably worth a try. They scarcely have any rural bastions, outside of Scotland.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,465
    Scott_P said:
    The EU had their chance for us to stay. They blew it.....

  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,859
    Scott_P said:
    Except that wasn't the result of the referendum, so there we go.
  • Said it before, but Corbyn's an anchor for both main parties. If he were replaced by someone who hasn't been accused of being an eastern bloc spy/declared himself a friend of Hamas, it'd help both Labour and the Lib Dems.
    ..........................................................................

    I hear it repeated often but with very little evidence provided for it. I can't see another Labour leader polling better than the current one, it seems to be mainly said by people who themselves would prefer a different Labour leader.

    I think the evidence is that oppositions normally poll ahead of governments. No matter who is leading.
    How did this collective 'wisdom' work out regarding the recent election?

    There are big splits on a number of issues in the electorate, the idea a new Labour leader would magically unite these splits is fanciful IMO, people pine for a new Labour candidate in the same way they pine for a new centre party, because it would appeal to them. The problem is the electorate is composed slightly differently to how a lot of PB users would like it.

    If the one or two people such as Morris would only consider voting Labour and they would lose many other votes moving back to a Millliband type position then electorally it isn't worth it. If a Milliband type position was more popular more people would have voted for it...

    The truth is Corbyn won within Labour because very few people believed in what Labour had become anymore. Those who complain who didn't vote for it before can't really complain that it changed to attract voters who would vote for it. In purely electoral terms Corbyn has been a boost to Labour, we were in terrible shape after the last election now we would probably be favourites to form the next government. Those who don't want Corbyn in charge of Labour don't want Corbyn as PM rather* than having genuine concerns for the Labour party winning power.

    *One or two aside but most on here.

    Ladbrokes have just made the Tories favourites to win most seats at the next GE.

    Labour’s problem with Corbyn is that with him as leader the Tories can bank 40% of the vote. His back story means millions will do whatever they can to keep him out of Number 10. It does not take much more than that for them to win. The Labour coalition is pretty fragile - I agree there are a lot of enthusiadtic Corbynistas, but there are also plenty of unenthusiastic, anti-Tories who see Labour currently as the only way to stop a loon-dictated Brexit. If the Tories can control themselves and not pick a right wing Brexiteer like Rees Mogg or Johnson as their next leader, then a lot of Labour votes could well be up for grabs.

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,077
    Foxy said:

    I would certainly vote LibDem in any local election.

    The GE is a different matter. If a right wing English nationalist like Johnson or Rees Mogg is leading the Tories I will be forced into voting to keep the Labour marginal I live in out of Tory hands. Otherwise, it’ll probably be the LibDems once more.

    No elections for me this May, but I think modest LD gains in the locals.

    It was a mistake for Farron to go when he did. Pavement politics was his strength, not sure Cable has one. I expect a new LD leader within a year. I would like Lamb, but happy with Swinson or Moran.
    I'm not convinced Cable will go this side of an election.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 975
    edited February 17

    Scott_P said:
    The EU had their chance for us to stay. They blew it.....

    Exactly. If they wanted us to stay they should have listened to UK concerns on freedom of movement seriously. They certainly should not have forced Juncker on the UK despite our outright opposition. But it was clear the EU wants the UK in the EU on the basis of the UK not having any influence.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,339


    The EU had their chance for us to stay. They blew it.....

    RobD said:

    Except that wasn't the result of the referendum, so there we go.

    And May is "taking back control" by begging the EU to pretend the result didn't happen and doesn't matter...

    What a result.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,188
    Scott_P said:
    May be they should have offered Cameron more
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 975
    edited February 17

    I would certainly vote LibDem in any local election.

    The GE is a different matter. If a right wing English nationalist like Johnson or Rees Mogg is leading the Tories I will be forced into voting to keep the Labour marginal I live in out of Tory hands. Otherwise, it’ll probably be the LibDems once more.

    Because highly conjectured English nationalism is worse than actual support for Iran, Hamas, Cuba, Venezuela, Hezbollah, the APLA and the IRA.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,859
    Scott_P said:


    The EU had their chance for us to stay. They blew it.....

    RobD said:

    Except that wasn't the result of the referendum, so there we go.

    And May is "taking back control" by begging the EU to pretend the result didn't happen and doesn't matter...

    What a result.
    The EU clearly aren't going to do that, and neither is the UK.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,077
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 23,570
    Charles said:

    Scott_P said:
    May be they should have offered Cameron more
    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 2,726
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    The byelections show the Lib Dems can make dramatic gains where they have infrastructure on the ground. The great political mystery right now is why the Lib Dems aren't doing better against two main parties that are so dire.

    Two problems for the Lib Dems. They lack that infrastructure in many places, having been hollowed out by their coalition years. Their national campaign is making no impression whatever.

    Curiously, Lib Dems must be picking up ex-UKIP voters.

    The LibDems main aim must be to simply stay in the game, until fortunes turn again.
    I don't think holding on is working for them. There's a possibility to reinvent themselves as the party of opportunity, international connection and liberal values. Brexit is the catalyst rather than the be all and end all. The two main parties have become very inward looking so that's the LD's chance. Worth them risking it in my view
    I agree. I see and promote the Lib dems as a sensible pragmatic open-minded party that is not wedded to a left or right wing ideology. It doesn't support private good, public bad, or the reverse, but what works. It is down to earth practical (potholes) and opposes Brexit on pragmatic not ideological grounds. Its only ideology is freedom from coercion, ignorance and conformity.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 41,900
    It is an odd thing. What approach do the applauding eurocrats think should be adopted? Just ignoring the referendum? Having another one? The EU actually offering something that might persuade the British to stay? Grieve's 'meaningful vote' rejecting a deal and leading to staying in by default?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,184

    A nice theme for PB, where our discussions remain generally pretty civilised:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/17/language-public-social-media-politics-repercussions

    The rise of polite politicians who quietly put their case, from Corbyn to Gove to Rees-Mogg, shows some real electoral potential, not least as armour against the routine assaults of the tabloids. If I read that Rees-Mogg was alleged to have had a drunken orgy, I'd simply dismiss it as obvious nonsense, in a way that I wouldn't if I read it about Trump. I don't think I share many views with him, but the civil manner puts him in the same room. Similarly, Corbyn is protected against the idea that he was greedily amassing money from the Czechs to tell them secrets that he'd somehow acquired because it just doesn't seem credible, as it might for a more flamboyant left-winger.

    By general consensus we are in an awkward position as a society and a country at the moment, and it's likely that the solutions will still be sub-optimal. It's worth recognising that none of us are likely to be entirely right as we look for the way forward, and that's a useful starting point for any discussion.

    Those less enamoured with Jeremy Corbyn than you can easily believe he'd betray Britain to the Communist bloc for free. Money would presumably be a bonus.

    My stumbling block is not the idea of betrayal but that he would have anything worthwhile to tell the Czechs.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,339

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,859

    A nice theme for PB, where our discussions remain generally pretty civilised:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/17/language-public-social-media-politics-repercussions

    The rise of polite politicians who quietly put their case, from Corbyn to Gove to Rees-Mogg, shows some real electoral potential, not least as armour against the routine assaults of the tabloids. If I read that Rees-Mogg was alleged to have had a drunken orgy, I'd simply dismiss it as obvious nonsense, in a way that I wouldn't if I read it about Trump. I don't think I share many views with him, but the civil manner puts him in the same room. Similarly, Corbyn is protected against the idea that he was greedily amassing money from the Czechs to tell them secrets that he'd somehow acquired because it just doesn't seem credible, as it might for a more flamboyant left-winger.

    By general consensus we are in an awkward position as a society and a country at the moment, and it's likely that the solutions will still be sub-optimal. It's worth recognising that none of us are likely to be entirely right as we look for the way forward, and that's a useful starting point for any discussion.

    Those less enamoured with Jeremy Corbyn than you can easily believe he'd betray Britain to the Communist bloc for free. Money would presumably be a bonus.

    My stumbling block is not the idea of betrayal but that he would have anything worthwhile to tell the Czechs.
    Can you imagine his disappointment that he wasn't approached by the KGB? :D
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 1,788
    edited February 17

    A nice theme for PB, where our discussions remain generally pretty civilised:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/17/language-public-social-media-politics-repercussions

    The rise of polite politicians who quietly put their case, from Corbyn to Gove to Rees-Mogg, shows some real electoral potential, not least as armour against the routine assaults of the tabloids. If I read that Rees-Mogg was alleged to have had a drunken orgy, I'd simply dismiss it as obvious nonsense, in a way that I wouldn't if I read it about Trump. I don't think I share many views with him, but the civil manner puts him in the same room. Similarly, Corbyn is protected against the idea that he was greedily amassing money from the Czechs to tell them secrets that he'd somehow acquired because it just doesn't seem credible, as it might for a more flamboyant left-winger.

    By general consensus we are in an awkward position as a society and a country at the moment, and it's likely that the solutions will still be sub-optimal. It's worth recognising that none of us are likely to be entirely right as we look for the way forward, and that's a useful starting point for any discussion.

    I have mixed feelings about Corbyn. I rather like his peacenik views and concern for the targets of austerity, less keen on nationalisation of utilities. I do like his calm and polite manner though. Despite all the personalised attacks on him, he does not reply in kind, but rather prefers to focus on policy.

    My biggest concern is not his history of support of dubious causes, or his lack of interest in Brexit policy, but rather his lack of administrative ability. A Corbyn administration is most likely to be too woolly and ineffective to be oppressive. Indeed in its incompetence it may match the May regime.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,859
    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 660
    I was careful to say next government ;)

    Though I'd fancy Labour to finish on most seats after a campaign.

    The problem is as much as some don't like Brexit it is popular among many and helped drive May to such a huge vote share, if that is taken away as an issue or run by someone seen as even less enthusiastic than May then that could drain a lot of May's support away.

    TBH even if both Labour and Tories do quite well they could both lose votes by the time of the next election, but most of May's possible replacements seem to poll worse than her. Not to mention the fact they have to govern will probably lead to letting some people down. The idea that a new leader will come in for the Conservatives and everything will suddenly be fine seems a bit optimistic...

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 20,730
    RobD said:

    A nice theme for PB, where our discussions remain generally pretty civilised:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/17/language-public-social-media-politics-repercussions

    The rise of polite politicians who quietly put their case, from Corbyn to Gove to Rees-Mogg, shows some real electoral potential, not least as armour against the routine assaults of the tabloids. If I read that Rees-Mogg was alleged to have had a drunken orgy, I'd simply dismiss it as obvious nonsense, in a way that I wouldn't if I read it about Trump. I don't think I share many views with him, but the civil manner puts him in the same room. Similarly, Corbyn is protected against the idea that he was greedily amassing money from the Czechs to tell them secrets that he'd somehow acquired because it just doesn't seem credible, as it might for a more flamboyant left-winger.

    By general consensus we are in an awkward position as a society and a country at the moment, and it's likely that the solutions will still be sub-optimal. It's worth recognising that none of us are likely to be entirely right as we look for the way forward, and that's a useful starting point for any discussion.

    Those less enamoured with Jeremy Corbyn than you can easily believe he'd betray Britain to the Communist bloc for free. Money would presumably be a bonus.

    My stumbling block is not the idea of betrayal but that he would have anything worthwhile to tell the Czechs.
    Can you imagine his disappointment that he wasn't approached by the KGB? :D
    The KGB only tried to recruit important people. A very obviously left wing, anti-Western MP wouldn't have any secrets worth knowing.
  • Elliot said:

    I would certainly vote LibDem in any local election.

    The GE is a different matter. If a right wing English nationalist like Johnson or Rees Mogg is leading the Tories I will be forced into voting to keep the Labour marginal I live in out of Tory hands. Otherwise, it’ll probably be the LibDems once more.

    Because highly conjectured English nationalism is worse than actual support for Iran, Hamas, Cuba, Venezuela, Hezbollah, the APLA and the IRA.

    I think the world view of people like Rees Mogg and Johnson is abhorent. Both have very dubious connections. I would do all I can to prevent them getting a majority in the House of Commons.

  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,752

    Said it before, but Corbyn's an anchor for both main parties. If he were replaced by someone who hasn't been accused of being an eastern bloc spy/declared himself a friend of Hamas, it'd help both Labour and the Lib Dems.
    ..........................................................................

    I think the evidence is that oppositions normally poll ahead of governments. No matter who is leading.

    The truth is Corbyn won within Labour because very few people believed in what Labour had become anymore. Those who complain who didn't vote for it before can't really complain that it changed to attract voters who would vote for it. In purely electoral terms Corbyn has been a boost to Labour, we were in terrible shape after the last election now we would probably be favourites to form the next government. Those who don't want Corbyn in charge of Labour don't want Corbyn as PM rather* than having genuine concerns for the Labour party winning power.

    *One or two aside but most on here.

    Ladbrokes have just made the Tories favourites to win most seats at the next GE.

    Labour’s problem with Corbyn is that with him as leader the Tories can bank 40% of the vote. His back story means millions will do whatever they can to keep him out of Number 10. It does not take much more than that for them to win. The Labour coalition is pretty fragile - I agree there are a lot of enthusiadtic Corbynistas, but there are also plenty of unenthusiastic, anti-Tories who see Labour currently as the only way to stop a loon-dictated Brexit. If the Tories can control themselves and not pick a right wing Brexiteer like Rees Mogg or Johnson as their next leader, then a lot of Labour votes could well be up for grabs.

    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 660
    edited February 17
    As for Lib Dems I think they just need one of the bigger parties to crash and burn quite hard*. Perhaps in a similar way to how they picked up a lot of seats in '97 when the Tories crashed. They've probably burned their trust among left wing voters for a while for various reasons and with Corbyn in place the centre seems the most sensible battle ground. It is just difficult to see them making much progress in the short to medium term.

    *Which seems unlikely at the moment.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,859
    edited February 17



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
  • I was careful to say next government ;)

    Though I'd fancy Labour to finish on most seats after a campaign.

    The problem is as much as some don't like Brexit it is popular among many and helped drive May to such a huge vote share, if that is taken away as an issue or run by someone seen as even less enthusiastic than May then that could drain a lot of May's support away.

    TBH even if both Labour and Tories do quite well they could both lose votes by the time of the next election, but most of May's possible replacements seem to poll worse than her. Not to mention the fact they have to govern will probably lead to letting some people down. The idea that a new leader will come in for the Conservatives and everything will suddenly be fine seems a bit optimistic...

    I agree that if the next Tory leader is a Johnson or Rees Mogg the Labour coalition will hold. But the Tories are more pragmatic than Labour and it could be the party’s MPs do not give the members the chance to make a mistake.

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 17,860
    Charles said:

    Scott_P said:
    May be they should have offered Cameron more
    “The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays is coming to its close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences.”
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,752
    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 1,788

    Foxy said:

    I would certainly vote LibDem in any local election.

    The GE is a different matter. If a right wing English nationalist like Johnson or Rees Mogg is leading the Tories I will be forced into voting to keep the Labour marginal I live in out of Tory hands. Otherwise, it’ll probably be the LibDems once more.

    No elections for me this May, but I think modest LD gains in the locals.

    It was a mistake for Farron to go when he did. Pavement politics was his strength, not sure Cable has one. I expect a new LD leader within a year. I would like Lamb, but happy with Swinson or Moran.
    I'm not convinced Cable will go this side of an election.
    His vanity is the obstacle, but he will lose interest as Brexit stumbles to its conclusion.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,859

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 7,960
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    I would certainly vote LibDem in any local election.

    The GE is a different matter. If a right wing English nationalist like Johnson or Rees Mogg is leading the Tories I will be forced into voting to keep the Labour marginal I live in out of Tory hands. Otherwise, it’ll probably be the LibDems once more.

    No elections for me this May, but I think modest LD gains in the locals.

    It was a mistake for Farron to go when he did. Pavement politics was his strength, not sure Cable has one. I expect a new LD leader within a year. I would like Lamb, but happy with Swinson or Moran.
    I'm not convinced Cable will go this side of an election.
    His vanity is the obstacle, but he will lose interest as Brexit stumbles to its conclusion.
    He is still the best chance the Lib Dems have right now. Everyone else is very, very dull.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 1,788
    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,859
    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    You really think they'll want the UK back after having forced them to go through this process less than a decade earlier?
  • RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Even ardent Remainers agree with that! What worries us is what comes after. Almost two years out from the EU Referendum nobody knows!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 1,788
    RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    You really think they'll want the UK back after having forced them to go through this process less than a decade earlier?
    That is why the accession talks will take time. They will want convincing that we have genuinely changed our minds. Other aspects would be fairly straightforward.

  • RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    You really think they'll want the UK back after having forced them to go through this process less than a decade earlier?

    Without a doubt. It would be a huge victory.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,188
    Barnesian said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    The byelections show the Lib Dems can make dramatic gains where they have infrastructure on the ground. The great political mystery right now is why the Lib Dems aren't doing better against two main parties that are so dire.

    Two problems for the Lib Dems. They lack that infrastructure in many places, having been hollowed out by their coalition years. Their national campaign is making no impression whatever.

    Curiously, Lib Dems must be picking up ex-UKIP voters.

    The LibDems main aim must be to simply stay in the game, until fortunes turn again.
    I don't think holding on is working for them. There's a possibility to reinvent themselves as the party of opportunity, international connection and liberal values. Brexit is the catalyst rather than the be all and end all. The two main parties have become very inward looking so that's the LD's chance. Worth them risking it in my view
    I agree. I see and promote the Lib dems as a sensible pragmatic open-minded party that is not wedded to a left or right wing ideology. It doesn't support private good, public bad, or the reverse, but what works. It is down to earth practical (potholes) and opposes Brexit on pragmatic not ideological grounds. Its only ideology is freedom from coercion, ignorance and conformity.
    Talk me through limits on numbers of children per child minder then. Or free school meals for middle class children.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,752
    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    Well maybe. But I wonder if a 'back to status quo' option could gain traction. The premise would be 'we've left and it's done a lot of damage, so let's get back on the easiest terms possible as quickly as possible'. That way we don't have to have a debate about anything other than the practicalities. Current leavers might regard it as a less undesirable option than letting it go for a few years and then having to rejoin an even more integrated Europe.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 11,296
    RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    You really think they'll want the UK back after having forced them to go through this process less than a decade earlier?
    I had got the impression on here that the UK's financial contribution to the EU was so huge and our appetite for German cars so insatiable that we've got the whip hand in negotiations. On the same basis surely they'd be gagging to have us back?

    Perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick.
  • Jonathan said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    I would certainly vote LibDem in any local election.

    The GE is a different matter. If a right wing English nationalist like Johnson or Rees Mogg is leading the Tories I will be forced into voting to keep the Labour marginal I live in out of Tory hands. Otherwise, it’ll probably be the LibDems once more.

    No elections for me this May, but I think modest LD gains in the locals.

    It was a mistake for Farron to go when he did. Pavement politics was his strength, not sure Cable has one. I expect a new LD leader within a year. I would like Lamb, but happy with Swinson or Moran.
    I'm not convinced Cable will go this side of an election.
    His vanity is the obstacle, but he will lose interest as Brexit stumbles to its conclusion.
    He is still the best chance the Lib Dems have right now. Everyone else is very, very dull.

    The LibDems are caught in the middle of something over which they have no control: the fact that millions dislike the Tories so much and millions more feel the same way about Labour. They are going to have to bide their time until stopping the other lot becomes less of a motivating factor. Or they’ll have to choose a side: anti-Tory or anti-Labour.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,859
    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    You really think they'll want the UK back after having forced them to go through this process less than a decade earlier?
    That is why the accession talks will take time. They will want convincing that we have genuinely changed our minds. Other aspects would be fairly straightforward.

    And what guarantee could the U.K. give them that it won’t change its mind a decade later? Probably none!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 1,788

    RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    You really think they'll want the UK back after having forced them to go through this process less than a decade earlier?
    I had got the impression on here that the UK's financial contribution to the EU was so huge and our appetite for German cars so insatiable that we've got the whip hand in negotiations. On the same basis surely they'd be gagging to have us back?

    Perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick.
    You are not the only one confused about Britain's Brexit objectives. Our civil servants, the EU team, EU leaders and the vast majority of Britons are too.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-angela-merkel-theresa-may-curious-frustrated-what-uk-wants-policy-a8214421.html?amp&__twitter_impression=true

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 39,676
    I think the LDs will do OK, picking up councils like Kingston Upon Thames in strongly Remain parts of London and campaigning in opposition to Local Plans in the Home Counties but I doubt they will see major gains.

    UKIP will certainly be the biggest losers on voteshare and seats given they got 17% in May 2014 and that will help the Tories a bit (most of the by elections on Thursday were in seats last fought in 2015 and 2017 when the Tories comfortably won the local polls). Labour I think will perform below expectations. On contrast to the general election where Corbyn was fighting seats last fought when the Tories had a 7% lead the seats he will fight in May were last fought when Ed Miliband had a 2% lead, so he starts from a lower base and with current polls neck and neck there is even a danger Labour could make a small net loss of seats
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,463
    The weird thing about the polling at the moment is that so many remainers still seem to think that Labour and Corbyn are the answer to their prayers. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary a very significant proportion of Labour's support seems to be under the delusion that Labour is committed to remaining in the Single Market, for example.

    Corbyn has managed to maintain some sort of constructive ambiguity about his position (at least for those not really paying attention) and it has starved the Lib Dems of their natural support. If the Lib Dems had any sense they would be doing everything in their power to expose the fact that it is difficult to get a fag paper between Corbyn's and May's position on Brexit and trying to peel away Labour supporters who actually care.

    I suspect the numbers who do care are less than generally thought (notwithstanding the evidence on this Board) but it would be a start. With 40 odd percent still thinking that Brexit is a mistake the party of remain really should be in double figures. And it isn't despite these excellent bye-election results.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,752
    RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    You really think they'll want the UK back after having forced them to go through this process less than a decade earlier?
    A UK that wants to come back will be a UK that has rejected the EU's biggest and most dangerous enemies. We'll be the most communitaire country in the community. The UK's return will be the biggest PR coup in the EU's history. They'll want us back alright.
  • Barnesian said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    The byelections show the Lib Dems can make dramatic gains where they have infrastructure on the ground. The great political mystery right now is why the Lib Dems aren't doing better against two main parties that are so dire.

    Two problems for the Lib Dems. They lack that infrastructure in many places, having been hollowed out by their coalition years. Their national campaign is making no impression whatever.

    Curiously, Lib Dems must be picking up ex-UKIP voters.

    The LibDems main aim must be to simply stay in the game, until fortunes turn again.
    I don't think holding on is working for them. There's a possibility to reinvent themselves as the party of opportunity, international connection and liberal values. Brexit is the catalyst rather than the be all and end all. The two main parties have become very inward looking so that's the LD's chance. Worth them risking it in my view
    I agree. I see and promote the Lib dems as a sensible pragmatic open-minded party that is not wedded to a left or right wing ideology. It doesn't support private good, public bad, or the reverse, but what works. It is down to earth practical (potholes) and opposes Brexit on pragmatic not ideological grounds. Its only ideology is freedom from coercion, ignorance and conformity.
    Ask the average voter on the high street what the Lib Dems are for, and I'd bet the answer would be "More EU". That's the only thing the Lib Dems are ever linked with. You just don't hear any cut through on other policies. It's an honourable stance, and there is a place for it, but they need to get their voice heard on something else.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,425
    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    The prognosis for Brexit is that it will be a never ending intractable mess. People will be desperate to put the whole thing to rest as quickly as possible. Do you think opening accession talks will do that? Genuine question.
  • RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    You really think they'll want the UK back after having forced them to go through this process less than a decade earlier?
    It’ll be in the terms.

    We sign up for a minimum of 99 years and the early exit fee will be €1 trillion per year of our early exit.

    Plus Luke 15:7
  • DavidL said:

    The weird thing about the polling at the moment is that so many remainers still seem to think that Labour and Corbyn are the answer to their prayers. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary a very significant proportion of Labour's support seems to be under the delusion that Labour is committed to remaining in the Single Market, for example.

    Corbyn has managed to maintain some sort of constructive ambiguity about his position (at least for those not really paying attention) and it has starved the Lib Dems of their natural support. If the Lib Dems had any sense they would be doing everything in their power to expose the fact that it is difficult to get a fag paper between Corbyn's and May's position on Brexit and trying to peel away Labour supporters who actually care.

    I suspect the numbers who do care are less than generally thought (notwithstanding the evidence on this Board) but it would be a start. With 40 odd percent still thinking that Brexit is a mistake the party of remain really should be in double figures. And it isn't despite these excellent bye-election results.

    I think it’s more that Remainers feel Brexit would be less destructive if delivered by Labour. May’s decision to cuddle up to the loons in her party and the press was not a wise one.

  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 660
    DavidL said:

    The weird thing about the polling at the moment is that so many remainers still seem to think that Labour and Corbyn are the answer to their prayers. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary a very significant proportion of Labour's support seems to be under the delusion that Labour is committed to remaining in the Single Market, for example.

    Corbyn has managed to maintain some sort of constructive ambiguity about his position (at least for those not really paying attention) and it has starved the Lib Dems of their natural support. If the Lib Dems had any sense they would be doing everything in their power to expose the fact that it is difficult to get a fag paper between Corbyn's and May's position on Brexit and trying to peel away Labour supporters who actually care.

    I suspect the numbers who do care are less than generally thought (notwithstanding the evidence on this Board) but it would be a start. With 40 odd percent still thinking that Brexit is a mistake the party of remain really should be in double figures. And it isn't despite these excellent bye-election results.

    You can think it is a mistake but still prefer a Labour government to either see it through or have a softer version. The more realistic remainers realise you cannot reverse the result and in many places voting for the Lib Dems is a waste.

    That and even those who don't want it and think Labour do want it have other priorities.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 39,676
    edited February 17

    I was careful to say next government ;)

    Though I'd fancy Labour to finish on most seats after a campaign.

    The problem is as much as some don't like Brexit it is popular among many and helped drive May to such a huge vote share, if that is taken away as an issue or run by someone seen as even less enthusiastic than May then that could drain a lot of May's support away.

    TBH even if both Labour and Tories do quite well they could both lose votes by the time of the next election, but most of May's possible replacements seem to poll worse than her. Not to mention the fact they have to govern will probably lead to letting some people down. The idea that a new leader will come in for the Conservatives and everything will suddenly be fine seems a bit optimistic...

    I agree that if the next Tory leader is a Johnson or Rees Mogg the Labour coalition will hold. But the Tories are more pragmatic than Labour and it could be the party’s MPs do not give the members the chance to make a mistake.

    Survation last summer post general election had only Boris getting a higher Tory voteshare than May v Labour albeit fractionally with Hammond getting the lowest Tory voteshare of alternative leaders, the Tories need to keep their base and Leavers on board too as well as win the the centre.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,465

    RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    You really think they'll want the UK back after having forced them to go through this process less than a decade earlier?
    A UK that wants to come back will be a UK that has rejected the EU's biggest and most dangerous enemies. We'll be the most communitaire country in the community. The UK's return will be the biggest PR coup in the EU's history. They'll want us back alright.
    You'll never convince the UK population that the massive annual membership fees are value for money. That really will be "so which hospitals do you want to close to pay for the EU then?"
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,339

    You'll never convince the UK population that the massive annual membership fees are value for money. That really will be "so which hospitals do you want to close to pay for the EU then?"

    Which car factories do you want to close to leave?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,463

    RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    You really think they'll want the UK back after having forced them to go through this process less than a decade earlier?
    I had got the impression on here that the UK's financial contribution to the EU was so huge and our appetite for German cars so insatiable that we've got the whip hand in negotiations. On the same basis surely they'd be gagging to have us back?

    Perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick.
    I think you have. Once the FTA is sorted we will be still be buying German cars in exactly the same way as we do now. And we will end up chipping in for the bits of the EU we actually want too.

    Within 10 years it will be impossible to be in the EU without being in the EZ. Our departure will accelerate this. The budgets of EZ countries will be a matter for negotiation in Brussels and Frankfurt and deficits will be strictly controlled. Economic policy will largely be determined there too giving governments in member states very little say over how much they spend and, increasingly, how they spend it. Democracy will be very much diminished, roughly equivalent to the right to choose your local council.

    In short going back to what we have now will simply not be an option because what we have now will not exist. I think it is highly unlikely that what does exist will look particularly attractive but who knows? It might prove wildly successful.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,669
    HYUFD said:

    I think the LDs will do OK, picking up councils like Kingston Upon Thames in strongly Remain parts of London and campaigning in opposition to Local Plans in the Home Counties but I doubt they will see major gains.

    UKIP will certainly be the biggest losers on voteshare and seats given they got 17% in May 2014 and that will help the Tories a bit (most of the by elections on Thursday were in seats last fought in 2015 and 2017 when the Tories comfortably won the local polls). Labour I think will perform below expectations. On contrast to the general election where Corbyn was fighting seats last fought when the Tories had a 7% lead the seats he will fight in May were last fought when Ed Miliband had a 2% lead, so he starts from a lower base and with current polls neck and neck there is even a danger Labour could make a small net loss of seats

    The London effect and Ukip's collapse should mean that Labour end up with net gains.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 2,726
    Charles said:

    Barnesian said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    The byelections show the Lib Dems can make dramatic gains where they have infrastructure on the ground. The great political mystery right now is why the Lib Dems aren't doing better against two main parties that are so dire.

    Two problems for the Lib Dems. They lack that infrastructure in many places, having been hollowed out by their coalition years. Their national campaign is making no impression whatever.

    Curiously, Lib Dems must be picking up ex-UKIP voters.

    The LibDems main aim must be to simply stay in the game, until fortunes turn again.
    I don't think holding on is working for them. There's a possibility to reinvent themselves as the party of opportunity, international connection and liberal values. Brexit is the catalyst rather than the be all and end all. The two main parties have become very inward looking so that's the LD's chance. Worth them risking it in my view
    I agree. I see and promote the Lib dems as a sensible pragmatic open-minded party that is not wedded to a left or right wing ideology. It doesn't support private good, public bad, or the reverse, but what works. It is down to earth practical (potholes) and opposes Brexit on pragmatic not ideological grounds. Its only ideology is freedom from coercion, ignorance and conformity.
    Talk me through limits on numbers of children per child minder then. Or free school meals for middle class children.
    LibDems, being pragmatic, are in favour of coercion with regard to all driving on the left of the road.

    Free school meals for all children means better nutrition and better ability to concentrate.

    There are more difficult points you could have made. Should adult individuals be free to make choices that may harm them and no-one else such as not wearing a seatbelt or smoking pot? On the other hand, smoking cigarettes harms others and so does unlimited numbers of children per child minder.

    There is no ideological silver bullet solution to the problem of balancing personal freedom with the common good. But there are common sense pragmatic solutions. Try Amartya Sen - the Idea of Justice.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 5,792
    Scott_P said:

    You'll never convince the UK population that the massive annual membership fees are value for money. That really will be "so which hospitals do you want to close to pay for the EU then?"

    Which car factories do you want to close to leave?
    The ones in Germany.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,463


    DavidL said:

    The weird thing about the polling at the moment is that so many remainers still seem to think that Labour and Corbyn are the answer to their prayers. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary a very significant proportion of Labour's support seems to be under the delusion that Labour is committed to remaining in the Single Market, for example.

    Corbyn has managed to maintain some sort of constructive ambiguity about his position (at least for those not really paying attention) and it has starved the Lib Dems of their natural support. If the Lib Dems had any sense they would be doing everything in their power to expose the fact that it is difficult to get a fag paper between Corbyn's and May's position on Brexit and trying to peel away Labour supporters who actually care.

    I suspect the numbers who do care are less than generally thought (notwithstanding the evidence on this Board) but it would be a start. With 40 odd percent still thinking that Brexit is a mistake the party of remain really should be in double figures. And it isn't despite these excellent bye-election results.

    You can think it is a mistake but still prefer a Labour government to either see it through or have a softer version. The more realistic remainers realise you cannot reverse the result and in many places voting for the Lib Dems is a waste.

    That and even those who don't want it and think Labour do want it have other priorities.
    Yes but what about the Labour supporters in Tory Lib Dem marginals? Why are they not being picked up? Even if you are not motivated to vote Lib Dem in a Labour/Tory seat why are Labour voters not voting more tactically where theirs is the wasted vote?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,339

    The ones in Germany.

    Ah, the ones where jaguars are made. Your wish is looking good...
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,463

    DavidL said:

    The weird thing about the polling at the moment is that so many remainers still seem to think that Labour and Corbyn are the answer to their prayers. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary a very significant proportion of Labour's support seems to be under the delusion that Labour is committed to remaining in the Single Market, for example.

    Corbyn has managed to maintain some sort of constructive ambiguity about his position (at least for those not really paying attention) and it has starved the Lib Dems of their natural support. If the Lib Dems had any sense they would be doing everything in their power to expose the fact that it is difficult to get a fag paper between Corbyn's and May's position on Brexit and trying to peel away Labour supporters who actually care.

    I suspect the numbers who do care are less than generally thought (notwithstanding the evidence on this Board) but it would be a start. With 40 odd percent still thinking that Brexit is a mistake the party of remain really should be in double figures. And it isn't despite these excellent bye-election results.

    I think it’s more that Remainers feel Brexit would be less destructive if delivered by Labour. May’s decision to cuddle up to the loons in her party and the press was not a wise one.

    You keep saying this but every time something is agreed we see it is simply not true.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 20,730
    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    You really think they'll want the UK back after having forced them to go through this process less than a decade earlier?
    I had got the impression on here that the UK's financial contribution to the EU was so huge and our appetite for German cars so insatiable that we've got the whip hand in negotiations. On the same basis surely they'd be gagging to have us back?

    Perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick.
    I think you have. Once the FTA is sorted we will be still be buying German cars in exactly the same way as we do now. And we will end up chipping in for the bits of the EU we actually want too.

    Within 10 years it will be impossible to be in the EU without being in the EZ. Our departure will accelerate this. The budgets of EZ countries will be a matter for negotiation in Brussels and Frankfurt and deficits will be strictly controlled. Economic policy will largely be determined there too giving governments in member states very little say over how much they spend and, increasingly, how they spend it. Democracy will be very much diminished, roughly equivalent to the right to choose your local council.

    In short going back to what we have now will simply not be an option because what we have now will not exist. I think it is highly unlikely that what does exist will look particularly attractive but who knows? It might prove wildly successful.
    Off-hand, I can't think of any country, or part of a country, which has seceded from a larger political entity, and has then sought to rejoin it. People tend not to revisit such decisions.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,465
    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    A nice theme for PB, where our discussions remain generally pretty civilised:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/17/language-public-social-media-politics-repercussions

    The rise of polite politicians who quietly put their case, from Corbyn to Gove to Rees-Mogg, shows some real electoral potential, not least as armour against the routine assaults of the tabloids. If I read that Rees-Mogg was alleged to have had a drunken orgy, I'd simply dismiss it as obvious nonsense, in a way that I wouldn't if I read it about Trump. I don't think I share many views with him, but the civil manner puts him in the same room. Similarly, Corbyn is protected against the idea that he was greedily amassing money from the Czechs to tell them secrets that he'd somehow acquired because it just doesn't seem credible, as it might for a more flamboyant left-winger.

    By general consensus we are in an awkward position as a society and a country at the moment, and it's likely that the solutions will still be sub-optimal. It's worth recognising that none of us are likely to be entirely right as we look for the way forward, and that's a useful starting point for any discussion.

    Those less enamoured with Jeremy Corbyn than you can easily believe he'd betray Britain to the Communist bloc for free. Money would presumably be a bonus.

    My stumbling block is not the idea of betrayal but that he would have anything worthwhile to tell the Czechs.
    Can you imagine his disappointment that he wasn't approached by the KGB? :D
    The KGB only tried to recruit important people. A very obviously left wing, anti-Western MP wouldn't have any secrets worth knowing.
    To the contrary, Corbyn would have had intimate details of all those important people on the left. He could have given a biog of a 1,000 people for the KGB to explore further.

    He could also have been a second source for intel they were unsure about.

    Corbyn might not have known the picture of the jigsaw they were building. But he could have known where various pieces fitted together....

    Admittedly, it's a stretch to think they could foresee that a way down the line, this guy could be in charge of renewing the UK's nuclear deterrent. Or not. But the secret to Russian chess success is planning six moves ahead!
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 5,792
    DavidL said:


    DavidL said:

    The weird thing about the polling at the moment is that so many remainers still seem to think that Labour and Corbyn are the answer to their prayers. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary a very significant proportion of Labour's support seems to be under the delusion that Labour is committed to remaining in the Single Market, for example.

    Corbyn has managed to maintain some sort of constructive ambiguity about his position (at least for those not really paying attention) and it has starved the Lib Dems of their natural support. If the Lib Dems had any sense they would be doing everything in their power to expose the fact that it is difficult to get a fag paper between Corbyn's and May's position on Brexit and trying to peel away Labour supporters who actually care.

    I suspect the numbers who do care are less than generally thought (notwithstanding the evidence on this Board) but it would be a start. With 40 odd percent still thinking that Brexit is a mistake the party of remain really should be in double figures. And it isn't despite these excellent bye-election results.

    You can think it is a mistake but still prefer a Labour government to either see it through or have a softer version. The more realistic remainers realise you cannot reverse the result and in many places voting for the Lib Dems is a waste.

    That and even those who don't want it and think Labour do want it have other priorities.
    Yes but what about the Labour supporters in Tory Lib Dem marginals? Why are they not being picked up? Even if you are not motivated to vote Lib Dem in a Labour/Tory seat why are Labour voters not voting more tactically where theirs is the wasted vote?
    Perhaps because after the 'betrayal' of the coalition they decided that never again would they lend their votes to the LibDems.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 1,788
    FF43 said:

    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    The prognosis for Brexit is that it will be a never ending intractable mess. People will be desperate to put the whole thing to rest as quickly as possible. Do you think opening accession talks will do that? Genuine question.
    It is the never ending intractable mess that will be the spur to accession talks. That and demographic change.

    I reckon about a decade before accession talks, as by then Brexit will be seen as the wrong solution to the ills of globalisation.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,463
    Don't bother pointing this out to Joff. She's really just indulging the fanatics, all the time apparently.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 1,397
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    You really think they'll want the UK back after having forced them to go through this process less than a decade earlier?
    I had got the impression on here that the UK's financial contribution to the EU was so huge and our appetite for German cars so insatiable that we've got the whip hand in negotiations. On the same basis surely they'd be gagging to have us back?

    Perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick.
    I think you have. Once the FTA is sorted we will be still be buying German cars in exactly the same way as we do now. And we will end up chipping in for the bits of the EU we actually want too.

    Within 10 years it will be impossible to be in the EU without being in the EZ. Our departure will accelerate this. The budgets of EZ countries will be a matter for negotiation in Brussels and Frankfurt and deficits will be strictly controlled. Economic policy will largely be determined there too giving governments in member states very little say over how much they spend and, increasingly, how they spend it. Democracy will be very much diminished, roughly equivalent to the right to choose your local council.

    In short going back to what we have now will simply not be an option because what we have now will not exist. I think it is highly unlikely that what does exist will look particularly attractive but who knows? It might prove wildly successful.
    Off-hand, I can't think of any country, or part of a country, which has seceded from a larger political entity, and has then sought to rejoin it. People tend not to revisit such decisions.
    Rejoiners to the Commonwealth: The Gambia, Pakistan, Zimbabwe now considering it.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,805
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    The byelections show the Lib Dems can make dramatic gains where they have infrastructure on the ground. The great political mystery right now is why the Lib Dems aren't doing better against two main parties that are so dire.

    Two problems for the Lib Dems. They lack that infrastructure in many places, having been hollowed out by their coalition years. Their national campaign is making no impression whatever.

    Curiously, Lib Dems must be picking up ex-UKIP voters.

    The LibDems main aim must be to simply stay in the game, until fortunes turn again.
    I don't think holding on is working for them. There's a possibility to reinvent themselves as the party of opportunity, international connection and liberal values. Brexit is the catalyst rather than the be all and end all. The two main parties have become very inward looking so that's the LD's chance. Worth them risking it in my view
    Fact that they are crap and lying toerags with no principles will mean they remain moribund
  • RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:



    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    They still absolutely and totally don't get it.

    Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.

    And you appear to have completely missed the point.

    May is begging them for stuff.

    They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.

    Dummkopfs.
    But the UK is leaving. The question now is what comes after.
    Easy. Going back in again.
    Can't see that happening in the next 18 months.
    No, we have to leave first.
    Yeah, and there's the thirty year gap in between before another referendum. Only fair ;)
    About 10 years, I reckon. We have to start accession talks before it can go to a referendum.
    You really think they'll want the UK back after having forced them to go through this process less than a decade earlier?
    It’ll be in the terms.

    We sign up for a minimum of 99 years and the early exit fee will be €1 trillion per year of our early exit.

    Plus Luke 15:7
    As one of the 48% do I have to repent as part of the collective or is that exclusively the responsibility of the 52%?

    Why should I repent my sin when I did not sin?

    EU divinity is very complicated!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 20,730
    DavidL said:


    DavidL said:

    The weird thing about the polling at the moment is that so many remainers still seem to think that Labour and Corbyn are the answer to their prayers. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary a very significant proportion of Labour's support seems to be under the delusion that Labour is committed to remaining in the Single Market, for example.

    Corbyn has managed to maintain some sort of constructive ambiguity about his position (at least for those not really paying attention) and it has starved the Lib Dems of their natural support. If the Lib Dems had any sense they would be doing everything in their power to expose the fact that it is difficult to get a fag paper between Corbyn's and May's position on Brexit and trying to peel away Labour supporters who actually care.

    I suspect the numbers who do care are less than generally thought (notwithstanding the evidence on this Board) but it would be a start. With 40 odd percent still thinking that Brexit is a mistake the party of remain really should be in double figures. And it isn't despite these excellent bye-election results.

    You can think it is a mistake but still prefer a Labour government to either see it through or have a softer version. The more realistic remainers realise you cannot reverse the result and in many places voting for the Lib Dems is a waste.

    That and even those who don't want it and think Labour do want it have other priorities.
    Yes but what about the Labour supporters in Tory Lib Dem marginals? Why are they not being picked up? Even if you are not motivated to vote Lib Dem in a Labour/Tory seat why are Labour voters not voting more tactically where theirs is the wasted vote?
    The problem for the Lib Dems is that the Tories are so far ahead in most such seats that even tactical voting by Labour wouldn't help them.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,463

    DavidL said:


    DavidL said:

    The weird thing about the polling at the moment is that so many remainers still seem to think that Labour and Corbyn are the answer to their prayers. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary a very significant proportion of Labour's support seems to be under the delusion that Labour is committed to remaining in the Single Market, for example.

    Corbyn has managed to maintain some sort of constructive ambiguity about his position (at least for those not really paying attention) and it has starved the Lib Dems of their natural support. If the Lib Dems had any sense they would be doing everything in their power to expose the fact that it is difficult to get a fag paper between Corbyn's and May's position on Brexit and trying to peel away Labour supporters who actually care.

    I suspect the numbers who do care are less than generally thought (notwithstanding the evidence on this Board) but it would be a start. With 40 odd percent still thinking that Brexit is a mistake the party of remain really should be in double figures. And it isn't despite these excellent bye-election results.

    You can think it is a mistake but still prefer a Labour government to either see it through or have a softer version. The more realistic remainers realise you cannot reverse the result and in many places voting for the Lib Dems is a waste.

    That and even those who don't want it and think Labour do want it have other priorities.
    Yes but what about the Labour supporters in Tory Lib Dem marginals? Why are they not being picked up? Even if you are not motivated to vote Lib Dem in a Labour/Tory seat why are Labour voters not voting more tactically where theirs is the wasted vote?
    Perhaps because after the 'betrayal' of the coalition they decided that never again would they lend their votes to the LibDems.
    Yep, I think that must be it. Puts the Lib Dems in a bit of a hole doesn't it?
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The weird thing about the polling at the moment is that so many remainers still seem to think that Labour and Corbyn are the answer to their prayers. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary a very significant proportion of Labour's support seems to be under the delusion that Labour is committed to remaining in the Single Market, for example.

    Corbyn has managed to maintain some sort of constructive ambiguity about his position (at least for those not really paying attention) and it has starved the Lib Dems of their natural support. If the Lib Dems had any sense they would be doing everything in their power to expose the fact that it is difficult to get a fag paper between Corbyn's and May's position on Brexit and trying to peel away Labour supporters who actually care.

    I suspect the numbers who do care are less than generally thought (notwithstanding the evidence on this Board) but it would be a start. With 40 odd percent still thinking that Brexit is a mistake the party of remain really should be in double figures. And it isn't despite these excellent bye-election results.

    I think it’s more that Remainers feel Brexit would be less destructive if delivered by Labour. May’s decision to cuddle up to the loons in her party and the press was not a wise one.

    You keep saying this but every time something is agreed we see it is simply not true.

    It may not be true, but that is the perception she created and now cannot undo. She accused the EU of trying to affect the election result, she said No Deal was better than a bad deal, she appointed Johnson, Gove, Fox and Davis to her cabinet, she talked about citizens of nowhere, she did not repudiate accusations in her cheerleading newspapers that judges are the enemies of the people, she stood by as they called Remain supporters traitors. That kind of thing gets noticed, David. And for many millions of voters it matters.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 1,788

    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    A nice theme for PB, where our discussions remain generally pretty civilised:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/17/language-public-social-media-politics-repercussions

    The rise of polite politicians who quietly put their case, from Corbyn to Gove to Rees-Mogg, shows some real electoral potential, not least as armour against the routine assaults of the tabloids. If I read that Rees-Mogg was alleged to have had a drunken orgy, I'd simply dismiss it as obvious nonsense, in a way that I wouldn't if I read it about Trump. I don't think I share many views with him, but the civil manner puts him in the same room. Similarly, Corbyn is protected against the idea that he was greedily amassing money from the Czechs to tell them secrets that he'd somehow acquired because it just doesn't seem credible, as it might for a more flamboyant left-winger.

    By general consensus we are in an awkward position as a society and a country at the moment, and it's likely that the solutions will still be sub-optimal. It's worth recognising that none of us are likely to be entirely right as we look for the way forward, and that's a useful starting point for any discussion.

    Those less enamoured with Jeremy Corbyn than you can easily believe he'd betray Britain to the Communist bloc for free. Money would presumably be a bonus.

    My stumbling block is not the idea of betrayal but that he would have anything worthwhile to tell the Czechs.
    Can you imagine his disappointment that he wasn't approached by the KGB? :D
    The KGB only tried to recruit important people. A very obviously left wing, anti-Western MP wouldn't have any secrets worth knowing.
    To the contrary, Corbyn would have had intimate details of all those important people on the left. He could have given a biog of a 1,000 people for the KGB to explore further.

    He could also have been a second source for intel they were unsure about.

    Corbyn might not have known the picture of the jigsaw they were building. But he could have known where various pieces fitted together....

    Admittedly, it's a stretch to think they could foresee that a way down the line, this guy could be in charge of renewing the UK's nuclear deterrent. Or not. But the secret to Russian chess success is planning six moves ahead!
    Except there is no evidence that he ever did more than have a chat over tea in the House of Commons with a Czech diplomat concerning the peace movement.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,224
    Like The Jezziah, I don't think the argument from, say, Morris Dancer, that if we had a centrist leader he'd need to "think about" how to vote is very persuasive. They used to say of the hereditary Lords that they would consider the issues carefully and then vote with the Conservatives, and I know quite a lot of Tories like that - they would like a not-too-dissimilar opposition, but not to the point of actually voting for it. (Similarly, I wouldn't mind Anna Soubry as a Tory leader, despite our personal differences in the past, but I wouldn't vote for her.)

    The case for having a centrist Labour leader is more defensive - as Southam says, if the Tories had an attractive centrist leader they'd appeal to non-Corbyn Labour voters. But firstly it's hard to see who that would be - the Tories have really been through the pack and everyone looks exhausted, before you even start to look at their policies. And secondly, a lot of us feel that politics isn't worth bothering with if the choice is between a couple of very similar people. The case for Labour at the moment is simply that society is seriously unbalanced after nearly a decade of Conservative-led rule, and Labour would quie clearly try to address that, while a Tory government by a hard-right Mogg or a chancer like Boris would equally clearly not.

    Yes, as Foxy says there's plenty of scope for discussing detailed policies and competence issues (though the current government does not set a high bar on that, does it?). But switching to a steady-as-we-go centrist as Barnesian argues just feels wrong for where Britain is today. I recognise the appeal of pleasant pragmatism - my father was very much in that camp - but we actually need a period of left-wing government to make our society more socially viable.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 1,933
    DavidL said:

    The weird thing about the polling at the moment is that so many remainers still seem to think that Labour and Corbyn are the answer to their prayers. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary a very significant proportion of Labour's support seems to be under the delusion that Labour is committed to remaining in the Single Market, for example.

    Corbyn has managed to maintain some sort of constructive ambiguity about his position (at least for those not really paying attention) and it has starved the Lib Dems of their natural support. If the Lib Dems had any sense they would be doing everything in their power to expose the fact that it is difficult to get a fag paper between Corbyn's and May's position on Brexit and trying to peel away Labour supporters who actually care.

    I suspect the numbers who do care are less than generally thought (notwithstanding the evidence on this Board) but it would be a start. With 40 odd percent still thinking that Brexit is a mistake the party of remain really should be in double figures. And it isn't despite these excellent bye-election results.

    For me in Ealing Central & Acton it was a case of a choice between a LD retread with no chance of winning and an ardent Labour remainer who voted against triggering Article 50. In the end, despite Corbyn - whom I loathe - it was an easy decision. And the result was quite remarkable. What had been the most marginal Labour seat in London (majority of 274 over the Tories) turned into a 13,800 majority.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 2,726
    DavidL said:


    DavidL said:

    The weird thing about the polling at the moment is that so many remainers still seem to think that Labour and Corbyn are the answer to their prayers. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary a very significant proportion of Labour's support seems to be under the delusion that Labour is committed to remaining in the Single Market, for example.

    Corbyn has managed to maintain some sort of constructive ambiguity about his position (at least for those not really paying attention) and it has starved the Lib Dems of their natural support. If the Lib Dems had any sense they would be doing everything in their power to expose the fact that it is difficult to get a fag paper between Corbyn's and May's position on Brexit and trying to peel away Labour supporters who actually care.

    I suspect the numbers who do care are less than generally thought (notwithstanding the evidence on this Board) but it would be a start. With 40 odd percent still thinking that Brexit is a mistake the party of remain really should be in double figures. And it isn't despite these excellent bye-election results.

    You can think it is a mistake but still prefer a Labour government to either see it through or have a softer version. The more realistic remainers realise you cannot reverse the result and in many places voting for the Lib Dems is a waste.

    That and even those who don't want it and think Labour do want it have other priorities.
    Yes but what about the Labour supporters in Tory Lib Dem marginals? Why are they not being picked up? Even if you are not motivated to vote Lib Dem in a Labour/Tory seat why are Labour voters not voting more tactically where theirs is the wasted vote?
    Of the 5,773 people who voted Labour in the Richmond Park 2017 General election, I am certain that at least 46 of them regret not voting LibDem and reducing the Tory majority by one - as well as getting rid of Goldsmith. Many of them voted Labour because they were enthused by Corbyn. I heard it on the doorstep. They won't make the same mistake again in this constituency.
This discussion has been closed.