General Election, June 8th

[Alf Bentley]

I wonder if Ruth Davidson will be the next Tory leader but one?

 

Even if May avoids an internal party coup, reaches an agreement with the DUP and gets the Queen's Speech passed, surely she'll be gone within months?

Can you imagine the reception she's going to get in Parliament? Loud ridicule from a bullish Opposition and only muted support from her own benches, I'd guess. And she'll be seen as damaged goods by much of the public.

 

I get the argument that, because Brexit negotiations are due to start, she needs to stay on a bit (there's not enough time for a party leadership election, surely?).

But the negotiations are designed to have breaks between phases, aren't they? https://www.ft.com/content/bd046284-1464-11e7-b0c1-37e417ee6c76

If the first phase lasts for 4-8 months, as planned, there could be a change of leader - and possibly another election after the first phase but before the second phase: early 2018?

 

The EU wants early agreement on the divorce payment, the Irish border and EU nationals in UK & UK nationals in EU. The last two are in everyone's interest - and the Irish border is particularly important to the DUP.

The divorce payment is likely to be the hardest to resolve, but if agreement could be reached on that, then discussion of future trade deals could start or be scheduled.....just in time for a new leader/new election.

Probably a big ask for all that to work out well, but not completely inconceivable.

 

For Davidson to be Tory leader within months, they'd presumably have to persuade a backbench MP to retire to the Lords so as to create a byelection, unless someone snuffed it conveniently.

But would Davidson want to become leader in those circumstances: new to Westminster, half-way through Brexit negotiations and inheriting a hellish in-tray full of economic and political problems?

Surely it's more likely that someone already involved, like Davis or Boris, would take over in a few months time and possibly call another election?

That way, Davidson could hang on in Scotland, burnish her reputation even more by pushing the SNP further into retreat, then be ready to be next leader but one.

 

The big risk for the Tories is if serious economic problems start to accumulate or no decent Brexit deal is available....Would any leader want another election then? But would any PM want to have to depend long-term on satisfying DUP blackmailers?

On the other hand, IndyRef2 must be dead in the water now, so the SNP could be deep in the crap.

[lgfualol]

46 minutes ago, foxes21 said:

Which country do you suggest? I'm thinking Canada or New Zealand.

 

 

They're probably where I would go. Dublin is a happening place right now but expensive. I'm in Germany at the mo. Very lovely.

[Foxxed]

Here's what the guy, Jonathan Powell, who helped negotiate the Northern Ireland peace process has said

 

Quote

I do think it’s a mistake to go into government with the “support of our friends” in the DUP. Even John Major avoided doing that and the reason he avoided that is the peace process is based on a balance that the British government has made it clear it is neutral in Northern Ireland, it doesn’t take sides. Once you have their support, you are no longer neutral.

 

It matters for two big reasons. First, we haven’t managed to get the executive back up and running in Northern Ireland because of divisions between the two sides. The British government were trying to mediate between the two sides to get an administration up and running again and of course now it can’t possibly have that role of mediating.

 

And secondly I think it’s a mistake because one of the big issues in the Brexit negotiations is the border between north and south. Now the DUP is a minority in its view about Brexit, it’s in favour of Brexit. This is going to be a very real problem.

 

Whatever you put on a piece of paper, you’re living there with a minority government. That’s dependent on the DUP. You get to a crucial issue and then they say: “Remember what we want in terms of talks in Northern Ireland,” and the government has a choice. Do they say: “We’re not giving you that. We’ll let the government collapse,” or do they just bend a little on that issue – it’s just one small issue, it doesn’t matter? But beyond that, the government can’t possibly be seen as neutral on Northern Ireland now if it puts itself at the mercy of the DUP.

Why would the Irish in Northern Ireland - both peaceful and links with the less peaceful - trust the British government in any peace process now we're in bed with the DUP?

 

May's first act in this parliament: jeopardized peace in Northern Ireland.

[Mike Oxlong]

Saw Emily Thornberry interviewed on tv this morning.

 

I thought she came across as a right arrogant cvnt. 

[Guest MattP]

1 minute ago, Foxxed said:

Here's what the guy, Jonathan Powell, who helped negotiate the Northern Ireland peace process has said

 

Why would the Irish in Northern Ireland - both peaceful and links with the less peaceful - trust the British government in any peace process now we're in bed with the DUP?

 

May's first act in this parliament: jeopardized peace in Northern Ireland.

Let's be honest, a Corbyn win would have possible done the same. 

 

The loyalist community wasn't exactly going to take kindly to him being their Prime Minister and they would never have been able to trust him.

 

Boris Johnson still "making moves" apparantly, I bet he fancies it now they can get away with a softer Brexit. 

[Izzy]

I can't imagine your average white, middle aged, closet racist, ever so slightly homophobic Tory would be that happy with Ruth Davidson as leader of the Conservative party. The thought of her holding hands with her gay lover outside number 10 would be too much for most to handle I'd have thought...

[Alf Bentley]

5 minutes ago, toddybad said:

 

 

Diane Abbott probably didn't cost as many votes as you'd think - she was one an extra thing for non-labour voters to complain about. Labour voters could see she was shocking but I don't think that alone would turn too many votes. The reality is she'll be nowhere near the front bench at the next election. The heavy hitters will be back and next time round it could be interesting - it will be difficult to waste time focusing on Corbyn himself in the way he was attacked this time as it, frankly, doesn't appear to have actually worked. Besides which, the DUP involvement with the Tories means they'll have to be very careful about the labels they give to others. 

 

Matt P is right about Ruth Davidson - great campaign by her and she's single-handedly saved the Tories from an even worse night. She did simply turn the SNP on themselves by focusing on the issue of a second Scottish Independence referendum but it worked for. 

 

As to what happens at the next election - well I guess it depends how far off it is, whether the Tories can somehow get through Brexit unscathed, who leads them etc but the current situation would tend to suggest Labour increasing their vote. I say that based on the belief that (as I've said before) political cycles begin and end when a party has new impetus and something to say. The Tories don't really have anything left to say and I'm not convinced that a different leader could have produced a new proposition, even if they had campaigned more effectively.

 

I think Labour didn't win yet as it takes some time for voters to rebuild trust in a party once they kick them out -Labour had 13 years and the Tories 18 before that. With the last election only 2 years ago and the internal strife within the Labour party over the last 2 years it was almost impossible to win. Getting as far as they did was incredible really. With a stronger team, a re-energised youth vote, an offering which will always be very different to what the Tories offer with Corbyn in change and the weight of problems in the economy and public services, they have to be in a stronger position before he next election.

 

Personally, I think Brexit will kill the Tories. I don't think for one second that May means that no deal is better than a bad deal as it very clearly isn't. Business would never forgive the Tories if they came away with no deal so it's just a soundbite rather than serious policy. They'll have to give numerous concessions, they'll have no choice. I suspect that the Tory strategy is to think they'll be able to blame the EU but I don't think that will wash with the public. Ultimately, the Tories held the referendum to deal with internal party disputes, got drowned out by UKIP and have then set themselves up as the party of Brexit to try to woo back the UKIP voters. Unless they manage to get an impossible deal (by definition they won't) they're stuffed. 

 

 

 

Good post. I agree with almost all of that - and hope Labour now has the wisdom to reunite with leading moderates joining the Corbyn team. He's earned the right to dictate most of the terms of that reconciliation - but some moderation of a few of the more off-the-wall policies might be a good idea.

 

A complicating factor to the scenario you describe - which I otherwise find highly believable - is Farage.

 

Nuttall has gone and Farage is already talking about returning to full-time politics to "protect Brexit" as May will sell the Brexiteers up the river.

There's also a scenario where the Brexit negotiations and/or the economy go badly, but instead of turning to Labour, voters blame the EU and/or immigrants and turn to a UKIP rejuvenated under Farage.....

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

Here's what the guy, Jonathan Powell, who helped negotiate the Northern Ireland peace process has said

 

Why would the Irish in Northern Ireland - both peaceful and links with the less peaceful - trust the British government in any peace process now we're in bed with the DUP?

 

May's first act in this parliament: jeopardized peace in Northern Ireland.

Absolutely, not only is she a acting as a terrorist sympathiser - now, not 30 years ago - but she's also prepared to risk the peace for her own personal gain. 

Not a great look is it?

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Good post. I agree with almost all of that - and hope Labour now has the wisdom to reunite with leading moderates joining the Corbyn team. He's earned the right to dictate most of the terms of that reconciliation - but some moderation of a few of the more off-the-wall policies might be a good idea.

 

A complicating factor to the scenario you describe - which I otherwise find highly believable - is Farage.

 

Nuttall has gone and Farage is already talking about returning to full-time politics to "protect Brexit" as May will sell the Brexiteers up the river.

There's also a scenario where the Brexit negotiations and/or the economy go badly, but instead of turning to Labour, voters blame the EU and/or immigrants and turn to a UKIP rejuvenated under Farage.....

I honestly don't think Farage would make an iota of difference. I think the ublic at large feel that last year's vote settled the matter. They've clearly added to their narrative at this election by killing off hard brexit - essentially the pubic want a soft brexit. I can't see anybody wanting to get back into the whole argument with UKIP/Farage again. His time has come and gone. 

[Foxxed]

9 minutes ago, MattP said:

Let's be honest, a Corbyn win would have possible done the same. 

 

The loyalist community wasn't exactly going to take kindly to him being their Prime Minister and they would never have been able to trust him.

 

Boris Johnson still "making moves" apparantly, I bet he fancies it now they can get away with a softer Brexit. 

The other option is to rule as a minority party and seek consensus from the opposition.

 

This is the option that guarantees peace in Northern Ireland. The option she threw away for personal gain.

[Guest MattP]

6 minutes ago, toddybad said:

They've clearly added to their narrative at this election by killing off hard brexit - essentially the pubic want a soft brexit. 

How can you come to that conclusion when 42.5% voted for Hard Brexit and 40% have voted for Labour - a party with a manifesto commitment to end freedom of movement. 

[Lionator]

10 minutes ago, MattP said:

Let's be honest, a Corbyn win would have possible done the same. 

 

The loyalist community wasn't exactly going to take kindly to him being their Prime Minister and they would never have been able to trust him.

 

Boris Johnson still "making moves" apparantly, I bet he fancies it now they can get away with a softer Brexit. 

I'd rather keep May. Boris is vile, he has little crediblity on a wider scale and he makes my skin crawl. 

 

From a Labour perspective, I think Corbyn stays for another couple of years until a clear candidate for a new leader emerges who can carry on the good work and maybe has a cleaner past/a little bit closer to the centre (but still to the left). Maybe a Clive Lewis if he fancies a return to the shadow cabinet or even Barry Gardiner who's been the star of this Labour campaign for me. If Labour get the next few years right then they can keep the Tories out of government for 10/15 years after the inevitable Brexit shambles, that's a big if though.

[Guest]

Just now, MattP said:

How can you come to that conclusion when 42.5% voted for Hard Brexit and 40% have voted for Labour - a party with a manifesto commitment to end freedom of movement. 

When did anybody vote for hard brexit? No party other than UKIP has offered hard brexit, in fact they've been at pains not to. 

The difficulty here may be that nobody has defined what they mean by hard brexit but I would consider that not making concessions to give us access to the single market would be a hard brexit. When it comes down to it, it is very, very likely that the government are going to have to choose between freedom of movement and access to the single market. If they can find a way around that fair enough but I don't see the Tories going against what business is telling them by allowing us to not have access to the market. They can make whatever noises they want when campaigning but ultimately the MPS themselves don't believe in Brexit for the most part and they know if they drop out on WTO terms they'll be voted out for a generation in the aftermath. 

[Spudulike]

Blimey.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbuY_vq5gD8

[Guest]

Just now, Spudulike said:

Blimey.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbuY_vq5gD8

He had a great night didn't he? 

[Foxxed]

11 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

Blimey.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbuY_vq5gD8

 

I was waiting for it to load to reply "I've had more awkward high-fives than that" but I've never high-fived anyone in the breasts before.

 

I love the look on his face afterwards.

 

"Did she notice? She probably noticed. No body else will notice right? They'll probably notice. Just smile and wish for death."

[ajthefox]

15 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

Blimey.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbuY_vq5gD8

Now he's a rapist too!!

[Rincewind]

I blame bad communication as to why Labour lost. Theresa May did everything she could to lose but the message did not get through to those that mattered. A poor manifesto, refusing to debate. changing her mind about policies and meeting up with Arab terrorists. But to counter this the tabloids ran stories attacking Corbyn and her PR staff were describing her as strong and stable. Now she has to deal with Brexit and another five years of unsure economy which she is now unable to blame Labour when it goes tits up.

[The Doctor]

16 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

Blimey.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbuY_vq5gD8

 outrage if he were leader of another party...

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

 

I was waiting for it to load to reply "I've had more awkward high-fives than that" but I've never high-fived anyone in the breasts before.

 

I love the look on his face afterwards.

 

"Did she notice? She probably noticed. No body else will notice right? They'll probably notice. Just smile and wish for death."

An old manager of mine once greeted a visiting woman by reaching out to shake her hand without properly looking and instead shaking her pendulous breast 

[The Horse's Mouth]

Tory's aligning themselves with those bat shit mentalists and the Labour establishment finally getting behind Corbyn, I must say I cannot wait for the next election 

[Guest]

I've never been a member of a political party but I must admit that the strength of my opposition to what the current government is doing, and my beliefs around social justice, the environment and other issues are seriously making me consider joining Labour to try to more directly influence the future of this country. 

[surrifox]

1 hour ago, Mike Oxlong said:

Saw Emily Thornberry interviewed on tv this morning.

 

I thought she came across as a right arrogant cvnt. 

True . She doesn't get enough credit for that - she's as thick as mince too. 

[AndWhat?]

Just having a play around the BBC election map and it's so obvious to see that the current system we have is really not fair. 

 

So many constituencies are won by a party that the majority of voters didn't want. Lib Dems are Labours worse enemy. 

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, toddybad said:

I honestly don't think Farage would make an iota of difference. I think the ublic at large feel that last year's vote settled the matter. They've clearly added to their narrative at this election by killing off hard brexit - essentially the pubic want a soft brexit. I can't see anybody wanting to get back into the whole argument with UKIP/Farage again. His time has come and gone. 

 

I don't think Farage would have made much difference if he'd been leader at this election for the reason you say: the public feel that the referendum settled the matter.

But the situation in 1-2 years time or less could be very different.

 

I think a lot of people have very little understanding of the scale of the disruption that a Hard Brexit could cause - and a very exaggerated idea of the strength of the UK negotiating position.

A lot of people have bought the Leave sales pitch: the EU needs us more than we need them because they need to sell us their cars and wine; we'll be able to negotiate a good deal; we won't have to pay a divorce fee; we'll be able to have complete control of our borders without losing market access; we'll easily be able to do great new trade deals with the EU, US and other nations worldwide.....more control, more freedom, few ill-effects, a great British success story etc.

 

In 18 months we could be panicking about a cliff-edge Brexit with no decent deal on offer, no trade deals imminent, the economy on the slide, people losing jobs and income, firms shipping jobs out, public services struggling without either immigrant labour or trained Brit replacements, tax revenues reduced by economic problems - thereby meaning more public spending cuts, higher taxes or higher debt etc, In that context, a UKIP led by Farage blaming the EU and the Tory Govt for the failure of Brexit negotiations, the state of the economy and poor public services, with immigrants taking some of the blame....that could be an appealing option to a lot of people who are currently just expecting the politicians to get on with Brexit as a benign, easy process. 

 

Some of that bad stuff might not happen - but an awful lot of it might well happen, I reckon - fertile ground for a charismatic populist leader. Unlikely as it used to seem, that leader might be Corbyn....but it might also be Farage, particularly for those more inclined to blame foreigners and more likely to suffer the lost jobs and income.