Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by FelixtheCat, 24 May 2019.
How about "regrouped"? Or "been resurrected"?
Funny you should mention that because I voted, in 2015, Tory in order NOT to have a Lab/SNP coalition.
How wrong I was, these days I'm absolutely gagging for the SNP to take over the flippin' country and run it properly!! Anyhow, as it stands if there was an election I doubt any part would have a majority, Brexit would probably split the Tory party more than Labour therefore there is every likelihood (as you allude to) of Labour sharing power with Libdems and SNP.
The Tory's only chance is somehow they squeeze Brexit through with/without a deal - and it's a success - neither of which is a given, and Brexit Party can disappear off and things return to normal. But the Tories have the problem that the polls (Euros, this latest poll) are trending against Brexit, so if they go ahead that could be against the NOW will of the people.
Anyhow, this has gone on far too long and there are other issues that need attending. Always thought that if the government didn't go ahead with Brexit, but told everyone they had, we'd all be none the wiser as things would just carry on as normal!
I wonder why. The DUP has a history of intransigence, is close to people prepared to use violence to get what they want and is now a key influence standing in the way of a reasonably sensible Brexit. The SNP has a much cleaner history. It is clear about what it wants, which you and I might not agree about, but why are they vomit-worthy?
I would have thought the DUP would WANT a hard Ireland border to distance themselves further from Dublin and more alligned to the UK, however that clearly isn't the case they, like everyone else want it kept totally open; yet the hard Brexit they want could well mean that hard border being installed. I don't understand their position at all.
The people of Northern Ireland benefit from a frictionless border with the Republic. If they lose it due to Brexit then more people will favour uniting with the Republic so as to regain that freedom. The Good Friday agreement obliges the government to hold a referendum in the North on uniting Ireland if there is evidence that a majority support it. So the DUP's actions could lead them to exactly the outcome they want least.
The other thing people either forget or overlook is that a no-deal Brexit will immediately lead to a hard border.
I wonder if the DUP position is essentially one of cake and eat it too, namely they don’t want to be part of the EU, do want to be part of the U.K., and don’t want a hard border. I agree their position doesn’t really add up.
I don't think it has to. For most of the time the Northern Ireland parties are an irrelevance, being no more than nuisance value at best (especially since a significant number never attend) but once in a generation they actually have some power so can make demands that can never be met. Therefore the governing party then has to offer more and more inducements to compensate NI parties because their basic demands are impossible to meet. They've probably got less than they would like because government is almost stagnant at present and the Assembly is in abeyance.
Last time it happened was the '70s; ironically, at that time Jim Callaghan failed to call a general election he might well have won. He said "he would not be surprised to be considered as the worst prime minister for more than 200 years." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/468625.stm , now I'm not so sure.
Worryingly, if an election was called this year, would anyone get a majority or would certain NI politicians be able to again make unachievable demands?
I doubt there'd be a majority, but who'd be in a "balance of power" situation depends on the Parliamentary arithmetic when all the votes come in.
In 2017, the Conservative party were close enough to the winning line that it'd require practically every other party combined to outnumber them, but they were also short enough that (with Labour, the SNP and Liberal Democrats all slamming the door on the Conservatives well before the votes were counted) the only party large enough to help the Conservatives was the DUP.
If, in the next election, the big parties aren't as large (which is what current polling suggests) and there are more "medium" size parties, then that'll mean there will be more possible permutations. But given the polarising issue at hand, I suspect that it'd still be a battle to find a majority coalition, as groups will stick to one side of the argument or the other.
Say we landed with an arbitrary result of:
That'd tot-up to a CON-DUP-BRX total of 310, and a LAB-SNP-LIB-PC-GRN-CNG total of 330, but a six-way coalition would be very wobbly indeed.
I think there's too many unknowns to be able to make any kind of prediction. History suggests that the small parties probably won't do as well as the hypothetical example suggests. Bear in mind the election where UKIP polled a sizeable proportion of vote share but failed to secure a single seat. What may well happen however is that the vote share for the minor parties is enough to cause some significant upsets for the main parties, not just in marginal seats but possibly in safer seats too, but instead of the seat being taken by the small party it might instead go to the rival big party simply by virtue of the vote being split. Obviously this depends on how much tactical voting occurs too, and how that pans out. So in essence I think it's almost impossible to say what a general election result might look like, either now or a year or two down the line.
Agreed, given Westminster's use of the FPTP system. But I'll be astounded if a general election held within the next few years gives a parliamentary majority to any single party.
(And whoever takes over from Theresa May as Conservative leader will want to see more favourable polling for their party before calling a general election, too.)
So the DUP's intransigence means that the most likely outcome of them wanting Brexit is a united Ireland in order to keep the border open, which is the complete opposite of what they want, to be part of the UK.
How many walls are there left to bang our heads on??
Is another possibility that *they* would be quite content with a closed border, but their voters might not be? Banging heads against walls possibly sums up several decades of NI politics...
You realise the reason Scotland can provide free education and such is because they get a lot of money from England?
Give Scotland zero money from English/Welsh taxes and they won't be able to do half of what they do now.
Not for the first time, Boris Johnson has warned that the Tory Party faces extinction.
Why should we care ?
We are talking about the party that let the coal and steel industries go to the wall, with no regard for the decimated communities they left behind.
If the Tory Party is no longer fit for (whatever its) purpose (is or was), then goodbye ... and good riddance.
The worry is that it would be replaced by something further to the right and probably run by Farage.
Of course the Johnson method of saving the Tory party is to deliver Brexit in whatever form by 31 October, something the polls clearly indicate no longer has majority support (by a 10% margin in the latest poll). Of the leadership candidates only Sam Gyimah has recognised the need for a referendum, and I suspect he will be eliminated quite quickly.
Could you point me in the direction of that poll?
I think another one may have appeared since I last looked, as the latest margin is 8% but the previous one was 12%, excluding the don't knows in both cases.
I don’t think Michael Gove taking cocaine at several “social events” during his time as a Daily Mail journalist will help with his leadership bid somehow...
Mind you there does seem to be quite a desperation to find evidence of any past drug taking with whoever it is in the Tory leadership race at the moment.
Maybe not, but it certainly provides the most compelling anti-drugs message of a generation
Assuming none of the other candidates indulged, they aren't a great argument for abstension either.
They're all leaping on the bandwagon now. Leadsom apparently smoked weed but didn't suffer from any long term insight
although in fairness my opinion of him has gone up since this news was announced!
Those last two posts made me chuckle.
The case against Boris Johnson has been thrown out https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48554853
Though at this stage we don’t know what the grounds for dismissing it were.
It does seem to be somewhat of a trend for people to try and get political decisions overturned through the courts, which seems a dangerous path to go down to me.
To be fair it wasn't a particularly strong case - it was a waste of a bunch of money which almost inevitably gave him the chance to appear vindicated in court, even though they basically vindicated him of nothing. As I understand the reasoning that has been released, it was that he may very well have lied, and he was in public office at the time, but since he did so as part of a campaign it was by definition not part of his public office.
so which one of them is going to actually admit to ," yes I took so much **** that they'd have to bury me in a coffin with a child-proof lid!"
It would be nice to see the Tory leadership decided by a kind of I'm a Celebrity... process by which they get publicly humiliated and the masks come off the faces so that we can see just how truly nasty they are.
In other news, I see Gove is on the you'll-get-taxed-less-under-me bandwagon . How is the NHS and other public services going to be funded then, you twit ?
I'm not sure anybody's told Gove that that bus he kept seeing in the referendum campaign was lying. He always made George Osborne look like an intellectual colossus, which is fairly impressive when you think about it.