BBO Discussion Forums: Could it happen? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Could it happen?

Poll: General election (11 member(s) have cast votes)

What do you think?

  1. Tories win a majority (9 votes [81.82%])

    Percentage of vote: 81.82%

  2. Labour win a majority (1 votes [9.09%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.09%

  3. Tories form a coalition (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  4. Labour form a coalition (1 votes [9.09%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.09%

  5. Other (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,341
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-June-01, 02:02

View PostZelandakh, on 2017-May-31, 13:25, said:

Then you severely underestimate the depth of feeling up there. If there were a referendum tomorrow the result would not really be in doubt.

I very much doubt that!
If Corbyn wins and there is a referendum, I would bet 3:1 that Scotland votes no again.
Even without a Corbyn win, the result would very much be in doubt. Yes, the Tories are pretty much despised here, but people also understand what a monumental decision it would be. (Which is more than I would say about some of these Tory politicians...)
Obviously we have a recall bias in favour of the assholes. -helene_t
1

#22 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,544
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-June-01, 03:50

Are you based in Edinburgh perchance Arend? I know the attitudes there are somewhat different from the rest of the country. I observed the last referendum primarily through the lens of Glasgow so no doubt my perception is somewhat biased in the oppiste direction. Regardless, I think your predictions are hugely optimistic from your side of the argument. 75% voting to stay in? really? No poll since the referendum has put Stay above 55% and most analysts think the campaign period is more advantageous to Leave than Stay as arguing for positive change tends to resonate more successfully. So I think 75-25 is absolute pie in the sky Edinburgh/Westminster thinking. Of course, the chances of Corbyn becoming PM are slim so we probably will not have the chance to test this.
(-: Zel :-)
0

#23 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,341
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-June-01, 04:05

Betting 3:1 = I pay 3 GBP if independence wins, you pay 1 GBP if independence loses.

Yes I am based in Edinburgh. I just think it is such a monumental decision that it's a tough ask to generate a 9% swing - voters gave this a lot of thought before the last referendum.

Part of the resentment against the UK government is resentment against conservative politics - remember that the SNP is fairly left-wing. The independence case would have a bit of an identity crisis with Corbyn as prime minister.

By the way, I know quite a few who voted for independence, but I don't know of anyone that they who voted for Brexit. So yes, I live in a bubble, but I am not sure it's a bubble as far as independence is concerned. I was conflicted in my own vote against it.
Obviously we have a recall bias in favour of the assholes. -helene_t
0

#24 User is offline   shyams 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 768
  • Joined: 2009-August-02
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2017-June-03, 09:29

View Posthelene_t, on 2017-June-01, 01:40, said:

I don't think so. unlike certain other politicians he seems to stand by his principles rather than power for the sake of power. Which is btw a problem because as a pm he would have troubles making the necessary compromises.

Not saying he wouldn't agree for a Scottish referendum.

Power corrupts everybody. He won't let an opportunity to pass -- never!
Secondly, he is not an island within the Labour party. Whatever his personal stance, his party will not let him pass on an opportunity to be in power.
0

#25 User is offline   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,461
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2017-June-03, 09:35

View Posthelene_t, on 2017-June-01, 01:40, said:

I don't think so. unlike certain other politicians he seems to stand by his principles rather than power for the sake of power. Which is btw a problem because as a pm he would have troubles making the necessary compromises.

Not saying he wouldn't agree for a Scottish referendum.


What like him failing to criticise the IRA for years until he feels he has to or be completely unelectable.
0

#26 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,544
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-June-04, 03:15

View PostVampyr, on 2017-May-31, 05:20, said:

Well, we all know by now not to trust polls. But I choose to believe the data that Labour are shortening dramatically, and I am not convinced that May can form a coalition. So we may be saved from 5 disaster our years under her. One can but hope.

Here is a very interesting from Nate that might give you even more hope Stefanie.
(-: Zel :-)
0

#27 User is offline   WellSpyder 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,545
  • Joined: 2009-November-30
  • Location:Oxfordshire, England

Posted 2017-June-05, 03:07

View PostCyberyeti, on 2017-May-31, 13:37, said:

His Brexit strategy is fundamentally dishonest.

Exactly. Maybe I just haven't read enough about, but I have no idea how any Lib Dems think this is supposed to work.

(And incidentally, if we do have a referendum in which the majority vote against the deal, does that mean the alternative is no deal, or the pre-article 50 deal? Do we actually know whether the latter would even be available? Having said we will leave, what is to stop the rest of the EU saying we will only have you back on different terms from before?)
0

#28 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,341
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-June-05, 04:45

I agree with Cyberyeti'so reservations about Farron, but I disagree about May:

View PostCyberyeti, on 2017-May-31, 13:37, said:

At least May warning that no deal is better a bad deal should encourage some sort of offer as German business (and IG metall) would hate there to be no deal.

I just don't think this is a credible negotiating position. The UK has a lot more to lose from no deal than Germany (or any other EU27 country). Are you saying that Merkel and others would consider May irresponsible or misguided enough to reject a "bad" deal that is still better than nothing deal?

(Of course, given some of the decisions she has made, ...)
Obviously we have a recall bias in favour of the assholes. -helene_t
1

#29 User is offline   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,461
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2017-June-05, 06:20

View Postcherdano, on 2017-June-05, 04:45, said:

I agree with Cyberyeti'so reservations about Farron, but I disagree about May:

I just don't think this is a credible negotiating position. The UK has a lot more to lose from no deal than Germany (or any other EU27 country). Are you saying that Merkel and others would consider May irresponsible or misguided enough to reject a "bad" deal that is still better than nothing deal?

(Of course, given some of the decisions she has made, ...)


I think she would reject a bad deal that was not much better than no deal.
0

#30 User is offline   Al_U_Card 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,662
  • Joined: 2005-May-16
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-June-05, 09:46

View PostCyberyeti, on 2017-June-05, 06:20, said:

I think she would reject a bad deal that was not much better than no deal.

The age of political ideals ended with the Russian revolution. Sbe would accept what she thinks will ensure her (party's) re-election. Typical.
The Grand Design, reflected in the face of Chaos...it's a fluke!
0

#31 User is offline   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,461
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2017-June-06, 01:53

View PostAl_U_Card, on 2017-June-05, 09:46, said:

The age of political ideals ended with the Russian revolution. Sbe would accept what she thinks will ensure her (party's) re-election. Typical.


That might be a lost cause if the negociations go badly and Labour move back towards the centre with a credible leader.
0

#32 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,544
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-June-06, 02:39

View PostCyberyeti, on 2017-June-06, 01:53, said:

That might be a lost cause if the negociations go badly and Labour move back towards the centre with a credible leader.

It was just a typically stupid AIU comment. The best way for May to maximise her chance of reelection is to get the very best deal she can for the country as a whole. This is one of those occasions when self-interest and party interest both align fairly well with national interest (ignoring the option of not leaving at all).
(-: Zel :-)
0

#33 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,878
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2017-June-07, 20:12

The Guardian has written a piece urging readers to vote for Labour. It is a nice sentiment, but are there really any Guardian readers who are not already Labour Voters? OK, I guess there could be a few Greens.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
0

#34 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,544
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-June-07, 23:20

View PostVampyr, on 2017-June-07, 20:12, said:

The Guardian has written a piece urging readers to vote for Labour. It is a nice sentiment, but are there really any Guardian readers who are not already Labour Voters? OK, I guess there could be a few Greens.

Are you working under the assumption that there are no Liberal voters left in Britain? Traditionally the Grauniad was the paper of choice for Liberal voters and with the passing of the Independant one wonders what else they are reading now the paper has moved somewhat more to the left than it used to be.
(-: Zel :-)
0

#35 User is offline   kenberg 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,883
  • Joined: 2004-September-22
  • Location:Northern Maryland

Posted 2017-June-09, 06:41

Yank needs help.


I have seen "May urged to step down" and "May vows to remain in power". If push comes to shove, as I gather it might, how does this get resolved? Fpr example, can the Conservative MPs gather for a vote, tell May she is out, and say who is now their leader? Also, as I understand it, May will go to the Queen and ask for permission to form a government. It is my understanding that this is not entirely just a polite visit, the Queen could tell her to get lost. Is that right?

Could it go like this: The Queen says ok, give it a ry, but then rebellion in the Conservative ranks makes it impossible for her to fomr a governemnt, and then the Conservatives select someone else? Seems clumsy but politics is often clumsy.

My ignorance on these matters probably surprises no one.

Good luck on this. I won't speculate on whether the US or the UK has the bigger mess, we could all hope for better I think.
Ken
0

#36 User is offline   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,461
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2017-June-09, 06:58

View Postkenberg, on 2017-June-09, 06:41, said:

Yank needs help.


I have seen "May urged to step down" and "May vows to remain in power". If push comes to shove, as I gather it might, how does this get resolved? Fpr example, can the Conservative MPs gather for a vote, tell May she is out, and say who is now their leader? Also, as I understand it, May will go to the Queen and ask for permission to form a government. It is my understanding that this is not entirely just a polite visit, the Queen could tell her to get lost. Is that right?


A candidate if he gets enough signatures from MPs can trigger a leadership contest.

The queen technically can but won't

Quote

Could it go like this: The Queen says ok, give it a try, but then rebellion in the Conservative ranks makes it impossible for her to fomr a governemnt, and then the Conservatives select someone else? Seems clumsy but politics is often clumsy.



More likely that the DUP demand too much for the Conservatives to stomach

The way this usually works in the Conservatives is that a "stalking horse" emerges. A candidate that is NOT going to lead the party, but people sign the papers to trigger a contest to show dissatisfaction with the leader. Once this happens, the serious candidates then join the contest.
0

#37 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,878
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2017-June-09, 07:00

I do not think that the Queen can refuse a request to form a government. Maybe in theory. She certainly has no power over the policies of "her government" although she has to give a speech about them.

If May refuses to step down the Parliamentary Torres could hold a vote of no confidence, after which there would be a new election for party leadership. I think she is deluded if she thinks she can remain in power after not increasing but in fact losing her majority.

Forming a coalition with the DUP is going to seriously sour our relationship wi Ireland, but it's not as if she can get the SNP on board...
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
1

#38 User is offline   y66 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,323
  • Joined: 2006-February-24

Posted 2017-June-11, 11:06

From Britain: The End of a Fantasy by Fintan O'Toole:

Quote

To understand the sensational outcome of the British election, one must ask a basic question. What happens when phony populism collides with the real thing?

Last year’s triumph for Brexit has often been paired with the rise of Donald Trump as evidence of a populist surge. But most of those joining in with the ecstasies of English nationalist self-assertion were imposters. Brexit is an elite project dressed up in rough attire. When its Oxbridge-educated champions coined the appealing slogan “Take back control,” they cleverly neglected to add that they really meant control by and for the elite. The problem is that, as the elections showed, too many voters thought the control should belong to themselves.

Theresa May is a classic phony Brexiter. She didn’t support it in last year’s referendum and there is no reason to think that, in private, she has ever changed her mind. But she saw that the path to power led toward the cliff edge, from which Britain will take its leap into an unknown future entirely outside the European Union. Her strategy was one of appeasement—of the nationalist zealots in her own party, of the voters who had backed the hard-right UK Independence Party (UKIP), and of the hysterically jingoistic Tory press, especially The Daily Mail.

The actual result of the referendum last year was narrow and ambiguous. Fifty-two percent of voters backed Brexit but we know that many of them did so because they were reassured by Boris Johnson’s promise that, when it came to Europe, Britain could “have its cake and eat it.” It could both leave the EU and continue to enjoy all the benefits of membership. Britons could still trade freely with the EU and would be free to live, work, and study in any EU country just as before. This is, of course, a childish fantasy, and it is unlikely that Johnson himself really believed a word of it. It was just part of the game, a smart line that might win a debate at the Oxford Union.

But what do you do when your crowd-pleasing applause lines have to become public policy? The twenty-seven remaining member states of the EU have to try to extract a rational outcome from an essentially irrational process. They have to ask the simple question: What do you Brits actually want? And the answer is that the Brits want what they can’t possibly have. They want everything to change and everything to go as before. They want an end to immigration—except for all the immigrants they need to run their economy and health service. They want it to be 1900, when Britain was a superpower and didn’t have to make messy compromises with foreigners.

To take power, May had to pretend that she, too, dreams these impossible dreams. And that led her to embrace a phony populism in which the narrow and ambiguous majority who voted for Brexit under false pretences are be reimagined as “the people.”

This is not conservatism—it is pure Rousseau. The popular will had been established on that sacred referendum day. And it must not be defied or questioned. Hence, Theresa May’s allies in The Daily Mail using the language of the French revolutionary terror, characterizing recalcitrant judges and parliamentarians as “enemies of the people” and “saboteurs.”

This is why May called an election. Her decision to do so—when she had a working majority in parliament—has been seen by some as pure vanity. But it was the inevitable result of the volkish rhetoric she had adopted. A working majority was not enough—the unified people must have a unified parliament and a single, uncontested leader: one people, one parliament, one Queen Theresa to stand on the cliffs of Dover and shake her spear of sovereignty at the damn continentals.

And the funny thing is that this seemed possible. As recently as late April, with the Labour Party in disarray and its leftist leader Jeremy Corbyn deemed unelectable, the polls were putting the Tories twenty points ahead and telling May that her coronation was inevitable. All she had to do was repeat the words “strong and stable” over and over and Labour would be crushed forever. The opposition would be reduced to a token smattering of old socialist cranks and self-evidently traitorous Scots. Britain would become in effect a one-party Tory state. An overawed Europe would bow before this display of British staunchness and concede a Brexit deal in which supplies of cake would be infinitely renewed.

There were three problems. Firstly, May demanded her enormous majority so that she could ride out into the Brexit battle without having to worry about mutterings in the ranks behind her. But she has no clue what the battle is supposed to be for. Because May doesn’t actually believe in Brexit, she’s improvising a way forward very roughly sketched out by other people. She’s a terrible actor mouthing a script in which there is no plot and no credible ending that is not an anti-climax. Brexit is a back-of-the-envelope proposition. Strip away the post-imperial make-believe and the Little England nostalgia, and there’s almost nothing there, no clear sense of how a middling European country with little native industry can hope to thrive by cutting itself off from its biggest trading partner and most important political alliance.

May demanded a mandate to negotiate—but negotiate what exactly? She literally could not say. All she could articulate were two slogans: “Brexit means Brexit” and “No deal is better than a bad deal.” The first collapses ideology into tautology. The second is a patent absurdity: with “no deal” there is no trade, the planes won’t fly and all the supply chains snap. To win an election, you need a convincing narrative but May herself doesn’t know what the Brexit story is.

Secondly, if you’re going to try the uno duce, una voce trick, you need a charismatic leader with a strong voice. The Tories tried to build a personality cult around a woman who doesn’t have much of a personality. May is a common or garden Home Counties conservative politician. Her stock in trade is prudence, caution, and stubbornness. The vicar’s daughter was woefully miscast as the Robespierre of the Brexit revolution, the embodiment of the British popular will sending saboteurs to the guillotine. She is awkward, wooden, and, as it turned out, prone to panic and indecision under pressure.

But to be fair to May, her wavering embodied a much deeper set of contradictions. Those words she repeated so robotically, “strong and stable,” would ring just as hollow in the mouth of any other Conservative politician. This is a party that has plunged its country into an existential crisis because it was too weak to stand up to a minority of nationalist zealots and tabloid press barons. It is as strong as a jellyfish and as stable as a flea.

Thirdly, the idea of a single British people united by the Brexit vote is ludicrous. Not only do Scotland, Northern Ireland, and London have large anti-Brexit majorities, but many of those who did vote for Brexit are deeply unhappy about the effects of the Conservative government’s austerity policies on healthcare, education, and other public services. (One of these services is policing, and May’s direct responsibility for a reduction in police numbers neutralized any potential swing toward the Conservatives as a result of the terrorist attacks in Manchester and London.)

This unrest found a voice in Corbyn’s unabashedly left-wing Labour manifesto, with its clear promises to end austerity and fund better public services by taxing corporations and the very wealthy. May’s appeal to “the people” as a mystic entity came up against Corbyn’s appeal to real people in their daily lives, longing not for a date with national destiny but for a good school, a functioning National Health Service, and decent public transport. Phony populism came up against a more genuine brand of anti-establishment radicalism that convinced the young and the marginalized that they had something to come out and vote for.

In electoral terms, of course, the two forces have pretty much canceled each other out. May will form a government with the support of the Protestant fundamentalist Democratic Unionist Party from Northern Ireland. That government will be weak and unstable and it will have no real authority to negotiate a potentially momentous agreement with the European Union. Brexit is thus far from being a done deal: it can’t be done without a reliable partner for the EU to negotiate with. There isn’t one now and there may not be one for quite some time—at least until after another election, but quite probably not even then. The reliance on a spurious notion of the “popular will” has left Britain with no clear notion of who “the people” are and what they really want.

Strong as a jellyfish and stable as a flea indeed.
If you lose all hope, you can always find it again. Richard Ford in The Sportswriter
0

#39 User is offline   Al_U_Card 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,662
  • Joined: 2005-May-16
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-June-11, 16:51

:) Gee whiz! What I said but much longer-winded. "Stupid", as analysis, speaks volumes...

May is just being a politician and that reduces the equation to pretty much one factor...
The Grand Design, reflected in the face of Chaos...it's a fluke!
0

#40 User is offline   shyams 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 768
  • Joined: 2009-August-02
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2017-June-12, 12:17

IMO, one outcome of this fiasco is that no other EU country will ever seriously contemplate an Exit. We've scared everyone else off any such thoughts.
1

Share this topic:


  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users